Arizona
Meet the Udalls
Outside magazine has a great profile on cousins Tom and Mark Udall. Go read it and learn more about one of the great Western Democratic families.
While you're at it, please give Tom and Mark Udall some of your spare change, to assist their campaigns to bring more and better Democrats to the Senate (and more and better Udalls).
Click here to contribute to Tom Udall's campaign to take back Pete Domenici's seat in New Mexico.
Click here to contribute to Mark Udall's campaign to turn Colorado bluer than it already is.
kencamp | March 10, 2008 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) |
Stunning turnout throughout the West
In a release, the DNC points out that turnout on Super Tuesday was stunningly high throughout the West -- which bodes well for the general election.
• In Colorado, Democrats saw twice the number of caucus-goers as Republicans—119,184 to 55,845. Yesterday’s turnout was eight times higher than that of turnout from 2004 when only 15,000 participated. [Denver Post, 2/6/08]• In Idaho, 21,224 people caucused for Democrats, far exceeding anyone’s expectations, and forcing officials to print more ballots. [AP, 2/5/08; cnn.com, 2/6/08]
• In Arizona, 368,828 people turned out for Democrats, far exceeding the record of 239,000. [cnn.com, 2/6/08]
• In New Mexico, more than 152,000 ballots were cast, far surpassing the 2004 number of 104,000 in 2004.
• And in Utah, 122,617 people came out for Democrats, far exceeding the 33,839 who participated in the 2004 primary. [cnn.com]
It's going to be a good year.
Kari Chisholm | February 6, 2008 | Comment on This Post (2 so far) |
The ultimate Western Democrat ticket
Awhile ago, this was mentioned here. (I'm extending off the good idea..thanks Leo!) Summary?
That presidential tickets are often either one of two combinations - balance or reinforcement. Kerry picked Edwards to balance him out, both regionally and personally. Clinton chose Gore to reinforce him, both regionally and issue-wise.
There is only one serious Western Democrat in the race for president and that is Bill Richardson. Now, I'm going to admit I'm a big fan of his but that isn't my point. It is that in 2008 we could have potential to deliver a knock-out blow to the entire Western GOP and paint the way truly for progressive western dominance allied with the traditional Democratic bloc (coasts and upper midwest).
The key is reinforcement. Instead of picking a easterner to balance him (if he was the nominee for that matter, IF) Bill Richardson should take Leo's advice and pick Janet Napolitano, the governor of Arizona.
You may say never! But look at this great poll that Kos pointed out today:
A new statewide survey shows that if the Senate election were held today, the Republican incumbent would be defeated by Gov. Janet Napolitano – that is, if Napolitano would choose to run for the seat. The Democrat governor cannot seek a third term.
Not surprisingly, the poll by the Behavior Research Center shows Napolitano the favorite of 78 percent of Democrats, versus 11 percent for McCain. But the governor also would pick up 20 percent of Republicans and 47 percent of independents who make up nearly 28 percent of Arizona’s registered voters.
If they went head to head, Napolitano would get 47 percent of the vote, compared to 36 percent for McCain, according to the poll.
Now, that head to head match up result is pretty damn astounding.
Think about it again. A Richardson/Napolitano ticket (even against McCain possibly) would take both New Mexico AND Arizona. That's not where it ends, either.
Napolitano is considered to be a very successful Governor, in fact she enjoy sky high approval ratings. So does Richardson here in New Mexico. That combination of two extremely popular red state (!) Democratic governors could have crossover appeal like nothing else.
Also - the Hispanic/Woman factor would provide an immense amount of change additive to the ticket itself. Contrast that against the possible GOP combinations shows a pretty clear sense of America.
Western electorate - that's putting all the Western swing states on the map (including possibly Montana and Wyoming) and maybe making Texas competitive.
If we really try and imagine a new electoral future for the Democratic Party we could do it with one swift blow.
Now, there is the ultimate Western Democratic ticket.
Landon Mascareñaz | August 22, 2007 | Comment on This Post (2 so far) |
The Continued Rise of the Southwest
America’s population is making a diagonal shift from the Northeast to the Southwest. Five of the nation’s largest cities are in the Southwest: Los Angeles, Phoenix, San Antonio, San Diego, and San Jose. Phoenix is now that nation’s fifth largest city, displacing Philadelphia, now at number six. Mesa and Fresno are now bigger than Cleveland, Pittsburgh and Buffalo. Seven of the ten largest American cities lie within 500 miles of the Mexican border. In 1910, in contrast, the ten largest American cities were all within 500 miles of the Canadian border.
What this means to the Democratic Party is that the Northeast and Midwest aren’t a sufficient base by themselves for the future of the party. With the GOP dominating the once solidly Democratic South, Democrats must look Southwest for growth and electoral majorities. Arizona, Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico have a combined 29 votes in the Electoral College and a corresponding number of seats in the Senate and House of Representatives. Moreover, the 2010 Census will undoubtedly raise that number beyond the current 29. Meanwhile, neighboring blue California’s population will continue to grow, reaching perhaps 60 million by 2050 with a Hispanic majority possible by 2042.
Newsweek is already predicting that the 2008 Presidential race will be decided in the Southwest. Their analysis:
The rise of the Swing-State Southwest (and the power of the Latino voters in it) is a function of timing, geography, demographics—and the Electoral College....The Southwest's ascendancy is linked to one key demographic: its vast, rapidly growing—but still politically unsettled—Hispanic vote….Generally speaking, [Hispanics are] culturally traditional, religiously devout and open to conservative appeals from the GOP. Economic populists, all too familiar with the trials of race-based discrimination, they feel an emotional bond with Democrats, too….In 2006 the Hispanic vote that went to the GOP dropped precipitously, to 30 percent. The war in Iraq was one reason, analysts say, but the main one was the war over immigration.
