Also Also

GOP Has Boehner for New Leadership

I just couldn't resist, sorry:

Boehner defeated fellow Republican Rep. Roy Blunt (news, bio, voting record) of Missouri, 122-109, after lagging behind his rival in a first, inconclusive vote of GOP House members. The third contender — John Shadegg of Arizona — withdrew after finishing last in the initial round.

Blunt, who had been the front-runner, remains the GOP whip. "Believe me, the world goes on," he said.

"We have a great leadership team," Blunt said. "We're going to work to make the Congress better, more importantly we're going to work to make the country better, and I look forward to working with John Boehner as majority leader to make that happen."

Boehner campaigned as a candidate of reform, and said his experience as chairman of the House Education and Workforce Committee had demonstrated his ability to pass major legislation.

While the GOP will surely try to play this as an achievement for reform and new direction within the House caucus, Boehner's fellow Ohioans aren't so sure:

Boehner depicts himself as a reformer despite his recent $5,000 donation to DeLay's legal defense fund. Boehner has also worked extensively with lobbyists to marshal support for legislation and continues to raise money from them, while calling for the end of the Republican Party's "K Street Project" that boosts GOP ties with lobbyists. Blunt's wife and other family members are lobbyists. Shadegg has fewer ties with the lobbying community.

...

Yet a list of supporters that Boehner circulated conspicuously excluded the scandal-tainted [Ohio GOP Rep Bob] Ney.

Boehner spokesman Don Seymour said his boss "would be proud" to have Ney's vote, but didn't ask Ney to take a public stance because he "hasn't wanted to add any further pressure on top of what he's already going through."

Yeah, they were really prioritizing Ney's best interests on that one. :rolleyes:

Meet the new boss!

--TJ

 

Hillary Throws Portland a Departing Pander

As readers have no doubt noticed in ever more excited terms, we've been carrying an ad for Hillary Clinton's Portland event. I suppose it's theoretically possible that someone who saw the ad decided to pay $50 minimum to 'nob with the beautiful ones, but I don't generally troll in the high rent district. But we're happy to carry the announcement, and hope everything went smoo...wassat? Wasn't a Bush-quality handpicked crowd?

In her 30-minute speech, Clinton acknowledged the "passions" of those who feel the war is a mistake.   Still, she said it would be a mistake to withdraw American forces while Iraqis are working to form a government.  "If we take precipitous action it could make a bad situation worse," she  said.    

  Clinton was interrupted several times by a dozen or so anti-war protesters who shouted "Bring the troops Home!" and "Hillary supports the war!"  Clinton was undeterred and continued talking through the shouts. She did say the Bush administration needs to give accurate information to the American people and a possible timetable for troop withdrawal. Then she said the United States need to "stay as long as it takes."

You gotta love a town where people will pay 50 bucks to shout down the presumptive nominee of their own party! I certainly understand, and almost completely sympathize--but crazy right wing people don't usually hoot down Olympia Snowe at fundraisers, do they?

Obviously, this whole "continues to support a lame ass war" thing seems to be developing into a problem of sorts for Hillary. Don't let me overstate it--it's two years away and she's already socked away more money than Heidi Fleiss at the Oscar afterparties. But the developing judgement on Clinton from the left seems to be "meh." Here's the problem: so far it's looking like 2 of every 5 voters are going to pull against her from the start. She's got another 2 of 5 viewing her favorably, but not all of them plan on voting for her necessarily. So she's already got a hole in her base.

Clearly she's not stupid; she knows she does not have an appealing position on Iraq to a wide swath of the Democratic faithful--and, it should be noted, a big chunk of independents and even Republicans. But she's stuck with it now, and there's an investment being built in by the DLC establishment that locks the top of the party into this Bushesque policy for Iraq. Why some Democrats plan to run for President suggesting that their Iraq plan is to pretty much do what Bush is now, I cannot fathom. Large majorities are not satisfied with the Bush plan, and to offer yourself as an alternative without changing anything but the nametag is so politically tone-deaf I can't stand it.

