I considered calling this post "Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's the nuttiest one of all?" but it wouldn't fit. Plus, this week's overall winner is Jean Stevens of Wyalusing, Pennsylvania. She was found living in her house with the embalmed versions of her husband and sister. In the house. Why?
Stevens, according to AP, says she kept the bodies because she wanted to be able to see them and talk to them.
I think she probably meant "...and talk to them without being interrupted", but I digress.
You can't make this stuff up. You can't make up the following, either.
You're the governor of a poor state. The economy sucks, and there aren't a lot of jobs out there. You have one, but your job is ending, due to term limits, and you don't want your career to end with it. You're supposed to LEAD, and do right by your consituency, which at 11% is facing one of the worst unemployment rates in the country. You KNOW that you can appoint someone to replace your senior senator, who recently passed, but you don't, so that you can have that job. Even though by waiting, you know that the extension to unemployment benefits remains one vote shy. Contestant 1: Joe Manchin.
You're the governor of a state with arguably the worst budget problems in the country. I know, I know, you think I'm talking about California, but I'm not. I'm talking about a state that has ceased paying its bills. They owe over $5 BILLION dollars. Details here. It's bad. And the biggest problem is the underfunded pension system which would bankrupt the state if states were currently allowed to go bankrupt. Well, not now, but in the 1800's some did.
Anyway.
You're the governor and you have some options:
Be fiscally responsible, cut where you can. Like, um, making everyone working in the executive branch take a 5% pay cut. Plus, it looks good to share the pain.
Tell the truth: hold a press conference to let the state residents know what's going on, and let them know that there will be pain: potentially higher taxes, fewer services, chopped public pensions.
Raise the salary of the majority of your staffers ranging up to 20%, and averaging 11.4%. To make it look like the overall salary amount has decreased, let people keep their offices, titles and duties, but get them paid by other agencies.
If you picked option 3, you'd be Contestant 2: Pat Quinn, governor of Illinois.
Yeah, I know, I could add Linda Lingle to the list for vetoing the gay marriage bill. Or Bobby Jindal for signing the guns-are-okay-in-church bill into law. Or Fat Boy Slim for the mess he's making of New Jersey, but I expect self-serving lunacy at the expense of the citizens from the IIE. I expect better from Democrats.
Andrew Cuomo has announced for New York Governor. This was no surprise, and it will be nice to have a Cuomo back in the mansion. You can watch the announcement here. He proposes a number of interesting things, including that elected members of state government (which are supposedly part time positions) will need to disclose their other income sources. Expect blow back.
If you don't remember it, here's a clip from Mario Cuomo's 1984 Keynote address at the 1984 Democratic Convention. See if you see any parallels to anything else....like today's IIE, especially the C Street contingent. While other speeches (like Ted's "...and the dream will never die") are more liberal rhetoric, this is the ultimate speech against corporatism.
The second tidbit is that when Rand Paul canceled his Meet the Press visit, he was only the third person in history to do so. Use the comments if you know the other two. I'll let you know if you're right around noontime.
Finally, my Saturday began with the weekly jaunt to the dog park, where Olivia got out of the car, threw up, laid down, and could no longer walk. While it looked identical to me like her stroke 3 years ago, it turned out to be an inner ear infection. (Note to dog owners: if there is sudden onset, and the dog has nystagmus, which is the dog's eyes going side to side very quickly, that's 99.9% inner ear infection.) My vet was out of town, but came back to see her. We saw the vet at around 9:30 p.m. after a day you don't want to know about. After a full hour of evaluation, chiropractic adjustment, and the first homeopathic remedy, we carried her out to the car to rest so we could argue politics, while Olivia rested a little before the half hour drive home.
I'll spare you the details, but the next time someone says to you that the Arizona boycott is wrong because they are an Article 5 person, point out that California has AS MUCH RIGHT to boycott as Arizona does to enact legislation (which may or may not hold up in actual court.) Trust me, it moves the conversation along.
On Tuesday, Tom Corbett won the Republican nomination for Pennsylvania governor. It was a foregone conclusion. He'll be facing Dan Onorato.
