When Is A Series Of Desperate And Bold-Faced Lies "A Pivot?"

You know how Señor Trumpanzee has been running around trying to trick people into thinking he's been reborn as a friend of African-Americans? No more Mr. Racist. He thinks he can try the same stunt with Hispanics too. Friday he had a meeting with the newly formed Trumpanzee Hispanic Advisory Council and told them he's open to hearing ways of dealing with the 10 million-plus Latinos in the U.S. without documents in a way that doesn't necessarily involve breaking down their doors and shipping them back to their countries of origin. That might not go over well with Trump's hardcore followers... although I can't imagine any of them will decide to be "with her" now. Picture Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III, for example.

At Red State, Kyle Foley speculated that Trump doing an about face on immigration reform "would be a good thing if people could trust him to keep his word... [Señor Trumpanzee] had months to pivot like this but refused. Now he is pulling a full reversal in order to hopefully make up ground in the polls where he is currently down by an average of  5.7 percentage points to Hillary Clinton. The biggest question is not how undecided voters will feel about this, as Trump is not likely to gain many more Hispanic supporters, but how will his base respond? Trump's base is built around this hardcore stance that the wall should be built and the illegal immigrants should be deported. They railed against "Gang of Eight" Marco Rubio for his perceived weak stance, however they will most likely justify Trump's flip-flop because let's face it, nothing matters to them. It's almost like Trump simply told them what they wanted to hear in order to win. Lord knows what he actually believes when it comes to immigration.

What a departure from the message of fear, bigotry and hatred in the first ad, released just a couple of days ago! No wonder the Clinton campaign refers to the "new" humane policy as "cynical." Her campaign's national political director, Amanda Renteria, urged Hispanics to remember how dangerous he is to the Latino community. "Trump started this campaign by calling Mexicans rapists and continued to find ways to disparage the Latino community by promising to implement a deportation force that would deport 16 million people, end DACA, end birthright citizenship, conduct round ups of families, ban Muslims and other immigrants from entering the United States, and build a concrete wall along the border."

Frank Sharry of America’s Voicesummed up what Trump is up to well: "It’s a sign of desperation. Trump wants to fool these Republicans uncomfortable with his racism and bigotry that he’s pivoting. But a late head fake won’t be taken seriously by Latinos and their allies."

Will it slow down mainstream Republicans concerned about the viability of the party jumping ship? In a report Saturday Alex Isenstadt wrote that Republicans worried about preserving their House and Senate majorities-- Lindsey Graham proclaimed that Trump's campaign is in a death spiral-- are considering blueprints for down-ballot candidates to distance themselves from him. One that is gaining popularity would have Republican candidates tacitly admit he'll never be president by urging voters to back them because they'll be a check on President Hillary.

Rove's SuperPAC, American Crossroads, practically an arm of the NRSC with whom they share personnel and everything else, "has tested to see how voters would feel about Republicans casting themselves as being a check and balance to Hillary Clinton, according to four sources familiar with the deliberations. It has examined the question in a number of Senate races on the ballot this fall, said one person working with the group, who added that 'it’s a question of not if but when' the group begins putting the message into TV ads."

In the race for Congress in IL-10, a blue district just north of Chicago, where Republican incumbent Bob Dold is battling off a challenge by the conservative New Dem he beat in 2014, Brad Schneider, a "Dold internal survey found that while voters were deeply unhappy with Trump, they overwhelmingly wanted their member of Congress to be a check on Clinton. Already, Dold has taken great pains to distinguish himself from the Republican nominee, even stressing that he won’t vote for him."

Even Trump-enabler Paul Ryan used that kind of a messaging in his own fundraising efforts. "If we fail to protect our majority in Congress," he wrote to Republican donors, "we could be handing President Hillary Clinton blank check."

In positioning themselves as brake-pedals to Clinton, Republicans hope to appeal to swing voters who are deeply unhappy with both presidential nominees. While much of the public is aligned against Trump, there’s a rich vein of voters who want to ensure that Clinton does not have too much power.

“Anti-Trump voters who are reluctantly voting for Hillary may be the swing vote this cycle,” said Andy Sere, a Republican ad maker who is working on over a half-dozen competitive down-ballot races. “She's unpopular even in states and districts that she'll carry easily, which means voters aren't giving her a mandate-- they want a check and balance against her.”

It wouldn’t be without risk, however. In writing off Trump before Election Day arrives, Republican candidates could risk alienating his supporters-- a voting bloc they desperately need.

To many, the 2016 campaign is evoking echoes of 1996. That fall, as the party’s campaign apparatus shifted focus from electing Dole to protecting the GOP congressional majorities, the NRCC aired a commercial warning that if Democrats won majorities in Congress and retained the White House it would result in higher taxes and more federal spending. “The liberal special interests aligned with Clinton desperately want to buy back control of Congress,” it warned. “If we give the special interests a blank check in Congress, who’s going to represent us?”

The triage worked. Republicans lost only two seats in the House and gained two in the Senate.



Chris Wilson, a prominent GOP pollster, said he was closely examining who voters believed would win the presidential race. More than half of the electorate, he said, was convinced Clinton would be the next president.

“That’s getting close to the point where we would start recommending our candidates pursue more of a midterm strategy and treat Clinton like a de facto incumbent,” he said, adding that he was holding off because Trump could still close the gap.

Meanwhile, the Trumpanzee campaign has doubled down on another shallow and crazy conspiracy theory to push out into the public consciousness, namely that Hillary is deathly ill and may die soon. The clownish and odious Giuliani was on TV trying to spread it today. By the way, only 9 more days 'til the Florida primary. Let's make sure we have people who won't let either the Trumpanzee or Hillary screw things up worse than they already are:

Why Pelosi's DCCC Has Lost Several Dozen House Seats In Recent Cycles

Schneider (New Dem) & Dold (R)-- same gray flannel suit garbage

It shouldn't surprise anyone that DCCC Chair Ben Ray Luján endorsed Hillary Clinton yesterday. Corrupt conservatives stick together-- and who cares who Luján endorses anyway? His silly statement claimed that "Hillary embodies New Mexico values. She puts people first and will roll up her sleeves to change their lives for the better." Yeah... More impactful is how Luján continues to put his fat finger on the scale to advantage Republican-lite candidates over progressives. The DCCC used to keep out of tightly contested primary races, or at least they claimed they did, so that local Democrats could make their own choices. Now they don't even pretend to be neutral. In Illinois' 10th district, for example, where conservative and much-disliked New Dem Brad Schneider-- defeated in 2014 when Democratic base voters stayed home in droves to protest his backing for the Boehner agenda-- the DCCC kicked the more progressive candidate, Highland Park Mayor Nancy Rotering, to the curb to line up behind Schneider. If the idiot Luján has his way, Schneider will once again face Republican Robert Dold, the guy who beat him in 2014, and either lose to him again or win on Bernie's or Hillary's coattails and then lose the seat in 2016.

"Brad Schneider," mouthed Luján insipidly, "is a proven leader on progressive issues that matter to Illinois voters: fighting for common sense gun violence reform, standing up for a woman's right to choose and protecting seniors' health care. As a former member of Congress, Brad has the track record, relationships and resources to proudly take back Illinois' 10th district in 2016." As a former member with a track record, voters can clearly see that Luján is flat-out lying about Schneider who is the opposite of progressive. Progressive and the opposite of progressive are not the same (as we discussed the other day)-- but, then again, no one ever accused Luján of having a functioning IQ.

