SUSA Governors Approval Poll

Survey USA has released their latest 50-state poll of Governors' Approval ratings. Highlights include:

Rell (R-CT) 77% approval
Perry (R-TX) 47% approval
Schwarzenegger (R-CA) 35% approval
Blanco (D-LA) 34% approval
Blunt (R-MO) 34% approval
Fletcher (R-KY) 32% approval
Murkowski (R-AK) 26% approval
Taft (R-OH) 18% approval

Gov Perry is up from 43% last month. I'm guessing the school finance ruling may have something to do with it. Taft is abysmally low. But nothing beats the Zogby Interactive poll on Taft that came out today. His rating stood at 6.5% approval!!! That's got to be a record. Certainly the lowest I've seen for any politician ever. Ohio is ripe for change I tell you. Ripe for change.

1994 v 2004: House Retirements

Jonathan Singer has a great post over at MyDD comparing retirements in the House of Representatives this election cycle with the cycle leading up to 1994. One of the striking differences often listed between the 1994 and 2006 cycles is the relative lack of open seats this year. Well, it turns out we're really not all that far behind in the House. (In the Senate, yes, but that's a different story.)

There are 9 Republicans seeking higher office this year. As of Thanksgiving, there were 5 additional retirements in the House:

• Randy "Duke" Cunningham, CA-50 (PVI R+5)
  
• Mike Bilirakis, FL-09 (PVI R+4)
  
• Henry Hyde, IL-06 (PVI R+3)
  
• Michael Oxley, OH-04 (PVI R+14)
• Jim Kolbe, AZ-08 (PVI ?)

Apparently, according to Jonathan Singer, this compares to 7 open seats this time in 1993. Less yes, but nothing to hang your hat on. Eventually, he says, there were 28 open seats - 20 retirements and 8 Democrats who unsuccessfully sought higher office. 9 more Democrats announced their retirements in January and February of 1994. 4 more announced in April. So we'll check back again at the end of April and see where we are.

CA-50: The Wheel of Scandal Lands on Duke

Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-CA) tearfully resigned today after pleading guilty to accepting bribes from defense contractors with business before his committee. From his resignation letter:

I am resigning from the House of Representatives because I've compromised the trust of my constituents.

When I announced several months ago that I would not seek re-election, I publicly declared my innocence because I was not strong enough to face the truth. So, I misled my family, staff, friends, colleagues, the public -- even myself. For all of this, I am deeply sorry.

The truth is -- I broke the law, concealed my conduct, and disgraced my high office. I know that I will forfeit my freedom, my reputation, my worldly possessions, and most importantly, the trust of my friends and family.

Some time ago, I asked my lawyers to inform the U.S. Attorney Carol Lam that I would like to plead guilty and begin serving a prison term. Today is the culmination of that process. I will continue to cooperate with the government's ongoing investigation to the best of my ability.

In my life, I have known great joy and great sorrow. And now I know great shame. I learned in Viet Nam that the true measure of a man is how he responds to adversity. I cannot undo what I have done. But I can atone. I am now almost 65 years old and, as I enter the twilight of my life, I intend to use the remaining time that God grants me to make amends.

The first step in that journey is to admit fault and apologize. The next step is to face the consequences of my actions like a man. Today, I have taken the first step and, with God's grace, I will soon take the second.

I must say, he sounds like a man who has accepted that what he did was wrong and is truly sorry.

Now, Cunningham had already announced his retirement. But with his resignation will come a special election to replace him. It seems likely to me (and to DavidNYC at Swing State Project) that Gov. Schwarzenegger will set the date for Jun 6, 2006 (6/6/06!!!) since there is already a statewide primary that day, and Schwarzenegger is already hurting for calling an unnecessary special election and costing California taxpayers millions.

Democrats have a strong candidate in California's 50th district in Francine Busby. But the deck is stacked against Democrats there. Chris Bowers at MyDD has some stats on the district:

Voter Registration (as of February 2005): Democratic 29.70% Republican: 44.52%

Presidential Vote
2004: Bush 55.2%, Kerry 43.9%. Partisan Index: RNC +9.9
2000: Bush 53.9%, Gore 42.5%. Partisan Index: RNC +12.0

Senate Vote 2004: Boxer 48.1%, Jones 48.2% Partisan index: RNC +19.9

2003 Special Election
Recall Davis: Yes 68%, No 32%. Partisan Index: RNC +25.6
Governor: Schwarzenegger 63.1%, Bustamante 20.3%. Partisan Index: RNC +25.7.

2002 Governor: Davis 37.3%, Simon 55.6%. Partisan Index: RNC +23.2

Other Data:
Race Ethnicity: 67.6% White, 18.8% Latino, 10.4% Asian, 1.9% African-American
Income: $59,813 (43rd wealthiest of 435) Poverty: 8.1%

The Bush-Kerry split has me optimistic, but the other data is not particularly encouraging. Nonetheless, when the incumbent resigns in disgrace from a corruption scandal, his partisan successor will suffer some of the fallout. I've got a glimmer of hope here, but just a glimmer.

Happy Thanksgiving!

May your holiday be as filled with blessings as mine was.

Murtha and Schmidt

The Bush administration suffered a blow when Rep. Frank Murtha (D-PA) came out against the war last week. And they did all they could to make it worse for themselves. It should surprise no one that their first reaction was to try and smear Murtha by tying him to documentarian Michael Moore, whining that he's a liberal (which he's not), and wringing their hands about surrendering and retreating. Here's White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan:

Congressman Murtha is a respected veteran and politician who has a record of supporting a strong America. So it is baffling that he is endorsing the policy positions of Michael Moore and the extreme liberal wing of the Democratic party. The eve of an historic democratic election in Iraq is not the time to surrender to the terrorists. After seeing his statement, we remain baffled -- nowhere does he explain how retreating from Iraq makes America safer.

