Red Racing Horses
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

Weekend Open Thread Part II or III

by: rdelbov

Sun Mar 25, 2012 at 13:52:15 PM EDT


Are we past talking about Louisiana?  No, but let's have a clean place to discuss it. How about a couple of questions?

1st How would you improve the GOP nomination process? 

2nd  What is the fairest way to elect delegates?

3rd Does Romney have the nomination locked up?

My answers are below.
rdelbov :: Weekend Open Thread Part II or III

1. Not a fan of the caucus format for electing delegates.  Republican primary voters IMO should select delegates.

2. CD winners gets 3 delegates, and statewide is proportional.  I think that is the fairest way. Let the winners win. This format along with having primaries for every state would ensure that.

3. Unless Mitt really stumbles he is the heavy favorite.  Not quite locked up but 97% certain.
Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Weekend Open Thread Part II or III | 133 comments
Answers
1) I think all states should be required to have fully proportional primaries, caucuses should be suppressed with extreme prejudice, and no jurisdiction without electoral votes should have any delegates at all. Also, no delegates should be seated for any state that holds a primary before March 1st. No formal debates should be held before January 1st. This of course applies to both parties.

2) Answered above, with the addendum that no delegates should be tied to congressional districts. A district with 4926 votes (IL-04) should hardly carry the same weight as a district with 37371 votes (IL-18).

3) Romney has the nomination locked up barring a LG/LB type situation. The only serious question is how much drama remains before it plays out, and whether that'll extend to the convention itself.

Democrat, NC-11

Proportional primaries
With proportional primaries you're almost guaranteed a result like the Democrats had in 2008 where neither candidate got the majority. Obama only did because the super delegates sided with him.

And that's with only 2 candidates. With more than 2, you are guaranteed that. Your solution will lead to a fight on the convention floor almost every time.

R, CA-37; hometown: PA-2

[ Parent ]
Oh, right
Add banning 'super-delegates' or any approximation thereof to my list! All delegates should be tied directly to votes.

Democrat, NC-11
[ Parent ]
Floor fight
so you want every nomination come down to a floor fight?  

R, CA-37; hometown: PA-2
[ Parent ]
Huh?
There would be almost no reasonable scenario that would ever result in a floor fight under my scheme. You would either need two candidates to get nearly the same number of votes throughout the entire primary cycle, or three strong candidates.

If a candidate gets 50%+1 of the votes cast during the primary season, they should automatically lock up the nomination.

Oh, and any 'released' delegate slots (when candidates drop out) should result in a reallocation of delegates from any state where the withdrawn candidate had received delegates.

And, if you're still worried about routine floor fights, just put in a threshold of 15% for receiving delegates.

Democrat, NC-11

[ Parent ]
Delegate allocation
I'm not sure what you want to do with released delegates and whether you're eliminating any super/automatic delegates. Because there are always multiple candidates, no one is likely to get 50%+1. John Edwards prevented Clinton from getting that in 2008. She got 48.0%

2008 would've been a madhouse for Republicans, as Romney, McCain, and Huckabee were fairly close in most states and each had a few where they dominated.

If you reallocate "released" delegates to the remaining candidates proportionally and do away with super/automatic delegates you will get 50%+1. What if 3 candidates keep their delegates and no one ends with a majority. Using your scheme, Gingrich would be in third, but not nearly as far back as he is now.

If everything works exactly the way you want it to there won't be a floor fight. The primaries, however, will be guaranteed to go all the way to the last primary each time. Clinton and Obama were separated by less than 1%. This year Santorum and Romney both have strong states.

R, CA-37; hometown: PA-2

[ Parent ]
OK
First of all, it only works if caucuses are eliminated.

This is not an apples to oranges comparison:

2008 Washington Dem Caucus

Obama: 21,768 votes
Clinton: 10,038 votes

97 delegates

2008 South Dakota Dem Primary

Clinton: 54,128 votes
Obama: 43,669 votes

23 delegates

That said, Hillary may very well have won out. Why do you seem to think I have a problem with that idea? I would've been just fine with either Obama or Hillary, as was the case with the vast majority of Democrats in 2008.

In a three-candidate scenario, it's certainly possible to end up with a convention fight, just as it is now. I already said that. What I added was that it's not significantly more likely; you said it would be routine. I see no reason why.

Once a frontrunner emerges and consolidates the vote, like McCain did in 2008, the others will fall by the wayside, just the way it goes now. The blunt fact is that Santorum and Gingrich refuse to go away because Romney is an awful frontrunner that a majority of Republicans clearly don't want. That is not representative of the typical primary.

Romney's problems this year are the result of being a fundamentally flawed candidate, not a result of the system.
In a purely winner-take-all system he'd be in far worse shape right now.

This would be the current delegate split:

Mitt: 575 delegates
Rick: 461 delegates
Newt: 101 delegates
Paul: 9 delegates

Democrat, NC-11

[ Parent ]
Your Washington state numbers are way off
The c. 32,000 votes you cite are actually the number of precinct level delegates elected at the first level of the caucus process.

Actually voter turnout for the 2008 Washington caucuses was much higher - although no official numbers were ever released, it was estimated to be close to 300,000 (still lower per capita turnout than a primary, but much higher than the precinct delegate number you cite). In just one state legislative district in King County, caucus turnout was over 18,000 (http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/02/results )

[ Parent ]
I stand corrected!
I did think that seemed shockingly low, even considering the caucus/primary issue.

That said, those are the figures that are used for Washington as part of arriving at the commonly cited 48.26% Hillary vs. 47.12% Obama breakdown.

Democrat, NC-11

[ Parent ]
PS.
I didn't finally decide whether to vote for Obama or Hillary until I was in the voting booth in 2008. I was switching my preference just about every other day. That's because I couldn't decide which one I liked most. That's a totally different scenario than this year's Republican primary, where voters who are indecisive are mainly trying to decide who they dislike least.