Both Chicago dailies endorsed Rotering this week, the Sun-Times editors announcing that it is time to move on from the see-saw battle between the two conservatives, Dold and Schneider. "Our endorsement goes to Nancy Rotering, the mayor of Highland Park, who took a terrific stand against gun violence by pushing through a municipal ban on assault weapons and large-capacity magazines. A federal appellate court upheld the ban-- an important symbolic step toward sanity in our nation’s gun laws-- and the U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear a challenge to the law. Now Rotering is pushing a similar statewide ban in Illinois. This is leadership. Schneider, for his part, disappointed many supporters-- now former supporters-- when he unwisely opposed President Barack Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran. Whatever enthusiasm we had for Schneider’s candidacy waned as well."

The more conservative, and historically pro-Schneider paper, the very corporate Chicago Tribune, decided to abandon him this time around. "Rotering," they wrote, "who says her No. 1 legislative priority would be combating gun violence, impressed us with the passion she would bring to that perennial lost cause. As mayor of the North Shore suburb, she passed an assault weapons ban meant to invite a lawsuit from the firearms lobby. The measure survived legal challenges all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court and has become a model for other municipalities, she says. She's spoiling for a fight at the federal level... Both say changes are needed to preserve the Affordable Care Act, but Rotering-- who has a master's degree in health services management, worked in benefits analysis for General Motors and has practiced health care law-- would likely bring more to those discussions. Our endorsement goes to Rotering."

The DCCC isn't just getting it wrong--and jeopardizing Democratic wins-- in Chicagoland. Their Rahm Emanuel/Chris Van Hollen/Steve Israel-inspired policy of butting into local primaries on behalf of conservative candidates has been devastating to the Democrats, who have lost dozens and dozens on House seats since the DCCC started undermining progressives. And this cycle, under a vapid moron as chairman, it's worst than ever. A few weeks ago we told you about Luján's primitive racism in central Florida. In fact... let's go over it again... it's that stunning:

This week the East Orlando Post reported that FL-10 voters are furious that the DCCC is interfering in their congressional primary on behalf of the incompetent conservative candidate, Val Demings to the detriment of beloved civil rights heroine Geraldine Thompson and highly-respected former Florida Democratic Party chairman Bob Poe. Demings may be seen as an easily-controlled shill by DC powermingers but she is not well-liked by many central Florida Democrats. Jacob Engels reported that Demings "suffered a tough loss to Republican Dan Webster in 2012 [and] angered many local Democratic voters and activists when she dropped out of the Orange County mayoral race at the last minute in 2014, leaving the party with no one to challenge long-term incumbent Republican Mayor Teresa Jacobs."

Regardless, an insider close to the DCCC told us that Demings earned the respect from running a campaign in a tough race against Republican statesman Daniel Webster. Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Ben Ray Lujan recently held an event for Demings in Central Florida, signalling DC insiders determination to hand the crown to the former police chief.

"We are not handpicking a candidate, but Chief Demings has earned the respect of Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and others on capitol hill. She seems to have the support locally."

Former Florida Democratic Party Chairman and serial entrepreneur Bob Poe, who is one of the candidates challenging Demings for the nomination, grew up in Florida's 10th district as a teen working at a gas station.

"This race is ultimately going to be decided by the voters in the 10th Congressional District and not a small group of power brokers in Washington," said Poe.

He continued by pointing to the fact that the party has far too many other "too close to call" races on their hands that have no contested primaries, and should be focusing their efforts there instead of in Florida 10.

"The DCCC should be spending their limited resources to defeat Republicans, not fellow Democrats."

Mr. Poe has spent the past three decades as an entrepreneur in the marketing and communications industry-- a sought after show-runner and ideas man. He has raised nearly $300k in the three weeks since he announced his bid.

A Democratic aide, who once worked in the office of Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi told the East Orlando Post that Poe does not have the right racial makeup for the district.

"Simply put, Poe can't buy this race. The hill has decided that we want Chief Demings, come hell or high-water. Thompson and Fahmy are not options either. They should wait their turn."

State Senator Geraldine Thompson, an African American civil rights icon, is also a candidate seeking the Democratic nomination. Thompson has served in elected office for 10 years in the area, and like Poe, she is determined to not let Washington dysfunction determine who the candidate ultimately is.

"This type of behavior signals a total disregard for the people in our district. To not allow a level playing field by openly supporting one candidate over the other three is flat out wrong. The Democratic party is supposed to be a big tent. I have been breaking down barriers and obstacles my whole life.

"While the open bias with which they are treating me and the other candidates is disappointing, I am not deterred. In this race is an openly gay man, a proud Latina woman and a veteran African American female elected leader. We are insistent that the people in the District will decide... not the Washington elite." Thompson told us on break from committee meetings in the Florida Capitol.

A donor familiar with the endorsement process and patterns of the DCCC told us that there is not really any rules against the committee supporting one candidate over another, but admitted that most of the time it is preferable to let the people decide.

"It is a little perplexing to see how they are handling this. Endorsements and support from Washington are in large part meaningless to the majority of voters. We have races that have no primaries and are extremely tough roads to victory against Republicans in the general election... why not focus on those?," the top bundler for Democrat candidates confided via text message, echoing Bob Poe's sentiment about smart allocation of precious party resources.

Fatima Rita Fahmy, a lawyer and former stockbroker who moved to Central Florida from Brazil when she was just five years old, is another Democrat making a run for congress in Florida's 10th district. Fahmy calls the DCCC's behavior "next level arrogance."

"They want to impose their will and I will push back hard against those movements. I am in total agreement with Mr. Poe and Senator Thompson, it shows a horrible disconnect between the power-brokers and everyday people."

Fahmy crashed a Demings event Monday morning where DCCC Chairman Ben Ray Luján was in attendance and publicly called attention to the committees unusual financial and structural support for a candidate who is facing a primary from other credible choices.

So, the DCCC claims that Poe, who is white and gay, "does not have the right racial makeup for the district" so they're stepping on a progressive African-American state senator and a Latina so they can support a conservative religious nut who also happens to be African-American. The district is 27.1% voting age African-American, 22.8% voting Hispanic, 44.3% voting age white and I was unaware Pelosi countenanced this kind of racial game-playing. The DCCC press secretary for the Southeast, Jermaine House, actually said, "We will never support Poe because he's white." I'd like to hear Pelosi defend that like DCCC statement. On top of that, the DCCC is complaining Poe "can't buy this election" when the hallmark of the DCCC in the last decade has been to always favor wealthy candidates over middle class candidates. The hypocrisy is overwhelming.

And Luján's disgraceful perfidy doesn't stop there. Right now the DCCC is working to guarantee another term for Tea Party Republican Steve Knight, but steamrolling the local Democrats in Santa Clarita, Simi Valley and the Antelope Valley and working to install some random self-funding candidate from Orange County in place of local progressive Lou Vince, an Agua Dulce councilman and a policeman. The biggest local newspaper in the district, The Signal ran this OpEd last week from David Barlavi, a local Democrat, disgusted with the DCCC's shenanigans.

