Who should challenge John Sununu in 2008?

I'll toss in a couple of dark horses (4.00 / 1)

Ken Burns, filmmaker of Walpole.

Dayton Duncan, Burns collaborator, writer, campaign operative in years past.

---

by: elwood @ Wed Nov 22, 2006 at 02:50:51 AM UTC

Ha! I actually know Dayton fairly well, (0.00 / 0)

but to be honest I'd not considered that.

Heard him speak publicly once, and he was fantastic (of course, that was his trade...).

Some might find this silly, but in my fantasy world of decency and justice, Al Gore gets to serve in 2008 the term he won in 2000, and in that scenario, Dayton finally gets to be his press secretary.

birch paper; on Twitter @deanbarker

---

by: Dean Barker @ Wed Nov 22, 2006 at 03:01:00 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Dayton Duncan in '08! (0.00 / 0)

Dudley Dudley in '10!

New Hampshire goes solid D!

---

by: elwood @ Wed Nov 22, 2006 at 03:03:28 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'll go with Dayton (0.00 / 0)

But not Ken. To avoid his film company being crushed Ken, as a public figure, has to walk a line that doesn't bring out the wingnuts in a crusade against him.

Dayton is obviously crucial to that operation, but as a lesser public figure could get away with it.

I'd love to see KB against Sununu though, that would be great.

---

by: Mike Caulfield @ Wed Nov 22, 2006 at 04:06:29 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Burns in the Monitor (0.00 / 0)

today:

"We now have a military class in this country that suffers apart and alone, whereas there wasn't a family on any street in America that wasn't in some way touched by the war," he said, adding that during World War II, everyone had to do without and had to deal with rationing and shortages.

"When 9/11 happened, what were you asked to do? Nothing. Go shopping. That's what we were told," Burns said. "Go shopping. It's ridiculous. Nobody said, 'This is a war borne of oil. Turn your thermostats down five degrees.' "

And Dayton Duncan in the same paper on the same day, but in a different article:

Dayton Duncan, former Democratic presidential adviser and author of a book on the New Hampshire primary, has this advice for the New York senator[Clinton]: What "you need to do is have a crisp, uncomplicated, un-convoluted answer to: If you had to do it all over again, would you still have voted to authorize the war?"

birch paper; on Twitter @deanbarker

---

by: Dean Barker @ Sat Nov 25, 2006 at 01:44:47 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

A Burns - Duncan primary (0.00 / 0)

This could get nasty...

---

by: elwood @ Sat Nov 25, 2006 at 12:23:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thinking strategically - Shaheen (4.00 / 1)

Thinking from my personal experience - Burling.

Swett could also mount a good challenge, I would imagine.

birch paper; on Twitter @deanbarker

---

by: Dean Barker @ Wed Nov 22, 2006 at 03:02:53 AM UTC

Although "second time's the charm" (4.00 / 1)

often works in the House, I think that in NH Senate races a brand-new face has an advantage over even the loser in a close  previous election.

---

by: elwood @ Wed Nov 22, 2006 at 03:06:03 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Peter Burling (0.00 / 1)

I've heard several people talk about him running... Or maybe it was just me...

I think it's really early, but i'm glad we're having this conversation now.

I'd like to invite the Diarist to come down and join us in the comments, if they would like.  I promise we won't bite... much...

---

by: Nicholas Gunn @ Wed Nov 22, 2006 at 04:47:29 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

nhcollegedem (4.00 / 1)

My thoughts are pretty much included in the diary.

Hirshberg is intriguing to me. I've never met him, but from what I've read he looks like a good potential candidate.

I am not sold on any of the State Senators, and definitely not Marchand. Either of the two Shaheens would be good, but I'd like to see who else is out there.

I really do hope that the national Dems target this race and make it a top priority. I want to beat Sununu before he becomes entrenched.

---

by: Scoonie @ Wed Nov 22, 2006 at 04:56:16 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Don't mind me... (0.00 / 1)

I'm just trying to stur up some more discussion.

Why do you like the Shaheens?  What makes them stronger candidates, aside from name Recognition?

I've bet both Jeanne and Bill, and i find both them highly intellegent and charasmatic.  I'm just concerned there would be a bit of "sore looser" syndrom if Jeanne Shaheen runs again.

Then again, look at Paul Hodes...

---

by: Nicholas Gunn @ Wed Nov 22, 2006 at 05:24:15 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

nhcollegedem (0.00 / 0)

Shaheens have the name recogntion, have the charisma, and could raise the money. You can't say that for most of the others. But you are correct, it's tough to run for Senate a second time after losing once already.

---

by: Scoonie @ Wed Nov 22, 2006 at 05:28:37 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

The 'sore loser' thing (4.00 / 1)

I've seen Kossacks gleefully anticipate a chance to make the 2002 phone jamming a big issue in a Sununu - Shaheen repeat. That would be a huge mistake. Voters want a vision for the future, not score-settling.