Given the mean-spiritedness of the recent immigration debate, the trend away from the GOP is likely to continue and even accelerate, strengthening the future Democratic base in the Southwest.
Leo Brown | July 11, 2007 | Comment on This Post (3 so far) |
Is the GOP losing the West?
The GOP is losing its hold on the rural vote according to a poll reported by NPR.
A new national poll indicates rural Americans are no longer reliably Republican, and the Bush administration's conduct of the war in Iraq seems mainly to blame."I think there are two big headlines out of this poll," says Anna Greenberg of the Democratic polling firm of Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research. "The first is 'Republican Collapse in Rural Areas.' And the second is 'Rural is the Battleground in 2008."
But Iraq is not the GOP’s only problem.
Nick Kristoff of the New York Times zeros in on the Southwest and how the nativist wing of the GOP is alienating both Hispanics and moderates on immigration.
…the closer you get to the border, the more voters back politicians who are looking for middle ground — and punish those who follow the rant-for-ratings route.
He sees Arizona, Nevada, Colorado, and New Mexico and their combined 29 electoral votes (more than Florida’s 27 or Ohio’s 20) as potentially the biggest battleground in next year’s presidential race. And he notes that Hispanics are the fastest growing part of the electorate and make up 28% of the population in Arizona, 24% in Nevada, 20% in Colorado, and 43% in New Mexico.
Kristoff cites Democratic congressional gains in Colorado and Arizona in 2004 and 2006 as evidence that Democrats can assemble a new Western majority and quotes David Waid, Chairman of Arizona’s Democratic Party:
“Arizona is in play like never before…and the Republicans are literally handing it to us.”
Republican strategist Clint Bolick sees the same trends.
Hispanic support for Republican candidates plummeted by 10 points, to 30 percent from 40 percent, between the 2004 presidential election to the 2006 congressional election debacle, costing the GOP as many as four congressional seats. In next year's presidential election, Hispanic votes could make the difference in four Western states, including Arizona. If Republicans continue chasing Hispanic voters away, they can kiss their national electoral prospects goodbye.Here at Western Democrat, we have always believed that the future of the Democratic Party lies in the West. The GOP is doing their part to hasten that future.
Leo Brown | June 22, 2007 | Comment on This Post (2 so far) |
Arizona, Nevada and the West are the fastest growing
Arizona grew by 3.6 percent last year and Nevada grew by 3.5 percent. And the West outstripped every other region in growth, including the South which had half of the top ten largest gainers, but also the largest loser, Louisiana.
The Baltimore Sun also notes the topsy-turvy nature of Arizona politics that is beginning to favor Democrats:
Long a Republican stronghold, Arizona now has a moderate Democrat as its governor. Democrats picked up two congressional seats in last month's midterm election, and voters rejected a ballot initiative banning gay marriage.Arizonans are used to a certain amount of political turmoil caused by the constant influx of new residents, said Marshall Vest, an economist at the University of Arizona in Tucson.
"Whenever you have a vote on any particular issue, you never know what it's going to be," because a large chunk of the electorate has just arrived, he said.
Emmett O'Connell | December 22, 2006 | Comment on This Post (1 so far) |
The New West Project
This is wonderful:
The New West Project, headquartered in Denver, will conduct research and develop strategies to secure and exploit recent Democratic gains in the Western states, party sources said.At least four Western governors - Janet Napolitano of Arizona, Bill Richardson of New Mexico, Brian Schweitzer of Montana and Bill Ritter, Colorado's governor-elect - are expected to lead the group's advisory council, the sources said. Incoming Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, Sen. Ken Salazar of Colorado and other members of Congress will provide "strategic guidance."
Reid confirmed the creation of the new organization, which he said would "build upon the leadership of people such as governors Napolitano, Richardson and Schweitzer" and "work to focus attention on the West."
This is a high level group. Consider the Western Strategy in play, my friends. It is wonderful to see this sort of institutional arrangement that will only benefit our local, state and national candidates long term. It looks like part think tank, part strategy firm, part communications development - all aspects that will be welcome by the plethora of candidates that will be running these next few cycles to take advantage of our our new promise out here in the west.
The best part of the article? The quote from an unnamed "Western Democrat":
As an example of what the new organization may do, the Western Democrat said that political professionals would analyze such questions as "the difference between first- and second-generation Hispanic voters, ... what motivates them and how we communicate with them," as well as "why a recent transplant from California, who has voted Republican all her life, is now voting for Democrats."
Good question, "Western Democrat" - it just leaves me amazed to see our namesake invoked so strikingly in an article. Methinks the author of the article, John Aloysius Farrell , might just be an reader of our humble site. If so, thanks for the article John - we'll be watching for you in the future.
It's great to have a new project designed for this express purpose and examining the multitude of new questions that are arising from the new political climate in the West. Now, if any of those people involved in the project are paying attention it would behoove them greatly to include netroots and blog outreach as an element of the project. You see, since major political focus has been absent from the West for awhile the netroots and blogosphere have been proliferating and recruiting top candidates all over the place. It would be an essential element of any plan that you should put together.
I'm excited.
Here's the The New West Project!
Landon Mascareñaz | December 6, 2006 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) |
Post-Election Statehouse Roundup
To quote Buffalo Springfield, "there's something happening here". Post-election, Western Democrats have made great gains in the states, building strong majorities in the legislatures and taking or retaining several governorships. Here's a look at the numbers, courtesy of NCSL.
