Skip to main content

Daily Kos Elections Live Digest banner
Want the scoop on hot races around the country? Get the digest emailed to you each weekday morning. Sign up here.
Pres-by-CD: Results keep trickling into SSP Labs, allowing us to roll out another 6 districts today.

Indiana (IN-06)

Missouri (MO-06)

New York (NY-17 through NY-20)

Both IN-06 and MO-06 show some fairly typical drop-offs for Obama: the former dropped 6 percent to 37 percent Obama; the latter dropped 3 percent to 38 percent Obama.

More interesting, though, are the suite of results from New York. We're still missing results from the city and Long Island, but the new districts take us down the Hudson from Saratoga almost to Yonkers. The pattern we've seen of a slight swing to Obama breaks down as soon as we enter the lower Hudson Valley: Paul Tonko's Capital Region-based NY-20 swung towards the President with 59 percent, but the districts further south did not: NY-17 was down 1 to 57 percent Obama; NY-18, where Democrat Sean Maloney knocked off incumbent GOPer Nan Hayworth, was down half a point to 51 percent Obama, and NY-19, where GOP Rep. Chris Gibson beat back a respectable challenge from Dem Julian Schreibman was down 1 to 52 percent Obama. (jeffmd)

8:54 AM PT: OH-Gov: Ah, what a bummer—though I'm not terribly surprised. After what felt like years of speculation and consideration, former Gov. Ted Strickland announced on Tuesday that he would not seek a rematch against the man who beat him two years ago, Republican John Kasich. I've always admired Strickland's fighting spirit and his unabashed populism, which kept his race against Kasich incredibly close despite the nightmare year of 2010. (Noam Scheiber summed up Strickland's singular appeal well in this post-mortem.) It also made Strickland's two-point loss all the more painful, and easy for supporters to imagine him exacting sweet revenge in 2014.

But alas, it's not to be. While Strickland didn't explain his rationale for declining to run again, he's 71 years old and, by all accounts, seems to be enjoying his life these days, which has involved a teaching stint at Harvard and just generally serving as the Ohio Democratic Party's booster-in-chief. You can't exactly blame Teddy Ballgame, and I wish him nothing but luck.

Now, attention will turn to a host of other possible candidates: Rep. Tim Ryan, Cuyahoga County Executive Ed FitzGerald, former state AG Richard Cordray, and perhaps even Columbus Mayor Michael Coleman or ex-Rep. Betty Sutton. Hazy reports have suggested Ryan's not interested, while an unnamed "Democratic source" tells the Cleveland Plain Dealer that Strickland specifically reached out to FitzGerald to alert him to his plans before making Tuesday's announcement. Given that Strickland is said to be a "mentor" to Ryan, and also seeing as Ryan, like FitzGerald, has been waiting on Strickland in order to make up his own mind, you have to wonder whether Strickland communicated with Ryan, too. If not, perhaps Strickland already knows Ryan won't run—or perhaps he prefers Fitz as a successor. In any event, this news should open the floodgates for other candidates to declare their intentions, so we'll soon see.


11:16 AM PT: IL-02: Monday was the filing deadline for the special election to fill ex-Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr.'s seat in Congress, and a ton of candidates tossed their names into the hopper, including 17 Democrats and five Republicans. (The full list is here.) In this dark blue district, the Democratic primary is the only contest that matters, though, and there were no last-minute big-name surprises. The top contenders are all names you've seen before: state Sens. Toi Hutchinson and Napoleon Harris, ex-state Rep. Robin Kelly, ex-Rep. Debbie Halvorson, and Chicago Alderman Anthony Beale. The only fundraising deadline ahead of the Feb. 26 primary is not until the 14th of that month, but a couple of candidates have leaked some early numbers (Kelly $200K, Hutchinson $130K). I wouldn't read too much into those figures, though: With little time left to campaign, I expect this to be a low turnout, anything-can-happen kind of affair.

11:36 AM PT: WATN?: Is it even news when an ex-congressman becomes a lobbyist? Republican Steve LaTourette, who served nine terms representing northeastern Ohio, is joining lobbying firm McDonald Hopkins, which is opening up a branch in Washington, DC, natch. LaTourette decided not to seek re-election very late in the cycle (long after the primary), and subsequently went on a tear, ripping his colleagues right and left to almost any reporter who'd let him. That actually does make him a somewhat surprising choice to head up a "government relations" shop, since he didn't exactly leave the House gracefully and had found himself quite marginalized by the end of his career. Ah, but money is money.

12:28 PM PT: VA-Gov: PPP's new Virginia poll is out. Short version:

Terry McAuliffe lead[s] Ken Cuccinelli 46-41. When Bill Bolling is thrown into the mix as an independent candidate he gets 15%, with McAuliffe's lead expanding to 8 points at 40/32.
More soon.

1:14 PM PT (David Jarman): VA-Gov: You've probably noticed a pattern about Virginia's off-year gubernatorial elections that goes back for decades: they elect someone from the party that didn't win the presidential election the previous year, apparently in a futile attempt to balance out the forces of the universe. (The last exception: Republican Mills Godwin in 1973.) So what's it going to take to break this trend? Apparently, it'll take running someone as unlikeable as Ken Cuccinelli.

Public Policy Polling's new poll of this year's Virginia gubernatorial race finds the Democrat, ex-DNC chair Terry McAuliffe, holding a 46-41 lead over Cuccinelli, the state's controversy-seeking Republican Attorney General. Since McAuliffe and Cuccinelli have essentially locked down their parties' nominations, there's only one other permutation that they test.

The state's Republican Lt. Governor, Bill Bolling, had been laying the groundwork a gubernatorial run for many years now and seems none-too-happy that he got elbowed aside by Cuccinelli, who has the state's GOP activist base on his side; he's been publicly floating the idea of running a three-way race as an independent. As you might expect, the effect of running a Democrat vs. two Republicans is... the Democrat wins by an even bigger margin: 40 for McAuliffe, 32 for Cuccinelli, and 15 for Bolling.

Bolling isn't particularly any less conservative than Cuccinelli, he's just more of an establishment figure. So, actually, it's surprising that McAuliffe loses as much ground as he does with Bolling in the race; it's not as if Bolling somehow fits into some previously-unsatisfied 'moderate'/Americans Elect/No Labels space in the spectrum, but is just a partisan who got screwed out of his turn by a bigger partisan and isn't going quietly. T-Mac loses few Democrats to Bolling, though (only 3%); most of the damage comes among self-described independents, who, in the three-way race, break 30 for McAuliffe, 27 for Cuccinelli, and 24 for Bolling. (Meanwhile, 19% of Republicans defect from Cuccinelli to Bolling.)

Bolling has the best favorables of the trio but is also the least-known, at 29/16. Voters are pretty 'meh' on McAuliffe, at 25/26; the main reason McAuliffe is faring as well as he does is because of how disliked Cuccinelli is. He's currently at 29/45 favorables, including only 48/23 favorables among Republicans. In other words, he's essentially starting out the race in a position where, even in a two-way race, Democrats only have to convince 5% more of the voters not to vote for him. Given the many targets in his record, that seems like a very doable proposition.

2:35 PM PT: AR-Gov: Sounds like things are getting worse for Dem AG Dustin McDaniel before they get better... if they ever do. McDaniel, who is married, recently acknowledged an affair with an attorney, Andi Davis, who had business before his office, but only on Tuesday did he go before the media. I don't think this is a great place to be in:

"There is no other shoe to drop," McDaniel said. "There are no other women. There is no litigation that was ever compromised. No rules of professional conduct were ever violated. No state resources, dollars or personnel were used for personal purposes. I made a mistake, for which I have taken and continue to take responsibility, but it had no impact on my job."
If he's telling the truth, that's good, of course, and these are strong, declarative statements to make. The problem for McDaniel is that he's the one making them, and naturally everyone expects a public figure in circumstances like these to defend himself. There's also one extremely uncomfortable additional detail: A man named Maxwell Anderson was found shot to death in Davis's driveway last February... and her brother is apparently a suspect. The matter is still under investigation by the state police, but this is not a good thread to have hanging loose.

Interestingly, though, the probable GOP frontrunner, ex-Rep. Asa Hutchinson, insists that he has no intention of making McDaniel's affair an issue... but weirdly, term-limited Dem Gov. Mike Beebe is shooting his mouth off, playing political pundit and declaring, "Certainly it's not helpful to him and it certainly will have some effect." Why wouldn't Beebe just keep quiet? Anyhow, this is one of those "only time will tell" type of situations: We simply won't know how this'll affect McDaniel's campaign until we see additional polling or fundraising numbers. Or until some other shoes drop—if they do at all. If McDaniel is lucky, they won't.

2:56 PM PT: NYC Mayor: Kill me now:

Mr. Bloomberg has mused about a Mayor Charles E. Schumer with the Democratic senator from New York, and teased Mortimer B. Zuckerman, a fellow billionaire media mogul, about a possible bid. The mayor's advisers raised the idea of a run with Edward G. Rendell, the former Democratic governor of Pennsylvania and mayor of Philadelphia, and with Edward Skyler, Mr. Bloomberg's former top deputy in City Hall, according to several people.

The mayor's most formal overture was delivered to Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, perhaps Mr. Bloomberg's most quixotic choice for the job. The mayor personally encouraged her to enter the race about a year ago, three people who were told about the discussions have told The New York Times.

Ed Rendell? Oh god. At least these ridiculous "musings" must be painfully embarrassing to City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, who's done everything she can to set herself up as Bloomberg's successor. It would be quite the irony if Democratic primary voters wound up feeling the same way about her as Bloomberg apparently does.

3:02 PM PT: Polltopia: Here's PPP's latest "where should we poll" poll. The choices: DE, FL, HI, ME, OH & RI. I picked Ohio, for what it's worth.

3:10 PM PT: P.S. Columbus Mayor Michael Coleman, who briefly ran for governor in 2005 before bowing out to make way for Strickland, confirms he will not make a gubernatorial bid this cycle. I don't think anyone was gunning for a Coleman entry very hard, but his spokesman went pure Sherman: "If nominated he will not run, and if elected he will not serve."

3:27 PM PT: NJ-Gov: Oy vey. FDU's new gubernatorial poll (PDF) out of New Jersey is as brutal as they come. Even though GOP Gov. Chris Christie's stratospheric approval ratings have edged down a touch since Hurricane Sandy (to 73-19, from 77-17), he's still—as you'd expect—crushing a trio of Democratic state senators in head-to-head matchups. Christie beats the only declared candidate, Barbara Buono, 64-21, while two other "maybes" are also getting pounded: Richard Codey (59-26) and Stephen Sweeney (65-19). There's really not much to say here except "ouch."