Today (Sunday) Hillary's people have changed her ad message. "Thank you, Portland" perhaps? "Suck my left one, you ungrateful bastards?" "Here's 5 grand, now quit crying?" "Bill always told me he never found good tail here, so chew on that?" Nope. And now I've missed it, because it's after midnight. Bollocks! But I can tell you what the headline was: Hillary Clinton -- No on Alito

Well then! I don't know when the Senator got into town, but seemingly the first chance she got to talk to somebody, she made known her vote not just on Alito but on cloture tomorrow morning: No. Joining Dianne Feinstein of California as filibusterers, Clinton seemed to give a boost to netroots activists, reenergizing their flurry of calls and faxes to newly wavering Senators. Which made me wonder: was she trying to soften up the evening's crowd? It's certainly not a play-it-moderate move, and not something she's been high profile about. I'll accept it as sincere for now (and frankly I don't care whether it's completely craven or not at this point; if there are 41 Democrats who oppose Alito there should be 41 voting against cloture.)

If she was trying to soothe the savage breast of the Stumptown Radicalia, I guess it didn't work. With $5,000 of shut-up money to the state party, Hillary was back on the Preordained Tour and Oregonians were left to scratch their mullets and ponder what they'd been fed.

--TJ

New Ad--Jeff Cogen for Multno Commish

I've taken another political ad, this one very local and thus gladly accepted. Jeff Cogen is running for Commisioner 2 in Multnomah, which will be an open seat now held by Serena Cruz. Cogen is Chief of Staff to Dan Saltzman--up for election himself against Amanda Fritz--and thus could find himself losing AND out of a job this fall. I'm not a major fan of Commissioner Saltzman, but I don't know him personally beyond an introduction--and I certainly have no problem with Cogen. I won't yet take an endorsement position (we'll do that likely over at Loaded Orygun; more on that name soon), but something immediately caught my attention:

Multnomah County has almost 4,500 employees, nearly all of whom work on computers that run Microsoft Windows. The County throws away 2 to 3 million dollars a year on licensing payments to Microsoft. As Jeff’s 7-year-old son Alex pointed out, “Bill Gates already has enough money, Dad.” Alex, we couldn’t agree more.

A few million dollars may not mean much to Microsoft, but it’s a very significant sum for the county. Fortunately, there’s an easy way to keep that money here and nurture our local economy in the process: transition the county’s computers to open-source operating systems. The Portland area has already emerged as a leader in open-source computing. It’s time for the county to take advantage of that native expertise and reap the savings that open source can provide.

Switching the county’s computers to open source won’t be free, but it will be far cheaper than what we’re paying now. And the best part is that the money we spend will stay here in the community, supporting an important sector of our local economy and providing jobs for local programmers, developers, and technicians. The governments of Munich, Vienna, and the whole state of Massachusetts have switched to open source. Let’s join them.

Brilliant. Seriously--outstanding idea. How can you lose with Linus Pauling a MAX ride away to help you through it? I do have trepidation about any involvement by the City Tech Services Bureau, however--BTS is still struggling mightily as a central services bureau for the City, and has earned a reputation in some departments as a place where you overpay for shoddy service that is often late and took too much slowdown nonsense. Short term, the transition needed to make  open source work for "ordinary" users would be a logistical nightmare made worse by BTS bureaucracy.

But in the long run, switching to open source would do the City wonders for reducing the throttlelock on IT by the current tech bureau. Centralized IT power in an organization always sounds good, and companies and governments cycle back and forth between the tech shop/home agency IT dichotomy hoping it will prevent redundancy and waste. Putting it all in one shop, to put it bluntly, empowers the geeks. And that's said as a fellow geek. The geeks get gadget-happy and power hungry if left to their own center code. All they do is chew up material and service budgets, and provide cost benefits that are very difficult to quantify. And because only they understand the language they speak to tell you what they think your IT needs are, you just have to nod and hope they know what they're doing.

Open source in the short term would increase reliance on IT services, but eventually its biggest strengths--customizability and extension--would by nature devalue the importance of central IT to an agency's Net profile. One of the things that makes Firefox such a clear winner over IE is all the extensions and high customizability you can achieve. IE by contrast is clunky and necessarily proprietary in function. Open source is that concept writ large--eventually office workers will custom fit their own mini-applets to their work environment.