Democrat, NC-11
[ Parent ]
In fact...
..I actually drove to the polling place planning to vote for Hillary, and basically changed my mind and voted for Obama after I had filled out the rest of my ballot. It's also the only election since 1998 that I've voted on election day itself, because I couldn't decide between them. Ordinarily I vote on the first day of early voting, especially for general elections, just in case I die before election day, so that one of my final acts can be voting against Republicans. ;)

Democrat, NC-11
[ Parent ]
BTW
If it's unclear, what I favor is a system that basically results every time in the nomination going to whoever gets the greatest number of votes throughout the primary. The only caveats are:

(a) I agree with weighting the states based on how many votes they cast for the party's nominee in the last presidential election, which is reason #1 for not doing a simple vote count.

(b) If a nominee wraps up the nomination, turnout is likely to suffer in later states, which is reason #2 for not doing a simple vote count.

(c) I think party conventions are a healthy, necessary part of the democratic process, which is the reason #1 for still having delegates rather than using a simple mathematical equation.

(d) I think there should be a 'safety-valve' by which a nominee who somehow manages to become unacceptable (say, by example, the Edwards scandal had erupted in June '08 in a hypothetical world where he had a majority of delegates, and he still refused to withdraw), which is reason #2 for still having delegates rather than using a simple mathematical equation (and a mechanism by which they can become unbound).

Democrat, NC-11

[ Parent ]
Mine
1. No caucuses. No state votes before The first Tuesday in February.

2. I don't mind the gerrymandered delegate selection process, when it gets us the best possible nominee. I say leave it alone.

3. Mitt is more or less inevitable at this point.

Lifelong Republican, TX-17

My Take
1.

First, no longer have states' make up their own rules. I'm a big advocate for federalism, but the GOP is not the government, it is a private entity, so we need to set up one set of rules for everyone to follow.

Second, IA, NH, etc... cannot happen anymore, it puts way too much emphasis (for over a year) in states that do not have that much impact in a general (yes, they are swing states, but they are not front in center all the time). So, we should have 8 regional primaries (also, get rid of caucuses). That way each region can rotate randomly, therefore, it will be easier to travel, but it places greater emphasis in many more areas at once.

Third, the primaries should be between a 5 month strech from the beginning of March until the end of July. This way it will discourage prospective candidates from entering way too early. It will also allow each region to get about an equal amount of time - for candidates to campaign.

Fourth, debates should be outlawed until the November before the first March primary. And only one debate can take place every three weeks. However, town hall style events can take place at any time. This way, we can get rid of the stupid "gotch ya" questions from liberal moderators and instead have more substance from actual voters.

Lastly, the primaries should all be closed, meaning only registered Republicans can vote. I would like to go a step further and only allow GOP voters that participated in the previous election cycle's GOP primary (in any race), but that won't fly. Therefore, by at least having only GOP voters participate, we cannot get the left to muddle up our process or have a liberal/moderate Republican as the nominee again. Now, some may say that could leave us with a horrible nominee (if this rule applied this year, it certainly would have), however, it might be enough motivation to get a strong Republican in.

2. Each congressional district that is held by Republican should have two delegates, while those that are not have one. The rest should be winner take all for whoever wins the state's popular vote.

3. More or less yes. Unless Santorum/Gingrich come out and say "I am no longer seeking the nomination, but a vote for me is a vote for a new candidate during the convention."

28/Male/Married/Republican/CA-3

how about you just make it so only
Republicans can moderate Republican debates? I don't want Republicans moderating Democratic debates, and I assume it's the opposite for you guys.

Age 20, CA-18 (home), CA-13 (college)


Check out my blog at politicohen.com.  Love the class war, hate identity politics and purism.


Berkeley Class of 2015.
[ Parent ]
I think that's a bad idea
It effectively turns the primary into an 'echo chamber' not unlike many online political forums. I very much want Republicans moderating Democratic debates, along with other moderators of various ideological stripes, and the Democrats who can't handle it don't need to be getting the nomination.

Democrat, NC-11
[ Parent ]
That said
Republicans should of course set their own rules, and if they want all their debates moderated by Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck that's fine by me.

But I hardly want to set rules for Democratic primaries based on the low bar set by this year's Republican field.

Democrat, NC-11

[ Parent ]
Moderators
Do you really want Sean Hannity or Glenn Beck asking the Democrats questions? Wouldn't you rather it be Rachel Maddow? I doubt she'd throw them softballs, but she also wouldn't try to trap them into saying something they'd rather not. That's what happened a number of times to the Republicans this cycle.

Would you really want a debate where the first question asked to Hillary was about her husband's extramarital affairs the way it was to Gingrich?

I don't see how that helps anyone with their primary choice. It just hurts the candidate for the general.

R, CA-37; hometown: PA-2

[ Parent ]
OK
Give me examples of where moderator questions hurt the GOP candidates this cycle. The Gingrich question from John King hardly qualifies - that was his best moment of the whole campaign!

It wasn't a moderator that produced Perry's 'oops..' moment. It wasn't a moderator that inspired Romney's $10,000 bet.

What, precisely, have moderators done to trip up the Republicans? If it's happened a number of times, surely you can give me a few actual examples.

Democrat, NC-11

[ Parent ]
BTW
Yes, of course I would prefer to have Rachel Maddow rather than Sean Hannity moderating Democratic debates, but that's not the false dilemma we're faced with. A quick search reveals to me that Brian Williams and John Harris (from Politico) moderated the NBC debate.

Has Rachel Maddow moderated any Republican debates?

Democrat, NC-11

[ Parent ]
Might I add
I don't think it would've created any problem at all for Hillary in 2008 to reissue the same answer she gave back in 2000 when Tim Russert led off the senate debate with this:

Russert: The issue of trust and character has been raised repeatedly in this campaign. Mrs. Clinton, I want to start with you. In January of '98, you went on the "Today" Show and talked about what had occurred at the White House. I want to play that for you and our viewers and our voters and give you a chance to respond.

