New polling shows that the June 8thh primaries could shake up the 2010 elections as much as Tuesday's primaries already did.
California Senate, Republican primary and general election Two new primary polls in California show former Representative Tom Campbell's lead over Carly Fiorina shrinking in the Republican Senate primary. M4 shows Campbell up 33%--28% (with 15% for Chuck DeVore), while PPIC shows Fiorina ahead 25%--23% (with DeVore at 16%). This puts the 15-day average at 30.3% for Campbell, 25.7% for Fiorina, and 15.3% for DeVore.
A Fionia win--or, for that matter, a shock DeVore win--would certainly be good news for incumbent Democrat Barbara Boxer. In the general election, Boxer now leads Campbell by 3.5% (87% current win %), Fiorina by 8% (98% current win %), and Devore by 8.5% (again, 98% current win %). Given Boxer's 72% current win % in yesterday's Senate forecast update, this improve the overall Democratic seante position by 0.13 seats (adjusting for slight error I made in Connecticut-should have been 98% win % for Blumenthal, not 100%). Democrats are now forecast at 52.20 seats, their best total since Evan Bayh's retirement announcement.
California 36th Congressional district, Democratic primary Another interesting poll on a June 8th primary comes from the Marcy Winograd campaign. The poll, which was not released in full (not a good sign), shows incumbent Blue Dog Jane Harman at only 43% support. This conflicts significantly with an internal Harman poll released earlier in the week, showing her at 58%.
My takeways from these polls are that Harman is strongly favored in the campaign, but Winograd can score over 40%, improving on her 2010 performance. To win, she is going to need a huge improvement in name ID and favorables over the final three weeks, combined with very low Democratic turnout on June 8th. Given the relative lack of major statewide Democratic primaries in California compared to Republicans, this isn't impossible. But it is a huge longshot.
Nevada Senate, Republican primary Another big primary to watch on June 8th int eh Republican Senate primary in Nevada. In the wake of her Chickens for Checkups fiasco, one-time Republican frontrunner Sue Lowden has crashed in the polls. The 18% lead she enjoyed from late February through early April has been cut to only 5% by wingnut fave Sharron Angle. Harry Reid is competitive with Sharron Angle in the general election, trailing by only 5.5%. If Angle were to win the Republican primary, Reid might be able to hang onto his seat.
Arkansas Senate, Democratic primary runoff Finally, to toot our own horn for a bit, the first poll on the runoff for the Democratic nomination in Arkansas Senate was first released here on Open Left yesterday by Democracy for America. It showed Bill Halter leading incumbent Blanche Lincoln 48%--46%. With Lincoln receiving less than 45% of the vote in the primary on Tuesday, there its a good bet that a a wave of anti-incumbent incumbent sentiment will lead to her defeat on June 8th.
****
Overall, while perhaps not quite as exciting as the May 18th primaries, June 8th seems ready to keep the anti-incumbent, anti-establishment buzz going strong.
This past fortnight, I set out to write an article for Random Lengths News about the primary race between incumbent Jane Harman and challenger Marcy Winograd in California's 36th Congressional District. My original plan was to interview Winograd to get her postions on the major issues she was running and then inverview Harman to get her responses, including her own characterization of her record. However, after an initial conversation with her media spokesperson that at least seemed to result in the promise of an interview, an underling called me back with a prepared statement refusing to be interviewed, on the pretext that my publisher had publicly endorsed Winograd.
Harman thought we were biased, and in one sense she was right: We were biased in favor of the citizen's right to hold their elected officials accountable, which is why my plan was to let Winograd go first. The corporate "mainstream" media--which Harman has no problem with--has the exact opposite bias: They treat elected officials almost like gods, whose words are to be carefully transcribed. It takes enormous effort for a challenger to break through, and challengers are virtually never allowed to set the terms of debate, even when elected officials are out of step with their constituents on major issues. Harman's refusal to be interviewed made it impossible to pursue the initial plan. I was not really happy with the fall-back solution I came up with, but that's pretty much the point of her refusal: to make it difficult for her to be fairly held accountable. Here is the article in its original form, the published version was shortened.
Winograd vs. Harman: A Choice, Not An Echo
by Paul Rosenberg, Senior Editor This June, there is a real choice about the direction the Democratic Party should take in the 36th Congressional District. Whichever way you think it should go, you owe it to yourself to understand just what that choice is. That is the essence of our democracy.
