Elise Stefanik Gets Famous... For All The Wrong Reasons

Not a good image for the North Country this cycle

North Country conservative Elise Stefanik (R-NY) is well-known among DC insiders-- but virtually unknown outside-the-Beltway. Or she was until last week, when she consistently beclowned herself on national TV during the impeachment hearings. Stefanik represents a huge, sparsely-populated district in the northeast corner of New York, bordered by Quebec, Ontario and Vermont. Plattsburgh and Watertown, each with less than 30,000 inhabitants, are the two biggest towns. There are a dozen counties in this swing district that went for Obama twice and then slammed Clinton with a massive 14 point loss against Trump in 2016. How would Bernie have done there? Well here's how he did in the primary:

• Saratoga- Bernie- 55.8%, Hillary- 44.2%
• St Lawrence- Bernie- 58.9%, Hillary- 41.1%
• Jefferson- Bernie- 50.9%, Hillary- 49.1%
• Clinton- Bernie- 73.5%, Hillary- 26.5%
• Warren- Bernie- 61.7%, Hillary- 38.3%
• Washington- Bernie- 64.1%, Hillary- 35.9%
• Fulton- Bernie- 61.1%, Hillary- 38.9%
• Essex- Bernie- 73.2%, Hillary- 26.8%
• Franklin- Bernie- 70.9%, Hillary- 29.1%
• Lewis- Bernie- 59.1%, Hillary- 40.9%
• Herkimer- Bernie- 56.0%, Hillary- 44.0%
• Hamilton- Bernie- 63.1%, Hillary- 36.9%

Last year, in an anti-red wave year, Stefanik beat Democrat Tedra Cobb 131,981 (56.1%) to 99,791 (42.4%) and won all but Clinton and Essex counties, both basically tied. As in many Bernie districts, the Democratic establishment pushed a Clinton-type candidate instead of a Bernie-progressive-- and lost. Cobb is running again and she just got her biggest break of the cycle. If her moderate, yes-but-better-than-a-Republican campaign was getting nowhere, Stefanik's clunky and uber-partisan defense of Trump benefitted no one but Cobb. Cobb's campaign raised over half a million dollars last week, her biggest fundraising week ever, and her social media following vaulted to over 200,000 people, now able to reach more people than Stefanik can on Twitter. Meanwhile, Stefanik's carefully-crafted, if misleading, image as a "moderate" lays smashed, irreparably, on the floor of the hearing room and in the minds of millions of Americans who saw her in action, kissing Trump's ass.

As much as Republican Party hacks-- from Nunes to Trump's Goebbels-like press secretary-- tried to push the idea that the hearings are boring and that no one was watching, people were very much watching and the hearings were all over TV, radio, newspapers and social media. CNN reported that the hearings were ratings bonanzas for Fox News and MSNBC. According to Nielsen, Fox averaged 2.9 million viewers at any given time between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. and MSNBC averaged 2.7 million viewers at the same time. How big a deal is that? "On a typical day, Fox News has about 1.5 million viewers during the daytime hours, and MSNBC has closer to 1 million... The ratings contradict claims from some of the president's allies, including one of his sons, Eric Trump, who said on Fox News that 'no one was watching it. No one cares.' Clearly lots of people cared enough to tune in. They also wanted to see the spin later in the day-- Fox's Sean Hannity had one of his highest-rated shows of the year, with 4.4 million total viewers."

It's impossible to estimate how many people watched or heard the hearings across all platforms, since television, radio and streaming video are all measured in different ways.

Some people consumed the hearing in one sitting, but the more common experience is much more scattered-- hearing snippets on the air and seeing clips on social media and headlines on phones.

The ABC, CBS (CBS) and NBC broadcast networks pre-empted regular programming for Wednesday's hearings as well. ABC and CBS averaged 2 million viewers each, and NBC had nearly 1.67 million.

But a much greater total number of people saw some portion of the hearings over the course of six hours. The granular Nielsen data shows fluctuations throughout the proceedings.

CNN, for example, averaged 1.85 million viewers during the entire hearing, peaking at 11 a.m. when more than 2.1 million were tuned in.

The cumulative average audience for the big six channels listed above was 13 million-- about on par with the day former special counsel Robert Mueller testified in July.

Wednesday's hearing was also carried live on PBS; by some local Fox stations; by C-SPAN; and by other television networks.

And the hearing was streamed almost everywhere, on a wide variety of social networks and news websites.

