Beyond The Polls

Gov. Sarah Palin's Mysterious Move

2009-07-04T11:07:00.006-04:00

Yesterday, Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska shocked the political world by announcing that not only would she not seek re-election in 2010, but she would resign from being Governor on July 26. While many expected she would forego re-election, nobody predicted her early departure as governor.

What does Palin's move mean? The early reaction has been scattered, though the conventional wisdom seems to be that Palin is all but finished as far as 2012 is concerned. At this point, it's too early to tell how things will shake out.

Overall, Plain's resignation has many negative consequences. If Palin does want to run for President, she must do so without finishing a full term of any major elected office. Sarah Palin's biggest problem is the public's perception that she's a lightweight and not ready to hold true responsibility. Resigning only magnifies this concern. Opponents will surely say, "How can we rely on Gov. Palin to finish a term of the Presidency, if she could not stand the heat of being governor of Alaska?"

If Sarah Palin did want to launch a 2012 Presidential bid, she would have been better off saying so yesterday. Such an announcement would have, at the very least, provided a rational explanation for her actions, even if many would have still disagreed with them. Instead, she leaves the political pundits with plenty to discuss this Independence Day weekend.

Of course, another possibility is that Gov. Palin has had it with electoral politics and that she wants to retreat from public life. That would make sense. The constant negativity thrown at her from the left would wear down anybody over time. Moreoever, Palin's national profile has surely put a financial strain on her family - many estimate that Palin had $500,000 or more in legal bills stemming from ethical complaints that have so far been proven completely false. Freed from the constraints of holding public office, Palin could easily raise enough money to pay her legal bills and fly around the country in style.

The problem with this last theory is that Gov. Palin's speech yesterday did not sound like one being made by a politician looking to get out of the business. Taken at face value, it seems that Palin was seeking to make an unconventional move that will allow her freedom to do something bigger.

If Sarah Palin does run for President, she will have steep hurdles to overcome. Before the resignation, Palin generally enjoyed the support of conservatives. She will retain much of this popularity, but at least some conseratives will question whether she does have the chops necessary for the Presidency (one conservative friend noted, "This just makes her look like too much of a flake). Palin's biggest problem has always been proving that she is up to the job - now, she will have to make an affirmative case that she is up to the challenge.

Palin's resignation will probably hurt her standing among conservatives to some extent, but she is still the most high profile Republican in the field of candidates looking at 2012. If she chooses to run, Palin will be a fundraising powerhouse and a formidable force. Will the public be willing to entrust a 3 year governor with the Presidency? That's the bigger question that remains unanswered.

Sanford Admits Affair

2009-06-24T15:16:00.006-04:00

Republican South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford aroused suspicions earlier this weekend when staffers could not identify the Governor's whereabouts. They later said that he was hiking on the Appalachian Trail. Some reports indicated that the Governor was trying to get away from a hectic legislative session. However, how often does a sitting governor essentially disappear for a few days?

Today, reports were released indicating that Sanford had been in Argentina for the weekend. In a press conference, the governor admitted that he had an extramarital affair with someone in Argentina. Sanford has stated that he will resign as the head of the Republican Governors Association.

Sanford's behavior is mind boggling. Did Governor Sanford seriously think he could disappear to a foreign country without arousing suspicion? Sanford is a major public figure and he had to know that his Presidential aspirations would place him under a microscope every day. How could he possibly make such a blunder? It's impossible to know, but politicians frequently get into these problems when their ego's become too large or they just do something plainly dumb. It is unfathomable that so many politicians, like Sanford, are willing to gamble their careers away for an extramarital fling.

Is Sanford's political career over? It's too soon to tell, but his 2012 Presidential ambitions are likely finished (rightfully so). Sanford is a huge embarrassment for the Republican Party and South Carolinian's, but he has done the most harm to his family.

NJ-Gov: Christie Exceeds 50% In Post Primary Poll

2009-06-05T15:10:00.006-04:00

On Tuesday night, former U.S. Attorney Chris Christie defeated former Mayor Steve Lonegan to win the Republican nomination to run for Governor. While Lonegan had a passionate group of supporters, Christie is probably the strongest candidate the Republicans could have fielded. Of course, the decisive factor in this rate is unlikely to be the Republican nominee. Instead, November's election will be about Gov. Jon Corzine.

This has been a good week for Christie's campaign. A new Rasmussen Poll gave Christie a 51%-38% lead over Governor Corzine. Christie's lead is significant because it is the first time either candidate has exceeded 50% in a head-to-head matchup.

Corzine's weakness stems from his poor job approval numbers and low favorability - a whopping 37% of voters have a "Very Unfavorable" opinion of the Governor. Still, Republicans cannot be too optimistic - past candidates have showed signs of strength, only to lose in the November election.

Corzine has a tough road ahead, but New Jersey's Democratic tilt should keep him in the game through November. Beyond The Polls currently rates this seat as LEANS REPUBLICAN.

Lonegan Ad - Ineffective?

2009-06-01T16:52:00.005-04:00

This is an ad that Mayor Steve Lonegan is running in New Jersey. I saw it on television yesterday for the first time, and I was struck by not only the poor production value, but also the ad's utter ineffectiveness. In the ad Lonegan says "We must go forth with a clear vision," adding he wants to "Make New Jersey the great state it once was and will be again" (nothing like bashing the state you want to run), and that he will "make this a great state in 4 minutes." Uh huh. How do you plan on doing that, sir? The ad certainly does not tell us.

Lonegan's ad shows what can happen when a candidate is desperate to get on television, but they do not have enough money to do it effectively. This ad does little for Lonegan, aside from letting viewers know that he is actually running for something tomorrow. It says absolutely nothing about Lonegan's plans for the future and it does nothing to distinguish him from Chris Christie. Overall, this ad has very little positive benefit for Lonegan and its poor production and confusing content run the risk of turning off the few voters who actually see it.

Christie Posts Leads In 2 Polls...

2009-06-01T16:36:00.004-04:00

While this year is a relatively quiet one when it comes to electoral politics, there are two significant races coming this fall - the gubernatorial races in both New Jersey and Virginia. Tomorrow, the Republican Party holds its primary in New Jersey. The primary will see former U.S. Attorney Chris Christie face off against former Bogota mayor Steve Lonegan.

Christie, who has had an enormous fundraising advantage, has led every poll taken of the race, though some have indicated that Lonegan is within striking distance. A Rasmussen Poll released today gave Christie a 46%-35% lead over Lonegan. Lonegan does best among voters aged 30-49, whereas Christie did better among younger voters and older voters. Interestingly, conservatives were divided evenly among the candidates, even though Lonegan has portrayed himself as the true conservative in the race.

A new Fairleigh Dickinson poll gave Christie a much larger lead - 54%-30% over Lonegan.

In primaries with low turnout, anything can happen, but Christie clearly has the edge. Christie would also enter the general election better positioned to face Gov. Corzine than Steve Lonegan. Not only does Christie have better name recognition and a proven ability to raise campaign funds, but his moderate image may be more acceptable to New Jersey's liberal/moderate voters.

Was 2008 A Realignment?

2009-05-28T13:54:00.002-04:00

On The Real Clear Politics Blog, author Sean Trende takes an interesting look at whether 2008 was a realigning election by historic standards. It is an interesting read for anyone who enjoys political analysis.

More amusingly, Trende quotes two columns from Ron Brownstein - one from 2004, in which he heralds the coming of a new Republican era and one from 2009, in which he discusses the sorry state of the Republican Party and the possibility that the GOP's power could be shrinking substantially.

Brownstein's column is clearly a reflection of "follow the leader." In 2004, the conventional wisdom was that Republican strength was growing, so Brownstein penned a column stating that. Of course, the conventional wisdom has taken a complete reversal since then, so Brownstein, too, has shifted with the wind.

In politics, substantial changes rarely rapidly occur and 2008 seems to be no exception. Trende's blog post does an excellent job of showing how drastically things DID change from 1888 to 1896. However, Trende's analysis demonstrates that there is little evidence to suggest that 2004-2008 represents a drastic change from previous years. Did the nation as a whole vote more Democratic in 2008? Sure. Did the nation as a whole permanently become more Democratic in 2008? Only time will tell, but Ron Brownstein's columns demonstrate that the conventional wisdom can change quickly.

State of the Day - Arkansas

2009-05-26T07:30:00.001-04:00

The Natural State has developed a marked dichotomy. It is a quite conservative state, especially socially, and this is reflected in the fact that Arkansas has become a reliably Republican state in Presidential elections. In fact, it was one of the few states that gave John McCain a bigger margin of victory than it ever gave George W. Bush. Locally, however, the partisan balance is a different story. Arkansas Democrats tend to be much more conservative than their national counterparts. These conservative Democrats personified in Governor Mike Beebe and the state’s Congressional delegation dominate Arkansas politics on all levels. The Republican Party, aside from some strength in Northwest Arkansas, is disorganized and demoralized. This has led to some embarrassingly poor performances for Republican candidates in a state that should be friendly to the GOP.

Not much looks to change in the near future. Governor Beebe and Senator Blanche Lincoln will likely coast to reelection. The hapless Republicans have shown no evidence they can compete for any of the three Democratic House seats or cut into the Democrats’ 3 to 1 advantage in the State Legislature. The status quo looks to continue to reign in Arkansas.

President – 6 Electoral Votes

2000: George Bush (R) 51%, Al Gore (D) 46%
2004: Pres. George Bush (R) 54%, John Kerry (D) 45%
2008: John McCain (R) 59%, Barack Obama (D) 39%

Aside from going solidly for native son Bill Clinton twice, Arkansas has been a reliably Republican state since 1980. It has gotten more Republican this decade. In 2000, George W. Bush won a narrow victory over Al Gore. In 2008, Arkansas was one of one of John McCain's best states. Unlike many other southern states, Obama did not stand to gain much from increased African-American turnout, since Arkansas has the lowest black population of any Southern state. Arkansas has a large enough Democratic base to make it possible for Obama to perform better here but if the Republican nominee does not win this state in 20120, then he or she will be headed for an historic wipeout.

Governor – Mike Beebe (D)

1998: Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) 60%, Bill Bristow (D) 39%
2002: Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) 53%, Jimmie Lou Fisher (D) 47%
2006: Mike Beebe (D) 56%, Asa Hutchinson (R) 41%

A recent PPP poll gave Beebe a 68% approval rating and Arkansas Republicans have neither a credible candidate nor any demonstrated competence. Beebe should win another term easily.