Senate 12-18 Republican majority
House 21-39 Republican majorityPost-Election
Senate 12-18 Republican majority
House 28-32 Republican majorityPickups
Senate – stays the same
House - +7 seats
Democratic Governor Janet Napolitano was overwhelmingly re-elected.
Pre-election
Senate 25-15 Democratic majority
Assembly 47-32-1 (Senate 25-15 Democratic majority
Assembly 48-32 Democratic majority
Pickups
Senate – stays the same
Assembly - +1 seat
Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger was re-elected.
Pre-Election
Senate 18-17 Democratic majority
House 35-30 Democratic majority
Post-Election
Senate 20-15 Democratic majority
House 39-26 Democratic majority
Pickups
Senate – +2 seat
House - +4 seats
Democratic gubernatorial candidate Bill Ritter was elected Governor.
Pre-Election
House 13-57 Republican majority
Post-Election
Senate 7-28 Republican majority
House 19-51 Republican majority
Pickups
Senate – stays the same
House - +6 seats
Republican gubernatorial candidate C.L. “Butch” Otter was elected.
Pre-Election
Senate 27-23 Democratic majority
House 50-50
Post-Election
Senate 26-24 Democratic majority
House 50-49-1 (
Pickups
Senate – -1 Seat
House – stays the same
Democratic Governor Brian Schweitzer is up for re-election in 2008.
Pre-Election
House 26-16 Democratic majority
Post-Election
House 27-15 Democratic majority
Pickups
Senate – +1 seat
House - +1 seat
Pre-Election
Senate 24-18 Democratic majorityHouse 42-28-2(
Post-Election
Senate 24-18 Democratic majority
House 42-28 Democratic majority
Pickups
Senate – stays the same
House – stays the same
Democratic Governor Bill Richardson was overwhelmingly re-elected.
Pre-Election
Senate 17-11-2(
House 27-33 Republican majority
Post-Election
Senate 17-11-2(
House 31-29 Democratic majority
Pickups
Senate – stays the same
House - +4 seats
Pre-Election
House 19-56 Republican majority
Post-Election
Senate 8-21 Republican majority
House 19-56 Republican majority
Senate – stays the same
House – stays the same
Republican Governor Jon Huntsman is up for re-election in 2008.
Pre-Election
Senate 26-23 Democratic majority
House 56-42 Democratic majority
Post-Election
Senate 32-17 Democratic majority (not since 1965)
House 63-35 Democratic majority
Senate – +6 seats
House - +7 seats
Pre-Election
Senate 7-23 Republican majority
House 14-46 Republican majority
Post-Election
Senate 7-23 Republican majority
House 17-43 Republican majority
Senate – stays the same
House - +3 seats
Democratic Governor Dave Freudenthal was overwhelmingly re-elected.
kencamp | November 22, 2006 | Comment on This Post (4 so far) |
Room to Grow in the West
Western Democrats did well in 2006. Here is a link to some helpful maps. Particularly noteworthy were pickups in Montana for the U.S. Senate and the Colorado for governorship, plus four pick-ups in the House of Representatives. And we won the office of Secretary of State in the swing states of New Mexico and Nevada. (Think Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004 for the importance of this). But we could have done better, and in 2008 we can. For the Senate in 2008 think Colorado and New Mexico. There is still room to grow in the West.
But returning to 2006, Senate pickups in Arizona and Nevada were possible. Governor’s mansion pickups were possible in Alaska, Nevada and Idaho. Additional House pickups were possible in California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Washington, and Wyoming. And we didn’t win the election for Secretary of State in Colorado. These races were close enough to be considered competitive. Several of the competitive House districts in 2006 could be just as competitive in 2008.
So while we are still basking in the warm glow of victory, let us ask ourselves, what could we do better? Any campaign can be critiqued, but I think the biggest factor is that we were outspent. Jack Carter was outspent four to one in Nevada. The GOP and the Club for Growth poured a ton of money into ID-1. The national GOP was spending much more in CA-4 than the DCCC was. And so it went in many districts. Meanwhile Hillary Clinton spent $30 million defeating token opposition in New York. Now I understand that each candidate can raise his or her own funds, and the national committees carefully decide where to spend scarce resources, but more seed money in planting season and more money at harvest time would go a long way in the West. Something to think about for 2008.
Leo Brown | November 21, 2006 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) |
Tester leading...
Of course, the big story in the West is that Jon Tester is leading Conrad Burns. As of 9:30 Mountain Time, he's up 49% to 48% leading by less than 2000 votes, out of nearly 400,000 cast.
In the US House, Democrats won Arizona-5, Arizona-8, California-11 (goodbye Pombo!), and Colorado 7 (Perlmutter). It's still too close to call in California-4 (Brown/Doolittle), New Mexico-1 (Madrid/Wilson), Washington-8 (Burner/Reichert), and Wyoming at-large (Trauner/Cubin). DailyKos has a Western election results tracker.
In the governor's races, Democrats won in Colorado and Oregon - but lost in Alaska, Idaho, and Nevada.
Kari Chisholm | November 8, 2006 | Comment on This Post (1 so far) |
Checklist for Tuesday
CREW (Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington) created a go-to guide on corruption in Congress to expose and hold accountable members of Congress for their questionable conduct. The list was updated in September to reflect the latest information and the resignation from Congress of three former members of the list, Congressmen Cunningham, Ney, and DeLay.
Here are members of CREW’s list in the West. Note that a Democrat made the list.
