Unlimited money in politics sucks (was that too subtle?)

By Richard K. Barry

If you stack up all my million dollar bills, 
it's way higher than this. 

CNN has been reporting that conservative patron Sheldon Adelson might donate as much as $100 million to help Republicans take back the Senate.

Now that the U.S. Supreme Court has officially declared money to be the same thing as free speech or, put another way, that billionaires can freely put elections in their trophy cases along with those rhino tusks bagged last summer, democracy is truly fucked.

More significant than any other use of the green stuff, needless to say, is that money buys media. 

Ever since the earliest days of advertising, whether for soap or cigarettes or cars, consumers have hated to think they can be influenced to do things they may not otherwise do. Sure, they reason, it's all bullshit but we can see past it and make up our own minds. It doesn't matter how many images, catchy slogans, beautiful women and men, or lies are put in the mix, they think, we are independed-minded American citizens and we'll decide for ourselves, Goddamit!

The problem is that they can't and don't; none of us do. Advertisers have long claimed they aren't responsible for creating demand, they simply respond to it. Political spinmeisters similarly claim, just a bit disingenuously, that they don't create opinion, they simply put the truth out there and let voters decide for themselves. Fox News, the formal advertising wing of the Republican Party describes it like this: "We Report. You Decide."

This guy.

Advertising, whether political or product, is about manipulation because, ever since Edward Bernays, they know how to do it, and we're very close to being helpless once they get us in their sites. 

But, because voters in particular don't like to believe they are capable of being led, they aren't as upset as they should be that billions more in paid media increases the likelihood that others will be telling them what to think and for whom to vote. 

I'd like to believe that Democrats won't engage in the same kind of manipulation as the other side with the gazillions they raise, but of course they will.  So, this is not really a partisan rant. 

The sooner we realize that independent thought in the face of incessant media conditioning is harder and harder to achieve,  the sooner we will get at least a little frightened at the idea that unlimited money in politics leads no where good. 

(Cross-posted at Culturolio.)

Used teabags

By Carl

I wrote a few weeks ago that the Tea Party was a drying wart on the American political landscape, a view cinched last night:

Tactically, the Republican establishment is routing the Tea Party. The insurgency's backslide has been apparent all year, as its handpicked challengers to GOP incumbents failed to gain traction, groups representing it in Washington overreached, and the deficit concerns stoking its base waned. But yesterday, the "backslide" slid right back off a cliff. Tea Party-backed candidates in three key primary races suffered decisive losses in Kentucky, Georgia, and Idaho.

With the handwriting on the wall, deep-pocketed conservative sponsors huddled last Thursday and stewed over how to force the GOP to double down on hard-right policy positions. Those include opposition to a big immigration deal, same-sex marriage, and abortion rights -- issues toxic to the imperative of broadening the party's demographic coalition. But the movement's electoral drubbing suggests its grip on the Republican agenda may finally be breaking.

The question is what will replace it. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, one of the big victors in yesterday's contests, was explicit with Fortune earlier this year that Senate Republicans will not unify behind a governing vision before the November midterms. And even if a more moderate brand of Republicanism is ascendant, the term itself remains relative -- and murky.

McConnell himself ducked the Teabaggers, as Fortune points out, but he still has to deal with the herd of cats in the Senate (and the House) that have managed to survive the apocalypse.

The Teabaggers rose as a result of (ginned up) anger at escalating deficits and government debt, both of which President Obama has reined in. Indeed, the 2012 election showed that Teabaggers were desperately looking for good electoral news and find precious little to rally behind, Obama had done such a good job of mastering the economy and re-energizing the debt reduction machinery.

Read more »

Obamacare is now a losing issue for Republicans

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Oh, Republicans. So desperate, so very desperate, and yet it's all just slipping away: 

Republicans struggled to land punches against ObamaCare in a hearing Wednesday, as responses from insurance companies deflated several lines of questioning.

Democratic lawmakers were emboldened to defend the Affordable Care Act with renewed vigor and levity, creating a dynamic rarely seen in the debate over ObamaCare.

Adding to the irregularity, exits on the Republican side at a subcommittee hearing led by Rep. Tim Murphy (R-Pa.) allowed multiple Democrats to speak in a row and let heavy Democratic criticism of Republicans go unanswered, a contrast with the heated exchanges of last fall.

*****

Republicans were visibly exasperated...

Yes, because reality is not matching up with their ideological bullshit.

