Potential Shocker On Tuesday?

There is going to be a gigantic Democratic Party victory in congressional races around the country. With an immense majority, though, I expect we will see tremendous disappointment as Democrats fail to accomplish progressive goals because of the enhanced power of nominal Democrats from deep in the bowels of the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. Earlier this morning we looked at the cynical approach of corporatist Democrats like Rahm Emanuel and Steny Hoyer who are using so-called "free" trade as a potent campaign issue to beat up on Republican incumbents while their own records are as bad-- if not worse-- than the Republicans! They admit that after the election they will work on new Democrats to "moderate" (i.e.- come over to the Dark Side) their positions. And this morning's Wall Street Journal reassures its reactionary readers that with enhanced clout within the Democratic caucus, the Blue Dogs will have the power to prevent any real reform from making America a more progressive nation.

Also this morning I was looking at some potential good news regarding possible losses from a couple of the worst most reactionary Democrats in Congress, Jim Marshall (GA) and Nick Lampson (TX), two whose voting records show they stand with the GOP far more than with the Democrats when it comes to representing the interests of working families. Members like Marshall and Lampson, in some ways, are even worse than actual Republicans, because these treacherous Blue Dogs eat away at the heart and soul of progressivism from within the Democratic Party. One of my friends with a similar perspective e-mailed me at around 6 this morning:

I want to choke when I read in places like Daily Kos things like: "Good news! This poll shows Carney with a solid lead" or "Bad news-- Jim Marshall is struggling." 

I mean-- I understand that in a two-party system, only one party can win, but when you know that your party is going to have a 60-seat margin (at least), there's no reason to openly cheer for people that support every horrible thing there is.

I wonder if the Kosack who was bemoaning Marshall's re-election problem even knows that, in the end, Marshall was the only Democrat to stand with Bush's veto of healthcare for needy children (SCHIP). I doubt it. But if Marshall does lose his seat on Tuesday, I would be shocked, pleasantly so. Same for Lampson. Voters are excited about Obama and think voting for generic "Democrats," even arch-reactionaries like Marshall and Lampson, will give Obama the ability to push through his agenda for change, an agenda that will be blocked by congressman like Marshall and Lampson who vote far more frequently with the GOP on substantive matters than with Democrats.

This morning Bob Geiger, a Senate expert who was the only person I know of who called every single Senate contest correctly in 2006, predicted that the Democrats would reach the filibuster-proof magic number. He is forecasting Democratic victories in 3 open Republican seats: Virginia, New Mexico and Colorado plus red to blue switches in Oregon, New Hampshire, Alaska, North Carolina, Minnesota, and, after a run-off, Georgia. That leaves the Democrats with 60 if you count Lieberman as a Democrat and if you ignore that nominal Democrats like Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu, Evan Bayh and others who cross the aisle and vote with the GOP frequently.

It's a dire look for a best-case scenario. The only way around it would be to elect 3 more progressives-- Andrew Rice in Oklahoma, Rick Noriega in Texas, and Tom Allen in Maine-- all of whom are struggling to gain traction but none of whom face hopeless situations. The Democratic Establishment Inside-the-Beltway will instead squander precious resources to help the most reactionary "Democratic" candidate running anywhere-- Bruce Lunsford in Kentucky, who, if he wins, will be an even worse and more corrupting presence than Ben Nelson and Mary Landrieu.

So what's the shocker from the headline? Ah... glad you remembered. It's in the House. Yesterday, we reminded you that the Insider prognosticators and pundits and pollsters shape the national perception of races and often miss key ones. No one talked about Nancy Boyda, Dave Loebsack or Carol Shea-Porter in the run up to the 2006 election. But all are members of Congress today. This morning CQPolitics moved the race in Idaho's first district from leans or likely Republican (incumbent extremist loon Bill Sali) to "toss up." For Insiders like CQPolitics to make a call like that, it pretty much means that Democrat Walt Minnick has the race in the bag. In any case, this race-- which has been the subject of optimistic chatter for weeks--is far from the shocker. The shocker (this year's equivalents of the Boyda, Loebsack and Shea-Porter victories) would be the races we talked about yesterday Rob Hubler and Becky Greenwald in Iowa and Steve O'Donnell in Pennsylvania.

Yes, the Beltway Cooks and Schnooks, have never looked seriously at any of these races but inside the districts, people who know a lot more about it than they ever will see a potential for change that the Cooks and Schnooks will call unpredictable and even cataclysmic on Tuesday if they come to fruition. Yesterday we looked at the Des Moines Register endorsements for progressive challengers Becky Greenwald and Rob Hubler. Today there was a much bigger surprise. One of the most conservative newspapers in the country, owned in fact by neo-Nazi Richard Mellon Scaife, the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review called for the defeat of Republican rubber stamp incumbent Tim Murphy in PA-18. The content of the endorsement is mind-boggling and must have left Murphy shattered this morning when he read it. Predictably, it attacks him from the right:

"We have serious problems and it's time for serious solutions," says Tim Murphy, Pennsylvania's 18th District congressman, in one of his campaign re-election commercials.

So, why isn't he offering any?

Mr. Murphy, 56, of Upper St. Clair, is seeking his fourth House term. But he doesn't deserve it.

Not only does Murphy remain under the cloud of a federal investigation that's attempting to determine if he illegally used his taxpayer-funded staff for impermissible political work, his conservative credentials have turned about as cloudy as they come.

The paper goes on to savage him for supporting the Employee Free Choice Act-- the biggest bugaboo for the Greed and Selfishness wing of the GOP this year-- their version of gay marriage-- and then mentions that "Murphy fails to give his Republican Party affiliation in his campaign commercials and literature. It sounds to us as if he's ready to switch parties and join the emboldened Nancy Pelosi Democrat-Socialist liberal majority on Capitol Hill. There's no excuse for Tim Murphy. And the electorate should make none for him."

It's not exactly a ringing endorsement for proud progressive Steve O'Donnell but the effect is what's key and for Republican voters already disillusioned by McCain's erratic, directionless campaign, this is exactly what the doctor ordered to keep depressed Republicans away from the polls on Tuesday-- in a district where registration has swung over to Democrats by 60,000. The DCCC is busy pumping millions of dollars into races of anti-choice fanatics-- Democratic anti-choice fanatics-- like Bobby Bright and Parker Griffith in Alabama, Kathy Dahlkemper just north of PA-18 up in Erie, David Boswell in Kentucky, Bill O'Neill in Ohio, etc-- while just a small push for a real Democrat like Steve O'Donnell would win him the race. But do they want real Democrats? Or do they want more reactionary garbage who will vote with the GOP the way Don Cazayoux and Travis Childers have been doing since millions of dollars in Democratic money was pumped into their special elections a few months ago?

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

Dick & Tim-- helping turn PA bluer

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



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

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


UPDATE: ET TU, SHAYS?

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

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

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