.....

Russert: Regrettably, it was proven true. Do you regret misleading the American people?

Clinton: Well, you know, Tim, that was a very painful time for me, for my family, and for our country. It is something that I regret deeply that anyone had to go through. And I've tried to be as forthcoming as I could, given the circumstances that I faced. Obviously, I didn't mislead anyone. I didn't know the truth. And there's a great deal of pain associated with that, and my husband has certainly acknowledged that and made it clear that he did mislead the country, as well as his family.



Democrat, NC-11
[ Parent ]
Ah, the Clintons
The very epitome of doubletalk and sleaze.

"I've tried to be as forthcoming as I could" Exhibit A.

Barack Obama's Administration hasn't been all fish and chips, but I will be eternally grateful that he (effectively) prevented the Clintons from taking over again.

Age 42. Location: GA-04 & GA-05.

[ Parent ]
The point remains
Or, rather, I think some are missing the point.

Would you rather have Perry's 'oops..' moment or Romney's $10,000 bet in a general election debate? I sure wouldn't if I were a Republican. The whole structure of the primary system is designed to vet the potential nominees, and that includes working through tricky debate issues early, when the impact can be contained for the eventual nominee.

If the primary debates are set up so that the candidates get nothing but softballs from ideologically kindred moderators, how will that help them prepare for the general election?

And, the irony here is that none of the debate flubs I can think of from this cycle's Republican primary resulted from anything more daunting than: "Mr. so-and-so, what's-his-name mentioned your statement, would you like to take a moment to respond?"

Democrat, NC-11

[ Parent ]
Debates, Vetting, etc.
I agree the debate questions should be "tough", and I agree that's part of the legitimate vetting process. But George Stephanpoulos asking Romney (in so many words) if birth control should be banned isn't a "tough" question; it's just a dumb one.

And no, the alternatives to Stephanapoulos and his ilk does not necessarily have to be Glenn Beck and his ilk. Informed, serious people who are not anti-GOP are ready and willing and able to serve in the moderator's role if given the opportunity.

Age 42. Location: GA-04 & GA-05.

[ Parent ]
I agree
Hugh Hewitt has made a big deal out of that this year on his show, and I think he's right. There are plenty of good center-right people in the media who could moderate Republican debates. Instead we get a bunch of questions from center-left people in the media that a lot of Republicans were upset about. I don't mind the occasional center-left person that generally gets more respect from Republicans like Juan Williams(although even he ran afoul of Newt), but there is no good reason why we couldn't have more debates moderated by some of the center-right people in the media like the writers from the Weekly Standard, National Review or some of the radio talk-show hosts.

41, R, NE-1.
[ Parent ]
I prefer forums/town halls more than anything
Rather than debates. But, my point is that Wallace, Beier, King, etc... Are fine, but clear cut liberals Shouldn't be doing it. Especially at NBC where 5 very liberal/socialist annualized afterwards.

28/Male/Married/Republican/CA-3
[ Parent ]
How do you restrict it to registered Republicans
when half the states don't register voters by party? TX, SC, VA, GA, AR, for instance.
[ Parent ]
Good Point
Perhaps in those states it can be restricted to past participants in GOP primaries. Certainly not perfect, but I cannot think of another alternative at the moment.

28/Male/Married/Republican/CA-3
[ Parent ]
You'd need an exception
for first time voters at least.

(-9.38, -7.49), Blood type "O", social anarchist, KY 01, "When smashing monuments, save the pedestals. They always come in handy."


-- Stanisław Lem
[ Parent ]
Alternatively
We just allow voters to declare a party in the states without partisan registration.

Lifelong Republican, TX-17
[ Parent ]
That could work


28/Male/Married/Republican/CA-3
[ Parent ]
Past Primaries
How do you deal with first time voters then?  Honest Party switchers?

32/M/D/NY-01 DKE:Socks The Cat

Hillary/Booker 2016
[ Parent ]
My point exactly
This is why I wish my state, and really all states had partisan registration. First, you can close primaries. Second, it's great data for redistricting.

Lifelong Republican, TX-17
[ Parent ]
Answers~
1). Fully proportional closed primaries. And caucuses should be banned. Also, all states should vote on the same day, the current system attaches way too much importance to a tiny unrepresentative proportion of the electorate, and -- for all practical intents and purposes -- totally undemocratically devalues the votes of people living in the states that vote later on. We also need to transfer to a campaign finance reform system similar to France's where all candidates are guaranteed to have the same resources and air time, my only quibble is that a large "x" number of signatures from registered voters from the party the candidate is a member of should be substitutable for the "x" number of signatures from elected official to qualify. Contrary to rougemapper however, I'm in favor of Super Delegates (although I think the number of them should be decreased on the Democratic side) which give party bosses a sort of "veto" which is healthy for the system IMO, but it's one that can be "overridden" and isn't a final say.

2). Well,"fairest" is pretty vague and subjective, but it would probably involve banning super-delegates as well... not that that makes it the best system (at least to me)

3). Yes... at least I think. Maybe we should all stop making absolute statements the way the primary has gone this time.

(-9.38, -7.49), Blood type "O", social anarchist, KY 01, "When smashing monuments, save the pedestals. They always come in handy."


-- Stanisław Lem

I do favor
closed party primaries and would prefer each state registers by party. Nationally I could make a rule for that.

I do prefer super delegates.  3 per state.  Technically in most states those delegates are chosen by party regulars.  I can see 3 per state chosen by party folks.  

[ Parent ]
Seems fair.


(-9.38, -7.49), Blood type "O", social anarchist, KY 01, "When smashing monuments, save the pedestals. They always come in handy."


-- Stanisław Lem
[ Parent ]
No proportional voting.
1. Winner-take-all by Congressional district and Winner-take-all by State vote.  Absolutely no proportional voting unless the minimum threshold is set very high such as 20 or 25%.