**********

Look, Obamacare is far from perfect, and many of us would prefer a single-payer system, but it was really only a matter of time before those early tech glitches were fixed and the system started working effectively. And it's not just working effectively, it's working brilliantly, and should just keep getting better and better as more and more people sign up and costs continue coming down. 

Which is why it's always seemed crazy to me that Democrats would try to run away from it instead of embracing it. The fact is, while Obamacare may be toxic to Republicans, and while some Democrats in red or reddish or otherwise swing districts may be concerned about being too closely connected to it, Obamacare is the signature achievement of this Democratic president. And that means it's seen as a major Democratic achievement. And so if you're a Democrat, you're on board whether you like it or not. Even if you think you can run away from it, you'll never be able to match Republican extremism in opposition to it.

There is political calculation involved, but there is also myopia and, worse, cowardice as well. Many Democrats tried to take cover when the glitches hit and that's all the media could focus on. But they were going to be fixed. And while maybe you couldn't quite predict just how successful Obamacare would be this early on, why bet on failure? Why not embrace it and hope, given expectations, that it would work out?

Read more »

The end of the Teabaggers?

By Carl 

You may have blinked and missed it. At any rate, tomorrow will be a bellwether for this November, and 2016:

The race has been cast as yet another skirmish in the ongoing GOP civil war, pitting the establishment-backed Tillis against seven tea party challengers. It's true that Tillis has the support of prominent national Republicans -- including former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell -- and the Chamber of Commerce.

But it would be too easy to frame a Tuesday victory for Tillis, if it happens, as a clean win for the newly emboldened Republican establishment. Tillis hasn't been forced to beat back a tea party challenge, because his opponents haven't put up much of a fight. They've also splintered conservative support.

He has two serious rivals for the nomination: Greg Brannon, a staunch libertarian tea party activist who wants to put U.S. currency back on the gold standard, and Mark Harris, a prominent Baptist pastor from Charlotte who spearheaded the 2012 passage of a constitutional amendment that strengthened the state's same-sex marriage ban. Like other insurgent Republican candidacies around the country this year, neither campaign has managed to stir the kind of grassroots passion that propelled so many tea party victories in 2010.

With memories of Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock marked indelibly in the consciousness of the Republican Party – along with the "what if?" of two winnable Senate seats thrown away – the GOP establishment must be taking comfort in the fact that they've managed to ostracize and minimize the Teabaggers on this go around.

The follow up question, then, is "quo vadis?" Where are they going? [ed. note: I know, technically it's "quo eunt?" but...]

There's no place in the Democratic Party for them, and any third party bid will be doomed to irrelevance, as Duverger's Law comes into play, even with Koch and Adelson shoveling money into a Tea Party engine, at least at the beginning. They're businessmen. They'll stop the minute it becomes unprofitable.

Read more »

Behind the Ad: A California frat boy does an ad in someone's basement

By Richard K. Barry

Who: The David Kanuth (D) campaign

Where: The California 33rd Congressional District

What's going on: In this safe Democratic seat, some guy by the name of David Kanuth is running against a slew of better known candidates. Rep. Henry Waxman (D) will be retiring so there is no incumbent.

Other Democrats in the field include state Sen. Ted Lieu, former Los Angeles Controller Wendy Greuel and radio show host Matt Miller. Los Angeles Deputy District Attorney Elan Carr is running as a Republican, while spiritual teacher Marianne Williamson is waging a bid as an independent.

I count 18 candidates in all. And California has that quirky blanket primary system, or top-two system, which allows all candidates to run and all voters to vote but only moves the top two vote-getters, regardless of party affiliation, to the general election.

In this ad, Karuths gives a shout-out to Boston on the day of this year's marathon because, I guess, he's a Harvard alum. This thing that looks and feels like it was produced in the basement of Karuth's Harvard frat house, as he says, "[w]ay to take this marathon back. This is out fucking city," though "fucking" is bleeped.

To be fair, he's received some attention for an $804,000 first quarter fundraising haul, so he might not be total joke. 

Grade: The first thing to know is that this district is home to many Hollywoods stars. Maybe the sensibilities of the rest of us don't apply. But I still thinking dropping an F-bomb in a campaign ad, whether bleeped or not, is a bit much. And the low tech production values? Who knows, maybe that's cool. I stick by the frat boy assessment. D+

Behind the Ad: What ads look like in safe blue congressional districts

By Richard K. Barry

Who: The Don Beyer (D) campaign

Where: Virginia's 8th Congressional District

What's going on: Rep. James P. Moran (D) is retiring. There are 10 Democrats running in the June 10th primary for the right to crush whomever the Republicans put up. Former Lt. Gov. Don Beyer is one of them. This 30-second ad crows about Beyer's commitment to women's issues like equal pay and abortion rights.