Senior Senator – Blanche Lincoln (D)

1992: Sen. Dale Bumpers (D) 60%, Mike Huckabee (R) 40%
1998: Blanche Lincoln (D) 55%, Fay Boozman (R) 42%
2004: Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D) 56%, Jim Holt (R) 44%

Looking at Lincoln's previous numbers and McCain's big win here would lead one to believe that Republicans have a great shot at picking up this seat in 2010. However, the weak state of the Arkansas GOP gives Lincoln an edge she would not otherwise enjoy.

A recent PPP poll showed that Lincoln had lukewarm approval ratings (45% approve, 40% disapprove), though she had leads over two potential Republican candidates - former U.S. Attorney Tim Griffin and state senator Gilbert Baker. Mike Huckabee could probably beat her, but he looks busy with his Fox News show and he seems to have his eye on the 2012 Presidential race.

Lincoln is definitely a favorite to win in 2010, but Arkansas' preference for Republicans at the federal level means that under the right circumstances, the GOP could make this a competitive race.

Update (05/26/09 12:53 PM): Former U.S. Attorney Tim Griffin said he will not run against Blanche Lincoln in 2010. State Sen. Kim Hendren is the only announced Republican candidate so far.

Junior Senator – Mark Pryor (D)

1996: Tim Hutchinson (R) 53%, Winston Bryant (D) 47%
2002: Mark Pryor (D) 54%, Sen. Tim Hutchinson (R) 46%
2008: Sen. Mark Pryor (D) unopposed

I know the conservative Pryor, blessed with a great Arkansas name, would be tough to beat, but Republicans should be ashamed for not nominating anybody. 2014 is a long way off, but Pryor has a good chance at matching his father's three terms in the Senate.

House 1 – Marion Berry (D)

2004: Rep. Marion Berry (D) 67%, Vernon Humphrey (R) 33%
2006: Rep. Marion Berry (D) 69%, Mickey Stumbaugh (R) 31%
2008: Rep. Marion Berry (D) unopposed

While Al Gore won this district in 2000, it has been trending heavily toward the GOP at the Presidential level - McCain won the district by over 20 points. Still, Berry's association with Blue Dog Democrats and the Republicans' ineffectiveness have made this seat safely Democratic in the last several election cycles.

Berry is a solid favorite for 2010, but it looks the GOP will not give him a free pass again. The NRCC has already spent money on ads criticizing Berry for supporting the President's stimulus bill. Republican businessman and veteran Rick Crawford, who participated in some of the Tea Party activism, is planning to run against Berry.

House 2 – Vic Snyder (D)

2004: Rep. Vic Snyder (D) 58%, Marvin Parks (R) 42%
2006: Rep. Vic Snyder (D) 61%, Andy Mayberry (R) 39%
2008: Rep. Vic Snyder (D) unopposed

Snyder, like the rest of Arkansas's Democratic Congressional delegation, has a good profile for this conservative state. Between that and a lack of decent Republican challengers, Snyder seems to be perpetually safe in this Little Rock centered district.

Some Republicans believe they will have a shot here if there is an anti-Democrat mood in 2010. The NRCC has already targeted Synder in some early advertising.

House 3 – John Boozman (R)

2004: Rep. John Boozman (R) 59%, Janice Judy (D) 38%
2006: Rep. John Boozman (R) 62%, Woodrow Anderson (D) 38%
2008: Rep. John Boozman (R) unopposed

This district is so Republican that even Arkansas Republicans cannot lose it.

House 4 – Mike Ross (D)

2004: Rep. Mike Ross (D) unopposed
2006: Rep. Mike Ross (D) 75%, Joe Ross (R) 25%
2008: Rep. Mike Ross (D) unopposed

Ross is your typical successful Arkansas Democrat. By definition, this means Republicans don't bother making his life difficult. The Hot Springs/Southern Arkansas district looks like it can go either way on paper, but the Republicans' weakness in the state means that Ross has little to fear.

Happy Memorial Day

2009-05-25T11:45:00.001-04:00

Beyond The Polls would like to wish its readers a Happy Memorial Day. While the day is most often associated now with barbecues, beaches opening, and the traditional start to summer, the holiday's origins are found in the years that immediately followed the Civil War. The day was originally known as Decoration Day, to honor the practice of decorating and commemorating the graves of Union soliders. New York was the first state to recognize the day in 1873. Memorial Day, intended to honor those who have fought valiantly for our country, was originally celebrated on May 30, but it was moved to its current day (last Monday in May) in the late 1960s.

We are blessed with freedom and liberty because of the sacrifices that were made for us over the last couple of centuries. So today, while we celebrate the holiday with our friends and family, it is worthwhile to take a minute to think about the wonderful men and women who made it all possible. Happy Memorial Day!

State of the Day - Arizona

2009-05-23T12:22:00.001-04:00

The Grand Canyon State has historically been one of the more Republican states. Since World War II, the state has only voted for two Democratic Presidential candidates - Harry Truman and Bill Clinton (in 1996). However, things may be changing. The state voted Republican for President again, but that had more to do with the candidacy of Arizonan John McCain than anything else. Former Democratic Governor Janet Napolitano was very popular and anti-immigration rhetoric has hurt Arizona Republicans. The immigration issue was largely responsible for the Democrats' gain of two House seats in 2006. Republicans, who lost another House seat in 2008, run the risk of alienating the rapidly growing Hispanic population that went heavily toward the Democrats in 2008.

Democrats will be in strong position to continue their good work in 2010. President Obama's choice of Janet Napolitano to lead the Department of Homeland Security led to a new Republican Governor, Jan Brewer. Still, Democrats will have a strong chance of regaining the governorship in 2010. Sen. John McCain should be safe for another term in the Senate, but Democrats will likely keep the three House seats they picked during the past two cycles. Democrats have made huge strides in the West over the past four years, and they can make big strides in Arizona, too.

President – 10 Electoral Votes

2000: George Bush (R) 51%, Al Gore (D) 45%
2004: Pres. George Bush (R) 55%, John Kerry (D) 44%
2008: John McCain (R) 54%, Barack Obama (D) 45%

Native son John McCain kept Arizona from becoming a true battleground in 2008. Obama's campaign did advertise in Arizona during the last days of the campaign, but he never made a serious effort here. Obama won the reservation counties and the heavily Hispanic border area, but lost everything else. Interestingly, McCain also performed well among young voters in his home stating, winning 48% of those under 30.

Arizona will be Obama's best chance to pick up a new state in 2012. The state still leans Republican, but McCain's nine point margin overstates Republican strength in this state.

Governor – Jan Brewer (R)

1998: Gov. Jane Hull (R) 61%, Paul Johnson (D) 36%
2002: Janet Napolitano (D) 46%, Matt Salmon (R) 45%
2006: Gov. Janet Napolitano (D) 63%, Len Munsil (R) 35%

Republican Jan Brewer, the former Arizona Secretary of State, became Governor when Janet Napolitano became Secretary of Homeland Security on January 20, 2009 (in Arizona, a gubernatorial vacancy is filled by the Secretary of State since there is no Lieutenant Governor). Brewer seeks to follow in the footsteps of Napolitano, who maintained high approval ratings throughout her tenure. Brewer has her hands full - she has already drawn the ire of some conservatives with her proposal to temporarily raise taxes to close the state's budget deficit.

Brewer has not announced her intentions for 2010, though many believe she will run for a full term. If the Governor does decide to run for office in 2010, she will likely see primary opposition. Former state representative Karen Johnson has already announced her candidacy. Other candidates include libertarian Roy Moore, pastor Tim Willis, and Tempe insurance agent Janelle Wood. Two possible wild cards are Congressmen John Shadegg and Jeff Flake.

The Democrats' best potential candidates are Attorney General Terry Goddard or Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon.

Right now, this race has no clear favorite. Brewer could benefit from being the incumbent, but it is too early to know whether Arizonans will embrace their new Governor.

Senior Senator – John McCain (R)

1992: Sen. John McCain (R) 56%, Claire Sargent (D) 32%
1998: Sen. John McCain (R) 69%, Ed Ranger (D) 27%
2004: Sen. John McCain (R) 77%, Stuart Starky (D) 21%

John McCain has already announced plans to run in 2010. McCain may face a few minor primary challengers, such as Minuteman founder Chris Simcox and Jim Deakin.

Governor Janet Napolitano would have been the Democrats' strongest candidate, but her appointment as Secretary of Homeland Security almost certainly takes her out of the race. The only Democrat who has announced his candidacy so far is Rudy Garcia, who was Mayor of Bell Gardens, California (Garcia has only lived in Arizona since 2004).

Even though McCain is not as strong as he was in 2004, he is a solid favorite to win re-election.

Junior Senator – Jon Kyl (R)

1994: Jon Kyl (R) 54%, Sam Coppersmith (D) 40%
2000: Sen. Jon Kyl (R) unopposed
2006: Sen. Jon Kyl (R) 53%, Jim Pederson (D) 43%

In 2006, Kyl scored an impressive victory over stiff competition despite the awful Republican environment of that election cycle. Kyl cannot be totally safe given Arizona’s Democratic trend, but he seems to be in good shape for 2012.

House 1 – Ann Kirkpatrick (D)

2004: Rep. Rick Renzi (R) 59%, Paul Babbit (D) 36%
2006: Rep. Rick Renzi (R) 52%, Ellen Simon (D) 43%
2008: Ann Kirkpatrick (D) 56%, Sydney Hay (R) 40%

Ann Kirkpatrick easily won this contest to replace former Republican Rep. Rick Renzi, who retired because of ethical and legal problems. While Democrats had the wind at their back in 2008, Kirkpatrick's win was impressive since this district was designed to be competitive. Republicans will surely target Kirkpatrick, but she definitely has an edge. The district seems to be trending toward the Democrats and Kirkpatrick may be the type of Democrat that fits this district well. One Republican challenger could be State Representative Bill Konopnicki, who declined to run in 2008.

House 2 – Trent Franks (R)

2004: Rep. Trent Franks (R) 59%, Randy Camacho (D) 39%
2006: Rep. Trent Franks (R) 59%, John Thrasher (D) 39%
2008: Rep. Trent Franks (R) 60%, John Thrasher (D) 37%

This Sun City based district is a mostly Republican seat. As Franks has easily survived the last two cycles, it is hard to see him being in much danger. He is probably set for life.