Senate:
Conrad Burns (R-MT)
Members of the House:
Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO)
Ken Calvert (R-CA)
Richard Pombo (R-CA)
John Doolittle (R-CA)
Rick Renzi (R-AZ)
Jerry Lewis (R-CA)
Maxine Waters (D-CA)
Gary Miller (R-CA)
Those of you living in Montana, Colorado, and Arizona are watching these races closely.
Unfortunately, some districts have been so gerrymandered that it may take more than one election cycle clean house via the electoral process. The last California redistricting was designed to protect incumbents, which may be why so many Californians are on the list. At least two of these Californians, however, are in tight races.
For Charlie Brown vs. John Doolittle, check out this conclusion from an editorial from the Tahoe Daily Tribune:
Despite the glib picture Mr. Doolittle likes to paint out of desperation, this Congressional race is not between liberals and conservatives. In fact, politics isn't really what's at stake. This election is about right vs. wrong, abuse of power, leading with integrity, protecting the earth, protecting the country and living within our means. For that Charlie Brown has our vote on Nov. 7.
For Jerry McNerney vs. Richard Pombo, check out this conclusion from an editorial in the Modesto Bee:
If you prefer the politics of extremes; if you're OK with selling off national parks; if backroom dealmaking and tainted money suit you; if you embrace out-of-balance budgets and the concentration of wealth — Pombo's your man. But he's no longer ours.Law enforcement has already taken its toll on CREW’s list.
Let’s see how many the voters will remove tomorrow.
Leo Brown | November 6, 2006 | Comment on This Post (1 so far) |
George Will Discovers the West
In today's "election scorecard" column from conservative commentator George Will:
Four years ago all eight Mountain West states -- Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming -- had Republican governors. If Democrat Bill Ritter wins Colorado's governorship, Democrats will hold five of eight governorships in the Mountain West, which in the 1990s was even more reliably Republican than the South. In 2004 a change of a total of 63,508 votes in Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico would have given those states' 19 electoral votes and the presidency to John Kerry. No wonder the Democrats' 2008 convention will probably be in Denver.
Bring it on home, folks. Bring it on home.
Kari Chisholm | November 6, 2006 | Comment on This Post (1 so far) |
Western Roundup
A brief smattering of Western news, for those inclined.
First off, John Ensign is in another world:
Most of the country (Iraq) is pretty positive.
He's also speaking truth:
Yes. Our (GOP) behavior (on fiscal issues) has been wrong.Richardson and right-winger Dendahl can't agree to debate :
The two camps had talked about an Oct. 15 debate but they couldn't agree on the terms. Dendahl wanted the debate televised live, but the governor's campaign argued that giving Dendahl an hour of air time would be a disservice to voters.
Richardson also lays out a fairly comprehensive position on Iraq:
I would set a timetable for withdrawal. I would couple that with a political solution of the three ethic groups forcing them to have a political solution. There is no military solution. Specifically, I would divide up the oil revenue, the cabinet ministries and force them to come up with a new political framework. I would also study Senator Biden's federation [proposal]. I think that may be ultimately the right solution.
In the same article, he clearly endorses the 50-state strategy:
I am on Dean's side. I think what Howard Dean is doing makes sense.... That is what we should concentrate on. The DNC's role is to rebuild the state Democratic party. For instance in New Mexico ... because of the DNC we have 4 extra full-time campaign workers that have been there. That is helpful.
Governor Napolitano is slaughtering her competitors among independents and well, everyone else:
A statewide poll released Tuesday found Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano with a 2-to-1 lead over Republican challenger Len Munsil, with the incumbent making deep inroads among Republican voters and attracting support from the vast majority of independents surveyed...Napolitano held a 4-to-1 lead - 72 percent for Napolitano, 18 percent for Munsil, 3 percent for Hess, 7 percent undecided - among independents surveyed and had backing from 62 percent of voters overall in Republican-leaning Maricopa County (Phoenix) and 68 percent in Pima County (Tucson), a Democratic stronghold.
Bill Ritter is setting up for be the next Governor of Colorado in a landslide:
Less than two months before the election, Denver District Attorney Bill Ritter (D) has jumped even further ahead in Colorado's gubernatorial race. He now leads Republican Representative Bob Beauprez 50% to 34%. Ten percent (10%) are undecided.
So if all the undecideds swing to Beauprez, Ritter still wins. Sweet.
Back to New Mexico, where Dendahl is calling Bill Richardson a "vengeful, ruthless man." Constructive.
In Nevada, the first gubenatorial debate between Titus and Gibbons was declared even (and pretty ruthless). Although, Titus got in this good shot:
Titus then popped Gibbons with a reference to his now-famous speech in Elko last year, when he plagiarized paragraphs from an Alabama politician's speech and complained about "the three-hugging, Birkenstock-wearing, hippie, tie-dyed liberals" for their opposition to the war in Iraq.'In my classes, congressman, if you plagiarize, you get an F.'
That's it for now, I may update later. I'll leave you with a Richardson quote that may resonate with everyone here:
My view is that the West is the future of the democratic party - Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah.
Landon Mascareñaz | September 28, 2006 | Comment on This Post (1 so far) |
Help write wiki for radio show on the AZ-8
Radio Open Source, an innovative show that jump starts their radio show with blog conversations, is developing a wiki on several important Senate and House races this fall, and their show next week will be on the Arizona 8. Though, the GOP recently pulled out of this race, this could be a good oppurtunity to broaden the reach of the "Western Dem" message.
Comment on the show here.
Help write their wiki on the race here.
