Thursday’s political round-up

November 30, 2006

Today’s installment of campaign-related news items that wouldn’t generate a post of their own, but may be of interest to political observers:

* It was close, but Democratic challenger Larry Kissell conceded the undecided House race in North Carolina’s 8th district yesterday, giving Rep. Robin Hayes (R) another term. Out of the 121,523 votes cast, Hayes won by 329 votes. Kissell, however, immediately announced he’s gearing up for a rematch. “The fight for the future of this district is too important to postpone another day,” he said in a statement. “That’s why I’m running for Congress in 2008 starting right now.”

* Strategist James Carville, speaking at the American Democracy Conference in DC, said, in a rather matter-of-fact fashion, that Al Gore will be a presidential candidate in 2008. Carville told the audience, “We’re going to have five larger-than-life candidates running for President. McCain, Giuliani, Hillary Clinton, Obama and Al Gore. And you want to make it interesting, you might have Newt Gingrich in it.”

* Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack (D) will officially kick off his presidential campaign today at an event in Mount Pleasant, Iowa. According to excerpted portions of his speech, Vilsack will tell supporters, “I am running for president to replace the anxiety of today with the hope of tomorrow and to guarantee every American their birthright: opportunity.”

* Speaking of Iowa, state party chairman Rob Tully said on Fox News last night that Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) has not yet laid the groundwork for a presidential campaign in the first caucus state. “She’s been quiet and, you know, there’s a question that we all hear is that she may not get in this if Barack Obama gets in. I have never seen a reaction other than Bill Clinton in terms of the excitement that people have to meet Barack Obama. Some people just wanted to touch him.” (For the record, I don’t believe Clinton is afraid of any potential ’08 rival.)

* And in Texas, Sen. John Cornyn (R) is generally considered a safe bet for re-election, but a handful of Dems are already eyeing the race against him in 2008. According to Roll Call, former State Railroad Commissioner John Sharp (D), a two time candidate for lieutenant governor, is considering throwing his hat into the ring, as is Houston Mayor Bill White.

Is James trying to repent for his stupid ass suggestion that Howard Dean should be replaced as chairman of the Democratic Party?

Hillary, Iowa is calling! Does she think she can start with New Hampshire?

I’m glad that some Democrats in Texas are willing to go up against Cornyn. The Guy is rather annoying I find.

  • I think maybe Hillary is using the John Kerry technique. I still don’t know how he came out of nowhere to get the 2004 Dem nominaiton.

    Vilsack probably will make Iowa irrelevant in the primaries.

  • “Vilsack probably will make Iowa irrelevant in the primaries.” – Dale

    Or Vilsack losing the caucuses will make him irrelevant in the primaries 😉

    I suppose his running could be all a clintonite plot to make New Hampshire the real first contest of the season and thus put Hillary in the driver’s seat. It could suck the air out of a Kerry or Clark campaign.

    I still think Edwards or Obama would win South Carolina though.

  • With regard to Vilsack, I think it’s more likely that “Iowa will make Vilsack irrelevant in the primaries.” After eight years of his milquetoasty administration as governor, I can’t fathom him winning the caucuses, let alone making a good showing. Gephardt couldn’t pull it off in 2004, and he was a more popular candidate in the state than Vilsack could ever be.

    I’ve been shaking my head ever since he started making noise about running and think he’s setting himself up for a big dose of humiliation. Not that he’s been a bad governor, he just doesn’t inspire anyone and has made plenty of enemies in the labor community over the years (and ASCFME in particular), and despite waning labor influence in general elections, unions do turn people out for the caucuses.

    Personally, the reason I think he didn’t run for a third term as governor is that he instinctively knew such a run would likely hand the office over to a Republican, and with the particularly loathsome one defeated this year (Nussle) that would have been a bad thing for the state. At least he had the good sense to let a younger, more personable candidate step in to win the office and both houses this year. No caucus-going Democrats I know would even vaguely entertain supporting Vilsack, so I’m baffled that he continues to think he has a ghost of a chance to even place, let alone win. I may be wrong, but I just don’t see it happening. I hope Lance’s theory is wrong, because supporting HRC is something I can’t fathom either…

    Oh, and btw, when we got a robo-call inviting us to attend his little coming out ceremony this week, well, let’s just say the volume of laughter that call engendered frightened the dogs.

