August 02, 2006

8/2: Catch Up

Perhaps it's because the GOP has enjoyed more electoral success in recent cycles, but for whatever reason the left blogosphere is just more developed when it comes to projecting their presence out of the web and into the real world. The new Rightroots project has raised over $9K in one day, and while it has received support from GOP leaders, it also, unsurprisingly has come in for criticism from sources across the spectrum. Progressive vets like Chris Bowers at MyDD believe their operations are much more effective while libertarian David Weigel isn't impressed with their initial list of candidates. Finally Liz Mair has launched a new site GOPProgress.comto battle the influence of conservative sites like the ones behindRightroots . Who knows, maybe this battle could be the next CT SEN?

Maura at My Left Nutmeg reports that cable exec Ned Lamont (D) and Sen. Joe Lieberman (D) will both attend the "Wake Up Wal-Mart" stop in Bridgeport, CT, at noon 8/2. Maura promises Lamont supporters will make the stop as difficult as possible for Lieberman focusing on Wal-Mart PAC contributions to the Sen: "When Lieberman ran for President, he also received maximum contributions from Wal-Mart family fortune heir John Walton and his wife Christy (This is just an initial search - I may find even more). Once again Joe Lieberman tries to have it both ways - scold Wal-Mart when he wants votes from people who care about good jobs and health care, but take campaign contributions to advance Wal-Mart's right wing agenda.

The unofficial LamontBlog claims "no one is showing up for Lieberman's events," and asks, "Why isn't this the focus of every article about the Joementum 2006! Tour? This entire made-for-press spectacle is nominally about Joe connecting with voters across the state... so when they don't show up, shouldn't the news be that he's not finding any?" Connecticut Bob reader Ben forwards a specific low turnout event: "This afternoon, I ventured down to Zip's Diner in Dayville, CT to catch Joe Lieberman on his Joementum tour. There wasn't. ... The Lieberman "supporters" didn't start arriving until about 5:25; the bus pulled up soon after. I figured that, if I stood outside, I would have a better chance of beating the crowd. But the crowd didn't come."

Christy Hardin Smith at firedoglake looks at 8/1's Dem leadership letter on Iraq and notes: "Hillary Clinton even issued a press release stating her support for the Democratic leadership's reasoned position yesterday. So where in the world is Joe Lieberman?"

DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas reports that Dems originally planned to introduce a similar amendment to the Defense Appropriations Bill but were foiled by Lieberman: "A top Senate aide privy to the situation told me that Lieberman didn't want to remind voters back in Connecticut that he was so wrong-headed in Iraq (or "principled", I'm sure he'd say) by having to vote against the withdrawal amendment. In fact, he was furious at the Senate leadership for merely issuing their joint letter. ... But, the Senate aide told me, leadership was afraid there would be several key defections on the vote from Senators friendly to Lieberman, trying to provide cover fire for their buddy. Loyalty to Lieberman is so strong amongst some in the caucus (think Boxer and Biden campaigning for Joe), that they might've had fewer votes for this amendment than the last one introduced by Levin and Reid."

Kos then waxes on what this means for Dems: "But what does this tell us? That Lieberman isn't just one vote in favor of the disaster in Iraq -- he's forcing a good portion of the caucus to side with him lest he suffer politically. He's destroying efforts to arrive at a caucus consensus on Iraq, and would've put a wrench on the leadership's Iraq letter earlier this week given the chance."

Progressive blogs are still up in arms over a Lieberman campaign flyer contrasting the civil rights records of Lamont and Lieberman. Connecticut Blog picks up on a APstory reporting on blogger use of the term "race baiting" and comments: "I'm not the only blogger who's calling this race-baiting as this story is all over the blogs and even Stevie Wonder can see that it's race-baiting plain and simple. ... I'm a proud, smart, African-American who is well-educated I know what race-baiting is and if you look up the term in the book, this crap from the Lieberman campaign would fit the description 100 percent. In fact, this is right up there with Karl Rove's dirty "black baby" smear on John McCain in South Carolina and it's disgusting."