So that's a very creative and smart idea. It's a tough thing to accomplish, but it's a good, high bar to set. Cogen also pimps wind power bought from Eastern Oregon, another winner:

• Healthy environment. Wind is a clean energy source. It doesn’t contribute to global warming or local air pollution.
• Boosting the local economy. By contracting with Portland-based wind energy developers, the city will support emerging local small businesses.
• Bridging the urban/rural divide. The construction of wind farms in eastern Oregon would create hundreds of much-needed jobs and bolster the tax base in that part of the state. This would improve our area’s relationship with our eastern neighbors and help bridge the urban/rural divide.
• Budgetary predictability. Rather than continue subjecting Portland to the fluctuations of the energy market, wind would give the City guaranteed utility rates for the next 20 years.
• Green leadership. Portland will be the first city in the world to get all of its electricity from wind—cementing its leadership in the emerging green economy and generating tremendous positive publicity.

My favorite benny is the bridging of the urban-rural divide. It's not hippie residue nonsense; there is a very real connection made when rural Oregonians see their products and services bought and sold in the NW corner of the state. The New York Times did a great piece on "local" being the new "organic," and featured Portland's New Seasons markets. The same dynamic Cogen talks about between power supplier and user comes between grocer and farmer:

The opportunity to sell locally has kept some area ranchers from going out of business in Oregon and nearby states. Doc and Connie Hatfield, who founded the Country Natural Beef cooperative in 1986, said the co-op now has 70 ranchers, who raise beef on a vegetarian diet free of hormones, antibiotics and genetically modified feed.

"Nineteen years ago we were going broke," Mr. Hatfield said. "Now we are paying income taxes."

Mr. Hatfield was just as pleased about an unexpected byproduct of selling locally: the bond forged between rural and urban residents.

"Most of the ranchers are rural, religious, conservative Republicans," Mr. Hatfield said. "And most of the customers are urban, secular, liberal Democrats. When it comes to healthy land, healthy food, healthy people and healthy diets, those tags mean nothing. Urbanites are just as concerned about open spaces and healthy rural communities as people who live there. When ranchers get to the city, they realize rural areas don't have a corner on values. I think that's what we are most excited about."

That kind of talk, in this political environment, gives me goosebumps.

So as I said, thanks to Cogen for Commish for supporting Also Also, and while he doesn't get the official nod he's off to a pretty good start. And of course, so far he's the only one who's filed, so he's got that going for him.

--TJ

Kitz in the Mix? Nope

Well, so much for that prediction. In his inimitable "I'm pretty sure I won't, but maybe I will, although now that I think about it I'm not" way, John Kitzhaber backed away from the political podium and redevoted himself to his public passion--fixing health care:

[H]ealth – not health care, but health – is the first rung on the ladder of opportunity; it is the cornerstone of a democratic society; allowing people to fully participate, to be productive, and to take advantage of the opportunities of upward mobility that lie at the heart of the American Dream.

Yet today those opportunities are being stifled for millions of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Oregonians who cannot afford the cost of needed medical care, living in constant fear -- one illness away from personal bankruptcy. Health care is the fastest growing cost for both families and businesses, eroding wages and posing a significant barrier to economic growth.

It is also compromising our ability to invest in other social priorities -- further undermining our system of public education which offers the best hope for success and meaningful civic engagement for the fastest-growing portions of the American population.

The cost of health care is also the major driver behind our national debt – the dark legacy we leave to our children. While Congress is preoccupied with the $5 trillion Social Security gap, Medicare – when the baby boom generation retires -- represents over $65 trillion in unfunded entitlements. And this staggering debt is being financed by China and other countries still willing to purchase U.S. securities. We are literally handing our financial future over to our major international competitors, putting at risk the independence and self determination which lie at the heart of our national identity.

I certainly would have supported his bid, and figured that someone who repeatedly flirts with the political limelight like he does, would eventually find himself back in the ring. But listening to what he says, I feel much better that he's NOT running--he's the real deal:

There is no question but that running as a candidate for Governor –as well as holding the office itself – offers a powerful forum in which to advance this cause. Indeed, the media interest in -- and coverage of -- the health care issue has increased dramatically over the past few weeks alone. And we seem to have quite a few representatives from the media assembled here this morning.

On the other hand, our politics today have become largely transactional – “lower my taxes and I will vote for you;” “give me prescription drug coverage and I will vote for you.” And it works the other way around as well – “vote for me and I will cut your taxes;” “vote for me and I will fund schools first.” The problem is that these transactions are all about “me” – and have nothing to do with “us.” They are all about what I can get, not what I can give. They neither foster a sense of the larger public interest; nor do they do advance the common good.