House 3 – John Shadegg (R)

2004: Rep. John Shadegg (R) unopposed
2006: Rep. John Shadegg (R) 59%, Herb Paine (D) 38%
2008: Rep. John Shadegg (R) 54%, Bob Lord (D) 42%

In February 2008, Rep. John Shadegg announced plans to retire from this North Phoenix seat. Ten days later, he retracted this statement and announced that he would be running. Bob Lord provided stiff opposition, but came nowhere close to Shadegg in this Republican leaning seat. Shadegg may continue to see competition given the Democratic trend in the suburbs, but the seat will continue to lean his way as long as he holds it.

House 4 – Ed Pastor (D)

2004: Rep. Ed Pastor (D) 70%, Don Karg (R) 26%
2006: Rep. Ed Pastor (D) 73%, Don Karg (R) 24%
2008: Rep. Ed Pastor (D) 72%, Don Karg (R) 22%

This is an utterly safe Democratic district. Pastor, one of the most liberal members of Congress, has no worries.

House 5 – Harry Mitchell (D)

2004: Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R) 59%, Elizabeth Rogers (D) 38%
2006: Harry Mitchell (D) 50%, Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R) 46%
2008: Rep. Harry Mitchell (D) 53%, David Schweikert (R) 44%

This Scottsdale/Tempe seat leans Republican, but Mitchell took advantage of a controversial incumbent to pick the seat off in 2006. He faced a decent, but hardly sterling challenge in 2008. This is type of seat where Democrats have done very well in the past two cycles, but continued success is hardly guaranteed.

The NRCC would be wise to target this seat for 2010. With a strong Republican in a year more conducive to Republicans, this is a total tossup, if not a slight Republican advantage. This is a district to watch in determining whether the Republicans can make serious gains in the House of Representatives in 2010.

House 6 – Jeff Flake (R)

2004: Rep. Jeff Flake (R) unopposed
2006: Rep. Jeff Flake (R) unopposed
2008: Rep. Jeff Flake (R) 63%, Rebecca Schneider (D) 35%

Flake is not a standard issue Republican, often angering GOP leadership by opposing any sort of spending. Nevertheless, this is a safe Republican seat and Flake looks safe for 2010.

House 7 – Raul Grijalva (D)

2004: Rep. Raul Grijalva (D) 62%, Joseph Sweeney (R) 34%
2006: Rep. Raul Grijalva (D) 61%, Ron Drake (R) 35%
2008: Rep. Raul Grijalva (D) 63%, Joseph Sweeney (R) 33%

This district is so Democratic that Grijalva’s margins of victory aren’t really very impressive. He may attract a competent opponent, but he’s not going to lose.

House 8 – Gabrielle Giffords (D)

2004: Rep. Jim Kolbe (R) 60%, Eva Bacal (D) 36%
2006: Gabrielle Giffords (D) 54%, Randy Graf (R) 42%
2008: Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D) 55%, Tim Bee (R) 43%

Giffords is a rising star and could be a future statewide candidate. She won this Tuscon based seat against a weak opponent in 2006, but held it impressively against a very strong opponent in 2008. Giffords may face a stiff challenge in 2010, but she remains a favorite. So far, Iraq veteran Jesse Kelley is the only announced Republican candidate.

Dave Ramsey's GOP?

2009-05-22T17:29:00.009-04:00

It's not exactly news that these are tough times for the GOP, what with Obama continuing to enjoy a surprisingly steady honeymoon, Bush still being blamed for the recession, and Michael Steele getting things embarrassingly screwed up at the RNC. If it weren't for Nancy Pelosi and the occasional "tea party," the GOP would have few signs of light this year.

But who's minding the store for the long term? While the media focuses on near-term tactics and the prospects for gaining a few House seats in 2010, we're not hearing any candid assessments of the tough decisions the GOP must make in the coming months and years concerning the massive debt burden and overall "financialization" of the U.S. economy.

Instead of sitting around the echo chamber with Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck, GOP strategists should take a little time off the shouting circuit and spend an afternoon watching the Dave Ramsey Show, on the Fox Business Network.

Dave Ramsey: Financial Guru of the Conservative Heartland

Dave Ramsey is a Tennessee-born financial adviser, motivational speaker, and former real estate broker whose successful call-in radio show won him a coveted spot on Fox's new all-business cable channel. Ramsey is starker--and in many ways less sophisticated--than Suze Orman or other pop financial advisors. His focus is plainly on the elimination of debt, pure and simple. He characterizes credit cards as the greatest evil of our day, and considers materialistic overspending childish and irresponsible.

When people call in, he encourages them to seek therapy for their marital troubles, seek religious counseling for their low self-worth, sell the house and the second car, and start eating "rice and beans" for as long as it takes to get out of debt and live in financial freedom. He calls his series of books and lectures "Financial Peace University."

If you're looking to find out how everyday people--and especially Southerners--view the current American debt debacle, look no further. Ramsey's attitudes are rooted in America's traditional conservative Protestant work ethic of putting family first in all things, and in pursuing a life of modesty and carefully managed, slow-speed wealth accumulation. It's true that his advice is a bit too simple to be true, failing to capture the time-value of money or the positive possibilities of well-managed debt. But by sticking to simple truths, Ramsey makes for a compelling show and presents a seemingly clean ethical case for personal decisionmaking. He often criticizes Congress on the show for its irresponsible deficit spending. He has no praise for either political party.

Ramsey's Ethic vs. the Ethic of Credit-Card America

Since Ramsey's chief villain is the credit card, the contrast is extreme between the values he promotes on his show and the values that have dominated American culture and politics for some thirty years--namely, boosterism of Wall Street, deregulation of corporate behavior, and the spread of personal debt throughout society (to the further advantage of Wall Street firms who reap the benefits through interest charges and other fees). We have all been breaking Dave Ramsey's rules, and neither political party is innocent. Everyone who has overspent has colluded in this binge.

How ironic, then, that GOP lawmakers criticize Obama's staggering deficit spending, but also criticize his efforts to regulate the financial industry and control the excesses of business. For the past thirty years, these two philosophies--opposition to government debt and support for private debt speculation--somehow managed to mesh in the rhetoric of the Republican Party. But now, in the wake of the economic crisis, this union may have been swept away as a viable political strategy.

Only since the 1980s has conservatism been so associated with adventuresome banking practices. And never before has a political party rooted in the rhetoric of Southern populism been so tied to an ideology of deregulated, highly leveraged gamesmanship by the rich and overspending by the burdened middle class.

The question for today's GOP, then, is how to come to terms with what we might call its potential "Dave Ramsey wing." Will its strategists and elected officials rediscover an old economic conservatism to match its social conservatism? Will the party embrace an ideology of prudence, modesty, and economic family values to match its opposition to abortion and its fear of urbanity, cosmopolitanism, and secular culture?

The Politics of Today's "Financialized" America

Southern populist rhetoric has not traditionally been joined with boosterism of unfettered Wall Street risk-taking. When FDR beat Hoover in 1932, he didn't have any Wall Street tycoons in his coalition. Amidst a traumatic financial crisis that affected most of society, he made his appeal against the "malefactors of great wealth" and used the rhetoric of the populist South and West to build a new regulatory regime that reined in Wall Street excesses. Back in 1896 and 1900, when William Jennings Bryan ran for president, he railed against the big monied interests of the Northeast and declared that religion was the source of all true morality. Even Andrew Jackson, in the 1820s and 1830s, ran against big Northeastern wealth in the name of the common people and their values.

It's all the more amazing, then, that for the past thirty or forty years, the Republicans have used the rhetoric of the old Democratic Party in pursuit of the goals of the old GOP. One can't help but wonder if this odd configuration can survive the new economic realities facing America. And in this era of massive fundraising and unregulated campaign contributions, can any corporate interest be opposed in the name of the people? Can any political party afford to clarify its message to voters at the expense of key financial supporters on Wall Street and elsewhere?

Conservative Republicans have an opportunity today, at least in theory, to hone an effective message against the Democrats, thanks to the bizarre half-measures Obama and Geithner have taken to keep the banking crisis under control. If Republicans can match their criticisms of Obama with a legitimate economic program that truly breaks from the Bush record by taming Wall Street and aiding the middle class, then they will vindicate the Dave Ramsey wing and bring many new supporters to their cause.

If they don't, or can't, then our economic recovery lies entirely in the hands of the Democrats, with a much-reduced GOP doing little more than sniping at Obama's heels. If that's the direction we're heading, then we had better pray Obama is truly free of influence from his Wall Street backers. Because if the Democrats fail to rein in our speculative, debt-driven economy, then we are in for a bigger fall than we have yet sustained, as the rest of the world retreats from buying our debt and bailouts turn into explicit government support for financial corporations. Such a turn of events would signal a decline in our share of the world's economic revenues and would also be accompanied by a loss of confidence in our bonds by foreign governments--which would mean a very dramatic devaluation of the dollar (in other words, hyperinflation).

Economics = Destiny

Economic observers from every political persuasion have noted with alarm that Geithner's policies largely perpetuate the profligacy and lack of vision that characterized the final Bush-Paulson years. Commentators as diverse as Paul Krugman and Niall Ferguson now agree that aggressive federal action is needed to restructure de facto insolvent banks (like Citigroup and Bank of America), and that a comprehensive rewrite of our regulations--and a new spirit of enforcement among our bureaucrats--will be needed to interrupt the unending cycle of speculation and bailout that has dominated our financial sector since the early 1980s. Will Obama and Geithner really do this? Or are they too beholden to the same Wall Street interests that dominated the Clinton administration? There is reason to be pessimistic, as the amount of Wall Street money donated to Obama in 2008 vastly outstripped the amount given to McCain.

In Kevin Phillips's recent book, Bad Money, one of the many illuminating charts lists the various bailouts our government has engineered since the early 1980s, sometimes with the help of Congress (such as the S&L Bailout of 1989-1992) and sometimes through the Federal Reserve alone (such as the bailout of Long-Term Capital Management in 1998). Phillips explains that these bailouts, which had already cost trillions of dollars before the current crisis began, helped prop up an economy of unprecedented debt speculation which ended up making the financial industry the single largest sector of our GDP, dwarfing the manufacturing sector after the mid-1990s. This "financialized" economy relied, ultimately, on America's international economic preeminence to manage its debt. Now, with East Asia rising and holding most of our debt, we are reaching the limits of our ability to fund this system.