Emmett O'Connell | September 28, 2006 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) |
Pederson turning the corner?
With some good poll numbers coming in showing him only a few points down from Jon Kyl, it looks like Jim Pederson actuall has a chance. Despite what I wrote here, he seems to be gaining some post Labor Day ground against who I thought would be a good target.
wactivist has a pretty good explanation of what might be going on:
Arizona activists on blogs, in Democratic meetings, and while talking with their friends and families have in the past been quick to criticize and dismiss Pederson’s chances. Let’s just admit that outright. The truth is, the guy isn’t always given much of a chance by the same people who probably are most dedicated to him winning.There are always a bunch of reasons given – some that might be true, some that definitely aren’t – but the consensus around these parts is that the Pederson campaign was still-born – he is a good guy – has the resources to win – but for whatever reason, Kyl will roll to victory.
People reacted similiarly to Jason Williams’ campaign. For whatever reason, activist chatter dismissed Williams – and look what happened? He quietly put together a strong effort, with disciplined message and good outreach. He shocked everyone but himself by winning – and I think Jim might be in that same boat.
Over the past few months, under the guidance of new campaign manager Sky Gallegos, an agressive communications team, and a more than amazing public schedule (heh, had to say that) – the Pederson campaign has been getting their message out in the media, has been airing effective TV ads both for Jim, and against Kyl – and the net result is a determined campaign clawing their way out of a hole that some of us worried was insurmountable as they close in on a lead.
Plus, Kyl going negative may put the incumbent in a much worse light than he would have been:
On the other hand the Kyl campaign has gone all buck-wild. Attacking Jim for being wealthy and putting his own money into his campaign … an attack which CLEARLY has no traction – but they are in love with. This money thing seems especially foolish when you realize how much money Kyl has in the bank from special interests. I’ll take a guy putting his own hard cash into what he believes ANY DAY over a guy who is getting checks from every evil special interest in America to do his bidding.The Kyl campaign and the GOP are petty – making silly jokes and childish accusations – always confused that the electorate in AZ is always and forever locked into the conservative mold they hope it is.
But Arizonans, just like the rest of the country, are fed up with what is going on in Washington – and the Kyl campaign’s refusal to actually engage on the issues and put forward a postive agenda is going to be their achilles heel – no matter HOW MUCH money they have.
Emmett O'Connell | September 21, 2006 | Comment on This Post (1 so far) |
Fighting Dems: Western Theater
Patriotism is not limited by geography, so the Western focus of this post is in no way intended to slight the “Fighting Dems” in other parts of the country. See their national website here.
Below is a list Western Fighting Dems. These are fresh troops, veterans running for Congress in the West on the Democratic ticket. Click on their names for a link to their respective websites. They are strong on national defense, strong on military experience, and the people we need in Congress to put America back on course.
AZ-03 Herb Paine
CA-03 Bill Dunston
CA-04 Charlie Brown
CA-46 Jim Brandt
CA-50 John Rinaldi
CO-05 Jay Fawcett
CO-06 Bill Winter
NV Senate Jack Carter
Their mission: take back the Hill. Let’s give them our support.
Leo Brown | September 18, 2006 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) |
Three Senate races, the difference between Tester, Carter and Pederson
Jon Tester is giving Sen. Conrad Burns a run for his money. Actually, I don't think anyone would be surprised come November if Burns was beaten by Tester.
Jack Carter in Nevada is starting to run even with Sen. John Ensign. Carter came into this race somewhat late, had a weird start with a smoking pot confession, and despite not being a politician, is turning up the heat in Nevada.
John Pederson, on the other hand, is still running in double digits behind Jon Kyl, the not so special junior Senator from Arizona. Kyl is certainly no Sen. John McCain in terms of being a maverick and is almost the poster child for the stalled immigration reform package. He's the harsh kind of partisan that you would think a smart Western Dem would have a good chance against.
Also President Bush's support in Arizona is soft, and while Kyl's poll numbers have never been super, they have pulled up significantly as the election approaches. Actually, his worst performance was during the months of the immigration debate.
So, what are Tester and Carter doing well why is Pederson not getting any traction?
My main thought has to do with whether each candidate is an outsider. Tester fits the bill. Despite being a state legislator and a legislative leader, he had a primary race against a popular statewide elected.
Carter, on the other hand, is the true outsider. He really has nothing to lose and is running like it. He came from private industry, convinced by Katrina a year ago that public service was where he needed to go.
Pederson as the former chair of the Arizona Democratic Party is, probably safe to say, the most insider of the three. This probably changes his style a bit, while Tester and Carter can feel free to take chances, Pederson takes the well trodden road of candidates past. Historically, though, unless an incumbent falls down the stairs, they keep their office.
So, what are the other differences between these three? Or is Arizona a different place than Nevada and Montana, so you can't expect the same thing in three Western states?
Emmett O'Connell | September 1, 2006 | Comment on This Post (10 so far) |
Bounty Hunters and Hired Guns
I have a theory that the Intermountain West is so red because for years outside money flowed into state GOP organizations in those states. The financial imbalance became self-perpetuating as Democrats directed their funding towards the coasts. But in small markets, a relatively few dollars can go a long ways. I was looking for support for that thesis when I cam upon this amazing story out of Arizona.
The Arizona Republican Party has put a bounty on the heads of voters this year — and their hired guns are cashing in. Republicans are spending $10 for every person GOP organizations and paid strategists recruit to join the party as it looks to increase its registration edge over Democrats.So far this year, the GOP has doled out more than $300,000 to register nearly 22,000 new members, said Matt Salmon, chairman of the Arizona Republican Party.