Matt Stoller at MyDD has also been following the controversy from CT and writes: "Politically, the black vote continues to be the centerpiece of the fight. Lieberman's rumor-mongering is incessant, and he's going to pull some stunts over the next few days to amplify the rumors. Tomorrow I'm going to Lamont rallies with Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, and those endorsements (along with Maxine Waters) should be enough to overcome the doubts that Lieberman's trying to plant. I've been watching the local news a bunch. Today it pitted a Lamont-supporting black minister against Sean Smith, Lieberman's pasty campaign manager, Guess who seemed more in touch with the African-American community?"

Stoller believes the impact of the race will stretch well beyond CT: "Oh, and DC Democrats should be very afraid. If white progressives, disaffected union members, and blacks strengthen the informal alliance that's being created in this campaign, there's not a Democrat anywhere in the country who can't be beaten in a primary."

Meanwhile further towards the center, the whole episode is giving TNR's Jason Zengerle flashbacks: "I see that Al Sharpton is denouncing the Lieberman campaign for its flyer that tried to make an issue out of Ned Lamont's membership in a snooty, presumably lilly-white Greenwich country club. Sharpton, who's endorsed Lamont, complains: "This country club stuff reminds me of how people smeared Bill Clinton. It's ironic that they have a picture of Clinton on the cover of the flyer." ... Actually, what's ironic is that Sharpton would bring up the fact that Clinton was once "smeared" with "country club stuff"--since it was Sharpton himself who did the smearing."

Zengerle then quotes from a 1992 USA Today article: "In a walk through Harlem -- as he contested for the black vote that has been central to Clinton's victory so far -- Brown was confronted by an alternate march led by black activist Rev. Al Sharpton. ... Brandishing a golf club that he used to make reference to Clinton's golf game at an Arkansas country club that has no black members, Sharpton and a group of followers virtually chased a reluctant Brown through a pack of onlookers." Zengerle finishes: "I guess Sharpton's displeasure over the Lieberman flyer is just another example of his remarkable maturation into a distinguished statesman."

Following up on Lamont's 7/31 Colbert performance, Atrios has video of Colbert's 8/1 invitation for Lieberman to stop by for a faux interview. The unofficial Lamont Blog has video of Lamont's new ad "Wishing Well." And finally from the left, Lamont was on The Tom Joyner Show at 8:30 AM 8/2 and will be on the Al Sharpton Show at 3 p.m.

On the right, National Review Online's Greg Pollowitz links to audio of a pro-Lamont song and transcribes some of the lyrics:

In these ugly times full of shameless crimes it's so easy to give up
Our democracy's hypocrisy is disgustingly corrupt
In Connecticut there are patriots who are ready to erupt:
Ned Lamont - at last we have a voice
Ned Lamont - not a puppet but the people's choice!
Now Clueless Joe tried to steal the show playing that third party game
Though he was a whore voting for the war he wont accept a drop of blame
He would gladly pee on the DNC - has he got no sense of shame?

Finally, Extreme Mortman passes along advice from conservative talk radio: "Sean Hannity sends conservatives a clear signal today on his radio show - if the choice in Connecticut is Ned Lamont running as a Democrat, Joe Lieberman running as an independent, and the Republican Senate candidate, "I would support Lieberman."

Tom Bevan at RCP Blog noticed Sen. Hillary Clinton's (D-NY) revitalize rural America initiative sounded a lot like Ex-VA Gov Mark Warner's '01 "The Regional Backbone/Roots of Progress Initiative." Bevan comments: "Clinton's been in office six years, and she's just now bringing up the subject? How very 2008 of her. One of Warner's biggest appeals is that he's a guy who has proven the ability to connect with Republican-leaning rural communities by addressing economic development issues, and without getting bogged down on social issues as so many national Democratic party figures typically do these days. Hillary Clinton is among those who could benefit from such a strategy, which is why she's employing the time-tested method: "if you can't beat 'em, steal their ideas and pass them off as your own."

Outside the Beltway links to a Hotline On Call (go team!) item looking at possible '08 fallout from a Castro demise and writes: "It's an interesting question, given that Florida was key in '00 and that retaining it will likely be a prerequisite to a Republican winning the White House in 2008 and beyond. If the Cuban vote were up for grabs with Castro gone, there would indeed be a new dynamic at work."

