Will Obama's Coattails And A Democratic Landslide In Iowa Drag Down King And Latham?

It wasn't a surprise in 2006 when progressive Democrat Bruce Braley won the open seat in IA-01 (Davenport, Dubuque, Waterloo). Although DCCC chair Rahm Emanuel was unenthusiastic over Braley's unambiguous opposition to the Iraq war, the DCCC gave him the green light and his victory over right-wing loon Bill Whalen was convincing (55-43%). On the other hand, the victory next door, in IA-02 (Cedar Rapids, Iowa City, Burlington), where Dave Loebsack squeaked by 30 year veteran Jim Leach, was one of the political shockers of the cycle. It was a Democratic year and Chet Culver's 100,000 vote margin in the gubernatorial race helped both Braley and Loebsack, each of whom has gone on to distinguish himself as among the better Democrats in the House.

Today's Des Moines Register doesn't mention any House races, let alone IA-04 (Tom Latham vs Becky Greenwald) or IA-05 (Steve King vs Rob Hubler). The Register story is, in a general way, about Mcpain, pointing out that the margin of victory in a brand new local poll shows Obama thumping McCain by 17 points. This morning I heard McCain on TV, delusional, insisting, shrilly, that Iowa is a battleground state he would win. Even if he improves his standing in the next 2 days-- and Palin's scheduled appearance in Dubuque on Monday is likely to do more harm than good for their ticket, it is unlikely he'll get to even 40%.

Obama's lead in the poll is almost three times what his average lead is nationally.

So much for Iowa being a "battleground" or "tossup" state this time.

In fact, the poll indicates a Democratic landslide may be in the offing in Iowa. The poll shows Democratic Sen. Tom Harkin beating his Republican challenger, Christopher Reed, by 57 percent to 31 percent. If Harkin wins by a margin like that - 26 points - it would be his biggest margin in his five general election campaigns for the Senate.

...Such poor numbers threaten to have a demoralizing effect among Republicans and an energizing one among Democrats. If Democrats smell victory and head to the polls while Republicans are in a funk and stay at home (as happened in the 1974 Watergate election), then Obama's landslide could bury other GOP candidates down the ballot.

And who would that be? There are only two Republican House members left in Iowa and both have strong Democratic opponents this year, though neither is on the lists the Cooks & Schnooks & DCCC make up as targets. Iowans, on the other hand, have shown in the past they make their own targets. The Register recommended that voters retire King as an embarrassment to the state and lauds Becky Greenwald's leadership potential as the right choice in IA-04. Iowa polls close late (10pm EST) and the only races we'll be looking at by then are in Alaska, Washington, Oregon and California. But if Hubler and Greenwald do manage to dislodge King and Latham, America will have, by then, taken a step towards the real systemic reform to our government that grassroots Democrats want so badly and that Republicans and odious Democrats from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party will do all they can to prevent. A short clip from the Register explaining why they think Rob Hubler is the right choice for IA-05... and for America:

For Many GOP Members Of Congress John McCain's Campaign Has Been A Career-Ending Tragedy

Dick & Tim-- helping turn PA bluer

Ever since McCain clinched the GOP presidential nomination and marched right into Denny Hastert's congressional district to campaign vigorously with Jim Oberweis for the seat Hastert was giving up, a shudder went up the spine of Republican incumbents. An unknown Democratic challenger, Bill Foster, straight from a bitterly fought primary that he only won by a few votes, should have been an easy target for McCain and Oberweis. The district is overwhelmingly Republican (R+5) and exactly the kind of district Republicans have to win if they are going to stay nationally relevant and not just fade away into the party of the old slave holding states and the Mormons. But instead of McCain's first victory, early March saw the beginning of a nightmare vision for the GOP about what kind of a disaster McCain's coattails were going to be for them. And it just got worse from there.