For a lot of reasons, it's going to be an interesting race, but here's one little piece of nonsense. Two people, tweet-named "casablancpa" and "bfbarbie" said not nice things about Tom on Twitter. In his current position as Attorney General, and under the flimsiest of excuses, he went to court for subpoenas to get Twitter to release the tweeps' real names.
Twitter said no and has not released the names. The ACLU got right on it.
A couple hours ago, Corbett withdrew the request for the subpoenas. The back story is that Democrat Brett Cott was sentenced to five years in jail today. Cott was one of the dozens of people charged by Corbett's office in "Bonusgate", about graft and corruption and elected officials in Harrisburg. (The state capital.) Of course, Corbett indicted the Democrats first. He claimed he wanted the names because he believed Cott to be one of the tweeps. I guess Corbett is unaware of the First Amendment.
Anyway, Tom's going to campaign, Brett's going to jail, and you should look forward to hearing all about the Orie sisters. The only people NOT indicted by Tom for graft and corruption actions. I guess when you date someone years ago.....
Today in towns large and small across New Jersey, polls are open for residents to vote on school budgets for the upcoming fiscal year. Most years, this garners a 15% turnout, but this year may well be different.
Chris Christie was elected last year on a platform of fiscal "responsibility." So, in one of his first proposals, he cut $820 million from the state aid that normally goes to local school districts for FY 2011. He asked for teachers to not get their contracted pay raises, and to contribute to the health care. As an aside, it turns out that Christie is spending an additional $2 million on salaries and perks for his staff than Corzine did per the AP, including doubling the amount of his staff earning more than $100,000/year. But back to the school budgets.
The majority of people reading DCW attended public schools. Sure, some of you went to private school, and some were home schooled, but I'm sure most of you went to public school. And since you're reading this remember...if you can read, thank a teacher. School teachers nowadays normally pay for some supplies out of their own pockets: it's so ubiquitous, there's a special above the line deduction for it.
In cutting state aid, Christie puts the school districts in a bad position. In general, they need to raise taxes to cover the loss in aid, but even in so doing, they are facing layoffs because they cannot make up the difference given their tax bases.
Will people vote no on the budgets? If so, property taxes will not rise, but further municipal cuts will be necessary. It's possible that in some locales, class size could double. Is there waste? Probably, but why hang so much of it on school children, who don't have the ability to vote? If the budgets pass, does this mean that people regret electing Christie, or only that many fewer people voted? If the budgets fail, what happens to education in New Jersey? Currently, it's ranked #5 in the nation.
So here's my favourite comment on the whole situation:
I am a Republican and a teacher. Christie's assault on public education while increasing his patronage payouts to his 34 subordinates making over $100,000 has led me to do something I never thought I would do - vote Democratic.
Simply another political hypocrite who wants to bust a union so Republicans do not have to run against union money. All Christie supporters, please at least be honest about that. He is not bringing down property taxes, he is destroying public education, he continues the political patronage that is commonplace in Trenton and has successfully created the "strawman," the teachers.
However, in politics and life,this to shall pass.
Lets vote against our budgets tomorrow so we can hurt the kids, destroy the union, and support Christie in his move to "share sacrifice" with higher paid subordinates. Man of the people!
About says it all: we'll see what those who vote say, and how many of them turn out.
A few days ago, I received my first mailer from the Joe Sestak campaign, and it's gorgeous. And brilliant. 8-1/2" x 14" on heavy card stock. Bigger than the standard mailer, 4-colour glossy. I have tried to pdf it so you could see it, but I've had scanner problems. On the back side is a lot of good information about Sestak with terrific pictures, and on the front side, three quotes from Arlen and a chart. The Sestak campaign was kind enough to send over a copy of the scorecard and it looks like this:
If you scroll to the bottom, you'll see the line "Specter voted 85% of the time with Republicans during other Administrations."
The chosen quotes?
