Last week the RNC and DNC released their first quarter fundraising results The good news is that Republicans are in good shape financially raising $25.3 million. Democrats raised a total of $13.8 million. The bad news is that Republicans are going to need all the financial help they can get. There are total of 19 seats that Republicans are defending versus 17 for the Democrats.
The way I see this election there are about 6 Republican seats that are up for grabs (Missouri, Kentucky, New Hampshire, Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio). These seats are up for grabs because either the seat is open due to retirement or an unpopular incumbent. One important thing to keep in mind is the number one, all it takes is one of these seats to go Democratic and there are 60 Democratic votes in the Senate. The races break down like this:
Missouri
A real mess for Republicans. The seat is from retiring Senator Kit Bond (R). The other senator is a Democrat. The state basically went 50-50 in 2008. The dems seem to already have their nominee Secretary of State Robin Carnahan, who comes from a very famous political family in the state. On the Republican side there is one announced candidate Rep Roy Blunt but he is doing all the well in terms of polls and money.
Kentucky
In 2004 Senator Bunning barely won and it looks like if he does actually go forward and run he might actually lose. Bunning has not been getting any help from Senate Republicans. What's worse is that there aren't many possibilities the Republicans can put up against Bunning.
New Hampshire
The seat is open after the retirement of Judd Gregg. The democratic nominee looks like it could be between current democratic Rep. Paul Hodes and Rep. Carol Shea-Porter. Former Senator John Sununu seems to be the only likely Republican that would get into the race.
Florida
Another open seat after the retirement of Republican Mel Martinez. This race is a toss-up at least until the nominees are decided. The state went for Obama in 2008 but right now in a head to head matchup a generic republican leads by 1%.
Pennsylvania
Senator Arlen Specter is running for re-election but will face a primary fight against former Rep. Pete Tooomey and a tough general election. Pennsylvania is a blue state and the 2004 race was very close. I see Specter surviving the primary challenge, but I can see him running out of energy and money to put up a good fight.
Ohio
Open seat due to retirement of Republican Senator George Voinivich. I think this seat will stay in Republican hands. Former Rep. Rob Portman seems to have a good hold on the race. At the end of the day the state is Ohio and has been a toss-up in recent national elections.
The Democrats will have to work hard in about 4 states (Colorado, Illinois, Connecticut,Nevada). What you should note about that statement is that I said "work hard" in 4 states. Each one of these states are unique on their own.
Illinois
Illinois could be a possibility (I know I am optimistic) depending on who the Republican nominee is. The only real chance this could be a race is if Rep. Mark Kirk decides to run for the Senate. Even with Kirk in the race it will be tough, Illinois is a very blue state. Illinoisans are mad at the corruption of their former governor and the scandals around their Senator Roland Burris, but I don't think they are mad enough to vote for the other party just another Democratic candidate.
Connecticut
I blogged entirely about this race last week. For more details see that post but the bottom line is Dodd is not popular in the state and losing in the polls right now. If the banking scandals surronding him continue he very well may be out of a job. What you should keep in mind though is Connecticut is as blue as the Atlantic Ocean.
Nevada
Could be a race depending what happens in the Senate between now and election time. It is not an impossibility that a Senate Majority Leader loses a re-election bid.
Colorado
Colorado is just a purple state and you can't quite tell what can happen with it. The state went for Obama and the current Senator is Michael Bennet, who was appointed to the seat and has never been on a statewide ballot.
As with every election time will obviously tell, it does not look good for Republicans right now. I can see a very real possibility that Dems pick up 3 or 4 seats.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
You spent my money on what?
If you can't guess political campaigns interest me if not consume most of my attention. But a recent story released by the Fort Worth Star-Telegram stating Texas Congressmen Joe Barton has lost a significant amount of money ($700K) in the stock market.
"What's new?" you might ask. Well he invested his campaign fund into the stock market. To be fair to Rep. Barton what he has done is completely legal. Also, this story probably wouldn't have made news if the market had not dropped about 50% from its October 2007 highs. But I think the underlying principle of what Congressman Barton and other public officials are doing or trying to do with their campaign cash that really irks me.
Correct me if I am wrong but when I or you give money to a political candidate I expect that money to be used, you know, for their campaign, or at least their future campaigns. The reason why I give money is because I hope that the person I gave the money to wins public office and votes the way I think they should vote.