CNN Digital reported strong but not off-the-charts interest in live streams of the testimony.

There's no Nielsen-like way to measure cumulative viewership on the web.

But the overnight ratings indicate that the impeachment hearing reached both political junkies and a wider group of daytime TV viewers.

The vast majority of Americans, however, didn't watch the entire event live-- they soaked it up through social media and heard about it later.

Nielsen estimated 13,787,000 viewers live (while most people are at work or school), however among elderly people, many of whom are retired and at home, there were 10,644,000 viewers live. News clips dominated the nightly news shows and all other forms of media. Elise Stefanik is famous, not as the moderate she has spent years trying to pass herself off as, but as a radical imbecile Trumpist trying to disrupt the hearings to protect a criminal plot to solicit foreign interference in the 2020 election. Stefanik congratulated AOC when she was first elected, saying she was glad to give up the spot as youngest woman in Congress to her and predicting that AOC would inspire other young women. AOC has, while Stefanik has continued to sink into a morass of hyper-partisan Trumpism, adding both another chin and political enemies among moderates and independents.

Washington Post columnist Aaron Blake called Stefanik's shameful game-playing a gender-centric stunt. "During the hearing's first break, Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-NY) declared that Democrats were trying to get Yovanovitch to 'cry for the cameras.' But arguably the most significant moment on that front was one that was manufactured by Republicans-- and rather transparently so. After returning from the first break, ranking Republican Nunes tried to yield time for questioning to Stefanik. But Schiff said Nunes couldn't do that-- that he could only yield to his counsel or ask questions himself. The Republican professed to be perplexed. 'You're gagging the young lady from New York?' Nunes said incredulously. The optics would seem to be pretty bad for Schiff; he was silencing the committee's only female Republican, for apparently no reason except spite. Except that's hardly the case. The rules as voted on by the broader House last month were clear: The chairman, Schiff, and the ranking member, Nunes, each got 45-minute periods to either ask questions or yield to a staff member. (The resolution says: 'Only the chair and ranking minority member, or a Permanent Select Committee employee if yielded to by the chair or ranking minority member, may question witnesses during such periods of questioning.') Afterward, each member would get five minutes, during which they can yield to other members. Stefanik still tried to use the moment for political hay, tweeting, 'Once again, Adam B. Schiff flat out REFUSES to let duly elected Members of Congress ask questions to the witness, simply because we are Republicans.' That is just not true-- Schiff was acting firmly within the rules-- and Nunes and Stefanik have to know that. It's pretty apparent this was a stunt."

Worst Democraps In Congress-- Time For NRA Champion Anthony Brindisi

Brindisi addressing other right-wing fake Democrats

There are just 10 Democrats left who haven't come out for an impeachment inquiry. It's probably the final list-- cowardly careerists afraid of losing their seats. These are the final 10-- 9 Blue Dogs and someone who should be tossed out of the Progressive Caucus-- with Trump's 2016 win numbers in their districts:

• Anthony Brindisi (Blue Dog-NY)- 54.8%
• Joe Cunningham (Blue Dog-SC)- 53.5%
• Jared Golden (Coward-ME)- 51.4%
• Kendra Horn (Blue Dog-OK)- 53.2%
• Ron Kind (New Dem-WI)- 49.3%
• Ben McAdams (Blue Dog-UT)- 39.1%
• Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN)- 61.8%
• Max Rose (Blue Dog-NY)- 53.6%
• Xochitl Torres Small (Blue Dog-NM)- 50.1
• Jeff Van Drew (Blue Dog-NJ)- 50.6%

Before we get into Brindisi, I want to just mention that DCCC chair Cheri Bustos and Señor Trumpanzee can hold a joint fundraiser for Jefferson Van Drew. Wouldn't that be clarifying? Van Drew was on Fox & Friends yesterday throwing shade at fellow Democrats for opening an impeachment inquiry. Trumpanzee tweeted "'All that’s swirling around us now is Impeachment. We talk about it day and night, it’s what’s on the news, there is NOTHING that has turned up that is Impeachable. Our founding fathers set impeachment to be extremely rare. We need to get good stuff done. Let the people vote... we are going to have an Election very shortly.' Rep. Jeff Van Drew, Democrat of New Jersey. @foxandfriends Thank you. Just another Witch Hunt by Nancy Pelosi and the Do Nothing Democrats!" Van Drew told Fox viewers that he doesn’t believe anything "turned up that is truly is impeachable" at this point.