The Caucus Cooler scooped the MSM on MS Gov. Haley Barbour (R) IA visit: "The Cooler has learned the Haley Barbour will be in Iowa on August 16th to fundraise for state House candidates in Des Moines and Rep. Danny Carroll in Grinnell. ... Danny visited the Gulf in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and is in a hotly contested general election race. ... As you can see from the Cooler line, we don't believe Haley is a Presidential candidate persay, but he would make a nice VP choice for any of the major candidates besides Allen or Huckabee. ... Another connection to Iowa for Barbour, a former aide of his Ward Baker is advising the LMF for the upcoming election."

A Mystery Pollster analysis of the NPR poll conducted by Republican Glenn Bolger and Democrat Stan Greenberg has lefties excited and righties scared. MP describes the poll: "They selected 50 House districts as most competitive based on their rankings by the best known congressional handicappers ... Using random-digit dial sampling, they interviewed 1,000 adults who, according to the questionnaire, said they were registered voters, cast ballots in 2004 (if eligible) and reported they are "almost certain" to vote or "will probably vote" this fall. ... The NPR questionnaire also asked about actual candidates rather than the party label featured in the "generic" ballot question. They asked the generic ballot question (Q12), but then followed it with a vote preference question (Q15) featuring the actual names of the candidates in most instances (using the "most likely" challenger in districts with upcoming primaries)."

MP looked at the results and concluded: "The results are fascinating. If the election were held today, the results of the NPR survey indicate a much different overall outcome than in 2004 or 2002. Republicans won 55% of the vote cast in these districts in 2004 and 58% of the votes cast their in 2002, but the Republican candidates are currently preferred by only 43% of the voters in the NPR survey. The gap is similar across various sub-groupings of districts reported in the survey."

Finally MP offers "a few caveat on the numbers: "First, keep in mind that the turnout in these districts in 2004 was considerably greater (roughly 14 million) than in 2002 (roughly 9 million). This year's turnout will likely be much closer to 2002 than 2004. Second, the 2002 totals do not include the two competitive Texas districts (17 and 22) because redistricting changed their boundaries after that election. Third and probably most important, the gap between current polling and past vote returns probably varies widely across individual districts. Some of the districts now considered "in play" were not at all competitive in 2002 or 2004 and saw lopsided wins by the incumbent in those years."

Progressive Chris Bowers at MyDD comments: "In the top tier (23 races, 20 held by Republicans) Democrats are up 16 points over where they finished in 2004, and in the second tier (27 races, 20 held by Republicans), Democrats are up 21 points over where they finished in 2004. That means that Democrats are actually receiving a larger swing within the competitive districts than they are currently receiving nationwide. That is just huge, huge, huge, and helps allay worries that our gains were coming from districts that were not competitive.

Conservative talk show host Hugh Hewitt responds: "YIKES! The Mystery Pollster has some excellent analysis of a bipartisan poll that looks at the 50 most competitive races coming up in November. In case you're thinking of following the link, let me offer a strong content advisory. As of today (a key caveat, admittedly), we're looking at a bloodbath for the GOP. For what it's worth, I don't think it will turn out that way. As election day nears and the stakes become evident, the Republican base will get motivated. A nation at war cannot afford two years of the 21st century Democratic Party running Congress."

Fired Up Missouri shoots back at the Sen. Jim Talent (R-MO) campaign for their continued attack on '04 GOV nominee/Aud. Claire McCaskill (D) staffer Melissa Berridge for a "late" FEC report (Berridge died in a 7/29 plane crash). Fired Up reports: "Despite the demonstration by McCaskill's camp that the report had been sent on time, Talent and his minions continued to press their attack. This is disgusting and pitiful behavior on the part of Talent, who can obviously see his Senate seat slipping away."

A commenter at Fired Up writes under the name JamesBerridge: "I am Melissa Berridge's brother James ... getting an indoctrination tonight to the blogosphere. Melissa (Missy to my mom, sisters and I) is the staffer who was attacked today by MOGOP lies just three days after passing away. Alas, at times the dead DO speak...and I WILL do so for my sister. I want anyone willing to hear me/read what I write to know that this attack came as Missy's family left a funeral home in Fairview Heights, IL after saying goodbye to her. By far the hardest day of my life (seeing what something like this does to your mother is nothing I would wish on anyone) this attack left me simply stunned...at a moment when my entire family was already hurting beyond words."

