9/12: A Story For Some, But Not For Others

Two big SEN primary battles will be decided 9/12 (for Dems MD SEN, for GOPers RI SEN). And yet only one, RI SEN, has garnered much attention in the blogosphere. Even then conservative bloggers' almost uniform support for Cranston Mayor Stephen Laffey (R) over Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R) has been largely muted. Unlike CT SEN, which had daily updates from DailyKos, MyDD, Eschaton, firedoglake, TPM Cafe, and a slew of well-read local CT blogs, none of the big conservative bloggers is on hand reporting for Laffey 9/12. It's no mystery where RedState, Power Line et al stand, but RI SEN was never a priority for them. Whatever the reasons for the difference in focus, the contrast demonstrates that the insurgent Dem faction is much more blogger-based than GOP dissenters. We'll see how long this stays the case.

"The biggest race," 9/12 according to Robert Bluey at Right Angle Blog "pits populist Steve Laffey against liberal Lincoln Chafee." Bluey points to Hotline TV analysis (go team!) of the race and notes: "Hotline, editors Chuck Todd and John Mercurio both think Laffey has a chance to knock off the incumbent. However, only Mercurio picked Laffey to take the big prize. Bluey also points out that Right Angle Blog readers prefer Laffey to Chafee 83%-15%.

Bull Dog at Ankle Biting Pundits acknowledges that "no one is under the illusion that a Laffey win makes it more likely that a Democrat will take the seat. ... Still, it is extremely galling to have the NRSC and the establishment ride to the rescue of Lincoln Chafee, someone without the (dare I say) gravitas to count to 10, let alone serve in the Senate. Especially given the fact that he couldn't even bring himself to vote for President Bush in 2004. ... Conservatives are as realistic as anyone, but there comes a point where you have to stand for something, lest you stand for nothing."

Mark Blumenthal at Pollster.com tries to make sense out of conflicting polls. "One poll had Laffey ahead by seventeen percentage points, another conducted at exactly the same time Chafee ahead by fourteen." Blumenthal concludes the Chafee leader poll is probably more accurate:

If the NRSC or Public Opinion Strategies has released information about their sampling methodology, I have been unable to find it. However, the WSJ Washington Wire item included an "intriguing nugget" that provides a pretty good clue about the discrepancy between the surveys: "Of the 53% of respondents who could actually name the primary election date, 58% support Mr. Chafee compared to 37% who back Mr. Laffey."

So Chafee's lead was wider on the POS poll among those who knew the primary date than among those who did not. True likely voters tend to be more knowledgeable about elections (one reason the Gallup likely voter model includes similar measures of knowledge). This result suggests that Chafee does better among the most likely of likely voters, a difference that may help explain the gap between the two polls.

Lefty bloggers are taking a pass on the Rep. Ben Cardin (D-03)/ex-NAACP pres./ex-Rep. Kweisi Mfume (D) contest. Matt Stoller at MyDD writes: "I'd probably vote for Mfume over Cardin on the Senate side. Mfume's just more dynamic, and Cardin's part of the Hoyer machine. Both candidates are good people." Chris Bowersadds : "The winner of the primary should get a very nice bump in the polls afterward, and will be favored against Republican Michael Steele in this open seat. ... I am neutral in this campaign, as I have my doubts about both Democratic candidates."

Both MyDDers do have strong opinions on MD-04's contest between Rep. Al Wynn (D) and atty Donna Edwards (D). Bowers writes: "Even if Edwards does not win, I hope she is willing to give it another go in 2008. Al Wynn needs to be replaced, and in a different cycle the progressive movement can get behind Edwards much earlier and with far more effectiveness." Stoller adds: "In Maryland's 4th, obviously I'm a big Donna Edwards fan. She's gotten a bunch of good press today, including this piece by CQ and this one at BlackAmericaWeb. Edwards has a shot, which is a huge deal. And if she doesn't win, she'll be able to force Wynn to left for the next few years. Go 50 state strategy, and go Donna."