According to Roll Call, Beyer is the only candidate with enough money to make a significant ad buy this early, especially considering how expensive airtime is in the D.C. area. He is also referred to in the piece as the front-runner, so it he must be true, though I haven't seen any polling. 

Also running for the Democrat nomination are state Sen. Adam Ebbin, state Dels. Patrick Hope and Charniele Herring, and radio show host Mark Levine, among others.

President Obama won here in 2012 by 37 points, so this seat is all about the Democratac primary. 

A fun fact about the Virginia 8th is that it boasts the shortest commute to Capitol Hill in the country.

Grade: Considering that this is a safe blue seat, the point is to make Democrats comfortable with the candidates progressive values. No harm done, but could it be a more boring ad? C- 

Behind the Ad: A very good ad from a GOP Senate candidate in Oregon

By Richard K. Barry

Who: The Monica Wehby campaign for U.S. Senate

Where: Oregon

What's going on: Dr. Wehby is a paediatric neurosurgeon who will face three other candidates in the GOP primary on May 20th. The winner will run again Democratic Senator Jeff Merkley (D).  Polling has Merkley with a decent lead over all comers at this point though Republicans are saying that Merkley could be vulnerable over local frustrations with Obamacare and the state exchange in Oregon.

Whatever the politics, the ad is quite stunning.

As The Hill describes it:

[T]titled "Trust," [it] runs a minute long and highlights the story of Lexi Liebelt from Gresham, Ore., whose daughter needed reconstructive surgery on her spinal cord shortly after she was born. In the ad, Liebelt tells the story of how Wehby helped her daughter that day.

Chris Cillizza at The Washington Post calls it one of the best political ads of 2014. It's worth noting in detail his reasons, which are that it:

a) Shows rather than tells how Wehby's background -- she's the head of pediatric neurosurgery at Randall Children's Hospital in Portland -- is decidedly different than most people running for office.

b) Conveys a story -- of a newborn with spinal problems -- that sticks with you.

c) Looks different. The image of Lexi Liebelt, the mom, crying as she recounts the story of how Wehby reassured her that her daughter would be ok is powerful. The shots of the now 12-year old Gabby Liebelt are equally moving.

Grade: For the moment,  I won't get into the curiosity of doctors taking issue with expanded health care coverage. As for the ad, a solid A. 

Behind the Ad: Don't confuse Michigan Republicans with logic

By Richard K. Barry

Who: The Terri Lynn Land campaign for U.S. Senate

Where: Michigan

What's going on: I saw this one on CNN's ever-moronic morning show yesterday. I could tell it was CNN because the hosts were going on about how clever the ad is, which, given how stupid the ad is, is what you would expect from CNN. 

I'll let Daily Kos take it from here:

As gentle piano music plays, Land starts off by saying "Congressman Gary Peters and his buddies want you to believe I'm waging a war on women." Incredulous, Land asks, "Really?", then insists: "Think about that for a moment." The music shifts to a peppier, almost annoying trope that signifies "waiting around" as Land takes a sip of her coffee, looks at her watch, shakes her head ... and says nothing at all for 12 seconds.

Then, thinking she's the cleverest lady ever, Land finally breaks her silence and declares, "As a woman, I might know a little bit more about women than Gary Peters."

Are we really supposed to believe that the mere fact there are female politicians and candidates in the GOP means we therefore cannot have a substantive policy debate about how Republican policies adversely impact woman? Is that the point? If so, and I'm afraid it is, it's a stupid point.

Again, Kos nails it when they write that "[a]nyone swayed by this kind of 'argument' is almost certainly already very hostile to Democrats—the sort of conservative who declares, "There's no 'War on Women' because Monica Lewinsky!"

For the record, Democratic Sen. Carl Levin's decision not to run again has made this race competitive. Land, a former Michigan Secretary of State, will be running for the Republicans and U.S. Rep. Gary Peters for the Democrats. Polling done as recently as March and April has it close, which is likely how it will remain. 