McCain's coattails were also toxic in Baton Rouge, in another very red district's special election, and then in a Mississippi district where Democrats normally don't even bother to run (R+10). It seems like every single day the rearview mirror, Inside the Beltway prognosticators are-- as usual-- trying to catch up with reality in the "real America" (everything to the west, north and south of the Beltway) by changing their ratings, which generally started out as 2 or 3 Democratic gains in the Senate and 8 or 9 net wins for the Dems in the House. Cook and Schnook and Rothengeek and the rest of them seem to be willing to declare a seat leaning to the Democrats when the Republican gives a concession speech. They're a joke and I expect that on Wednesday they will make fairly accurate predictions for a Democratic landslide in both houses.

Today's Washington Post deals with the delicate subject-- in a one industry company town-- of John McCain's coattails, by claiming that his struggle in traditionally Republican states is "complicating the already tenuous reelection prospects of some congressional Republicans." Moderate suburban districts are breaking for Obama and vacated Republican seats plus embattled GOP incumbents are looking mighty blue 6 days before the election.

The apparent McCain drag on congressional races comes as voters increasingly cast blame on Bush and Republicans for the crumbling economy and at a time when the GOP's national party committees have little financial resources to defend an increasing number of House and Senate seats that are in jeopardy.

"McCain is just running so poorly now. He's collapsed in some districts. It's brutal out there for Republicans," said Stuart Rothenberg, editor of the independent Rothenberg Political Report.

The environment has created the potential for gains by the Democrats that could leave them in control of the Capitol for years.

Democrats hold a 51 to 49 edge in the Senate when the two independents who caucus with them are factored in, and a 236 to 199 House majority. Rothenberg predicted that Democrats will pick up 27 to 33 House seats, and make gains of six to nine seats in the Senate. The Cook Political Report, another independent political forecaster, suggests that Democrats will net 23 to 28 House seats, and pick up seven to nine Republican-held Senate seats.

That would have been an astute observation in late August. If Cook were on the ball he would have said "Democrats will net 30 to 40 House seats."

Does anyone pay attention to these blinkered forecasters? The DCCC and NRCC consider them the holy grail, media frames the coverage of races through the prism they offer, and their impact on big donors is immense. Otherwise, they're inconsequential.

Many political observers are talking about the career-ending balloting coming up for John Sununu (R-NH), Steve Pearce (R-NM), Robin Hayes (R-NC) and Ric Keller (R-FL) but I want to talk about two races that none of the pollsters or pundits ever mention and that have been largely flying under the radar. This morning the most influential newspaper in Iowa, the Des Moines Register shocked the political establishment by rejecting 7-term incumbent rubber stamp Tom Latham and endorsed a grassroots Democrat for his seat, Becky Greenwald. Cook and Schnook must be scratching their head and scurrying around for a map that shows where Iowa's 4th CD is.

Iowa's 4th District has a chance to make history. This state has never sent a woman to Congress, but should do so this election.

Becky Greenwald, a Democrat from Perry, has not made that point the main emphasis of her campaign. She calls herself a candidate who "happens to be female." But she also happens to be a woman with potential to be a leader in Washington.

[The Register also endorsed progressive Democrat Rob Hubler in the 5th district and urged Iowa voters to retire hysterical extremist goon Steve King.]

The other race I want to bring up, though, is even further under the radar than either of the Iowa races. Southwest Pennsylvania's 18th CD was gerrymandered to find every potential Republican voter south of Pittsburgh and put them into a safe district for Tim Murphy. But the district (R+2) isn't safe enough for someone with as terrible a rubber stamp record as Murphy has amassed since first taking office in 2002. Just look at this Iraq voting record; it could have been accrued by Dick Cheney! But I bet no one outside the district-- especially no one Inside the Beltway-- knows that there might be an upset brewing inside.

Steve O'Donnell is a progressive Democrat with a shot-- albeit a longshot-- to be Tuesday night's jaw dropper. Murphy has tried to stay under the radar himself and he's tried, despite his record, to sound like a moderate and keep his distance, at least publicly, from Bush and McCain. But his approval rating is only 34%, something that would have him on the critical list if the DCCC was paying attention. Registration has changed so drastically in Pennsylvania that there are now 60,000 more registered Democrats in PA-18 than registered Republicans! And it's an economically hard-hit part of the country with very strong anti-Republican sentiment.