The GOP only has approximately 160 super delegates for State Chairs and State RNC committee members. That is an acceptable total. No change needed.

South Philly Gay Republican

Agree
I like WTA-CD because it means that candidates have to campaign everywhere in the state to get votes. WTA will mean that the candidate who is winning is the one who gets the delegates. In all other elections, the race is winner take all. A candidate who wins 52%-48% gets the same time in congress as one who wins 70%-30%.

I don't like straight winner-take-all, because you end up with an Arizona where no one campaigns.

When you do it proportionally, however, candidates don't really have to bother campaigning at all. In Oklahoma the first three finishers got 14, 13, and 13 delegates. Romney didn't really try there and still managed to get 13 delegates.

R, CA-37; hometown: PA-2

[ Parent ]
Agree as well
But I also think that not all CD's should have the same number of delegates: they should be apportioned by the number of registered Republicans in the district, or in states without party registration, McCain's performance there in 2008. That makes the candidates campaign throughout the state, but also prevents the type of situation we saw in Ohio and Michigan, where MI-02 and OH-04 were worth the same as MI-13 and OH-11.
[ Parent ]
I was going to mention that
Although you can't make it based on GOP performance. In one district Republicans get 200,000 votes, while in another they get 20,000. How many delegates would you get in the 200,000 district?

I'd take the 3 delegate allocation and give 4 in the bigger districts and 2 in the smallest.  

R, CA-37; hometown: PA-2

[ Parent ]
Mine
#1 Harmonize all the various rules formats for the Republican presidential primary. And the harmonization being more important than actual details.

Personally I prefer the binding primary format where only presidential candidates names appear on the ballot. (Actual delegate selection to be chosen in state conventions later but bound by results of the primary.) Also include an "uncommitted" line.

#2 I think best is for the state wide portion to be:
By PR. 15% seems a good minimum threshold to me.
Reassign forfeited delegates (from candidates failing to met threshold) to the existing candidates that met the threshold by PR rather than adding the percentage to "uncommitted".

Congressional portion: (Only applicable in states with 2 or more congressional seats; for those with just 1 seat have those three be part of the state wide)

In every Congressional district:
A) Single candidate with 50%+: All three delegates
B) No single candidate clearing 50%: 2 delegates to the congressional winner, 1 to the second place candidate.


41 Male Republican, Maryland Heights, MO (MO-2). Previously lived in both Memphis and Nashville.

CoD's Answers
1. As others have mentioned, we ought to outlaw caucuses as they require too much time and involvement for every voter to be fully involved. (the only way I, as the hypothetical RNC Chair, would allow it is if the state declared a holiday for it). Closed Primaries ftw.
Also, we ought to change the first states around but keep the same idea of different regions at first. So for example if the changes were made before 2016, we would keep the order of IA (Midwest), NH (NorthEast), SC (South), NV (West) and then after that focus on the NorthEast for about 3 weeks (have CT, VT, NY on the 1st tuesday of March; MA,ME,RI on the 2nd Tues; PA,NJ,DE,MD on the 3rd Tuesday), and do a similar thing for the rest of the regions such that each region will have a focus on its particular issues instead of this criss-crossing we currently have. We could also switch out the "Representative States" (i.e. the states that represent the region in the first month of the primary; e.g. instead of IANHSCNV we have OH,PA,NC,AZ).

2. I think CA's system of 3 delegates per CD and statewide proportional is the fairest. I also think released delegates should proportionally represent their states' vote.

3. 99.99% Confident Mitt will be the nominee barring DGLB

19-Cubano, R, CA-38
Turning L.A. County Red


Making CA a Golden State

Gov Haley
Nikki Haley is taking questions on Facebook right now. She gets mad props for that. I asked one and, judging by her order of answers, am a few answers away from getting my question answered.

From suburban Chicago's North Shore, now living on suburban Philadelphia's Main Line. Back home until July.
Bruce Rauner for Governor!
I just saw that
Didn't see your question though.

SC1-Charleston
[ Parent ]
My question
It's about the BBA.

From suburban Chicago's North Shore, now living on suburban Philadelphia's Main Line. Back home until July.
Bruce Rauner for Governor!
[ Parent ]
Ah- near the beginning
Looks good.

SC1-Charleston
[ Parent ]
Here you go...
"Peter Kondalis, South Carolina awaits you. To answer your question our federal government must make it a priority to balance our federal budget if we want to avoid national bankruptcy."

SC1-Charleston
[ Parent ]
so either SCRep or Nikki Haley
spelled his last name wrong :P

Age 20, CA-18 (home), CA-13 (college)


Check out my blog at politicohen.com.  Love the class war, hate identity politics and purism.


Berkeley Class of 2015.
[ Parent ]
Nikki did it.
nt

SC1-Charleston
[ Parent ]
Hah
1) She didn't answer whether she supports a BBA...
2) Haha considering she misspelled my last name, at least a google search of my last name won't take people to RRH... I think. :p

From suburban Chicago's North Shore, now living on suburban Philadelphia's Main Line. Back home until July.
Bruce Rauner for Governor!
[ Parent ]
Beware the ShadowLurker
when you come home...he now knows who you are...


http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/...

Also I'm sure she supports BBA/CCB

19-Cubano, R, CA-38
Turning L.A. County Red


Making CA a Golden State

[ Parent ]
Haley for Senate
Haley said she "isn't right now" interested in being a Senator because she loves her job... Sounds like she's leaving the door open for an eventual Senate run.

From suburban Chicago's North Shore, now living on suburban Philadelphia's Main Line. Back home until July.
Bruce Rauner for Governor!
[ Parent ]
Hmm
DeMint's seat will be open in 2016, which would be halfway through her second term if she gets re-elected. Then there's Graham's seat. He'll be 65 in 2020, which is still pretty young by Senate standards.
[ Parent ]
Not sure what's she's angling for
have always thought eventual VP or an administration cabinet post before Senate. I think Tim Scott or more likely Mick Mulvaney will likely replace DeMint. Scott has been said to want to run for Gov, and his 8 year term limit pledge works out perfectly if Haley is reelected. Another 8 years for Graham is too far off to think about that seat.