"...I have surveyed public opinion polls...and have found that the prospects for winning the Republican primary are bleak...And therefore, I have decided to be a candidate for re-election in the Democratic Party." (Arlen Specter Press Conference, 4/28/2009
"I did not say I would be a loyal Democrat. I did not say that." (Arlen Specter on Meet the Press, May 3, 2009)
"...One guy [Sestak] was willing to lose his job [in Congress] for his principles, and one guy [Specter] wasn't." (Philadelphia Magazine, 11/25/09)
The idea of running AS a Democrat is obvious not only in the Sestak campaign, but also in the Onorato campaign. Why this is different, and what it all means, after the jump.
I find this poll fascinating for two reasons: first, notice the comparisons, both Hoeffel and Dan Onorato against the presumptive Republican, Tom Corbett. And there is no doubt in my mind that progressives favour Hoeffel over Corbett and don't care as much about the Onorato vs. Corbett match-up as there is very little daylight between those two candidates. And this WAS a poll of progressive Democrats as the respondents were only selected from Philadelphia and the surrounding counties. While it's true that for a Democrat to win Southeastern Pennsylvania to win the state, one has to win BIG in Southeastern Pennsylvania to win statewide. As Lake says in one of their notes:
The region accounts for roughly 34% of the vote in the General Election and 40% in the Democratic Primary. In the 2000 General, the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate, Ron Klink, won 53% of Southeast PA, 51% of Western PA, and lost that race. In 2002 General, the Democratic nominee for Governor, Ed Rendell, won 71% of Southeast PA, 50% of Western PA, and won that race.
Thus, Southeastern Pennsylvania truly matters, but it's not the only factor.
The second fascinating thing is that there is no head-to-head comparison of Hoeffel and Onorato. That's because in the most recent poll, Onorato barely beats Hoeffel, but the big winner is "don't know":
"Don't know" leads the field for the Democratic nomination with 59 percent, followed by Allegheny County Executive Dan Onorato with 16 percent, State Auditor General Jack Wagner with 11 percent, 2004 U.S. Senate nominee Joel Hoeffel at 10 percent and State. Sen. Tony Williams at 2 percent, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University poll finds. [...]
Onorato and Wagner are the best known of the four Democrats and 64 or 65 percent of Democrats don't know enough about them to have an opinion. Hoeffel is unfamiliar to 73 percent and Williams to 93 percent.
The primary is 2 months away, and you'd think everyone would be advertising like crazy. I live in Southeastern Pennsylvania, and I've heard NOTHING from any of the gubernatorial campaigns: not a mailer, not a door hanger, not a call.
So, it's an interesting poll, but I think Hoeffel would be better served introducing himself to rank and file voters. Hoeffel has run for statewide office before: against Arlen Specter for Senate in 2004, and capturing 42% of the vote. 2004 wasn't that long ago, so you'd think he'd have name recognition, but he didn't do so well with that in 2004, either.
In a parallel universe situation reminiscent of something that would come out of Babylon 5, Jerry Brown will be announcing that he's running for governor of California. Here's the weird thing: we noted in February of 2009, or 13 calendar months ago using the regular calendar, that he was running. I guess this is the "formal" thing. He's been being polled all along, and he's done well: last September, he was winning. In Republican polling a couple weeks ago, Brown was dead even with Meg Whitman. He'll do even better once he gets going.
In the interest of full disclosure, I'm a big fan of Jerry Brown. Met him back in 1976, and he's smarter and more impressive then his "Governor Moonbeam" press might indicate.
Moving across the country: it did not go unnoticed in Jessville that the House is going to slap Charlie Rangel's hands. It's called "formal admonishment", and will occur on Friday. It's offensive. They nailed him for misusing funds for a trip. That other Congressmen went on. That was approved. Is he guilty of that? Yeah, sure, and he'll give back some money. BUT...Charlie is REALLY guilty of serious misuse of funds: the housing in violation of New York City rent control laws, the tax problems with his Caribbean properties, the outright bribe money.....plus the parking tickets....(lots of links here). They nailed him for something minor to avoid having to deal with more legitimate and serious charges, and thus not have to censure him. Or worse.