  • Carville told the audience, “We’re going to have five larger-than-life candidates running for President. McCain, Giuliani, Hillary Clinton, Obama and Al Gore.

    He was also rather matter-of-fact about Obama, as you have been lately. Have we reached the point at which Obama’s 08 run is taken as a given, or at least as more likely than not?

  • “Have we reached the point at which Obama’s 08 run is taken as a given, or at least as more likely than not?” – James Dillon

    Only that Obama is running Vice President the only way you can, by running for President.

  • Thanks Iowa Victory Garden. It’s good to get info from people “on the ground”. I’m sure Vilsack will be rendered meaningless at some point, but one article made me think he might have strengths in Iowa.
    http://www.lenconnect.com/articles/2006/11/11/news/news09.txt

    I wrote:

    Estimating Tom Vilsack
    Don’t underestimate Tom Vilsack is the message from Erik Gable, news editor of the Daily Telegram in Iowa. Vilsack was the first Democratic Governor in 32 years and he has worked with and against Republicans in an area where he is surrounded by them. Gable reminds us that Jimmy Carter was a small state governor nobody knew at one time too. Let’s keep an eye on him.

    Maybe it’s just hometown cheerleading.

  • What did they say about Jimmy Carter? All the candidates in 1976 came to Georgia to ask for his endorsement but he concluded, as he considered himself smarter than anyone else, he should run for President.

    Well, he was a nuclear engineer. Than again my brother was a nuclear engineer, so maybe I’m not so impressed 😉

    Does Vilsack really imagine himself the better of all the candidates who’ve dropped by Iowa so far?

  • He was also rather matter-of-fact about Obama, as you have been lately. Have we reached the point at which Obama’s 08 run is taken as a given, or at least as more likely than not?

    Good point. Two quick responses.

    One, I make a distinction because Obama has publicly acknowledged an interest in the race, whereas Gore has not. With that in mind, if Carville assumes Gore is in, it’s a bit more surprising.

    Two, I’m not quite at the point in which I’d assume Obama is running, but there’s plenty of evidence to suggest he’s getting close to being a formal candidate.

  • A Des Moines Register Iowa Poll several months ago showed Vilsack behind Clinton and Edwards (and as I recall within a few points one way or the other of Kerry) in Iowa. And that was without our charismatic neighbor making noises about running. I generally like Vilsack, but I have mixed feelings about his tenure as Governor. And talking to others here, I do not get a lot of passionate support for his presidential bid (although the Register has suddenly become a cheerleader). I also do not think he will render the caucuses irrelevant. Unlike Harkin, who owned the Iowa machine, the party this time is likely to be lead by a very neutral, fair chair and there will be many other organizations dividing the power base. I doubt many candidates will give Vilsack a pass in Iowa (which means HRC skips at her own peril).

    But here is the bottom line. Imagine the following campaign commerical from Club for Growth:

    [Bad photos of Vilsack with headlines about various Dem tax-and-spend ideas over the years]

    “The liberal Democrats want you believe they’ve changed, that they wont just tax and spend all of your hard-earned money. . . don’t believe it. Tom Vilsack is the same old tax-and-spend liberal,

    [cut to photo of Vilsack wearing Winnie the Pooh costume]

    with his hand in the honey jar.”

    Yes, the photo exists and has run in the newspaper. Now, don’t get me wrong, his wife’s childrens literacy advocacy is a great and noble thing, and Tom was always a good sport for her opening up the Governors Mansion and hosting a reading/costume party for kids every year. But there are three basic constitutional prerequisites to be President: (1) you must be at least 35 years old; (2) you must be a natural born citizen; and (3) you cannot have been photographed dressed as Winnie the Pooh (or, as he was another year, Friar Tuck. or, accord. the Dukakis campaign, in a tank if you are shorter than 5’9″).

    President Vilsack simply cannot happen, regardless of whether that is good, bad, or what it says about the superficiality of the process.

  • “you cannot have been photographed … in a tank if you are shorter than 5′9″ ”

    You know I always thought they wanted short men to drive in tanks. Other than the loader for the gun of course, which is all automated now anyway.

  • Honestly, Lance, I have never understood quite what it was about Dukakis that made people consider that photo so implausible or how it became such a joke. I’ve assumed part of it was his height, but maybe not. . .

  • I think it’s just that wingnuts will laugh at whatever the handlers of their Saint Reagan told them to Zeitgesit.

    • Comments are closed.