SC1-Charleston
[ Parent ]
Graham
Will either retire or be in Romney's cabinet. There is no way he will want to fight it out the way Hatch and Lugar are right now. That will set up Tim Scott for the seat with Haley replacing DeMint in 2016.

28/Male/Married/Republican/CA-3
[ Parent ]
Nah
Graham's running, he votes conservative enough and will pivot right before the election. We have open primaries here, and there is not enough room to his far right for a successful primary challenge. Tom Davis may run, but would be a longshot. He's in decent enough shape.

SC1-Charleston
[ Parent ]
We shall see
But, conservative enough is not satisfactory in a state like SC.

28/Male/Married/Republican/CA-3
[ Parent ]
90% lifetime ACU
is well within reason. I much prefer DeMint, but Graham will win going away. Only outside SC, does anyone believe much differently.

SC1-Charleston
[ Parent ]
Graham's problem
is much more his rhetoric than his record. I wouldn't count him out by any stretch but against a credible challenger (say, a member of the delegation or a SWO - Loftis?) Graham will definitely have a race on his hands.

R, MA-7/MD-7/moving to WV-1
[ Parent ]
Problem is
no one in the delegation will run against him. That has already been talked out. Loftis wants to primary Haley. Davis is the only one right now talking about it, and he doesn't have the stature. Maybe someone will step up, but I'm not counting on it.

SC1-Charleston
[ Parent ]
If Haley's Re-election internal polling isn't good
she really should go for it. She'd be a cause celebre for EE and TPX and be able to sidestep the good old boy network in Columbia at the same time.

R, MA-7/MD-7/moving to WV-1
[ Parent ]
National Security Advisor
I think he will take it from Romney and SC will have a new superstar in the senate, Haley will have a ton of pressure to pick Tim Scott. Romney would get credit for picking a credible candidate, while Graham gets an easy out to finish his career.

28/Male/Married/Republican/CA-3
[ Parent ]
Seems like
not a prestigious enough position. I think he's on the shortlist for Romney's SecDef with McCain and Talent though.

It's definitely to Romney's advantage to get Graham out of the Senate. The last thing he's going to want to do is have to play the game Bush did with Specter and Chafee, he's already on thin enough ice with the conservative base.

R, MA-7/MD-7/moving to WV-1

[ Parent ]
Possibly, but my thinking
Is that Graham won't be picky. Sure, right now a clear cut challenger has not emerged, however, once the campaign season were to pick up, than he would be in the fight of his political career.

But, I totally agree that the conservative base would give Romney some kudos on the taking Graham out of the senate.

Also, I'm always thought that Talent would either be his AG, Treasurey Sec., or his Sec. of State.  

28/Male/Married/Republican/CA-3

[ Parent ]
2008- Same thing for Graham
Lots of talk of a conservative primary challenge from the right, and no first rate challenger emerged. RNC committeman Buddy Witherspoon was hyped, ran against him from the right and had decent connections and fundraising and took 33%. Graham is popular with a large segment of the Republican electorate in SC, plus moderates, independents, and Democrats who can and do vote in the primary. He isn't Arlen Specter or Dick Lugar. Tim Scott would give him a good race, but Tim Scott will not run. Make no mistake, Graham is a solid favorite in 2014 if he runs.  

SC1-Charleston
[ Parent ]
Conservative antennas have been up since 2009
Graham is anything but safe. I don't think Scott or anyone from the delegation will run against him, but I doubt that he won't get a serious challenge. And given this potential danger, I truly believe that he will either be picked in Romney's cabinet or just flat out retire. If Lugar and Hatch are being primaried, than certainly Graham will as will. All of the national groups (CFG, Tea Party Express, etc...) will go after him.  

28/Male/Married/Republican/CA-3
[ Parent ]
Romney needs to win first
Your perception outside of South Carolina is different from the reality in South Carolina. I hear your opinion though.

SC1-Charleston
[ Parent ]
YEah
I'd never write him off, unless a member of the delegation ran. Davis seems to have been weakened by his Paul endorsement.  

Male, LA-06/LA-01 (Home is where the heart is)
Cassidy, Tillis, Rounds, Latham for Senate!  
[ Parent ]
Yep, knocked him off his trajectory
he's better off waiting Scott out, as Beaufort County is a nice share of the new SC-1.

SC1-Charleston
[ Parent ]
Sen. Haley (R-SC)
What would her voting record and priorities look like? Will she be a showhorse or a workshorse (in the immortal words of Sen. Hayden)

19-Cubano, R, CA-38
Turning L.A. County Red


Making CA a Golden State
[ Parent ]
Very much a showhorse
so far as Governor. And her voting record would be DeMint like.

SC1-Charleston
[ Parent ]
Evidence
I've heard that she's a showhorse but am only vaguely up on SC politics. What has she done to show she's one? I remember hearing something about her deleting emails and not operating transparently like she said she would. Is this evidence of her being classified as a showhorse?
[ Parent ]
Perception Thing
Days spent out of state, number of fundraisers/ speaking engagements out of state. National tv interviews. Book just released/ book tour that follows. All contribute to the perception. Bright spot of her first two years has been new industry thats located to SC/ jobs brought with. Here is an article in todays State paper that speaks some toward your question.
http://www.thestate.com/2012/0...

SC1-Charleston
[ Parent ]
Article
I had seen the article in today's Charlotte Observer but didn't look closely at it then. Transparency is mentioned in the article but just in passing. Is the transparency issue mainly a Democratic Party criticism or are Republicans also focusing on that?
[ Parent ]
Reps too
She didn't come from the party establishment and is not in favor with much of the legislature much like Sanford wasn't. She came in with alot of distrust because of the business and personal scandels surrounding her. So it's been a rocky 2 years so far. How it all plays out, we'll see.

