Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch, finch, beech
Democracy for NH
Live Free or Die
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Granite State Progress
Seacoast for Change
Still No Going Back
Susan the Bruce
Tomorrow's Progressives
Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Krauss
Landrigan
Lawson
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Primary Wire
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes
Welch
Campaigns, Et Alia.
Paul Hodes
Carol Shea-Porter
Ann McLane Kuster
John Lynch
Jennifer Daler
ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC
National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
The Next Hurrah
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo
50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Odd quote of the week goes to Tory Mazzola of the National Republican Congressional Committee for asking why Kuster referred to "Yankee values like fairness, frugality and responsibility" in announcing as a candidate. "Why would you use the word 'Yankee' when announcing in New England?" Mazzola asked.
There is nothing odd about this.
It deftly summarizes the complete break between the Yankee Republicans who ruled New Hampshire for, um, forever, with the modern day Rush Limbaugh led GOP.
This doesn't mean the GOP can't come back in the Granite State. Plenty of hate radio fans, fooled by our pledge politics, have crossed the border from Massachusetts into the southern tier.
But, and especially to the older, native voters: with perhaps the tiniest of exceptions at the very local level, do not think the Republicans running in this state bear any relationship to what once was.
Adding: I would like to thank the NRCC for their assistance to the Kuster campaign with this unforced error.
In another episode bordering on tedium, the national GOP party apparatus will simply not let you decide for yourselves who should represent you:
Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas), the chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, prefers ex-Rep. Charles Bass (N.H.) in his comeback campaign for a seat that at least two more conservative Republicans are seeking.
Sessions' leadership organization, People for Enterprise, Trade and Economic Growth (PETE) PAC gave Bass' exploratory campaign a $2,500 contribution on Nov. 19, according to a filing it made Wednesday to the Federal Election Commission.
Jennifer Horn, who represents 21st century Granite State Republicans a whole lot more than anyone in the Bass family dynasty, is quite candid about what's going on:
"No surprise here - Washington politicians endorsing Washington politicians. Charlie has been a Washington insider for 16 years and I am sure this will not be the last Washington insider to endorse his candidacy. Unfortunately for Charlie, New Hampshire voters are not particularly interested in who Pete Sessions wants to see in this seat..."
As James Pindell says about an identical situation over in the senate race: It is getting to the point where news of Ayotte's DC fund-raiser this week was met with a giant, "what else is new?"
MMC caught a doozy from the latest Pete Sessions NRCC fundraising email:
Who will step up to the plate? Well, we've had incredible success in recruiting some of the best candidates we've seen in a long time, including former Rep. Charlie Bass (NH-01)
Leaving aside the stoopid mistake, the bigger insult to New Hampshire Republicans is yet more evidence that DC has zero intention of letting voters decide on their nominees for Congress and Senate.
It's almost certain this will not happen again for another five or ten years, so enjoy the headline.
Here, I'll repeat it for posterity: what the Union Leader said:
The message is clear: The GOP leadership in Washington supports Ayotte for Senate. Anyone else considering a run should forget it.
The National Republican Congressional Committee has talked up Manchester Mayor Frank Guinta since before Guinta announced he was running. It has heavily promoted him and last week listed him among several candidates included in its "Young Guns" program. That program, according to The Hill newspaper, which covers Congress, "aims to help non-incumbents win in top races around the country."
These Washington elites presume to pick our candidates for us. But they have no idea who the best possible candidates for Senate and Congress are. That's why we have primaries in which party members, not the bosses, pick who will represent them in the general election.
Imagine. Even Republicans find Judd's senate successor coup a bit heavy-handed. And the Mayor's rollout, well, that's a mess of a whole different order.
10. New Hampshire's 1st district (Democratic-controlled): Manchester Mayor Frank Guinta (R) kicked off his campaign for Congress with a bang or, more accurately, a crack. Guinta's involvement in a bar fight that left a man's leg broken has significantly marred the momentum national Republicans were hoping to build for his race against Rep. Carol Shea-Porter (D). The $90,000 he raised between April 1 and June 30 didn't exactly bowl us over either. Is Shea Porter vulnerable? Yes. Is Guinta off to a very rocky start? You betcha. (Previous ranking: 4)
So, the NRCC has decided to put Mayor Guinta on their "Young Guns" program, which appears to an imitation of the D-Trip's Red to Blue priority list of challengers.
Sorry, Mr. Bestani, sorry New Hampshire Republicans. The land of the DC Villagers has decided for you whom you shall support.
(Add this, btw, to Kelly Ayotte's first trip to her constituents K Street consultants and Senate GOPer taskmasters.)
Given the 2006 electoral history of the incumbent currently holding this seat and working for the rest of us in the Granite State, it appears the NRCC is an irony free zone.
Adding: of course, all kidding aside, he's probably on that list at least in part due to his lackluster Q2 fundraising.
