Obama Keeps a Low Profile In Georgia And Louisiana Races-- Possibly Dooming Both Democratic Candidates

Woulda, shoulda, coulda... Palin did and Obama didn't

By wide margins, Americans approve of President-elect Obama and his cabinet choices. Almost 70% approve of his choice of Hillary Clinton to be Secretary of State and 80% approve of his decision to keep Robert Gates on at the Pentagon.

In the poll, Americans by more than 3-1 say they trust Obama more than Bush to handle the economy. By 58%-33%, they support Obama's promise of a huge spending package to stimulate the economy.

...There's little concern Obama is relying too much on veterans of President Clinton's administration. By nearly 4-1, those polled say the picks will make the new team more effective.

Numbers like that mean he's getting support across the board. Even 40% of Republicans approved of the Clinton choice (as did 89% of Democrats and 69% of independents). In fact, 78% of Americans approve of the way Obama is handling his presidential transition, with only 13% disapproving. A majority of Democrats (94%), independents (79%), and Republicans (57%) all say they approve. By way of comparison 66% approved of Bill Clinton's 1992 transition and 63% approved of Bush's right after he stole the 2000 election.

Still, Obama was unwilling to put any political capital on the line to try to win a veto proof Senate and defeat one of his most die-hard reactionary opponents, Saxby Chambliss, whose entire negative campaign is based on stopping Obama. Polls close at 7pm Eastern Time and short lines so far presage a win for Chambliss. The only way he could have been defeated would have been for Obama to go to Georgia and work it. He chose to stay above the fray, cutting a radio spot-- not even TV!-- and a robocall. And the DSCC sent around e-mails begging us to help by sending money! Screw them!

Polling stations across Georgia reported low to moderate voter turnout. At the Atlanta Public Library on Ponce de Leon Ave., where more than 1,600 people voted in the general election, only 400 people had voted by noon today.

But among those who did bother to get out to the polls, "many voters interviewed today said the balance of power was an important factor in their choice of a candidate."

But how important is this election if Obama is doing approximately the same thing for Jim Martin as he did for a backward, reactionary asshole, Paul Carmouche, running as a Democrat in Louisiana's 4th CD in an election this coming Saturday. Carmouche-- like Don Cazayoux, who was one of only 4 Democrats defeated last month (and unlike Jim Martin) is unlikely to support much of what Obama tried to do to change the direction of the country-- now has a radio ad from Obama, which is expected to appeal to progressives and African-Americans, two groups that have no logical reason to support Carmouche. In fact, Obama is either disingenuous or naive in his statement:

"To change America and to get Louisiana's economy back on track-- I need leaders like Paul Carmouche working with me in Washington. Paul Carmouche is the kind of leader we need in Washington...to make a difference for the people of Northwest Louisiana."

It was just a few weeks ago that enough African American and progressive voters abandoned Cazayoux-- basically cut from the same vile mold as Carmouche-- to throw his seat to a Republican. They had given him a chance and elected him but once he got into Congress he abandoned all pretense of serving working families and threw his lot in with the Republicans. On substantive matters that divided the two parties in the House, Cazayoux voted with the GOP far more frequently than with his fellow Democrats. And the voters back in Baton Rouge noticed and voted for a third party candidate. The only Democrats who voted more frequently with the Republicans than Cazayoux were Nick Lampson (TX), who was also defeated last month, Jim Marshall (GA) and Joe Donnelly (IN). African-Americans in LA-04 don't appear inclined to vote for Carmouche, which is why the DCCC implored Obama to cut the radio spot. Of all the people who took part in early voting, only 19% were African Americans, who make up almost a third of registered voters in the district. Paul Carmouche deserves to lose. Jim Martin doesn't.


UPDATE: POLLS ARE CLOSED IN GEORGIA

Votes are coming in and the Secretary of State's website seems to be getting the results up pretty fast. Tondee's Tavern is a good place to watch for fast interpretations and details. Atlanta Metro will probably come in late though-- that's what happened last time-- and if Martin has any chance of winning, it will be because of unexpectedly large margins in Fulton and Dekalb. So far, comparing early returns to returns from last month don't show any surprises at all (good news for the bad guys).