SC1-Charleston
[ Parent ]
Wisconsin or bust for Santorum?
https://twitter.com/#!/jeffzel...

"The race isn't over until the people of Wisconsin sing. We need you to sing a week from Tuesday."

23, MA-07, Rockefeller Republican. Christie-Martinez in 2016. Visit me at http://twitter.com/polibeast

Nerves Fraying
"I ask Santorum if Romney is 'worst Republican' to run. He says: 'Quit distorting my words It's bullshit.'"

https://twitter.com/#!/jeffzel...

Male, LA-06/LA-01 (Home is where the heart is)
Cassidy, Tillis, Rounds, Latham for Senate!  

[ Parent ]
If you didn't say it, you couldn't accuse them of distorting it
http://m.apnews.com/ap/db_2687...

Rick Santorum says his presidential campaign rival Mitt Romney is "the worst Republican in the country to put up against Barack Obama."

Santorum on Sunday told voters in Wisconsin that Romney is "uniquely disqualified" to be the GOP's presidential pick and urged his supporters to stand with him even as he faces an increasingly improbable pathway to the nomination. Santorum says "the race isn't over until the people of Wisconsin sing."

It was Herman Cain's first time with the media. Rick acts surprised the media is "distorting" his words. I don't care what the context is, saying Romney is the worst Republican in the country to put against Barack Obama is pretty clear.  

R, CA-37; hometown: PA-2

[ Parent ]
5 L.A. Dem Rep Money Scandals
http://blogs.laweekly.com/info...

-Waxman took more than $10,000 from his campaign war chests for travel, meals and even gifts
-Waters' campaign paid her husband more than $10,000 for hotel and travel expenses.
-The campaign of Linda Sanchez paid her sister, Rep. Loretta Sanchez, $1,000 for "rent." Really. Linda's "PAC" also contributed $2,000 to ... Loretta's campaign.
-Laura Richardson paid herself $9,542 in interest for loans she made to her own campaign. Yeah.
-Howard Berman paid $170,000 to his brother's political consulting firm for ... advice ... and stuff.

They're all going DOWN!!11!!!1!1!!11!!1! [/snark..except for maybe Berman]

19-Cubano, R, CA-38
Turning L.A. County Red


Making CA a Golden State

Don't you think Richardson has the upper hand against Hahn?
And Waxman, Waters, Sanchez & Sanchez have no plausible challengers.

Age 42. Location: GA-04 & GA-05.
[ Parent ]
No
Hahn has a marginal edge there, the entire establishment is behind her and that's the kind of territory where having establishment backing may be the most useful thing of all.

R, MA-7/MD-7/moving to WV-1
[ Parent ]
Richardson is a joke
The only way she wins is if people vote for her because she's Black. I know that's not politically correct to say, but Janice Hahn has never been accused of being unethical and is marginally competent. And she's always tried to fight for the Black and Hispanic communities. The less I say about Richardson, the better.

Hahn and Richardson are the only two candidates, however, so the final act is in November.

Of course the other 4 will survive. They aren't in competitive districts. Steve Cooley did win Waxman and Loretta Sanchez's districts. So maybe some day.

R, CA-37; hometown: PA-2

[ Parent ]
"The only way she wins is if people vote for her because she's Black."
Well, there can't be more than a few hundred thousand people in the district who would do anything like that.

Anyway, I readily confess my general lack-of-awareness about California politics. But I did notice that Richardson represented about 47% of the new CA-44 prior to redistricting, and Hahn represented about 16% of it. That may not be decisive, all by itself, but it has to make a difference in Richardson's favor.

Age 42. Location: GA-04 & GA-05.

[ Parent ]
Richardson
is simply so terrible that the normal rules don't really apply here. Normally when a credible White and Black candidate square off in a VRA district primary the Black establishment seriously circles the wagons. Right now they seem to be almost unanimously going for Hahn. And urban Black and Hispanic voters don't so much vote on race as much as they're strongly influenced by the local machines.

Hahn's internal had her up 20. I'd imagine that's the general neighborhood of her margin of victory.

R, MA-7/MD-7/moving to WV-1

[ Parent ]
Richardson
I think she needs Maxine Waters to endorse her to survive. Basically the whole D party has lined up behind Hahn, including Karen Bass. But Waters has serious pull in that district and AFAIK is still staying neutral.

R, MA-7/MD-7/moving to WV-1
[ Parent ]
I don't think that can save her
http://janicehahn.com/

Her website is loaded with endorsements from the Black community. Diane Watson is at least as well respected as Maxine Waters is and Watson is behind Hahn. Kenneth Hahn was fighting for the Black community at a time when there were no Black politicians. He represented many of these areas as an L.A. County supervisor for 40 years. There are a lot of old time Black politicians that owe a lot to Kenneth Hahn. They come from a generation that won't turn their back on his daughter.

You can't really judge L.A. based on who represented how much territory. All these congressional districts are in the L.A. media market, so people know the reps from other districts. They may even know them better than their own.

Janice Hahn spent more than 10 years representing some of it on L.A. city council. Most of the current CA-36 isn't in the city of Los Angeles, however, and I believe she only represented San Pedro/Wilmington in city council.

If the race were to be decided in June, I'd predict Hahn by 20 points, but because it'll be replayed in November, Richardson might be able to make it close. If Hahn wins big in June, Richardson may be able to get some people in the Black community to rally around her.

R, CA-37; hometown: PA-2

[ Parent ]
Good info
I was aware of the Kenneth Hahn legacy with African-Americans, I just didn't realize it was still so widely known and relevant to voters in 2012.  

Age 42. Location: GA-04 & GA-05.
[ Parent ]
People under 30
I can't promise you most of the voters under 30 know Kenneth Hahn, but the leaders of the Black community, e.g. politicians and pastors, worked with him. Family legacies have a way of continuing. That's why people named  Frelinghuysen will keep getting elected in New Jersey.