This incident raises the question of what exactly should politicians do with their spare campaign cash when they don't have to spend it for their campaigns?
Barton is acting liking a capitalist and I think capitalism is a great thing, but could there be a conflict of interest with a Congressman's investments and what might be before him on the floor of the House? People have talked about conflicts of interest politicians have based on a politicians private investments. A politicians private investments, like what they invest in their retirement account should be for the most part private. But, I think the issue changes when the funds come from the voting public and to be used specifically for running for a public office.
But the campaign cash being invested is not the only issue. Rep. Barton probably has some fees associated with his investment account like commission etc. Who here would be willing to give money to a politician to pass along to a broker?
I know the family who scrimped and saved money to contribute to a politician because they believed in the politician wouldn't be happy to know their contribution went to pay a broker.
But, what Rep. Barton and others have done pales in comparison to what former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich is trying to do with his campaign fund. The former governor has asked that his campaign be allowed to use his campaign fund for his legal defense. If you don't know the ex-governor is on trial for racketeering and fraud.
The decision for the Blagojevich matter is in the hands of US District Judge James Zagel and a decision is not expected to be made until May 1st. I hope the good judge comes to his senses and doesn't allow the ex-governor access to campaign funds.
I think it would be refreshing if politicians couldn't use their campaign contributions to get them out of jail for crimes they committed while they were in public office. I also think it would be refreshing if politicians invested their cash maybe in US Treasury bonds rather than the stock of the day. What do you think?
"What's new?" you might ask. Well he invested his campaign fund into the stock market. To be fair to Rep. Barton what he has done is completely legal. Also, this story probably wouldn't have made news if the market had not dropped about 50% from its October 2007 highs. But I think the underlying principle of what Congressman Barton and other public officials are doing or trying to do with their campaign cash that really irks me.
Correct me if I am wrong but when I or you give money to a political candidate I expect that money to be used, you know, for their campaign, or at least their future campaigns. The reason why I give money is because I hope that the person I gave the money to wins public office and votes the way I think they should vote.
This incident raises the question of what exactly should politicians do with their spare campaign cash when they don't have to spend it for their campaigns?
Barton is acting liking a capitalist and I think capitalism is a great thing, but could there be a conflict of interest with a Congressman's investments and what might be before him on the floor of the House? People have talked about conflicts of interest politicians have based on a politicians private investments. A politicians private investments, like what they invest in their retirement account should be for the most part private. But, I think the issue changes when the funds come from the voting public and to be used specifically for running for a public office.
But the campaign cash being invested is not the only issue. Rep. Barton probably has some fees associated with his investment account like commission etc. Who here would be willing to give money to a politician to pass along to a broker?
I know the family who scrimped and saved money to contribute to a politician because they believed in the politician wouldn't be happy to know their contribution went to pay a broker.
But, what Rep. Barton and others have done pales in comparison to what former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich is trying to do with his campaign fund. The former governor has asked that his campaign be allowed to use his campaign fund for his legal defense. If you don't know the ex-governor is on trial for racketeering and fraud.
The decision for the Blagojevich matter is in the hands of US District Judge James Zagel and a decision is not expected to be made until May 1st. I hope the good judge comes to his senses and doesn't allow the ex-governor access to campaign funds.
I think it would be refreshing if politicians couldn't use their campaign contributions to get them out of jail for crimes they committed while they were in public office. I also think it would be refreshing if politicians invested their cash maybe in US Treasury bonds rather than the stock of the day. What do you think?
Sunday, April 19, 2009
A Connecticut Lesson: Dodd has something to learn from Lieberman
The 2010 Senate race is getting interesting already. Republicans have a challenge ahead of them trying to prevent the Democrats getting 60 seats. But could they gain a seat in Connecticut? That's right I didn't mistype the state, Connecticut. Senator Chris Dodd is in for a tough re-election fight.