I can understand why Collin Peterson is so scared of Trump voters. He's got a really hard core rural red district, filled with Trumpists. But none of the others do. Trump won marginally in the other districts. The second biggest Trump score was in Brindisi's upstate New York district-- all or part of 8 counties that wanted CHANGE, not Trump. How do I know? In 2016 these counties completely rejected the the status quo candidacy of Hillary Clinton. In fact of the 8 counties in Brindisi's district all 8 went to Bernie in the primary (listed in order of population):

• Oneida

• Bernie- 7,272
• Hillary- 6,054
• Trumpanzee- 10,830

• Broome

• Bernie- 9,176
• Hillary- 7,035
• Trumpanzee- 8,409

• Madison

• Bernie- 2,346
• Hillary- 1,880
• Trumpanzee- 2,968

• Herkimer

• Bernie- 1,755
• Hillary- 1,377
• Trumpanzee- 3,955

• Chenango

• Bernie- 1,494
• Hillary- 958
• Trumpanzee- 2,384

• Cortland

• Bernie- 1,878
• Hillary- 1,402
• Trumpanzee- 1,627

• Oswego

• Bernie- 3,066
• Hillary- 2,424
• Trumpanzee- 6,151

• Tioga

• Bernie- 1,825
• Hillary- 1,232
• Trumpanzee- 2,801

Last year the Republicans managed to lose the two biggest counties-- Oneida, Broome-- hold the 3rd biggest (Madison) by a virtual tie and lose Cortland by double digits. So win is Brindisi such a woos? I asked a member of Congress yesterday. He told me that all Brindisi ever does is whine about how anything the caucus wants to do that is even vaguely progressive. "Do you want to end my career?" is his one and only cpontribution to any discussion about anything. "And I bet he skips right over to Peter King and tells him everything he's heard from our side of the aisle. (Because he's one of the chairs of the Blue Dog caucus, Brindisi is privy to planning sessions so he's hearing a lot more than he should.)

The other day, Brindisi and the Republican next door, John Katko, made a joint statement to the media about opposing the beginning of an impeachment inquiry. Katko is an absolutely horrible member of Congress and, hopefully, the DCCC won't screw up the election again, which will mean he's replaced by progressive champion Dana Balter. But Brindisi is actually a worse-- and more destructive-- member of Congress than Katko is. And Brindisi has no primary. Cheri Bustos has threatened anyone who wants to primary him and, in fact, has been fundraising for him, even after his joint statement with Katko:

Brindisi is bad on just about everything. His ProgressivePunch score is not just an F-- it's tied with fellow Blue Dogs Jeff Van Drew (NJ) and Joe Cunningham (SC) as the worst Democratic record in Congress. His crucial vote score is exactly 20%. As a point of reference, conservative Republicans John Katko (NY) and Thomas Massie (KY) voted more progressively than he does, respectively 21.35% and 28.50%. Brian Fitzpatrick scored a 20.10% and Justin Amash's lifetime score in 32.86%. Amash is very conservative but his score for the current cycle is 57.78%. Compared that to Brindisi's 20.0%. And Brindisi sucks across the board. When Jim Clyburn's moderate background check bill came up for a vote, 7 Republicans voted for it and just 3 Democrats voted against it, Brindisi, of course, being one of them. How about raising the minimum wage? That should be easy for every Democrat, right? Well, almost every Democrat. Three Republicans voted with the Democrats to raise the minimum wage. Six Blue Dogs who hate the working class-- Xochitl Torres Small (NM), Kurt Schrader (OR), Joe Cunningham (SC), Ben McAdams (UT), Kendra Horn (OK) and, of course Brindisi (NY) voted to kill it. Does this lunkhead think voters-- who backed Bernie in 2019-- in Binghampton, Rome, Utica, Cortland and Oneida don't want better wages? This clown deserves to lose his seats. I asked my friend the congressman if he agrees. His whispered, "yes!" This is the kind of raw sewage in a suit and tie that Cheri Bustos is trying to protect from progressives.





And the Democrats who kiss up to the GOP most-- and most frequently vote for their reactionary positions and policies-- are the ones the NRCC goes after with the most vehemence. This ad above started running over the weekend to destroy freshman Blue Dog Max Rose, even though he-- like his pal Brindisi-- has adamantly and publicly opposed an impeachment inquiry. This is the misleading press statement the NRCC sent out: "Aware of the political damage it will cause, Max Rose is desperate to convince Staten Island voters he hasn’t backed the socialist Democrats baseless impeachment of President Trump."