And the fact is that we cannot solve the crisis in our health care system – or in our school system or in our economy or our environment – through this kind of transactional politics because they erode any sense of common purpose and foster the belief that if we can just elect a new governor; a different legislature or a different congress – all our problems will be taken care of. And that is simply not true.

These problems – and especially the crisis in our health care system – cannot be solved without taking some risks, which means they will not be solved by relying solely on a political process which is set up to reward people who play it safe – who ask at every decision point “which transaction offers the safest path to retain my position?”

That means that if we want anything to happen we are going to have to make it happen ourselves. It means that the responsibility to find a sustainable solution does not, in fact, belong to someone else. It belongs to us – to you and me and to people in communities throughout this state and nation. We are not powerless here and should not be without hope. We are limited only by the scope of our imagination and by the depth of our commitment to one another.

Clearly this man's head is screwed on far too well, and is far too focused on one issue, to waste him on the political process. I'm shaking my head now, wondering why on earth I wanted him to be sullied by another run. His energies are far better directed to his passion and expertise, and the Archimedes Movement is bound to be worthy of the name under his leadership.

But I'm going to hang onto the phrase "transactional politics," because it perfectly encapsulates the entire pay-for-play system we suffer under now. The shallow view of Abramoffukah is that politicians have put themselves up for sale and lobbyists are pounding on the doors to buy, like parents at Toys R Us waiting for them to open on Black Friday. But Kitz is right--it goes beyond that, to the way that politicians succor favor from ordinary voters by promising tax breaks or special projects in their neighborhood, and the way that voters expect a specific tangible benefit from their vote as opposed to solid but generic leadership.

So Ted gets an easier  shot at another term, and while he's clearly breathing a sigh of relief [reg may be reqd], hopefully he took a minute to think about Kitzhaber's reasoning and will ask himself how he can disengage from transactional politics and--essentially--make himself too good for his job. We can only hope.

--TJ

Kitz in the Mix? Announcement Tomorrow

The waiting, definitely the hardest part, appears nearly over. Tomorrow morning at 11AM, speaking from a health clinic in Old Town's "charity alley," former governor John Kitzhaber will let us know whether he plans on taking the job again:

       Kitzhaber is keeping his decision under wraps for now, but the location of his news conference could be telling - it's a health clinic for low-income people on Burnside Street.

       The former emergency room physician has said in recent weeks that being governor again might help him "jump start" a renewed debate over transforming the nation's health care system to make medical care more affordable and accessible for all Oregonians.

       However, Kitzhaber also has been promoting a sweeping health care reform proposal for the state that could wind up on the November ballot, an effort that wouldn't require him to run against Gov. Ted Kulongoski - a fellow Democrat - in the May primary election.

For those of you scoring at home, that's two "he will" paragraphs, followed by one "he won't." The O's brief hitter on the subject tonight has no "he will" lines, but does quote the man himself saying it would be tough to both run for office and manage a health care ballot initiative. On the other hand, if you're governor you get to make initiatives anytime you want. On the other other hand, the plan he's got in mind is one big political minefield that even a Democratic statehouse might be loathe to touch. But what's the best part about the two stories? They're written by the same guy!

I suppose it's only proper to offer a prediction, and that prediction is that I think he's in. Contrary to Cain's assertion in the KATU piece, I think appearing at a low-income health clinic could presage either kind of answer. He could say "these are the kind of people who are being ignored by our state government, and that's why I'm running," or he could say "I tried once to get things done, and most of the time I spent swatting away crappy bills from the Republicans. This is where things get done, and this is where I can do the most good, which is why I'm not running." However, I think the natural tendency if you're not running is not to make too much of a deal out of the announcement--especially for someone who apparently doesn't need his ego stroked (although more on that in a moment). You might have your family around you and appear somewhere more ceremonial or casual. If you are looking for political symbology from your venue, you're trying to project an active agenda (and thus would be running for office to achieve it).

In any case he's certainly drawn the decision out longer than many people (cough--Vicki Walker!--cough) might like, and the party is basically treading water until they have a scenario. Kitzhaber has visited just about anyone who might care, and they all say the same thing: we won't say who we'd endorse (because we don't want to be up the creek with Ted if Kitz says no), but we can't help but shuffle our feet in the dirt and smile shyly when Kitz talks to us. We think he's real purty.