To give a little background on Connecticut right now their entire congressional delegation is Democratic and in fact the entire New England Delegation is Democratic. Connecticut hasn't voted for a Republican in a presidential election since 1988. Right now there are three potential Republican challengers and each one is beating Senator Dodd in a head to head match up. A recent Quinnipiac University poll has the race as follows:
Match-up #1
Candidate Vote%
Former Rep. Rob Simmons 50%
Senator Dodd 34%
Match-up #2
Candidate Vote%
State St. Sam Caliguri 41%
Senator Dodd 37%
Match-up #3
Candidate Vote%
Ambassador Tom Foley 43%
Senator Dodd 35%
Not only are the poll numbers frightening for Dodd and his allies, his fundraising abilities (or lack thereof) within Connecticut shows he might be in trouble. Dodd recent filing with the FEC shows he has $1 million raised the first quarter but only $4250 came from within the state. Those numbers highlight his unpopularity within the state but also a larger issue with campaign finance
Keep in mind $1 million is still a $1 million and Dodd still is an incumbent. There also is no doubt Dodd will get help from his Senate colleagues and former Senate colleagues like President Obama and Vice President Biden. The White House is already talking about Senator Dodd and their eagerness to help come 2010 (which means they are already scared).
But I believe there is a lesson Senator Dodd should learn from the other Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman. Lieberman when he ran for re-election lost the Democratic nomination in 2006 but won as an Independent. The lesson Liberman learned was if Connecticut likes you, you will win. The same logic can be applied for Dodd, if Connecticut doesn't like you, you can lose. In 2006, a lot of national Democrats did not like Liberman but Connecticuters did. In 2010, a lot of national democrats like Dodd, but so far Connecticuters don't. In the end, Connecticut picks their Senator.
It's still very early in this Senate race and a lot of anger towards Dodd is directed at him from what he has done (or not done) as Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. If the economic situation improves people may be more forgiving of him but he does have some other ethical accusations against him. I certainly can't call this race yet but I believe in 6 months we can have an idea of where this race is heading.
To give a little background on Connecticut right now their entire congressional delegation is Democratic and in fact the entire New England Delegation is Democratic. Connecticut hasn't voted for a Republican in a presidential election since 1988. Right now there are three potential Republican challengers and each one is beating Senator Dodd in a head to head match up. A recent Quinnipiac University poll has the race as follows:
Match-up #1
Candidate Vote%
Former Rep. Rob Simmons 50%
Senator Dodd 34%
Match-up #2
Candidate Vote%
State St. Sam Caliguri 41%
Senator Dodd 37%
Match-up #3
Candidate Vote%
Ambassador Tom Foley 43%
Senator Dodd 35%
Not only are the poll numbers frightening for Dodd and his allies, his fundraising abilities (or lack thereof) within Connecticut shows he might be in trouble. Dodd recent filing with the FEC shows he has $1 million raised the first quarter but only $4250 came from within the state. Those numbers highlight his unpopularity within the state but also a larger issue with campaign finance
Keep in mind $1 million is still a $1 million and Dodd still is an incumbent. There also is no doubt Dodd will get help from his Senate colleagues and former Senate colleagues like President Obama and Vice President Biden. The White House is already talking about Senator Dodd and their eagerness to help come 2010 (which means they are already scared).
But I believe there is a lesson Senator Dodd should learn from the other Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman. Lieberman when he ran for re-election lost the Democratic nomination in 2006 but won as an Independent. The lesson Liberman learned was if Connecticut likes you, you will win. The same logic can be applied for Dodd, if Connecticut doesn't like you, you can lose. In 2006, a lot of national Democrats did not like Liberman but Connecticuters did. In 2010, a lot of national democrats like Dodd, but so far Connecticuters don't. In the end, Connecticut picks their Senator.
It's still very early in this Senate race and a lot of anger towards Dodd is directed at him from what he has done (or not done) as Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. If the economic situation improves people may be more forgiving of him but he does have some other ethical accusations against him. I certainly can't call this race yet but I believe in 6 months we can have an idea of where this race is heading.
Update: Texas Governor's Race
There have been quite a bit a news since I last wrote about the Texas Governor's race and I wanted to give everyone an update.
Republicans:
The Republican nomination appears to be between just two candidates. Of course, the two candidates are two big name candidates. Governor Perry has already announced his candidacy and Senator Hutchison has announced her exploratory committee (a big step for her).