R, CA-37; hometown: PA-2
[ Parent ]
New story on Richardson ethics
http://www.politico.com/news/s...

I had to check the date because it feels like I've read this before.

R, CA-37; hometown: PA-2

[ Parent ]
Necessary but not sufficient condition
Waters won't carry the election for Richardson, but LR needs Waters's endorsement in order to have a prayer - that is, in order to bring some semblance of organizational support to her side. Otherwise it basically looks like everyone is lining up behind Hahn and I can't see how Richardson could ever overcome that.

R, MA-7/MD-7/moving to WV-1
[ Parent ]
Son_of_the_South's Answers
1. Compress the timeframe.

2. That is for individual states to decide.

3. Most likely.

20, Male, Conservative Republican, TN-08 (home and internship), VA-01 (college)

I dropped the ball
this last week.  I forgot legislative retirements!!

#10 and counting in TN

http://www.newschannel5.com/st...

There has been 4 state senators retire--okay only three but Eric Stewart is long long shot for TN4.

Plus now 6 house members including Speaker Naifeh.

Things could get brutal TN house and senate in 2012.

I don't know if it's been linked to here,
but Eddie Bass is retiring. Also, I met an RRH lurker at Youth in Government who works on state legislative campaigns. He told me some very interesting stories which I am bound not to repeat, but suffice it to say that we Republicans could be up against some real competition in the organization department if this guy ever gains power in the Tennessee Democratic Party.

20, Male, Conservative Republican, TN-08 (home and internship), VA-01 (college)
[ Parent ]
How many of these open seats
could the GOP flip in November?
[ Parent ]
Pick ups
We could pick up all four senate seats. The house seats are a bit more complicated because some involve seats moving and there may be additional open seat pickups for the same reason. We should pick up:

Senate:
Andy Berke's (D-Chattanooga) reconfigured seat (he's running for Mayor because his seat got much more Republican)

Douglas Henry's (D-Nashville) seat, which has been turned into a Davidson County Republican vote sink to give  us a near-guaranteed seat

House:
We'll pick up Naifeh's seat

We'll likely pick up McDonald's seat (R+25 in an exurbanizing, still rural part of Sumner County)

Five moved open seats (I'll explain those in my diary, which I am finally finishing). However, we lost a rural seat to population loss as well.

We might pick up:

Senate:
Roy Herron's seat. The Dems have no state house members to run, but their local bench is strong.

Eric Stewart's seat. Bill Harmon's (D-Dunlap) state house seat was nuked in redistricting, so he or another good candidate could hold this for the Dems. It's a very Yellow-Doggish area, so I'll say Lean Dem.

House:

Eddie Bass' (D-Prospect) seat, which he vacated, is definitely within reach, but if a popular Giles County Democrat in Bass' mold runs, it will be a hard-fought race.

Harry Tindell's (D-Knoxville) seat became more Republican, and he's retiring, but Dems still have a good shot with a popular candidate who will get moderates to split tickets.

There are a few other possibilities, but they're rural seats with incumbents that are probably Likely or Safe D at the moment.

More will come in the second part of my state house analysis.

20, Male, Conservative Republican, TN-08 (home and internship), VA-01 (college)

[ Parent ]
Bass
was he the one thinking of switching to R. So he decided to retire instead I take it.

SC1-Charleston
[ Parent ]
Yes, though unless
I find an article about it, I may have accidentally blabbed something that I wasn't supposed to talk about that the lurker told me.

20, Male, Conservative Republican, TN-08 (home and internship), VA-01 (college)
[ Parent ]
I forgot
thatforgot that we have a very good shot at picking up the new open rural seat in Midfle Tennessee that State Rep. Joey Hensley (R-Hohenwald) is running for.

20, Male, Conservative Republican, TN-08 (home and internship), VA-01 (college)
[ Parent ]
Grijalva tanking?!
This can't be right...

http://sonoranalliance.com/cat...

Member, Small Government Caucus

21, Pro-life Libertarian-leaning R, NC-1


I would however
like to know what the PVI of his new district is. It got more republican right?

Member, Small Government Caucus

21, Pro-life Libertarian-leaning R, NC-1


[ Parent ]
Yeah, one point better
It's still a very long-shot district but it would be great to see Grijalva go down in the primary. I wonder if CPA might play here?
[ Parent ]
Mercer
would have a better shot at Grijalva than anyone else. The guy is pretty much Alan Grayson.  

Member, Small Government Caucus

21, Pro-life Libertarian-leaning R, NC-1


[ Parent ]
Mercer
Is a Republican, and her fundraising has been pretty bad so far. I kind of wish McClung would run again. She has name rec already and was a stronger fundraiser

Male, LA-06/LA-01 (Home is where the heart is)
Cassidy, Tillis, Rounds, Latham for Senate!  
[ Parent ]
I wanted her too
With the shift in PVI, she would win in 2010 conditions. But Mercer is alone in the primary correct?

Member, Small Government Caucus

21, Pro-life Libertarian-leaning R, NC-1


[ Parent ]
CPA
Heh, the Communist Party of America would love to help Grijalva, I'm sure. (I know that's not the CPA you're talking about.)

From suburban Chicago's North Shore, now living on suburban Philadelphia's Main Line. Back home until July.
Bruce Rauner for Governor!
[ Parent ]
Certified Public Accountant
That's what I thought when I first read CPA.

Maybe he means the California Psychological Association? (He does need to get his brain checked for boycotting his state...)

19-Cubano, R, CA-38
Turning L.A. County Red


Making CA a Golden State

[ Parent ]
I can guarantee you
that this poll is fake. No pollster would ever write a release like that. And 78% disapproval among Democrats and Independents is bullshit. I doubt that Blagojevich the day of his conviction reached that.
[ Parent ]
And no Democrat in the fucking history of this nation
has ever gotten 5% of Democrats vs. a Republican. Even John Edwards wouldn't get remotely that few.  
[ Parent ]
I believe you.
This poll reeks of excrement.