In 2006, grassroots activist Marcy Winograd, a co-founder of Progressive Democrats of America's [PDA] Los Angeles Chapter challenged incumbent Congresswoman Jane Harman (CA-36) in the Democratic primary, primarily because of Harman's support for Bush's war policies--including erosion of civil liberties at home. She won 38 percent of the vote after a very short, 3-month campaign. This campaign cycle, Winograd started much earlier.
Last month, Harman's media spokesman, Harvey Englander told Politico.com that "Winograd and the PDA have no issues to campaign on". We don't believe that's true, given Harman's relatively conservative voting record on the one hand, and the kind of support Winograd has garnered on the other. We believe there's a story to be told about the campaign. But when we tried to interview Harman along with Winograd, Harman refused, just as she has refused to debate Winograd. Thus, what follows, for the most part, are the questions we put to Winograd, with her responses (edited for brevity), followed by relevant aspects of Harman's record?including the most objective measures readily available of her voting record. The most objective overall measure, known as "DW-NOMINATE" is considered the gold standard in political science, but it only applies to roll-call voting records as a whole. Progressive Punch uses a similar--not identical--methodology for ordering legislators from liberal/progressive to conservative (as well as generating voting percentages), but it also generates measures for issue areas and sub-areas. As described below, both measures combine to provide ample evidence that Harman is significantly more conservative than her district's constituents.
We take this approach even though it is problematic, as San Pedro Democratic Club President David Greene--a Winograd supporter--explained: "Comparing records looking backwards can miss something important. Marcy has a real genius in terms of finding issues, such as getting stars and public officials to voluntarily stop using the Santa Monica Airport when the FAA wouldn't act. I think that's one of the things that's certainly appealing to me about her being a representative, is that she can kind of sense the pulse of community concerns and take creative action."
Ultimately, it is up to you, the voters, to decide.
Between now and June 22nd, progressive pose a real threat to House Blue Dogs and Senate ConservaDems in at least six primary campaigns. Five of these primary campaigns feature incumbents, and in all six campaigns the Democratic Party machinery is backing the more conservative candidate. Sometimes, as is the case in the Pennsylvania Senate primary, this support means several hundred thousand dollars of paid advertisements.
There is no better way to get Democratic members of Congress to listen to you, than by defeating, or even by coming close to defeating, incumbent Democrats in primary elections. If you can beat the party, or at least make them sweat, then they have no choice but to take you, and your concerns, seriously. These are six campaigns where the party machinery is already sweating.
So, today I a asking you to join up with all six of these primary campaigns. Follow the links below, and sign up to their email lists. If you want abetter Democratic Party, this is the best possible way to make that happen:
Primaries on May 18th
Join Joe Sestak, running for Pennsylvania Senate against ConservaDem Arlen Specter
Join Bill Halter, running for Arkansas Senate against ConservaDem Blanche Lincoln
Join Shelia Dow Ford, running for Pennsylvania's 17th Congressional district against Blue Dog Tim Holden.
Primaries on June 8th
Join Marcy Winograd, running for California's 36th Congressional district against Blue Dog Jane Harman
Primaries on June 22nd
Join Elaine Marshall, running for Senate in North Carolina, and facing a run-off with future ConservaDem Cal Cunningham
Join Claudia Wright, running for Utah's 2nd Congressional district against Jim Matheson.
There will be more primaries over the summer, and lots of general elections to focus on as well, but right now these are the campaigns we need to support. So, sign up and get your primary on! The Democratic Party won't represent you just to be nice,or if you just stamp your feet--this is something we have to fight for.
Over the last week and a half, Marcy Winograd has won some impressive victories in the endorsement battle--first by denying Jane Harmon the automatic party endorsement that incumbents normally get, then by picking up endorsements from The Mexican American Bar Association (MABA) and the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) Southern District--the most politically important union in the southern part of the district, and arguably the district as a whole.
I need your support to block the endorsement of Blue Dog Jane Harman on the floor of the California Democratic Party convention in Los Angeles this weekend. Harman is a formidable opponent for the 36th congressional district seat (West LA to San Pedro), particularly since she has hired campaign consultant Harvey Englander, notorious for engineering the passage of Howard Jarvis' Prop 13.