Chris Bowers at MyDD looks at "a tough three-way battle between Jamie Wall, Nancy Nasbaum and Steve Kagen" and concludes: "While the Democrat leads in the generic ballot 48-44, I worry that our nominee will not have the time to recover following a brutal primary. Then again, our nominee will emerge with a superior infrastructure and name ID to Republican nominee Gard, so maybe it won't be all that bad. Again, I am neutral in this primary."

Kausfiles looks at an Los Angeles Timesstory on a ex-Rep. Mac Collins (R-GA) recent television ad playing on fears that House min leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) could become speaker and give "amnesty" to illegal aliens. Kaus comments: "In other words, Pelosi might pass Bush's immigration plan! ... P.S.: Is anyone still suggesting that nasty Sensenbrenner immigration bill is going to cost Republicans the House? I haven't heard that one lately."

TPM Muckraker reports that a judge ordered ex-Chattanooga Mayor Bob Corker (R) to provide documents relating to a lawsuit filed by environmental activists on 10/20. The suit concerns Corker's involvement "in two sides of a three-way deal to develop a Wal-Mart "supercenter" in the town of Chattanooga. His company sold land to the developers of the site -- and as mayor, his city administration allowed environmental concerns to be pushed aside in favor of the development."

Over at RedState, Erick Erickson has audio from a recent interview with Corker including talk "about September 11th, first responders and criticisms that the Bush Administration has not helped first responders, Harold Ford, Jr.'s attempts to run as a Republican, and the issues Mayor Corker sees in this 2006 election season."

Chris Bowers at MyDD looks inside Mason-Dixon's fav/unfav ratings for Sen. George Allen (R) and ex-Navy sec. James Webb (D) and likes what he sees: "Webb has a 3-1 positive ratio in this category, at 28% favorable and 7% unfavorable. Allen, by contrast, has only a 3-4 positive ratio, at 41% favorable, 31% unfavorable. Numbers like these strongly suggest that Webb will not only pull ahead of Allen, but comfortably pull ahead of Allen once they have comparable name ID's."

Bowers is less impressed with Webb's first television ad which attempts to raise Webb's name ID: "Not only does the ad never mention that Webb is a Democrat, it prominently features Ronald Reagan in both words and images. This may appeal to some voters, but I have serious doubts about its' effectiveness when it comes to actually getting people to vote for Webb. What happens when people go into the voting booth ready to dump Allen, but then discover that the nice-seeming alternative that is Jim Webb is actually a Democrat? Without any branding of the Democratic Party image in Virginia, how many people will Webb end up losing in the voting booth itself?"

DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas wants to see potential Dem WH hopefulls ability to help fellow Dems down ballot before he starts picking sides. To that end he lets each candidate know what they can do to catch his eye this fall.

• Bayh: "Indiana has become one of the hottest battlegrounds in the battle for Congress, with competitive races in the IN-02, IN-08, and IN-09 districts. Furthermore, Democrats have a real shot at taking control of the Indiana House, which is currently 48-52, Democratic/Republican. Bayh has an opportunity to prove his detractors wrong and demonstrate that he can be a powerful force toward rebuilding his state's tattered Democratic Party and helping us win back control of Congress."
• Clinton: "Clinton has her work cut out for her. ... But Democrats are legitimately competitive in a stunning six House seats in the state ... That's nothing to sneeze at. ... Clinton may not be able to give cash to these Democratic challengers ... but she ... can fund the most lavish GOTV operation in the history of the state ... And with no serious top-of-the-ticket Republicans to fund GOP turnout or drive Republicans to the polls, Hillary can help completely transform the state and Congress.
• Edwards: "North Carolina has great pickup opportunities in NC-08 and NC-11. Edwards is one of those guys (like Clark) that campaign for Dems all over the country. But North Carolina is a state that is trending Blue, and Edwards can help speed up that transformation."
• Richardson: "I lost a bit of respect for Richardson when he failed to help deliver New Mexico to Kerry in 2004. He can start making up for it by helping deliver NM-01 to the Democratic column this November."
• Vilsack: "Like Richardson, Vilsack gets a strike for failing to deliver Iowa in 2004. Like Warner in 2005, Vilsack can help protect his legacy by helping keep the governor's office in Democratic hands, as well as pick up IA-01."
• Warner: "Warner already proved himself in 2005 by helping hold the governor's seat in a tough state, and making Democratic gains in the state legislature for the second election cycle in a row. ... But, we all have short memories in politics ... what better way to do that than to help Jim Webb take out Felix Macaca Allen?"