When Dylan Ratigan Said He Might Have Voted For Trump, Everyone's Jaw Dropped. When Richard Ojeda Said He Did Vote For Trump, He Won The Democratic Primary

Elisse Stefanik's North Country district (NY-21) is the biggest in New York State. Obama won it both times he ran but in 2016 it saw a big red swing. An even PVI is now R+4. Trump crushed Hillary 53.9% to 40.0%. And Stefanik was reelected in a landslide-- 65.3% to 30.2%. The DCCC had insisted on another conservative candidate to replicate their last congressman in the district, an exceptionally bad Blue Dog Bill Owens, who had retired in 2014.

The district includes all of Clinton, Franklin, St. Lawrence, Jefferson, Lewis, Hamilton, Essex, Warren, Washington and Fulton counties and parts of Saratoga and Herkimer counties. Democrats up there don't go for status quo, establishment conservaDems. The district vote overwhelmingly for Zephyr Teachout against Andrew Cuomo in the last gubernatorial primary and this is how each county voted in the 2016 presidential primary:

• Clinton- Bernie- 73.5%; Hillary- 26.5%
• Essex- Bernie- 73.2%; Hillary- 26.8%
• Franklin- Bernie- 70.95%; Hillary- 29.1%
• Fulton- Bernie- 61.1%; Hillary- 38.9%
• Hamilton- Bernie- 63.1%; Hillary- 36.9%
• Herkimer- Bernie- 56.0%; Hillary- 44.0%
• Jefferson- Bernie- 50.9%; Hillary- 49.1%
• Lewis- Bernie- 59.1%; Hillary- 40.9%
• Saratoga- Bernie- 55.8%; Hillary- 44.2%
• St. Lawrence- Bernie- 58.9%; Hillary- 41.1%
• Warren- Bernie- 61.7%; Hillary- 38.3%
• Washington- Bernie- 64.1%; Hillary- 35.9%

So, you've probably noticed by now, that every single county-- most in landslides, voted for the progressive, not for the establishment mode4rate who had been the state's senator. Does that make the DCCC stop and think about what kind of a candidate Democrats want in that district? Of course not; DCCC staffing decisions favors morons and conservatives.

Currently there are five Democrats competing in the June 26 primary for the opportunity to go up against Stefanik. Not all of them have raised enough money to run a competitive campaign against Stefanik, who is sitting on a $1,301,870 warchest.

• Tendra Cobb- $293,256
• Emily Martz- $215,084
• Katie Wilson- $166,464
• Dylan Ratigan- $150,948
• Patrick Nelson- $53,620

The only candidate who had raised substantial money, Don Boyajian ($492,873) withdrew this month to run for an Assembly seat instead. and the candidate with the most name recognition, former MSNBC host Dylan Ratigan, made a possibly fatal error a couple of weeks ago at a Democratic women's luncheon. He didn't voted in 2016 but told the audience that if he had he might have voted for Trump.

The statement is significant because Trump remains deeply unpopular and even toxic among many of the rank-and-file Democrats in the 21st House district who will decide next month's primary.

“It’s mind-boggling that a Democratic candidate asking for my vote would say this,” said Julie Wash from the town of Stillwater. She told North Country Public Radio that Ratigan made the comment in response to questions she posed.

“He said, I would have voted for Trump,” Wash recalled. “There was silence and everyone’s jaw dropped.”

...Asked by NCPR to detail her exchange with Ratigan, Wash said it began when she asked who he would have supported in the 2016 presidential race, if he had voted. He first named Bernie Sanders, she recalled.

Wash reminded Ratigan that Sen. Sanders wasn’t on the general election ballot and asked again who he would have chosen. That’s when Ratigan voiced a preference for Trump, she said.

Three other people at the table that day corroborated Wash’s account: “She kind of pressed [Ratigan] to choose between Clinton and Trump,” said Alan Stern, a Democrat from Greenwich. “He said, I would have voted for Donald Trump. I was pretty shocked as I think most of the people at the table were.”

“He said Donald Trump,” agreed Stern’s wife Mary Lou. “We all kind of looked at each other, like, did we hear that correctly?”

A fourth Democrat, Jill Nadolski from West Hebron, wasn’t interviewed by NCPR, but sent a public letter to the Glens Falls Post Star last week describing the exchange. Nadolski, who is Mary Lou Stern’s sister, wrote that she heard Ratigan voice support for Trump, while comparing himself to the Republican as “an outsider like me.”