Speaking of Sweeney, did he just commit political suicide by cop—at least as far as a run for governor might be concerned? Sweeney, president of the state Senate, has never really seemed interested in making the plunge himself, so this is definitely one way to forcibly take yourself out of the running:

"We gave the governor a jobs package. We gave him one. He vetoed it. And his job package is a hurricane. I guess he prayed a lot and got lucky a storm came. I shouldn't say that... I apologize for saying it."
Hey, sometimes we all say things we shouldn't say, so I'm willing to cut Sweeney some slack here, particularly since he apologized instantly. But yikes... you have to really know that this is the kind of remark you just can't make, period. My read could be totally wrong, though, since Sweeney hasn't backed down over the point he was originally trying to make. In response to the inevitable blast of GOP outrage, Sweeney issued a further statement accusing Christie of becoming the "chief politicizer of Sandy" and saying that the governor has been "using the storm to paper over his failure to lead" on other issues. I guess this one's not over yet.

3:51 PM PT: MS-04: One thing I neglected to mention in the previous Digest is that GOP Rep. Steven Palazzo was thought to be a potential primary target last year, thanks to a "raucous house party" organized by his staffers that led to two of them getting fired, as well as a possible violation of state ethical laws regarding a transfer of his accounting business to his wife. No such challenge ever materialized in this dark-red district, but could Palazzo's outrageous vote against relief for victims of Hurricane Sandy—his pleaded for federal aid for his hometown of Biloxi after it was badly damaged in Hurricane Katrina—offer additional fodder? At least one local paper is taking Palazzo to task over his vote, but I'm not sure this is the kind of hypocrisy that motivates Republican primary voters. Still, it's worth keeping an eye on this crumb bum.

4:12 PM PT: MA-Gov: Here's a new potential Democratic primary candidate: Donald Berwick, a former administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, who says he is "strongly considering" a run but has no timetable for deciding. If you follow DC goings-on closely, you may recall that Berwick was named to his post by President Obama via recess appointment, but after serving for a year and a half, he resigned because Republicans were opposed to permanently confirming him. Berwick doesn't have much of a public profile back home, but he is recognized as a healthcare expert and, if he can raise some money, could try to gain traction on that front, particularly as more key provisions of the Affordable Care Act come online.

The linked article also mentions a few other possible Dem names, in addition to the two heavy hitters who've already openly mooted runs (Lt. Gov. Tim Murray and Treasurer Steve Grossman): Somerville Mayor Joseph Curtatone, Salem Mayor Kim Driscoll, and state Sen. Daniel Wolf are all reportedly looking at the race.

4:37 PM PT: WI-08: Uh, Reid Ribble said what? From a new Huffington Post piece on how (predictably) miserable fundraising (chiefly, "call time") is for new members of Congress:

On Capitol Hill, call time evokes a rare bipartisan accord. "An hour and a half is about as much as I can tolerate. There's no way to make it enjoyable," Rep. Reid Ribble (R-Wis.) told HuffPost. "I've never had four hours a day. Not even close to it. I've got work to do. I don't know how anybody could put that much time to it. That'll burn everybody out. Why would you want this stupid job if you had to do that?"
This stupid job? Also, check out the useless Alcee Hastings bragging about how he doesn't help his party:
But call time isn't for him. "Yours truly, in 20 years, I have combined—on behalf of DCCC, DNC and myself—been to DCCC for call time less than six hours in 20 years. I’m still standing."
Hastings is the same jagoff who berated Rahm Emanuel in 2006 for supposedly doing a poor job recruiting candidates, while at the same time refusing to campaign against then-Rep. Clay Shaw because the two were buddies. In fact, Hastings even "gave Shaw strategic advice" on how to campaign that year. Well, Shaw lost and Rahm won, to put it mildly, so maybe we're better off without Hastings' "help."

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (5+ / 0-)

    Get the Daily Kos Elections Digest in your inbox every weekday. Sign up here.

    by David Nir on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 06:00:06 AM PST

  •  A little birdie (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, Audrid

    a little birdie told me today, the opening say of the 2013 Minnesota legislature, that the senate will not vote to put any constitutional amendments of any kind on the 2014 ballot.

  •  OH-Gov (6+ / 0-)

    A liberal knows that the only certainty in this life is change but believes that the change can be directed toward a constructive end.--Henry Wallace

    by 54cermak on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 06:29:01 AM PST

  •  Interesting... (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wwmiv, zyangunc, sacman701, dufffbeer, lordpet8

    Gibson is now in the fourth-most Democratic seat held by a Republican (only IRL, Valadeo, and Gary Miller have seats Obama did better in).  D+1 seat.  

    In contrast, while NY-18 improved a bit in terms of PVI (going from R+1 in 2008 only numbers to EVEN in 2012), it's now to the right of Owens NY-21, given the latter shifted more to the left.  It may end up the most Republican-leaning seat held by a Democrat in New York, although we'll have to see how NY-01 turns out.  

    NJ-02 is the only remaining Republican seat we don't have numbers on I'm certain Obama won.  Obama may have carried NJ-03, NY-02, NY-11, NY-22, NY-23, PA-06, and PA-15 as well, although I'm guessing he only carried two or three of these.  

    •  Yep (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, lordpet8

      Lowey and Tonko stayed the same at D+5 and D+7, respectively.

      Also, MO-6 went from R+9 to R+12 and IN-6 stayed the same at R+12.

      23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

      by wwmiv on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 07:00:55 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Within your list, (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lordpet8, abgin

      I bet that Obama carried NJ03 and NY11, and lost the rest.

      If you look at the NY / PA spreadsheets, even though not complete yet, it is pretty clear that Obama narrowly lost NY-22 (maybe within 1K) / NY-23 / PA-06 / PA-15. Most likely he won NY-11, given that the Brooklyn portion of NY11 is a little more Dem friendly.

      Dave Wasserman now has NJ02 / NJ03 / NY11 definitively in Obama column, NY22 / NY23 / PA06 / PA15 in Romney column, and only NY01 / NY02 / PA07 as TBD. Of the TBDs, my guess is that Romney won PA07 by no more than 3K votes,  or about 1%. NY01 is a possible Obama district by around 10K. And if that is true, then Romney possibly won NY02 by less than 10K.

      That will bring the total number of CDs carried by Obama to 208, and Romney to 227. Given the 4% presidential popular vote difference, you will know how effectively the Republican map makers exploited the concentrating of Dem votes in major urban areas to created lopsided vote sinks, especially in states like PA, OH, MI, and VA.

  •  Gabby Giffords/Mark Kelly (5+ / 0-)

    With former Representative Gabby Giffords and her husband Mark Kelly launching a gun control group, Americans for Responsible Solutions, are they now entirely off the table for future Senate races in Arizona?

  •  Lol, apparently Bloomberg asked Schumer and (9+ / 0-)

    Ed Rendell to run for mayor on separate occasions.
    http://thehill.com/...

    That's basically like Oscar Goodman asking Harry Reid to run for Las Vegas mayor.  Why in hell would Schumer do that when he could be senate majority leader for a long time?  I tend to think he's a modest to strong favorite over Durbin thanks to his tenure as DSCC head helping to elect several current members, as well as his ties to the financial industry and their cash.  He's also my personal preference once Reid retires in 2016 since he seems to have the LBJ ballsiness that Durbin doesn't quite display (and that Reid has only started to develop over time).

    NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

    by sawolf on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 08:01:07 AM PST

  •  US Senate Seniority (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dc1000, MichaelNY, zyangunc, RVKU

    So every once in a while I check wikipedia's US Senate Seniority as I find the list fascinating.  Fun things from the current US Senate:

    -When Kerry is confirmed, Barb Mikulski will break into the top 10 for tenure, I presuem the first woman to do so.
    -Somehow Jeff Begich, despite serving his first term and being from one of the smallest states and having the lowest seniority of his 2008-elected class, has seniority over 34 other Senators (US Senate has urnover like McDonald's it seems)
    -Of the 50 least senior US Senators, the breakdown is 26 Dems, 23 GOP and 1 Indy.  Of the 23 from the GOP, 12 were firste elcted in the 2010 wave (crazy).  Of the 26 Dems, 8 were first elected in 2008.

    Looking at the list made me wonder which of the Dem bench of current female senators is most likely to be majority leader some day?

    "What if you're on a game show one day and the name of some random New Jersey state senator is the only thing between you and several thousand dollars? And you'll think to yourself, "if only I had clapped faster." - sapelcovits

    by rdw72777 on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 08:25:21 AM PST

  •  Anthony Gutierrez (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, KingofSpades, lordpet8

    Gallego Campaign manager:

    http://blog.chron.com/...

    (love him).

    23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

    by wwmiv on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 08:49:10 AM PST

  •  MT (11+ / 0-)

    Steve Bullock officially took over as Governor today. He could be a great successor for Max Baucus in 2020.  

  •  Why doesn't TIm Ryan wnat to be OH-Gov (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    Has anyone heard about this?  I kind of thought in the apst he was deferring to Strickland, but i guess he just doesn't want the job.  

    I mean if I'm an ambitious congressman, OH-Gov is a fantastic stepping stone to national aspirations down the road.

    "What if you're on a game show one day and the name of some random New Jersey state senator is the only thing between you and several thousand dollars? And you'll think to yourself, "if only I had clapped faster." - sapelcovits

    by rdw72777 on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 09:16:46 AM PST

    •  Maybe doesn't want to take in incumbent... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      And will wait until 2018.  Unless he has his sights on Portman in 2016...

      President Obama would have been a Republican in the 1980's.

      by Jacoby Jonze on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 09:21:22 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  he's been pretty quiet since his incident in KY. (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jj32, OGGoldy, MichaelNY, lordpet8, dc1000

      ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

      by James Allen on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 09:22:13 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Abortion? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sawolf, MichaelNY, lordpet8

      Being a pro-life Dem was quite the thing post-2004. Lots of Dems thought pandering to cultural conservatives was the way to go after Dubya's re-election, hence Gov. Bill Ritter, Bob Casey, etc. But now? It's much more of a millstone, and Democrats seem to have learned that assertiveness on the topic yields real political benefits. Ryan could always promise not to sign legislation to restrict abortion, and talented politicians aren't going to split their coalition if they can help it. But it's an obstacle to be sure.