Sure. That's the one trick in their book. Make their critics themselves the issue and distort their viewpoint so no one pays attention to what their critics are actually saying. Here's the text of the resolution Murtha put before the House:

Whereas, Congress and the American People have not been shown clear, measurable progress toward establishment of stable and improving security in Iraq or of a stable and improving economy in Iraq, both of which are essential to "promote the emergence of a democratic government";

Whereas, additional stabilization in Iraq by U, S. military forces cannot be achieved without the deployment of hundreds of thousands of additional U.S. troops, which in turn cannot be achieved without a military draft;

Whereas, more than $277 billion has been appropriated by the United States Congress to prosecute U.S. military action in Iraq and Afghanistan;

Whereas, as of the drafting of this resolution, 2,079 U.S. troops have been killed in Operation Iraqi Freedom;

Whereas, U.S. forces have become the target of the insurgency,

Whereas, according to recent polls, over 80 percent of the Iraqi people want U.S. forces out of Iraq;

Whereas, polls also indicate that 45 percent of the Iraqi people feel that the attacks on U.S. forces are justified;

Whereas, due to the foregoing, Congress finds it evident that continuing U.S. military action in Iraq is not in the best interests of the United States of America, the people of Iraq, or the Persian Gulf Region, which were cited in Public Law 107-243 as justification for undertaking such action;

Therefore be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, that:

Section 1. The deployment of United States forces in Iraq, by direction of Congress, is hereby terminated and the forces involved are to be redeployed at the earliest practicable date.

Section 2. A quick-reaction U.S. force and an over-the-horizon presence of U.S Marines shall be deployed in the region.

Section 3. The United States of America shall pursue security and stability in Iraq through diplomacy.

Section 1 indicates that the current deployment should be terminated. Section 2 indicates that American forces will remain in the region (presumably in smaller numbers). And Section 3 indicates that security and stability in Iraq would still be US priorities. That doesn't sound like Michael Moore, surrendering or retreating. It sounds like a strategic pullback.

Now, I've gone back and forth on this war for a number of reasons. I find the desire to create stability, security, democracy and the rule of law in the Middle East to be a worthy goal. But on the other hand, I'm not confident this adminstration is the one to do it. And I don't trust their public pronouncements on the war. And I have a romantic attachment to peace. Yes, peace also is a worthy goal. So I've gone back and forth between support for the war and support for withdrawal.

At this point, though, I'm convinced that the number of troops we have there is not particularly significant. Yes, we need a credible force there for the short term. But here's the thing: We probably can't stomp out the jihadists and Baathists with force. We can still win the war, but we'll need to win politically as opposed to militarily. That means dealing with some of the Sunnis to create a stable Iraq. Whether we double the size of the force or cut it in half, the political challenges will remain the same. So, to me, that says we should pull some troops out. The latest development in Iraq, the Iraqis themselves calling for an American withdrawal timetable, should provide Bush with the political cover to do that. And that might shore up support for Bush just enough to make him look stronger in the eyes of the parties he's dealing with over there.

And that brings me to Bush's situation in Washington. Which is to say, his domestic weakness. His line of attack on Murtha was already sketchy. By the time Murtha was preparing to speak, the media had already developed their portrayal of the congressman as a war hero, hawk, and respected authority on the military. McClellan's line rang hollow. And then, there was Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-OH). (Video)

She crossed a line. And even Republicans figured it out quickly. On the floor of the House, the newest representative (she won a special election earlier this year) accused Rep. Frank Murtha, a marine who served in Vietname, of being a coward:

A few minutes ago I received a call from Colonel Danny Bubp, Ohio Representative from the 88th district in the House of Representatives. He asked me to send Congress a message: Stay the course. He also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message, that cowards cut and run, Marines never do. Danny and the rest of America and the world want the assurance from this body – that we will see this through.He also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message, that cowards cut and run, Marines never do. Danny and the rest of America and the world want the assurance from this body – that we will see this through.

Shortly thereafter, the House went out of order as congressmen yelled and generally got in each others' faces. When the House came back into order, Schmidt had this to say:

Mr. Speaker, my remarks were not directed to any member of the House and I did not intend to suggest they applied to any member, most especially the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania.

She backed down. Why? The only reason she would have done that is if the Republican leadership asked her to. Soon after that, Bush and Cheney both toned down the rhetoric and praised Murtha. And the state legislator she quoted now denies he called Murtha a coward. Schmidt is twisting in the wind. Given how recent and how close (52% to 48%) her election was, she may have made herself a career-ending move.

So all of this goes to show that Republican refrains of "Stay the course!" and "Criticism of Bush hurts the troops!" aren't going over quite as well anymore. Republicans lost this round. And it will have consequences in 2006, and in Iraq.

NJ-Sen: Pick Codey! Pick Codey!

Quinnipiac's new poll for the New Jersey 2006 Senate contest:

Tom Kean (R) 39%
Robert Menendez (D) 41%

Tom Kean (R) 38%
Frank Pallone (D) 38%

Tom Kean (R) 39%
Rob Andrews (D) 38%

Richard Codey (D) 55%
Tom Kean (R) 32%

This is one of the stranger Senate contests for next year. The sitting senator, Sen. Jon Corzine (D), was just elected Governor of New Jersey. That means that, first of all, he has to relinquish his seat, and second of all, he gets to appoint his successor, who serves until the election is held in 2006. Republican State Senator Tom Kean, the son and namesake of a popular former governor, is running. So one question weighing heavily on Governor-Elect Corzine's mind is probably, who can beat him?