When the SEIU, the teachers, the environmentalists and the tribes are winking and nudging like Eric Idle, batting their eyes as you talk about giving the native Oregonian animals and plants full health care and a growing wage--and you go seeking that out--that's got to suggest some kind of ego. He is so smooth and earnest and well balanced that he doesn't project the typical politician's love of his own voice, second only to the voices of others talking glowingly about him. But here's a guy who left on top of his game in order to get away from the life, and now he's a hair's breadth from getting back into it, like some cowboy Corleone. Underneath that craggy exterior is someone who likes to be in the middle of things, thinking he can fix them. That kind of guy doesn't hold a press conference to say No.

So I won't announce my endorsement at this time, but if he happens to run I'll vote for him.

--TJ

Progressive Majority Takes Another Big Step

I'm not typically one to sponge off a press release for blog material, but this one is pretty succinct and informative: don't let the GOP spinners tell you this was a ho-hum, nothing to see election. There were few major races, but a lot of little ones--and progressive candidates did very well. Remember this is part of Howard Dean's strategy--create a farm team of solid candidates to get established, move up the ladder and eventually become potential national stars. So far, so good. Here's Gloria Totten of Progressive Majority to give the details (I've left in the fundraising/volunteering appeals in case you're motivated to give of yourself for the cause):

Yesterday, voters in Washington State and Arizona voted for progressive values and elected 69% of Progressive Majority's candidates.   It's a great time to be a progressive - Americans are demanding new leadership, and we've got the winning agenda.

I hope you'll take a moment to celebrate our victories - and remember, this is only the beginning:
View the complete list of our winning candidates >>

Tucson City Council candidate Karin Uhlich celebrates her 61% win over a conservative incumbent.  An openly gay candidate who's fought for affordable housing and workers' rights, Karin's win is an important step for both the LGBT community and for progressives nationwide. Despite being outspent 2-to-1 and subjected to attacks from conservative opponents, Dave Somers won his race for Snohomish County Council.

Winning Big

Earlier this week, Washington State Director Dean Nielsen wrote to tell you about the attacks being waged on three Progressive Majority candidates.  Today I am happy to report that all three were elected.  In Snohomish County, Dave Somers' opponents outspent him 2-to-1, vandalized his signs, and played on homophobia.  But yesterday, the community was on Dave's side and turned out to give him the win.  In Clark County, Progressive Majority was instrumental in ensuring that Steve Stuart was victorious in his campaign for County Commissioner despite GOP smear tactics, and in Port Orchard, Fred Chang took 60% of the vote against a former mayor to win the City Council seat.

Progressives can also celebrate big wins for minority candidates in Washington State.  Through the Racial Justice Campaign Fund, Progressive Majority backed candidates like Cindy Ryu, Michelle Sandoval, Eric Faison, and Ron Sims.  And as openly gay candidates, Fred Chang along with winning Tacoma Parks Commission candidate Ryan Mello represent huge strides for progressives and the LGBT community.  By electing such diverse candidates, we move towards the day when our government represents everyone.

And in Tucscon, AZ we secured a progressive majority on the Tucson City Council when Karin Uhlich and Nina Trasoff each unseated conservative incumbents with over 60% over the vote.  Progressive Majority worked with coalition partners to elect these women - resulting in the first majority-women council in Tucson history.  In helping defeat two conservative incumbents who were slated for higher office, Progressive Majority is also putting a significant roadblock in the far right's plans.  Karin and Nina's victories are significant and give Arizona progressives momentum in recruiting candidates for 2006 local and municipal elections.

These victories in Washington State and Arizona make the case that progressive candidates win when they have the right training and support.  I am so thankful for your support - and I hope you will pass along news of our success:

Tell your friends about yesterday's election results >>

Americans Vote for a Progressive Majority

Last night's results - not just in Washington and Arizona, but nationwide - show that the political majority in America is a progressive majority.