      •  To clarify (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, lordpet8

        I actually think Casey has been a pretty good senator despite being pro-life, but that was one of Schumer's odd fixations in 2006. He tried to get Jim Langevin to run for the Senate from Rhode Island, which is just insane. Casey's pick was partly about putting more pro-life faces out there, as any Dem with a pulse, which includes a few pro-choice ones, could have beaten Santorum.

        •  I remember there being some controversy... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          ... over Casey, because Schumer's recruitment of Casey bumped aside Barbara Hafer. If I remember correctly, Hafer (when she switched parties) had been seemingly promised support for an '06 Senate bid by Rendell and much of the PA Democratic establishment. A pro-choice, ex-Republican woman from SW PA would have, on paper, been a solid choice to defeat Santorum.

          •  Santorum was done no matter who was selected (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            Casey made it a walk, but Ricky had been a punchline for four years by then because of his man on dog comments, he was an ardent supporter of Rumsfeld and the Iraq War, and his bizarre foreign policy theories about Venezeula and Iran becoming allies only poured fuel on the fire. He had strayed so far from any interests in his state that any Dem was going to be able to beat him. Casey was picked because of the optics and because of how easy it would be for him, so that Democrats could lock it down to focus on other races.

  •  is it cool to mourn richard ben cramer here? (8+ / 0-)

    seriously, titan of campaign journalism. what it takes is THE book on politics. RIP.

    Deputy Political Director, DGA. Opinions here are my own and in no way represent the DGA's thinking.

    by Bharat on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 09:16:51 AM PST

  •  Betty Sutton (9+ / 0-)

    I'd LOVE seeing her as governor. Woman has gumption. And really not much else in terms of places to go.

  •  Various stuff (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, Xenocrypt

    some covered last night, some not

    Special elections on March 12th to replace McLeod and Vargas in the CA State Senate, runoffs in May if nobody wins a majority in March.

    Special election for the NYC Council to replace James Sanders, in a winner-takes-all plurality rules election. It's technically nonpartisan but in a heavily Dem area.

    Filing continues for a Georgia House seat, 5 Republicans have filed.

    Guessing nothing big will occur in tonight's elections though.

    I'd note the San Diego city council special election again, but i'm too captivated by their District 8 connecting Logan Heights to the US/Mexico border. The quirks of city limits.

    The Republican Party isn't a party of small government, it's a party of a government for the few. @bhindepmo

    by RBH on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 11:33:05 AM PST

  •  Southern Dems from the late 19th Century (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, bumiputera, David Nir

    So I just got around reading all the old live digests and I had a few questions about post regarding ideology.

    While the main concern of the piece was the ever growing conservative pull within the GOP, I was more curious to know exactly how they rated ideology for the southern Dems. The chart has them as the most liberal party from the 1870's through 1920! Was it the populism of the southern Dems that put them to the left of their northern brethren?

    Secondly I wish they broke down Republicans into their liberal, radical and conservative wings. I would have considered some Republicans of the 19th century to be the left of the Dems.

    24, gay Atari Democrat CA-41

    by lordpet8 on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 11:37:22 AM PST

    •  In that time period (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      During that Victorian era of politics you are referring to, there were a string of Republicans from the North with Harrison, McKinley, Teddy, and Taft all being northern Republicans. During this period the Democratic Party was nearly non-existent outside of Dixie, so any and all attributes assigned to the Democrats in the post-reconstruction era can be attributed to Dixiecrats.

      •  That's not entirely true (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, bumiputera, James Allen

        The Democratic coalition from the party system after the civil war also consisted of the "white ethnic" immigrants in northern cities such as New York, Boston, Chicago etc.  This includes Catholics (Irish, later Italians), Jews, as well as other groups, basically the immigrants and non-Protestant working class.  It also involved small farmers in the west as well as miners who were getting screwed by the big banks and railroads, that's why William Jennings Bryan's campaign took on as much as it did outside the south: populism.

        NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

        by sawolf on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:14:20 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  well the Dems managed to actually win (5+ / 0-)

        the house from 1875-1881, 1883-1889, and once more from 1891-1895.

        So there were clearly Northern Democrats that helped provide the Dem House Majority. I was just curious on how Northern Dems were considered to be to the right of Southern Dems during these periods.

        The Democratic party was based on two different wings, you had the southern dixiecrat wing, and the Northern, wet, Immigrant wing.

        24, gay Atari Democrat CA-41

        by lordpet8 on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:17:21 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  About right (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Xenocrypt, lordpet8, bumiputera, MichaelNY

      It's easy to forget that Democrats enacted virtually every single progressive wish list item during Woodrow Wilson's first term, while the prior two Republican Administrations failed to implement more than a small number of them. Democrats were the party of Wm. Jennings Bryan while Republicans worshiped McKinley. And throughout that era, Republicans defended privilege and corruption while Democrats preached reform. The big-city machines were drivers of that, though it is true that there were some Theodore Bilbo types who married virulent racist rhetoric to a progressive policy agenda. Of course, only the rhetoric on race differed from what Southern conservatives of the time supported on that issue, but the domestic policies between the two were very different.

      The conflict between Southern populists and Southern conservatives persisted for quite a while actually. Even as late as the fifties, Alabama was represented in the Senate by John Sparkman and Lister Hill, both of whom were liberal on most domestic issues, though not civil rights of course. And, of course, Tennessee sent Estes Kefauver and Albert Gore to the Senate, and the former was one of the most liberal senators of his time. The civil rights battle would ultimately end all that.

      •  Hold it (0+ / 0-)

        I feel like you're giving short shrift to TR. He implemented some of the most important progressive reforms, right?

        Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

        by MichaelNY on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:24:28 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Compared to McKinley anyone was progressive (4+ / 0-)

          And while yes, TR's administration does deserve some credit, particularly with things like the Pure Food and Drug Act, the Wilson era economic reforms were much stronger (setting aside civil rights which was a huge step backwards).  Things like the Clayton Antitrust Act, the Federal Reserve Act, the direct election of senators, etc. etc. were all much more effective and progressive than the previous reforms.

          NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

          by sawolf on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:29:37 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Not all of TR's suggested reforms (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            bumiputera

            were put into effect. He was the first to campaign for universal health care, but that was during his third, unsuccessful presidential campaign that led to the election of Wilson. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe Wilson tried to get any universal health coverage.

            Here, from Wikipedia, are some of the progressive reforms TR effectuated:

            Once President, Roosevelt worked to increase the regulatory power of the federal government. Regulation of railroads was strengthened by the Elkins Act (1903) and especially the Hepburn Act of 1906, which had the effectively favored merchants over the railroads. Under the president's leadership, the Attorney General brought forty-four suits against monopolies. Notably, J.P. Morgan's Northern Securities Company a huge railroad combination, was broken up. To raise the visibility of labor and management issues onto the federal stage, he established the new Department of Commerce and Labor.[12]
            In response to public clamor, Roosevelt pushed Congress to pass the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906, as well as the Meat Inspection Act of 1906. These laws provided for labeling of foods and drugs, inspection of livestock and mandated sanitary conditions at meatpacking plants. Congress replaced Roosevelt's proposals with a version supported by the major meatpackers who worried about the overseas markets, and did not want small unsanitary plants undercutting their domestic market.[13]
            Roosevelt was a prominent conservationist, putting the issue high on the national agenda. He worked with all the major figures of the movement, especially his chief advisor on the matter, Gifford Pinchot. Roosevelt was deeply committed to conserving natural resources, and is considered to be the nation's first conservation President. He encouraged the Newlands Reclamation Act of 1902 to promote federal construction of dams to irrigate small farms and placed 230 million acres (360,000 mi² or 930,000 km²) under federal protection. Roosevelt set aside more Federal land, national parks, and nature preserves than all of his predecessors combined.[16]

            Roosevelt established the United States Forest Service, signed into law the creation of five National Parks, and signed the 1906 Antiquities Act, under which he proclaimed 18 new U.S. National Monuments. He also established the first 51 Bird Reserves, four Game Preserves, and 150 National Forests, including Shoshone National Forest, the nation's first. The area of the United States that he placed under public protection totals approximately 230,000,000 acres (930,000 km2).

            Gifford Pinchot had been appointed by McKinley as chief of Division of Forestry in the Department of Agriculture. In 1905, his department gained control of the national forest reserves. Pinchot promoted private use (for a fee) under federal supervision. In 1907, Roosevelt designated 16 million acres (65,000 km²) of new national forests just minutes before a deadline.

            And there were more reforms that he pressed for but wasn't able to get passed:
            By 1907–08, his last two years in office, Roosevelt was increasingly distrustful of big business, despite its close ties to the Republican party in every large state. Public opinion had been shifting to the left after a series of scandals, and big business was in bad odor. Abandoning his earlier cautious approach toward big business, Roosevelt freely lambasted his conservative critics and called on Congress to enact a series of radical new laws — the Square Deal — that would regulate the economy.[23] He wanted a national incorporation law (all corporations had state charters, which varied greatly state by state), a federal income tax and inheritance tax (both targeted on the rich), limits on the use of court injunctions against labor unions during strikes (injunctions were a powerful weapon that mostly helped business), an employee liability law for industrial injuries (preempting state laws), an eight-hour law for federal employees, a postal savings system (to provide competition for local banks), and, finally, campaign reform laws.
            It looks to me like TR's agenda was a lot more radical than what Wilson got passed. How much more domestic reforms did Wilson want that he wasn't able to get passed?

            Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

            by MichaelNY on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:50:20 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Wilson passed most of what that second passage... (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sawolf, MichaelNY, bumiputera

              ... described, save for, as you point out, the national incorporation law. Under Wilson, the 16th Amendment passed, for example, reestablishing the income tax. As sawolf points out, with the very significant exception of civil rights, Wilson had a very progressive domestic policy record. Though it's common to cite TR as more progressive, there isn't much evidence that's actually true. TR's platform in 1912 was somewhat more radical, but much of what he proposed was enacted during the Wilson Administration (a point that Democrats made during the 1916 campaign to appeal to progressives).

              TR's accomplishments during his actual presidency were significantly fewer, and in fact Taft pursued more antitrust cases than TR had.

              Also, while it's common to criticize Wilson's race and civil liberties records (genuine black marks), TR wasn't that much better. He was more progressive on African-American civil rights, though he did little to advance them during his presidency. But he was an arch-imperialist and swung way to the right post-1912. Had he been president during that period, the US would have entered WW1 earlier and his civil liberties restrictions would likely have outdone Wilson's.