Later, on a radio show, he tried worming out of it by saying he was joking and that the reports are part of a dirty tricks campaign designed to harm his campaign. He said "Somebody is trafficking in rumors to try to take me down because they’re threatened by my candidacy, which is part of our broken political system."

The Democrats who recounted the conversation are all supporters of Tedra Cobb of Canton, one of Ratigan’s primary opponents. All voiced anger about his Trump comments, but denied being part of an orchestrated effort to weaken his candidacy.

They described themselves as average voters, low-level unpaid volunteers and small-scale donors for the Cobb campaign, not the kind of experienced operatives who would take part in a political hatchet job.  None attempted to contact NCPR, but agreed to be interviewed after being telephoned by a reporter.

During those interviews, they also pushed back against Ratigan’s assertion that he spoke about Trump in jest. “In no way did I get that this was sarcastic or humorous,” Wash said.

“This is not a joke. Our republic is falling apart and for him to even insinuate that he was joking [about voting for Trump] inflames me.”

Trump remains a deeply polarizing figure in the North Country. After his surprise victory in November 2016, many Democrats in the 21st district joined marches and protest rallies focused on issues ranging from immigrant and women’s rights to healthcare and climate change. In interviews with NCPR, many Democratic voters say opposition to Trump has energized them ahead of the mid-term election.

On one level this reminds me of the battle in southern West Virginia where Democrat Richard Ojeda is facing off against Carol Miller in the third district. Ojeda-- like the 2016 primary voters in his district-- went heavily for Bernie. In the general election the district went heavily for Trump (a 72.5% to 23.3% landslide, one of Hillary's most catastrophic performances anywhere in the country). Ojeda was one of the Democrats who voted for Bernie in the primary and flipped to Trump in the general election. In the May 8th primary, he beat the 3 other Democrats combined.

• Richard Ojeda- 29,837 (52.05%)
• Shirley Love- 14,251 (24.86%)
• Paul Davis- 9,063 (15.81%)
• Janice Hagerman- 4,176 (7.28%)

He also beat the top Republican running, eventual GOP nominee Carol Miller, who got 8,936 votes. In fact, Ojeda took more votes than the 3 top Republicans combined. 57,327 Democrats were motivated to get out and vote in the primary but just 37,585 Republicans bothered showing up. Ojeda could actually win this thing. He's running on Bernie's economic populism but on the social conservatism that has helped Democrat Joe Manchin win both gubernatorial and Senate races deep in the heart of Trump country.

Will the same dynamic propel Ratigan to a victory next Tuesday in upstate New York? He's been trying to explain why he has disdain and contempt for the Democratic establishment and how that establishment has enabled Trump. We'll see if that works for him and short circuits the DCCC.

John Kasich Wouldn't Have To Deny He's About To Become An Independent, If He Wasn't Considering It

Did you watch Ohio Governor John Kasich on State of the Union with Jake Tapper Sunday? There's a short clip above you should watch. He was railing against the Trump-Bannon wing-- "if the party can't be fixed, Jake, then I’m not going to be able to support the party. Period. That’s the end of it. I mean, I’m worried about our country and my kids’ future. I am worried about it. But have I given up? Of course not." Tapper interrupts his ad for Brian Sandoval by asking him if "giving up on the party" means he's talking about "possibly becoming an independent." Kasich almost slips. At the 1:15 point on the video, he responds, "No, not at this p..." but backing off and going back to his "we need to fix it" mantra. "If the Republican Party is going to be anti-immigration, if it’s not going to be worried about debt, if it’s going to be anti-trade, this is not where our party can be."

Well, Republican voters spoke last November and that is where they are. Every poll shows that while a large and growing majority of the country-- including most independent and unaffiliated voters-- rejects Trump's ugly right-wing populism, Republican voters stand firmly with him. Kasich can continue fighting-- "that's why I'm on these shows," he said plaintively-- but it isn't doing much good, at least not yet. His party it spiraling into a civil war and the rest of the country is increasingly turning against the Republican Party and their leaders. The 2018 midterms are shaping up into an apocalypse for the GOP already. The Republicans are out of synch with the vast majority of American voters on just about everything. That new PPP poll, for example:

Trump may be doing poorly with the overall electorate but he's still in pretty firm control of the Republican Party. By a 34 point margin, 61/27, GOP voters say they'd rather have Trump be their candidate for President in 2020 than anyone else. His margins against specific potential Republican challengers are even more emphatic. He leads Mike Pence by 38 points at 59/21, John Kasich by 50 points at 68/18, and Ted Cruz by 53 points at 68/15. His leadership style might not be doing much to help him win over Americans in the middle but it's helping him keep a strong hold on his party base.