Lou Vince has been fighting for progressive values here in the 25th Congressional District for years. Lou ran for L.A. County Sheriff in 2014 on a progressive platform. Over the last year, Lou has been fighting as our strong, local, progressive candidate for Congress. Lou has been phone-banking and door-knocking for a year.

Lou has attended countless Democratic meetings and been pounding the pavement for a year. He has earned the endorsements and support of every Democratic Club in the 25th District-- some unanimously.

He’s earned the endorsement of our state’s California Democratic Party with the vote of more than 80 percent of our Democratic delegates. Lou has the endorsements of many prominent Democrats, both locally and state wide.

But most importantly, Lou has earned the support and confidence of local residents in the 25th. Lou is a Marine, an LAPD lieutenant with 21 years of service, a local town council member and a wonderful family man and father of four great kids.

Lou has lived in the 25th for over a decade, knows our issues, and cares deeply about our/his community.

Why, then, would the Washington elites parachute in a Johnny Come Lately, unknown carpetbagger into our district to jeopardize the Lou Vince campaign?

Here’s why:

Remember when the DCCC political elite in Washington did not support Lee Rogers for Congress? The DCCC didn’t support Lee in 2012 when he raised good money, and they didn’t support Lee in 2014 when he raised nearly $400,000.

Therefore, it’s logical to conclude that the DCCC supports issues, not as they contend, “fundraising ability.”

So why did the DCCC abandon the 25th in those last two elections and not support Lee Rogers? It is clear to me that it’s because the DCCC opposes progressive politics.

So let’s be honest witch each other here in the 25th. When the DCCC comes out of nowhere and parachutes in a wealthy, unknown, inexperienced lawyer from outside of our district, the message is clear.

The DCCC is not concerned about Lou Vince’s fundraising ability; they are opposed to Lou’s progressive politics.

The second important question is whether the DCCC is concerned about Lou Vince losing the general elections in November. Absolutely not. We all know 2016 is the year Democrats can defeat the Republicans and turn the 25th blue.

Democrats will have record turn-outs in June and November. The DCCC has not parachuted in a carpetbagger because they fear Republicans; they have forced a carpetbagger on us because they fear Lou Vince’s progressive politics.

Finally, why this particular out-of-towner? Well, to put it bluntly, he’s rich, with rich friends outside of our district. Now, there is nothing wrong with being rich, but those rich out-of-district friends have funded this out-of-town campaign.

Yes, he has raised a lot of out-of-town money all at once, but his well in the district is dry. He has little support from local Dems.

Lou Vince has raised campaign funds from more than 600 local contributors. That is a strong grass-roots campaign.

The carpetbagger has come in with bags of outside money, rented a place in Valencia, and proceeded to try to make us think he cares about our local issues and concerns. Absurd!

We need to nip this issue in the bud. It goes against our Democratic values in the 25th to parachute an unknown, out-of-town candidate into our district to undermine the already-existing, strong, year-long grass-roots Democratic campaign of Lou Vince for Congress.

A carpetbagging campaign itself is an affront to Democrats in the 25th. Add to that the big money bags thrown on us from outside the district, and the urgency becomes clear.

Make no mistake about it; this is a slap in the face of Democrats in the 25th.

Let’s not find out the dark truth in July when it’s too late. Let’s not unnecessarily sacrifice a real and local progressive. An honest-to-goodness, home-grown, 25th district Democrat, Lou Vince.

Please write to the DCCC and ask them to withdraw their candidate from our district and put their support behind Lou Vince for Congress. Their address is:

430 S. Capitol St. SE
Washington, D.C. 20003
Phone: (202) 863-1500

If Pelosi had any interest in winning back the House, all it would take is a competent, uncorrupted staff. Too much to ask for? Nope. Banish people like Steve Israel, Chris Van Hollen and Ben Ray Luján from the building and appoint someone who knows how to win and wants to win-- a Keith Ellison or a Mark Pocan or Ted Lieu or Matt Cartwright, not another loser crony from her own circle. Enough of this loser bullshit!

Big Shakeup In An Illinois House Race-- Durbin Endorses Nancy Rotering, Not The DCCC Hack Candidate

When it comes to recruiting, the DCCC is always attracted to conservative ex-colleagues who have already lost to Republicans. We've talked about how Steve Israel and his crew of incompetents managed to lose the D+5 district centered around Syracuse, New York last cycle by running Republican-lite New Dem Dan Maffei after he had already been beaten in 2010. He road back into office on Obama's strong 2012 coattails, only to be thoroughly thrashed by the voters again in 2014 after 2 years of proving, again, he's not in the least bit progressive. Obama won NY-24 171,502 (57%) to 123,534 (41%) in 2014 while Maffei took 130,969 (48%) to beat Tea Party incumbent Ann Marie Buerkle's 118,578 (44%). Two years later, predictably, Democrats stayed away from the polls in droves and Maffei only managed to get 80,304 votes (40%) and lost to John Katko's 118,474 (60%). This is a blue district and its only the DCCC's ideological, anti-progressive interference that has saddled it with a Republican congressman again.

The story in IL-10 is similar-- except this is a D+8 district, the bluest district in the country with a Republican congressman. In 2012 Republican incumbent Mark Kirk gave up the seat to run for the Senate. The Democrats ran a conservative Democrat, Brad Schneider and, like Maffei in NY, he got into office on Obama's coattails. Obama beat Romney there 157,400 (58%) to 112,552 (41%) and Schneider-- after the DCCC helped him defeat progressive champion Ilya Sheyman in a close primary-- beat Bob Dold much more narrowly-- 130,941 (50%) to 128,423 (50%). And of course, again, quite predictably, Democratic voters saw Schneider in action and just didn't show up at the polls in 2014. Dold beat him 95,992 (51%) to 91,136 (49%).

So now Schneider wants back in again-- and, of course, the DCCC is trying to help him win, which is very possible since either Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders could be expected to do very well in the north Chicagoland district. And, then it would be time for a Republican to beat Schneider again in 2016. Seems silly, huh? In NY-24 the likely nominee is a progressive Eric Kingson, who will break that cycle.

I've been worried about IL-10, where the DCCC is making every effort to disadvantage the more progressive primary challenger Nancy Rotering in order to bolster their New Dem loser, Brad Schneider, who used to throw fundraising events at his hold for Mark Kirk. High profile Democrats have been pealing away from Schneider in recent weeks. Jan Schakowsky had endorsed him and withdrew her endorsement after he backed the Republican move to undermine President Obama's deal with Iran. Adlai Stevenson III and Abner Mikva also withdrew their endorsements and then each endorsed Nancy. But yesterday there was an even bigger break in the DCCC pattern of inevitable failure. Illinois' senior senator, Dick Durbin, very publicly announced that he was on team Rotering. "Nancy, a working mom and skilled attorney, has the courage, leadership and determination to return the 10th Congressional District to the Democratic fold," he said.

Nancy brings to this race an extraordinary record for a first-time Congressional candidate. As Mayor of Highland Park she successfully confronted ComEd when local families were suffering from unreliable service, balanced the City budget five consecutive years and enacted real reforms. Her most noteworthy achievement gained national attention when she passed one of the nation's first local assault weapons ban and successfully defended the ordinance against an onslaught of gun lobby attacks all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. While the Republican-led Congress refused to respond to the nation's gun violence, Nancy Rotering and her City of Highland Park showed real leadership. Nancy combines fiscal responsibility with true progressive values.