Even worse, the East Asian financial systems are command-driven, dominated by government goals and operating as anything but free markets. If America is to show the world that a free market can work, we will have to change the way our banks lend money, reducing their speculative impulses and returning some of that capital to the middle class. With an economy less based on boom-and-bust and on endless government bailouts, and more on prudence, thrift, and taking the long view, we can restore our place in the world as the nation of successful free-market risk-takers who know when to hold 'em and know when to fold 'em.

Dave Ramsey and the Power of Opposition

In the end, there is no substitute for an effective opposition with a coherent and workable economic theory to keep the governing party honest. America desperately needs a GOP that makes a genuine appeal to the conservative roots of its Southern base. The GOP must dispense with its nostalgia for Reagan and Bush and promote a new kind of conservatism for an era of overblown debt and financial adventurism on the home front, and increasing economic precariousness abroad. It must base this new conservatism on the traditional heartland values that work around the kitchen table: integrity, avoidance of debt, commitment to family, self-reflection, and deferral of gratification. If it can articulate these principles with sincerity--and match its policies to its rhetoric--then the GOP can become a coherent challenge to Obama's sprawling economic policy and earn the title of Dave Ramsey's party.

If, on the other hand, the GOP finds itself unable to wrench free of its old-GOP creed of deregulation, debt speculation, and government-bashing in favor of corporate interests, then we are truly stuck. No other coherent opposition to Obama is likely to emerge, considering the expense involved in political campaigns. That would mean it's all in Obama's hands, and if he fails to change the system, we're at the mercy of a two-party political system with only one economic policy: speculating and leveraging and financing this country into increasing disparities of wealth, an increasingly burdened middle class, and significant economic decline.

Interesting Article on Guantanomo

2009-05-22T08:15:00.002-04:00

In the political debate over what to do with Guantanamo Bay's prison facility that currently holds several suspected terrorists, the facts are often tossed to the side. In Commentary Magazine, Pulitzer Prize finalist Arthur Herman takes an extensive look at the history of the Guantanamo Bay prison and allegations of torture and abuse. Whatever your political affiliation, I highly recommend the article.

State of the Day - Alaska

2009-05-21T12:52:00.011-04:00

The Last Frontier generally despises the federal government. This has led to serious Republican domination here over the past thirty years. Until 2009, Republicans had held the two Senate seats and one House seat since 1980. Tony Knowles, elected Governor in 1994 and 1998 against multiple candidate fields, is the only Alaska Democrat to have any success here in the past twenty years, and even he lost statewide races in 2004 and 2006. Alaska politics entered the national spotlight with the selection of Governor Sarah Palin as John McCain’s running mate. Democrats finally won a statewide race, as Democratic Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich barely ousted longtime Republican Senator Ted Stevens. However, they fell well short of ousting embattled Republican Rep. Don Young.

2008 exhibited the weakness of Alaska Democrats. Begich almost certainly would not have won had Stevens not been convicted of seven felonies, and he will be a decided underdog for reelection in 2014. Young could still be vulnerable if his legal problems worsened, but his victory despite them in 2008 helped his standing. Governor Palin should easily win reelection in 2010, and looks to be a strong national contender.

President – 3 Electoral Votes

2000: George Bush (R) 59%, Al Gore (D) 28%
2004: Pres. George Bush (R) 61%, John Kerry (D) 36%
2008: John McCain (R) 60%, Barack Obama (D) 37%

Some evidence suggests that Alaska was competitive before McCain selected Sarah Palin to be his running mate. Without Palin on the ticket, Obama may have done slightly better, but it is hard to believe that Obama could have come very close to winning. Looking forward, Alaska is a major energy producer and hates federal government interference with state decision making. That is not a the type of profile that will enjoy an Obama Administration. The Republicans will win Alaska easily in 2012, with or without Sarah Palin.

Governor – Sarah Palin (R)

1998: Gov. Tony Knowles (D) 51%, Jon Lindaeur (R) 17%
2002: Frank Murkowski (R) 56%, Fran Ulmer (D) 41%
2006: Sarah Palin (R) 48%, Tony Knowles (D) 41%

Governor Palin actually saw her approval rating drop during her time on the ticket. That said, she still enjoys a healthy approval rating of nearly 60%. Palin will have no problem raising money for her candidacy. While Democrats have made several ethical complaints against the Governor, she has successfully defeated all of them so far. It is hard to see Palin facing any sort of threat for re-election.

The Democratic field is fairly weak. Consultant Bob Poe and activist Rob Rosenfeld are running. Former State Representative Eric Croft has also expressed interest. The two strongest candidates the Democrats could recruit - former Governor Tony Knowles and Senator Mark Begich - will probably not run. Knowles has already lost two statewide elections in recent years, and Begich is unlikely to leave the Senate at this early stage in his career.

Should she choose to run, Palin would be a strong contender for the Republican nomination for the White House in 2012. Grass roots conservatives absolutely love her, so she would have a strong fundraising and volunteer base. Her biggest weakness, especially with non-conservatives, is an impression that she is a lightweight or not qualified. Expect her to stay engaged in national issues in a quest to combat this perception. She may never get over first impressions, but she’ll certainly try. One makes a mistake to underestimate her. Despite her claims of being Joe (or Jane) Six-Pack, her career success shows she is anything but ordinary.

Senior Senator – Lisa Murkowski (R)

1992: Sen. Frank Murkowski (R) 53%, Tony Smith (D) 38%
1998: Sen. Frank Murkowski (R) 74%, Joseph Sonneman (D) 20%
2004: Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R) 49%, Tony Knowles (D) 46%

Senator Murkowski survived in 2004 against the strongest Democratic challenger she could draw despite furor over the fact that her father appointed her to the Senate in 2002. With a moderate record she may face a primary challenge, but it is hard to see Alaska Democrats making a serious challenge for this seat. For a time, some speculated that Gov. Palin might run against Murkowski in a primary, but Palin put that speculation to rest by announcing that she would raise funds for the Senator. Murkowksi is a solid favorite for 2010.

Junior Senator – Mark Begich (R)

1996: Sen. Ted Stevens (R) 77%, Theresa Obermeyer (D) 10%
2002: Sen. Ted Stevens (R) 78%, Frank Vondersaar (D) 11%
2008: Mark Begich (D) 48%, Sen. Ted Stevens (R) 47%

Senator Ted Stevens long run in the United States Senate came to a close with the 2008 election. Stevens had been indicted and placed on trial in the months preceding Election Day. In a case of bad timing for Stevens, he was convicted just a week before votes were to be cast. Amazingly, despite his conviction, Stevens still managed to win the votes cast on Election Day, but Begich swept the absentee vote to pull out a narrow win. The narrow margin shows major weakness for Begich and Alaska Democrats. To maintain viability in his home state, Begich will have to compile a relatively moderate record and focus on Alaska issues. Nevertheless, at this very early stage Begich is a likely one term Senator.

The Justice Department dropped the charges against Stevens in early 2009, citing problems at Stevens' trial. While some (including Gov. Palin) called for Begich to resign so that there could be another special election, this will not happen.

House At Large – Don Young (R)

2004: Rep. Don Young (R) 71%, Thomas Higgins (D) 22%
2006: Rep. Don Young (R) 57%, Diane Benson (D) 40%
2008: Rep. Don Young (R) 50%, Ethan Berkowitz (D) 45%

Young continues to face major ethical issues and possible indictment. This was supposed to sink him in 2008 but he won a shockingly comfortable victory over Democrat Ethan Berkowitz. He may be vulnerable to another primary challenge, which he just barely survived in 2008. Republican Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell, who only lost to Young by 304 votes in the 2008 Republican primary, is keeping the door open to running again in 2010. On the Democratic side, there are no obvious challengers, though Berkowitz could run again.

It will be difficult for Democrats to dislodge Young. If he is convicted before the 2010 primary, Lt. Gov. Parnell or another Republican will likely replace him on the ballot. If Young is not convicted, he is still a favorite in 2010.

State of the Day - Alabama

2009-05-20T07:30:00.004-04:00

Like most of the Deep South states, the Heart of Dixie has had its fair share of racially polarized politics over the past twenty years. Republicans have dominated here since George Wallace left the Governor’s Mansion for the third and final time in 1987. Blacks vote overwhelmingly for Democrats in all races. Whites vote almost as heavily for Republicans in Presidential and Senate races. Conservative Democrats can still win state races, however, and the Democrats maintain solid majority in both houses of the Legislature. 2008 was actually a pretty good year for Alabama Democrats. Barack Obama predictably lost badly, but Democrats held an open, Republican leaning House seat in North Alabama and picked up an open, heavily Republican House seat in Southeast Alabama.

It is hard to find any evidence that Alabama is undergoing any changes politically. It is difficult to see Barack Obama winning this state in 2012, and Richard Shelby looks safe for 2010. The action will come in the open gubernatorial race and the two competitive House seats that Democrats won so impressively in 2008. These races will test the appeal of conservative Democrats in Alabama.

President – 9 Electoral Votes

2000: George Bush (R) 56%, Al Gore (D) 42%
2004: George Bush (R) 62%, John Kerry (D) 37%
2008: John McCain (R) 61%, Barack Obama (D) 39%

This was a predictably racially polarized electorate in 2008. However, that is not necessarily indicative of racism, because white voters in Alabama do not vote for any national Democrats. Perhaps Obama may pick up a few points if he remains popular in 2012. However, there is no way Obama or any Democrat will carry Alabama any time soon.

Governor – Bob Riley (R)

1998: Don Siegelman (D) 58%, Gov. Fob James (R) 42%
2002: Bob Riley (R) 49%, Gov. Don Siegelman (D) 49%
2006: Gov. Bob Riley (R) 57%, Lucy Baxley (D) 42%

Governor Riley cannot run for a third term.

On the Democratic side, Representative Artur Davis has announced intentions to run. Davis is African-American, but much more moderate than most members of the Congressional Black Caucus, so he could be a serious threat to win. Other announced candidates include Agriculture Commissioner Ron Sparks and Chief Justice Sue Bell Cobb. Davis recently released an internal poll showing him with significant leads over the other challengers.

The Republican side is likely to draw a plethora of potential challengers. Right now, announced challengers include businessmen Tim James, who lost the 2002 primary to Riley, and state representative Robert Bentley. Alabama's two-year colleges Chancellor, Bradley Byrne, has recently resigned his post and is expected to announce intentions to run for governor on May 27. Another possible candidate is former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore (who lost the 2006 primary to Riley), who was removed as state chief justice in 2003 for refusing to comply with a federal court order to remove the 10 Commandments that Moore had placed in the State Judicial Building. Moore is expected to make a formal announcement on June 1.