Due to grapevine rumors and the realization that "Hillary's weaknesses has made the field look more open than it previously did," Ezra KleinTAPPED looks at the success of Al Gore's movie and his recent WH'08 non-denial in Australia and concludes: "Given that there are already a wide range of sites, organizations, and individuals trying to attract Al to the race, it's looking less and less likely to me that he'll resist the temptation."

GOP '08 FIELD: Immigration And Pro-Life Crosstabs To Come!

GOP Bloggers is conducting their third 2008 Straw Poll with another wrinkle: "New in this poll, you tell us your views on abortion and the guest worker program. How does ones views on these issues influence your vote? We shall soon see!" Many righty blogs carry the poll and results by each participating blog are available (eg Right Wing News).

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) political consultant Patrick Hynes at Ankle Biting Pundits and Liz Mair at GOP Progress both are unhappy with David Frum's latest American Enterprise Institute piece on McCain's WH hopes.

• Hynes: "McCain, Frum argues, is destined to lose the presidency (should he decide to run) because, like William Jennings Bryan (a three-time presidential loser) and Adlai Stevenson (a two-time loser), he serves in the Senate. ... Um, no. You see, William Jennings Bryan never served in the United States Senate. Neither did Stevenson, for that matter. Stevenson was Governor of Illinois for one term, which, by Frum's calculation, would have made it far more likely that he would have become president. But he wasn't. So what's Frum's point? Oh, yeah. He doesn't like John McCain. And he's scrounging for a good reason.
• Mair: "Frum points to Lieberman and then says "Like McCain, Lieberman never really strayed that far from the Democratic line." Huh? McCain never strays far from the Democratic line? Maybe I've missed something, but last time I checked, privatizing Social Security, getting rid of pork barrel spending, stopping abortion on demand, suggesting more troops in Iraq would be a good idea, and voting for Sam Alito were not exactly indicative of the "Democratic line."

If you were blogging on 9/11/2006, you had thoughts on 9/11. For the most thorough roundup of blogger thoughts memeorandum is the best place to go. Some Blogometer quick hits include:

• DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas
: "Thanks to everyone who has wished me a happy birthday today (like this diary. If any of you want to get me something for my birthday, what I really, really want today is $5-10 (or whatever) to your favorite ActBlue Netroots candidate."
• the right's littlegreen footballs: "Allahpundit tells me that he captured the video from 8:30 am to 3:00 pm, but did not see this infamous footage, pulled from the airwaves almost immediately on 9/11 after threats from Palestinians against Western news agencies. Did CNN also purge this from their video archives?"
• the left's Charles P. Pierce at TAPPED: "However, one little bit of video did catch my attention this morning. Matt Lauer of The Today Show got an interview in the Oval Office with George W. Bush. ... To Lauer's enormous credit, and given the strange circumstances, he pushed as hard as was possible on the subject of the president's right to torture people. The way you knew he'd pushed hard was that the president began talking in smaller and smaller circles. ... The president refused to talk about "techniques that we use on people." .... "It's my job to protect YOU," he told Lauer at one point.
• the left's Atrios: "It's firmly etched in the bedrock of our political discourse that war in Afghanistan was necessary and desirable and that All Serious People agree with that. But, frankly, there really isn't much reason to be so sure about that anymore. ... There's no way to answer the question of whether the Afghanistan war was the right thing to do - it was inevitable and there's no way to tease out a credible "what if" alternative history timeline - but it's reasonable to ask if it's been a net good. ... We certainly didn't achieve what we should have, and those "far-left types" who worried that we were going to kill a bunch of people then screw the pooch certainly had a point.

Outside the Beltway's James Joyner touched a nerve with The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum when he wrote: "Earlier, I collected a series of 9/11 anniversary reflections from the press and the blogosphere. ... everyone pretty much agreed that the day was horrible, changed a lot of things about the world, and reflected on people who were murdered that day. There's a different view out there, though, and it's not just held by Muslim fanatics and our enemies across the globe but by some prominent lefties with large soapboxes.