9:08 PM, Eastern: CNN projects Chambliss

UPDATE: RIGHT WING FANATIC, SENATOR CHAMBERPOT RE-ELECTED IN GEORGIA

Obama supporters didn't turn out in the same kinds of numbers that hysterical right-wingers did. African American participation was down drastically from last month.

Martin appeared to suffer mightily from a lack of African-American turnout, which dropped from 30 percent of early votes four weeks ago to around 20 percent in the runoff.

In Atlanta-based Fulton County, Chambliss was almost even with Martin with half the precincts reporting. Martin defeated him nearly two-to-one in the county in the general election.

The Race To 60: Alaska, Minnesota, Georgia

Would Chambliss dare bring Bush back to Georgia for a campaign event?

By now, you surely know that Republican convicted felon and senator, Ted Stevens-- unlike sore losers GOP reps Marilyn Musgrave, Virgil Goode and Randy Kuhl-- has conceded defeat. Not sure when he'll be reporting for prison. Just kidding; he'll certainly be one of the Republicrooks Bush pardons. One assumes that Bush will refuse, as a matter of "principle," to read Russ Feingold's warning about the abuse of pardons, which in any case only addresses the really huge, heinous stuff the Bush Regime was involved in, not the bribery and corruption one expects from political hacks like Stevens.

Despite the conviction, Stevens keeps his pension, which the National Taxpayer's Union calculates at about $122,000 a year. Members of Congress can lose their pensions for being convicted of specified crimes, such as bribery and racketeering, but Stevens' offenses aren't on the list. Senators also have investment retirement accounts.

Anyway, that leaves the Democrats with 58 seats-- if you count Lieberman as a Democrat-- with 2 to go. As I mentioned the other day, I'm just a passive observer in the race to 60. But I figure readers want to know what's going on. So... let's start with Minnesota, where Paul Wellstone seems to be smiling down from Heaven. The recount started yesterday and it's all bad news for the bad guys.

By day's end, with about 18 percent of the vote recounted, Coleman continued to lead Franken -- but by only 174 votes, notably narrower than the unofficial gap of 215 votes at which the recount had begun. Franken's gain owed much to a swing of 23 votes in the Democratic stronghold of St. Louis County-- the result of faintly marked ballots and older optical scanners that failed to read the marks.

Nate Silver has a more comprehensive analysis of what happened yesterday than the Star Tribune, although the same ending, of course: a shrinking margin for Coleman (now 172 votes). The important thing to remember is that Democratic strongholds in Minneapolis and Duluth are yet to come in with their numbers, which are expected to overwhelmingly favor Franken.

Minnesota reports that it has thus far re-counted 15.49 percent of its ballots. If the first day's results are indicative of the pace that the candidates will maintain throughout the recount process, Franken would gain a net of 278 votes over Coleman, giving him a narrow victory. For any number of reasons, however, the results reported thus far may not be indicative of future trends.

Although Franken gained ground relative to Coleman, in actuality both candidates have fewer votes than they began the day with. This is because of the "challenge" process in which representatives of either candidate may challenge any ballot for any reason, which will subsequently be reviewed one at a time by Minnesota's canvassing board in December. Challenges can occur to ballots that had previously been deemed to be legal, in which case those votes will be deducted from the opponent's total. Coleman has thus far challenged 115 ballots and Franken 106. However, based on local reports, many or perhaps most of the challenges are frivolous, and are unlikely to be upheld upon review. Thus, the candidate who has challenged fewer ballots probably stands to gain ground once such challenges are adjudicated.

And that leaves Georgia's run-off. The good news for Jim Martin yesterday was an enthusiastic and very compelling endorsement from the state's biggest newspaper, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:

Jim Martin and Sen. Saxby Chambliss may be former fraternity brothers at the University of Georgia, but they look, act, think and speak in very different ways. The two candidates in the Dec. 2 Senate runoff offer Georgia voters a stark choice.