The primary is March 15 and Durbin's endorsement must have shocked the DCCC hacks, not enough to make them up from their incompetence or corruption. But enough to discomfort them. This is a race Nancy can win-- both against Schneider and against Dold, two conservatives who shouldn't be presenting an area like IL10.

Wall Street Has A Batch Of Very Unsavory Favorite Candidates

Bill Maher has told people that this Alan Grayson response to GOP hacks Nicolle Wallace and P.J. O'Rourke is the only instance of his Real Time audience ever giving one of his guests a standing ovation. And now there's a pretty good song based on it! Not a song, though, that the Senator from Wall Street, Chuck Schumer ($23,059,037), is likely to play at the next fundraising event he or one of his allies throws for Wall Street's pick for the open Florida senate seat, Patrick Murphy ($2,260,848). What are those number amounts next to their names? It's the amount of legalized bribery that each legislator has accepted from the Finance Sector in their careers. Schumer's had a long career-- as a congressional Wall Street lackey-- so he's got a huge amount, more, in fact, than any other Member of Congress in history with the exception of few candidates who ran for president. Murphy is relatively new but no one in Congress-- not ever-- has been given as much Wall Street loot as Murphy is such a short amount of time. So why is that?

I'll answer that question with another question. How do you know who carries water for Wall Street? Easy: Wall Street pays them-- and pays them a lot. Of the top 10 recipients of legalized bribes from the Financial Sector so far this election cycle, 8 are Republicans and 2 are Democrats. Let's take a look-see at who the corrupt culprits are and how much cash they've gotten and then we'll try to figure out why. Remember this is just for the House (not the Senate) and just for this one election cycle, which has over a year to run:

• John Boehner (R-OH)- $1,133,340
• Kevin McCarthy (R-CA)- $768,500
• Patrick Murphy (D-FL)- $659,600
• Jeb Hensarling (R-TX)- $521,715
• Paul Ryan (R-WI)- $490,875
• Bob Dold (R-IL)- $431,593
• Patrick McHenry (R-NC)- $425,900
• Steve Stivers (R-OH)- $384,102
• Bruce Poliquin (R-ME)- $353,033
• Chris Van Hollen (D-MD)- $340,807

The two biggest recipients need no explanation. Boehner and McCarthy, respectively Speaker and Majority Leader, control the House's agenda. They decide what gets on the floor and what doesn't and who gets on which committees and who doesn't. Whomever holds those positions is who Wall Street wants to own. Simple. We'll come back to Murphy (#3) in a moment and discuss his special case when we look at the only other Democrat on the list, Maryland Establishment shill Chris Van Hollen. But first, the rest of the Republicrooks.

Hensarling's $521,715 (and his career-long $6,610,960 from the banksters) is easy to explain. He's not just a loud opponent to any consumer protects for banking and insurance customers, he's the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, the guy who is dismantling, piece by piece, Dodd Frank on behalf of Wall Street's worst criminals.

Paul Ryan's contributions from Wall Street (#5) are about to shoot up into the stratosphere. He's about to replace Boehner as Speaker and he just hired David Hoppe, a shady lobbyist adept at extorting money from banksters, as his chief of staff. They've already given Ryan $5,420,978 since he was first elected in 1998 and have been thrilled with his work on their behalf, first as the Budget Committee chairman and now as the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. That was the best $5,420,978 they ever invested!

#6, Bob Dold from Illinois is an interesting case-- $431,593 so far this year, for a very tough reelection battle against another Wall Street shill, grotesquely corrupt New Dem Brad Schneider who he beat last year. Now, keep in mind that the financial sector showered Schneider with $1,123,544 in his short career and has given him another $135,381 this cycle, not as much as Dold, but far from nothing. Old is a Wall Street-supporting conservative on Ryan's House Ways and Means Committee and they're loathe to lose his services, but if he loses to Schneider... they don't lose much. Schneider was always helpful with Wall Street's agenda and is one of the few Democrats who openly admits-- as do Murphy and Van Hollen-- that he is open to cuts in entitlements (i.e., gutting Social Security and Medicare). The only nightmare for the banksters would be if Schneider loses the primary to a far more progressive Democrat, Nancy Rotering, and that she beats Dold, a likely scenario. That's why this year's bankster contributions in IL-10 look like this:

• Bob Dold (R)- $431,593
• Brad Schneider (New Dem)- $135,381
• Nancy Rotering (D)- $68,298

Rotering understands-- as the banksters do-- that there's not much difference between Dold and Schneider on the issues most important to them. The other day she told us, "Both of my opponents, Brad Schneider and Bob Dold are part of the Washington establishment that has failed our families by stacking the economic deck against them. Both Scheinder and Dold have taken hundreds of thousands from the financial industry (450k for Schneider and over 800k for Dold) and then used their power to do the financial industry's bidding. Our families will not catch the economic break they need if we continue sending the same old people to Washington to do the same old thing. I will be new progressive voice watching out for families not the financial industry."

And that brings us to North Carolina Republican closet case Patrick McHenry, who's in a safely gerrymandered red district (R+11) and doesn't face any serious opposition. Yet... the Financial Sector has given him $2,966,186 since he was first elected in 2004 (and already $425,900 this year). It's not just because they like diminutive closet cases ready to go to any lengths in a quest for power. McHenry is an up-and-comer in the dysfunctional GOP House Leadership, the Chief Deputy Whip since last year and, perhaps more importantly, a Member of the House Financial Services Committee, always eager to do Wall Street's bidding (like act as an attack dog against Elizabeth Warren) and the chairman of the TARP, Financial Services and Bailouts of Public and Private Programs subcommittee of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

Next up: former Bank One/Bank of America lobbyist Steve Stivers. Again, safely gerrymandered and ethnically-cleansed red district that carefully skirts Columbus (R+6) and is designed not just to prevent a Democrat from winning, but to also make sure no non-Franklin County teababgger can ever cobble together a natural majority. Stivers has no opposition so far this cycle. He wasn't elected until 2010 but Wall Street has showered him with legalistic bribery, $3,411,738 in his first 4 years in Congress and now this keel $384,102 chunk. And he's earned it, working diligently against his own constituents and for the banksters from his little perchs at the Financial Services Committee and on the Capital Markets and on the Insurance subcommittees.

The last Republicrook on the Top 10 list is Maine sociopath Bruce Poliquin, who represents a blue-leaning district (D+2) and would be likely to be defeated next year if not for the gross incompetence of the DCCC. (Obama beat McCain in this district 54-44% and then beat Romney 53-44%.) Before running for office Poliquin, a mutimillionaire Tea Party loon, was a bankster in Chicago. He was Maine's appointed Treasurer and used his office to further enrich himself. He's a freshman who won the seat in a 3-way race and immediately got onto the House Financial Services Committee, where he has endeared himself to Wall Street and, like Stivers, serves on the Capital Markets subcommittee. He's widely considered one of Congress' most corrupt members and the Finance Sector has been happy to give him checks amounting to $644,183 so far in his miserable congressional career.

