DoD Buzz: Dems Face Doom in House

[unhappycamper]

Dems Face Doom in House
By Colin Clark Friday, August 20th, 2010 12:10 pm
Posted in Policy, Rumors

Washington’s most respected election analyst, Charlie Cook, is now calling the House for the Republicans. And he’s predicting not just a close race, which had been the call of most analysts until now, but is predicting a so-called “wave” election, one where the party in power is swept away. Cook spoke with the Wall Street Journal.

Before GOP tribalists begin crowing and dancing the sacred dance of victory, Cook cautions that he does not think the GOP is likely to win the Senate. And, with all respect to my many friends in the House, the Senate is what really matters when the other party holds the White House. Why? Every Senator has the enormous power to just say no — such as putting holds on nominations or using procedural means to gum up the works or — and control of the Senate would give the Republicans the ability to push through legislation they might not be able to otherwise. Not to mention the symbolic power of a GOP victory in both houses.

Given all that, let’s consider what the Republicans are likely to focus on should they gain the bully pulpit of controlling the House Armed Services and House appropriations defense bodies. top of the list will be protecting defense spending from what some GOP leaders believe is an overeager Robert Gates and a left-leaning Democratic Party eager to strip defense money and spend it on social programs.

The other area likely to receive increased attention is oversight of Afghan strategy. Some senior GOP leaders have worried about the rules of engagement, which they think were foisted on Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the former commander, by the White House. When Gen. David Petraeus issued his new rules of engagement in late July they were, arguably, even tougher in restricting the use of force. If they hear comments from troops that they are confused by the new ROEs or feel overly restricted by them, expect Republicans to hammer away at this.

But it’s early days yet. Most aides are on vacation and most lawmakers are on the hustings or fund raising. Have a look at the Defend America statement House GOP leaders put out earlier this year for some insight on what they will bring to the election discussion on defense issues. Hopefully, GOP views will become sharper the closer we get to the elections.



unhappycamper comment: I'll bet there were woodies all over the place after Colin wrote this......

[babylonsister]

1. I would so like to see Charlie Cook fail miserably. I would also

like to see Americans use the brain cells they were supposedly born with, but have been disappointed too many times.

[xchrom]

2. We will see - it doesn't help that he's jumped out here now.

He'll get plenty of air time for this 'early prediction'.

[mmonk]

7. Which may energize the Democratic base

that has been demoralized.

[ThomThom]

25. What will energize the base is some progressive thinking?

Someone should start listening before it is too late.

[mikehiggins]

3. Clinton II

If the GOPukes do take the reins of the House, not only are we likely to see Boner as Speaker, but you can absolutely expect a myriad of hearings and investigations into every aspect of O's first two years with an almost 100% certainty of impeachment efforts on all fronts.

We have to hammer the Pukes with their lies, evasions and horrendous past at every point from here on in or things will indeed rapidly answer the question, how much worse could things get?

Really, really worse.

As sick as it might make you feel, we actually DO have to rally around the Dems across the board, at least for this election cycle. If we lose in 2010, we are done in 2012.

[AlinPA]

5. Correct. If we lose the house in 2010, the corporate money will steamroller us in 2012. That new

SC ruling is crippling. If the republicans need a billion dollars to feed house and senate races it will not be a problem for them. That's a drop in the bucket for corporations.

[Tesha]

4. I think you can count on -2 from New Hampshire

Today, our two Congressional Districts supply Carol
Shea-Porter in the First CD and Paul Hodes in the
Second CD.

But Shea-Porter has only been elected twice and has
never won overwhelmingly; it's always close. This year,
it's hard to see her squeaking through again against
strengthened, emboldened Republican opposition.