Labor is behind O'Donnell in a big way and his pro-choice, single payer healthcare, out-of-Iraq positions are in sync with what voters actually want. Meanwhile the FBI is investigating Murphy as another dirty Republican Culture of Corruption crook:



Murphy was named one of the 20 most corrupt members of Congress by CREW and he's continued taking immense sums of money from the special interests he serves in Congress, like Big Oil, Halliburton, Wal-Mart and many of the worst players in the mortgage crisis and Wall Street meltdown.

If O'Donnell comes close, the DCCC will be weeping to activists next year for screwing up-- like they're doing this year for screwing up Larry Kissell's race in 2006. But he can win, especially if McCain and Palin keep campaigning in Pennsylvania.


UPDATE: ET TU, SHAYS?

Chris Shays is a self-serving hack from a blue district in Connecticut who manages to stay in office by distancing himself from his right-wing voting record at election time. This year, up against an energetic and much smarter opponent, Jim Himes, it looks like Shays' old tactic isn't working. So instead, the Chairman of McCain's campaign committee in Connecticut has come up with an interesting new strategy: attacking McCain, when he's on the ground... and groping for a break.

"He has lost his brand as a maverick," Rep. Chris Shays, a Connecticut Republican and co-chairman of the McCain campaign in that state, told the Yale Daily News in the latest criticism. "He did not live up to his pledge to fight a clean campaign."

Connecticut conservatives are furious and many are swearing off support for Shays. "I know he always votes the right way when we really need him," said a Republican elected official in Fairfield County, who asked to remain anonymous, "but this is the last straw. He's just so treacherous and hypocritical. We all know McCain is going to lose but does that mean you kick him in the teeth on his way down. Christopher Shays owes Republicans an apology."

Why Are Republican Incumbents Afraid To Debate In Their Home Districts?

After seeing what an incredibly effective speaker Oregon Senate candidate Jeff Merkley is, I was interested in knowing if he would be debating Bush's rubber stamp mouthpiece Gordon Smith. So I asked. His campaign has proposed a series of 8 debates. Merkley has committed to five specific debates around the state with different Oregon television stations and nonpartisan public service groups. So far Gordon Smith hasn't committed to any. But let's be fair, if you had a record like his-- in a state like Oregon-- would you want to defend it in public? But they I started seeing a surprising pattern: Republican incumbents all over the country are avoiding or minimizing the number of debates they're willing to have with Democrats.

Yesterday, almost in passing, we saw how Bush rubber stamp Charlie Dent refuses to debate Sam Bennett about energy policy. “Congressman Dent is so deep in the pocket of Big Oil companies and special interest groups he’s refusing to publicly defend his record and have an open debate about the issue,” said Kathryn Seck, Sam Bennett’s campaign manager. “He should explain why he’s taken $75,000 from Big Oil and given them billions in tax breaks while middle class Pennsylvanians are struggling to afford high gas prices.  Voters deserve an open dialogue on the issues and Congressman Dent is ducking the issue.” Then this morning I got a press release from Iowa's 4th CD (the north central part of the state, centered in Ames). And sure, enough, the Bush rubber stamp incumbent, Tom Latham, is refusing to debate the Democratic candidate Becky Greenwald.

Tom Latham refused this week to debate Becky Greenwald while he is home on the August recess. The Greenwald campaign accepted a debate with Latham at the Iowa Farmer’s Union Convention, an event that Latham is attending. Latham refused to debate.
 
“We are disappointed that Tom Latham refused to debate Becky Greenwald at the Iowa Farmer’s Union Convention. We tried to work with his schedule and find a venue for a debate at an event Latham would already be attending,” said Campaign Manager Robert Brennan. “Iowans deserve to hear from Tom Latham why after 14 years in Congress, he has done nothing to address the energy crisis, lack of care for our veterans and the high cost of healthcare.”
 
Last week, the Greenwald campaign sent a letter to the Latham campaign asking to hold four debates over the August recess. The Latham campaign refused the debates saying their schedule was full. The Iowa Farmers Union tried to accommodate with his schedule and arrange for a debate at their convention in Marshalltown, IA on Saturday August 23rd, an event that Latham will be attending. The Latham campaign refused to debate.