20, Male, Conservative Republican, TN-08 (home and internship), VA-01 (college)
[ Parent ]
He's not losing
Let's tone down the language a little. I dislike Grijalva more than anyone but this is a D+5 Obama seat that's probably really D+9. If they couldn't knock him off in 2010, they won't get him for the rest of the decade. Who was the last non-Texas Hispanic congressman the GOP beat?  

R, CA-37; hometown: PA-2
[ Parent ]
John Salazar
Also the only one, if I'm not mistaken.

Democrat, NC-11
[ Parent ]
I wouldn't count that
as Salazar represented a white majority R+ seat. It's certainly not similar to Grijalva's seat.

27,TN-5. Neoconservatism is just another leftist movement.
[ Parent ]
Grjalva's issue
IMO has more to do with geography.  He has been weak outside of his Pima county base.  Any idea where this other D comes from?

I suspect democrats from Yuma and Maricopa will be against Congressman D regardless of where she is from.  

[ Parent ]
It'd be hilarious if the AZ map dummymandered
and led to an  8-1 delegation. I know I'm dreaming and we should be thrilled to get 6-3 on that map.

27,TN-5. Neoconservatism is just another leftist movement.
[ Parent ]
Renee Ellmers
If anyone doubts that she is a leadership favorite, look at this pic:

http://www.politico.com/news/s...

She's next to Boehner, and surrounded by members of leadership at that table, with Cantor, Walden, and Price.  

Male, LA-06/LA-01 (Home is where the heart is)
Cassidy, Tillis, Rounds, Latham for Senate!  

Is she the freshman representative
to the leadership or something, to get a seat at the table.

SC1-Charleston
[ Parent ]
No
Those would be Kristi Noem and Tim Scott. She's just be a very reliable vote for them, more so than Scott or Noem, and she has been used to whip Tea Party and freshman for leadership.  

Male, LA-06/LA-01 (Home is where the heart is)
Cassidy, Tillis, Rounds, Latham for Senate!  
[ Parent ]
Yep, knew about Noem and Scott
thought there might be some other type of freshman representaive slot as to why she's in that picture.

SC1-Charleston
[ Parent ]
I gotta admit I had low expectations for her
She seemed to be one of the most accidental of the freshman as that district probably isn't even on the radar unless Etheridge goes Rambo on those kids. But she's been really impressive, she's got the safe district now, and I'm starting to think that she'd be a better candidate than McHenry for Senate in 2014.

Also, who is that between Ellmers and Price? I feel like I should recognize him but it's not coming.

[ Parent ]
I feel the same way
About the guy between Etheridge and Price. Looks familiar, but have no clue. Camp is on the other side of Cantor, so maybe Upton? And both McHenry and Ellmers have struggled with fundraising, but Ellmers is probably a better messenger and would do better in the Research Triangle.  

Male, LA-06/LA-01 (Home is where the heart is)
Cassidy, Tillis, Rounds, Latham for Senate!  
[ Parent ]
Yep, it's Upton
Kate must have inherited her looks from the other side of the family.

That's pretty big-time for Ellmers: four leadership guys, two major committee chairmen, and her. I wouldn't be surprised to see her join leadership for the 113th.

[ Parent ]
Maybe
Taking Walden's spot if he resigns to run for Senate or becomes NRCC Chair? He was appointed, not elected, which would be an advantage to Ellmers, not having to compete in a popularity contest with Tim Scott

Male, LA-06/LA-01 (Home is where the heart is)
Cassidy, Tillis, Rounds, Latham for Senate!  
[ Parent ]
Looks a little similar to a greyed Upton with a new hairstyle.
It is him, I think, but wow, he looks younger on his official pic.
[ Parent ]
Agree
I have thought along those same lines about her. Could see her against Hagan.

SC1-Charleston
[ Parent ]
Glad to see my new congresswoman
Will have a bit more prominence than my last.  

21, Conservative, NC-02 (SC-04 college) Matt 6:25-34    
[ Parent ]
Answers
1. I would have a national primary three months before the General Election. Every state would be winner take all, and if you couldn't get to 270 electoral votes, the party would have to decide at the convention. I also would bar all campaigning before May 1.  
NY-27
Since it seems that Chris Collins is getting in, does this end any speculation that Ann Marie Buerkle will switch to the district?

I'm hoping she does make the switch, as she has been great so far and it would be a shame to see her lose in a district that is just too Democratic-leaning for her.  

28/Male/Married/Republican/CA-3

I agree wholeheartedly.


20, Male, Conservative Republican, TN-08 (home and internship), VA-01 (college)
[ Parent ]
She's staying in Syracuse
Only way she'd have considered relocation was if Ithaca was added to her district. She's a "stand & fight" politician.  
[ Parent ]
She can win
Just because some of the national GOP's issues are not popular with NY suburbanites doesn't mean that a local member of the GOP cannot win. I will at least vote for her.

NY-24
[ Parent ]
Santorum On Romney
That video of Santorum endorsing Romney in 2008 stands out in my mind everytime I listen to him now.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com...

SC1-Charleston
Latham- Boswell Article
Weekend Open Thread Part II or III | 133 comments
About
Elections have consequences -- from the race for President to the race for one seat on a city council. The political economist Max Weber wrote that the state possesses a monopoly on the legitimate use of force. But in the United States, the state is divided into myriad federal, state, and local entities. And the elections to fill those entities are the products of the fascinating interactions between campaigns, party affiliations, voter turnout, and the media spotlight. Red Racing Horses analyzes those elections -- from a Republican-leaning perspective -- to keep a close eye on the process of electing officials, and to offer our perspective on the election-related issues of the day. Thank you for visiting, and we hope you'll enjoy the blog.

Inside information? Problems logging into your account? Complaints? Compliments? E-Mail us at redracinghorses@yahoo.com
Search




Advanced Search

(C) RedRacingHorses
Powered by: SoapBlox