The first thing about the poll that immediately comes to one's attention is the breadth of Acting Governor Richard Codey's lead over Kean. Not only is Codey leading by 23 points, but he's over 50%, a magic number in election polling. One other bit of information from the Quinnipiac poll: the people are clamoring for Corzine to pick Codey (emphasis mine):

Acting Governor Richard Codey is the leading choice of New Jersey voters when they are asked whom Governor-elect Jon Corzine should name to the U.S. Senate, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

Codey is the choice of 43 percent of voters, followed by 14 percent for U.S. Rep. Robert Menendez, 10 percent for U.S. Rep. Rob Andrews, 8 percent for U.S. Rep. Frank Pallone, with 4 percent who want someone else and 22 percent undecided, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University poll finds.

So yes, Codey would be the perfect safe choice for Corzine. But does he want the job? Codey hasn't made that clear. The second thing about the poll that grabbed me was that every other candidate is close. So even if Codey doesn't want the job, Corzine has other viable options. And if 2006 turns out not to be the banner year for Democrats that I expect, Democrats are more likely than not to hold this seat in deep blue territory.

Krauthammer Savages Intelligent Design

I usually don't agree with Charles Krauthammer, but he has shows he's firmly on the coporatist side of the Republican Party with this column attacking one of the theocrats' favorite issues: the teaching of intelligent design alongside evolution in science classes in public schools (article -- emphasis mine):

Let's be clear. Intelligent design may be interesting as theology, but as science it is a fraud. It is a self-enclosed, tautological "theory" whose only holding is that when there are gaps in some area of scientific knowledge -- in this case, evolution -- they are to be filled by God. It is a "theory" that admits that evolution and natural selection explain such things as the development of drug resistance in bacteria and other such evolutionary changes within species but also says that every once in a while God steps into this world of constant and accumulating change and says, "I think I'll make me a lemur today." A "theory" that violates the most basic requirement of anything pretending to be science -- that it be empirically disprovable. How does one empirically disprove the proposition that God was behind the lemur, or evolution -- or behind the motion of the tides or the "strong force" that holds the atom together?

In order to justify the farce that intelligent design is science, Kansas had to corrupt the very definition of science, dropping the phrase " natural explanations for what we observe in the world around us," thus unmistakably implying -- by fiat of definition, no less -- that the supernatural is an integral part of science. This is an insult both to religion and science.

Special creation is not a scientific theory because it posits a supernatural explanation for natural phenomena. Therefore it should not be taught in science classes. End of story.

Arnold's Neighbors

Check out Arnold's Neighborhood. Hilarious. My favorite character is the Cheney Monster.

Where Has the Weekend Gone?

Gone to Harry Potter and Civilzation 4 it would seem...

I'll have more tomorrow. For now, enjoy Bush's Quest for an Exit.

Friday Cat Blogging

Can you find Plumeria Rita?

Keep Austin Blue pictures

Last Wednesday, I went to a Keep Austin Blue meeting at Mother Egan's and got some photos of the guest speakers. I was a lot colder than the last time I went, and less people I knew were there. But there was definitely an energy in the air among Democrats hardcore enough to turn out to listen to politicians' speeches on a cold, dark autumn eve...



Buddy Meyer is running for 299th District Court Judge.



Lou Dubose of the Texas Observer spoke of DeLay's foibles.




Bush has no brain, Cheney has no heart, and Congress just needs Courage!



Radnofsky's spokesman tells us the DSCC put Texas in the list of competetive races.

Prop 2 Maps - Part II

A second map from Burnt Orange Report shows how each county in Texas voted on Proposition 2. My adopted home, Travis County, was the only county in Texas (hint: It's the green one.) to vote against the it. I'm so proud of Austin and its suburbs! Also note that Williamson County and Hays County, where most of Austin's suburbs are, while not voting against Proposition 2, had some of the best margins in Texas. Dallas, San Antonio and El Paso were better than average, as was the Big Bend area, and (just barely) the Houston area, parts of the Rio Grande Valley, and Brazos County.

Prop 2 Maps - Part I

Burnt Orange Report has some great maps showing how parts of Texas voted on Proposition 2 earlier this month. First, here's a map showing Galveston County, which voted for Prop 2, but at lower levels than the state average:

Blogs You Should Read

I just added a couple blogs to the old blogroll (look to your left).

The first, Opiate of the Masses, is run by James, a friend of my brother's, who I just discovered had a blog and had already linked to me (Thanks, James!). He's got some great pictures in his photo gallery, and a very eloquent post about why the Plame Affair is such a big deal. Check it out.

The second, the cryptically-named blog, blah, is run by Kaan, a friend of a friend who's been writing recently about Austin software shop Motive, his former place of employment. Apparently they've been having some problems with their shareholders and the SEC. Kaan also wrote an excellent rant against those who voted for Proposition 2.

In case anyone is interested in how I choose the blogs for my blogroll, here's the process. If I've had some interaction with you outside of the world of blogging, you might get on the blogroll. If I've contributed to your blog, you might get on the blogroll. At the moment, that's it. So, if you've sent my 107 requests to be added to my blogroll and I don't know who you are, you're wasting your time (Andrew Sullivan).

Myths and Legends

Chris Bowers at MyDD has three very thoughtful posts about myths regarding Republicans woes in the polls. Those myths are:

1. That past presidents have recovered from similar low polls.
2. That Republicans and Democrats are equally responsible for the polarization of politics.
3. That voters have abandoned Republicans, but have not yet embraced Democrats.

On point 1, it seems a little like the question, "Is the glass half full or half empty?" to me. Bowers references Roper Center's excellent list of all polls for all presidents to show that Bush is in more trouble in the polls than any President who has recovered. According to that list, Truman recovered from a lower approval rating than Bush (33% in Sept 1946), but didn't recover from a higher disapproval (67% in Jan 1952). Disapprovals are important, especially for midterm Congressional elections. But the approval rating shows how much support the President has. 34% is horrible, but President Truman recovered from worse. And Clinton and Reagan both recovered from nearly that bad. Sure there are differences in their specific situations. There always are. But I think if voters are allowed to vent enough on Republicans in Congress in 2006, and give Democrats control of Congress, Bush can probably still recover afterward.