Was I looking at a pattern? I reached out to a few of the campaigns I speak to regularly. Gary Peters (D-MI) has accepted invitations from the Troy Chamber of Commerce-- and even from the Troy Republican Party Club, as well as from other groups who have been trying to set up debates. Joe Knollenberg-- a Big Oil shill who has accepted $66,250 in "donations" from Big Oil and owns over $90,000 in oil company stocks that increase in value as gasoline prices rise-- is petrified to stand up in front of an audience of voters and defend his energy voters.

Annette Taddeo debates empty chair in Miami

In May the AFL-CIO, which had endorsed Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Mario and Lincoln Diaz-Balart in 2006, invited their 3 candidates plus Democratic challengers Annette Taddeo, Joe Garcia and Raul Martinez to a debate. The three Republicans, panicking at the last moment, ducked the debate. Each blamed scheduling conflicts. The AFL-CIO went on with the debate-- Annette told me she debated Ros-Lehtinen's empty chair-- and then endorsed the debate winners, the three Democrats.

South Florida congressional Republicans backed out of next week's debates. Their opponents say they're hiding.

Miami's three Cuban-American Republicans in Congress have scrapped plans to participate in a series of debates with their Democratic challengers.

The South Florida AFL-CIO, which in recent years has hosted debates for mayoral and gubernatorial races, planned three debates next week for the nationally watched contests. But the Republicans said this week that they're not going, throwing the bipartisan nature of the event into doubt.

The union-- which endorsed the three incumbents in 2006-- says the events will go on next week as scheduled. All three Democrats, who represent the first significant challenge to the incumbents, said they plan to attend and suggested the Republicans were reluctant to spar face to face.

"We just want to give our working families a chance to talk to the candidates,'' said union president Fred Frost, who met late Wednesday with representatives from two of the Republican campaigns in a bid to revive the events. "I think they'd be squandering what I'd consider a great opportunity."

In New Jersey Dennis Shulman has been trying to get incumbent Scott Garrett to debate him in front of voters. Apparently Garrett-- like fellow extremist loon and Big Oil shill John Kline in Minnesota-- just doesn't think he has to do debates. Kline's spokesperson said his record speaks for itself. It does-- and if voters were actually reading it Kline wouldn't get 30% of the vote.

Last year Darcy Burner was eager to debate incumbent Bush rubber stamp Dave Reichert everywhere in the district. His staff, wary of putting him into unscripted settings because he has a tendency to either put his foot in his mouth or reveal his lack of policy depth, allowed him to do one debate, which was sponsored by the Seattle Times. The Times debate for 2008 is scheduled for October 8 and Reichert is going to do it. Meanwhile, though, there have been debates proposed by KCTS-9 and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer as well as by TV station KING 5 and radio stations KUOW and KIRO 710. Darcy wants debates. Reichert wants to hide. Similarly, Bob Lord has challenged John Shadegg who refuses to talk, only waves his toy air pressure gauge over his head and mutters incoherently about running for the Senate. Shadegg won't say yes or no about debates. Last year Vic Wulsin was able, after embarrassingly her repeatedly, to get Mean Jean Schmidt, one of the House's most woefully ignorant members, to do one debate. Vic would like to do a series of debates across the district to talk about how to help solve the economic conditions of Ohio families hit hard by recession, the housing crisis, gasoline prices, unemployment, the health care crisis and inflation but Mean Jean isn't answering. The Ohio News Network has asked both candidates to debate in October but it looks like Vic may have the stage to herself.

Most of the Senate races have at least one debate scheduled. But Gordon Smith isn't the only senatorial coward hiding from his Democratic opponent. John Cornyn (R-TX) doesn't feel comfortable unless he's speaking at places like the Petroleum Club in Fort Worth. Big Oil has given him more money this year ($480,100) than any other member of Congress (other than the million plus they gave to ExxonJohn McCain) and he's backed them all the way, which is precisely why you're paying around $4/gallon at the pump. But when it comes to debating Rick Noriega about his votes, Cornyn is full of... petroleum. Plenty of TV and radio stations, as well as civic organizations throughout Texas, have reached out to the two campaigns for debates. Noriega keeps accepting invitation. Cornyn claims he's negotiating. But he isn't even doing that-- unless he's negotiating with himself.