And finally, people have been asking me how an earthquake in Chile that was 500 times worse than the one in Haiti could cause so much less damage and loss of life. I don't know why people ask me these things...but in case you were wondering, it's because they have a functional government in Chile. That means organization, response, infrastructure. Yes, it's also that the quake was much deeper and offshore and away from populated areas. But no matter what the disaster, the response matters. In Chile, people were allowed to "loot" grocery stores while waiting for aid, and the government will make payments to the stores. (No TVs, though....bravo to the Chileans to realize that finding food when you're hungry is very different from stealing.) Is the Chilean earthquake a terrible tragedy? Absolutely, but the recovery will be quicker and easier because of a functioning government.
Today is primary day in Texas. The marquis race will be the Republican gubernatorial primary, and we'll be following that and some of the other races tonight. Most of the polls will close at 8 pm Eastern, except those around El Paso, since they're in Mountain Time.
Yesterday, the Chesco Dems held their nominating convention. Any local Democrat can attend, but only committeepeople, zone, regional and county elected officials can vote. 55% is required to win. The specific numbers differ by position. For example, everyone can vote for the senatorial and gubernatorial endorsements, but only those in CD6 can vote for that race, same with CD7 part of which is also part of Chesco. It was interesting, to say the least.
First off, no gubernatorial nor senatorial candidate received enough votes for an endorsement. For Governor, the votes were:
Onorato - 103
Hoeffel - 95
Wagner - 52
Williams - 1
Remember, the State Committee also failed to endorse due to a lack of majority.
The vote was 126 Sestak - 119 Specter on the Senate side. Interesting, to say the least, given that Specter won the State Committee endorsement, and the Chesco voters went 8 - 3 for Specter. While the votes are sealed, Andy Dinneman is a big Specter backer. Andy is a second term State Senator, holding a seat that was never Democratic before he captured it in a special election due to the death of his predecessor. And we'll get back to him.
The CD-7 vote was straightforward: 39 for Brian Lentz, with two votes for Gail Conner and one for Teresa Touey.
In the 6th District, Manan Trivedi carried 99 votes to Doug Pike's 40 and Brian Gordon's one. 77 were required. All of the people I spoke with voted for Trivedi for some version of "his personal story" "his background" "his ability to present a clear difference to Gerlach" and "his position on health care." It was a blow-out, especially since the Pike campaign was convinced it had 56 solid votes going in, which did not materialize.
As an aside, because of Andy Dinneman, some of the town committees held meetings where Manan spoke, and Doug and Brian were not allowed to speak, even though they, in some cases, showed up. This should not detract from Manan, the man and the candidate, just a little nod to local politics and peccadillos on the part of Andy.
The question becomes whether or not a man like Manan can win against Jim Gerlach. I contended previously that he could not based on organization and money. Predominantly money. But if each of the 99 people who voted for him, and their spouses and a few friends each, give the $2400 that they can for the primary, he could erase the financial deficit in a week.
Further, many people are excited about Manan Trivedi. He is pure Single Payer, he is completely opposed to any build-up in Afghanistan. What won the election for Obama in Pennsylvania was that he overcame the mistakes of the primary, and utilized excited volunteers. In 2008, that was a winning formula. In 2010 it's questionable, but in my eyes, this endorsement means a lot. Or rather, it will mean a lot if the committeepeople actually work for him: the phones, the canvasses, the lit drops, the voter drives, and the rest of GOTV. This is something that, organizationally, they never did before in history. But 2010 is an odd year.
It brings up the question of whether a true progressive can win in a mixed purple district like the PA 6th. I like Manan. I like Doug. There is no question that either would be a much better Congressman than Jim Gerlach. By the way, Steve Welch pulled out yesterday, meaning that Gerlach will not need to spend any money on the primary as the rest of his competitors present little challenge. He'll be primed and ready on 21 May for whichever Democrat challenges him.
The people who came out in Chesco yesterday were primarily progressives. all are activists. That they overrode the state endorsement of Arlen Specter, and rated Joe Hoeffel so highly is telling of that. The question is whether or not that can translate to the voters: the workers for whom 2008 was their first campaign and didn't even vote last year. The people who are so fed-up that they have changed their registration from Democrat to either "Independent" or "unaligned". Can force of personality and a compelling story win? It's possible we'll see....a week ago, I would have said that Pike had this primary sewn up, now I'm thinking it's 50/50.