On point 2, I absolutely agree with Bowers. Polarization and base turnout was the explicit strategy of Bush in 2004, and the implicit strategy of Gingrich and the Republicans in 1994. Republican activitists, their rank and file folks, are further from the center than the party as a whole and pull the party to the right. Democratic activists, on the other hand, are closer to the center than the party as a whole and serve as a moderating influence. And independents views on just about everything track very closely with Democrats, who actually try and win their votes by appealing to them.

On point 3, I'd like to agree but I fear the jury may still be out. Bowers relies on the internals of only one poll to show who it is that is upset with Democratic leaders. His point is basically that independents and moderate Republicans look on Democrats more favorably, but the Democratic rank and file is unhappy. But they clearly do not intend to vote for Republicans or stay home, as one can see from generic ballot questions on a variety of polls and the results of the 2005 elections. I'd like to see more information before I make up my mind, but I'd love to believe it. I'll keep an open mind on this one.

Today in Politics: My Take

Today in Politics:

Harris Poll: Bush at 34% approval, 65% disapproval, tying Nixon's worst disapproval rating.
Washington Post: House Democrats defeat spending bill.
Stakeholder: Congressman John Murtha (D-PA) introduces a resolution for withdrawal from Iraq.
Rothenberg: Kilgore lost Virginia on his own. Republicans will still have problems in 2006.
CNN: Democrats very concerned by Alito's abortion position.
365Gay: Massachusetts gay marriage foe to retire.
365Gay: Gays' parental rights safe in Ohio.
Rasmussen: OH-Gov: Strickland (D) 42% Blackwell (R) 36%

My take: Bush is in some dangerous waters. Although past presidents have recovered from approval ratings like his, no past president has recovered from a disapproval rating like his. I'm glad to hear Democrats are defeating Republicans on the budget, mostly because that is as clear a sign of Republican disarray as one could ask for. Rep. Murtha calling for a withdrawal is a big big deal. Why? Because Murtha is a respected Democratic hawk who had supported the war. This should open up a lot of Democrats to be able to call for a withdrawal from Iraq. The question is, what about Hillary? Kilgore did lose Virginia himself. The primary responsibility for any loss rests with the candidate. But Bush was clearly a drag on Kilgore, especially in the suburbs. And the fact that a candidate as liberal as Leslie Byrne nearly won the lieutenant governorship of Virginia should worry Republicans more than Kaine's victory. Alito looks like a vote to overturn Roe. Democrats should vote against him. But should they filibuster to block him? I don't know. Bush could just pick someone worse, like Janice Rogers Brown or Priscilla Owen. I think Democrats would probably get the best mileage out of the nomination by voting as a bloc to oppose him without filibustering. Unless of course they could defeat him on the Senate floor. Massachusetts looks less and less likely to get rid of gay marriage. Ohio looks like it is minimizing the effects of the constitutional ban on gay marriage they passed last year. And Ohio also looks more likely than not to elect a Democratic governor next year. And that's my take.

New 2006 Polls

FL-Gov: There's a competetive primary on both sides. Congressman Jim Davis and State Senator Rod Smith are competing for the Democratic nomination. State CFO Tom Gallagher and State Attorney General Charlie Crist are competing for the Republican nomination. New polls are quite mixed, and all are close. This one will likely go down to the wire. But I'm encouraged that Davis, the more likely Democratic nominee, leads or ties either of his opponents in both polls.

Via Politics1, a Quinnipiac poll:

Davis (D) 40% Crist (R) 39%
Davis (D) 41% Gallagher (R) 38%
Crist (R) 41% Smith (D) 36%
Gallagher (R) 41% Smith (D) 36%

Rasmussen has a poll out as well, but didn't include Rod Smith:

Davis (D) 41% Crist (R) 38%
Davis (D) 40% Gallagher (R) 40%

Recent 2006 Senate polls include:

Rasmussen:

FL-Sen: Nelson (D) 53% Harris (R) 36%-- Democratic hold
WA-Sen: Cantwell (D) 52% McGavick (R) 37%-- Democratic hold
NY-Sen: Clinton (D) 57% Pirro (R) 33%-- Democratic hold

OH-Sen: Hackett (D) 42% DeWine (R) 41% -- Democratic pickup
PA-Sen: Casey (D) 53% Santorum (R) 34% -- Democratic pickup
MO-Sen: McCaskill (D) 47% Talent (R) 45% -- Democratic pickup

MT-Sen: Burns (R) 51% Morrison (D) 39% -- Republican hold

All of these polls seem in line with expectations for 2006. It still looks to be a good Democratic year in the Senate. The only question is, how good?

Site Traffic Seems Normal Again

Thought you all might want to see what happened here on election day...



That's unique visits (as opposed to page views). Normal here seems to be somewhere between 25 and 50 views a day. It's more like 70 to 100 if I write about local stuff and post it on Austin Bloggers. So imagine my gleeful surprise on election day, seeing my visits rise to an unprecedented 180 in a day. My heart was warmed. Not quite enough to make up for Proposition 2's passage. But warmed nonetheless.

The King Will See No One But the Queen

From the excellent America BLOG:

Washington Times:

President Bush feels betrayed by several of his most senior aides and advisors and has severely restricted access to the Oval Office, administration sources say. The president's reclusiveness in the face of relentless public scrutiny of the U.S.-led war in Iraq and White House leaks regarding CIA operative Valerie Plame has become so extreme that Mr. Bush has also reduced contact with his father, former President George H.W. Bush, administration sources said on the condition of anonymity.

Drudge:

The sources said Mr. Bush maintains daily contact with only four people: first lady Laura Bush, his mother, Barbara Bush, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Undersecretary of State Karen Hughes. The sources also say that Mr. Bush has stopped talking with his father, except on family occasions.