While it will be a while before the governors' field sorts itself out, the Republicans definitely start with an edge.

Senior Senator – Richard Shelby (R)

1992: Sen. Richard Shelby (D) 65%, Richard Sellars (R) 33%
1998: Sen. Richard Shelby (R) 63%, Clayton Suddith (D) 37%
2004: Sen. Richard Shelby (R) 68%, Wayne Sowell (D) 32%

Senator Shelby remains highly popular and has a ton of money. In short, he can expect another non-serious challenger and an easy win in 2010.

Junior Senator – Jeff Sessions (R)

1996: Jeff Sessions (R) 52%, Roger Bedford (D) 45%
2002: Sen. Jeff Sessions (R) 59%, Susan Parker (D) 40%
2008: Sen. Jeff Sessions (R) 63%, Vivian Figures (D) 37%

Senator Sessions easily won against the outgunned Vivian Figures. As long as he stays out of trouble, he has this seat for life.

House 1 – Jo Bonner (R)

2004: Rep. Jo Bonner (R) 63%, Judy McCain Belk (D) 37%
2006: Rep. Jo Bonner (R) 68%, Vivian Beckerle (D) 32%
2008: Rep. Jo Bonner (R) unopposed

This is one seat Democrats have no chance of winning.

House 2 – Bobby Bright (D)

2002: Rep. Terry Everett (R) 71%, Charles James (D) 28%
2004: Rep. Terry Everett (R) 69%, Charles James (D) 30%
2006: Bobby Bright (D) 50%, Jay Love (R) 50%

By any measure, Democrats should never win this Southeast Alabama seat, based mostly in Montgomery and Dothan. Yet they did. It took a perfect storm of factors to make it happen. Everett's retirement left the seat open. Democrats nominated Montgomery Mayor Bobby Bright, who was both well known and conservative. Republicans had some dissension and ended up with Jay Love, who was not a great candidate. Finally, it was a big Democratic year and black turnout (29% of the district population) peaked.

Despite all this, Bright barely won. This is one of the most likely seats to flip back to the Republicans in 2010. It is still early and Bright has a profile that might succeed here, but there will be no shortage of Republican challengers. Bright has a tough road ahead.

UPDATE: Montgomery City Councilwoman Martha Roby announced that she will be a Republican candidate against Bobby Bright. Jay Love, Bright's 2008 challenger, has not announced his own intentions, but said that he is more likely to run for re-election in the state House of Representatives in 2010.

House 3 – Mike Rogers (R)

2004: Rep. Mike Rogers (R) 61%, Bill Fuller (D) 39%
2006: Rep. Mike Rogers (R) 59%, Greg Pierce (D) 38%
2008: Rep. Mike Rogers (R) 53%, Joshua Segall (D) 47%

Conventional wisdom would suggest that after picking up over fifty seats the last two years, Democrats have limited opportunities in future years. This may be a chance, however. The seat leans Republican, but less so than the 2nd and 5th districts, which Democrats won this year. Segall was not exactly a prime opponent. If Rogers gets an even stronger opponent, and the Democratic trend continues, then Rogers has a problem. However, we expect the Democratic trend will abate as the Democrats wrestle with actually holding power, so we still consider Rogers a favorite.

House 4 – Robert Aderholt (R)

2004: Rep. Robert Aderholt (R) 75%, Cari Cole (D) 25%
2006: Rep. Robert Aderholt (R) 70%, Barbara Bobo (D) 30%
2008: Rep. Robert Aderholt (R) 75%, Nicholas Sparks (D) 25%

If Republicans lose this seat, they really are dead. Aderholt is safe for another term in 2010.

House 5 – Parker Griffith(D)

2004: Rep. Bud Cramer (D) 73%, Gerald Wallace (R) 27%
2006: Rep. Bud Cramer (D) unopposed
2008: Parker Griffith (D) 52%, Wayne Parker (R) 48%

Conservative Democrat Cramer held this Republican leaning Huntsville based seat for eighteen years, and the party hopes Griffith can hold it with a similar profile. Nevertheless, his narrow win in a Democratic year ensures a strong challenge in 2010. This looks like a prime tossup seat for 2010. Much will depend on the Republican nominee, Griffith's fundraising, and the political mood. I expect an end to the Democratic trend in 2010, and a Republican mood would put Griffith in very precarious position.

UPDATE: One possible Republican candidate in this district is Lester Phillips, an African-American navy veteran.

House 6 – Spencer Bachus (R)

2004: Rep. Spencer Bachus (R) unopposed
2006: Rep. Spencer Bachus (R) unopposed
2008: Rep. Spencer Bachus (R) unopposed

The strength of the Democratic opposition to Bachus from 2004-2008 illustrates just how strong the Republican Party is in this district.

House 7 – Artur Davis (D)

2004: Rep. Artur Davis (D) 75%, Steve Cameron (R) 25%
2006: Rep. Artur Davis (D) unopposed
2008: Rep. Artur Davis (D) unopposed

This black majority district is safely Democratic. Since Davis is running for governor, this seat will likely be open in 2010. Democrats have wasted no time in getting into this race. Birmingham lawyer Terri Sewell (a former classmate of Michelle Obama at Princeton University and Barack Obama at Harvard Law School) announced her entry into the race in February. In April, State Rep. Earl Hilliard Jr., son of former Congressman Earl Hilliard (who was defeated by Artur Davis in a 2002 primary), threw his hat into the ring. Expect many other candidates to join this field before the June 1, 2010 primary filing deadline.

Whoever wins the Democratic primary in this race will become the next Congressman from Alabama's seventh district.

Sign of the Problem - 67.2% of Mortgages Underwater in Las Vegas

2009-05-18T18:11:00.005-04:00

While we hear frequent comparisons of the current economic crisis to the Great Depression, there is one way in which the current crisis differs greatly - we know why it happened! While economists and historians still debate the causes for the Great Depression, there is little doubt that today's problems originated with the housing market and subprime lending. As a result, housing prices have plummeted - especially in California - causing many people to lose their homes.

Many buyers now face the unenviable position of being "underwater" on their mortgage - owing more money than their home is worth. For some owners this is not a huge problem, since they are only slightly underwater and they can still afford to pay their mortgages. For others, the problem is enormous. For example, homes in Stockton, California have lost about half their value since the market's peak. Some homeowners (many of whom purchased homes at the peak of the market in 2005-2006) in these areas face no choice but to face foreclosure.

The magnitude of the problem - and one reason why our economic recovery will likely happen slowly - is this article detailing the ten most "underwater" areas in the country. Who is at the top of the list? Sin City - Las Vegas, Nevada - where 67.2% of mortgages are currently underwater. Check out more details and the top ten cities with homes of negative equity.

Democrats Lose Challenger to Burr

2009-05-17T23:10:00.003-04:00

Democrats see North Carolina Sen. Richard Burr as a top target for 2008 given his low approval ratings (36% in a recent PPP poll) and their newfound strength in the state this past November. Many Democrats had been hoping that North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper would challenge Burr. Cooper announced that he will not be running against Burr, leaving Democrats without a top challenger.

Regardless, Burr will likely face a tough challenge in 2010. According to Roll Call:

National Democrats could look to several Democratic Members from North Carolina, including Reps. Bob Etheridge and Mike McIntyre, to run for the seat. Former state Treasurer Richard Moore, Secretary of State Elaine Marshall, Lt. Gov. Walter Dalton and state Rep. Grier Martin are also possible targets of Democratic recruitment.

State of the Day - Wyoming

2009-05-14T23:53:00.005-04:00

The Equality State has always been pretty Republican. It became exceedingly so in the 1990's, thanks in large part to revulsion over Clinton Administration environmental policies. Environmentalists may have enjoyed all the national monuments created in the West, but Wyoming didn't appreciate bans on the use of natural resources. In both 2000 and 2004, this was twice one of George W. Bush's best states and not just because of the presence of Wyoming’s own Dick Cheney. Democrats can still do okay on the state level, but only if they are not obviously associated with national Democrats.

Wyoming showed just how Republican it is in 2008, when it gave John McCain a huge victory, despite Barack Obama's convincing seven point win in the national popular vote.

President – 3 Electoral Votes

2000: George Bush (R) 69%, Al Gore (D) 28%
2004: Pres. George Bush (R) 69%, John Kerry (D) 29%
2008: John McCain (R) 65%, Barack Obama (D) 33%

Wyoming is one of the most Republican states on the Presidential level. Despite Obama's great success in turning many former red states into blue ones, he made little progress here. Wyoming gave John McCain his largest winning margin. Whoever the GOP nominates in 2012 can count on Wyoming's three electoral votes.

Governor – Dave Freudenthal (D)

1998: Gov. Jim Geringer (R) 56%, John Vinich (D) 41%
2002: Dave Freudenthal (D) 50%, Eli Bebout (R) 48%
2006: Gov. Dave Freudenthal (D) 70%, Ray Hunkins (R) 30%

Is Governor Freudenthal term limited? The answer is yes and no. Wyoming does have a two term limit for its governors, but a 2004 state Supreme Court decision invalidated term limits for state legislators since they were imposed by state initiative, rather than a state constitutional amendment. If the Governor makes a similar legal effort to overturn the gubernatorial term limits, he would likely succeed. However, so far Freudenthal has not stated whether he will challenge the term limits. In the meantime, the political scene in Wyoming is frozen, pending the Governor's decision. If Freudenthal decides to retire, Paul Hickey and State Senator Mike Massie are the most likely Democrats to put their hats into the ring.

Republicans have a wider bench of potential candidates, though Freudenthal's decision on term limits is likely to affect the field. State House Speaker Roy Cohee and State House Majority Leader Colin Simpson are thought likely to run. Other potential candidates include former U.S. Attorney Matt Mead, Ron Micheli, and Auditor Rita C. Meyer.

If Freudenthal decides to run again, he is only a mild favorite. The Democratic Governor is popular, but defying term limits could hurt his standing within the state. If the Governor retires, the Republicans have a great chance to pick up this office.