And that brings to the two unsavory Democrats running for Senate, New Dem and Wall Street darling Patrick Murphy, an opportunistic "ex"-Republican who tends to always vote with the Republicans, especially at the House Financial Services Committee, where he is a low-ranking member but is widely regarded, along with Jim Himes and John Delaney to speak for the Wall Street banksters. He is the Democrat who most backs the banksters' agenda for complete dominance. And now they want him in the Senate, where he can do far more damage. A Goldman Sachs patsy, the Finance Sector has loaded him up with $2,260,848 during his brief tenure in Congress (part of which is the $659,600 they've given him so far this year). Getting Patrick Murphy into the Senate is Wall Street's top electoral priority for 2016. His $659,600 haul this year is a lot more than the Finance Sector gave Alan Grayson, a former economist-- $3,625. That should tell you something about who the banksters want in the Senate... and who they fear.

They are also extremely eager to get the only other Democrat on this List of Shame, Maryland Congressman Chris Van Hollen, into the Senate. Van Hollen, a hideously failed former chair of the DCCC, is the Ranking Democrat on the Budget Committee and is regarded as someone who never holds the banksters' feet to the fire. The banksters appreciate his friendliness and have given him $1,935,871 career-long (considerably more than they've given to Congresswoman Donna Edwards who he is trying to defeat for the open Senate seat. This cycle, just $65,290 compared to Van Hollen's hefty 2015 $340,807 payoff).

If you'd like to keep Wall Street allies like Patrick Murphy and Chris Van Hollen out of the Senate, you can help both Donna Edwards and Alan Grayson on this Blue America ActBlue page.

How The DCCC Keeps Undermining Progressive Candidates-- And Chances To Ever Win Back The House

This week the DCCC is having a series of meetings to introduce their favored candidates to incumbents, lobbyists and other DCCC supporters. Tonight they're throwing a big dinner at an event space for lobbyists and both political parties, the Oracle Townhouse on D Street. Most smart candidates are passing on the "opportunity" and staying in their districts to campaign.

In several districts the DCCC actually lived up to their "neutrality" promise, inviting more than one candidate. For example, they invited Ruben Kihuen, Lucy Flores and John Oceguera (as well as vanity candidate, wealthy socialite Susie Lee) all from Nevada's 4th district. But not in every district.

In the Syracuse-centered NY-24, there are-- as of yesterday when wealthy moderate self-funder Steve Williams tossed his hat into the ring-- 3 Democrats running. Originally the only candidate was Blue America-endorsed Eric Kingson, the co-founder of Social Security Works. But the DCCC didn't want him in the race. They want a conservaDem like Dan Maffei, the New Dem who won in 2008 when Obama first ran and did well in the D+5 district, beating McCain 57-41%; then lost in 2010 to a teabagger psycho, won it back in 2012 when Obama was at the top of the ticket again, holding Romney down to 42%; and then losing again last year to John Katko 59.9-40.1%.

Maffei lost because, like all DCCC-preferred and recruited candidates, he voted with the Republicans, He's a member of the Wall Street-owned New Dems and his voting record was what the DCCC and their boneheaded media allies call "moderate," but, for Democratic voters, is "conservative." So he lost twice... in a D+5 district. It's a district that is almost impossible for a Democrat to lose in-- unless voters sense the candidate isn't actually a Democrat.

So the DCCC set out to recruit this self-funding Williams person and he was tepid and on-and-off and on-and-off. And then Kirsten Gillibrand, a Wall Street darling ($7,535,820) and former Blue Dog, put up-- along with EMILY's List-- a staffer of hers, Colleen Deacon, to represent the "moderate" wing of the party. So the DCCC invited Deacon and Williams and very pointedly not Kingson, the one candidate who is in this for all the right reasons-- and none of the wrong ones.

Would you consider helping Blue America tell Steve Israel/Ben Ray Luján, New Dem recruitment chair Denny Heck and Blue Dog recruitment vice-chair Cheri Bustos to stop sabotaging progressive Democrats? All of the candidates on this page are progressives and none of them are DCCC favorites. But please concentrate on Eric Kingson today.

Similarly in IL-10, where the DCCC is pushing conservative New Dem retread Brad Schneider over a much better candidate-- Nancy Rotering-- he's in Washington today being introduced around to any crooked lobbyists he doesn't already know, where she wasn't even invited to their "candidates' week." (I guess Pelosi's malarkey about "when women win..." only goes so far.)

Now... for the opposite of the DCCC, take a look at this letter Alan Grayson sent out to his own supporters yesterday:

I was swapping e-mails with Blue America’s Howie Klein today, and the subject of a GOP Congressional seat in the Northeast came up. He knew both Democratic challengers. Knew all about them, in fact. And the same thing would be true of House candidates in the other 434 districts. Howie knows all about them, too.

There are people who actually are paid to know all about Congressional campaigns-- Stu Rothenberg, Charlie Cook, Larry Sabato, etc. I’ve read their stuff. Howie knows more than they do.

But Howie doesn’t sell what he knows. Instead, he uses that knowledge to cultivate and nurture progressive candidates all over the country. Blue America will not be supporting those two challengers that Howie knows in the Northeast, because-- because-- they’re not blue. But other candidates are true blue, and those are the ones who get Howie’s help. The only ones. With Howie in charge, Blue America PAC is the manager of the Progressive Farm Team.

Go Progs! Give me a “P”! Etc.

Join me and Howie Klein now in turning America blue in 2016, by contributing $9 or more to the Blue America PAC.

You might think that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) might be doing this. Mais non, as the French would say. Despite having $100 million a year to spend, they don’t know what Howie knows. And for sure, they don’t care the way that Howie cares. Ever since the Rahm Emanuel regime, the DCCC has had a strong built-in bias against progressive candidates. And the DSCC? Don’t get me started. They can’t find their derriere with deux mains. Just look at their record last year.

So progressives really need Blue America PAC. Which is why you should help.

Politics is a team sport. Show your support for progressives all over the country by donating $9 or more to the Blue America PAC.

At an earlier time in his life, Howie Klein was the Vice President of Warner Reprise records. He knows countless top performers (which is why he sometimes holds contests giving away great stuff like platinum records). He doesn’t have to work anymore. He helps progressives for one reason and one reason only: because he cares.

And if you contribute to Blue America PAC, you not only have Encyclopedia Howie working for you, but you also enlist the support of the pioneering blogger Digby, and John Amato of the website “Crooks and Liars” (dot-com, of course). Because they all share the Blue America dream of making America blue. Not purple. Blue.

Chip in $9 now, and Help Make America Blue.

Do Schumer And AIPAC Want To Make An Example Of Jerry Nadler For His Iran Vote?