Martin, the Democrat, has been a fighter for the little guy throughout his life, and he’s proved effective in that role. He served his country in the U.S. Army in Vietnam and as a state legislator, lawyer and head of the state Department of Human Resources. Throughout his public life he has been known as a workhorse not a showhorse, someone whose first concern was getting the job done well rather than trying to get the credit.

In fact, Martin was so well-respected for his competence and ability to work across party lines that when Gov. Sonny Perdue became the state’s first Republican governor in a century, he asked Martin to remain as head of the state Department of Human Services.

In his six years in the U.S. Senate, Chambliss has set a very different course. He fought against stricter immigration policies not out of a sense of compassion, but because easy immigration and lax enforcement served the interests of industry. When he fought against reform of farm subsidies that cost taxpayers billions, it wasn’t out of concern for the small family farmer. The reforms championed by President Bush but opposed by Chambliss would have cut payments only to huge corporate farms.

Time and again, on issue after issue, Chambliss has taken the side of the powerful and influential over those of the taxpayer and general citizen. His performance this year at a Senate hearing, in which he took the side of corporate management by browbeating a safety whistle-blower at a Savannah sugar mill, has become the stuff of legend. (A few months earlier, an explosion at the plant had killed 14 workers.)

The less good news for Martin is that the polling data shows Chambliss slightly ahead, 50-46%. Polls are less relevant in special elections like this however because the entire game is turn-out, which is expected to be low. It comes down to this: will the Republican's hysterical fear-mongering about a Democratic ability to overcome reactionary filibusters of the Obama's agenda for change trump an effort-- if there is one, which I doubt-- by Obama to win the 60 seat filibuster proof majority and get on with the change he promised in the election campaign? Bill Clinton was in Georgia explaining the damage a filibuster will do. If Obama goes down there and does it, Martin will win. (And a radio spot is only a halfway effort and won't do the trick.) If he doesn't, Chambliss will be re-elected:

60 Seats? Who Cares?

Reactionary crook defeated in Alaska

I have nothing against the Democrats getting 60-- or 70-- votes in the Senate. In fact, every Republican defeated is a step, more or less, in the right direction. Last night when Blue America-endorsed Mark Begich was finally declared the winner in Alaska-- the first Democrat to win a Senate seat in that bizarre former Russian colony since Mike Gravel-- I would have opened a bottle of something for a toast if I was a drinking man. Instead, I thought, "Mark's a good man and all it cost Blue America was six grand; let's hope it was worth it."

The Senate is an intensely conservative body. It was meant to be. They call it the world's most exclusive club. In fact, just a few years ago arch-reactionary Zell Miller (GA), who was appointed to a seat opened up by the death of a Republican, proposed a constitutional amendment repealing the 17th, which gave voters the right to elect senators. Ole Zell believes that was way too progressive and that senators should be chosen by (easily-bribed) state legislatures, not by the unwashed masses (who he referred to as "special interests").

There was never any real chance the Senate was going to discipline Joe Lieberman. In the end only 13 members voted to do it-- far more than the small handful of unabashed reactionaries who actually campaigned for him in Connecticut against the Democratic Party candidate, Ned Lamont. They love Lieberman because he's one of them. Any of them could empathize with his predicament. They all like to think of themselves as independent (at least independent of anyone not giving them direct bribes). What a crappy job Harry Reid has, keeping all these assholes on the same page!

OK, so last night Stevens was defeated bringing the Democratic majority to at least 58. An intense recount procedure looms for Minnesota, where only 206 votes separates Al Franken and rubber stamp incumbent Norm Coleman. And early voting has already begun in the December 2nd Georgia run-off between Jim Martin and Saxby Chambliss.