Grade: As you can see, I don't think much of this cringe-making ad, which obviously wouldn't move any vote and might even alienate some who actually think for themselves. D-

Behind the Ad: Sen. Mitch McConnell takes no chances

By Richard K. Barry

Who: The Sen. Mitch McConnell Campaign (R-Ky)

Where: Kentucky

What's going on: Mitch McConnell should have no difficulty dispatching Tea Party Challenger Matt Bevin (R) for the GOP Senate nomination in Kentucy, but he wants to make sure. As with other Republican incumbents who are being primaried from their right, McConnell has been forced to scream from the rooftops that he is in fact a conservative.

"Mitch McConnell: He's not a show horse, Mitch is a genuine Kentucky workhorse," the ad's narrator says. "Last year, he saved 99 percent of Kentuckians from an income tax increase. Mitch stopped bureaucrats from shutting down fishing below Barkley Dam, saving Kentucky jobs. Mitch fights for Kentucky miners against Obama's war on coal and he's leading the fight against ObamaCare. Mitch McConnell fights for our values, our future and our jobs."

The primary, which McConnell will win, is on May 20th. Then the real work begins as he goes head to head with Kentucky Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes (D) in the general election.

Grade: To explain the grading scale: Anything less than a C, in my estimation, starts to do the candidate damage. I consider a C anything that does what it has to do but probably doesn't move much vote.  A B may move vote in a positive way. And an A is a game changer, a "Morning in America" moment, if you will. With that in mind: C 

Behind the Ad: Who's zoomin' who in the North Carolina GOP Senate race?

By Richard K. Barry

Tom Tillis

Who: Senate Majority PAC (Democratic super PAC)

Where: North Carolina

What's going on: Well, this one really climbs into the gutter. In this ad, the Democrats attack Republican state House Speaker Thom Tillis by drawing attention to the fact that "two former staffers were engaged in inappropriate relationships with lobbyists," as The Washington Post reports. One of the staffers was Tillis' chief of staff, with whom Tillis shared on apartment.

Tillis has said he wasn't aware of his chief staff's affair, despite the two of them living together. The affairs were revealed in 2012, and Tillis was criticized for giving the staffers severance pay when they were forced to resign.

If you haven't been following the U.S. Senate race in North Carolina closely, it is shaping up to be a tough one for Democratic incumbent Sen. Kay Hagen, at this point a likely toss-up. Tom Tillis is considered the frontrunner for the GOP nomination, which is also being contested by physician Greg Brannon, Mark Harris, a Baptist minister, and nurse Heather Grant. The Tea Party is split between Brannon and Harris.

As for the details of the dirty dancing, this was reported by local North Carolina media:

The incident referenced in the commercial came to light just before the May 2012 legislative short session. Charles Thomas, who was Tillis' chief of staff and roommate, resigned after admitting to a romantic relationship with a lobbyist for the Home Builders Association. The affair was problematic both because Thomas was married and because of the perception that Thomas could have used his role to do favors for the lobbyist.

Days later, Tillis' policy adviser, Amy Hobbs, resigned after volunteering to Tillis that she, too, had had a romantic relationship with a lobbyist. The story surfaced again two weeks later when it was reported Tillis paid roughly $19,000 in severance to the two staffers in question.

That Democrats are attacking Tillis in this way suggests they take him seriously. 

Grade: I know that progressives are supposed to be okay going after Republicans on questions of morality because conservatives are usually so damned sanctimonious. I'm still a little uncomfortable with it, though it is true that these were not simply extramarital affairs, but involved lobbyist, so that's not good. Does the work? Yeah, probably, maybe, I don't know. C

Behind the Ad: The power of bleak comes to New Jersey's 12th

By Richard K. Barry

Who: Assemblyman Upendra Chivukula.

Where: New Jersey's 12th Congressional District.

What's going on: The New Jersey 12th is currently represented by Democratic Rep. Rush Holt. Holt first won election to the House in 1999 but has decided he's had enough, announcing in February that he would not seek re-election in 2014. Holt sought the Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate in the 2013 special primary election to fill the seat of Sen. Frank Lautenberg, who died in office in June of last year, but lost to Newark Mayor Cory Booker.

In 2012, Holt won re-election to his House seat with 69.2 percent of the vote. Some people describe the district as leaning Democratic. Charlie Cook calls it solidly Democratic. I suppose without an incumbent in a midterm year it could be closer this time.

So far, Assemblywoman Bonnie Watson Coleman, State Sen. Linda Greenstein, Assemblyman Upendra Chivukula, and South Brunswick resident Andrew Zwicker are seeking the Democratic nomination. The primary is on June 3.

I haven't seen any polling, and am not sure any has been done.

According to local press reports, the Democratic nominee will likely face off against Republican candidate Alieta Eck in the general election.