Voters are tired of conservatives who are out-of-touch - like you and I, they want leaders who believe in government and will make it work for the people.  Americans everywhere are turning out to vote for progressive values:

...in Pennsylvania eight progressive challengers for Dover School Board swept the election, defeating all eight extreme conservative incumbents.
...in Minnesota progressive candidate Chris Coleman got 70% in his race for Mayor of St. Paul, defeating Bush-endorsing Democrat Randy Kelly.
...in Washington State, traditionally conservative areas joined progressive regions to defeat a conservative anti-tax initiative.
...and all throughout California, progressives won the battle against Schwarzenegger's divisive special election initiatives.

In the following months, Progressive Majority will be in these states, recruiting new champions and training them for races in 2006, 2007, and beyond.  Your support makes a big impact in these races, and is critical to future wins.

Please take a moment to tell your progressive friends and relatives about our success >>

Sincerely,

Gloria A. Totten
Executive Director

(--TJ)

Predictions Recap: How'd We Do?

In short, pretty well. The only major cockup was handicapping the Ohio reform slate. Details below...

NJ Goobernor-- (Corzine, in the biggest lock of the day.)
A fairly easy pick, certainly, although some saw a tightening race late, and polls were all over the map the last month or so. Corzine ended up winning by about 10 points, a strong showing that met or exceeded expectations.

VA Goobernor: (Kaine, by about 3%.)
As it stands with just a precinct or two left, Kaine finished almost six full points ahead of Kilgore. I have to say that's a bit of a surprise, especially given the lack of coattails for other statewide offices. Voters thought Kilgore sucked as a candidate, pretty much, and were apparently happy with the direction Warner had taken.

CA Props: (a major defeat for Arnie here, as all four of his pet props go down--74, 75, 76, and 77 . Prop 76 may be the biggest loser, perhaps not even gaining 40% support. Prop 73, the parental notification bill, also looks like it will go down fairly easily. Neither 78 nor 79, the competing drug discount props, will likely pass either. Prop 80 is a total wildcard; given the negative reaction to all the other initiatives, I'm going to guess the weight of "straight ticket" voting will lead to its defeat as well.)
I'll take a nice little victory lap on this one. All eight propositions were defeated, and none were particularly close. Prop 73 was the closest, and it still failed by over five points. Of Arnie's Four, Prop 76 was indeed the biggest loser, coming in under 38% approval. Interestingly, the one I labelled the biggest wildcard, Prop 80, was the most resoundingly defeated one of all--65.7% opposed.

Maine Gay Rights Repeal: (I think the experience of Vermont and Massachusetts in the five years since the last vote makes the nut this time.)
I hope you all will give me the benefit of the doubt here, since as I look at it, it's not entirely clear what prediction I was actually making. What I meant to say was that the passage of civil unions and gay marriage in two neighboring states was likely to soften Maine voters to the idea of gay rights. I was right, but I'm not sure anyone expected it to go down by 57%. Kudos, Maine! Third time was the charm. Those legislators sure showed some stones testing the voters' patience by passing the law over and over. In Oregon, our guys and gals would have run screaming from a 2nd try, much less a third.

Texas Gay Marriage Ban: (passes, easily, duh)  NY Mayor: (Bloomberg, duh again.)
Got these both, but no credit--a guy plucked off the streets of Bangalore could have predicted them. Interesting sidebar on the Texas amendment: because of rather sloppy wording in the text, it looks to me like they've banned ALL marriages, not just gay ones. That could be a fun court challenge to watch, and if nothing else will keep the ban from being codified for another year or two.

OH "Reform" Slate: (Measures 2, 3 and 5 will pass; unfortunately Measure 4, the non-partisan redistricting initative, will fail. Voters were just too confused by it, and in that case tend to vote no.)
Whoops. Talk about a misread. Not only were all four defeated, they were obliterated. Measures 4 and 5 in particular got almost 70% No. I'll take a little solace in having reported that the ballot texts were absurdly complex, but they were all like that--I should have extended my own advice to the others besides M4. If you ran to the political stock market sites and placed a bet, I apologize. Ohio may send Bob Taft, Mike DeWine and Bob Ney packing in 2006, but they're not there yet.

WA King County Executive: (Ron Sims beats David Irons, in a race closer than many Democrats figured at the beginning, but bigger than many Democrats feared going into today.)
I'll give myself full credit here, because I think the expectation would be that Sims would coast roughly by about the same margin as in his first campaign. Irons did finish 5 points better than the last GOP candidate, but he was still squashed. I would have suggested 7-10 points; he won by about 15.