One other thing to consider in the calculus is that a couple weeks ago, the 6th was the most likely district to be lost to redistricting. With the death of John Murtha, his district is in play for being redistricted out of existence. A consideration, too.
Southeastern Pennsylvania was hit hard by a major snowstorm yesterday. It was the second highest snowfall total in history, at an official 28.5 inches. 10 hours before the snow ended, Olivia was outside considering her options, as you can see in the photo.
Meanwhile, some 50 miles west of Philadelphia, the State Democratic Committee met in Lancaster to make its endorsements. On the good news side, there was unanimous agreement on one issue. All 301 attending State Committee members voted to endorse a resolution calling for passage of single payer healthcare, Senate Bill 400 and House Bill 1660, also known as the "Family and Business Healthcare Security Act." If you haven't read the bill yet, a synopsis is here, including a link to the full legislation. Note that the legislation is only 27 pages: it doesn't take a lot of words to put forth a great idea.
And then, the votes went downhill. On the issue of governor, there was no endorsement.
Four people competed for the endorsement: state Auditor General Jack Wagner of Pittsburgh, Allegheny County Executive Dan Onorato, former U.S. Rep. Joe Hoeffel and state Sen. Anthony Williams of Philadelphia, who said Friday he has filed papers that allow him to raise money for a prospective campaign. Scranton Mayor Chris Doherty has declared his candidacy, but did not compete for the endorsement Saturday.
Hoeffel was eliminated on the first ballot as the low vote-getter. On the second and final ballot, Wagner received the most votes — more than half of those cast, but far short of a two-thirds majority.
It's interesting that Wagner received the most votes as Onorato has the institutional support of the party, and Ed Rendell, behind him. If the party cannot pull together behind a candidate, it bodes poorly for November, which was all uphill in any event. Will Hoeffel's progressive support evaporate after he loses the primary? Voting for Onorato or Wagner is an incredibly tough thing for a progressive: there is very little daylight between their positions and those of Republican Tom Corbett. Plus, Corbett has more name recognition, is currently prosecuting corrupt state officials from both parties, and is squeaky clean.
On the Senate side, Arlen Specter won the endorsement of more than the required two-thirds, with 229 votes to Joe Sestak's 72. Sestak had this to say:
It showed "I was a little too independent" for the committee members, who hail from all corners of the state, the second-term congressman from the Philadelphia suburbs said as he vowed to stay in the race. "This is going to be a great fight."
The endorsement of Specter is a little surprising given that many of those who voted for the endorsement are the same people who worked very hard against him in all the previous elections. If Specter wins the primary, it's almost certain that Pat Toomey will win the seat. Specter hasn't had a polling lead since October. In the most recent poll, of likely voters, Toomey holds a 14% lead, plus an enthusiasm gap lead when the party registrations are considered.
Last night, current CD-6 Congressman Jim Gerlach announced he was dropping out of the Pennsylvania Governor's race. The race hadn't been polled since October, when Jim was pulling at 10%, and Tom Corbett at over 50%. Corbett, in his position as State AG, has since indicted a swath of Republicans to match the Democratic crowd he indicted last year. It's all corruption, extortion, bribery, misuse of public funds: and they're all guilty and it is highly probable that a court will find them guilty although everyone deserves his day in court and is innocent until proven guilty under the American justice system.
Jim has sat pretty in a district specifically gerrymandered for him in 2001. This time, his reach far extended past his grasp. It won't change the gubernatorial primary on the GOP side, Corbett has always been a lock. The question is whether or not he'll get back into the CD-6 race.
Although WaPo says that he'll be re-entering the race, it's hard to see how that will last. First, he has no money: only $34,000 in the bank as of Q3. Second, there are already six Republicans running, including State House Rep Curt Schroeder, who was a victim of some of the corruption Corbett indicted several Republicans about, as well as Steve Welch, who is running at the behest of the national party. Third, Doug Pike is a much more difficult challenge for Jim than his three previous Democratic challengers. Doug hasn't won the Democratic primary, but he's ahead at this time. Finally, there is the personal issue. No one seemed to know about it when he ran before, but it came to light inadvertently last summer. It hasn't paid to use it, but I'm still holding it just in case he jumps into the CD-6 race. Suffice it to say that he has run on lots and lots of family values, and he seems to lack them. It's all in the divorce papers. For the divorce he's denied having. Sorry, no boys involved. Still, it would hurt him.