The ad below is for Democratic candidate Upendra Chivukula. Of interest is that Mark Putnam, who is doing some very nice ads for Sen. Mark Begich (D) in Alaska, did this one for Chivukula. 

As Daily Kos describes it:

It's a very stark ad featuring grim black-and-white urban scenes in which Chivukula, who was born in India, describes his native country as a bleak place with "no minimum wage, no equality for women, no Social Security, and no Medicare" -- and "no way up." Chivukula warns that "we cannot let it happen here."

Grade: Stark indeed. I don't know that Garden Staters will necessarily respond well to the idea that their fortunes could slide so badly. Perhaps they should, but I don't know that they will. I like the idea of the ad, and I know voters can be effectively frightened. But I'm on the fence as to whether or not New Jerseyans will relate to this approach. B-

Behind the Ad: Did someone say "boner"?

By Richard K. Barry

Who: The J.D. Winteregg campaign.

Where: Ohio's 8th Congressional District - web ad.

What's going on: Mr. Winteregg is a Tea Party-backed candidate running agains House Speaker John Boehner (R). Just because someone had to, Winteregg produced an ad positioning himself as the answer to "electile dysfunction." Get it. Electile. Oh, my.

In a parody of all those commercials for what Charlie Sheen in Two and Half Men calls boner pills, couples are seen drinking out of Winteregg mugs and generally looking as silly as the people in the real commercials.

In the event you can't access YouTube, some of the copy goes like this:

Sometimes when a politician has been in D.C. for too long, it goes to his head, and he just can't seem to get the job done... Used on a daily basis, Winteregg in Congress will help you every time the moment is right — to have your voice heard at the federal level... When using Winteregg, it's important to note that the borders will be secured, Second Amendment rights protected, ObamaCare and Planned Parenthood will be defunded, and common sense will be used in solving the nation's problems.

And then:

The narrator says that signs of electile dysfunction include "extreme skin discoloration," a reference to Boehner's infamous tanned skin, "the inability to punch oneself out of a wet paper bag, or maintain a spine in the face of liberal opposition."

Finally, because acting like a fourteen-year-old boy never gets old, the narrator warns, "[i]f you have a Boehner lasting more than 23 years, seek immediate medical attention.”

For the record, John Boehner got 84 percent in the 2013 primary in the Ohio 8th, which also happens to be the most Republican district in the state. So, this Boehner is lasting a bit longer (sorry).

Grade: Okay, it's kinda cute. Unfortunately some of the copy brushes up against a bit of unnecessary meanness which damages the cuteness, but, other than that, whatever. Mr. Winteregg and friends can have their chuckle. This is probably the last time any of us will hear his name in this election cycle or any other. Having said that, we're talking about him today. B-

Behind the Ad: How not to make an attack ad

By Richard K. Barry

Who: House Majority PAC (Democratic super-PAC), in support of Rep. Nick Rahall.

Where: West Virginia's 3rd Congressional District.

What's going on: Nick Rahall was first elected to the House in 1976, and while it's always hard to unseat a long-term incumbent, this is going to be a real race. In fact, The Hill calls him one of the most vulnerable incumbents. Evan Jenkins (R), a well-connected state senator who can raise a lot of money, is the challenger.

The ad attacks Jenkins, claiming that he tried to "delay a water safety bill meant to prevent a chemical spill similar to the one that recently devastated parts of the state":

The spot goes on to tie Jenkins to the billionaire Koch brothers, Charles and David, who have poured millions into competitive House and Senate races — including hundreds of thousands into Rahall's district — hammering vulnerable Democrats.

It says that Freedom Industries, which caused the spill, is a "corporate partner" of the Koch brothers and suggests after Jenkins opposed the water safety bill, his Koch support increased.

Recently there was quite a bit of back-and-forthing that Rahall was contemplating retirement due, apparently, to attacks by the right, including from the Koch brothers. The story, reported by CNN's John King, included the claim that Rahall agreed to stay in the race on the basis of increased support from the Democratic national leadership. Rahall has denied he was thinking about walking away, but that's what you would expect him to say.

A recent poll has Rahall trailing Jenkins by a margin of 54 to 40 percent (conducted March 3-5). That'd depress me. A nasty race is expected:

"It's going to be quite ugly," said Nathan Gonzales, deputy editor of The Rothenberg Political Report — a national non-partisan political publication that currently lists the state's Third District as one of seven "toss up" Congressional districts across the country.