In the 2nd CD, Hodes has won fairly well, but he's
decided to seek a promotion to the Senate seat being
vacated by Judd "the Dudd" Gregg. So the 2nd CD is
an open seat. Two Democrats are vying for the nomi-
nation: Katrina Swett and Ann McLane Kuster. I think
Swett will win the primary but she's already run for
the seat and lost in the general election. And in
1994, it was her husband Dick Swett (sic!) that was
evicted from the seat in the great Republican blow-
out of 1994, partially over his support for the ban
on assault weapons, so if she's the nominee, you can
bet the Republicans will be out campaigning with
guns almost-literally blazing. And pro-gun Democrats
will be helping to shoot her down.

McLane Kuster is (IMNSHO) the much better candidate.
She's much stronger on basic Democratic issues such
as women's rights, gay rights, and access to repro-
ductive services. And her mom was a famous long-term
NH moderate Republican State Senate office-holder, so
she has some built-in *GOOD* name recognition and
credibility with the saner parts of the the NH Re-
publican contingent (and we still have some sane
Republicans here). But she's weak in the primary
whereas I believe Swett is "the anointed one"
chosen by our DLC-to-the-core party elites.

Meanwhile, the Republicans are likely to nominate
Charlie Bass as their candidate and he's the one who
evicted Dick Swett in 1994 and went on to sit quite
a few terms in the House. So expect him to trounce
Katrina Swett in 2010.

Net result? NH delivers a -2 for the House Democrats.

Tesha


P.S.: Oh, and Hodes probably loses too, depending
on whether the Republicans nominate Kelly Ayott
(the machine politician, never met an abortion
she liked, a sure winner), Ovid LaMontagne (rep-
resenting God, has lost statewide races in the
past but could win this one), Bill Binnie (motto
"He's certifiable!"), or What's-his-name from
Hollis (too much of an unknown, probably won't
even "show" in the Primary and would almost-
certainly lose the General). But at least that
only means "0" for the Senate since the open
seat is being vacated by a Republican.

[SoxFan]

8. Kuster is a terrible choice

Kuster has the support of pseudo-Democratic governor John Lynch, so I would hardly call her the belleagured outsider.

She spent most of her life as a Republican, only changing her registration when the tide began to turn.

She has made numerous contributions to Republican state senators.

She is a lobbyist for big pharma and the financial industry.

She made an elitist mess out of Women For Obama by freezing out anyone who didn't have a six figure income and an elite degree.

Katrina Swett was busting her ass for Democratic candidates and causes back when Annie was still a Republican. I'll stick with the real Democrat, not the fashionable pet rock, thank you.

[Tesha]

9. As I said, Swett will win the primary and be blown away in the General. (NT)

[SoxFan]

11. Kuster would lose by an even larger margin

I've heard some her top supporters say that Nashua and Salem "don't matter". Two of the three largest cities in the district don't matter? That is insanity. You can't win an election with waspy liberal enclaves alone.

[Tesha]

12. You'll forgive me if I take Admiral John Hutson's endorsement over yours.

I know John Hutson; I respect Hutson, as the former
Navy Judge Advocate General, as a highly-outspoken
proponent of Constitutional rights for everyone
both during the dark days of the Bush Presidency
and now, and now as the Dean of Franklin Pierce Law
School.

And he's behind Ann, not Katrina.

http://www.bluehampshire.com/diary/10194/ann-kuster-a-uniquely-unifying-candidate-pt-iii

As am I.

Tesha

[SoxFan]

16. Kuster is an Annie Come Lately

If she's so progressive, then tell me:

Why did she support Charlie Bass for re-election in 2002?

Why did she help send NARAL pac money to the Bass campaign?

Why did she donate to right-wing State Sen. Andy Martel?

Why did she donate to right-wing State Sen. Bob Clegg's campaign?

Why did she donate to right-wing State Sen. Bob Flander's campaign?

Why did she donate to right-wing State Rep. Larry Emerton's failed campaign for state senate?

Why did she donate to Republican State Sen. Ned Gordon?

Why did she donate to Republican Nashua Mayor Donnalee Lozeau?

