Buzz and Reverb

by: Dean Barker

Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 22:57:20 PM EST

Then the ice storm hit, and I lost power for a few days.  In the interim, Pindell's piece created a fairly significant buzz over at SSP and dKos.  By the time I got back on, it was too late to leave a substantive remark in a decent time frame.  So while I'm late to the party, I hope you'll indulge me. And forgive me too, because I'm about to lay a pox on both houses of conventional wisdom, tradmed and netroots.  And I say that as someone who has a daily addiction to the outstanding work at the 'Ticker and SSP and dKos.

First, let's set a ground rule.  If I say something encouraging about Carol Shea-Porter's ability to win a senate race, that doesn't mean I don't want Paul Hodes as my next senator, or vice versa.  So let me make something perfectly clear before going forward: I'd be absolutely thrilled to have either Carol or Paul be our senate nominee.  Either one of them would be a strong progressive voice for a legislative body that badly needs progressive voices, and both of them, I believe emphatically, have what it takes to win the race.

Now why is that?  I think it's because, despite defying everyone's expectations for a primary and then two contiguous races, the CW meme out there on Carol is that she's somehow still "accidental".  And there's no way a one-time Bush protestor who was never supposed to have won in the first place should have any business going up against Mt. Gregg.  She should know her place.  To not know is both "bold" and typical of her lack of political acumen.  Or so goes the conventional wisdom.

But here's the crazy part.  I think there's a second, equally misleading CW out there, owing to the circumstances of the 2006 elections, and coming from an unusual souce: the netroots.  In the '06 cycle, Paul Hodes was a netroots hero. As one of the local bloggers covering the race, I have some experience in that meme. At the time, I remember feeling like the whole Shea-Porter story, whose support and grassroots-style campaign was mostly absent from the blogosphere, was some sort of weird fluke too.  I didn't understand it because I knew NH-02 better and had been covering every available inch of it.  CD1 remained mostly at a (confusing) distance, and besides, Jeb was going to win anyway.

In the intervening two years, I feel like I've really come to understand the players and the process behind Carol's win a whole lot more.  I've learned how unbelievably tough and fearless and persuasive and savvy and hardworking she is. And I had a front row seat to her rematch with Bush League Bradley this time around.

But with the general election and a myriad nationwide races, I'm not sure the larger netroots scene has had the same opportunity.  Now I love pretty much everything brownsox writes, but this post on dKos had me shaking my head:

That said, 52% isn't all that impressive, particularly considering that this was a Democratic year, Obama actually did slightly better in the district (in a state where John McCain has been exceptionally popular), and the DCCC spent vats of money bailing Shea-Porter out this year - $2.5 million.

The argument credited to Shea-Porter is a bit of an odd one - that since she's been in close races before and won them, she's better prepared for a tough race. That's true, but Paul Hodes has proven a superior vote-getter, winning his 2006 race by 8 points and his 2008 race by 15. He's been successful enough on his own, for example, that the DCCC didn't have to bail him out this year.

Generally, Shea-Porter's fundraising has been weak, and she hasn't won by margins that instill confidence in her taking on an entrenched opponent like Judd Gregg, who has served as a Congressman, Governor, and Senator since 1980. Granted, Shea-Porter has shocked the world before. But Hodes would still be a safer and stronger pick, between the two of them.

* A 52% win in swing CD1 against a high name rec former representative is an impressive win to me.  Especially impressive when the leading state political media organ is rabidly right-wing and located in Carol's biggest city.  And particularly impressive given what a target she had on her back from the NRCC and various third party groups.

* Carol made it clear very early on (Mike Caulfield scooped it on Political Chowder) that she would accept DCCC help if Jeb or his allies went negative, which they did almost immediately.  Moreover, the NRCC, totally debased in money and enthusiasm was looking for a few token races to hang their symbolic hat on, and Carol's was one of them.  They were here heavily for Jeb with some of the nastiest trash I've seen in advertising.  By way of contrast, NH-02 wasn't even on the NRCC's radar screen.  The demographics against them in CD2 are terrible, and Jennifer S. Palin-Horn, a bad fit for the district's Republicans, was a long shot at best.  There was no bailout here - Carol more than held her own against Jeb, while the DCCC fought NRCC fire with fire. And as long as we're talking about outside money, has anyone noticed yet that Shea-Porter mostly did better in CD1 areas than Shaheen did?  Yet Shaheen was the recipient of all kinds of DSCC and third party help, and she was upticket of her.  And Shaheen won her senate seat.

(Not really relevant, but as a side note: I'm thrilled the DCCC spent some money this time around, considering how the Rahmbo-led D-Trip screwed up in '06 and intruded into the primary process.  If anyone deserved just desserts from the DCCC in '08, it's Shea-Porter.)

* Shea-Porter increased her vote totals substantially in voter-rich purple and red areas of her district in '08.  How is that not an argument that she is a proven vote-getter in the tougher of the two districts?  In contrast, Paul showed how one can win in CD2 without bowing to the almighty Nashua (which didn't budge much toward him from '06).  But if he runs for senate, he can't use that strategy. To win statewide, he will have to work Nashua-esque areas such as Manchester and other similar southern tier places that Carol's already made good gains on to win.  While conversely, for her to win she would have to introduce herself to the much friendlier terrain of the western and northern progressive Democrats. One could argue that makes her the "safer and stronger pick".

* Shea-Porter's fundraising has not been weak.  While Hodes raised more overall, Carol, without accepting PAC money, outraised him in Q3 and Q4.  And unlike Sununu, Gregg does not have a huge warchest.  If she started early, she could raise what it takes.

None of this is to suggest that Carol should run instead of Paul or that Paul should run instead of Carol.  As I said before, either would be fantastic, and both of them can (and would, imho) win.

But I think it's finally time to lay to rest the meme that Carol is somehow lucky to be where she is and that she should mind her manners and sit tight.  Both she and Paul would be foolish not to consider running against Gregg, as each of them has particular strengths that could topple him, or else comfortably win an open seat if he decides to hang it up.