Jerry Nadler, hero of peace

Although one Republican-- libertarian-leaning Thomas Massie (R-KY)-- abstained, all the rest of the House Republicans voted against the Iran nuclear deal. 86% of House Dems voted for it (162 out of 188)-- as had 91% of Senate Dems (42 of 46). Yesterday the House GOP warmongers were joined by 25 faithless Democrats, these 25 faithless Democrats:

Brad Ashford (Blue Dog-NE)
Brendan Boyle (PA)
Tony Cárdenas (New Dem-CA)
Ted Deutch (AIPAC-FL)
Eliot Engel (AIPAC-NY)
Lois Frankel (AIPAC-FL)
Gwen Graham (Blue Dog-FL)
Gene Green (TX)
Alcee Hastings (FL)
Steve Israel (AIPAC-NY)
Ted Lieu (CA)
Dan Lipinski (Blue Dog-IL)
Nita Lowey (AIPAC-NY)
Carolyn Maloney (AIPAC-NY)
Grace Meng (AIPAC-NY)
Grace Napolitano (CA)
Donald Norcross (AIPAC-NJ)
Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN)
Kathleen Rice (New Dem-NY)
David Scott (New Dem-GA)
Brad Sherman (AIPAC-CA)
Kirsten Sinema (Blue Dog-AZ)
Albio Sires (AIPAC-NJ)
Juan Vargas (New Dem-CA)
Filemon Vela (New Dem-TX)

Jerry Nadler's principled and well-reasoned position for the Iran nuclear deal helped make it "safe" for Jews and other Democrats representing Jewish districts to vote for it-- and the great majority of Jewish Democrats in the House and in the Senate did.

Chuck Schumer has been working, covertly of course, to drum up hatred against Nadler and to find a primary opponent to run against him, possibly right-wing nut Assemblyman Dov Hikind from Boro Park, although Hikind claims the anti-Nadler forces are looking for someone less right-wing who could possibly win the district-- something an out-and-out, across-the-board reactionary like Hikind could never do. He also claims that AIPAC fanatics will make sure the candidate is loaded with cash to deploy against Nadler.

Nadler's district runs from West 122nd Street in Morningside Heights on the Upper West Side north of Columbia University, down Riverside Drive and Broadway, over to Central Park West, through Hell's Kitchen, the Garment District, Chelsea, the West Village, Soho, Tribeca, and the Financial District and then, incongruously, across the East River to Brooklyn and south to Red Hook, Boro Park, Kensington as far east as Coney Island Avenue and Ocean Parkway, into Midwood and Bensonhurst and right it the front door of Lafayette High School. The district is one of the most Jewish in the country and includes enlightened liberals in the Manhattan part and extremely right-wing, racist and backward Hasidim in the Boro Park area. Normally the progressives outvote the reactionaries by wide margins-- Obama, despite the hatred of the lunatic fringe, beat McCain 76-23% and then beat Romney 74-25%-- but the primary is in June and unlikely to generate much turnout. So... Blue America just added Jerry to our "Worthy Incumbents" page. Please consider helping him fend off the right-wing warmongers.

The opposite is happening in Illinois's 10th District, north of Chicago (from Northbrook, Glencoe and Prospect Heights through Deerfield, Buffalo Grove and Waukegan up to the Wisconsin border), where DCCC incompetence and a dreadful Wall Street-owned New Dem incumbent, Brad Schneider, saw the victory of Republican nitwit Robert Dold in a deep blue (D+8) district that Obama won with 63% against McCain and 58% against Romney. Progressive Highland Park Mayor Nancy Rotering decided to take the district back from the conservative Dold, but soon after she started campaigning the New Dem idiot Schneider was back-- and campaigning by joining Dold in the fight against the Iran nuclear deal.

Abner Mikva, who's been an icon of Jewish and Democratic activism in Chicagoland since the late 1960s, originally endorsed Schneider but switched his endorsement when Schneider announced he was opposing the Iran deal. This is a big deal because New York warmonger Steve Israel has forced the DCCC to get behind Schneider. Mikva was one of 11 Jewish former congressmen who signed an ad in the NY Times backing the Iran deal.

The 10th district has a large Jewish vote, and support for Israel is a given. Indeed, candidates of both parties in the 10th for years have competed to outdo themselves as champions of Israel’s security.

In 2014, Schneider and Rep. Bob Dold, R-Ill., fought over who was the bigger hawk when it came to Israel.

The political landscape is different in 2016 for Schneider, who has to get through a primary. Rotering is going after Schneider from the left, looking to rally progressive Democrats to her side.

Rotering told me she called Mikva after Schneider proclaimed his opposition to the Iran deal in a Times of Israel column. Mikva is popular with progressives. He once represented the 10th-- and is a former federal judge, counsel to President Bill Clinton and member of the Illinois General Assembly.

As a result of the call, Mikva invited Rotering to lunch at the Cliff Dwellers Club of Chicago.

In an “open letter” to Schneider, Mikva wrote,”When you first asked for my support, you assured me that you would not be dominated by AIPAC’s and Benjamin Netanyahu’s view on Iran. I signed on to your campaign in good faith, but have since been compelled to reconsider. I was disappointed when you came out against the Iran agreement, opposing your president and your party.”

An anti-Nadler flyer from Boro Park

A Point Of Contention Between A Progressive And A DINO In IL-10: The Iran Deal

Brad Schneider and Nancy Rotering (IL-10)

When tepid New Dem Brad Schneider lost his House seat in 2014, it became the bluest district anywhere in the country with a Republican representative. The PVI is a daunting D+8. Obama beat McCain there 63-36% and beat Romney 58-41%. But with a Republican-lite voting record that discouraged Democratic base voters (in a midterm), Schneider was beaten by Republican Robert Dold 93,984 to 88,010, 51.6-48.4%. When Dold first won in 2012, 130,941 voters had pulled the lever for him. Almost 43,000 of his original voters just stayed home, many because they knew they were getting an unsatisfactory choice between a Republican and a Republican-lite DINO. 

There are millions of voters all over the country no longer playing the Beltway Democratic Establishment game of forcing them to pick between the lesser of two evils. Brad Schneider was, at best, the lesser of two evils. Now he's looking for another rematch against Dold. But... there is a better Democrat he first has to get through in the primary, Highland Park Mayor Nancy Rotering.

In March Rotering told me:

You can't change the gridlock in DC by electing the same people over andover again... The rate of poverty in the suburbs has been growing rapidly-- in this district and across the country-- and that's something that has to be addressed seriously on a national level... To expand the middle class we need to provide constant, sufficient education across the entire district. Fair wages are critical. 81% of SNAP recipients have at least one full time employee in the family. What does that say about wages?

It doesn't matter what Schneider says about this or any other issue-- those are just words crafted to win an election. He has a record for his one miserable term in Congress, a record during which he sided with Big Business and Wall Street against his own constituents... which is why he lost in such a deep blue district just north of Chicago (from Glencoe, Northbrook and Buffalo Grove up through Deerfield, Niles, Highland Park and Lake Forest to Fox Lake, Waukegan and the Wisconsin border).

Yesterday Kimberly Railey, writing for National Journal, contrasted Rotering and Schneider based on one issue: the Iran deal. Both candidates-- and many of their constituents-- are Jewish. Schneider, predictably, is with the Republicans on this. Rotering is sticking with keeping nuclear weapons out of the hands of Iran through the deal. AIPAC is already on the warpath to make sure Schneider wins the March primary.

“The people in the dis­trict are as split as people are in the na­tion,” Roter­ing said in an in­ter­view. “People are in­ter­ested in the con­trast between the two of us be­cause they them­selves prob­ably have dif­fer­ent po­s­i­tions on the top­ic.”

In Roter­ing and Schneider’s dis­trict, voters are closely watch­ing the is­sue.