        •  His record might be overstated (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, lordpet8

          Taft (Taft!) ended up busting more trusts than Teddy did (though that's not all of progressivism).

          28, Male, MA-07 (hometown MI-06)

          by bumiputera on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:32:29 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Roosevelt was progressive (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sawolf, MichaelNY, bumiputera

          But he still governed a Republican Party that was dominated by archconservatives like Henry Cabot Lodge and Nelson Aldrich. He got some things through, but he struck a bit of a middle course.

          TR was the most liberal, radical candidate on the ballot in 1912, and sometimes people let that bleed retrospectively into appraisals of his performance as president. It wasn't bad considering the times, but he was no Wilson.

          •  Exactly, and this is what I meant by (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            NMLib

            Roosevelt administration and Wilson era.  These people weren't divorced from their parties even if they did have leeway on some issues.  It would have been interesting to see what Roosevelt would have done with a Democratic Congress (Wilson with a Republican Congress would have just seen regressive civil rights policies, but not much in the way of progress other than the courts).

            However, Personal values really don't mean that much in the grand scope of things if they bear no relation to the actual policy actions of the party.  This is why I hope that in the future, Bill Clinton's stock plummets among the left, as his most lasting impact is going to be Welfare Reform and helping Republicans blow up our trade deficit (which was the prime cause of the housing bubble, though not the sole cause obviously).  Not that he wasn't worlds better than what a Dole administration would have been, but Clinton is certainly no Kennedy.  Obama is our Kennedy.

            NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

            by sawolf on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:11:47 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Well, save for Eugene Debs (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            sawolf, MichaelNY, jncca, bumiputera

            Who got 6% of the vote that year.

      •  What about Huey P Long (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        lordpet8, MichaelNY

        Senator from Louisiana, and one of the most radical socialists ever to serve in Congress.

        •  One thing I wondered about him (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, JBraden

          what were his views on civil rights?  His views on "spreading the wealth around" would sharply contradict the Dixiecrat view on civil rights.

          Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

          by KingofSpades on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:36:05 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  He was a segregationist. (0+ / 0-)

            Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

            by SaoMagnifico on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:37:06 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  -_- Figures. The hypocrite. (0+ / 0-)

              Was there any white southern Democrat in that era (the Jim Crow era) who was pro-civil rights?  Rep. Ken Hechler marched with MLK, but he was from WV, which defected from the CSA.  Who was that Georgian Democrat who proudly voted for the Civil Rights act even though he well knew that Lestor Maddox would rain wrath down upon him?  Also, there's LBJ, of course.

              Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

              by KingofSpades on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:44:18 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Well, sure there were (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                KingofSpades, MichaelNY

                Then-Speaker Sam Rayburn reluctantly supported civil rights legislation starting in the 1950s.

                Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

                by SaoMagnifico on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:47:21 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I know, I just wanted someone to list from memory (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY

                  Yeah, Rayburn was from NE Texas, a Dixiecrat area.

                  Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

                  by KingofSpades on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:48:28 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  and i'd imagine that (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    MichaelNY, bumiputera

                    Rayburn dying in 1961 and being replaced with a Massachusetts Dem sped up the process of meaningful civil rights legislation.

                    The Republican Party isn't a party of small government, it's a party of a government for the few. @bhindepmo

                    by RBH on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:06:08 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  McCormack wasn't that liberal either (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      MichaelNY, levlg, KingofSpades

                      He was decent supporter of the vietnam war, though he did preside over the one of most liberal congressional sessions since the new deal. House Liberals grew tired of him by the end of the 1960's and he promptly retired in 1970.

                       I don't think Rayburn was that anti-civil rights either in the grand scheme of things. IIRC:  He was prepared to strip many southerners from their chairmanships/seniority over civil rights legislation nearing the end of the 1950s.

                      I want to say in the 5 speakers that followed Rayburn, Tip Oneill was the most liberal.

                      24, gay Atari Democrat CA-41

                      by lordpet8 on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:19:47 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

              •  if we limit that to people who got elected (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                KingofSpades, MichaelNY

                probably not that many elected passed using current standards. Some Southern Dems didn't sign the manifesto but couldn't go full-integration.

                Not sure on if there was really much of a states-rights/backlash upcurrent in WV. They did elect some civil rights friendly Republicans in the 1950s.

                The border state approach to school desegregation seemed to be "Ok, we don't have many African-Americans in this area, so let's just integrate so we don't have to pay for a separate school covering a huge geographic area"... there were exceptions in MO, but in some parts of MO, integration came quick.

                The Republican Party isn't a party of small government, it's a party of a government for the few. @bhindepmo

                by RBH on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:50:54 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  looking at Civil Rights act of 1964 Passage (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                KingofSpades, MichaelNY

                6 or 7(there is a discrepency on wikipedia) Southern House Democrats (one was fellow texan J.J. Pickle) and 1 southern Democratic Senator (Ralph Yarborough) voted for the bill

                24, gay Atari Democrat CA-41

                by lordpet8 on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:00:16 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  House vote (5+ / 0-)

                  It was really a regional vote. IL voted 23-1, PA 27-0, OH 22-1, and IN 10-1 in favor even though all 4 delegations were majority GOP. NY went 41-0 and NJ 15-0. WV voted 5-0 in favor so at that point it was definitely northern when it came to civil rights. OK was 3-2 in favor, suggesting that it wasn't really southern on that issue either.

                  Southerners who voted for it, all Dems:
                  Claude Pepper, FL
                  Charles Weltner, GA
                  Carl Perkins, KY (which was 6-1 against)
                  Ross Bass, TN
                  Richard Fulton, TN
                  Jack Brooks, TX
                  Albert Thomas, TX
                  Jake Pickle, TX
                  Henry Gonzalez, TX

                  http://www.govtrack.us/...

                  SSP poster. 43, new CA-6, -0.25/-3.90

                  by sacman701 on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 02:15:51 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

              •  A few (4+ / 0-)

                Claude Pepper, Ralph Yarborough, Lyndon Johnson, Estes Kefauver, and Albert Gore (though he chickened out in the 1964 CRA, he voted for all the other major legislation on the subject) in the Senate. In the House I'm not quite so sure--Rayburn favored voting rights at least, and probably a few people from Tennessee and Texas, I'd have to look. Those two states tended to produce most of the less-racist politicians for various reasons. I'm pretty sure all the East Tennessee Republicans voted for it.

              •  the most liberal dems from the old CSA (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MichaelNY, lordpet8

                off the top of my head were:

                Bob Eckhardt
                Dante Fascell
                Dick Fulton
                David Pryor
                Bill Anderson
                Sam Gibbons
                Claude Pepper
                Hale Boggs
                Henry Gonzalez
                Bill Alexander

                RRH expat (known as AquarianLeft). Also known as freepcrusher on leip atlas forum

                by demographicarmageddon on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 02:07:15 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  Mentioned but (4+ / 0-)

                just to put an exclamation point on it: Ralph Yarbrough!  Didn't sign the Southern Manifesto and voted for every Civil Rights Bill between 1957-1970.

            •  Was he really? (0+ / 0-)

              Or was it just that he worked within the system to provide for both whites and blacks? I mean, would you also call FDR a segregationist? If so, then it's fair to also call Huey Long one. If not, I'd like to hear more about why you think it's fair to use that term for Huey Long.

              Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

              by MichaelNY on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:57:00 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  FDR was no segregationist (7+ / 0-)

                He mounted a real effort to unseat some of the worst racists in the Senate in 1938, which mostly failed, and he fought like hell to get Henry Wallace on the ticket in 1940 rather than a Southern segregationist successor. Part of the Truman pick too was that Truman was not racist. FDR was very conscious that this would become one of the major political issues after WWII and set things up accordingly.

                But he didn't push an anti-lynching law because he was afraid it would cost him support in the South. Most historians argue his judgment on that was wrong, but he did know an awful lot about politics.

              •  Yeah I think this is a misguided perspective (4+ / 0-)

                for example, do we want future generations to look back on the Democratic party from 1965 to a few years ago and say "Democrats were reactionary on LGBT rights, they should all be swept under the rug!"  No, of course not.  I'm not making excuses for vile policies regarding civil rights, but the politics of a two party system has to consider all issues and in that regard, FDR and Long were as left wing as you could realistically hope for yet still get elected and implement reforms.

                NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

                by sawolf on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:14:57 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

          •  He was much beloved in Louisiana (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            KingofSpades, bumiputera

            by both blacks and whites, and was quite liberal on race for a Southerner.

            Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

            by MichaelNY on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:51:06 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  I'm trying to remember some articles (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, bumiputera

      about this.  I think the Southern Dems were the most consistent advocates for lower tariffs, which was generally an economically liberal position.  

      On the other hand, just looking for a vote, I found this one from 1913 on "increasing income taxes on those in the upper bracket so that they shall be compelled to pay an equitable and proportionate share of the expenses of the government".  16 Senators voted for it, all Republicans, and mostly Midwestern or Western Republicans (Robert La Follette, George Norris).

      27, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-10 (formerly PA-02/NY-12, then PA-02/NY-14).

      by Xenocrypt on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:27:21 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  In reality though it wasn't exactly a progressive (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bumiputera, James Allen

        position.  The northern working class in particular would have been hurt by lower tariffs while southern blacks wouldn't really stand to gain from increased agricultural exports.

        In comparison, countries that successfully industrialized over a rapid period protected their infant industries while repressing agricultural rents.  These include Taiwan, Japan, South Korea.  This is in stark contrast to Latin America where even after Spanish/Portuguese control ended, development languished as all of the agricultural exports went to wealthy landowners.  The same would have happened here had the South gotten its way prior to and immediately after the civil war (when those industries were in "infancy").

        However, the taxation issue is surprising at first glance, but wealth inequality was (probably? I don't have a citation) lower in the North and West thanks to the absence of plantation farming and when inequality is lower, political power is more dispersed allowing for more players to have an interest in taxing the rich.  In the South the large agricultural interests, though representing a small slice of the population, wielded a great deal of political power.

        NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

        by sawolf on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:37:43 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Again, I don't really remember (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          but my sense is that northern liberals often voted for lower tariffs as well.  For example, this vote on eliminating hemp duties was nearly party line, with Northern and Southern Democrats voting together.  And I think an article I read used "lower tarrif" votes as a proxy for overall liberalism.  Whatever the actual effects of tarrifs, lower tarrifs might still have been regarded as a liberal position at the time (like prohibition).  But I'm certainly no expert in either regard.