Senior Senator – Michael Enzi (R)

1996: Michael Enzi (R) 54%, Joyce Corcoran (D) 42%
2002: Sen. Michael Enzi (R) 73%, Joyce Corcoran (D) 27%
2008: Sen. Michael Enzi (R) 76%, Chris Rothfuss (D) 24%

Democrats simply do not win federal races in Wyoming. As long as he stays out of trouble, Senator Enzi should be safe for as long as he would like to keep this seat.

Junior Senator – John Barrasso (R)

2000: Sen. Craig Thomas (R) 74%, Mel Logan (D) 22%
2006: Sen. Craig Thomas (R) 70%, Dale Groutage (D) 30%
2008: Sen. John Barrasso (R) 73%, Nick Carter (D) 27%

Senator Barrasso was appointed by Dave Freudenthal to the Senate (Wyoming law requires the governor to make the appointment from among three nominees submitted by party of the previous Senator) after Craig Thomas died. Even though Barrasso was once pro-choice, he avoided a primary challenger and easily coasted to victory against Nick Carter. Barrasso looks to be in good shape for 2014.

House At Large – Barbara Cubin (R)

2004: Rep. Barbara Cubin (R) 55%, Ted Ladd (D) 42%
2006: Rep. Barbara Cubin (R) 48%, Gary Trauner (D) 48%
2008: Cynthia Lummis (R) 53%, Gary Trauner (D) 43%

The Republican Party likely benefited from Rep. Barbara Cubin's retirement in 2008. Cubin had a caustic personality and missed more votes than any member of Congress. To make matters worse, in 2006 Cubin told the wheelchair bound Libertarian candidate that she wanted to slap him after one debate.

While Lummis trailed Trauner in some early polls of this race last summer, Lummis managed to win by a ten point margin. While Democrats might try to target Lummis, she should be safe as long as she has more tact than her predecessor.

State of the Day - Wisconsin

2009-05-14T11:55:00.004-04:00

After a long hiatus, we are planning to try to get our State of the Day column going once again. Because of work commitments, the column may not be daily, but we hope to bring you a few columns a week, if possible.

The Badger State has a long history of progressive politics. Yet, in recent years it has been a surprisingly competitive state. Republican Tommy Thompson won four straight gubernatorial races, serving from 1987-2001. George W. Bush lost Wisconsin twice, but it was very close in both elections. Since, Wisconsin has definitely trended Democratic. Democratic Governor Jim Doyle won reelection in 2006 despite low popularity and Democrats picked up a House seat in the 2006 wave.

Democrats - particularly President Barack Obama - did very well here in 2008. President Barack Obama's campaign message of change and reform had outsized appeal to Wisconsin’s tradition of LaFollette style progressive reform. The unpopularity of President Bush's Iraq policies also boosted Obama's wide winning margin. Has Wisconsin permanently shifted to the left, or does the shift have more to do with the circumstances surrounding the last two election cycles? That remains to be seen, but it looks like the Democrats' edge in the state has grown.

President – 10 Electoral Votes

2000: Al Gore (D) 48%, George Bush (R) 48%
2004: John Kerry (D) 50%, Pres. George Bush (R) 49%
2008: Barack Obama (D) 56%, John McCain (R) 42%

Wisconsin voted within a point of the national average in 1996, 2000, and 2004. That trend stopped in 2008, when Barack Obama won by five points more than the national average. It's hard to believe that this state went from being the closest state in 2004 to being a huge blowout for Barack Obama. Barack Obama seemed to have special appeal in Wisconsin, thus it's not surprising to see that he did so well here. Much can happen in three years, but right now, it seems like Obama should have a clear edge here in 2012.

Governor – James Doyle (D)

1998: Gov. Tommy Thompson (R) 60%, Ed Garvey (D) 39%
2002: James Doyle (D) 45%, Gov. Scott McCallum (R) 41%
2006: Gov. James Doyle (D) 53%, Mark Green (R) 45%

Governor Doyle has struggled with budget deficits in his entire tenure, and has never really won over the state. He benefited from the huge Democratic year in 2006, but his approval rating is very low. A recent SurveyUSA poll shows that only 35% of voters approve of Doyle, whereas 59% disapprove. Those are hard numbers for any incumbent to overcome.

While Doyle has continued to raise money, he is in serious trouble at this point. Lieutenant Governor Barbara Lawton has said she will run if Doyle opts to retire. Given Doyle's low approval ratings, a good Republican in a better Republican climate could knock him off. For the GOP, the two big names in the race are Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker and former Representative Mark Neumann. Appleton businessman Mark Todd has also registered to run. A poll taken in March showed Doyle with a lead over Walker and Neumann, but Doyle remains very weak.

One wildcard? Former Governor Tommy Thompson has expressed interest in possibly running in 2010 if other candidates fail to step up to the plate.

Given Doyle's low approval ratings, it seems like at this early stage, Republicans have an edge.

Senior Senator – Herb Kohl (D)

1994: Sen. Herb Kohl (D) 58%, Robert Welch (R) 41%
2000: Sen. Herb Kohl (D) 62%, John Gillespie (R) 37%
2006: Sen. Herb Kohl (D) 67%, Robert Lorge (R) 29%

Senator Kohl is popular, noncontroversial, and very rich. All of this ensures his continued reelections.

Junior Senator – Russell Feingold (D)

1992: Russell Feingold (D) 53%, Sen. Bob Kasten (R) 46%
1998: Sen. Russell Feingold (D) 51%, Mark W. Neumann (R) 48%
2004: Sen. Russell Feingold (D) 55%, Tim Michels (R) 44%

Senator Feingold looks to be in strong shape. His strongest opponent would undoubtedly be Tommy Thompson. Representatives Paul Ryan and Jim Sensenbrenner might also be strong candidates. In any event, Feingold is a favorite.

House 1 – Paul Ryan (R)

2002: Rep. Paul Ryan (R) 67%, Jeffrey Thomas (D) 31%
2004: Rep. Paul Ryan (R) 65%, Jeffrey Thomas (D) 33%
2006: Rep. Paul Ryan (R) 63%, Jeffrey Thomas (D) 37%
2008: Rep. Paul Ryan (R) 64%, Marge Krupp (D) 35%

Ryan is considered a rising GOP star, and he has locked down this swing district even against two Democratic waves. Some have mentioned Ryan as a potential Senate candidate in 2012, should Sen. Kohl decide to retire.

House 2 – Tammy Baldwin (D)

2004: Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D) 63%, Dave Magnum (R) 37%
2006: Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D) 63%, Dave Magnum (R) 37%
2008: Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D) 69%, Peter Theron (R) 31%

This is a safe Democratic district.

House 3 – Ron Kind (D)

2004: Rep. Ron Kind (D) 56%, Dale Schultz (R) 43%
2006: Rep. Ron Kind (D) 65%, Paul Nelson (R) 35%
2008: Rep. Ron Kind (D) 63%, Paul Stark (R) 34%

Kind has performed solidly in this district and will likely continue to do so.

House 4 – Gwen Moore (D)

2004: Gwen Moore (D) 70%, Gerald Boyle (R) 28%
2006: Rep. Gwen Moore (D) 71%, Perfecto Rivera (R) 28%
2008: Rep. Gwen Moore (D) 88%, Michael D. LaForest (I) 12%

Moore is unopposed. Republicans have no shot here.

House 5 – Jim Sensenbrenner (R)

2004: Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R) 67%, Bryan Kennedy (D) 32%
2006: Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R) 62%, Bryan Kennedy (D) 36%
2008: Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R) 80%, Robert Raymond (I) 20%

Sensenbrenner faced no opposition in 2008. It doesn't really matter if Democrats field an opposition candidate in 2010, since Sensenbrenner will be safe as long as he continues to run in this district.

House 6 – Tom Petri (R)

2004: Rep. Tom Petri (R) 67%, Jef Hall (D) 30%
2006: Rep. Tom Petri (R) unopposed
2008: Rep. Tom Petri (R) 64%, Roger Kittelson (D) 36%

The veteran Petri is entrenched in this Republican leaning seat.

House 7 – David Obey (D)

2004: Rep. David Obey (D) unopposed
2006: Rep. David Obey (D) 62%, Nick Reid (R) 35%
2008: Rep. David Obey (D) 61%, Dan Mielke (R) 39%

As Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Obey has no problem raising plenty of funds. Obey should be safe in 2010.

House 8 – Steve Kagen (D)

2004: Rep. Mark Green (R) 70%, Dottie Le Clair (D) 30%
2006: Steve Kagen (D) 51%, John Gard (R) 49%
2008: Rep. Steve Kagan (D) 54%, John Gard (R) 46%

Kagen won this Republican leaning Green Bay/Northeast Wisconsin seat in the 2006 wave. After coming close in 2006, Republican John Gard ran again in 2008, but the race never really panned out for him.

While Kagan is becoming more entrenched in this district, Republicans will surely come after him, as WI-8 is really the only district in the state where Republicans could gain a seat in 2010. Door County Commissioner Marc Savard will be running. Other candidates mentioned by Roll Call include state representatives Roger Roth and Phil Montgomery, Green Bay Mayor James Schmitt, and former Green Bay mayor Paul Jadin.

Kagan has an edge, but if the political environment swings back toward the GOP by 2010, he could have problems.

Crist Changes Florida Political Outlook

2009-05-12T11:23:00.004-04:00

Governor Charlie Crist made it official this morning - he will be a candidate for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Republican Sen. Mel Martinez. Crist will face a potentially stiff primary challenge from Marco Rubio, the former Florida House Speaker. Rubio will surely attack Crist from the right, portraying himself as the true conservative in the race. Whether Rubio will gain traction remains to be seen. For what it's worth, the NRSC has lined up behind Crist.

Should he win the Republican nomination, Crist is a solid favorite to win the Senate seat. While it's a strong win for Republicans, Crist's less than conservative politics have roiled some conservatives in the past. Will Crist become more or less conservative as a U.S. Senator? Who knows? Crist does seem to have national ambitions. If he wants to run for President someday, it's unlikely that Crist will break that sharply from conservatives, as he would need their support in the future.

Crist's decision breaks with the conventional wisdom that being a Governor is a better national stage for running for higher office than being a Senator. Perhaps Crist would like to follow Barack Obama's example. While Crist running is good news for Republicans, it is bad news for Florida Republicans who will face a much tougher job in retaining the Governor's Mansion.