Political insiders are all excited about all this stuff. Should the grassroots be? I'm not so certain. Sure, I think Norm Coleman and Saxby Chambliss are two of the absolute worst members of the U.S. Senate and each makes the place an even bigger disgrace than it would be without them. And both Franken and Martin seem like decent and conscientious guys. (Even Allen Buckley, the Libertarian candidate who threw the Georgia race into a run-off, thinks Martin is a better choice.) I'm rootin' for him and Franken. But no fund drives at Blue America. We've given enough this year. And what did we get in return? Joe Lieberman smirking on TV. If I lived in Georgia I'm sure I'd go vote for Martin. If the pitiful slobs in the Senate Democratic caucus want him to win... they're stinking rich and basically take as much in bribes from corporate America as the Republicans do-- if not more. This will be expensive but they don't need our money. We'll be saving it for primaries in 2010.

Do The Democrats Even Deserve A Filibuster-Proof Majority?

I hope Jim Martin beats Saxby Chambliss. I hope he beats him by a lot. Chambliss is one of the worst members on the Senate, both in terms of his unbelievably extremist voting record and in terms of his utter disregard for even the vaguest sense of personal ethics. Lately he's taken to defending his putrid ad against Max Cleland, which even John McCain denounced as reprehensible and is now running a similar a similar smear tactic against Jim Martin. As much as his ad campaigns, Chambliss himself is reprehensible. And, like I said above, I hope Martin defeats him.

So why no fundraising campaign here? Jim Martin actually meets the criteria we use at Blue America. He's not just better than Chambliss-- after all, it would be hard for anyone not to be better than that venal slug-- Jim Martin's vision for America is pretty progressive and very much geared towards serving the needs of the working families ignored over the past 8 and 6 years, respectively by George Bush and Saxby Chambliss. But we're just going to let President-elect Obama and the Senate Democratic caucus win this one on their own. Let them put up the money and go for that 60-vote filibuster-proof majority if they really want it. (I have my doubts that they do, since it would leave them with no excuses if they fail to deliver on their campaign promises and on the expectations of the voters.)

And whether they really want it or not, do they even deserve it? The Senate Democratic caucus-- which includes reactionary scumbags like Evan Bayh, Mary Landrieu, Mark Pryor, and Ben Nelson-- is sickening, cowardly and next-to-worthless. Patrick Leahy is the ONLY member of the caucus with the balls to publicly state that the treacherous Joe Lieberman doesn't deserve to be given the chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee. "I’m one who does not feel someone should be rewarded with a major chairmanship after what he did." (Listen.) Alas, he's the only one so far. At least the vote won't be unanimous. Too bad the voters of Connecticut don't get a say. In a new poll that came out this morning, most Connecticut voters express so much dissatisfaction with Lieberman that it's next to impossible to see him ever winning an election there again. If the voters there could re-do the 2006 election today 59% would vote for Ned Lamont and only 34% would vote for Lieberman. And if loses his chairmanship and then jumps to the GOP only 31% of Connecticut voters say they would favor his re-election.

So what to do? Well, it's clear to me that the Democratic caucus should start acting with some degree of self-respect and, at the minimum, take away his chair. If they do, we'll do whatever we can to help get Jim Martin elected. Meanwhile, I want to suggest that the ones siding with the caucus' reactionaries watch Rachel Maddow's explanation and pay attention to her suggestions. She's got it right-- much more so than hack political reporter Ron Brownstein, who is urging the Democrats to step on the people who elected them and to instead govern like less extreme Republicans.



It looks like we were correct a few days ago when we predicted that a small handful of progressive Democrats would stand up against the inherent conservative inertia that makes the world's most exclusive club nearly worthless. Bernie Sanders just joined Patrick Leahy in opposing Lieberman's demand that he get the Homeland Security chair to prevent him from becoming (officially) a Republican. Most of the cowards, led by reactionary Evan Bayh, are wimpering that an "apology" is enough for them. Bernie:

"To reward Senator Lieberman with a major committee chairmanship would be a slap in the face of millions of Americans who worked tirelessly for Barack Obama and who want to see real change in our country.

"Appointing someone to a major post who led the opposition to everything we are fighting for is not 'change we can believe in.' I very much hope that Senator Lieberman stays in the Democratic caucus and is successful in regaining the confidence of those whom he has disappointed. This is not a time, however, in which he should be rewarded with a major committee chairmanship."

Here's one way to celebrate Veterans Day: Help toss that sack of garbage Saxby Chambliss out of the Senate -- "Do It for Max!"