"The Congressman is facing a reelection race like he's never faced before," said Gonzales who characterized the campaign between the likely nominees, Rahall and state Senator Evan Jenkins (R-5, Cabell), as a "race to bottom," with the opposing candidates – and the groups that support them – spending a lot of money to tell voters why the other guy is a bad choice. 

Grade: Much as I dislike the Koch brothers, the logic of this ad is strained. Something about the Republican candidate "delaying" aid money after an environmental disaster - and having ties to the Koch brothers who had something to do with, I think,  some other environmental disaster. And they have given him lots of money to run in campaigns, suggesting that they are buying his support to do things that harm West Virginians. 

In a sense, it doesn't matter. The Koch brothers are the bad guys, and connecting them to bad things that happen to ordinary people is going to be a major part of the Democrats campaign in the midterms. I like the approach, but not this ad, which seems dishonest to me, and might well appear that way to others. The bad guys are bad enough. Don't help them by making them objects of sympathy. By the way, I'm not saying there's no case here, just that the ad doesn't make it. D+

Behind the Ad: Babies, so many babies

By Richard K. Barry

Who: The David Perdue campaign for the U.S. Senate

Where: Georgia

What's going on: I've written a lot recently about the U.S. Senate election campaign in Georgia here, here, and here, so I won't cover familiar territory. I will just say that a bunch of GOP candidates are vying for the seat that will become vacant when Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R) retires. Michelle Nunn is the presumptive Democratic nominee. Those in the know are saying this will be a close fight, at least in the general.

Businessman David Perdue is one of those running for the GOP nomination. He is a cousin of former Gov. Sonny Perdue. Purdue is mostly using his own money to talk about his business experience, while berating his fellow Republicans for having "too much" political experience, which seems to be something we are seeing a lot of from certain Republicans.

In that vein, Perdue has some very unusual ads, in which he points to the "childish behaviour" of politicians, specifically his GOP primary opponents, who, he says,  would already have solved our problems if they understood anything about the free enterprise system - a system Perdue almost claims to have invented.

The most recent ad begins with a bunch of computer generated babies in the foreground of the Capitol building. Perdue then comes on to give us his pitch without ever mentioning the babies.

Presumably, we are all supposed to know that the babies were introduced in earlier ads citing the aforementioned childish behaviour. 

It's all very confusing. 

Grade: Aside from baby fiasco, I find David Perdue very smarmy, though I suspect he finds himself extremely charming. I know, however, that with certain conservatives the lack of political experience is exactly what they want in their politicians. And it is the one thing Perdue has that his rivals lack. On the thought that one must turn weaknesses into strengths, I'll say this is not an awful ad, but it's not great. And that whole thing about running businesses being good training for running government didn't work all that well for Mitt. C

(I will do Mr. Perdue the favour he has not done us, by posting the ads back-to-back so it all makes sense, sort of. For the record, there is a second ad that is almost exactly the same as the first ad. Got it? Keep in mind that a lot of people would have seen the most recent ad with the babies in front of the Capitol with nary a mention by Perdue as to why they are in the ad at all. That must have been a moment.)

Behind the Ad: Former Mass. Sen. Scott Brown comes to New Hampshire (and not for a vacay)

By Richard K. Barry

Who: End Spending Action Fund

Where: New Hampshire (on WMUR TV and cable sports networks).

What's going on: The End Spending Action Fund is a group backed by billionaire Joe Ricketts, which, as the name suggests, is a Republican advocacy group. This ad is in support of former Massachusetts GOP Sen. Scott Brown, who has been toying with the idea of running for the U.S. Senate in New Hampshire. Now comes word via the Boston Globe that he will in fact take the plunge, and make his intentions clear this Thursday.

The incumbent is Democrat Jeanne Shaheen, who was first elected in 2008 with 52 percent of the vote, defeating then-GOP Sen. John Sununu. As you will recall, 2008 was a particularly good year for Democrats, which is likely why Brown is thinking he can poach the seat in this year's midterm, when Republicans have done well more recently.

Scott Brown won, I'm sure you'll remember, an upset special election in 2010 in Massachusetts to fill the remainder of Ted Kennedy's term, but was than unseated in 2012 by Democrat Elizabeth Warren.

As for polling in New Hampshire, HuffPollster's trend line has Shaheen ahead of Brown by a margin of 49.8 percent to 40.3 percent, though this was done before it was clear he was running. The most recent poll (March 13-16) has Shaheen up 50 percent to 38 percent. Still, if Democrats
want reason to worry, they can direct themselves to President Obama's job approval rating in the state. Just 31 percent say they like the job he is doing, while 56 percent disapprove.