And as Aravosis points out, the fact that Drudge and the Washington Times are Republican mouthpieces makes this story all the more fascinating. The King sees no one but the Queen, the Queen Mother, his nanny, and the Vizier. Which of those people would you guess is running the kingdom?

1994 v 2006: Baer Compares

Kenneth Baer over at the New Republic has a piece explaining why he thinks 2006 won't be a replay of 1994 for Democrats. His key points:

1. 1992 was a volatile year in the House after the 1990 redistricting, especially in the South, produced a large number of freshmen who won with less than 55% of the vote.

2. A change in campaign finance laws caused an unusually large number of representatives (67 -- a postwar record) to retire, creating an unusually large number of open seats.

3. The scandals that were in the news in the early 90's were more complicated, had gone on longer and hit deeper (17% approval for Congress) and wider (269 sitting Congressmen were hit by the House Bank Scandal) than the scandals of today (DeLay, Cunningham, Sherwood).

4. 1994 marked the culmination of the realignment of the South in the House. No region has been gradually realigning in the same way today.

5. Districts are more properly aligned by ideology now than they were in 1994. In 1992, 53 districts had voted for Bush for President, but sent a Democrat to Congress. In 2004, only 18 districts had voted for Kerry but sent a Republican to Congress.

My first thought is, this is absolutely true, but only applies to the House of Representatives. There are additional reasons why the Senate terrain is different that Baer doesn't mention. In general, Democrats would do well not to set the bar at 1994, because in terms of numbers of seats that switch hands, 2006 is not likely to come close.

But at the state level, the terrain is much more similar to 1994 than at the federal level. And the national mood is also very similar. I'm sure I'll have more to say on this later.

A History of Recent Off-Year Election Results

From Hotline on Call:

2005: Corzine/Kaine (D)
2001: McGreevey/Warner (D)
1997: Whitman/Gilmore (R)
1993: Whitman/Allen (R)
1989: Florio/Wilder (D)

I believe you'd have to go back to 1985 when Tom Kean (R) won the governorship of New Jersey and Gerald Baliles (D) won the governorship of Virginia to break the trend. The trend is this: the party that doesn't hold the Presidency wins both the Virginia and the New Jersey governorships. It's held for the last 5 elections.

Lessons Learned From 2005

What lesssons did the politicians and political operatives learn from the 2005 election? National Journal's Hotline Blog has a couple posts, that when put together, reveal the following:

Lessons our guys learned from 2005 elections:

1. Democrats should focus broadly on failed GOP policies rather than focusing on Bush.
2. Bush's base is in bad shape.
3. The Columbus Dispatch is a poor pollster.
4. Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick is a skilled politician.
5. Republicans will do anything to win.
6. Outgoing Governor Mark Warner has helped Virginia Democrats find a new identity.
7. Democrats still have work to do in Virginia.
8. Massively outspending your opponent isn't always enough.

Lessons their guys learned from the 2005 elections:

1. Democrats who are "cretins" can still win easily.
2. Kilgore was flawed, but didn't drive voters away from down-ballot races.
3. Don't put everything your enemies don't want on the same ballot.
4. Attacking your opponents' ex-wife may not completely backfire.
5. People weren't creeped out by Kaine's ads.
6. Mark Warner was ineffective in Kaine's ads.
7. Bush shouldn't have visited Virginia.
8. Arnold should have distanced himself from his ballot measures.
9. Riling a base is always easier than motivating one in the last days of a campaign.
10. Democrats can win two statewide races in a row in Virginia.
11. Sometimes people vote against tax cuts.
12. Either the other ballot measures sunk California's abortion parental notification ballot measure, or California is more liberal than Republicans think.
13. Kilgore's ads were ineffective.
14. Democrats are able to win Fairfax County, VA by a large margin.
15. George Allen and John Warner couldn't put Kilgore over the top.

Lessons Our Guys Don't Want Our Side to Learn:

1. Democrats can sit back and do nothing while Republicans self-destruct.
2. Democrats should oppose the death penalty and grow beards.
3. 2005 is a sign of a broad national trend.
4. Republicans will repeat their 2005 mistakes -- using flawed wedge issues.
5. Voters don't care about taxes.
6. The failure of the Ohio redistricting measures means the Ohio Republicans are in a healthy state.
7. Public disapproval with Bush caused the Democrats' victories.
8. Republicans are done.

Lessons their guys dont want their side to learn:

1. ANY Lessons.
2. The 2004 formula will work in 2006.
3. Republicans should run away from Bush.
4. Republicans should shy away from any bold new measures in light of their failures.
5. Bush is not a drag on GOP candidates.
6. Republicans are not fighting a furious rearguard action
7. 2005 represents a broad national trend.
8. Bush is a drag on GOP candidates, even in red states.
9. 2005 was a referendum on Bush.
10. The best way to win is to modeate.
11. Negative ads don't work.
12. Republicans should take advice from the New York Times and CNN.
13. Republicans are in disarray and can't win.
14. Republicans have collapsed in Virginia.
15. Exurbs are slipping away from Republicans.
16. Running an anti-tax campaign won't work.

My own observations from reading theirs:

1. Republicans are much more focused on the Virginia loss than the others.
2. Republicans are divided about Bush's effect on the ticket.
3. Democrats warn against getting too cocky, while Republicans warn about not getting to depressed.
4. Republicans still believe being extremist, going negative, attacking the media, and talking about taxes and divisive wedge issues is the way to win elections.
5. Democrats are upset about the Ohio ballot measures' loss and need to look deeply into how they let that happen.
6. Everyone still thinks Republicans still have the upper hand in Virginia.
7. Schwarzenegger definitely made a mistake tying the ballot initiatives so closely to himself.
8. 2005 should not be over-interpreted. But, the parties' reactions to it should be noted.