"Do It for Max"

by Ken

Or is that an insult to garbage?

You recall surely that Saxby Chambliss's campaign for reelection to the Senate from Georgia fell short of the state-mandated 50 percent, and he faces a December 2 runoff against his unexpectedly strong challenger, Jim Martin. With turnout typically falling off precipitously in a runoff, this should normally be a cakewalk for an incumbent, especially with the president-elect no longer on the ballot.

I'm hoping otherwise -- and understand that I'm speaking here strictly for myself. I'm hoping that off his 47 percent showing in the general election, Martin's campaign may attract a heap more attention. What's more, there are no other races with a claim on finite attention and resources. This seems to me a crusade worthy of everyone's attention.

I don't claim to know everything there is to know about Jim Martin, but from what I do know, he seems a pretty darned good candidate, maybe as good as we can hope for from Georgia. And most important, I'm told his race has the enthusiastic blessing of former Sen. Max Cleland.

And I guess for me this race isn't just political, it's personal, even moral. Because, you'll recall, the unspeakable Chambliss seized that Senate seat in 2002 with a campaign of lies that prefigured the just-past national Republican campaign. And specifically, he somehow conned Georgia voters by impugning the patriotism of Cleland, a war hero if there ever was one.

Okay, he probably didn't con that legally required majority of Georgia voters. There seems general agreement that the election was "won" via machine-rigging vote fraud. You know, a classic Republican victory. Still, Chambliss got enough votes to be in a position to steal the election.

And we get one more chance at the monster -- the last one for another six years. Yes, it would be nice to have one more Democrat in the Senate, and one less Republican, especially this extreme a Republican. But even that isn't quite what this is about.

We have to win this one for Max.

Note: If you want to help, visit the "Do It for Max" ActBlue webpage. There's also a "Bloggers for Martin" ActBlue webpage.


UPDATE: MARTIN VS. CHAMBLISS ON VETS' ISSUES

Senate Guru celebrates Veterans Day with a post contrasting Jim Martin's strong history of military service and support for veterans with Saxby Chambliss's unsurprisingly dreadful record. Basically, the senator seems to support veterans by playing a lot of golf -- something of a miracle in that his terrible knees prevented him from serving in the military in Vietnam.

#

The Daily Blue America Report-- #4

McCaul- to the right of Cheney, about to get some Texas Justice

Lots of great news today. Since we've covered the fortunate news from Alaska, let's go right to some awesome tidings from Oregon. KATU, via SUSA, is reporting that Jeff Merkley, a Democrat from the Wellstone wing of the party, "is pulling away from Gordon Smith in the race for Senate."

Jeff Berkley 49%
Bush rubber stamp Gordon Smith 42%
Dave Brownlow (Constitution Party) 5%
Undecided 4%

Looks like Brownlow is killing Smith's re-election chances. It's fitting Smith leave government at the same time as Bush. But Brownlow isn't the only independent running who has been helpful to a Blue America candidate. David Krikorian, the right-wing xenophobe running in southwest Ohio against Mean Jean Schmidt and Vic Wulsin has been eating into Schmidt's base. That's about to get worse. Another far right zealot, Tom Brinkman (anti-choice, anti-taxes, anti-sanity) just endorsed Krikoran. Polls that include Krikorian are showing a neck and neck race between Vic and Mean. (By the way, if you're thinking about donating to Vic's campaign, today is an especially good day to do it: her birthday. She was born in 1953 and the campaign suggested people send in $19.53.)

Let's skip down to... oops, I'm sworn to secrecy on where this bit came from. But it's a good one. In 2006 the Republican rubber stamp incumbent, a slug of a human being (there's a hint), beat his opponent, a conservative Democrat by 9% in early polling. This year early polling has been far more substantial and the slug is not up by 9%. He's down by 20%-- against a progressive Democrat and a real kick ass fighter. With all those hints, how could any regular DWT reader not figure out who we're talkin' about here?