…“Had we not done this, I really think we would have been overtaken by the Democrats,” he said referring to state registration numbers. “And studies show that if you register someone, they will vote that year.”
Michael Fries, who is in charge of the Democrats’ campaign efforts, said his party doesn’t hire professionals to recruit new members. He said volunteers are the ones who recruit new members...“This is a campaign about talking to voters day in and day out,” he said. “(Republicans) are trying to come up with a strategy that works because they don’t have a good message.”
This speaks volumes about the GOP’s concept of the “marketplace of ideas.”
Leo Brown | August 29, 2006 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) |
Asking Congress to get something done
From the Albuquerque Tribune:
AUSTIN - Accusing Congress of abdicating its responsibility to control immigration and secure the U.S.-Mexico border, Gov. Bill Richardson and three other border-state governors have signed a letter urging federal lawmakers to pass comprehensive immigration reform before the end of the year.Richardson, fellow Democrat Janet Napolitano of Arizona, and Republicans Rick Perry of Texas and Arnold Schwarzenegger of California signed the letter Friday at the close of the two-day Border Governors Conference.
They joined the governors of six Mexican states in signing a joint declaration on issues ranging from tourism and trade to education and border security. They pledged to share information about human, drug and arms trafficking, and to work together to prevent agricultural terrorism and ensure high food safety standards.
In their letter to House and Senate leaders, the governors said: "We urge you to get back to work and pass legislation that puts the interest of taxpayers first and solves this crisis once and for all."
It is interesting how you can get all the border state governors to agree on the framework, along with governors from another country and you can't get elected representatives in Congress to do anything except grandstand and play to special interests.
The chances of anything getting done regarding this issue are next to none before the 2006 election. The GOP will play up the open border as an issue but their credibility on this issue is severely hampered by the fact that even though they controlled both houses and the presidency, they achieved next to nothing for the American people.
Western Governors and politicians may find themselves frustrated by the lack of true concern from D.C. regarding this issue but their recourse is limited. Most national Republicans cater to the elements of nativism or fear and comprehensive solutions are a direct assuault on the ideology of the far right.
I suggest a very simple solution:
VOTE DEM IN 06.
Landon Mascareñaz | August 28, 2006 | Comment on This Post (2 so far) |
Gas and Property Rights and fishermen
Now here's an interesting mix of issues. On one side you have the current gas and oil boom across the west that is pitting not only ranchers and small property owners against big Oil and Gas, their state governments and the BLM, but also (as pointed out here by the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel), hunters and anglers (thanks Coyote Gulch).
On the other side, you have a somewhat under the radar, astro-turf, sagebrush rebellion sweeping the West with five eminent domain initiatives.
One of the key pieces to the entire Western Democrat theme is the connection of the bullets and bait folks to the Democratic Party. Once they feel that we have their interests in heart (like protecting stream access in Montana for Schweitzer), they'll forget about voting for a Republican.
Anyway, here is a good part of the Daily Sentinal piece, leaves you thinking how to bring the bullets and bait crowd into the property rights fight:
Alliances among groups who once considered themselves at odds with popular environmentalism are occurring throughout the West, and they’re being noticed by politicians, chief among whom are Colorado’s gubernatorial candidates.“It feels like a natural alliance, a coming-together of common interests to fight forces that are threatening our outdoors,” said Evan Dreyer, spokesman for Democrat Bill Ritter’s gubernatorial campaign. “I think that for a very long time, this was something that was fought on the fringes, the environmentalists on the far left and the hunters’ groups on the far right. I think there is an agreement that they can be more effective by coming together and finding that middle ground.”
Emmett O'Connell | August 22, 2006 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) |
Nevada leaps ahead of New Hampshire!
In a huge victory for Western Democrats, the DNC rules and bylaws committee has decided to allow Nevada to schedule a presidential caucus before the New Hampshire primary. NH would retain its "first in the nation primary" status, but Nevada would slip in after Iowa. Also, South Carolina will hold a primary shortly after New Hampshire, during the time previously reserved as a quiet period.
As one on-site observer told me, "Nevada and South Carolina won in a landslide in the Rules and Bylaws committeee meeting."
At this point, the full DNC will need to approve the recommendation in mid-August to formalize the decision. Expect a full court press and lobbying from all players.
Coverage from the National Journal is here.
Kari Chisholm | July 22, 2006 | Comment on This Post (10 so far) |
Liveblogging the DNC primary calendar meeting
Over at the Hotline blog, Reid Wilson is liveblogging the DNC rules & bylaws committee meeting - during which it's expected that either Arizona or Nevada (or maybe Colorado) will add a presidential caucus after Iowa, but before New Hampshire.
Kari Chisholm | July 22, 2006 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) |
Bring on the Western Caucus
Tomorrow, the DNC is expected to make a change to the presidential primary calendar - adding a Western caucus before New Hampshire's primary. It's believed that the main contenders are Arizona and Nevada (and Colorado could slip in there.)
For the Democratic Party, though, there are big advantages to the new schedule. It is meant to expand the pool of voters who have an early, and often definitive, say in who the candidate will be. Iowa and New Hampshire are small, northern and largely white; the new states to be added are intended to broaden the field and bring Hispanics and blacks into the process. Once reliably Republican, the Southwest is increasingly becoming a bloc of swing states, crucial to Democratic hopes for the White House. Officially, Colorado, Arizona and Nevada are all in the running for the Sun Belt spot, but the last two are most favored.