On Tin Foil Hats

MIT students did a study. Apparently, not only do tin foil hats not keep out the secret government radio frequencies, they amplify them.

Go figure.

Election Loose Ends

All ballot measures lost in California. Arnold Schwarzenegger is seen as the big loser there because he called a special election just to put Props 74-77 before the voters. The state spent $300 million and nothing happened.

Intelligent Design-ers lost big in school board elections in Dover, Pennsylvania as all 8 Republican incumbents were defeated and replaced by 8 Democrats who opposed the previous school board's requirement that a statement about intelligent design be read in science classrooms.

Maine defeated a ballot measure that would have repealed a landmark gay rights law there. This marks the first time gay rights has won in a ballot measure contest in America. So despite the Texas Marriage Amendment abomination passing, there was good news for gay rights yesterday. I'm crushed, yes, but finding silver linings to this Texas stormcloud everywhere else in America. I'll post more thoughts later, I'm sure.

There are a few bloggers offering some retrospection on Proposition 2 here in Texas that is well worth reading. Please give them a look. Karl-Thomas is wistful. Rawhide at Pink Dome is defiant.

The Election Results in JPG form

Need I say more?

Image stolen from the conservative site Town Hall.

Proud Voter

A loyal reader proudly displays the proof of her vote. Well done, Bree! Every time you vote, an angel gets his wings!

More 2005 Election Results

The brighter side of the election is that overall, it went well nationally for Democrats. Democrats won the two big races of the night...

1. In the Virginia governor's race, Democrat Tim Kaine beat Republican Jerry Kilgore.

2. In the New Jersey governor's race, Democrat Jon Corzine beat Republican Doug Forrester. Now the question is who Senator Corzine will pick to replace him in the Senate. Convention wisdom is he'll pick Acting Governor Richard Codey.

Among mayoral races, the news is mostly good for Democrats as well:

Also, in St Paul, Democratic Mayor Randy Kelly, who endorsed Bush in 2004, was defeated by another Democrat, former City Councilman Chris Coleman. Ah, vengeance is ours...

Other Democratic mayors that won: Houston Mayor Bill White has been re-elected in a landslide. As has Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin. Bob O'Connor has won in Pittsburgh. Mark Mallory has won in Cincinnati.

The bad news (aside from Proposition 2 here in Texas...):

The Democrats' election reform ballot measures in Ohio have failed though.

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has been re-elected. Although he's really kind of a Democrat in Republicans' clothing...

And the I-don't-know news:

Dallas' strong mayor ballot measure has narrowly failed.

Maine's ballot measure repealing the state's discrimination protection for gays has still not been called.

California's polls just closed, so Arnold's initiatives should be called soon. As will the San Diego mayors' race

I'm not sure whether I'll be back tonight for more or not.. I just got George R. R. Martin's new book, A Feast For Crows and I'm feeling the need to escape into fantasy just now.

Alas

Proposition 2 has passed. It wasn't even close. Someday Texas will look back on this with shame. The Houston Chronicle:

77% in favor
23% opposed

Rabbi Friedman: No on Prop 2

My rabbi, Rabbi Alan Friedman, of Temple Beth Shalom in the Dell Jewish Community Center, sent an election day reminder to all members of the congregation. Reading it reminds me how proud I am to belong to his congregation, and how welcome my partner and I feel there. Here's his message:

Chaverim,

This is a reminder that tomorrow is Election Day and that you will have the opportunity to cast a vote for tolerance and against discrimination by voting against the Second Proposed Amendment to the Texas Constitution. The proposed amendment changes nothing in Texas law while serving to isolate our gay neighbors and branding gay Texans as being less than full citizens of Texas. We who were "strangers in the land of Egypt" know the feeling of exclusion and must not impose that feeling on others.

As your rabbi, I urge a no vote on this divisive amendment.

Rabbi Alan Freedman

If this amendment passes, gays will be marked strangers in the land of Texas, less than full citizens. And shame on all of us who would let this come to pass.

Please vote today. Please vote NO on Proposition 2.

VOTE

November 8 is election day. Be sure to exercise your civic duty and GO VOTE.

DO IT!!!

Election Stuff

First, some polls:

New Jersey Governor:

Marist: Corzine (D) 51% Forrester (R) 46%
Rasmussen: Corzine (D) 44% Forrester (R) 39%
Survey USA: Corzine (D) 50% Forrester (R) 44%
Quinnipiac: Corzine (D) 52% Forrester (R) 45%

Virginia Governor:

Survey USA: Kaine (D) 52% Kilgore (R) 43%

NYC Mayor:

NY1/Newsday: Bloomberg (R) 60% Ferrer (D) 28%
Quinnipiac: Bloomberg (R) 68% Ferrer (D) 30%

St Paul Mayor:

Star Tribune Minnesota: Coleman (D) 66% Kelly (D) 25%

San Diego Mayor:

Survey USA: Sanders (R) 50% Frye (D) 48%

Buffalo Mayor:

Survey USA: Brown (D) 61% Kelfer (R) 30%

Detroit Mayor:

Survey USA: Hendrix (D) 51% Kilpatrick (D) 44%

Minneapolis Mayor:

Minneapolis Star-Tribune: Rybak (D) 55% McLaughlin (D) 33%

Cleveland Mayor:

Cleveland Plain Dealer/Mason-Dixon: Jackson (D) 52% Campbell (D) 37%

Ohio Ballot Initiatives (Columbus Dispatch):

State Issue #2 (absentee balloting): Yes 59% No 33%
State Issue #3 (contribution limits): Yes 61% No 25%
State Issue #4 (redistricting): Yes 31% No 45%
State Issue #5 (role of the Secretary of State): Yes 41% No 43%

California Ballot Initiatives (Survey USA)