Let's head north now to the district of one of our favorite incumbents, Carol Shea-Porter (NH-01), who has been targeted by GOP front groups and hate organizations like Freedoms Watch. They are flooding her district with the slimiest ad campaign anywhere in the country. But with her polling numbers holding up nicely, that isn't enough. They do not want a fighter for working families in that seat; they want it back in the hands of a corporate shill, Jeb Bradley. And they given Jeb Bradley the cash he needs to hire the criminals who stole the 2002 New Hampshire Senate race that illicitly put John Sununu in office. Bradley has funneled over $90,000 into convicted felon-- now released from prison-- Chuck McGee's election stealing operation.

The huge Texas congressional delegation is a hotbed of the most reactionary vision of America anywhere on Capitol Hill. This year Blue America found only one Texas House race we wanted to get involved with-- Michale McCaul's bid for re-election in a gerrymandered masterpiece that sprawls from a piece of Austin to the suburbs of Houston, designed especially to disenfranchise Austin voters (by splitting the blue city into pieces where their votes could be diluted by red surroundings). But McCaul, whose father-in-law, the chairman of Clear Channel, bought him the seat, has been such a disaster as a congressman that even a red district like TX-10 seems to have had enough of him. His progressive opponent, Larry Joe Doherty has virtually caught up with him in the polling, with 4 points, less than the margin of error, separating them.

Today's Austin Statesman agrees that a defeat for McCaul, a rotten piece of "low hanging fruit," is Texas' best shot at turning a red district blue.

[W]ith the national mood turned fiercely against Republicans, some Democratic operatives believe they can win a seat that they haven't seriously contested since it was drawn in 2003.

The outcome of the 10th Congressional District race will also offer a glimpse of just how Republican Texas still is. Though Democrats have been making gains in the Legislature, Republicans have dominated races for statewide office for 12 years. A Doherty win would show that his party's resurgence, while far from complete, is further along than many would have guessed a few elections ago.

Whether Doherty can win will depend on how well he personally connects with voters, whether McCaul can distinguish himself from President Bush and whether Democrats in the Travis County part of the district can outmuscle Republicans closer to Houston.

..."Republicans are losing on the generic ballot, and polling for right track/wrong direction has never been worse," Karen Hanretty, a spokeswoman for the National Republican Congressional Committee, said in a memo Thursday.

Democratic enthusiasm is up, and that enthusiasm was fueled by unexpectedly high turnout in the party's March presidential primary.

About 109,000 10th District residents voted in the Democratic primary. Of those, almost 63,000 appear not to have voted in either party's primary in the past 16 years, said Democratic consultant Harold Cook, who offers occasional advice to Doherty's team.

"Never before have we been able to identify such a rich target full of low-hanging fruit," Cook said. "We know that they've already voted for Democrats, so they'll consider it again, and probably lean toward it again."

And we'll leave you with this to ponder: tomorrow morning at 6AM we'll be announcing a major endorsement for one of our East Coast candidates. Wanna take a guess? Hint: think someone with extremely clear vision for American working families.

Let me leave you with an ad from our pals at VoteVets. It's a TV spot that targets one of the worst members of the Senate, Georgia rubber stamp wingnut Saxby Chambliss, who looks like he may lose his seat to Jim Martin next week. It's not a Blue America race but we've got our fingers crossed that a decent Democrat will replace an absolutely odious Republican.

Jim Martin might be able to oust Saxy Chambliss from his disgracefully stolen Senate seat, and might also be a serious senatorial upgrade

by Ken

Here's a race that was off the charts till now, and is suddenly in play. It's the Georgia Senate race where the unspeakable Saxby Chambliss (aka, at least hereabouts, as Saxby Chamberpot) is seeking a second term. Only last week Howie described this race as "an uphill battle." (Back in march our Georgia-resident friend Valley Girl reported to DWT readers on "much-loved Georgia pol" Martin's inching toward making the Senate race.)