Steve Krieg is no John Kasich (although he voted for him in the Republican primary last year). He's a member of the Plattsburgh, NY School Board and last week he announced that he's running for Congress as a Democrat against Elise Stefanik, a vaguely mainstream conservative in upstate New York. She's already got a primary challenger, a Libertarian challenger and at least half a dozen Democrats vying for the party nomination. Krieg, however, was always a Republican and he switched parties and is now claiming to be a Democrat. Which is great; I love new members of the party coming over from the Dark Side. But... is this someone who voted for George W. Bush twice? Who opposed Obama twice? Who voted for Señor Trumpanzee less than a year ago? And now he thinks because he switched parties he's entitled to become the highest-ranking Democrat in NY-21, a huge sprawling North Country district that stretches from Lake Champlain up where New York, Vermont and Canada all meet, south to the outskirts of Saratoga Springs and west to pasted Watertown to Lake Ontario. It's the biggest district in the state and Obama won it both times with 52%. Last year the PVI was "even" and Trump beat Hillary 53.9% to 40.0%. The PVI is now a much redder R+4.

Stefanik has been a complete Ryan rubber stamp, which makes sense, since she was a Ryan staffer before being elected to Congress in 2014. This evening all the candidates except Stefanik will take part in a forum at the Williams High School Auditorium in Canton, including Russ Finley, the Republican challenging her, and these 7 Democrats: Don Boyajian of Cambridge, Tedra Cobb of Canton, Ronald Kim of Queensbury, Emily Martz of Saranac Lake, Patrick Nelson of Stillwater (the Berniecat in the race), Katie Wilson of Keene and, of course, new Democratic "convert" Steve Krieg of Plattsburgh. I guess we'll find out which Republican ideas he's clinging to and which Democratic ideas he's embraced. Think he's a Medicare-for-All backer? His website has no positions page and no clues about where he stands on anything at all (which is similar to most of the candidates other than Nelson, who is very upfront about advocating progressive positions across the board). When I did speak with him, he told me he's put his positions on his Facebook page instead of his website. A couple of months ago Krieg did post a very un-Democratic message on Stefanik's Facebook page: "I intend to kick your stingy, money-grubbing, sniveling coward of a butt out of congress. Don't worry, sweetie, you're a little girl. You can always run home to Mommy and Daddy." Welcome to the party... I guess.

A little update-- after writing the above, I spoke with Krieg on the phone for about an hour.. He switched parties in April-- it will become "official" in December-- because he had been growing more and more frustrated with the Republican Party and then Trump, for whom he did not vote, was the last straw. In fact, he decided to run against Stefanik because she doesn't stand up to Trump and because she doesn't engage in policy conversations with her constituents. When I asked him if there's anything that attracted him to the Democratic Party, he said it was the two parties' relative positions on climate change. He's an optometrist who believes the private sector does things better than the public sector except when it comes to healthcare. He said he liked Bernie's single-payer approach but felt it would have to be implemented incrementally over time because otherwise it "would piss a lot of people off."

He's also "pro-life," not pro-choice and, although he isn't judgmental about a woman stuck in "a trap" pushing her towards an abortion, he would vote against the use of federal funds for abortions. And, since I talked to him less than 24 hours after the mass shooting in Las Vegas, I asked him about semi-automatic weapons. His positions sounded like they came straight out of a canned NRA narrative of flawed "logic," utterly fake "facts" and crackpot theories. He said he will always come down on the side of workers over corporations but was unable to back a $15 minimum wage in the long, windy conversation. Personally, I think he should spend a couple of years being a Democrat and interacting with Democrats politically in Plattsburgh before running for Congress. After our q and a session, he accused me of "possibly" working for one of his opponents to find out what he will say at the candidates' forum tonight.

