Before we go to the meat of this post (House races!), I want to update my afternoon post on North Carolina polling because I’ll never cease to be amazed by national Democrats’ utter disdain for Marshall. Despite the fact that the Secretary of State is electable and that she would be a more reliable vote for Democrats than Cunningham if she joined the Senate, we now learn that Barack Obama has taken the time to call Cunningham, ensuring he gets covered as having the White House’s implicit support. (This is only the third primary I can think of in which Obama is getting involved with another goal than supporting the incumbent, the other two being NY-Gov and WI-Gov. Am I missing any?)
Hawaii special might be conducted by mail
Rep. Neil Abercrombie was hoping that leaving the House would help him campaigning in Hawaii’s gubernatorial race, but his decision could still come back to haunt him. The state’s Chief Elections Officer Kevin Cronin is insisting that the state has no money to organize a special election: the estimated cost is $2 million, a sum the Office of Elections cannot cover since it already facing a deficit. Abercrombie has already been facing criticism from state Democrats for leaving the state without representation and for endangering the party’s hold on the district, but his resignation’s financial burden should give his opponents powerful ammunition.
It is still unclear what will happen when Abercrombie does finalize his resignation in the coming weeks. Cronin hasn’t ruled out trying to delay the special election until the regularly scheduled September primary; that would seem to go against state law, but what does occur when state officials refuse to organize an election? Alternatively, a mail-in vote could be organized, i.e. voters would only be able to mail in their ballots; this system exists in Oregon, but can Hawaii effectively implement it in just a few months?
These discussions are only making more chaotic an already confused situation: The two Democrats who were already planning to run in next year’s race are not backing down from their plans to both run in the special election, which could help the sole Republican candidate score a pick-up since there will be no primary. In fact, former Rep. Case is already out with the election’s first TV ad. (I already pointed out last week that liberals will want to ensure Case’s defeat because he is far more conservative than is called for in a blue district. But I failed to mention that if he wins Case would be well placed to move up to the Senate once one of the state’s aging senators retires, and it would be quite a blow to the left if Akaka or Inouye were replaced by a Lieberman ally.)
Herseth Sandlin retains a lead, but she is on shaky ground
Public Policy Polling tested South Dakota Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin’s prospects of holding on to SD-AL. The good news for Herseth Sandlin: Unlike many other Democratic incumbents who represent tough territory, she doesn’t find herself trailing just any Republican she’s tested against. In fact, she leads a statewide official outside of the margin of error: Against Secretary of State Chris Nelson, she comes out ahead 46% to 39%. Also meaningful is the margin by which she crushes state Rep. Blake Curd 52% to 31%; Curd might be a low-profile opponent, but the bottom line is that voters aren’t rushing to support the GOP nominee and that more than half are willing to commit to supporting the incumbent.
On the other hand, those results also reveal that Herseth Sandlin’s standing is shaky. Not only is she under 50% in her match-up with Nelson, but the Secretary of State’s name recognition is a surprisingly low 41%, which means he has more room to grow than his title might suggest. Furthermore, Herseth Sandlin’s approval rating stands at 49-38, which is not particularly impressive for a state like South Dakota that tends to prize its incumbents. In short, Herseth Sandlin remains favored as she enters 2010 but she certainly has a competitive race on her hand; that’s quite a change of fortunes for someone who just a few months ago was considering seeking higher office.
In WA-03, both parties get their favored candidates
Of the four Dem-held seats that opened up in recent weeks, WA-03 is clearly the most competitive on paper (it swung from Bush to Obama in the past two elections) - and it looks like this will translate in a top-notch battle as both parties are getting some of the candidates they were hoping for. On the GOP side, the party’s standard-bearer could be 31-year old state Rep. Jaime Herrera; a protege of Rep. Cathy McMorris-Rogers, she served as an intern in the Bush White House. While she is certainly far younger than your average congressional candidate, she does appear to have enough political experience to be a strong candidate. It remains to be seen not only how easily she’ll coast to the nomination.
On the Democratic side, we are heading towards a primary between state Senator Craig Pridemore and state Rep. Deb Wallace; the latter is already in the race while the former is reportedly getting there. A third candidate has also jumped in the race: Maria Rodriguez Salazar, an activist and the former vice president for the League of United Latin American Citizens. All 3 candidates appear divided by stark ideological contrasts: Pridemore looks like he would be a mainstream Democrat while Wallace appears like she’d stay true to Baird’s legacy. As for Rodriguez Salazar, she’s introducing herself as a “conservative” and a “Blue Dog.”