If she does run I'm confident Shaheen would not let that become a focus of the campaign.

---

by: elwood @ Wed Nov 22, 2006 at 12:06:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

This is a good point (4.00 / 1)

Not only a vision for the future, but also six years is probably too long for this sort of thing.

Had it been for a House seat, two years later, I could see that narrative woven in a little better. But as Laura noted the media is already getting a bit crotchety that the PJ thing is still going on...Which of course, it's the Repubs dragging this out.

---

by: Mike Caulfield @ Wed Nov 22, 2006 at 13:57:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Exactly. Now, if (4.00 / 2)

the Republicans did some other dumbass thing that fed back into that narrative, I would certainly not be opposed to Shaheen doing what Paul Hodes did this time around and weaving it all together, using phonejamming in showing a consistent thread of their dirty tricks involving telecommunications.  That is, Republicans do something new, Shaheen goes with "in 2002, phonejamming; in 2006, sockpuppets on blogs and robocalls aimed at suppression; in 2008, [whatever]."

But surely even Republicans can't be that arrogant and stupid?

---

by: Laura Clawson @ Wed Nov 22, 2006 at 21:24:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Agree and Disagree (4.00 / 3)

Not to say that you're not considering this, but I think an important thing to remember in thinking about this particular topic is that the political landscape in NH and across the country is likely to look very different in 2 years than it does today.  Presidents tend to make approval gains during the end of their terms as they start to worry more about legacy and what history will say about them.  The current Democratic Congress will be closing it's term, and people will be judging the Dems, fairly or unfairly, on whether they have successfully delivered on a variety of campaign promises.  In two years, Sununu's seat could well be safe and out of touch, and Hodes and Shea-Porter could be in dogfights to retain their seats in districts that are probably still (despite changing demograpics) more conservative than either of them.

However, these types of conversations are important for drumming up interest in politics (always a good thing) and are fun (definately a good thing), so my two cents:  I think that by-and-large, Senator Sununu's will be a tough seat to win back, but that the RNC and NRSC is likely to be stretched pretty thin defending Senate seats across the country. 

While I think that New Hampshire is definately trending further to the left than in years past, the message that was sent by the midterms was not necessarily a policy endorsement, but rather expressed a desire to get rid of the old guard and bring in some new blood.  Assuming that trend continues into the '08 elections, I think the Dems are best served by nominating someone who we haven't seen before, and  trying to find someone who can advocate reform, preferably from outside the establishment.  While this list has a number of such names (and I know is not intended to be comprehensive), I think the most interesting one might be this one:

5) Portsmouth mayor Steve Marchand-young guy (33?) with a bright future. Supposedly Lynch wants him to run to build up his name recognition and political capital for a future run. Personally, I want a candidate who can win the FIRST time. I also think Marchand would be viewed as a lightweight.

One thing I do disagree with, however, is the idea that Marchand ought to run to build up name recognition.  While I think that can work at a House level (see Hodes, Paul), it's a tougher sell at the Senate level, where the stakes are higher, the pressure is on, and the media scrutiny is more intense.  Voters often see as much (or more) of  a candidate as they want in Senate races, and they don't often bounce back all that well (with some notable exceptions).  If he decides to run, I think it's important that he do so with the full intent that this is his time, and his show.  Anyone who is running to do anything other than win will have trouble in '08.

---

by: Matt @ Wed Nov 22, 2006 at 05:53:26 AM UTC

The Landscape will be different...but... (4.00 / 2)

...I think the tide will still be Democratic (ebbing just a little).  You know the war won't be getting any better for the Republicans (whether we're still there or not).  While I hope the Dem Congress does not go crazy on the Impeachemnt path, they will have enough investigations that will show how stupid the Republicans are.  So I think we will see plenty of anti-Republican feelings in the electorate.

And let's not forget it's a Presidental Election year, with a lot more independents who like to vote against the staus quo.

True, the high tide for the Dems will be '06, but the tide will still be high in '08.  ANd Sununu will be very tough to beat in '08.  But the samething was said about Bass and Bradley two years ago.

---

by: Stark Blue @ Wed Nov 22, 2006 at 22:42:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Point well taken (0.00 / 0)

...I think the tide will still be Democratic (ebbing just a little).  You know the war won't be getting any better for the Republicans (whether we're still there or not). 

That's a very reasonable point.  I agree that the GOP, both in NH and nationwide, aren't going to be getting any healthier in the next couple of years with the war the way it's going.  The problem, I think, is that the Democrats are going to start to see the war reflect negatively on them, as a result of the strategy that earned them the majority (which was obviously a good one).  Democrats across the country campaigned on the Iraq war, but the nature of the constitution will make it difficult for them to be much more than gadflies to the President's war effort.  I think that if the war continues to go poorly, the Dems will face some blame, even though that's not really fair. 