National Review Online's John J. Pitney Jr. picks up on a north south divide:

Los Angeles Times:
SCHWARZENEGGER SLIGHTLY AHEAD OF ANGELIDES IN FUNDRAISING
San Francisco Chronicle:
ANGELIDES' CAMPAIGN FUNDS LAGGING FAR BEHIND GOVERNOR'S

KS GOV: Underwhelmed

Under the header "Incumbency trumps philosophy in Kansas GOP Primary" The Right Angle Blog expressed their unhappiness with 8/1's primary result:

With almost 80% of the precincts counted, the margins have gotten closer but the winners appear the same in tonight's Kansas Primary. Conservative State Senator Jim Barnett appears to have won the GOP nomination for Governor with 54,347 (36%). Fatherhood advocate and conservative activist Ken Canfield has narrowed the gap with 40,555 (27%) and the more moderate candidate former House Speaker Robin Jennison has 32,455 (21%). ...Barnett spent more than his opponents and was the only one with a statewide television campaign. He is leading in almost 40 of the state's 105 counties in East and Central Kansas including the counties containing most of the state's major cities (Topeka and Witchita). Canfield ran especially well in the Kansas City suburbs and a belt of conservative counties in N. Kansas carrying 14 counties. Jennison won 20 counties mostly in the sparsely populated far western plains.

BLOGGER VS. BLOGGER: Mirror, Mirror

Captain's Quarters follows up on 8/1's Rightroots birth: "Our first day of the Rightroots initiative has started off very well -- and has received quite a bit of notice. In less than a day, we have already raised almost $7,000 for the eighteen key candidates we have endorsed in our effort to hold both houses of Congress."

CQ then forwards a challenge from Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA): "I'm going to make a pledge: If Rightroots raises a total of $26,000 by 11:59 PM (EST) on Friday, August 4, I will contribute a total of $14,000 directly to some of the candidates from my Leadership PAC in the name of our movement."

Over at the libertarian Hit and RunDavid Weigel was in a mocking mood: "Two years of mocking the Democratic blogs for donating to loser candidates has taken its toll; Republican blogs want to donate to their own loser candidates. Introducing Rightroots, an alliance of conservative bloggers who've created a list of endorsed candidates and a handy venue for bloggers to donate to their campaigns."

And on the left Chris Bowers at MyDD was incensed that the fledging righty effort would ever be compared to the his left juggernaut creation: "So I went to the Rightroots site to se if they really had created a counter to Act Blue. Immediately, I recognized that they had done no such thing. There was no way for people to start their own fundraising pages or create their own slate of candidates. Instead of being able to give to every candidate for federal office, every party committee, and to candidates in several states not running for federal office, the only options available to people not in control of the page were to give to a fixed slate of around 18 candidates. Further, there were no links available to local blogs covering the race, candidate websites / official blogs, volunteer pages, or lists of campaign events. In short, this page offers only one way to become active in the 2006 elections: donate to their officially endorsed candidates."

Ezra Klein at TAPPED "was all set to blast Matt Stoller and Markos for putting their agendas before the facts" on their criticism of Carter Eskew stumping for "Big Pharma" over Medicare Part D. But Klein then realized that despite being wrong about the details of the specific issue, Markos and Stoller were right on the larger "deep dysfunction in the Democratic Party."

For Eskew and Joe Lockhart and various others, ideological concerns are secondary to occupational responsibilities -- which is fine. There are many jobs where such a prioritization is useful. Running political campaigns, however, isn't really one of them. ... political consultants shouldn't end with that data. They should be explaining how to make the case that it's a mess, that it's easily improvable, that it's corporate welfare on an astonishing scale. Were they ideologues, they would do exactly that. As disinterested professionals picking up pharmaceutical work on the side, however, they glance at the data and -- not even dishonestly -- advise that Democratic candidates focus elsewhere. It's not that Democratic politicians don't stand for anything. It's that the folks they're told to listen to don't."

LEST WE FORGET: Safest Headline Possible

Under the header "Harry Potter to take on an interesting role..."College Humor links to a BBCstory announcing: "Harry Potter actor Daniel Radcliffe is to appear on the London stage next year, playing a stable boy who has an erotic relationship with his horses."

Posted by Conn Carroll at August 2, 2006 12:30 PM