There are rumors that Lt. Governor David Dewhurst will run but I believe those are just rumors. Two others have announced their candidacy, Larry Kilgore (former gubernatorial and senate candidate) and Debra Medina( former Wharton County Republican Chair). I think this blog will be the last you hear of those candidates. I cannot see any other big name Republican entering the governor's race. I think people like Dewhurst are actually waiting for Hutchison to run so they can run for her senate seat.
The two big pieces of news since I last wrote is that, Hutchison is in, more or less. She's tried in the past to run for governor but I truly believe she is very serious this time. This election cycle her only competition at this point is winning the nomination against an unpopular incumbent governor. Her exploratory committee is now official and she has transferred funds from her Senate campaign fund to her gubernatorial fund. Hutchison does have until January 2010 to announce her candidacy but I truly believe she will announce and much sooner than January.
The second piece of news is the national fame Governor Perry has gained from his participation in the Texas Tea parties. My guess is Perry recognized that Hutchison is running and knows he's in for a rough race so he's trying to increase his appeal to the parties base. The tea parties were very popular around the country and every participant leans to the right on their political views. Most Texans can see through Perry and his pitiful attempt at leaving the door open for secession from the union. We will see what else Perry does to try and re-invent himself for this race.
Democrats
There has been a lot of progress on the Democratic side of the race. There are now two official candidates Kinky Friedman and Tom Schieffer. Friedman ran as an independent in 2006 but his campaign never really got traction and most people did not take him seriously. Schieffer is a former Texas state representative and Ambassador to Japan and Australia. His brother is Bob Schieffer the host of CBS's "Face the Nation."
Aside from these two canidates there are not many other potential candidates. Houston Mayor Bill White was rumored to be considering a run but he has indicated he is going to run for the Senate assuming Hutchison runs for governor. Texas Senator Leticia Van de Putte may run, there are "Draft Leticia" campaigns on Facebook, but a successful candidacy is a stretch. Van de Putte represents the San Antonio area and does not have much statewide recognition.
The Democratic Nomination looks like it will between Schieffer or Friedman. Who will win depends largely on how serious Friedman is taken. His campaign theme so far seems to actually be copying Senator Hutchison's theme "Texans for Kay" and he announced his candidacy in a letter to Texans the same way Hutchison did. Kinky does have statewide name recognition having run for governor before. He might have a chance in the general election if he can get Democrats to actually support him and he can get the same number of independent voters he got in 2006.
Schieffer actually has credible qualifications for a governor. The big question with Schieffer is: Can he excite Democrats? If Schieffer can get his campaign some steam and Kinky is considered a joke the nomination is no doubt his. I will say this about the democratic nomination Texas Democrats are looking for a serious candidate who can actually win the Governors Mansion. Whoever is successful in showing they can win statewide will immediately get massive Democratic support.
Time will tell about the Democratic candidates. The way things look right now, the Republican nomination is going to be fun to watch, so grab your popcorn!
Republicans:
The Republican nomination appears to be between just two candidates. Of course, the two candidates are two big name candidates. Governor Perry has already announced his candidacy and Senator Hutchison has announced her exploratory committee (a big step for her).
There are rumors that Lt. Governor David Dewhurst will run but I believe those are just rumors. Two others have announced their candidacy, Larry Kilgore (former gubernatorial and senate candidate) and Debra Medina( former Wharton County Republican Chair). I think this blog will be the last you hear of those candidates. I cannot see any other big name Republican entering the governor's race. I think people like Dewhurst are actually waiting for Hutchison to run so they can run for her senate seat.
The two big pieces of news since I last wrote is that, Hutchison is in, more or less. She's tried in the past to run for governor but I truly believe she is very serious this time. This election cycle her only competition at this point is winning the nomination against an unpopular incumbent governor. Her exploratory committee is now official and she has transferred funds from her Senate campaign fund to her gubernatorial fund. Hutchison does have until January 2010 to announce her candidacy but I truly believe she will announce and much sooner than January.
The second piece of news is the national fame Governor Perry has gained from his participation in the Texas Tea parties. My guess is Perry recognized that Hutchison is running and knows he's in for a rough race so he's trying to increase his appeal to the parties base. The tea parties were very popular around the country and every participant leans to the right on their political views. Most Texans can see through Perry and his pitiful attempt at leaving the door open for secession from the union. We will see what else Perry does to try and re-invent himself for this race.
