Wednesday’s political round-up

January 25, 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:

* Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) may not be as popular as he once was, but he remains competitive looking ahead to his re-election campaign. A new Rasmussen poll shows Schwarzenegger leading State Treasurer Phil Angelides (D), 41% to 39%, but trailing State Comptroller Steve Westly (D), 40% to 39%.

* Speaking of California, it looks like Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D) will not run unopposed after all. Retired State Sen. Richard Mountjoy (R) said yesterday that he’s throwing his hat into the ring. A longtime leader of the state Republican Party’s conservative wing, Mountjoy said his decision was “definite.”

* Ken Canfield, author of several books and articles on fathering, announced yesterday that he’s running for the Republican gubernatorial nomination in Kansas. Canfield, who has never before held public office, join State Sen. Jim Barnett and former Kansas House speaker Robin Jennison in a GOP primary. The winner will take on Democratic Gov. Kathleen Sebelius in November.

* The three-way GOP gubernatorial fight in Ohio is now just two-way. Ohio Auditor Betty Montgomery (R) announced yesterday that she was withdrawing from the governor’s race and would instead run for state attorney general. Her decision leaves Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell and Attorney General Jim Petro to slug it out for the Republican nomination.

* The conservative New York Sun is making hay of a new poll that shows 51% of voters saying they would definitely not vote for Sen. Hillary Clinton if she chooses to run for president in 2008.

* John Edwards may be gone from the Senate, but he’s still working to help boost Dems’ chances in the chamber through his One America leadership committee. In an email to his supporters yesterday, Edwards sought activists willing to help the DSCC. “It’s hugely important that you become involved as soon as possible with the [Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee] and its campaign to win back the Senate,” Edwards said. “Only a Democratic Senate can provide the moral leadership that we are so desperately lacking, put the brakes on the Bush agenda, and shine a bright investigative light on Republican abuses.” It’s a reminder to party officials that Edwards is still focused on his ’08 ambitions, but he’s willing to help out in ’06.

For a whole host of reasons, I am absolutely furious with Senate Democrats. Except for Feingold and Reid, they seem to be mostly a bunch of spineless wimps who hem and haw and then go along with the president. Without more leadership and more spine, it’s not clear to me that taking back the Senate will do a damn bit of good.

  • That last item reminds me, I’m really curious to see a roundup of the 33-34 Senate contests this year, as well as the House elections and see where any seats might change hands. Santorum won’t be reelected, that’s for sure, but how many more seats does it look like Dems might win? How many might we lose?

  • I’m really curious to see a roundup of the 33-34 Senate contests this year…

    Good point. I’ll try and put one together before the end of the week.

  • Personally I have never thought Hillary was the Dem’s strongest candidate for 2008 anyway, only the most famous (or notorious, depending on your point of view). I actually think she would make a great president if she could get in office, but with all the baggage from the Bill years she brings with her she’s pretty much unelectable.

    The best thing she brings to the table is her proven ability to make the right wing knuckle draggers go totally ballistic at the mere mention of her name. But while that’s always entertaining for those of us in the reality-based community, that kind of polarization simply does not win elections, and we have much better candidates waiting in the wings.

  • If things go as I would wish, Hillary (like Ted Kennedy) would tease the party and the electorate/press with the possibility of running for president – it would increase her power in the Senate (as it did Ted Kennedy) – but she should never, never actually throw her hat in any ring but the NY Senate race. Like a host of other spineless Democrats, she voted twice for the “war” in Iraq, the burn-the-flag amendent, and a host of other Lieberman-like weasel policies. She can’t get elected (for these reasons and a ton more which only bigots can resonate with).

  • Good point. I’ll try and put one together before the end of the week.

    The wall street journal recently put up a pretty interesting synopsis based on thier polling. And its free-of-charge. Until Mr. Carpetbagger or some other worthy can give a more comprehensive (read more than just one set of polls), its may be worth a look.

    go to Wall Street Journal Home Page, scroll down to the “Interactive” section and you’ll see the link for the polling data. You need flash, but its actually pretty cool. Again, I wish it aggregated more than just the WSJ polling data, but it is what it is.

    • Comments are closed.