          27, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-10 (formerly PA-02/NY-12, then PA-02/NY-14).

          by Xenocrypt on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:56:10 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  That's a bit later than the period I was thinking (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY, bumiputera

            Once domestic industry was well established and by that time it was, lowering the tariff wouldn't kill it so yes, lower tariffs were the more left-wing position.

            But I'm thinking back to the 2nd party system where the Whigs were for the tariff and Democrats were against it and the period after the initial 2nd stage industrial revolution sparked by the civil war where a lot of nascent manufacturing would have been vulnerable to British competition.  From a domestic viewpoint, a policy that encouraged the greater amount of total development and prevented rents from accruing to an aristocratic elite seems hands down the more progressive of the realistic options.

            Don't get me wrong, not everything about that development strategy was perfect, but if you compare our experience with that of Latin America and Russia (and later Africa) on the one hand and Japan (and later South Korea and Taiwan) on the other, it doesn't take a genius to see which one we were closer to and that we are a lot more developed as a result.  Especially since the baseline wasn't all that different from Latin America in the 1800s, particularly countries like Argentina.

            NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

            by sawolf on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:04:41 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  I wouldn't make assumptions about inequality (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          bumiputera

          outside the South. Let's remember that the Industrial Revolution led to tremendous inequality between the factory workers - who were expendable and could literally be worked to death - and the owners and managers.

          Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

          by MichaelNY on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:58:32 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Not everyone worked in a factory though (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY, jncca

            I know for damn sure that agricultural wealth inequality was magnitudes lower outside the South (not just the North but also the midwest and plains) thanks to things like the Homestead act and the inability to grow plantation crops.  Yes, the wealth disparity between the factory workers and owners was disgusting, but do you really think it was worse than the disparity between the Southern plantation aristocrats and sharecroppers? I doubt it was.

            I'd love to see some GINI coefficient calculations for the South and non-South over the course of the 3rd party system though, I bet a lot of people would be surprised.

            NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

            by sawolf on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:17:44 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  that vote (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KingofSpades, MichaelNY

        That 1913 vote would be scored as the conservative position, just fyi, due to the left right axis on that issue at that time. It was a "fiscal responsibility" vote.

        Remember to not look at those old votes through the prism of today's politics, because it'll warp what was the actual spectrum.

        23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

        by wwmiv on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:00:26 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Al Smith (6+ / 0-)

      a New Yorker, strong Catholic, and anti-Prohibition Democratic candidate for President in 1928 was way too extreme for the country and lost in a landslide to Herbert Hoover, carried only the Deep South.  I'm not sure how liberal he really was but he definitely had no Southern social values, and yet the Deep South was so afraid of Republicans that they still supported him.  Just think of the South supporting someone like Anthony Weiner today, that's how crazy it was.

      •  He wasn't really that extreme (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, James Allen, bumiputera

        Ideologically, he and Hoover were nearly identical; their only major difference of opinion was on prohibition.

        Smith lost because: (1) the economy was booming (which advantaged Republicans), (2) Republicans had a structural advantage between 1896 and 1928, and (3) he was Catholic, running in a time when anti-Catholicism and nativism were extremely strong.

        Still, even with the last handicap, had Smith been the nominee in '32, he'd have probably won.  

        •  Smith would easily have won in '32 (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, sawolf, James Allen, bumiputera

          By then, nobody cared about the demon rum or papists, they just wanted relief. Smith's work all during the '20s showed him to be a believer in activist, compassionate government, a perfect fit for the times. FDR winning really set off Smith's bitterness, setting him on course to become a right-wing nut within four years.

          The Old South's tactical voting was often highly unusual. In 1924, presidential candidate William G. McAdoo collected the endorsement of the KKK even though he was a progressive, simply because he was "dry" and Protestant (unlike Smith). And yet, the South voted for Smith as the candidate in 1928. They had a strict hierarchy of hates going on back then.

        •  I'd bet their tariff positions were different (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, bumiputera

          but I can't remember for sure.  It's been quite a while since I actually took a history course and Smith isn't really important enough in the grand scope of things that I remember it from first learning it.

          That said, any Democrat would have won in 1932.  Even Huey Long.  Hell even Henry Wallace would have won.

          NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

          by sawolf on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 02:34:35 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  They use party ID as a stand-in for ideology (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, sawolf, lordpet8

      What many of the previous posters have said is true, but having seen these Voteview graphs and figures before, there's a major flaw: they use party ID as stand-ins for ideology. So if you stick with the party leadership and you're a Democrat, that's automatically counted as "liberal." Likewise for Republicans.

    •  Also, re: Southern Democrats and liberalism (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, sawolf, lordpet8

      ...To answer your question, no: Southern Democrats were never the "most liberal" members of Congress. Some Southern Democrats did have a populist, anti-Wall Street streak, pushing for greater regulations, breakups of monopolies, protective tariffs, etc. But this wasn't universal - many Southern Democrats were arch laissez-faire types. And all of them were extremely racist.

      Defining "liberal" and "conservative" in the 19th C. is actually quite difficult, since the issues don't line up along contemporary lines. Republicans, for example, were generally more in favor of government interventions into the economy or social policy, and were more protective of Civil Rights. But they were also closer to big business, hostile to immigration, and in the early 20th C. pushed prohibition.

      •  Again, except for TR (0+ / 0-)

        He seems to have been highly pro-labor.

        Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

        by MichaelNY on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:31:20 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Up to a point (0+ / 0-)

          ... but not necessarily any moreso than Wilson. All the parties were fairly hostile to labor at the time except the Socialists.

          •  Really? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            sawolf, sacman701

            Again, from Wikipedia:

            A national emergency was averted in 1902 when Roosevelt found a compromise to the Anthracite coal strike that threatened the heating supplies of most homes. Roosevelt forced an end to the strike when he threatened to use the United States Army to mine the coal and seize the mines. By bringing representatives of both parties together, the president was able to facilitate the negotiations and convince both the miners and the owners to accept the findings of a commission.The labor union and the owners reached an agreement after this episode: the labor union agreed to cease being the official bargainer for the workers and the workers got better pay and fewer hours.
            He wanted a national incorporation law (all corporations had state charters, which varied greatly state by state), a federal income tax and inheritance tax (both targeted on the rich), limits on the use of court injunctions against labor unions during strikes (injunctions were a powerful weapon that mostly helped business), an employee liability law for industrial injuries (preempting state laws), an eight-hour law for federal employees, a postal savings system (to provide competition for local banks), and, finally, campaign reform laws.
            Fairly hostile to labor? That might be an overstatement. It seems like he cared about laws and actions that improved conditions for laborers but was ambivalent about unions.

            Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

            by MichaelNY on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 03:10:30 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  Yes (0+ / 0-)

        It was not black and white, liberal and conservative.  For example, the conservative Republicans of the Northeast were generally much more educated, and so called "liberal" populist Democrats in the South/Midwest were very anti-intellectual, anti-science.  E.g.: William Jennings Bryan's famous defense of Creationism.

      •  Yes, I can't emphasize enough that the primary (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        policy divide of our country for at least the first hundred and fifty years was the tariff.  That's what put plantation aristocrats and poor farmers in the south in the same party, and rich industrialists and their poor factory workers (who were protestant) in the same party.

        We didn't start to see the modern division of left-right truly develop into a party system until the Great Depression.

        NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

        by sawolf on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:35:30 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Prohibition was the "liberal" position (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, bumiputera

        of the day, though, at least with a great many politicians.

        27, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-10 (formerly PA-02/NY-12, then PA-02/NY-14).

        by Xenocrypt on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:37:12 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yeah, sort of (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          It wasn't universal, but many progressives embraced prohibition as part of their general program for social reform. Although even at the time it cut across both progressive and conservative lines. Many northern, Protestant conservatives (Republicans mostly) backed prohibition, and many urban progressive Democrats (many of them Catholic) opposed it.

        •  If we're going to be analyzing things on a (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          left-right axis though and it seems a logical thing to do, we have to look at prohibition from a modern perspective.  Knowing what we know now, it couldn't be further from a left-wing position since it created organized crime and did nothing to treat what we now regard as a health problem instead of just a character flaw (alcoholism).

          Speaking of prohibition, I think a lot of people here would enjoy watching season 1 and 2 of Boardwalk Empire.  It looks at prohibition and also ties in the machine politics of it as well as the corruption of the Harding administration, women's voting rights, etc.

          NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

          by sawolf on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 02:03:44 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  progressive yes, liberal no (0+ / 0-)

          and an example of why I hate using them interchangeably.

          ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

          by James Allen on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 11:06:50 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  How were the words different in meaning then? (0+ / 0-)

            I maintain that there is no difference now, except that "liberal" was a bad word, so people who used to call themselves liberals started calling themselves "progressives."

            Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

            by MichaelNY on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 11:10:56 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  meh (0+ / 0-)

              I'm too tired right now.  Progressives essentially had no problem limiting people's freedom if they thought they knew better, so of course they were pro-prohibition.  Liberals should have always been against restricting people's liberty to produce, sell, purchase, and consume alcohol, whether we're talking about engaging in manufacture, commerce, or personal behavior.

              Fwiw I identify as neither liberal nor progressive.

              ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

              by James Allen on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 11:27:54 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  I'm working on an Illinois megamander (5+ / 0-)

    for a preview, I stretched IL-02 down to take in both all of Kankakee and Iroquois County, and it's still VAP majority black.

    Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

    by KingofSpades on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:31:29 PM PST

  •  WI-Gov: Peter Barca subject to draft movement (6+ / 0-)

    There is a Facebook group with 588 members, including Democratic Party of Wisconsin chairman Mike Tate, State Assemblyman Andy Jorgensen, State Assemblywoman Chris Taylor, State Senator Jon Erpenbach, and former Attorney General Peg Lautenschlager, among others, who are calling for Peter Barca, the Minority Leader of the Wisconsin State Assembly, to run for Governor of Wisconsin in 2014.

    If Peter Barca decides not to go through with a WI-Gov run, he'll let down a lot of people...

    Progressive activist and lifelong resident of Vermilion County, Illinois IL-15/IL-SD-52/IL-HD-104

    by DownstateDemocrat on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:34:06 PM PST

    •  Now this is news (3+ / 0-)

      Good find.

      Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

      by SaoMagnifico on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:34:57 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  He is a former US House Representative (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DownstateDemocrat, MichaelNY

      Still, I wish to see the strongest people running.

      •  Represented WI-1 for 3/4 term in the mid-1990s (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KingofSpades, MichaelNY, abgin

        Peter Barca narrowly won a special election in the spring of 1993 to replace Democrat Les Aspin, who resigned from Congress to take the Secretary of Defense post. Barca was defeated in the 1994 general election (bad year for Democrats nationally) by Republican Mark Neumann. Both elections were decided by less than 2,000 votes.