On the Democratic side, Doug Pike is the front runner with close to a million as of the end of Q3. Manan Trivedi had about $100k, and Brian Gordon has just announced and doesn't have a full committee yet, much less any money to speak of. We'll see what the Q4 numbers say.
I've met with Doug several times, and I've sat down with Manan for a couple hours. I am working on the formal interviews I accomplished with each. It is so difficult because both are good men, both are strong candidates, and there is little daylight between their positions on all but one issue. One, though, will be a much stronger and more electable candidate in the general. But the interview was undertaken to help Democrats make a primary decision. Holding to journalistic ethics in a race with personal ramifications is tougher then I would have thought it would be.
This will be an interesting year overall in Pennsylvania politics. Will John Murtha pay a price for his long-time ethics issues, or will the fact that he brings big money home consistently trump the problems? It looks like another Kanjorski-Barletta match-up in the 11th. Under the radar, Lois Herr is challenging Joe Pitts in the 16th. It's a quiet race, but she will be the most formidable challenge Joe has had in his seven terms. He is also a co-sponsor of the Stupak amendment (yes, that one)and the 16th is a changing district. With Joe Sestak running for Senate, Brian Lentz, a state rep, is stepping up, running against Pat Meehan. Look for that to be a true horse race. Herewith, my overalls, as always, Democrats in blue, IIE in red.
Wow! Go to sleep extra early, and wake up to a whole new Senate.
Look down the posts and the comments: Dorgan and Dodd, gone. 11 Democratic House members. Open Senate seats in Delaware, Illinois, North Dakota, Connecticut, Ohio, Kansas, Missouri, Florida, and that list could change today. And let's not forget the special election for Senate in Massachusetts coming up: contrary to everyone else's polls, Rasmussen has Scott Brown only 9 points behind Martha Coakley. If Massachusetts sends a Republican to the Senate, ALL bets are off for 2010. The last time that state sent a Republican to the Senate was in 1972, and that was Edward Brooke, who doesn't even count as a "Republican": first because that party was very different back then, and second because he was unique and wouldn't find a place in today's GOP.
Pretty obviously, we're going to have to update the House and Senate forecasts, which we're working on and hope to have up within a week. (It takes longer than you might think.)
And let's not forget the people dropping out of the gubernatorial races, like Bill Ritter. A lot of governors' mansions can easily change this year: two prime examples are Pennsylvania and Texas.
The big questions are:
Why?
Who's next? Or is the season of quitting over?
Which direction will the replacements go?
Obviously, some people, like Dodd, are quitting because the chances of winning are slim, and another party member would have a better shot at holding the seat. It may also be that some House members want to try for the Senate, or for governor, or, like Bob Wexler, left/are leaving for a job in public service which interests them more than government service. Others may just have had enough of a polarized DC.
As for who is next, the list is too long to poll, so use the comments for those candidates you think will be next on the drop-out list. Or if you think the bleeding is done.
The biggest question, to me, is whether the Democrats who replace the drop-outs will be moderates or progressive. Personally, I hope that they are progressive. ACTUAL liberals. People who will gladly join the House Progressive Caucus, run their states as governors of, by and for the people, not the banks, and Senators who are not beholden to the insurance industry.
If progressives run, at all levels, on Act Blue money, and other direct-donor monies, it would really change the calculus of legislation. Think how different the health care battle would have been had none of the elected reps been beholden to the special interests.
And let's not forget the Independents. I'm not talking about the right wing wackos here. I'm talking about people like Lincoln Chafee who is running for Governor of Rhode Island. Chafee, like his dad before him, is a good man. While a fiscal conservative, his social policies are liberal. Had he switched parties in 2006, he'd still be in the Senate, and that move was considered. He'll have money troubles this year, but if he can overcome them, it would place a good, reasonable, man in contention. IMAGINE if for the open seats Republicans run far right candidates, Democrats run mushy-centrists, and Independents swoop in and take seats and mansions. A couple cycles and we would end up more like Europe, dependent on coalitions. The calculus is different if the Democratic Party runs actual progressives, and they run as populists. People who say "the party has not moved far enough on issues that matter most on a daily basis to Main Street."
