I am a Democrat who would like to run for Senate in 2020. I believe in the promise of America, the ability to dream things that never were and ask 'Why Not?' I know that together we can make progress and bring peace and prosperity to America.
I first want to report that I'll be live blogging/tweeting the Virginia Governors Race Primary in much the same fashion as I covered the special election in NY-20. I'll have the twitter tags, campaign messages and other input available here. You can sign up for an email reminder at this link.
Currently, the campaigns are all trying out any tactic they can to help secure a few critical votes. Top Democratic leaders from around the country are flocking to Virginia to help Terry McAuliffe, while Deeds is latching on to his rising poll numbers and Moran is working the online angle pretty intensely. But the real story is no one has any idea what'll happen.
Estimates of voter turnout range from a couple hundred thousand to more than two million and it's impossible to know anything without a more solid count of voter turnout. It might end up that turnout in the politically attuned Northern Counties is greater than those in the less politically inclined Southern Counties but who knows? One thing is certain, the campaigns will be busy selling their story until Tuesday and through polls closing on Tuesday.
The Washington Post probably says it best when they write: "Recent public polls have shown all three candidates bunched within the margin of error. But the dynamic in the final days has McAuliffe, who had more resources and the early poll lead but no elective experience, fending off a late surge by Deeds, whose candidacy was boosted by the endorsement of the editorial page of this newspaper."
We'll have to wait and see what happens...
Natch Greyes is a Democrat running for Senate in 2020. His campaign platform may be found at natchgreyes.com more of his writing may be found here.
'Is Sotomayor Catholic?' was the headline I read first today. And I have to say that it's a fair question. If she's appointed she'll be the 6th Catholic sitting on a 9 person Court. The question being ignited now is how will her religion affect her stance on abortion and in particular Roe v. Wade.
Research into her decisions has not shown whether she'll support the precedent of Roe v. Wade or not. While I'm inclined to think that President Obama would have asked these questions ahead of nominating her given his track record on nominations I'm not convinced that he did get the right assurances. Although, if things follow precedent we need only worry about whether she paid her taxes or not.
"Next up: Expect her nomination to re-ignite the ongoing Catholic blogosphere wars over who is Catholic enough. If confirmed, Sotomayor, who grew up in Catholic schools in the Bronx, would be the sixth Catholic on the high court. It may be that her life experiences will align her with the social justice issues pushed by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops on race, poverty, immigration and economic issues. But for some outspoken Catholics, the 'life' issues -- abortion, family planning, so-called 'conscience clauses' for health workers, embryonic stem cell research and end-of-life choices -- are the litmus test."
How serious is the debate going to be over Sotomayor's position on abortion? The New York Times reports: "In a letter, Nancy Keenan, president of Naral Pro-Choice America, urged supporters to press senators to demand that Judge Sotomayor reveal her views on privacy rights before any confirmation vote." Further, Robert Gibbs' response was worrisome yesterday when asked about Obama discussing abortion with Sotomayor. Gibbs said Obama "did not ask that specifically," meaning Obama may not know Sotomayor's opinion on abortion.
Ironically, "as president, Mr. Obama has sought to avoid being drawn into the culture wars of the last several decades and has encouraged each side in the abortion debate to be respectful of the other's opinions. " Unfortunately for President Obama nominating Sotomayor opened this, the most divisive issue in American politics, and, if he doesn't handle it carefully it'll severely taint his Presidency.
The thing I find most ironic about this debate is that if it is revealed that Sotomayor will follow in the traditional Catholic path (pro-choice without exception) then her confirmation will, undoubtedly, be reversed, with many Democrats against her and many Republicans for her.
Liberty University's administration has revoked recognition of the campus Democrats but not, I might add, the campus Republicans. Why? According to their official statement: "we are unable to lend support to a club whose parent organization stands against the moral principles held by [the university]."
The Washington Post reports that the 30-member campus Democrats were formed in October and worked to elect President Obama. The larger campus Republicans have existed on campus for several years and were unaffected by this change in policy. I need not emphasize that this is not the same as Brigham Young University-Idaho which dissolved both clubs, something which can be legitimately promoted. Dissolving one or the other without student consent is most definitely sponsoring anti-American sentiment.