        The 1990's WI-1 would be a true swing district today...all of Rock, Walworth, Racine, and Kenosha counties, the eastern half of Green County, two small sections of southern Jefferson County, and a small section of south central Waukesha County were in the 1990's WI-1. By eyeballing this map and drawing the 1990's WI-1 on DRA (I don't think I got the boundaries exactly right, but it's very close), it's a 56% Obama 2008/45% Democratic Average 2010 district (the 2010 Democratic Average for WI on DRA consists of the 2010 WI-Gov and WI-Sen races).

        Progressive activist and lifelong resident of Vermilion County, Illinois IL-15/IL-SD-52/IL-HD-104

        by DownstateDemocrat on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 08:49:34 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  VA-Gov: Sweet! (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, lordpet8, JBraden, James Allen

    Winning VA is key for both the narrative and the people there.  Also, we get to keep Warner in the Senate (not my favorite Senator, but if McDonnell is thinking of a Senate run, Warner is probably the only Democrat favored over him from the outset).

    Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

    by KingofSpades on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:38:13 PM PST

    •  Hopefully a modest McAuliffe win (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingofSpades, MichaelNY, bumiputera, jncca

      will result in us flipping both the Lieutenant Governor's office and the Attorney General's office, which we haven't held in several cycles.  Picking up LG flips the senate, which isn't up until 2015.

      Our best possible scenario is to have control of both the governor's mansion and state senate and force court-drawn maps.  Then if we ever gain the trifecta, move state elections to presidential years and destroy the state GOP's advantage.

      NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

      by sawolf on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:51:39 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Gov. Christie cruising toward reelection (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sawolf, MichaelNY, dc1000

    He pummels all tested possible opponents by more than 30 points (vs. Buono by more than 40, vs. Sweeney by more than 45) in a Fairleigh Dickinson poll. Of course, the Democrats would close the gap as they garnered more name recognition and went on the attack, but it's a pretty tough sell to recruit a top-tier candidate with numbers like this, and it's daunting to say the least to ask a second- or third-tier candidate like Buono (the only one who has declared, AFAIK) to come back from a 40+ point deficit less than a year out. Results here.

    Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

    by SaoMagnifico on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:41:44 PM PST

    •  Wow we need to run Richard Codey stat (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dc1000, MichaelNY, R30A, bumiputera, jncca

      while Christie's 73/19 approvals (62-29 among Democrats!) makes him look nigh unbeatable, Codey has an impressive 56/18 fav/unfav spread among the 55% who have heard of him.  Sweeney seems to be the worst possible plausible candidate we could run, for anything ever.  The guy only has 44% name rec, but among those people he's underwater 25/39.

      Oh, and Codey is the only one of the three named candidates in the poll who actually wins Democrats (ugh...) It's such a shame Corzine didn't just retire in 2009, then we'd be talking about Chris who?

      NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

      by sawolf on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:56:32 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I disagree, Buono looks better daily (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, James Allen

      Don't all these polls greatly increase Buono's stock? Getting in early is a hallmark of long shot candidates like Buono appeared to be, but it seems to have been a good decision. Buono is the only candidate who we know can raise money against Christie. With an establishment candidate like Sweeney or Codey, their donors are probably also more establishment, and thus more likely to have converted to Christie. Since Democrats also seems so unlikely to win, that means outside groups and lobbying groups probably won't contribute money no matter who the nominee is, so nominating someone with more connections or a better political résumé might not matter much. Buono however has showed she can raise money even against Chrisitie, presumably by tapping the most partisan donors (we are the 29%?) So despite being an apparently second-tier candidate, it might be hard to challenge her for the nomination, and would also seem to position her better to take on Christie better than these other candidates with better résumés.

      (-9.38, -7.49), Blood type "O", social anarchist, KY-01, "When smashing monuments, save the pedestals. They always come in handy." — Stanisław Lem

      by Setsuna Mudo on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 02:05:52 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Interesting outside-the-box perspective (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bumiputera

        Codey really an establishment guy, though? I thought the party bosses in South Jersey prevented him from running for Governor. Am I confusing him with someone else?

        Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

        by MichaelNY on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 03:13:39 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Barbara Buono should take this to account (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sawolf, MichaelNY

        If first you dont succeed try again. She's not going to when this time around, but will be in a much better position if she want to run again in '17 when Christie is term limited and coming off his fail presidential bid. I have a hard time believing that Republicans are going to elect another Northeastern Republican as their standard barrier. Mitt Romney was a exception cause the field was a total laughing stock.

        Honestly I wish she was running for the US Senate  instead of Booker.

        Moderate Progressive, Born in Cairo, Raised in NY-11, Living in NJ-13.

        by BKGyptian89 on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 05:34:58 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  VA-Gov poll: Think this may encourage Bolling? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, jj32

    Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

    by KingofSpades on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 12:51:30 PM PST

    •  It would seem so (0+ / 0-)

      given he has much lower name rec than Cooch or McAuliffe.

      I hate to say it, but I would be slightly skeptical looking at these PPP polls this far out.  They are after all a Democratic pollster.  They are great at what they do (as we saw last year) but right now they might be playing around with Republicans a bit.

      •  PPP's results don't lean Democratic. n/t (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        drhoosierdem, skipos

        Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

        by MichaelNY on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:13:08 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I know (0+ / 0-)

          but they may feel the liberty to skew the results because there's no immediate election right now and this is the stage where Republicans who might run are looking at polls and deciding if they have a chance.  Rasmussen has done it to an extreme in the early part of the election season - not to compare PPP to Rasmussen, obviously PPP is much more accurate, but it has happened before.

          Again, this is just speculation.

          •  The only issue (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            With that speculation is that the die has pretty much been cast as to who the candidates are.  

            Whether Bolling runs as an Indie isn't really a poll-related issue, it's a revenge-based one.

            "What if you're on a game show one day and the name of some random New Jersey state senator is the only thing between you and several thousand dollars? And you'll think to yourself, "if only I had clapped faster." - sapelcovits

            by rdw72777 on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:25:51 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  The Indiana General Assemly is back in session (6+ / 0-)

    with Mike Pence to become governor on Monday, with a 37-13 majority in the Senate and 69-31 in the House majority.

    Indiana will see some radical agenda items like banning union dues deductions from paychecks, requirement to recite the Lord's Prayer in public schools, putting an anti-gay marriage amendment on the 2014 ballot, increasing the school voucher program, new abortion regulations, destruction of local governments, income tax cut of 10%, further cuts to public education, more attacks on public school teachers, super majority for tax increases, and banning straight ticket voting (which targets Dems in Marion County). The only positive thing that I see is a push for a redistricting commission, which Senate President David Long would likely kill. The great Hoosier state, home of the far right's dream agenda.

    "So there's a time for silence, and there's a time for waiting your turn. But if you know how you feel, and you so clearly know what you need to say, you'll know it. I don't think you should wait. I think you should speak now." -Taylor Swift

    by SouthernINDem on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:06:28 PM PST

    •  And there's nothing we can do to stop it (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dc1000, MichaelNY

      If you're one of the few Democrats left in the General Assembly, be prepared to vote "No" a lot!  We'll see what the public reaction is going to be to esepcially the radical social stuff the GA is likely to pass.

      •  Only hope you Hoosiers have is Pence's ambition (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        for higher national office.  If he still has ultimate designs on the WH, he needs to forecast where the country will be in four or eight years and factor it in to at least some extent.  If he goes hard right wing agenda, his chances of winning the WH likely disappear.    

        President Obama would have been a Republican in the 1980's.

        by Jacoby Jonze on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:20:26 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  You presume he wants to win the presidency (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, sawolf, KingTag, lordpet8

          I'm beginning to think the dream of of GOPers is to go whacky in the primaries, spend billions in the GE and then sign a huge book deal.  

          Why bother being President?

          "What if you're on a game show one day and the name of some random New Jersey state senator is the only thing between you and several thousand dollars? And you'll think to yourself, "if only I had clapped faster." - sapelcovits

          by rdw72777 on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:23:23 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Pence won't moderate himself (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          and if he tries it won't go over well with either the public or the state party.  He might try to run on some bullshit like George Bush did by being a "compassionate conservative" (and even that I highly doubt) but he'll always run as a dyed in the wool conservative.

          I think a lot of Republicans are looking at Romney's utterly humiliating limp through primary season last cycle and are taking notes.

          NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

          by sawolf on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:38:22 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  but (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          if he blocks any of the hard right agenda, it will hurt his chances to win the nomination. If he runs in 2016, it will be as a true believer, which is consistent with his record in the House.

          SSP poster. 43, new CA-6, -0.25/-3.90

          by sacman701 on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:52:22 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  It didn't kill Romney's chances (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            he passed a healthcare mandate into law, was pro-choice, and anti-coal.  All anyone needs to do is be in denial for so long, even you believe your own lies.

            Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

            by KingofSpades on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:57:27 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  Lord's Prayer (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingofSpades, sawolf, HoosierD42

      That will be struck down by the courts.

      Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

      by MichaelNY on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:13:40 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah, forcing people of all creeds to say it (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sawolf, MichaelNY

        is akin to a theocracy.

        Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

        by KingofSpades on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:55:36 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Like the Pledge of Allegiance and In God We Trust (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jncca, MichaelNY, NMLib

        right? ;)

        Now I'm being facetious of course since there's actual precedent in our favor on school prayer, but there are a ton of things our government does/forces/allows that seem like they should be a slam dunk to get struck down by the courts on the grounds of separation of church and state, yet they're still there.

        NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

        by sawolf on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 02:06:31 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I don't disagree at all (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KingofSpades

          But the Lord's Prayer is a specifically Christian prayer, ergo sectarian, regardless of its content, which would be acceptable to some non-Christians.

          Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

          by MichaelNY on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 03:15:19 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  True. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            The Pledge of Allegiance, despite its flaws, is much more inclusive as Christians, Jews, and Muslims worship the same God.  The Lord's Prayer is a New Testament creation.

            Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

            by KingofSpades on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 03:25:35 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  However to us atheists it's still offensive (7+ / 0-)

              But what really disgusts me the most is that we force people, who have a right to freedom of speech and expression as well as a right to live here, to have to pledge allegiance.

              NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

              by sawolf on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 03:30:35 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  "Under God" (6+ / 0-)

                should be offensive to everyone, believers and non-believers alike. This nation is emphatically not under God, but under a secular constitution.

                Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                by MichaelNY on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 04:02:49 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Yes (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Audrid, MichaelNY

                  In high school, I declined to speak the pledge (hand over heart and standing, still) partially because it was against my beliefs in a secular government free from religion, partially because I did not like the concept of having to redundantly reiterate my allegiance.

                  Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

                  by KingofSpades on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 04:49:14 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  heh (4+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    KingofSpades, Audrid, JGibson, MichaelNY

                    We had to say it through 6th grade. I would recite the whole thing except for "under God". I don't remember anyone getting in trouble for saying it wrong, kids used to say things like "one nation under the Beatles" or "I pledge allegiance to the fag of the united states of asparagus".

                    SSP poster. 43, new CA-6, -0.25/-3.90

                    by sacman701 on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 05:03:15 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  I was in middle school at the time (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    KingofSpades, Audrid, MichaelNY

                    and I became politically aware in about 2003/2004 when it became incredibly obvious that Bush and co had lied us into war for profiteering, both financially and politically.  That was when I decided that I had had enough pledging allegiance to the flag that Bush and his cronies so disgustingly wrapped themselves in that I made a point of not standing up and remaining silent.  One of my teachers basically tried to get me to do it and I was incredibly ticked off, but there was no way for them to "force" me to say it.

                    If I were to say it now (for whatever reason) I would leave out the "under God."

                    Anyway, this is getting a little far from elections so...

                    NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

                    by sawolf on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 05:19:44 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  I had a friend of a friend (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    KingofSpades, James Allen, MichaelNY

                    Refuse to stand for the pledge and my winger teacher tried to get him in trouble. It was hilarious.

                    I call her a winger because this was a Speech class and at one point she said Catholics weren't Christians because they weren't born-again. Even as an ex-Catholic, I was incredibly offended.

                    24, Practical Progressive Democrat (-4.75, -4.51), DKE Gay Caucus Majority Leader, IN-02; Swingnut. Defeat Wacky Jackie for 2014!

                    by HoosierD42 on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 11:26:42 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

            •  There is also a variation in the Lord's Prayer (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              between Catholics and Protestants. I would expect former Catholic turned Evangelical Protestant Pence to pick the Protestant version. The Lord's Prayer is also to be remembered for those of us that are Catholic as the part of the mass just before the Eucharist.

              "So there's a time for silence, and there's a time for waiting your turn. But if you know how you feel, and you so clearly know what you need to say, you'll know it. I don't think you should wait. I think you should speak now." -Taylor Swift

              by SouthernINDem on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 05:16:02 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  Won't they have an opt out clause (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KingofSpades, MichaelNY, HoosierD42

        for students who don't want to say it. I can't imagine the Republicans are so crazy that they'd mandate that every student has to say it.

    •  Well (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JGibson, MichaelNY, KingofSpades, LordMike

      Maybe your state will set a record for most laws passed by a single legislature to be over-turned by the courts.  

      That'd be something :-)

      "What if you're on a game show one day and the name of some random New Jersey state senator is the only thing between you and several thousand dollars? And you'll think to yourself, "if only I had clapped faster." - sapelcovits

      by rdw72777 on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:19:10 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  We will likely lose seats in 2014 as well (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      And I can't see us winning statewide or congressional races.

      •  I am afraid you are correct (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        drhoosierdem, MichaelNY

        though Shelli Yoder seems likely to run again in IN-09, but I just don't see how she can overcome the GOP numbers in Johnson and Morgan Counties. Mullen may run again in IN-02, but he may face a turnout issue in St. Joseph County compared to 2012. Connie Lawson seems a lock for Secretary of State in 2014, and the open Treasurer and Auditor races will likely go to party hacks on the GOP side, though Tim Berry may try to switch back to being Auditor. I am also afraid we could lose more ground in the Indiana Senate in 2014, where Sen. Lindel Hume (D-Princeton) and Richard Young (D-Milltown) face redrawn seats.

        "So there's a time for silence, and there's a time for waiting your turn. But if you know how you feel, and you so clearly know what you need to say, you'll know it. I don't think you should wait. I think you should speak now." -Taylor Swift

        by SouthernINDem on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 05:20:50 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Amazing to think Dems ran the House until 2011 (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sawolf, MichaelNY, lordpet8
      •  It goes to show that maps matter (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jncca, MichaelNY, lordpet8, ehstronghold

        Just think about what our national politics would look like today if instead of the median House seat being R+3 it were D+3.  We'd be talking about economic stimulus, comprehensive immigration reform, progressive tax reform, the public option, etc.  Instead we're talking about the sequester and the platinum option.

        NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

        by sawolf on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:49:30 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Same thing... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KingofSpades, MichaelNY

        ...here in Michigan.  Dems had a commanding lead in the house for a few years until 2010 when it flipped nearly inversely.  Luckily, here, the House is moving in the Democrats direction, and it seems likely we'll narrowly carry it in two years, and while I don't ever see us winning the state senate, again, I can't imagine any scenario in which we won't get some seats back.  The governor's race is also going to be competitive next time around.

        I take it Indiana doesn't have that many swing districts, anymore?  Is there a map showing the partisan divide of the state house by district?  I'd really be interested to see where outside of Indy Dems have seats.

    •  This is mega-depressing (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sawolf, MichaelNY

      But very much worth writing up as a full diary with more detail.

      Get the Daily Kos Elections Digest in your inbox every weekday. Sign up here.

      by David Nir on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 04:47:17 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  The Inevitability of Terry McAuliffe (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, jj32, IndianaProgressive, bfen

    I remain highly perplexed that, especially given the low likelihood of Cooch being able to win the general election, that no Virginia pols - not 1 - are challenging McAuliffe. I mean sure he's a national money guy, but he's never won a single elected office.

    •  I suppose they want to avoid (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sawolf, LordMike, MichaelNY, lordpet8

      the VA Dem primary of 2009 where they nuke each other.  Also, McAuliffe has done quite a bit for the state party.  If it hadn't been for him, Democrats would likely have outright lost the Senate.  He brought a million in and helped the NoVA Dems like George Barker.

      Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

      by KingofSpades on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:54:33 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  It's the Clinton machine (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jj32, MichaelNY

      which while not particularly strong in Virginia, can help make or break people in a Democratic primary thanks to money and the value of the Bill Clinton endorsement.  After all, it seems the Lanisters Clintons always pay their debts and it doesn't take too much imagination to think that Bill has been manipulating things behind the scenes for McAuliffe.

      It also doesn't hurt McAuliffe that there isn't really anyone with a lot of stature to challenge him.  Deeds was an embarassment, Periello is too obscure by now, Moran, Connolly, and Scott are all too liberal, Warner and Kaine seem fine with the senate, we hold no other statewide offices, and a lot of potentially attractive state Senators would probably put their seats at risk by running.

      NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

      by sawolf on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 01:56:36 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yeah, people might laugh at me (0+ / 0-)

      but I think Creigh Deeds would actually be better than McAuliffe.

      Not saying Deeds was a great candidate, but I think his bigger problems were a better opponent and a bad political climate.

      I'm surprised some Dem state senator isnt jumping into the gov race. For that matter, I'm surprised GOP seems intent on letting Cuccinelli take the GOP nomination.

      •  My reaction: (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sapelcovits, MichaelNY, NMLib, James Allen

        Deeds took a month off after the primary, didn't play his cards well enough on the college thesis issue, couldn't unite Democrats well enough, and underestimated the need of NoVA.

        Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

        by KingofSpades on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 02:19:24 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  He'd learn from those mistakes though (0+ / 0-)

          I think personally, as candidate he would have more appeal than McAuliffe.

          •  People on DKE (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            sapelcovits, NMLib, Skaje, R30A

            are way too willing to assume horrible candidates can learn from their mistakes. Aren't some people just terrible at running for office?

            Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

            by MichaelNY on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 03:18:45 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  maybe (0+ / 0-)

              but if that's the case would Deeds have gotten elected to the state legislature and nearly been elected AG?

              ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

              by James Allen on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 11:13:56 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Peter Principle? (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                sapelcovits

                Coakley was always fine running for AG, too.

                Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                by MichaelNY on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 11:50:54 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  and again (0+ / 0-)

                  there's no indication other than one campaign that she's actually a bad candidate.  She's won others.  If a football team loses one game in a season are they just a bunch of losers?

                  ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

                  by James Allen on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 12:19:47 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  a good indicator of whether someone (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    MichaelNY

                    can win an office is whether they've won that office before...

                    and to answer your question: if the football team takes a month-long vacation and then refuses to practice for the game because it's cold outside - yes.

                    Living in Kyoto-06 (Japan), voting in RI-01, went to college in IL-01.

                    by sapelcovits on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 12:38:37 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Not to rehash this, but everyone and their (0+ / 0-)

                      mother treated this race like a cakewalk. The blame doesn't lie solely with Coakley. When she got back did she fumble? Sure, but so have many other experienced politicians. Especially when the only "race" was the primary.

                      I realize Coakley lost an important seat and that still rankles, but it's been 3 years now and she's exhibited that she can in fact campaign. She took a race for granted and it cost her. I don't think she will ever make that same mistake again. This isn't meant as a defense, but as a recognition of facts.

                      20, Dude, Chairman DKE Gay Caucus! (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09) Tammy Baldwin and Elizabeth Warren for Senate!

                      by ndrwmls10 on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 01:50:31 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  It's more like (0+ / 0-)

                    If a team gets into the wild card playoff series and then is shut out in 3 straight games, how good were they, really?

                    Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                    by MichaelNY on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 06:29:12 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

      •  No Deeds (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KingofSpades, sawolf, MichaelNY

        KingofSpades is right, but the bigger problem is that he never defined himself or his opponent. He attacked McDonnell non-stop without putting him into a box, so when the college thesis came around Deeds couldn't really integrate it into an overarching theme that was ready to go. Just another couple days' attack fodder, nothing more. Also, by distancing himself from numerous Democratic priorities, he encouraged Democrats to either sit out or vote for McDonnell.

        Of course, by now we all know that McDonnell's self-definition was bull, but he was largely given a free hand to do it.

        •  To be clear, I'm not endorsing Deeds (0+ / 0-)

          specifically. But I do he would be stronger than McAuliffe.

          Mainly, I'm disappointed a stronger candidate didnt get into the gov race, like state senators Ralph Northam(running for Lt. gov) or Mark Herring(running for AG).

          •  No he wouldn't (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            JBraden, MichaelNY

            I'm not sure you appreciate how awful the Deeds campaign was.