While most people see the economy getting better, I see an unemployment rate still at 10% next November, and more importantly, next summer. Any candidate that can run on "a chicken in every pot, a good job in every household" will have a much better shot at an open seat than anyone else. Certainly more than the "pull yourself up by the boot straps" tea-baggers, more than mixed-bag independents.
And that is how I believe we turn the quitting season into a major win in November; run actual Democrats on an actual Democratic platform. NO MUD. There is no better way to overcome the enthusiasm gap, no better way to get voters to the polls.
If we don't do it, we're left with people like Danny Bauder, who is the Executive Director of the Chester County Democratic Committee (Pennsylvania). Yesterday, Danny personally endorsed Arlen Specter as having always delivered for Pennsylvania. He endorsed someone that we've voted against, as a party, for decades. Forget about the idea that a local party with a contested race should say "we will support and work for whichever Democrat wins the primary", forget that this is a personal endorsement, most people won't catch that nuance. If we don't support actual Democrats, we end up supporting Democrats who are either moderate Republicans in current Democratic clothing, like Specter, or beholden tools like Baucus, Nelson, Landrieu, Lincoln and the rest.
Again, no mud. We win in November as Democrats. If we can BE Democrats.
A couple months ago, the name "Drew Pritt" crossed my radar. He took out a Facebook ad announcing that he was running against Blanche Lincoln in next year's Democratic primary. I looked into him, and didn't consider him a serious, nor a viable, candidate for the US Senate. Posts here and here.
And now Mr. Pritt is no longer a Senate candidate. He's now running as Lt. Governor of Arkansas.
The Lt. Governor's office has always been an office I have wanted to serve in. As Lt. Governor, I can be an effective advocate for health care reform as well as economic development in the Delta, protecting a woman's right to choose in Arkansas, and most of all, continue to be a voice for equal rights for all Arkansans. However, to another level, unlike the current incumbent, as Lt. Governor I am willing to work with the leadership of the State Senate and the Governor's office, rather than just offering my own agenda.
The question is whether or not Bill Halter, the current Lt. Governor, will run for re-election. Halter is popular, thanks to his education lottery and his support of health clinics in Arkansas. Halter is a true progressive. In a poll earlier this month, he trailed Lincoln in the primary, but not by much, and in head-to-head with 4 potential Republican opponents, split 2/2. The details:
[I]f Lincoln filibusters health care, watch the numbers change:
Lincoln 37 Halter 27
Yes, she didn't filibuster, and this poll was taken prior to the vote, but the final conference committee legislation isn't known yet. The public option is favoured in Arkansas 53 - 41.
So what does this mean for Drew Pritt? Halter has not said he'll challenge Lincoln. If he does, and Drew Pritt runs unopposed in the primary, he will be the Democratic candidate for Lt. Governor next November. The only declared Republican in the race is Mark Darr, a conservative (says so on his Twitter profile). His current profession is pizza store owner. Pritt vs Darr would be a true race of progressive vs evangelical, and would give Arkansas voters a clear choice. The question is whether or not they would elect a progressive who has never held public office. My perception (and I'm willing to be wrong) is that the majority of Democrats in Arkansas are more moderate than progressive. Thus, a hard slog for Pritt.
If Halter decides to run another time for Lt. Governor, it's hard to imagine that he would be beatable in the primary. It's hard to understand why Pritt would chose to exchange race positions from against a weaker candidate to the stronger one. Unless he knows that Halter will run for Senate. Then it would make sense.
Anyway, it is interesting to watch. I don't think anyone has a sense of what will happen with Pritt or Halter next year as there are still too many unknowns. However, we all know Blanche, so let's poll on her:
Southeastern Pennsylvania was hit hard by a major snowstorm yesterday. It was the second highest snowfall total in history, at an official 28.5 inches. 10 hours before the snow ended, Olivia was outside considering her options, as you can see in the photo. 