You will hear Harman's appointees argue that we should not usurp the local caucus's power to endorse. Our Party's bylaws, however, provide for exactly this type of challenge because when a candidate is endorsed that endorsement reflects the will of the entire statewide Party, not just local delegates. Moreover, when a corporate Democrat, funded by military contractors and personally invested in those same contractors, takes us to war without exercising her oversight responsibility all of us pay the price.
You may hear that we must respect what Party activists in the 36th congressional district want. Please know that I am proud to be endorsed by the majority of grassroots Democratic clubs in my district, including the San Pedro Democratic Club; Torrance Democratic Club; Progressive Democratic Club (Harbor); Gardena Valley Democratic Club; Progressive Democrats of America-36th District.
More on the endorsements Winograd has received, and what those endorsing her have said on the flip. First, here's the ad she's fundraising for to get on the air (you can contribute here.):
So I was sitting around my house today, putting off doing my Latin homework, when it hit me - instead of just opening the fridge a dozen times and checking my facebook a hundred times, I could be putting this time to good use! And I did. I started doing some online phonebanking for Marcy Winograd's campaign for Congress in California's 36th district.
If you're bored, feeling helpless and alone amidst a sea of political currents fighting against you, excited about the upcoming primaries and election, overcome with energy you need to spend on something, or feeling any other emotion, this is for you! Marcy has been a member of the Netroots for years and is a firebrand progressive. Since she's running against a corrupt Blue Dog (Jane Harman), this is one of the best races in the country for progressives to get involved in.
I live in Pennsylvania, yet I'm still able to help Marcy's campaign, because of a neat online phonebanking tool that has been set up. Follow me below the fold to learn how you can help, too.
This hasn't been a very good year for the House Progressive Caucus-or a very good decade, for that matter. Although there have been some signs of life lately, there has yet to be even one clear-cut victory won in anything more than a minor skirmish. But maybe, just maybe they can finally win something decisively by helping Blue Dog warhawk Jane Harman win re-election against grassroots progressive challenger Marcy Winograd. That would really show progressive strength in Washington, now wouldn't it?
Wouldn't it?
Well, not so much in the eyes of a growing number of people who actually live in the district, and who are feed up with Harman representing everyone but them, from Washington neo-cons to Israel Likudnicks. This week, Progressive Caucus co-chair Lynn Woosely and caucus member Henry Waxman have both weighed in supporting Harman-Woosely by attending a Harman fundraiser in Venice-a progressive hotbed of the district that Winograd carried with 59% of the vote when she first challenged Harman in 2006-Waxman by writing a fundraising letter attacking Winograd for holding views on the Isreal/Palestine conflict that are more in line with progressive Jews in America than with Likud hardliners in Israel.
"The fact that Harman has brought out these big guns, Waxman & Woolsey, to give her progressive cover shows that she is worried," Winograd said in response.
Indeed, the net result may turn out to be the exact opposite, creating a new flashpoint for grassroots progressive frustration with Democratic Party failures that continue mounting despite strong majorities in both chambers of Congress, as well as control of the White House. For this, the timing couldn't have been better as Blue America announced Winograd as their first endorsed candidate for 2010.
"Marcy is the model for 2010 Blue America candidates," said Blue America co-founder Howie Klein, writing on Winograd's Facebook page. "We wish there were candidates like Marcy running in every district in America. But there aren't."
Yesterday, I reported that Progressive caucus co-chair Lynne Woolsey is holding a fundraiser for Blue Dog Jane Harman, who is facing a primary challenge from Progressive Marcy Winograd.
Now, at FDL, David Dayen reports that powerful Progressive Caucus member Henry Waxman sent out a fundraising letter earlier this week. Apparently, Dayen himself was asked to co-chair the Woolsey-Harman fundraiser. The Harman campaign is trying to hard burnish its progressive credentials through progressive surrogates.
Waxman apparently doesn't like Winograd because of her views on Israel and Palestine. That is really lame. In the House, power is rarely wielded by individual members, and instead comes in networks. Even if Winograd were in Congress, she wouldn't be able to change American I/P policy one iota.
What Winograd wold do, however, is be the first Progressive member of Congress who defeated a Blue Dog incumbent in a primary challenge. Instead, Waxman--through Harman--is strengthening a network that in 2009 successfully weakened education reform, health care reform, new financial regulations, climate change legislation, and the budget.