UPDATE: It didn't take long for the GOP primary race to start. This relatively tame web ad, released by Marco Rubio's campaign, seeks to identify Gov. Crist with President Obama's large budget and spending:

Ridge Not Running For PA Senate

2009-05-07T15:53:00.004-04:00

Yesterday, I discussed Republican recruitment and noted that it's probably too early for the GOP to get their hopes up. Today, Tom Ridge proved that point by announcing he will not run for the Senate in 2010. Ridge's decision is not terribly surprising. Before Sen. Arlen Specter switched to the Democratic Party, Ridge likely never contemplated running for the seat. The obstacles were two-fold for Ridge. First, he would face a contentious primary against former Rep. Toomey. While Ridge had a good chance of defeating Toomey, Ridge's disfavor among conservatives would make any race a tough one. Second, even if he won the GOP primary, Ridge would face a difficult and expensive race against Sen. Arlen Specter.

Ridge's decision shows one of the tough things about recruiting candidates. Oftentimes, there are one one or two people in a state that are good enough candidates to make a race competitive. For the GOP in Pennsylvania, Tom Ridge was the only Republican who would have had a real shot against Specter. Of course, anything can happen, but the Democrats' chances of retaining this Senate seat have significantly improved.

GOP Recruiting for 2010?

2009-05-06T17:18:00.004-04:00

Recently, when I was reading some leftist blogs, I came across several posts indicating how poorly GOP recruiting was going in several districts. While it's true that the Republican Party has had recruiting problems in the last two cycles, one would expect things to improve (somewhat) by 2010. Most notably, George W. Bush is no longer President. While his lack of popularity still haunts the GOP, Democrats will no longer be able to run against Republicans by associating them with Bush.

National Review's Jim Geragthy takes a look at some positive aspects of Republican recruiting this cycle, by way of Chris Cilizza:

Chris Cillizza of the Post takes a look at recent good news in Republican recruiting for the 2010 cycle — mentioning declared or likely Senate candidates Charlie Crist and Marco Rubio in Florida, Tom Ridge in Pennsylvania, Rob Simmons in Connecticut, Rep. Mark Kirk in Illinois, and Rep. Mike Castle in Delaware, as well as declared or likely House candidates Manchester (N.H.) mayor Frank Guinta and Springfield (Ore.) mayor Sid Leiken to run against Rep. Peter Defazio.

But there’s a lot more going on on the House side.

Click through to Geraghty's post to see analysis of the House. Things are definitely looking up for the GOP on the recruiting front, but these candidates still have a tough road ahead.

There is no doubt some of these potential candidates could do well, however, some are unproven. For example, Chris Christie's success in New Jersey really tells us nothing about Christie himself. Christie could be a great candidate, but it's too early to know. His lead in the polls has more to do with Gov. Corzine's unpopular standing more than anything else. Tom Ridge would be a coup for the Republican Party in Pennsylvania, but can he win a primary against Toomey? Would his time at the Department of Homeland Security be a plus or a negative?

That said, some of the GOP recruits are definitely strong. In Illinois, Mark Kirk is probably as solid a candidate as the GOP can hope for, but Kirk's success will likely ride on whether Roland Burris is the Democratic candidate. In Ohio, Rob Portman gives the GOP a young candidate who stands a good chance against the Democratic opposition. In Delaware, Rep. Mike Castle is probably the only Republican who could win against the Democratic opposition (Beau Biden?). Gov. Charlie Christ would totally transform the Florida Senate race, though he might give conservatives headaches once he is actually in office.

Overall, the GOP definitely has reason for optimism, but it's too early to make any broad generalizations.

Potential Replacements for Justice Souter

2009-05-01T13:56:00.004-04:00

Welcome back, readers. Real life obligations have kept us away from the blog for a while, but we intend on trying to post when we can. We hope to bring back State of the Race as time permits.

In the meantime, MCS has penned a summary of potential nominees to the Supreme Court. This list focuses on several current appellate judges and a few well known law professors. Who do you think President Obama will choose?

Circuit Court Judges

Sonia Sotomayor, 54, Court of Appeals for Second Circuit, appointed to 2nd Circuit by Bill Clinton in 1997, confirmation blocked for a year, ultimately confirmed 68-28. Originally appointed in 1991 to S.D.N.Y. Of Puerto Rican heritage, born in South Bronx. Has diabetes. Suggested by Democrats as SCOTUS appointee during Bush administration. Democrats may view her as too “centrist.” Graduate of Princeton and Yale Law School.

Diane Wood, 58, Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, appointed by Bill Clinton in 1995 and confirmed unanimously. Former law professor, and worked Office of Legal Adviser in State Department in the late ‘70s. Clerked for Justice Blackmun. Has authored some controversial abortion decisions/dissents. Graduate of University of Texas and University of Texas Law School.

Helene N. White, 55, Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, originally appointed by Bill Clinton in 1997, but never confirmed. Appointed by Bush in 2008 as part of Gang of 14 compromise. Confirmed with 63-32 vote. Formerly married to Charles Levin, cousin of Sen. Levin. Formerly appellate judge in Michigan. Graduate of Barnard College and University of Pennsylvania Law School.

Ann Williams, 60, Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, appointed by Bill Clinton in 1999 and unanimously confirmed. Previously, District Judge in N.D. Ill. - appointed by Reagan. Calls herself politically independent. Probably not overtly liberal enough. African-American. Graduate of Wayne State University and University of Michigan Law School.

Karen Nelson Moore, 61, Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, appointed by Bill Clinton in 1995, confirmed by voice vote. Clerked for Justice Blackmun. Graduate of Radcliffe and Harvard Law School.

Kim Wardlaw, 54, Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, appointed by Bill Clinton in 1998, enjoying strong bipartisan support. Clinton appointed her to District Judgeship in 1995 and she was confirmed unanimously. Former partner at O’Melveny and Myers. Politically active in Democratic circles. Graduate of UCLA and UCLA Law School.

Others

Elena Kagan, 49, Solicitor General (confirmed 61-31), former dean of Harvard Law School, and former law professor at Harvard and Chicago. Also associate White House counsel under Clinton. Appointed to D.C. Circuit by Clinton but never got vote. Respected among some in conservative legal academic circles. Former clerk to Justice Thurgood Marshall. Graduate of Princeton and Harvard Law School.

Kathleen Sullivan, 54, professor at Stanford Law School and appellate litigator at Quinn Emmanuel. Described by Laurence Tribe as most extraordinary student he ever had. Former HLS professor and Stanford professor. Author of leading Constitutional law casebook. Failed CA bar exam on first try. Graduate of Cornell and Harvard Law School.

Pamela Karlan, 50, professor at Stanford Law School. Formerly professor at UVA. Co-founded Supreme Court law clinic at Stanford. Experienced Supreme Court advocate and frequent contributor to media. Clerked for Justice Blackmun. Graduate of Yale and Yale Law School.

Former Rep. Simmons To Challenge Dodd

2009-03-16T13:51:00.009-04:00

Republicans in Connecticut got a bit of good news, as former Rep. Rob Simmons announced that he will be running against Sen. Chris Dodd in 2010. While Dodd has long been viewed as a favorite for re-election, his role in the Countrywide mortgage scandal, along with his failed Presidential bid, have made him more vulnerable than one might expect. A recent Quinnipiac poll showed Simmons with a small lead over Dodd.

It's certainly too early to count out Chris Dodd. He has been a mainstay in Connecticut for several years, and the state is still very Democratic one. Dodd will have no problem raising funds, though that may just serve to highlight the fact that Dodd has become a consummate Washington insider.

Simmons' decision will certainly be welcome at the NRSC. Simmons has been viewed by many as the strongest potential challenger to Dodd. Simmons narrowly lost his house seat in the Democratic wave of 2006, but he showed an ability to win in a Democratic district in 2000, 2002, and 2004.

Corzine's Woes Continue

2009-03-12T10:27:00.003-04:00

In a Quinnipiac poll released today, Governor Jon Corzine trails likely Republican candidate (and former U.S. Attorney) Chris Christie by 9 points (46%-37%). In February, Christie had a six point lead in the same poll. One very startling number is that New Jersey voters say, by a 53-34 margin, that Gov. Corzine does not deserve to be re-elected. Corzine also has a negative 38-50 favorability rating.

Clearly, Governor Corzine is in a lot of trouble. However, Corzine has the advantage of nearly unlimited campaign funds and a state that still favors Democrats. Make no mistake - Corzine is in trouble and will have to improve his standing from where it is now to win reelection. It is hard to be optimistic about the chances of any Republican candidate in New Jersey given their frequent failures over the last twenty years, but Corzine may give the GOP the opening it needs.

State of the Day - West Virginia

2009-03-06T08:00:00.001-05:00

For most of the 20th Century, the Mountain State was one of the most Democratic in the nation. It only voted Republican for President in huge landslides, and it did not desert Michael Dukakis in 1988. It is still by and large a Democratic state, and Democrats dominate state politics. However, George W. Bush carried West Virginia twice, and it has become evident that West Virginians will not vote for liberal national Democrats with whom they cannot identify. George W. Bush's social conservatism and charm had no problem getting past perceived urban elite liberals Al Gore and John Kerry. Democrats easily won the Governor’s Mansion even as Bush won here easily.

2008 provided an excellent example of the Democrats that can be successful in West Virgnia. Barack Obama struggled in a state that lacked the demographic groups that formed his "base" - youthful voters, African Americans and "latte liberals." Meanwhile, socially conservative Democratic Governor Joe Manchin easily won. As long as Democrats nominate liberals like Barack Obama, they are going to have trouble winning here at the Presidential level.

President – 5 Electoral Votes

2000: George Bush (R) 52%, Al Gore (D) 46%
2004: Pres. George Bush (R) 56%, John Kerry (D) 43%
2004: John McCain (R) 56%, Barack Obama (D) 43%

If Democrats ever nominated a Southerner, social moderate, or anyone with outsized blue collar appeal, you would see that West Virginia is still, at heart, a Democratic state. Barack Obama is none of the above, and that is why he struggled in the Democratic primary here and lost to John McCain by 13 points. If anything, Obama's plans to enact a cap and trade system for carbon emissions will probably put West Virginia even further out of reach for 2012.

Governor – Joe Manchin (D)

2000: Robert Wise (D) 50%, Gov. Cecil H. Underwood (R) 47%
2004: Joe Manchin (D) 64%, Monty Warner (R) 34%
2008: Joe Manchin (D) 70%, Russ Weeks (R) 26%

Manchin is incredibly popular, even after revelations West Virginia University gave his daughter a degree she did not earn. Manchin is quite conservative, and may be more popular among non-Democrats than within his own party. At the state level, Democrats clearly dominate in West Virginia.