As we've seen in the past, all bets seem to be off in the midterms.

The ad in question features a clip of Brown criticizing Obamacare in his victory speech after the 2010 special election in Massachusetts. “It will raise taxes; it will hurt Medicare; it will destroy jobs and run our nation deeper into debt,” he states. And then the announcer intones: “Scott Brown was right on ObamaCare then. He’s right for New Hampshire now.”

Grade: While Republicans running hard against ObamaCare makes sense now, it is hard to tell how the issue will play in November. Maybe it will still work. Maybe not. In a state where Obama's favourability is seriously underwater, health care reform has to be a part of that. The funny thing about Brown is that he campaigned in Massachusetts as a moderate, as you would expect, but became a Tea Party favourite as they dreamed of swiping Ted Kennedy's seat. It will be interesting to see how he plays his candidacy in New Hampshire, especially as outside money designs a message that may not be very moderate at all. The ad is effective for now, to the extent that ObamaCare is a negative proxy for President Obama, but that may change. In fact, the more popular ObamaCare becomes, the more likely Republicans are to start calling it the Affordable Care Act. B

2014: Turbulence ahead for the Democrats

By Richard K. Barry

Well, here's some bad news for Democrats, according to an Associated Press-GfK poll conducted between March 20-24:

Thirty-seven percent in the poll last month chose Republicans, compared to 36 percent who said they would rather see Democrats in charge, with the November general elections seven months away.

[...]

[R]egistered voters, who are most strongly interested in politics, favored the Republicans by 14 percentage points -- 51 percent to 37 percent. In January, they were about evenly split, with 42 percent preferring Democrats and 45 percent the Republicans.

Just to help us unpack the obvious, former senior Obama campaign strategist David Axelrod tweeted this:

Every bit of evidence points to stronger GOP turnout in a low turnout elections this fall. Major hurdle for Ds. http://t.co/FTLk7eG3Sb.
— David Axelrod (@davidaxelrod) April 5, 2014

I do wish progressives would figure out that all elections matter, not just the ones with a rock star at the top of the ticket.  

Behind the Ad: Cleveland vs. Cleveland? Really?

By Richard K. Barry

Who: Mississippi Conservatives PAC (a pro-Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss) group)

Where: Mississippi

What's going on: As I said last week, Cochran is seen by many as the most vulnerable Republican
incumbent facing a primary challenge. State Sen. Chris McDaniel has received the support of every national conservative group expressing an opinion on the matter. He is running to the right of Cochran with the argument that Cochran is a Washington insider who deserves to be defeated.

Cochrane has been trumpeting his conservative bona fides in response. It's already silly season in Mississippi.

Now a pro-Cochran PAC has launched an ad charging that McDaniel has "taken both sides" on some key issues.  The ad charges that he has "both been in favor of and against tort reform, for and against Common Core educational standards and “on both sides” on earmarks."

We'll be following closely some of these GOP primaries in which the issue of what it means to be a real conservative are front and centre. Not a hell of a lot of light between both sides as far as I can see. 

Noel Fritsch, a McDaniel's team spokesman, pushed back against the ad saying this:

Sen. Cochran and his lobbyist friends will say anything to try to distract voters from Sen. Cochran’s record of voting for bailouts, debt ceiling increases, tax increases and taxpayer-funded abortion...The truth is, Sen. Cochran has been one of the biggest proponents of wasteful government spending while state Sen. Chris McDaniel has been a conservative leader in Mississippi. No wonder Sen. Cochran’s campaign is so afraid."

I'm not in a postion to unpack all of Fritsch's claims about Cochran's record, but it's a pretty nasty hit list if you're a Republican.

Grade: The ad attacking McDaniel is pretty standard fare. If McDaniel is going to claim purity, Cochran is going to push back. Okay. I like the point that McDaniel didn't want to support funding for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland, Ohio, but voted to give ten times more to the Grammy museum in Cleveland, Mississippi. Well, that's confusing. Anyway, the ad is nothing special, but makes a point. C

The Koch brothers are about to become even more famous, and that's a good thing

By Richard K. Barry

In yesterday's New York Times, writers Jeremy W. Peters and Carl Hulse note that Democrats have begun to attack the Koch brothers with a tactic they successfully used against Mitt Romney in the 2102 campaign. This is to say that they are attacking the "brothers' sprawling business conglomerate as callous and indifferent to the lives of ordinary people while pursuing profit and power. "

By drawing public attention to layoffs by subsidiaries of Koch Industries across the country — a chemical plant in North Carolina, an oil refinery in Alaska, a lumber operation in Arkansas — Democrats are seeking to make villains of the reclusive billionaires, whose political organizations have spent more than $30 million on ads so far to help Republicans win control of the Senate.