While I hope the Dem Congress does not go crazy on the Impeachemnt path, they will have enough investigations that will show how stupid the Republicans are.  So I think we will see plenty of anti-Republican feelings in the electorate.

Another good point, but one worth taking with a grain of salt.  The Dems will be better off the more moderate they are in the upcoming Congress, as compared to the blatant partisanism of the exiting Republican one.  By contrast, the country certainly benefits the more deeply they dig into the decision-making in the Iraq war.  The danger, of course, is that the Democrats end up looking petty and vindictive, and that they're looking to use the Iraq war for political gain.  So, while I definately agree with you that the political landscape looks bad for the GOP going forward, I think it's early to say that it looks anything other than cloudy for the Dems as we wait for this Congress to define itself.

Either way, this race is going to be a down-ballot one for the Presidential election anyway, so how vulnerable Sununu is going to be will depend heavily on whether the GOP nominee is a moderate or a conservative.
 

---

by: Matt @ Thu Nov 23, 2006 at 02:12:06 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Good point... (0.00 / 0)

...about who the Rep nominee is and how it will impact Rep turnout.

---

by: Stark Blue @ Thu Nov 23, 2006 at 03:58:02 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

We need to get you to write diaries, Matt (0.00 / 0)

This is all really good stuff.

---

by: Mike Caulfield @ Thu Nov 23, 2006 at 14:36:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not impressed (0.00 / 0)

I would be intrigued by the yogurt guy but I must admit that I'm not really impressed with the lot listed here.

Politizine.com

---

by: Tony Schinella @ Thu Nov 23, 2006 at 00:04:45 AM UTC

There's a reason (4.00 / 3)

New Hampshire doesn't have a useful political ladder or steppingstone system.

Our neighbors elect Attorneys General, Lieutenant Governors, and Secretaries of State. Here the only candidates who run statewide are the Governor and the two Senators.

Congressmen have to introduce themselves to the other district when they run for Senate; state Senators and mayors have no base to work from at all.

So we keep electing dark horses to the Governorship or the Senate.

---

by: elwood @ Thu Nov 23, 2006 at 00:11:18 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'd never thought of that (0.00 / 0)

But yeah, it makes sense.

I think when I was in Illinois George Ryan's name was on my license as Sec of State...then later he moved to Gov. Here, we're dysfunctional.

Of course, I think that may have made it a little easier for the Shaheen's and Lynch's of the world, that there was no clear heir to the Repub throne, but over all it's a net loss.

---

by: Mike Caulfield @ Thu Nov 23, 2006 at 00:21:44 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Just so (0.00 / 0)

That observation is from Dick Winters, a Dartmouth Gov't prof I had some years ago.

It's one of those "Of course!" things that may not occur to you, but when someone says it, it is absolutely clear.

---

by: elwood @ Thu Nov 23, 2006 at 00:29:28 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think this compartmentalization (0.00 / 0)

is a consequence of ME/VT/NH's insistence on the primacy of small town autonomy.  Northern new England is more a collection of hundreds of city-states than 3 unified nations.

I bring up city-state because the town meeting day politics of this area has more than once been described as the closest modern equivalent to the radical democracy of Athens.

I imagine this in part causes the standard political statewide ladder here to be more wayward than vertical.

birch paper; on Twitter @deanbarker

---

by: Dean Barker @ Thu Nov 23, 2006 at 02:07:26 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Can I bring up Dayton Duncan again? (4.00 / 2)

Is there anybody here who can escribe in detail why he would be perfect? I've asked other and they state the when he speaks, you start to cry it's so beautiful and resonant. But I've never seen him speak, so I need details...

Why Dayton? Let me know...

---

by: Mike Caulfield @ Thu Nov 23, 2006 at 05:49:08 AM UTC

I don't know that he would be perfect, but... (4.00 / 2)

...he knows New Hampshire. He used to write for the Keene Sentinel; he has lived in the state for more that 30 years. He has both an interest axperience in politics: in addition to serving as Mike Dukakis' press secretary, he was chief of staff to NH Governor Hugh Gallen.

I haven't heard him speak, except on some of Burns' films. But I remember some of his writing for the Sentinel, and he has both a great writing style and a quick and subversive sense of humor.

We usually get candidates "out of nowhere" for statewide office, or legacies like Gregg, Bass, and Sununu. I can't think of any Dem legacies. For an "out of nowhere" candidate, Dayton has a far better resume thatn most: he knows the state well, he knows politics well, and he can communicate well.

---

by: elwood @ Thu Nov 23, 2006 at 12:09:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Dem Legacies (0.00 / 0)

Wouldn't Jeanne Shaheen and Dick Swett count as Democratic Legacies?

---

by: Nicholas Gunn @ Thu Nov 23, 2006 at 19:18:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm using the term (4.00 / 3)

in the sense of "legacy admissions" to Ivy League colleges: approved because their Dad is an alum.

---

by: elwood @ Thu Nov 23, 2006 at 21:07:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]