WA I-912: (fails, in a squeaker.)
Good call, but underestimated. Nearly six points No is not a squeaker, it's a statement.

--TJ

Election Predictions: Big Night for the Dems

With polls nearing closure on the East Coast, a promised (but likely anti-climatic) post on how I think the evening will turn out around the country, in races I've been following:

NJ Goobernor: Corzine, in the biggest lock of the day. He's running at 95% on Intrade, and he's never really been threatened by Forrester (although it tightened up a bit the last couple weeks)

VA Goobernor: Kaine, by about 3%. He's gotten as high as 91% on Intrade, although he's currently down around 80%. This one could turn out to be a surprise if Republicans were able to swamp the polls, but I'm not hearing any of that. There's the usual noise from both camps about their turnout, but overall it sounds like a fairly typical off-year election.

CA Props: a major defeat for Arnie here, as all four of his pet props go down--74, 75, 76, and 77 . Prop 76 may be the biggest loser, perhaps not even gaining 40% support. Considering that was the one most directly tied to Schwarzenegger's power to direct legislative policy, that's a powerful blow to his influence. Prop 73, the parental notification bill, also looks like it will go down fairly easily. Neither 78 nor 79, the competing drug discount props, will likely pass either. Prop 80 is a total wildcard; given the negative reaction to all the other initiatives, I'm going to guess the weight of "straight ticket" voting will lead to its defeat as well. Remember when Californians were enthusiastic about the initiative process? No more.

Maine Gay Rights Repeal: Tough call here, because although the most recent polls show the measure going down to defeat, it looked that way the last two times the rights bill was repealed by referendum. However, I think the experience of Vermont and Massachusetts in the five years since the last vote makes the nut this time.

Texas Gay Marriage Ban: passes, easily, duh.

NY Mayor: Bloomberg, duh again.

OH "Reform" Slate: Measures 2, 3 and 5 will pass; unfortunately Measure 4, the non-partisan redistricting initative, will fail. Voters were just too confused by it, and in that case tend to vote no. (There will also be substantial no sentiment from GOP party regulars who want to maintain control of the process for political gain). Still, for Ohio this is pretty big news, and is likely a precursor to a fairly dramatic shift in representation come 2006.

WA King County Executive: Ron Sims beats David Irons, in a race closer than many Democrats figured at the beginning, but bigger than many Democrats feared going into today. The attempt by King County GOP to challenge voter registrations backfired in a big way in the media, and IMO that's going to hurt Irons today.

WA I-912: fails, in a squeaker. If not for Hurricane Katrina, oddly enough, I bet this would have passed. It still may, but support has been on a downward trend since September, and opponents have been active and well-funded. Mad props to Northwest Progressive Institute, Washblog, and several other Washington bloggers who kept a steady stream of information flowing on this gas tax repeal issue. I think they'll be rewarded tonight.

Really, the only items I'm not strongly confident on are the Maine repeal and I-912. Even if both go the other way, this should be a very positive evening for Democratic party leaders and their supporters across the country. I think it has limited meaning overall for the national electoral scene, but there's no doubt that the political landscape is beginning to shift.

--TJ

Kilgore Campaign, Also Also Exchange Email

So I was in a fairly goofy mood this morning, even pre-coffee, and upon receiving another email from Jerry Kilgore touting his appearance with Bush last night, I thought in the spirit of things I should wish the high-talker good luck:

From: Also Also <[email protected]>

Mailed-By: gmail.com

To: [email protected]

Date: Nov 8, 2005 9:01 AM

Subject: Good luck!

 

Jerry--
Well, it's finally here! I'm sure you're excited, and so am I. I've enjoyed laughing at your ridiculous, slanted "news" briefs coming to my mailbox every so often. I was a little disappointed you never mentioned the fake fliers or poorly spliced Kaine tapes you had your witless minions produce for you, but there's only so much garbage you can stuff into one propaganda mailing.

I offer you sincere wishes of good luck--because you're going to need excessive amounts to beat Kaine. Intrade is giving you a 1 in 3 shot, which means you're likely doomed. But hey, thanks for playing, and don't go away mad. Just go away.