Prop 73 (abortion parental notification): Yes 51% No 47%
Prop 74 (teacher tenure): Yes 48% No 51%
Prop 75 (union dues): Yes 45% No 54%
Prop 76 (spending limits): Yes 39% No 49%
Prop 77 (redistricting): Yes 41% No 56%

Maine Ballot Initiatives (Survey USA):

Repeal of Maine Anti-discrimination Law: Yes 42% No 56%

2006 polls:

Generic Ballot for Congress: ABC/Washington Post: Democrats 52% Republicans 37%
MD-Gov: Baltimore Sun: O'Malley (D) 48% Ehrlich (R) 33%
MD-Sen: Baltimore Sun: Cardin (D) 43% Steele (R) 32%
OH-Sen: Columbus Dispatch: Brown (D) 35% DeWine (R) 31%

And then of course in the world of fantasy (thanks to Zogby):

West Wing President pre-debate: Santos (D) 58% Vinick (R) 29%
West Wing President post-debate: Santos (D) 54% Vinick (R) 38%

Early voting in Texas is heavier than 2003, a similar election in which only referenda were on the ballot. Turnout seems especially heavy in Travis and Williamson counties.

Everybody remember to vote tomorrow! In fact, I think that will deserve its own blog entry...

November 8 Elsewhere

Some predictions for contests on November 8 outside of Texas:

New Jersey Governor: Corzine (D), narrower than people suspect
Virginia Governor: Kaine (D)
New York City Mayor: Bloomberg (R) by a landslide
Arnold's California Propositions: all will fail
Reform Ohio Now Propositions: all will pass except redistricting
Maine Anti-Gay Initiative: will fail

Let's see how I do...

Good Night and Good Luck

Just got back from Good Night and Good Luck, a movie about Edward R. Murrow's public fight with Senator Joe McCarthy in the 1950's. It was a great movie -- I'd highly recommend it to anyone, and I suspect there will be several Oscar nominations for it. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'll be spending tonight pining for the days when news was news and not the twisted hybrid of entertainment and opinion that it is today...

2005/6 News and Polls

2005:

VA-Gov: Kaine (D) 44% Kilgore (R) 36%
NJ-Gov: Corzine (D) 50% Forrester (R) 38%
NJ-Gov: Corzine (D) 44% Forrester (R) 40%

2006:

AR-Gov: Beebe (D) 47% Hutchinson (R) 40%
VT-Sen: Sanders (I) 64% Tarrant (R) 16%
AZ-Gov: Napolitano (D) 53% Goldwater (R) 21%
HI-Gov: Rep. Abercrombie (D) not running

If most of this news seems good for Democrats, here's why:

Bush Approval:

Poll   Approval
Zogby  39%
ABC    39%
AP     37%
CBS    35%

Mayor Wynn Calls for Tolerance as KKK Descends

Austin Mayor Will Wynn is calling on Austin citizens to ignore the pro-Proposition 2 Ku Klux Klan as they descend upon Austin for a Saturday rally. From 365gay:

(Austin, Texas) Austin mayor Will Wynn on Thursday declared that Saturday will be a Day of Tolerance as the Ku Klux Klan rallies against same-sex sex marriage on the square outside city hall.

Voters go to the polls on Tuesday to decide whether to amend the Texas constitution to ban gay marriage.

As the KKK protests at city hall on the public square the LGBT civil rights group opposed to the amendment will hold a vigil about a half block away. (story)

In seeking permission for the protest, called a "pro-family" rally, the American White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan said it was concerned the gay group would incite violence.

...

Mayor Wynn and other city officials called for calm. In making his Day of Tolerance proclamation the mayor urged residents to ignore the Klan.

"On a personal level, I'm asking citizens to simply ignore the event that's going to occur here Saturday," Wynn said. "I think it would send a very strong signal about the tolerance of this community if we simply go about our lives on Saturday."

I'm personally very glad Mayor Wynn is taking a strong stand against the Klan. I wonder, has Governor Perry issued a call for Texans to send a very strong signal about tolerance in the face of the Klan?

Anyway, the Mayor's idea about how to deal with the KKK rally isn't the only one. Pinkdome disagrees that ignoring the Klan is the best reaction:

There's also the camp that says to 'ignore them' so they won't get coverage. This is the one I disagree with the most. We've ignored hatred and bigotry and people that are just plain wrong for too long in this country. The KKK is never right. Not once. Never. I'm ashamed they'll be here. As a defender of our Bill of Rights, I have to acknowledge their right to speak. I have to acknowledge my right to stand up against them.

Whatever protest is planned and by whom, I say go. Go to City Hall on Saturday and let the KKK know that Austin does not welcome them with open arms. Let CNN know that the Klan is not welcome in Austin. Silent protest, moon, march, hold up a sign or whatever.

As Pink Dome mentions, there is a move afoot to Moon the Klan again, and that would amuse me greatly. I'm agnostic about which is the best way to deal with the rally, though. Ignore, protest, moon... what do you think? How can we best show the world we disagree with everything the KKK stands for?

Tidbits

It seems Alito's polling (Gallup) a reaction similar to that of Miers. 53% say he should be rejected if it becomes clear he would vote to overturn Roe v Wade. 50% say Democrats would be justified in filibustering Alito. Only 45% say Republicans would be justified in abolishing the filibuster to confirm him while 47% say they would not.

Meanwhile Alito's conservative bonafides are being tested in the media. AP reports a young Alito defended gay rights and privacy rights at Princeton.

And according to a CBS poll, Bush's approval rating is at 35%, the lowest of his presidency in any poll. The poll also indicates the public think the CIA Leak scandal is more serious than Monica Lewinsky, Whitewater, or Iran-Contra.

Good night, and good luck.