This would be important in any primary, but potentially all the more so in WA-03: Local Democrats will want to pay special attention to electing a more reliable congressman than Brian Baird had become (he was a member of the New Democratic Coalition and a rare Democrat from an Obama district to oppose the health-care bill) and thus seize on this opportunity to push the House a bit to the left. My sense is that Pridemore starts as the favorite: Not only does he have a bigger geographic base, but his district contains a larger share of Democrats than Wallace’s, who’ll have to compete with Rodriguez Salazar for the centrist vote. Yet, much of this wil depends on how national Democrats and unions behave and on whether Emily’s List gets involved.
If the White House and National Dems do for Marshall what they are doing for Gov. Paterson in NY, she might end up thanking them. The national parties are more and more out of touch with those of us “common folks”. The base of the GOP is totally at war with its leadership, and now with the continued healthcare debacle, the base of the Democratic Party is likely going in similar direction. The healthcare bill, as it now stands, has no public option or Medicare buy in, and is not making the liberal base very happy (whether or not we agree with the public option and etc. is beside the point.) Also, the new law that says health insurance companies can’t deny healthcare due to pre-existing conditions, this law has a little technicality that says the companies can charge whatever they want to those with pre-existing conditions. This is healthcare reform? The devil is always in the details. I can’t wait to see what else comes out of this 2,000 page bill.
I actually think Herseth-Sandlin would have been better off running for Governor. She’d be able to distance herself somewhat from the Obama administration and run on her basic likability and competence. Now, she’s got to run, in part at least, defending the Democratic congress.
I agree she’s still favored, but I don’t think she’d be worse off running for Governor. I think it would probably be roughly her chances of maintaining her seat, if only slightly worse.
My brother (who lives in Pierre) says that there are several farm bills that she could make a big deal out of, and if nothing else (I don’t think she needs much), they should pull her through. And the last name is a big bonus, just as any Democrat in Idaho with the last name Andrus would be at no worse than a 50-50 shot.
And on Marshall-Cunningham: is there a possibility that the DCCC just wants a big primary to raise name rec? They know it doesn’t come easy in some cases (Burr). If it’s based on the Loebsack-Leach modal, it might be a good thing.
In WA-3, I am leaning towards supporting Craig Pridemore, although Deb Wallace is a decent candidate. She is pro-choice, so she may get the backing of Emily’s List.
Maurice, the same thought occurred to me. For some reason they may want a primary and name recognition seems the most logical reason why. However primaries can be unpredictable (thank God). So we will see. It may help Marshall in the end.
Cliff I disagree that Herseth-Sandlin would have been better off in the gubernetorial race. Unlike the Federal Congressional races, Republicans have dominated state government, including the governorship. She wouldn’t have the advantage of incumbancy, and the GOP candidates for goveror are much stronger than the Secretary of State, with the most promiment being the Lt. Govenor and the State Senate Majority leader. No doubt she would be competive in the governor’s race, but she would be in the position of the underdog, prbobably the complete inverse of her race with the secretary of state now, her being down 7 points or so.
Maurice and Guy, it’s one thing to want a contested primary; it’s another to systematically undermine Marshall’s attempts to emerge as a credible contender and to consider wasting millions of dollars in the process - money that is much needed in the 8-9 seats Dems are defending and the 4 open seats they’re hoping to contest.
Jaxx,
It’s possible you’re right, but it still strikes me that she wouldn’t have to defend the record of the Democratic Congress running for Governor and could focus purely on local issues. She could also portray herself as the anti-establishment candidate of sorts, since Republicans have controlled the state Government forever. (I’m personally hesitant about this regardless of party. It’s not a universal rule, but in general, if one party owns the Governor’s mansion for longer then 20 years, I think it starts to become a problem.)
Also, I think her Congressional race is complicated by the fact that Thune, and whomever the R Governor’s candidate is going to be, are going to win by gigantic landslides. That wouldn’t be the case if she were running for Governor.
Minor technical point: Pridemore despite being a Senator doesn’t have a larger constituency than Wallace. WA has a strange setup (like NJ) where there are 49 legislative districts, each of which elects 1 Sen. and 2 Reps. So Pridemore and Wallace both have about 110K constituents. They’re from neighboring districts in Vancouver, so they’re both part of the Portland media market (an advantage that someone coming from the Olympia end of the district wouldn’t have). Also, I don’t think Rodriguez-Salazar is going to be much of a factor here; it doesn’t seem like much of anyone had heard of her before her announcement (despite being a Washingtonian, I certainly hadn’t). If there’s a third wheel here who could screw things up one way or the other, it’s ex-state Rep. Denny Heck, who’s from Olympia (although, confusingly, when he was a Rep., it was from Vancouver, but that was back in the 1980s — the few people who know him, know him as the founder of TVW, which is our local equivalent of C-SPAN).
Taniel - I completely agree, I was just trying to see what sense (if any) there was to having a contested primary. The money could certainly be better spent.