Why has she donated to both sides in several state races? Could her work as a lobbyist be served by trying to gain access with both sides?

[Tesha]

17. She probably supported Donnalee for the same reason Mr. Tesha and I voted for Donnalee.

Donnalee was the best alternative among bad choices.

(We used the same sort of pragmatism that is so often
advocated here on DU as a reason to vote for really
crappy Democratic candidates: "because they're the
clear lesser of two evils".)

Meanwhile, you've made a lot of assertions against
Ann; do you have links to back them up? Also, in
some cases, the same questions apply: Katrina was
clearly anti-abortion when she ran against Bass.
Now, she's "pro-choice" but it's really no surprise
that (NH-?)NARAL would endorse Bass (who has always
been at least nominally pro-choice). Still, the first
time NH-NARAL did that, I demanded my donation back
from them and cut them off from further giving.

You've also mentioned lobbying; Katrina has recently
been revealed to be doing that as well, even though
she's used Ann's lobbying as a big stick with which
to whack Ann.

Tesha

[SoxFan]

20. Response

1. Katrina has never lobbied. Her name was listed on her husband's registration form as an ethical precaution, should she ever have to perform work that fit under the definition of lobbying; as it turned out, she didn't have to perform any such work.

2. Katrina has spent the last several years in academia, teaching at New England College and at the Fletcher School of International Law & Diplomacy at Tufts University. In addition, she founded a foundation dedicated to the promotion of human rights around the world. That's a far cry for shilling for a drug manufacturer.

3. The donations to right-wingers like Clegg is a matter of public record. Go look at the filings on the Secretary of State's web site.

4. Kuster was a member of the NARAL board when they endorsed Bass, and she never voiced any protest. NARAL also endorsed Bass over Mary Rauh and Arnie Arnesen, two coandidates who were indisputably pro-choice by any definition. That leads me to assume that she supported Charlie. Charlie was on the wrong side of almost every economic and foreign policy issue.. A genuine progressive Democrat would understand that getting rid of Bass was more important than single-issue purity politics.

[Tesha]

21. Take a look at the $$$

http://www.opensecrets.org/races/contrib.php?cycle=2010&id=NH02


and this matters in NH, in-state contributions
http://www.opensecrets.org/races/geog.php?cycle=2010&id=NH02

and here are her political contributions - 2 to Rs in 93 and 94
http://www.opensecrets.org/races/geog.php?cycle=2010&id=NH02

that's it.

[SoxFan]

22. No, not it

OpenSecrets does not track contributions to candidates for state office, which are not covered by federal campaign finance laws. Kuster has made numerous donations to Republican legislators who were friendly to her lobbying clients. Like I said, dig through the NHSoS archives.

[Tesha]

23. You're the one making the allegations; if you have proof, why not just post the links? (NT)

[SoxFan]

26. Here

Clegg contribution
http://www.sos.nh.gov/2004%20Receipts%20&%20Expenditures/August%2025%20Candidates/clegg82504.TIF

Flanders contribution
http://www.sos.nh.gov/2002Receipts%20&%20Expenditures/August%2021%20CANDIDATES.htm/flanders2002-08-21.tif

[Tesha]

28. I don't see Ann's name anywhere on those docs n/t

[SoxFan]

29. Is this rocket science or something?

They're alphabetical, for god's sake. Kuster, with a K. Under "Contributions".

[Tesha]

30. You posted links to two TIFFs that show the cover sheets from two Republican candidates'

contribution reports. Where on these cover sheets
does it say *ANYTHING* about individual contributors?

Perhaps these aren't the links you think they are?

Tesha

[SoxFan]

31. My bad

Go to the SOS web site. Look at the Receipts & Expenditures forms from the 2002 and 2004 cycles. It's in there.

Frankly, they need a working, searchable database similar to what they have at the FEC site. There was supposed to be one by now, but it has been left hanging in a sort of half-assed limbo for years. This business of having to scrounge through TIF and PDF files is nuts.