My Email Regarding Proposition 2

I sent the following email to a number of friends and family earlier this evening urging them to vote No on Proposition 2. If I forgot to email you, please accept my apology and read the email here:

Hi Everyone,

You guys all know me, and you know I don't usually send out mass emails.

But I really feel this is so essential and so fundamental, I would be remiss if I failed to even ask you to do something so as easy as this.

On Tuesday, November 8, 2005, there will be an election in Texas in which no candidates are running, but several proposed constitutional amendments are on the ballot. One of these propositions, Proposition 2, is an anti-gay marriage amendment to the Texas State Constitution. If you are a Texas resident, I'm asking you to vote, and to vote against Proposition 2. If you're not, I'm asking you to pass this message on to your friends and family who are, with a few words of your own.

I'm optimistic that this ballot measure can in fact be defeated. But it truly depends on getting people to the polls to vote. Historically, off-year elections like this one attract 10-15% of the vote. A high turnout in urban areas would do it, and it looks like amendment opponents are surprisingly better organized than supporters. Although few people make up their mind based on newspaper endorsements, every major newspaper in Texas, including the Bryan/College Station Eagle, has come out against Proposition 2.

But if this amendment does pass, it will be in the Texas Constitution for decades. This is our one shot. Early voting has already started and continues through November 4. Election day is next Tuesday, November 8. Please get out and vote, and remind others you know to do the same.

Thanks for listening,

Abram

Looks like Karl-Thomas Musselman at Burnt Orange Report had the same idea as me. Check out his far more eloquent email here.

TX-Gov, TX-Sen polls

Zogby Interactive, via Off the Kuff:

Perry (R) 40%
Bell (D) 27%
Friedman (I) 18%

With Sharp, we'd see:

Perry (R) 41%
Sharp (D) 26%
Friedman (I) 19%

Looks like John Sharp may not have been as strong as I thought. Oh well. He's not running anyway.

What really surprised me though, was the Senate poll:

Hutchison (R) 52%
Radnofsky (D) 34%

52% is amazingly low for an incumbent Republican senator from Texas. It's not horrible for her of course -- it is over 50%, the customary danger line. But just barely, and that belies her reputation as invincible. Hutchison may have a closer race than people expect.

Tommy's NYC/New Jersey Update

-- promoted from comments -- abramcf -- I just want to add two polling links: Real Clear Politics' NYC Mayor polls and New Jersey polls.

Tommy said...

The New York mayoral race does in fact look to be locked up by Mr. Bloomberg who (and I hate this term) 'just happens to be' a republican. And that's not necessarily a bad thing. Compared to Rudy, he's a hippie! Socially, he's staying out of everybody's way, keeping the government as small as it can be (given the circumstances) and focused. He's been calm and level-headed when we needed him to be. And he's not trotting out his religious convictions or his mistress for all the world to see (which is a huge step up from Giuliani). He's a republican that ain't going to be invited to speak at the convention in a major time slot, if you know what I mean. Bloomberg is a New York CITY republican, not a New York STATE republican, which as anybody from Albany will tell you, is a big difference.

Now, the NJ race is another story. The polls may say one thing right now, but Corzine is in real danger of getting lumped into the whole anti-corporate, anti-corruption wave that's sweeping the Northeast, and to some extent, the country. Despite the fact that his opponent may be a republican (the boogeymen of Yankee-dom right now) he's running a pretty Left-friendly campaign...it's hard to call from the ground. This is going to be one of, if not THE, ugliest campaigns in recent memory; and there are a lot of swing voters who will, I think, side with whomever seems less beholdant to the whims of money and party. Corzine's core left voters, inspired by the liberals voting for Bloomberg, could actually go either way.

You're Luggage

A new Field poll out with Schwarzengger's ballot initiative. Not looking good for the governator:

Prop 74 -- 44% opposed, 34% in favor (public school teacher tenure)
Prop 75 -- 46% opposed, 29% in favor (public employee union dues)
Prop 76 -- 40% opposed, 27% in favor (state spending and school funding limits)
Prop 77 -- 36% opposed, 31% in favor (redistricting)
Prop 80 -- 23% opposed, 13% in favor (electric service providers regulation)

If none of these pass, Schwarzenegger will look even more like a fool. He called this special election for those ballot measures that he is pushing. Mr. 33% may be not be heading upward anytime soon.

Reid's Gutsy Thrust

Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) apparently pulled off some sort of political miracle today, shutting down the Senate, closing its doors, turning off its lights, and getting Republicans to agree in private to complete an investigation into the administration's pre-Iraq intelligence failures. From CNN:

Democrats forced the Senate into a closed session Tuesday to pressure the Republican majority into completing an investigation of the intelligence underpinning the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Democrats demanded that Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts move forward on a promised investigation into how Bush administration officials handled prewar intelligence about Iraq's suspected weapons programs.

The probe would be a follow-up to the July 2004 Intelligence Committee report that blamed a "series of failures" by the CIA and other intelligence agencies for the mistaken belief among U.S. policymakers that Iraq had restarted its chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs.

Apparently it made Republican Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist cry like a baby:

"This is an affront to me personally," said Frist, a Tennessee Republican. "This is an affront to our leadership. It is an affront to the United States of America, and it is wrong."

Typical Republican response. Anything that is an affront to me personally or my authority is an affront the United States of America. Bullshit. From MSNBC, Frist also says:

“Since I’ve been majority leader, I have to say, not with the previous Democratic leader or the current Democratic leader, have I ever been slapped in the face with such an affront to the leadership of this grand institution,” Frist said.

“For the next year and a half I can’t trust Sen. Reid,” he added.

Oh poor little Frist. Sure Daschle didn't do things like this. But he lost control of the Senate, and then lost his own seat because he was perceived as weak. I, for one, am glad to see Democrats at the national level fighting for what they believe in -- in this case, Congressional oversight of espionage and war. And maybe Frist should just stay away from the word "trust". It's just too easy...