Senior Senator – Robert Byrd (D)

1994: Sen. Robert Byrd (D) 69%, Stan Klos (R) 31%
2000: Sen. Robert Byrd (D) 78%, David T. Gallaher (R) 20%
2006: Sen. Robert Byrd (D) 64%, John Raese (R) 34%

The ninety year old Senator Byrd says he will continue "'til this old body drops." and that probably means he'll stay in the Senate as long as he's alive. Byrd is more than an institution in West Virginia, he is a way of life. West Virginia's voters will surely indulge him as he turns into Strom Thurmond. Whether Byrd runs or not, the best Republican candidate would be Representative Shelley Moore Capito.

Junior Senator – Jay Rockefeller (D)

1996: Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D) 77%, Betty A. Burks (R) 23%
2002: Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D) 63%, Jay Wofle (R) 37%
2008: Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D) 64%, Jay Wofle (R) 36%

Rockefeller is the exception that proves the rule about "down home West Virginia Democrats." Actually, despite his name, Rockefeller has an affable persona that connects with West Virginia voters.

House 1 – Alan Mollohan (D)

2004: Rep. Alan Mollohan (D) 68%, Alan Parks (R) 32%
2006: Rep. Alan Mollohan (D) 64%, Chris Wakim (R) 36%
2008: Rep. Alan Mollohan (D) unopposed

Despite a scandal involving using his Appropriations perch to enrich his real estate holdings and a district that leans Republican, Mollohan was unopposed in 2008. Can you tell that the West Virginia Republican party is pretty weak?

House 2 – Shelley Moore Capito (R)

2004: Rep. Shelley Moore Capito (R) 57%, Erik Wells (D) 41%
2006: Rep. Shelley Moore Capito (R) 57%, Mike Callaghan (D) 43%
2006: Rep. Shelley Moore Capito (R) 57%, Anne Barth (D) 43%

In 2006 and 2008, Demorats targeted Capito, without success. Both times Democrats failed to get their preferred candidate, but Capito has displayed an ability to survive despite the toxic environment for her party that existed in 2006 and 2008. Democrats will likely target Capito again, but she is a favorite to win re-election.

House 3 – Nick Rahall (D)

2004: Rep. Nick Rahall (D) 65%, Rick Snuffer (R) 35%
2006: Rep. Nick Rahall (D) 69%, Kim Wolfe (R) 31%
2008: Rep. Nick Rahall (D) 67%, Gary Gearheart (R) 33%

This district has tended to vote right at the national average in Presidential elections, though it seems to have given McCain a sizeable win in November. Rahall, a blue collar entrenched Democrat, will have no problem winning here.

State Of The Day - Washington

2009-03-06T00:01:00.002-05:00

The Evergreen State has cycled from a heavily Democratic state that voted for Michael Dukakis in 1988, to a swing state that was very close in 2000, to a state that has trended even more Democratic than the rest of the nation over the past four years. Eastern Washington, angry with Seattle liberals and environmentalists trying to protect the spotted owl, turned violently against the Democrats in the 1990’s. However, Seattle is quite Democratic, and combined with Democratic trending Western Washington, the state is pretty Democratic on the whole.

Democrats had a good year in Washington State in 2008. The state continued its leftward trend at the Presidential level, giving Barack Obama a huge 17 point victory. Considering that the state had been considered a potential "swing state" just eight years before, one can see how far Washington has moved to the left. Democratic Governor Gregoire also won a comfortable victory over Republican Dino Rossi, a race many Republicans had hoped to win. The one bit of good news for Republicans was that in WA-8, Republican Dave Reichert managed to hang onto his seat once again. Republican Rob McKenna also won an easy re-election as the state's Attorney General.

Washington will continue to be a safe state for Democrats. 2010 will be a quiet year for Washington state, with Patty Murray's Senate seat being the most significant office at stake.

President – 11 Electoral Votes

2000: Al Gore (D) 50%, George Bush (R) 45%
2004: John Kerry (D) 53%, Pres. George Bush (R) 46%
2008: Barack Obama (D) 57%, John McCain (R) 40%

Washington state continued its trend away from the Republican Party at the national level in 2008. In many ways, Barack Obama was an ideal candidate for the state. He had immense appeal among the state's many young, liberal and environmentally oriented voters in Seattle. Moreover, President Bush's policies in Iraq and social conservatism were particularly unpopular here.

While Washington state was often referred to as a "battleground state" in 2000, and even in 2004, there was never any doubt that Barack Obama would have a decisive win here in November. Even if the President's popularity is waning by 2012, he should still come out ahead in Washington state.

Governor – Christine Gregoire (D)

2000: Gov. Gary Locke (D) 58%, John Eric Carlson (R) 40%
2004: Christine Gregoire (D) 49%, Dino Rossi (R) 49%
2008: Gov. Christine Gregoire (D) 53%, Dino Rossi (R) 47%

After Democratic Governor Gregoire won in 2004 by only 129 votes after a disputed recount process, many Republicans were hopeful that a rematch in 2008 would yield a different result. All along, this was a close race, but Gregoire prevailed in the end. President Barack Obama's large victory surely helped Gregoire improve on her narrow 2004 win.

Looking toward 2012, the Democrats have a clear edge, though a Republican victory would not be impossible under the right circumstances. Attorney General Rob McKenna may be a strong candidate for Republicans.

Senior Senator – Patty Murray (D)

1992: Patty Murray (D) 54%, Rod Chandler (R) 46%
1998: Sen. Patty Murray (D) 58%, Linda Smith (R) 42%
2004: Sen. Patty Murray (D) 55%, George Nethercutt (R) 43%

Senator Murray is often underestimated, but her big win over strong opposition in 2004 indicates that she is probably invincible in this Democratic leaning state. She'll be a big favorite over her three most likely potential challengers, State Attorney General Rob McKenna and Representatives Cathy McMorris Rodgers and Dave Reichert. A recent Research 2000 poll confirmed Murray's strength against Reichert and McKenna - Murray held double digit leads over both men.

Junior Senator – Maria Cantwell (D)

1994: Sen. Slade Gorton (R) 56%, Ron Sims (D) 44%
2000: Maria Cantwell (D) 49%, Sen. Slade Gorton (R) 49%
2006: Sen. Maria Cantwell (D) 57%, Mike McGavick (R) 40%

Senator Cantwell has come a long way from winning election by 2,229 votes in 2000. Like Murray, she easily dispatched a strong challenge in 2006, and looks to be in strong shape. Barring an unforeseen turn of events, she should be secure for 2012.

House 1 – Jay Inslee (D)

2004: Rep. Jay Inslee (D) 62%, Randy Eastwood (R) 36%
2006: Rep. Jay Inslee (D) 68%, Larry Ishmael (R) 32%
2008: Rep. Jay Inslee (D) 68%, Larry Ishmael (R) 32%

Republicans would need a lot of breaks to win in this district. Inslee is in good shape for 2010.

House 2 – Rick Larsen (D)

2004: Rep. Rick Larsen (D) 64%, Suzanne Sinclair (R) 34%
2006: Rep. Rick Larsen (D) 64%, Doug Roulstone (R) 36%
2008: Rep. Rick Larsen (D) 62%, Rick Bart (R) 37%

While this district is not as solidly Democratic as Larsen's numbers might indicate, he has a good grip on the district.

House 3 – Brian Baird (D)

2004: Rep. Brian Baird (D) 62%, Thomas Crowson (R) 38%
2006: Rep. Brian Baird (D) 63%, Michael Messmore (R) 37%
2008: Rep. Brian Baird (D) 63%, Michael Delavar (R) 36%

This district mirrors the national average almost exactly, giving 48% and 50% for George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004 respectively. In 2008, it gave 52% to Barack Obama and 46% to John McCain. Baird has a moderate record and has become popular locally. He'll be tough to knock off. Republicans will have to do better than recent challengers if they want a shot here.

House 4 – Doc Hastings (R)

2004: Rep. Doc Hastings (R) 63%, Sandy Matheson (D) 37%
2006: Rep. Doc Hastings (R) 60%, Richard Wright (D) 40%
2008: Rep. Doc Hastings (R) 63%, George Fearing (D) 37%

This safe Republican district shows that Republicans can survive in blue states.

House 5 – Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R)

2004: Cathy McMorris (R) 60%, Don Barbieri (D) 40%
2006: Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R) 56%, Peter Goldmark (D) 44%
2008: Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R) 65%, Mark Mays (D) 35%

This is another very tough district for Democrats.

House 6 – Norm Dicks (D)

2004: Rep. Norm Dicks (D) 69%, Doug Cloud (R) 31%
2006: Rep. Norm Dicks (D) 71%, Doug Cloud (R) 29%
2006: Rep. Norm Dicks (D) 67%, Doug Cloud (R) 33%

Dicks is firmly entrenched in this Democratic leaning seat.

House 7 – Jim McDermott (D)

2004: Rep. Jim McDermott (D) 81%, Carol Cassady (R) 19%
2006: Rep. Jim McDermott (D) 79%, Steve Beren (R) 16%
2006: Rep. Jim McDermott (D) 87%, Steve Beren (R) 16%

This is one of the most Democratic seats in the nation, which explains the presence of someone as liberal as McDermott.

House 8 – Dave Reichert (R)

2004: Rep. Dave Reichert (R) 52%, Dave Ross (D) 47%
2006: Rep. Dave Reichert (R) 51%, Darcy Burner (D) 49%
2008: Rep. Dave Reichert (R) 53%, Darcy Burner (D) 47%

Reichert, a former Sheriff who helped apprehend Gary Ridgway, has one of the coolest backgrounds in Congress. This probably helped him survive in this Bellevue based suburban Seattle swing seat in 2006 and 2008.

This district has trended toward the Democrats and gave Barack Obama a healthy win. However, David Reichert has repeatedly fended off difficult challengers. Since Reichert weathered the GOP storms of 2006 and 2008, one has to give him the edge for 2010. If Reichert were to challenge Patty Murray for her Senate seat, WA-8 would be a prime pickup opportunity for House Democrats.

House 9 – Adam Smith (D)

2004: Rep. Adam Smith (D) 63%, Paul Lord (R) 34%
2006: Rep. Adam Smith (D) 66%, Steven Cofchin (R) 34%
2006: Rep. Adam Smith (D) 66%, James Postma (D) 54%

Smith should have an easy time in this Democratic leaning district.