[Tesha]

13. You'll also forgive me if I take MoveOn's endorsement over yours.

http://leftword.blogdig.net/archives/articles/August2010/14/NH_02__One_month_to_primary_day.html

> MoveOn, which has more than 20,000 New Hampshire members,
> endorsed Kuster this week, saying (via email) "Ann McLane
> Kuster is a genuine progressive running a powerful grassroots
> campaign."

Tesha

[SoxFan]

15. You'll also forgive me if I take the SEIU's endorsement over MoveOn's.

Seeing as their decision was actually made by people who live and work in the New Hampshire trenches.

A lot of the SEIU/SEA people weren't originally with Katrina. They were supporting John DeJoie. Like John, they were won over by Katrina's demonstrated committment to Democratic values. If MoveOn understood NH, they would know that a longtime pharmaceutical and financial industry lobbyist isn't going to provide real change.

[NHDemProg]

24. I think Hodes can win

But only if the 'Pukes are stupid enough to put Binnie up. RCP has Hodes beating Binnie, and losing to Ayotte, last time I checked. I hope you're not giving up on either of the Congressional seats. There are a lot of good progressives on the western border in 2nd CD, and Shea-Porter is still wildly popular in the Seacoast region in 1st CD, so both seats I've seen as toss-up recently, especially if Gunita gets into more bar fights like he's been doing.

[CanonRay]

6. They're not going to pick up squat in Colorado

It was 5 Dems to 2 Rethugs, and it will remain so. We will also retain the Gov, Treasurer etc, and probably PICK UP the Secretary of State office. So there Charlie.

[Hawkeye-X]

32. The SoS office is a Dem - I know Bernie

he is one of our clients.

So it'll be static this year.

[neverforget]

10. If Charlie says it, it's going to happen. Or not. A lot can happen between

now and the election.

[Dawson Leery]

14. Perhaps Democrats will get out do what has to be done.

Turning out the base makes a major difference in off-year elections.
They didn't turn-out in New Jersey (where Corzine did all he could, unlike Coakley or Deeds) and Jersey has a thug running things.
Cook's big mouth could help galvanize the Democrats.

[Tesha]

18. But see that's the point: the base has been told, *REPEATEDLY*, to "piss-off!"

Or at least "Sit down, shut up, and support the
President, even if you're not getting your pony!"

So much of the base probably has pissed-off or will
at least stay seated and quiet.

You can't spend twenty months actively driving away
almost *ALL* of the people who do the work and then,
at the last minute, cry "We need you!!!!!"

Tesha

[Chan790]

19. They didn't turn out for Corzine...

because Corzine had been a terrible governor and was simply a toxic candidate. He was sunk from day one on re-election. All Christie had to say to win over independents was "I oppose everything Corzine stands for." Corzine, lacking a winning policy position and tainted by being perceived as one of the bad guys of Wall St. countered by attacking Christie on his weight. It was farcical.

I worked the GOTV trenches on weekends on that campaign in Newark (commuting from Yonkers because I needed to see Christie lose)...I might have spoken to 5000 voters. Opinions of Corzine ranged from "He's an asshole! Throw the bum out!" to "He's not really on our side, is he?" Nobody had a nice thing to say about Jon Corzine. To expect those people to turn out for Jon Corzine was an exercise in delusion.

Edit: It starts with the right candidate. The base (whatever you think that base may be) will not turn out to put a terrible, unlikeable and unsupportable candidate into office; no matter how much you rally that base. My perception, admittedly skewed from being an East-coast liberal, is that the base wants Democratic knife-fighters who think "compromise" and "bipartisanship" are dirty words; who will go to Washington fighting for them and bloodying Republicans. To quote H.L. Mencken: "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats." They can't so they want representatives that will metaphorically.

[kentuck]

27. The sky is falling !!!

Run for your lives!

The end is near!

The Republicans are going to kill all the Democrats!

Resistance is futile!