Democrats
There has been a lot of progress on the Democratic side of the race. There are now two official candidates Kinky Friedman and Tom Schieffer. Friedman ran as an independent in 2006 but his campaign never really got traction and most people did not take him seriously. Schieffer is a former Texas state representative and Ambassador to Japan and Australia. His brother is Bob Schieffer the host of CBS's "Face the Nation."
Aside from these two canidates there are not many other potential candidates. Houston Mayor Bill White was rumored to be considering a run but he has indicated he is going to run for the Senate assuming Hutchison runs for governor. Texas Senator Leticia Van de Putte may run, there are "Draft Leticia" campaigns on Facebook, but a successful candidacy is a stretch. Van de Putte represents the San Antonio area and does not have much statewide recognition.
The Democratic Nomination looks like it will between Schieffer or Friedman. Who will win depends largely on how serious Friedman is taken. His campaign theme so far seems to actually be copying Senator Hutchison's theme "Texans for Kay" and he announced his candidacy in a letter to Texans the same way Hutchison did. Kinky does have statewide name recognition having run for governor before. He might have a chance in the general election if he can get Democrats to actually support him and he can get the same number of independent voters he got in 2006.
Schieffer actually has credible qualifications for a governor. The big question with Schieffer is: Can he excite Democrats? If Schieffer can get his campaign some steam and Kinky is considered a joke the nomination is no doubt his. I will say this about the democratic nomination Texas Democrats are looking for a serious candidate who can actually win the Governors Mansion. Whoever is successful in showing they can win statewide will immediately get massive Democratic support.
Time will tell about the Democratic candidates. The way things look right now, the Republican nomination is going to be fun to watch, so grab your popcorn!
Pirates of the Horn of Africa
I know this post is a little late following the rescue of Captain Richard Phillips, but I felt it was important to send such much needed praise.
First and foremost, I am happy Captain Phillips is now home with his family. His family should be so proud of him, it is refreshing to know there are people out there in this world that are willing to put their lives on the line for the safety of others. Captain Phillips made himself a hostage so that his crew and his ship could be safe. How many of us can honestly say we would make ourselves a hostage for our coworkers?
Secondly, I need to pass praise to the Navy Seals who rescued Captain Phillips. There is no doubt they are incredibly skilled. What we can learn from this experience is that our military knows what it's doing.
Lastly, I feel it is appropriate to pass praise to President Obama. I admit I was very worried how the hostage situation would end going into the last weekend. I was worried because it appeared the pirates were at least willing to challenge the US Navy and the White House was rather quite on the issue. After Captain Phillips was rescued and I learned that President Obama had authorized the use of deadly force multiple times, I grew confidence in our commander in chief. I don't celebrate the death of anyone, but, unfortunately we live in a world where extreme military action is needed in appropriate situations.
The pirate situation has fallen out of the daily news cycle at this point but I don't think it is an issue that is going to go away. There is so much commerce and ship traffic that goes through the Horn of Africa it is only a matter of time that a hostage situation occurs.
First and foremost, I am happy Captain Phillips is now home with his family. His family should be so proud of him, it is refreshing to know there are people out there in this world that are willing to put their lives on the line for the safety of others. Captain Phillips made himself a hostage so that his crew and his ship could be safe. How many of us can honestly say we would make ourselves a hostage for our coworkers?
Secondly, I need to pass praise to the Navy Seals who rescued Captain Phillips. There is no doubt they are incredibly skilled. What we can learn from this experience is that our military knows what it's doing.
Lastly, I feel it is appropriate to pass praise to President Obama. I admit I was very worried how the hostage situation would end going into the last weekend. I was worried because it appeared the pirates were at least willing to challenge the US Navy and the White House was rather quite on the issue. After Captain Phillips was rescued and I learned that President Obama had authorized the use of deadly force multiple times, I grew confidence in our commander in chief. I don't celebrate the death of anyone, but, unfortunately we live in a world where extreme military action is needed in appropriate situations.
The pirate situation has fallen out of the daily news cycle at this point but I don't think it is an issue that is going to go away. There is so much commerce and ship traffic that goes through the Horn of Africa it is only a matter of time that a hostage situation occurs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