Yours as a Virginian who left because of freaks like you,
TJ

Little did I expect a reply--or if I did, I imagined some kind of defensive snark from a staffer in return. Shouldn't they be out pestering rural fundamentalists to vote, instead of engaging liberal hacks who can't even cast a ballot in their election?

But in the grand Southern tradition of politeness, I got a prompt return:

From: Info <[email protected]>

To: Also Also <[email protected]>

Date: Nov 8, 2005 10:22 AM

Subject: Re: Good luck!

Thank you for your support and vote today--we truly appreciate it.

Form letter? Too-quick scanning of the message? Sarcasm? You be the judge.

--TJ

Bush, Kilgore Roll the Dice Together

As you read this (unless you're an insomniac), voters in Virginia are going to the polls to pick a replacement for Democratic goobernor Mark Warner. The most recent polling available comes from Survey USA, who have had a strangely schizophrenic approach to calling the race today. They started out giving results from Friday to Sunday, which showed Kaine with a whopping 9 point lead, something I've not seen any other outfit match at any time for Kaine. As if realizing how far out there they had suddenly become, they began to look at Monday's numbers, which showed a dead heat.

While admitting that Monday's numbers seemed like an anomaly, because Sunday's numbers were better for Kilgore than Saturday, which was better than Sunday, they offered a last minute revision which included Monday, and cut their final FINAL call to five points. Fair enough I suppose, but the point of mentioning it here is that all polls in the last couple of weeks have shown Kaine with some kind of lead, however tiny--a surge that reversed Kilgore leads for much of the previous year.  Even with their vaunted 72-hour blitzkrieg, the Republicans appear pretty jittery that they've blown this one.

Of course, they've been jittery for a while, to the extent that they have conveniently seemed to just miss having various national GOP heavyweights come to Virginia and lend their faces, names and support. Karl Rove was supposed to come by and have breakfast the day after testifying before Patrick Fitzgerald, but that got the kaibosh. Then Jerry was going to hook up with the President in Norfolk after the big guy's speech, but magically that failed to happen as well--again, coincidentally on the day Plamegate swallowed up Scooter Libby.

As WaPo reports for this morning's edition, Little Jerry and Little George apparently have both decided they've got nothing to lose by throwing in with each other, and so G-Dub rushed home from Venezuela all Schiavo-like, to keep Kilgore's campaign on life support and maybe sneak a transfusion of his own if he could:

"They're going to own the results either way, so why not land the plane?" asked Scott Reed, a Republican strategist who ran Robert J. Dole's presidential campaign in 1996. "If Kilgore wins, the president's political heart keeps beating." At the same time, given Bush's broader problems, Reed said, "it doesn't change the dynamics."

Ed Rogers, a Republican lobbyist close to the White House, said a Kilgore win would essentially avoid another setback for a president who has seen nothing but reverses lately. "Nobody's going to suggest that 'Gee, something happened in Virginia that's an overall tonic for the president's problems,' " he said. "But it would be the absence of bad, and when you're in trouble the absence of bad is the first step toward recovery."

Talk about the soft bigotry of low expectations! Can't you see that on a campaign bus? "Let the Momentarily Absent Bad Times Roll!"  Hopeful Avoidance of Further Disaster Tour '05, indeed.

Of course, Bush can kind of shake this off either way, because he'll still have a job on Wednesday even if Russell Potts wins. The stakes are a little higher for Kilgore, who sat agonizing over the names on his dance card all summer and fall. There can't be many more disheartening things for a candidate, than to have his ace in the hole endorser suddenly become a distinct liability. And make no mistake, Bush is now a liability in Virginia, as the Post details: 44 percent approval rating; but more saliently,

Nearly half of Virginia voters said a Bush endorsement would make them less likely to vote for Kilgore, compared with a quarter who said it would make them more likely to support the Republican candidate.

I'm not always that great with math, but only someone who thinks he's going to lose anyway would read those kinds of poll results and say, "Yeah, let's bring the big guy in for a grasp n' grin." If it works, awesome. If it doesn't, it wasn't going to matter.

Perhaps Kilgore has been watching his stock fall at Intrade, where as of this moment Kilgore is paying about 3-1 odds on a victory. Are ya feeling lucky, punk?

More tomorrow on my predictions for Tuesday's main electoral events. If the polls are any indication, it's going to be a very nice day for the Democrats in VA, NJ and CA, not so good in OH.