Obviously, the parallel with Romney is that he was effectively painted as a Mr. Burns-type far more concerned with his own bottom line than with the well-being of his employees.

Some Republicans are claiming that the approach won't work, that taking shots at the Koch brothers will deplete resources and energy Democrats would be smarter to use elsewhere, presumably in efforts to challenge actual candidates.

For example, Tim Phillips, head of Americans for Prosperity, a pro-Republican political advocacy group, says that "Mitt Romney was the candidate for president of the United States...That's the big difference. David Koch (one of the two brothers) isn't running for anything. This just points to what bad shape they're in."

Okay. That's an interesting perspective.  But many voters tend to see shadowy influences pulling the strings of elected officials. And though the Supreme Court may have equated money with speech, many Americans understand that money buys things it shouldn't be able or allowed to buy. In light of recent Supreme Court decisions, which will have the effect of pouring even more money into the electoral process, I would not be so sure the Koch brothers will be an ineffective target for Democratic attacks. 

Perhaps the most important feeling to be exploited in politics is the feeling of powerlessness. The right has, albeit illegitimately, created and then exploited a sense of powerless among certain elements of the electorate when it comes to Obamacare. 

In contrast to Tim Phillip's argument, the fact that the Koch brothers aren't running for anything, but working in the shadows, is what makes then so salient an image of corruption in the process, and powerlessness for the electorate. 

Release the hounds. 

Behind the Ad: Kingston, get a new campaign team!

By Richard K. Barry

Who: The Jack Kingston U.S. Senate campaign

Where: Georgia

What's going on: Kingston is an 11-term member of the U.S. House. He is running to replace retiring Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA). In this absolutely terrible ad, Kingston has hired an Obama impersonator to give him a fake phone call.

“Kingston, this is the president. You’ve got to back off Obamacare,” the fake Obama says as images of the president on the telephone flash on the screen. “Kingston, let me be clear: I do not want you in the Senate. Call me back, Kingston, please.”

After the fake Obama foolishness, Kingston comes on screen to say he would “never answer” a call to stop opposing Obamacare.

It could be a tight race for the GOP nomination in Georgia with businessman David Perdue currently leading Kingston, Reps. Paul Broun and Phil Gingrey and former Georgia secretary of State Karen Handel.

And with the daughter of former Democratic Sen. Sam Nunn Michelle Nunn as the presumptive Democratic nominee, no matter who the GOP picks, this one is likely to be in play.

Grade: This is ad is so stupid. It reminds me of a bunch of frat boys making prank phone calls late at night. You know, "do you have Prince Albert in a can?" Even Kingston's appearance at the end looks like he is oh-so-satisfied at this totally clever joke. And that line from the fake Obama saying "I do not want you in the Senate," is to make me weep. OMG. I'd give it a flat out F but for the fact that at least some Obama haters must have thought it was hilarious. D-

Can't anybody here play this game?

By Richard K. Barry

Last week I wrote about a clip of Rep. Bruce Braley, Democratic U.S. Senate candidate in Iowa, making disparaging comments about farmers. Just for fun I dug up a statistic provided by Iowa State University finding that "more than 20,000 people make their living each year as full-time employees on Iowa farms." Another fun fact is that farms make up 92 of Iowa's land.

You get the point.

Enter Georgia Republican Senate candidate David Perdue who thought it might be helpful to belittle the education level of his Democratic opponent.

"There's a high school graduate in this race, OK?" he said at one of his campaign headquarters. "I'm sorry, but these issues are so much broader, so complex."

The problem, as Matt Vasilogambos points out, is that he might have checked the state's education profile before he did that.

According to census statistics, only 27.8 percent of Georgians over age 25 hold a bachelor's degree or higher, while 84.4 percent have a high school diploma. For the 72.2 percent of Georgians without that college degree, Perdue's boast may tell them they're not smart enough for higher office.

The comment is certainly dickish, as was Braley's, but it's politically moronic.  Like I said (and Jimmy Breslin said first), can't anybody here play this game.

Here's a clip of Perdue's comment, if you haven't yet had a chance to cringe today.