I admit to strong personal feelings here. Chambliss probably isn't the worst person in the Senate, where there's such tough competition for the title. But for me he is just about the vilest, simply because of the way he got there. In denouncing the McCranky presidential campaign, I've tried to be careful to include the distinction "national" in any estimate of its all-time vileness rankings. It's hard to believe that a campaign could be any more loathsome than the one Chambliss waged against Sen. Max Cleland, an authentic war hero, somehow turning his service record against him. And even then, the campaign apparently had to engage in some significant election fraud to put their, er, man over the top.

The good news is that the political convulsions of recent weeks have apparently put Chambliss's reelection bid in play.

Now, Georgia Democrats are not necessarily adornments to the nation's progress and well-being. The name of virtual Republican Rep. Jim Marshall comes up regularly on DWT, where he generally vies with North Carolina's Heath Shuler for recognition as the worst Democrat in the House. And of course no survey of Georgia "Democrats" (sorry, quotation marks required) would be complete without mention of the appalling Zell Miller.

In order to find out what kind of Democrat Jim Martin, Chambliss's opponent, is, our colleague Matt Stoller eked out some time from the candidate's busy campaign schedule for an informative interview on OpenLeft.

Martin assures Matt that he considers hiimself a progressive, and insists: "Progressives can win in the South because people are fed up with where we are as a country, and they are looking for real change." He's not even fazed by Matt's mention of the Z-name:

Simply put, I am not Zell Miller. I am a proud Democrat and a proud progressive and I would just ask you to look at my record. Over the course of my career, I have earned deep, bipartisan respect as a principled leader for progressive causes. That is who I am and what I will be as Georgia's next United States Senator.

Martin manages to work references to "the failed Bush-Chambliss economic policies" in nearly every sentence. He opposed the bailout, and explains why:

As I've said, I strongly believe that action must be taken to stabilize our economy in order for us to start reversing the failed Bush economic policies that have proven so disastrous for the middle class. But what I am not willing to do is to stick taxpayers with an enormous and costly bailout bill, rushed through in haste, which won't even solve the problem. Among other issues, the package failed to address the fundamental problems created by the deregulation of Wall Street. And it lacked consumer protections to stem the abusive lending practices that are at the root of this crisis - practices that I devoted hundreds of thousands of dollars in television ads to sound the alarm on two years ago, long before the mortgage crisis began.

For reasons that should be obvious from what I've written above, I award Martin points for the statement: "I am lucky enough to count Max Cleland as a friend and a strong supporter of my campaign. Everyone knows of his service to his country, but I am also inspired by his long service to the state of Georgia."

There's a lot to like in the interview, and the apparently realistic chance of Jim Martin capturing the seat from the most illegitimate member of the Senate.


AND MARTIN IS OUTRAISING CHAMBLISS!

According to the Associated Press:

Campaign finance reports show upstart Democratic Senate challenger Jim Martin has raised more money than Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss over the most recent three-month period.

In by far his best fundraising haul, Martin took in more than $1.3 million from July through the end of September.
Click here to find out more!

The silver lining for Chambliss is that Martin spent almost all of the money and had just $92,340 in the bank heading into the final month of the campaign.

Chambliss had about $1.2 million in his treasury after raising about $1.1 million for the third quarter.

The advantage shows that Martin has had an easier time convincing people to donate as the race has grown competitive. Chambliss once had some $4 million in the bank compared with just a few hundred thousand dollars for Martin, a former state legislator.

#

Yesterday's Primaries-- And A Preview For Tomorrow's Primary In Memphis

Judy Baker, progressive victor in Missouri

Kansas, Missouri and Michigan all had primaries yesterday. Mostly incumbents and Establishment favorites won their races. The stupidest candidate who ran for Congress in any district in any state for either party, Brock Olivo in the Missouri district (MO-09) being abandoned by Kenny Hulsdorf, got wiped out. He came in 4th. If you want to understand why, watch the video at that link back there. What I can't understand is why 4,637 Republicans (10%) voted for him. Blaine Luetkemeyer won the GOP nod with 39%, beating Bob Onder in a bloody, vicious contest between two extremists, and progressive state Senator Judy Baker beat former Missouri House Speaker Steve Gaw (42%-33%) to take the Democratic nomination. It's a very Republican, very white district (PVI is R+7) and includes "Little Dixie." Kerry scored 41% of the vote in 2004.