Drum responded: "Speaking only for myself, I'm not sure this should come as a surprise to anyone. My biggest disappointment of the past five years - the biggest by a very long way - has been the way that George Bush transformed 9/11 from an opportunity to bring the country together into a cynical and partisan cudgel useful primarily for winning a few more votes in national elections. ... Compare and contrast: FDR was surely one of the most partisan presidents of the 20th century, but after Pearl Harbor he announced that "Dr. New Deal has been replaced by Dr. Win the War." And he made good on that.

Joyner shot back: "Just as FDR didn't roll back the New Deal when his war got going, Bush didn't suddenly stop believing in tax cuts, the non-utility of the UN, and so forth. Further, it's not as if Democrats stopped trying to stonewall the majority's policy initiatives in a spirit of bipartisan cooperation."

Josh Marshall at Talking Point Memo has a message for Dems concerning WH Dep. CoS Karl Rove: "Get off your butt, forget the cult of Rove, and start contesting the election. ... the bigger victory Rove has managed over Democrats ... his ability to get deep inside the heads of many Democrats and make them think that no matter what the situation or what the available facts suggest, Karl Rove must be on top of the situation and it must be playing to his advantage." TPM reader RP adds: "Every basketball coach will tell you the way to win games is to 'get the other team out of its game, and make them play your game." To a certain extent, even listening to Rove and the Republican Screech Monkeys is a waste of time. What to do? Stay focused on one and only message."

At TPM Cafe Will Menaker has video of a new ad from The Center For Security Policy which will run in NY, OH, MO, VA, and VT. "The ad shows images of the burning Twin Towers and Americans held hostage and concludes by flashing on the screen: "Vote as if your life depends on it. Because it does."

Tom Schaller at TAPPED looks at lefty blogger efforts to thwart ABC's "The Path to 9/11" docudrama and likes what he sees:

For years now, the standard attack on liberals or liberal Democrats has been two-pronged. The first prong proceeds from the idea that the vast majority of liberals are weak, slow-to-learn political bunglers who repeat the same mistakes, chose the same dumb candidates, take lumps without fighting back, etc. The second prong of the attack is to assert that the small sliver of politically competent liberals are ruthless, shameless, rabid radicals bent on destroying the country and its values -- not to mention liberalism itself and the Democratic Party along the way.

Well, guess what? In the wake of the nationwide campaign to de-legitimize ABC's 9-11 "documentary," it will be increasingly hard for the mainstream talking heads, who normally opt for the feckless half of the critique, or the Limbaugh/Hannity/York types, who by reflex lean toward the reckless option, to be successful unless they adapt a new way of perpetrating their systematic demeaning and diminishing of the left. For what we saw in the past two weeks, led yet again by key actors on the left, from MoveOn to powerhouse blogs to Media Matters for America to key politicians, was a smart, measured, coordinated, savvy, sometimes cheeky but ultimately successful -- no less pre-emptive -- criticism of a national network, its key decision makers, and its corporate owners.

This feat would not have been possible even three or four years ago. But, regardless of when the clout threshold was crossed, a smart, coordinated, energized left is now here, and no more wait-and-see analyses or other postponed judgments will suffice because a decidedly non-feckless, non-reckless campaign was put together on the fly. And it succeeded.

Ryan Sager at RCP Blog highlights the efforts of www.stopshuler.com www.stopshuler.com whose mission statement reads:

No, we are not residents of North Carolina's 11th District, nor could we pick it out on a map (it's up in the mountains, right?). No, we aren't working for any of Shuler's rivals. We simply are Redskins fans and we love the city of Washington. And quite frankly, both are better off since Heath left town, and we don't want him back.

Sager includes video of the groups's "latest attack ad on Shuler" which blames Shuler for Marion Barry, the city's record homicide rate, the city's lack of a baseball team, the awfulness of the Wizards, and, of course, the awfulness of the Redskins. The ad concludes: "Don't let Heath Shuler anywhere near Washington or the Redskins. Stop Shuler."