“It’s something the people in the dis­trict are keenly aware of,” Schneider told Na­tion­al Journ­al. “They study it, they fol­low it. We have fam­ily that lives in Is­rael, we have neigh­bors. Our kids spend sum­mers in Is­rael.”

...She has com­pany among Chica­go Jew­ish Demo­crats back­ing the Ir­an deal, too. Chica­go May­or Rahm Emanuel has en­dorsed it, while Demo­crat­ic Rep. Jan Schakowsky, who is the only Jew­ish mem­ber of Illinois con­gres­sion­al del­eg­a­tion, is also back­ing the agree­ment.

Some Demo­crats sug­ges­ted that Roter­ing’s en­dorse­ment of the deal could en­dear her to more pro­gress­ive Demo­crats in the dis­trict. The can­did­ate who ran closest to Schneider in his 2012 Demo­crat­ic primary was pro­gress­ive act­iv­ist Ilya Shey­man, now the ex­ec­ut­ive dir­ect­or of the lib­er­al group Mo­ve­On, which backs the Ir­an deal.

“[Roter­ing] is clearly go­ing to ali­en­ate some people with this po­s­i­tion,” said one Chica­go-area Demo­crat­ic strategist, who re­ques­ted an­onym­ity to speak can­didly about the situ­ation. “But she has the pos­sib­il­ity to at­tract a lot more.”

Oth­ers said that in a race where both can­did­ates are per­ceived as pro-Is­rael, the Ir­an deal won’t be a de­cis­ive factor among Demo­crat­ic voters. “I think there’s some ne­ces­sity for ob­vi­ously a new face and chal­lenger to try to take some risk on some po­s­i­tion­ing,” said Thomas Bowen, a Demo­crat­ic strategist in Chica­go. “But for­eign af­fairs isn’t usu­ally an is­sue that changes Demo­crat­ic primary out­comes.”

It is, however, the sharpest di­vid­ing line between Schneider and Roter­ing. And their dis­trict, which pays at­ten­tion to is­sues af­fect­ing Is­rael like few oth­ers, has be­come a mini­ature ver­sion of the na­tion­al fight over the Ir­an deal.

DSCC And DCCC Continue Searching For Conservative Candidates

IL-10 Dems Schneider & Rotering

Yesterday 4 generally conservative Democrats-- Heidi Heitkamp (ND), Bob Casey (PA), Joe Manchin (WV) and Joe Donnelly (IN)-- voted with the GOP to end the Senate Democrats' filibuster of an anti-human trafficking bill that includes anti-Choice provisions. Even with supposedly pro-Choice Maine Senator Susan Collins voting with her own party on this, the final vote, 55-43 wasn't enough to shut down the filibuster.

People wonder how we wind up with Democrats like these. It's easy enough to make excuses for conservaDems in red states like West Virginia and North Dakota, but Democrats could have/should have done a lot better in Pennsylvania, where progressives don't have pander to bigots, haters and anti-Choice fanatics to get elected. But the Democratic Beltway Establishment never learned that lesson and is always encouraging the worst Democrats to run for office. This year, the DSCC is encouraging horrible conservative candidates, like Patrick Murphy in Florida and Bill Foster in Illinois, to run for the Senate, after watching them vote with Republicans over and over and over for two terms. Florida and Illinois are not red states.

The DCCC is, if anything, even worse than the DSCC. With anti-family/pro-Big Business millionaire New Dem Denny Heck as chairman of the Recruitment Committee (which also includes Blue Dogs Steve Israel and Cheri Bustos and New Dems Ann Kuster and Terri Sewell), they've been doing a dreadful job all cycle, encouraging an especially wretched batch of horrible conservative candidates like "former" Republican Monica Vernon (IA), pro-business lobbyist tool Isidore Hall (CA) and defeated Blue Dog Pete Gallego (TX).

The DCCC especially loves conservative losers former colleagues who were defeated the cycle before. They're trying to recruit plenty of them. One, for example, is Wall Street shill New Dem Brad Schneider, who managed to lose a district gerrymandered by the Democratic legislature to elect Democrats. The PVI is D+8, the bluest district won by a Republican in 2014. In 2012, when Schneider beat incumbent Robert Dold-- the one who came back and beat him last November-- he only won, and just barely (50.6-49.4%), because Obama was at the top of the ticket. Out of 264,000 votes cast, Schneider only managed to win by around 3,000 votes. In 2014, Dold beat him 93,984 (51.6%) to 88.010 (48.4%), Schneider having catered to Republicans for 2 years and turned off the Democratic base, many of whom just stayed home. But the DCCC thinks it's smart to run him again-- even though a far better candidate, Highland Park Mayor Nancy Rotering, has already declared her candidacy.

I spoke with Nancy yesterday a few hours after he announced and her campaign seems to be all about her how her local experience working to expand and protect middle can translate on a national level. "You can't change the gridlock in DC," she told me, "by electing the same people over andover again... The rate of poverty in the suburbs has been growing rapidly-- in this district and across the country-- and that's something that has to be addressed seriously on a national level... To expand the middle class we need to provide constant, sufficient education across the entire district. Fair wages are critical. 81% of SNAP recipients have at least one full time employee in the family. What does that say about wages?" We'll be hearing more from Nancy as the primary unfolds.

Ratings Changes-- From A "Leans Dem" Down To A "Tilts Dem"

Rich, conservative New Dem in trouble with the Democratic base back home…I wonder why!

The Rothenberg Political Report (Roll Call) changed some of it's November ratings today. Stuart Rothenberg's and Nathan Gonzales' Beltway-oriented ratings changes are worthless. The silliest one day was moving Julia Brownley's reelection contest (CA-26) from "safe" down a tick to "Democrat favored." Either one is accurate in the real world but in their own world it is a demotion. And what was it based on? It seems to be based entirely on what the NRCC told them. Their analysis didn't include a word about the preferred GOP candidate, Tony Strickland, backing out of the race to run in another district. Instead:

When the Republican wave hit in 2010, it lost virtually all of its strength before it got to the West Coast. Most Democrats in competitive races west of the Rocky Mountains held on.

So Democrats are in a precarious electoral position this cycle, and it’s unclear whether some districts that look Democratic on paper could be a struggle to hold in November.

Barack Obama carried California’s 26th District by 10 points in 2012 and by a whopping 16 points in 2008. But Republicans believe that state Assemblyman Jeff Gorell is a unique candidate who can run a competitive race against Democratic Rep. Julia Brownley.

"Republicans believe that state Assemblyman Jeff Gorell is a unique candidate who can run a competitive race against Democratic Rep. Julia Brownley." Well, by all means, change that rating! Not going into Rothenberg predictions-- not ever-- are findings like this from reputable, nonpartisan pollsters: Reason-Rupe/ Princeton Survey Research Associates International: 62% of Americans oppose the subsidies that the federal government gives to oil, gas and coal companies or from the Pew Research Center: "65% of Americans favor setting stricter emission limits on power plants in order to address climate change." And this contrast:

But Rothenberg's silliest "analysis" today came in IL-10. I don't even disagree with the finding, just how they reached it. Short version: Dold has a chance to beat Schneider in a rematch. They downgraded the rating from "leans Democrat" to "Tilts Democrat." Here's the Rothenberg version:

Illinois’ 10th District was drawn by Democrats to elect a Democrat, and it did just that in 2012 when Brad Schneider defeated GOP Rep. Robert Dold.