            Fact of the matter is, he has little appeal for Northern Virginia which is political death for any aspiring statewide Dem. McAuliffe, for all his faults, will at the very least be able to go toe to toe with Cuccinelli's more than likely well funded operation.

            If McAuliffe can effectively present himself as a solid choice while pointing out that Cuccinelli is a nut and Bolling has been an empty suit as LG then we break a historical trend.

            But no, we're not going back to the Deeds well. I still remember the horror stories friends on the campaign told me of mismanagement, disorganization, and visceral anger they faced over Deeds's over-reliance on negative ads at the end.

            •  this response ignores the fact (6+ / 0-)

              that the result of the election is preordained.

              After 1973, everyone in the state of Virginia got together and decided that regardless of their personal political opinions, they had to vote for the party that had lost the previous year's presidential election. Or else.

              therefore, Republicans will win no matter what.

              Living in Kyoto-06 (Japan), voting in RI-01, went to college in IL-01.

              by sapelcovits on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 07:43:44 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

    •  The bench is pretty thin (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingofSpades, sawolf, jj32, MichaelNY

      Tom Perriello has a job, Chap Petersen looks to be staying out, and Ralph Northam and Mark Herring are going for the downballot offices. I can't really think of any other potential candidates with the potential to win a statewide race.

  •  MA-GOV: Don Berwick(D) for governor? (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, LordMike, MichaelNY, JBraden

    If the name sounds familiar, Berwick served for 1 1/2 years as head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

    The GOP blocked his appointment, and Obama had to recess appoint him.

    He is seriously considering the race.

    A Berwick vs Baker race would certainly have some interesting, substantive discussion on healthcare. Baker was head of Harvard Pilgrim Health Care before he ran for governor.

    link.

    To me, Berwick(and really even Baker) might be better as the MA HHS secretary(or whatever the equivalent is in MA) than governor.

    •  I just love the idea of Berwick as Gov... (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jj32, kleinburger, MichaelNY, betelgeux

      because it could mean that the GOP Senate screwed Scott Brown over twice.  Blocking Berwick and Warren and then both go back to Mass and beat Brown.  

      (Of course Brown would have to choose running for Gov over Senate this time around).  

      President Obama would have been a Republican in the 1980's.

      by Jacoby Jonze on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 04:35:07 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  True (4+ / 0-)

        Yeah, resisting Warren's appointment to CFPB sure worked out well for the GOP. Imagine what a homerun it would been for Brown to publicly support for her the post. He would get credit for being bipartisan and keep a strong challenger away from the race.

        Another mistake by Brown that might have hurt his re-election chances: opposing Elena Kagan for SCOTUS. As I heard someone say recently, SCOTUS is a clear issue for both sides, and the fact that Kagan was even from MA, probably made the vote worse for Brown.

        •  Brown would have lost to any top tier Democrat. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KingofSpades, jncca, Skaje

          Warren's campaign wasn't spectacular by any means, just her fundraising.  Don't get me wrong, I think she'll make a fantastic senator, but Brown was always a paper tiger and his approvals were always misleading.  The only way he would win is if we nominated a 3rd tier candidate like Setti Warren or Alan Khasei.  If we nominated Markey or Capuano I think he would have lost which is why I'm not terribly worried about him running again.  Massachusetts is too blue to elect Republicans in a presidential year barring a spectacular screw up on our part.

          NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

          by sawolf on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 05:34:47 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Dems House Reps are chicken though... (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            JBraden, MichaelNY

            And none wanted to risk their house seat for life taking on Brown.  If Warren didn't run, we would have had 3rd tier against Brown.  

            And you can't discount her fundraising - she was a progressive rockstar before she ever considered running and money flooded in nationally to her race.  I don't think any house rep would have been able to do that.  

            President Obama would have been a Republican in the 1980's.

            by Jacoby Jonze on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 06:08:07 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  I agree with you on Warren's campaign (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            but I wonder if any first tier candidates would have entered the race, especially with the possibility of Kerry leaving his Senate seat in 2013.

          •  I disagree on this (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            KingofSpades, bumiputera
            The only way he would win is if we nominated a 3rd tier candidate like Setti Warren or Alan Khasei.
            The second half of Warren's campaign was quite good. Yes, there were other Democrats who could have won, but she deserves credit for being humble enough to take speech instruction and use testimonials, and she comes across as sincere and motivated more by caring about people than by pure ego.

            Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

            by MichaelNY on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 10:32:33 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  random stuff (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, Christopher Walker

    Mississippi State Rep. David Gibbs (D-West Point) resigned due to health concerns. So his decisively D seat will be filled in like March.

    Alabama, Georgia and Mississippi are leading the nation in legislative special elections for 2013, aren't they?

    The Republican Party isn't a party of small government, it's a party of a government for the few. @bhindepmo

    by RBH on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 03:20:09 PM PST

    •  special elections in Minnesota (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      14A and 19A special elections set for February 12th with primaries on January 29th. Filing ends next Tuesday.

      14A went 50-47.5 for Romney.

      19A went 52-45 for Obama.

      Minnesota doesn't waste time when it comes to their special elections.

      February 12th is one day after Gustavus Adolphus students return from break. In other news, Gustavus Adolphus gap between fall and spring semesters is from December 20th to February 11th, but they have the January Interim Experience and Touring Week in their February.

      The Republican Party isn't a party of small government, it's a party of a government for the few. @bhindepmo

      by RBH on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 04:59:57 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  IN08 and IN09 (4+ / 0-)

    Koss Pres by CD has only one county outstanding, Crawford [which apparently has no website]

    I used the IN secretary of state website to determine the congressional votes in November, to split the votes in the presidential electeion, and came up with

    IN08  

    Obama   39.60%
    Romney  58.38%

    IN09

    Obama   40.71%
    Romney  57.17%

    •  I live one county away from Crawford County (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      drhoosierdem, David Nir, MichaelNY

      and can get those numbers this week. It is only a small area around Alton that is in the 8th District (which is slightly more Republican than the county as a whole). There was a slight problem in Crawford in that when they had a recount, there were 65 more ballots than poll book signatures.

      "So there's a time for silence, and there's a time for waiting your turn. But if you know how you feel, and you so clearly know what you need to say, you'll know it. I don't think you should wait. I think you should speak now." -Taylor Swift

      by SouthernINDem on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 05:28:34 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Georgia Special Results so far (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    SD-11:
    Burke 41%
    Keown 36%
    SD-21:
    Beach 64%
    Jerguson 36% (!!)

    SD-30:
    Dugan 88%
    Camp 12%

    HD-21:
    Republicans are combining for 77% of the vote; Democrats for 23%.

  •  how would a pro-gun control; pro-death penalty (0+ / 0-)

    democrat do in a presidential election?
    By that I mean sort of an Italian democrat from the northeast with somewhat of an abrasive personality. Maybe pro-life but supportive of SSM. Think of a tough on crime type person who is popular among the working class. Think of someone like Mario Biaggi.

    RRH expat (known as AquarianLeft). Also known as freepcrusher on leip atlas forum

    by demographicarmageddon on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 06:53:14 PM PST

  •  Meanwhile in Mississippi (0+ / 0-)

    Powell 51.4%
    Lum 24.6%
    Hubbard 18.8%
    Allen 5.2%

    http://www.rankincounty.org/...

    First round knockout, Powell wins the seat. Powell/Lum/Allen were Republicans, Hubbard listed no party affiliation

    The Republican Party isn't a party of small government, it's a party of a government for the few. @bhindepmo

    by RBH on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 07:04:34 PM PST

  •  finally! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades

    the members of the RI Senate Judiciary Committee have been named!

    they are:

    Stephen Archambault (D)
    William Conley (D)
    Dawson Hodgson (R)
    Paul Jabour (D)
    Frank Lombardi (D)
    Erin Lynch (D)
    Michael McCaffrey (D) - Chairman
    Harold Metts (D)
    Donna Nesselbush (D)
    Leo Raptakis (D)

    Archambault, Hodgson, Lynch, and Nesselbush all support gay marriage. McCaffrey, Metts, and Raptakis oppose. Jabour opposes but has made it sound like he could be convinced to vote yes. Can't find information for Conley or Lombardi - any help with that would be appreciated.

    my understanding is that 5 yes votes would be enough to advance gay marriage if one person is absent/abstains, but I might be mistaken.

    Living in Kyoto-06 (Japan), voting in RI-01, went to college in IL-01.

    by sapelcovits on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 07:32:04 PM PST

  •  Some of the House Freshmen Dems portrait (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, bumiputera

    Gabbard
    Duckworth
    Bustos
    JKIII
    Murphy

    And then there are some that look awkward. The type of photo that you'll find on a state issued I.D. from the DMV
    folks like Pocan, Bera, Castro

    I personally like the first set w. the dim backdrop and flag.

    Moderate Progressive, Born in Cairo, Raised in NY-11, Living in NJ-13.

    by BKGyptian89 on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 07:41:21 PM PST

  •  Voter ID to disenfranchise 600,000 in NC (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike, MichaelNY
    If lawmakers follow through with plans to require voters to show a photo identification at the polls, more than a half million registered voters could be affected, according to a new analysis by the State Board of Elections.

    612,955, or 9.25 percent of registered voters, for which no match could be made. These voters may not have any DMV-issued identification. Of those, 506,763 are active voters, those who have voted in recent elections.

    http://www.wral.com/...

    The no-match list includes more than 2X more Democrats that Republicans, which is the whole point of Voter ID, after all:
    324,997 D
    141,149 R
    144,968 U

    Filibuster reform now. No more Gentleman's agreements.

    by bear83 on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 09:01:19 PM PST

  •  Hastings is one of the most embarrassing members (7+ / 0-)

    The Democratic caucus would be much better off without him.  He's a disgrace and it's a sad thing that he's safe.  Anyone impeached and convicted by the Senate shouldn't be eligible to run for Congress.

    •  He was primary challenged by Lois Frankel (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      during which he called her a "racist b**."  20 years later, he endorsed her for FL-22.

      Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

      by KingofSpades on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 10:22:54 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  MA-Sen: Lawrence O'Donnell to announce... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    ...either his intention to run for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by John Kerry or an endorsement of a candidate or potential candidate in the MA-Sen special election.

    Yes, I'm talking about THIS Lawrence O'Donnell

    Progressive activist and lifelong resident of Vermilion County, Illinois IL-15/IL-SD-52/IL-HD-104

    by DownstateDemocrat on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 11:38:10 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site