Beltway Dems Found Another Republican To Recruit-- This Time In New York

New York Democrats are counting on Hillary to turn out the voters in 2016. NY-21-- the North Country-- has an even PVI, although Obama beat McCain 52-47% and then beat Romney 52-46%. When Obama appointed John McHugh, the incumbent Republican, Secretary of the Army in 2009, the Republicans nominated a well-known moderate Assemblywoman, Dede Scozzafava; the Democrats nominated a barely known Republican-lite New Dem, Bill Owens; and the Conservative Party nominated a teabagger, Doug Hoffman. A few days before the election, Scozzafava, who had been brutally attacked by Sarah Palin and her crazed far right allies, withdrew and endorsed Owens, who beat Hoffman 48-46%. In 2010 the NRCC targeted Owens and put up a wealthy Wall Street bankster, Matt Doheny. Owens won, again 48-46%. And in 2012 the Owens-Doheny rematch gave Owens a 50-48% win. Owens announced he wouldn't run again in 2014 and the Democrats nominated a very weak candidate, Aaron Woolf, who was thrashed by Republican newcomer Elise Stefanik, 55.2% to 33.5%.

Now the DCCC would like to win back the seat and they've been trying to recruit another Republican opportunist-- their specialty-- William Derrick, a retired Army colonel. Derrick has nothing to do with the Democratic Party or the values and principles of Democratic voters. From 1980 to 2004 he was a registered Republican, and then he became politically inactive. In 2006 he registered as an independent (unaffiliated) in Colorado and soon switched back to the GOP. Last month he moved back to New York and reregistered... as a Democrat.

Democrats don't have enough of their own garbage candidates that their corrupt Beltway committees have to hunt for Republican garbage to run? Just what we need-- another opportunist like Patrick Murphy! What makes the DCCC and DSCC recruit candidates like Owens, Derrick and Murphy? They seem to always favor candidates based on their Republican-ness-- Are power-mongers like Chuck Schumer, Jon Tester, Steve Israel, Rahm Emanuel and Chris Van Hollen self-loathing Democrats? Wall Street whores? A little of each? Did the Cro-Magnons recruit the Neanderthals? Did the Romans recruit the Vandals? Did the British recruit the Mau Maus? When did it start to be a good idea that you pretend to be your opponent? They are killing off any motivation for anyone to vote Democratic. They act as though a party is a social club, like the freakin’ Kiwanis. Or a business venture for a pack of career-obsessed egomaniacs. No Republican-lite candidates on this page-- not ever.

What Kind Of People Sell Personal Information From Donors?

If someone offered me a huge sum for the Blue America mailing list, I would tell them no. If they doubled the offer, I would tell them to go suck wind. Today I got an e-mail from a candidate in New York who I've never been in contact with, Aaron Woolf, a film producer from New York's North Country who is trying to hold a rough swing district for the Democrats. The current incumbent, right-wing leaning New Dem, Bill Owens, saw the handwriting on the wall and announced he would be retiring. Happy to see him go. His 32.87 Progressive Punch crucial vote score is exactly tied with Republican Chris Gibson's (R-NY) and more right-wing than Walter Jones' (R-NC). The only Democrats who vote more frequently against progressive proposals or with the GOP are Sean Patrick Maloney (New Dem-NY), Pete Gallego (Blue Dog-TX), Mike McIntyre (Blue Dog-NC), Ron Barber (Blue Dog-AZ), John Barrow (Blue Dog-GA) and Jim Matheson (Blue Dog-UT). Sticking with Steve Israel's insistence on adhering to the moronic "mystery meat strategy," Woolf has no issues on his campaign website. So who knows if he'll even be better than Owens or just as horrible. Or worse.

There was nothing about his stands on issues in the e-mail he sent me and stories about him online are generally devoid of anything to do with issues. He owns an organic deli in Brooklyn, which is a 6 hour drive from Plattsburgh. This from the biggest newspaper in the district, the Watertown Daily Times:

A call to his store/deli yielded the information that he doesn’t spend all that much time there. Calls to leading north country Democrats have so far failed to yield a number at which Mr. Woolf can be reached. He has no campaign committee that anyone can find, even though a Republican frontrunner to be on the ballot in November, Elise Stefanik, has a well-oiled political campaign and has raised a quarter of a million dollars. With sufficient effort, I can reach Ms. Stefanik, or at least someone who can reach her. She’s already been in this newspaper office, met with our editorial board. She has an actual platform, a set of ideals that she can elucidate-- whether you like them or not.

Thus far, in terms of organization and quality of candidates based on what we know about them, it’s Republicans 1, Democrats 0. Ms. Stefanik has worked hard over the past year to make her name known from the Vermont border to Lake Ontario. She waltzed through the Republican selection process and although there is almost certainly going to be a GOP primary for the seat, she appears ready to take on all comers. This is known as a serious candidate.