Harman wants to use progressive surrogates to boost her progressive credentials. That is nothing more than symbolism. If Harman really wants to prove she is progressive, then she publicly renounce her membership in the network of right-wing Democrats that have successfully weakened every single major piece of Democratic legislation over the past year. It is the same network that helped George W. Bush pass his agenda through a Democratic Congress.
We need to weaken this network. They are helping to deny our generational opportunity for change. Unfortunately, along with her Progressive surrogates, Jane Harman is strengthening it.
Marcy Winograd is one of the very few serious, viable, progressive challengers to a Blue Dog in Congress. In the California 36th congressional district, Winograd, who has spent a lifetime as an activist for progressive causes, is taking on Blue Dog Jane Harman.
Please join Congresswoman Jane Harman in welcoming Congresswoman Lynne Woolsey Co-Chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus for a special evening of conversation and hors d'oeuvres with Lynne and Jane in support of Jane's re-election to Congress!
Danny's Venice
23 Windward Avenue
Venice, CA 90291
Saturday, January 16, 2010
4:00pm to 6:00pm
A cash bar and discounted parking will be available (two lots: one next to Danny's or on Speedway just south of Windward)
For more information, please contact Marc Saltzberg at XXXXXXXX or Email: Harman_Woolsey@yahoo.com
Please join us at this extraordinary event, a fund raiser for Congresswoman Harman in an historic Venice location.
To ensure everyone has an opportunity to attend, Democratic Club members can attend for as little as $36. Not a Dem Club member? You can still attend with a small donation of $50!
Aarrgghhh!! Come on Progressive Caucus!! A little help? Even Progressive Caucus leaders are supporting Blue Dogs in primaries against prospective Progressives? Do the Progs even want to have more influence in Congress?
This is not even to mention that Jane Harman is the third wealthiest member of Congress, with a net worth of $112 million. She doesn't need any additional funding for her re-election campaign--she could self-fund another 20 re-election efforts. What she needs is progressive credibility to cover up her Blue Dog membership and past endorsements from Republicans. In that regard, Progressive Caucus Co-chair Lynne Woolsey is happy to deliver.
If you live in the Los Angeles area, I would strongly suggest that you attend the above meet and greet. Show up and challenge Representative Woolsey for undermining attempts replace Blue Dogs with Progressives. She should be working to increase Progressive power in Congress, not limit it. And why should we be working to support the Progressive Caucus if the Progressive Caucus leadership actively undermining our efforts to strengthen the caucus?
Marcy Winograd, Co-founder of Progressive Democrats of Los Angeles, is establishing an exploratory committee to challenge incumbent Jane Harman (CA-36) following explosive new revelations about Harman's involvement in potentially illegal obsctruction of justice, which the Bush Department of Justice overlooked because of her political support. Winograd won almost 38% of the vote in a 2006 primary challenge.
Following Jeff Stein's initial revelation of the the Jane-Harman/Alberto-Gonzales/AIPAC scandal last weekend, Harman whipped herself into a frenzy of denial, whilst simultaneously transforming herself into the least believable champion of civil liberties outside the Republican Party.
And speaking of the Republican Party, what may have been the most significant news of the week was the revelation that--totally fulfilling Fredo's expectations--Harman was such a staunch defender of Bush lawlessness that she weighed in to help stop the NY Times from publishing the NSA wiretap story before the 2004 election.
It was known before that Harman had offered to interfere with an investigation into alleged spying by two AIPAC staffers. What wasn't known was the real reason the Bush Justice Department dropped the investigation into what she did: they needed her political support. And now it seems that they got it, too.
On April 21, NYT spokesperson Catherine Mathis emailed a statement from NYT executive editor Bill Keller to Greg Sarget, stating, in part:
Congresswoman Harman spoke to Washington Bureau Chief Phil Taubman in late October or early November, 2004, apparently at the request of General Hayden. She urged that The Times not publish the story.
It doesn't appear that Harman played a major role--such as talking directly to Keller--but she clearly did weigh in. And that could be just one step too far to keep her in the good graces of her party brethren and sistren.
"I think her credibility with fellow Democrats is going to be strained at best," said grassroots activist Marcy Winograd, co-founder of Progressive Democrats of Los Angeles--who ran a strong campaign against Harman in 2006--just before confirming that she was forming an exploratory committee for another primary challenge in 2010.
STATE BLOGS