In addition to changing up the demographics of the early-voting electorate, it would also adjust the issue mix. As the Arizona Republic editorialized:
Such as immigration reform. No state in the Union would provide a more riveting platform than Arizona for a presidential-candidate debate over immigration reform. The same holds true regarding the increasingly high-tech-driven national economy, which is a fast-growing part of Arizona's economy.
Whether it's Arizona or Nevada (or Colorado) doesn't matter much here to us at Western Democrat. But, obviously, we're big supporters of any kind of change that puts the West into the mix.
Not only will it add some ethnic diversity and new issues to the presidential race, it's also going to force the candidates to fundamentally understand the Western attitude and political culture. If candidates spend the early months learning the straight-talkin', truth-tellin' attitude that works in the West - it's going to help the nominee when he or she hits the hustings during the general election.
One thing to watch out for: a "compromise" that would add a Washington DC caucus - rather than a Western state. As New Hampshire's Union-Leader reported:
As the Democratic National Committee’s rules committee readies for a key meeting in Washington this weekend, D.C. proponents say it’s a way to end the battle between New Hampshire and the DNC. They say a caucus in D.C. instead of a state would not violate New Hampshire’s law requiring its primary to be held at least seven days before any other state’s primary. Key word: state.
DNC members should stick to their guns -- let's add Arizona or Nevada (or Colorado) to the early voting mix. This isn't about making it interesting, and it's not about attracting campaign pork, and it's certainly not about tradition. It's about winning the presidency.
Let us look west.
Update: I just posted a stronger advocacy piece over at DailyKos.com. Check it out.
Update: New Hampshire Public Radio did a one-hour show on the topic this morning, including a brief interview with some guy from WesternDemocrat.com. :) Listen here.
Kari Chisholm | July 21, 2006 | Comment on This Post (3 so far) |
Mayor Hickenlooper asks Western governors to raise money for Denver DNC Convention
The Denver Post reports today that Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper has started raising money so that the city can host the 2008 Democratic Convention without using taxpayer dollars.
Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper is asking governors of four other Western states to raise millions of dollars to bring the Democratic National Convention to Denver. .."What I said to John (Hickenlooper) is, 'Giddy-up, I'm in,"' Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer said. "It's high time that Democrats across America see the kind of Democrats that we have in the West." ...
He told City Council members Tuesday that he has spoken to the governors of Arizona, Montana, New Mexico and Wyoming and hopes to bring them to Denver next month.
"This is not just about Denver," Hickenlooper told council members. "It's really about Colorado, and it's actually about the Rocky Mountain West." ...
"It isn't just about fundraising for the convention. It's about a vision of a convention that represents not just Colorado but the entire Rocky Mountain West," [Hickenlooper spokeswoman Lindy Eichenbaum] Lent said. "It's a platform to build more collaborative dialogues and efforts among the Western states."
Here's the rest. Hat tip to Coyote Gulch.
Kari Chisholm | July 12, 2006 | Comment on This Post (1 so far) |
Western Blogs: Flip Flopping Republicans, etc...
This is something I've been meaning to do for awhile, but there are tons of great blogs being written across the West. I read a good portion of them, and every once in awhile, I'll do a basic post like this linking to notable posts.
From Square State (Colorado): Both Ways Bob Beauprez takes a belly flop on a ballot initiative that would have given citizens greater access to local government:
So let's get this straight: Holtzman is in the primary, Both Ways supports Amendment 38. Holtzman drops out, Both Ways is against it.
Left in the West (Montana): What if Tester-like style, not just Tester, Western Democratic politics, made it back east?
And, Spidelblog (Arizona): The Democratic Arizona AG takes on Walmart.
Emmett O'Connell | July 7, 2006 | Comment on This Post (1 so far) |
Western Governor Poll Watch and Commentary
Wyoming 4/27/06
Dave Freudenthal (D) 52%
Ray Hunkins (R) 29%
Arizona 5/24/06
Janet Napolitano (D) 55%
Don Goldwater (R) 34%
New Mexico 6/27/06
Bill Richardson (D) 56%
John Dendahl (R) 32
Colorado 5/25/06
Bill Ritter (D) 43%
Bob Beauprez (R) 38%
And we lost all these states in 2004? Now that is some food for thought.
I have three main points:
First, that this certainly says a ton about our chances for picking up these states in 2008. While support for a local governor doesn't always translate into support for a presidential nominee - I don't see how a 2008 Dem would not be starting from a positive position in the West.
Second, what is it that makes each of these politicians so successful in red (purple, really) states, either with hostile legislatures or overcoming vast party registration barriers? Some would argue populist tons, gut-believing, policy positions, luck, etc. While all of those are important, I would note that all of these politicians have co-opted issues from both sides to deliver results for their state. Call it Clintonism, triangulation or just good politics, these governors have an ability to get things done for their states.
Third, in Colorado where no sitting governor exists, Bill Ritter has opened up a good (if not strong) lead in the race. This pro-life Democrat is surprising everyone, I think, with the intensity of his campaign. He has picked up endorsements from Republicans, speaks upfront about "the legitimate role of government" in protecting the environment and investing in education, and wants to look at raising fuel efficienct standards. By adding Ritter to the mix, Democratic governors will be dominating in almost all Western states (save Utah and Idaho).
This, I think, shows how well the Western Democrat philosophy maintains out here.
Landon Mascareñaz | July 5, 2006 | Comment on This Post (4 so far) |
Hot Issues in Arizona
Congressional races to watch in Arizona this year include the Senate and AZ-5 and AZ-8.
So what are some issues in Arizona and how do the voters feel?