In the Missouri governor's race, Democratic homophobe Jay Nixon won his primary handily, as was expected, and he will face Kenny Hulsdorf who barely managed (49-45%) to edge by Sarah Steelman for the GOP nod. Nixon is favored to win in November but after his most recent outburt of homophobic hysteria some of his financial support dried up.

There were two congressional races in Michigan people were watching and one in Kansas. The KS-02 race looked like it would be a re-match between radical right lunatic (and ex-Congressman) Jim Ryun and incumbent moderate Democrat, Nancy Boyda. But it appears that Ryun went down to a narrow defeat-- 51-49%-- to Lynn Jenkins. It's a pretty red district but Boyda has done a good job, is known as very independent-minded, and hasn't given the voters any reason to vote her out of office. A side show in Kansas was ex-Attorney General Phill Kline's running for re-election as District Attorney in Johnson County. He's the titular head of the Nazi-faction of the Kansas GOP and he had his head handed to him by a mainstream conservative, Steve Howe.

In Michigan's 7th CD, state Senator and Blue America-endorsee Mark Schauer beat a perennial vanity candidate-- who was the party nominee in 2006-- 66-34%. Schauer will face far right extremist Tim Walberg, a freshman, in November. The more complicated race was in MI-13, where incumbent Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, mother of Detroit's unpopular, hapless and indicted mayor, drew two opponents, Mary Waters and Martha Scott. Aside from being the mother of the reviled mayor, Kilpatrick was a die-hard Hillary supporter, something that went over badly among African-American voters in MI-13, who overwhelmingly and enthusiastically supported Obama. It was neck and neck all night-- with Waters ahead most of the night-- until Kilpatrick's home turf came in late and put her ahead. She raised around $800,000 and her closest opponent, Waters, raised around $10,000.

The other hot race today was the Democratic senatorial primary run-off in Georgia. Moderate ex-state Rep. Jim Martin beat reactionary loon Vernon Jones, 59-41%. He'll be facing extremist Saxby Chambliss, one of Bush's most dependable Senate rubber stamps in November.

Rep. Steve Cohen & Obama

Tennessee holds its primary tomorrow and all eyes are on Memphis, where progressive freshman Steve Cohen, who is white and Jewish, is being challenged by a vicious anti-Semitic, racist pawn of ex-Congressman Harold Ford. It's been a very ugly race-- and the ugliness is all on one side, Nikki Tinker's. Steve Cohen was first elected in 2006 with the help of Blue America and we have enthusiastically endorsed him again. If you know anyone in Memphis, please call them and talk to them about this race. Cohen has been a real leader for working families and he is the only progressive congressman from Tennessee. Tinker is a complete corporate shill and far more conservative across a wide array of issues. Rahm Emanuel, a longtime ally of Ford's, has encouraged institutional support for Tinker and has prevented his DCCC pawn, Chris Van Hollen, from coming to the aid of Cohen, the way the DCCC and Nancy Pelosi backed other challenged incumbents like Kilpatrick yesterday and Al Wynn a few months ago. One of the most corrupt members of the Democratic Party, Gregory Meeks (NY) has been supporting Tinker, as has Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-Ohio). More progressive and respectable members of the Congressional Black Caucus like John Conyers and Jesse Jackson, Jr. have been campaigning for Cohen.


EMILY's List Embarrassed By Nikki Tinker's Racist Campaign

We were pretty disappointed when EMILY's List came out for Nikki Tinker in her anti-semitic, homophobic, racist jihad to turn a solidly Blue district reddish. I think they wish they had never gotten involved with this campaign of bigotry. The following statement was issued by Ellen Malcolm, president of EMILY's List, in response to recent ads run by the Nikki Tinker for Congress campaign: 
 
"We were shocked to see the recent ads run by the Nikki Tinker for Congress campaign.  We believe the ads are offensive and divisive.  EMILY's List does not condone or support these types of attacks."

Next time DLC Chair Harold Ford makes a recommendation, take it with a grain of salt.