(Release below the fold and blockquoted. - promoted by Dean Barker)
Do you think that the NRCC will ever wise up and accept that CSP is a great member of congress supported by the majority of her constituents because she represents the mainstream values of her district?
The NRCC can waste all they money they have but the voters of NH aren't going to buy the snake oil sales job that Republicans are more responsible with taxpayers' money.
NRCC Chair Pete Sessions (TX-32) was having a hard time expressing his thoughts in an interview with Hotline last week.
In the aptly-titled "What?", Sessions compares the House Republican caucus to the Taliban:
"Insurgency, we understand perhaps a little bit more because of the Taliban," Sessions said during a meeting yesterday with Hotline editors. "And that is that they went about systematically understanding how to disrupt and change a person's entire processes. And these Taliban -- I'm not trying to say the Republican Party is the Taliban. No, that's not what we're saying. I'm saying an example of how you go about [sic] is to change a person from their messaging to their operations to their frontline message. And we need to understand that insurgency may be required when the other side, the House leadership, does not follow the same commands, which we entered the game with."
He followed up with "So we either work together, or we're going to find a way to get our message out." That's when, according to Hotline, his staffer interrupted and took over, more appropriately explaining the challenges of a minority party functioning under a majority.
It's not like the NRCC has already come up with their hit-list for 2010 or anything on the very day she was sworn in to the 111th.
You can click here to give to the BH Five For Foster's plan.
And as for the Senate rumors, the 'Ticker's got this quote:
"I've put in two bills yesterday, we've met with constituents today and that's a full enough plate for me right now, so I just laugh when I hear that," she said.
I've been trying to write this post for a week, but I've been stymied by my two top choices. So I'm just throwing them both in.
What is the worst, most odious, factually vacuous ad of this election season? For me, it's a tie between the NRCC's disgraceful, dishonorable drive-by on Carol Shea-Porter, and McCain's gutter-ball, race-baiting slime.
I see that the common thread between the two is sexual depravity - perhaps that's the ticket for making the top of the list for me. For you, perhaps some other lowest minimal threshold of acceptability fits the bill.
Put your choices in the comments below. If you don't/can't embed video, no worries - a description will do. I'm curious as to what ads push your buttons.
And if these ads don't motivate you to work like crazy over the next nine days to make sure Jeb Bradley and John McCain don't have the honor of representing us - I don't know what will.
...Republican officials in Washington and state party chairman Fergus Cullen went to trouble of meeting with Horn last fall and urging her to run against Hodes.
So, how indicative of the nature of the Republican party is it that the GOP prefers talk show hosts to policy wonks, experienced state legislators, and Green Berets?
Then in the afternoon Senator Clinton made something unequivocally clear on a major news network:
"Anybody who has ever voted for me or voted for Barack has much more in common in terms of what we want to see happen in our country and in the world with the other than they do with John McCain," Clinton said on CNN's "The Situation Room."
"I'm going to work my heart out for whoever our nominee is. Obviously, I'm still hoping to be that nominee, but I'm going to do everything I can to make sure that anyone who supported me ... understands what a grave error it would be not to vote for Sen. Obama."
In the evening came a surprise endorsement of John Edwards for our increasingly presumptive nominee.
And here in New Hampshire, we are apparently on track to break attendance records for the state Democratic party convention - on the year after the presidential candidates came.
Bush sacrificed more than golf (and lives and treasure and national reputation) when he invaded Iraq. He sacrificed his party.
2006 was a good year for New Hampshire Democrats. We had Carol Shea-Porter headlining electoral successes all over the state and for almost no money.
2008 looks to be not quite as good. The end of the quarterly fund-raising reporting cycle has brought missives to my mail box, suggesting it's all about the money again.
DavidNYC has got his hands on the NRCC's Top 24 Targets, and both of our newly blue reps are on the list. Not surprised one bit that Shea-Porter made the list, but I am a little by Hodes' listing, and I half wonder if it's got something to do with McCain's clinching the nomination, and thus the GoOPers feeling a little more optimistic than they should be.
(Did someone not tell them that both Clinton and Obama got more votes than McCain in the primary, even among independents?)
Anyway, best of luck to the NRCC on their efforts. I hear they are flush with cash, and have nothing big or symbolic or anything to spend it on at the moment.
What would the Republicans say if someone gave $15,000 to the DCCC and also gave about $150,000 to help fund terrorist activities? Right now the NRCC is not commenting about the person who gave $15,000 to the NRCC - and $150,000 to help fund terrorist activities. This story has been floating around on talkingpointsmemo.com for a couple of days. Now cnn.com has an AP story up.
The NRCC would be screaming about traitorous Democrats, calling for a special prosecutor, and probably want to incarcerate Rahm Emmanuel and Nancy Pelosi on treason charges! Hey, do you think some of this $15,000 was used to help pay for those robocalls the NRCC made into the second district to jam voters' phone lines?