But Schneider won very narrowly, 50.6 percent to 49.4 percent, a margin of a slightly more than 3,000 votes out of 264,000 cast. And he did it with President Barack Obama running at the top of the ballot. This year, Obama is not on the ballot, he’s more unpopular and Dold is running again.

This race likely won’t be decided by money. Both men should be able to raise and spend enough money to compete.

But it will likely be decided by Democrats’ ability to define Dold as being too conservative for the district, and Republicans banking on Schneider not yet being entrenched in the suburban Chicago territory.

This race could go down to the wire once again. We’re changing our Rothenberg Political Report/Roll Call rating of the race from Leans Democrat to Tossup/Tilts Democrat.

The reason the "Democrats’ ability to define Dold as being too conservative for the district" comes into play is because the wretched New Dem incumbent, Brad Schneider, is also too conservative for the district. His consistent pattern of voting against progressive legislation and crossing the aisle in a way Democrats in red districts are told to do by the DCCC, will only do one thing in IL-10 (with its D+8 PVI)-- keep progressives home sitting on their hands. No mention of any of that by Rothenberg or Gonzales and no peak into Schneider's ugly conservative voting record which seems custom-made to win over Republican voters in Republican-leaning districts. If Schneider's record comes into play it will be a classic case of voter discouragement, a Steve Israel specialty when it come sot advising his lamest and most credulous freshmen.

Forget About The Romney-Newt-Santorum Clown Show; Tuesday Is Primary Day For Illinois Democrats

The House Democrats' chief corporate whore, Steny Hoyer, seems to think Ilya Sheyman (D-IL) is too progressive or grassroots or independent-minded or incorruptible or young or something Insiders hate. So he's funneling cash into the campaign of the conservative shill, Brad Schneider. Yesterday some delusional crank who writes nasty notes to Digby was whining about Ilya and sent us a critique from Corrente about him being an Obama supporter (sin of sins) and how he's to hijacking the Occupy brand. The combination of these two mentalities sure is what makes the Democrats the Democrats!

Earlier today we referred to the article in Mother Jones extolling the 99% Movement. Ilya Sheyman was one of the candidates they picked, a theme the author, Josh Harkinson, had developed earlier when writing about Ilya. "A victory for Sheyman would send a clear, early message to all Democrats running for office," he quote PCCC's Neil Sroka saying. "If you stand up and fight for the progressive values that matter to voters, you'll win your primary and build the enthusiastic grassroots base of donors and volunteers that all Democrats will need to win in November."

Yesterday the gigantic grassroots enthusiasm for Sheyman continued to build-- thwarting the plans the slimy DC Insiders had for the 10th district. The National Organization for Women, Democratic National Committee Hispanic Caucus Chair State Sen. Iris Martinez and National Nurses United all endorsed Ilya's surging campaign, adding themselves to an impressive list of progressive leaders and non-Beltway organizations, from Howard Dean, Russ Feingold, Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-IL), Rep. Donna Edwards (D-MD), Rep. Danny Davis (D-IL), Peter Welch (D-VT), Keith Ellison (D-MN), to DFA, PCCC, AFSCME, MoveOn, the Sierra Club, the Illinois Federation of Teachers, the United Steelworkers and another dozen unions and, of course, Blue America.

Friday I participated in a meeting with a self-proclaimed "progressive" bunch of organizations. Perhaps some of them hadn't read Katrina vanden Heuvel's piece in The Nation about the need to elect not garden variety Democrats, but progressives.

Former Senator Russ Feingold recognizes that need and was moved to make his first endorsement in a Democratic primary since leaving the Senate. On Tuesday, Feingold pledged his support and that of Progressives United-- his recently formed group focused on opposing corporate power-- to Ilya Sheyman, a 25-year-old community organizer running in Illinois 10th District for a shot at the incumbent, Republican Representative Robert Dold.

While some Democratic candidates might look to co-opt the spirit and convictions of the Occupy movement, Sheyman is authentically of, by and for the 99 percent, ready to go to Washington and work with a strong grassroots to rebuild economic opportunity and fairness.

One of the groups, a gigantic national organization with hundreds of thousands of members announced they planned to support the Republican incumbent against Ilya in the general election. And no one asked them to leave the room. Washington is such a weird place. I avoid it at all costs.

Schneider, a wealthy businessman who has given thousands of dollars to extreme right wing Republicans running on platforms to end Medicare and Social Security, can read polls. He sees himself being crushed Tuesday and groused to The Hill that he knew “it would get ugly when I entered this race. But I expected it from the Tea Party, not our own party,” blaming his troubles on MoveOn and other progressive groups. While Schneider was whining about his moribund campaign, Sheyman told The Hill that "This campaign has really come down to economic issues, people who will get up and fight for middle-class families. There is the sense that economic mobility is slipping away, the American Dream is slipping away… This is one of the few districts in this country where we can not only turn a red seat blue but actually send a true progressive to Congress.”

But there is another one. South and east of IL-10 we find IL-13, a district that was always deeply red and is now purple-- and winnable by a Democrat. The primary has the same dynamic as the 10th-- a dynamic working family-oriented progressive (Dr. David Gill) being challenged by a Democrat who sounds suspiciously like a Republican (Matt Goetten). Last night, after Goetten had studiously avoided all debate challenges from Dr. Gill, the two finally met face to face-- and it became clear why he had avoided debates. This guy can't possibly go up against a Republican incumbent and hope to win. A vote for Goetten is a vote for another 2 years of Republican representation! After the debate Dr. Gill sent an e-mail to his supporters:

The debate tonight was refreshing for me because it allowed both candidates to speak unfiltered to the Democratic voters of this district.

It was interesting tonight to stand across from Matt Goetten. I had a strange sense of deja vu. It reminded me of standing across from Republican Tim Johnson.

The same parsing. The same hollow rhetoric. The same Washington buzz words. The same double-talk.

My primary opponent is just a younger, newer version of Tim Johnson's brand of insider deal-cutting and corporate politics. The Democrats of Illinois' 13th District deserve better than that. The people of the United States deserve better than that.

I called my opponent out for his complete and utter lack of leadership on protecting women's health and the right to choose. Matt had nothing to say. He stood there silently.

But that's nothing new for Matt Goetten. He's tried to duck questions and avoid the hard issues ever since he entered the race.

The key question now is can Democrats really trust Matt Goetten to fight for women on this issue and to fight for our progressive values on so many other issues.

Let me be as clear as I was in tonight's debate about where I stand: 

• I am 100% pro-choice, without restrictions. 

• I am 100% for access to birth control for all American women under every health care plan without restrictions. 

• I fully support Planned Parenthood and its work in clinics around this nation and government partnerships with that outstanding organization to make women healthier. 

• I support access to emergency contraception in every health care facility in our country without exception.

My opponent Matt Goetten is conflicted and confused on this issue. America's women cannot afford to be.

We have only 5 days left. The politicians backing Goetten have started a "Rapid Response" fund to come after me for telling the truth.

I won't be intimidated. I won't back down.

This is what I'll be watching Tuesday, not which GOP clown beats up the other. And if you'd like to donate directly to Dr. Gill's get-out-the-vote effort, you can do it here.