Gas prices: Seven out of ten Arizonans say rising gas prices are taking food off their tables! A similar number favor beefing up public transportation in response to this problem, and an even higher percentage want to see price gouging investigated and prosecuted. Six in ten likely voters now see gas prices as a reason for a change in elected officials. Among Democrats and Independents, that number rises to almost three in four.
This is huge.
Immigration: Seven out of ten Arizonans favor immigration law reform that permits foreign workers to enter the U.S. without breaking U.S. law. Three quarters believe that it is a federal rather than a state responsibility to secure the borders. Only 4% of voters believe than illegal Mexican immigrants include terrorists. Two thirds disagree with the assertion that illegal immigrants who come to the U.S. seeking work on no better than common criminals. Arizonans are equally split on whether it is immoral to deport illegal workers when doing so would split up a family.
In short, while Arizonans are concerned about immigration, most are not panicked and aren’t buying into extreme rhetoric. Most are clearly open to a humane middle-ground on immigration reform.
Iraq: A poll in Phoenix shows the public is split 45%-39% over near term withdrawal from Iraq vs. staying the course (a significant shift from three years ago). But this is a gender-gap issue. Among women the split is 56-30, among men it is 35-48.
Not surprisingly, Senator Kyl’s approval numbers are slipping as are the numbers for President Bush. Both are now in negative territory. Democratic Governor Janet Napolitano remains popular with voters.
Leo Brown | June 12, 2006 | Comment on This Post (1 so far) |
Good polling in Colorado and Arizona
In Colorado both Fawcett and Winters (congressional candidates in the 5th and 6th) are showing good numbers. Fawcett is already polling at 48 percent (with 35 undecided) with two thirds of the district saying they would consider voting for a Democrat.
In Arizona sitting Senator Jon Kyl is tanking and Democrat Jim Pederson is picking up steam.
Emmett O'Connell | May 18, 2006 | Comment on This Post (1 so far) |
3 Western States Apply to Vote Early in 2008 Primary Season
At least eight states applied Friday to join Iowa and New Hampshire in voting early in the 2008 presidential contest.
Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Michigan, Mississippi, Nevada and South Carolina had put in a bid by Friday afternoon. Democratic National Committee spokesman Damien LaVera said he wasn't sure how many more states might apply.
Despite the applications it is worth it to note that the proposal to allow up to two other states to hold caucuses between Iowa and New Hampshire, and then allow up to two more states to hold primaries shortly after New Hampshire still has to be voted on by the DNC Rules Committee and the full DNC. Even then, look for New Hampshire to make a lot of noise on the issue. After all, in New Hampshire "First in the Nation" primary is a birthright.
kencamp | April 14, 2006 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) |
Kyl dropping?
Is Kyl of Arizona finally taking his lumps as a DC Republican? His Survey USA numbers seem to be stuck on 45 or so, but Pederson is tightening the race for Senate (Wactivist):
The recently released Wall Street Journal / Zogby Interactive poll shows that Jon Kyl’s numbers have taken a dive as Pederson’s remain steady, making this a 5 point race.I can’t do a link since WSJ doesn’t allow it – so instead here is a screen shot of the results and the trendline.
There will be a lot of talk about the suspect methodology of this poll. In fact, I personally have questioned it in the past when it showed Don “I now have supporters” Goldwater running near even with Janet. But, as I always say, when you don’t trust the way a poll is conducted focus on the trendlines. And the trendlines show good news.
Since the polling is done the same way each time, you can look at even “suspect” results to judge possible MOVEMENT. Looking at this poll shows that there is a good decline in the works for Kyl, with him once agin below 50%.
Why is this happening now? Well I don’t know, but I do know WHAT this means. It means that the time is JUST RIGHT for the Pederson campaign to come roaring out of its corner to land a few choice hits on the stumbling Kyl to knock his ass out.
I know the CW in the blogosphere is that Pederson isn’t doing anything and is blowing his chance to win … but hang tight folks. I have a feeling this ...is about to get VERY interesting.
Emmett O'Connell | April 1, 2006 | Comment on This Post (2 so far) |
Arizona Dems Kicking Elephant
The Phoenix New Times has a long, long piece on the resurgence of the Arizona Democrats. Definitely worth a read.
Start with the opening line:
After looking like political asses in the '90s, Arizona Democrats have the money, moderation and 800-pound gorilla to kick some pachyderm tail...
Kari Chisholm | February 28, 2006 | Comment on This Post (4 so far) |
Despite Pederson not getting traction, Kyl still soft
Two recent polls point out the opportunity in Arizona. Even though Jim Pederson is behind to Jon Kyl (55 to 26 with the rest undecided), the junior senator from Arizona is still soft in the support column (44 approve, 39 unapprove).
This still looks like an opportunity, but Pederson has to start making like Tester and Morrison in Montana:
Just from an approval rating standpoint, this looks a bit like the above mentioned Montana race where Conrad Burns was doing ok in his approval ratings until Katrina and the entire Ambramoff thing blew up in his face. Kyl's numbers have slowly tracked down since October, but not enough yet to give a boost to Pederson.
Emmett O'Connell | January 26, 2006 | Comment on This Post (3 so far) |
Pederson in Arizona
The Tucson Citizen reports that Jim Pederson meant what he said. He is going to run against Senator Kyl. No more free rides for the GOP.
Five years ago, shopping mall developer Jim Pederson said it was shameful that Democrats had failed to challenge Republican U.S. Sen. Jon Kyl during his 2000 re-election bid. He vowed as Arizona Democratic Party chairman to end free rides for Republican incumbents.
Apparently, he meant it.
Pollsters and political observers say the ra