Is Aaron Woolf a serious candidate? A full day has passed since his name was drawn out of the Democrats’ hat, and the closest anyone can come to answering that question is ... maybe. In an interview posted in an online magazine, Mr. Woolf comes across as a thoughtful man and a talented maker of documentaries. He has a passion for agriculture with a small a, and with his Brooklyn store, he has put his money where his heart is — he seeks locally produced, organically grown products to sell in the big city, and he sells Saranac Brewery products from the Adirondacks. Good for him!

But ... how does he feel about Fort Drum? How does he feel about gun control? How does he feel about economic development for Northern New York, especially given his connection to the Adirondack Park? Can he find Rossie and Rosiere, Lorraine and Lousville, Osceola and Ogdensburg, without a GPS or a paid driver? If he was forced to honestly answer the question “How much time do you spend in metropolitan New York and how much time in Elizabethtown?”, what would he say?

For the north country, these are big, big questions. Fort Drum, the largest single employer in the state of New York, needs a strong and devoted champion in the House of Representatives. The integrity and the ability to easily cross the Canadian border in both directions is a vital issue here. The farm bill, and especially its dairy provisions, has to be a major priority for anyone who wants to represent this region in Congress. We don’t know how Aaron Woolf feels about any of these issues. Until he deigns to come out in public, we won’t know.

Beyond that, however, is a greater concern for the west side of the 21st district, which is about the size of Tennessee: if the ballots the voters see on Nov. 4 bear the names Aaron Woolf on the Democratic line and Elise Stefanik on the Republican row, we will be selecting between a part-time Elizabethtown homeowner with his roots in New York City and a conservative Washington policy wonk who hasn’t wanted to be anything but a politician since she was in eighth grade chorus. And no matter what angle I come at that from, I don’t see how the more than 250,000 people of Franklin, St. Lawrence, Lewis and Jefferson counties can win.

Finally, last month, the mysterious Woolf did an interview with the public radio station. He's pro-Choice and pro-marriage equality. So at least we know that about him. He's as pro-gun as a Democrat needs to be in a hunting district. And it wants to fix-- not repeal-- to Affordable Care Act. All standard Democratic Party fare. Will he turn out to be as bad as Owens? Not likely… but who really knows?

No one in the district may know who he is but Israel put him right on the DCCC's Emerging Races list. This will be a very difficult district to hold. Woolf will not win by saying "I'm a Democrat so vote for me." The PVI is dead Even, though Obama won with 52% in 2008 and again in 2012. Owens squeaked through last time 126,631 (50%) to 121,646 (48%) after an internal Republican bloodbath, followed by two contests against far right extremist (and perverted playboy) Matt Doheney.

The massive 21st CD has a dozen counties. Owens won 4 and Doheney won 8, but Owens' big win in Clinton County, the main Democratic county, neutralized Doheney's narrow wins in Jefferson, Warren and Saratoga counties, the GOP heartland.

So back to that e-mail I got from Woolf today. It was typical DCCC consultant drivel:

He's at it again folks.



Congressman Paul Ryan has proposed another budget akin to his 2010 plan. He wants to cut Medicare, slash K-12 education programs, and eliminate transportation investment by $172 billion over 10 years.



I need your support.

This June, if the Republican establishment has its way, I'll be running against Congressman Ryan's former debate aide, Elise Stefanik. Please click here to contribute $5 or more to my campaign.



Ending the Medicare guarantee and forcing seniors to pay more is not the answer. We must work together to find responsible ways to reduce our debt that don't cripple job creation, burden our seniors and students, or penalize middle class families.



I'm running to ensure that our North Country senior citizens keep the healthcare and physician access for which they have worked so hard.

If the DCCC was serious about the danger of Paul Ryan, they would be helping Rob Zerban win in Wisconsin's first CD. But they're not helping him-- the same way they didn't help him in 2012. I sent the e-mail to Zerban as a laugh. He wrote back asking me if I knew how Woolf got his mother's e-mail address. She got the letter too. Like we warned last December, the DCCC-- or at least the corrupt, revolving-door consultants they're in business with-- steal the lists and sell them to candidates they "work" for. Moral of the story? Um… don't vote for mystery meat candidates and don't contribute or sign a petition that comes from an entities connected to the DCCC. What kind of people sell personal information from donors? The same kind of people who rob their synagogue. That should cover it.

Oh, yeah, so… forget about the DCCC mystery meat candidates but, by all means, contribute to actually stop Paul Ryan-- you can do it by supporting Rob Zerban here.