Just as I was about to publish this, I got an e-mail from Andrea Miller, the powerfully articulate and knowledgeable Democratic candidate running against dull rubber stamp Randy Forbes in southern Virginia. Her experience is almost identical to at least half, perhaps three-quarters of Democratic challengers:

Randy Forbes is avoiding me big time. There have been at least 3 requests (2 from radio and 1 from TV). Additionally, there has also been a debate request from a group that simply wants to schedule a public forum.
 
What is he afraid of? I have an energy policy and he has energy questions. I have solutions to our education challenges and he doesn't even know there is a problem.

My guess: he's just afraid of Andrea Miller and getting his ass kicked publicly in front of the electorate when she exposes his indefensible voting record.

About That Mess Bush Is Leaving Obama... Closin' In On Half A Trillion Dollar Deficit

"It's good to be the boss," my old boss you to say to me when he was in a lighthearted mood. He was the chairman; I was the president. We had a few hundred people working with us. And it was good to be boss, responsibilities not withstanding. I have a feeling being president of the United States is immeasurably more amazing and awesome. And I sure hope it will be for Obama. But I don't see how it can be. It's like Bush and the GOP have systematically gone about wrecking the government they loathe and despise. They are the living, breathing, walking, talking evidence of the old Republican adage: "Government doesn't work; elect me and I'll prove it." They sure did!

This afternoon, the NY Times mentions the record deficit the Bush Regime is bequeathing the next president: $482 billion, a hell of a different figure than the flourishing, hard-won surpluses Clinton left Bush. And the story gets worse.

The deficit announced by Jim Nussle, the White House budget director, does not reflect the full cost of military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, the potential $50 billion cost of another economic stimulus package or the prospect of steeper losses in tax revenue or further declines in the housing market.

Mr. Nussle also predicted Monday that the deficit would more than double in the current 2008 fiscal year-- to $389 billion, from $162 billion in 2007.

The deficit projected for 2009 would be the largest in absolute terms. The White House and many economists prefer to measure the deficit as a share of the economy.

...“I think that the fiscal year 2009 deficit could get a lot worse, if you add in war costs, there could well be a real drop-off in revenues from this year’s slowing economy and of course if there are further problems in the housing market, if the federal government does have to inject some money into Freddie and Fannie, that could get worse too," [according to Robert Bixby, executive director of the center-right Concord Coalition

At 3.3% of the economy, at least it isn't as bad as it was in the Reagan years. The problem for Obama, of course is that it "will crimp the ability of the next president to carry out ambitious spending plans of any kind," which is precisely what Bush's brain (Rove), Cheney, Norquist and other GOP long-range thinkers had in mind. They don't want government to be able to work for the common good. To them that's godless communism.

In a statement that only someone who listens to tapes of Rush Limbaugh when the heroic figure isn't on the air could give any credence, Nussle blames the Democrats for letting spending get out of hand, although, still lying without blinking, he told reporters that Bush's budget blueprint remains on track to achieve balance with surpluses of $58 billion in 2012 and $29 billion in 2013." [Can we incarcerate or incinerate all of them if they're wrong?] Expect to hear lots more of Nussel-like crap from McCain and his lobbyist brigade.

Representative John Spratt, Democrat of South Carolina and chairman of the House Budget Committee, said the deficit figures confirmed “the dismal legacy of the Bush administration.”

“Under its policies,” he said, “the largest surpluses in history have been converted into the largest deficits in history.”

Becky Greenwald, whose feisty come-from-behind campaign has suddenly moved into position to challenge rubber stamp, 7-term incumbent Tom Latham (R-IA) in a district trending distinctly Democratic, pointed out that since Latham is a member of the Appropriations Committee he was in a position to rein in Bush's irresponsible spending. Instead, he rubber stamped everything, while Latham helped wave the fiscal magic wand to turn record surpluses into record deficits, opposing earmark reform and voting again and again to raise the debt ceiling so Bush could continue the occupation of Iraq.