Ben Smith adds: "Part of [vice president for student affairs Mark] Hine's e-mail said, "The Democratic Party platform is contrary to the mission of Liberty University and to Christian doctrine (supports abortion, federal funding of abortion, advocates repeal of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, promotes the "LGBT" agenda, hate crimes, which include sexual orientation and gender identity, socialism, etc.)"
So, basically, "His bottom line was, `You can't be a Democrat and be a Christian and be a university representative.'" Umm...yeah, so, as far as I understand the self-proclaimed "fundamentalist Baptist university" suddenly has a problem with Christian Democrats. See, that's a problem, especially considering many elected Democrats are Christian.
Even though Hine claims that this is not a blatent violation of free speech (and American Principles) it's clear that, unlike someone who follows the Constitution, he is not like Voltare and will not defend to the death your right to say something.
Clearly, there is something wrong at with the administration at Liberty University and I urge you (bloggers, news writers, etc) to keep up the pressure to get them to reverse course on this matter.
I received this in an email and decided to do as requested and post it online:
As far as anyone knows Mark Hine, Vice President of Student Affairs, is in charge of this fiasco. You can contact Liberty University to tell them what you think via:
Liberty University
1971 University Boulevard
Lynchburg, Virginia 24502
or
University Switchboard
(434) 582-2000
or
email Mark Hine
{The contact information above has been confirmed as accurate except for Mark Hine's email address. One of my readers noted that his email bounced when writing to Mark Hine and thoughtfully told me. I haven't tried emailing Hine so I cannot corroborate this information. Further, I want to ask that if you call Liberty University you should be nice to the person (undoubtedly a student) who picks up the line s/he is probably just as frustrated as you are}.
It's the 100th Day of Obama's Administration. It's pretty clear that the GOP is gearing up for a fight in 2012, but it's also clear that the GOP is splintering into factions. And considering that Obama will certainly be the Democratic nominee for 2012 I'd like to take this time to examine our current (Democratic) Party and point out from where some of the next crop of leaders, including those who might run for President in 2016, are going to come.
Hillary Clinton - The Wall Street Journal had this to say today: "Though she resigned her Senate post in January, her Senate campaign committee will remain in existence and hold onto her presidential mailing list for possible use in the future, said a spokeswoman for Mrs. Clinton's political committees. She declined to be more specific.
Mrs. Clinton hasn't spoken about returning to electoral politics, although retaining a campaign operation could make it easier. The Clinton committees' spokeswoman said that Mrs. Clinton, as secretary of state, doesn't engage in political activity."
What the retention of that list means is anyone's guess but, whether fortunate or not, Hillary's political fortunes are tied to Obama's.
If we discount Hillary, Biden, and the rest of the Cabinet we can turn to look at those states which both have Democrats who show promise and/or states which have been, in the past, politically powerful.
Alaska - Best known as the state that spawned Palin, I think that its Senator Begich might have a shot in 2012. While it's no secret that Palin wants a rematch between Stevens and Begich it's possible Palin wants to run for the Senate. While this won't necessarily take place against Begich it would significantly raise his profile if he could beat off a Senate run by Palin. But without that it's not likely Begich is going to get ahead.
California - 55 electoral votes, the keystone to Democrats winning the Presidency, the birth place of Nixon and Governorship of Reagan and the Speakership of Pelosi. California is a major player in politics. Pelosi is off the list for obvious reasons. While it's not likely either Senators Feinstein or Boxer will run for President it's possible the next (Democratic) Governor might. Obviously, that will depend on who becomes Governor in 2010 but it is possible that person will become a major contender.
Illinois - We just got a President from Illinois and with the whole Burris debacle it's looking unlikely that Illinois' Democrats will be able to shake the implications of a long drawn out corruption investigation.
Iowa - Governor Culver might try a run but, if Republicans are to be believed, he's currently losing approval rapidly. I'm not sure that Iowa has a potential Democratic Presidential Nominee.
New Hampshire - Given (fictional) Jed Bartlet's run and the fact that it's the first primary New Hampshire has some real weight. I'm betting that if Congressman Hodes becomes Senator Hodes in 2010 he might weigh a Presidential run in 2016, though that's a long shot. Senator Shaheen really doesn't seem to have the visibility but she too could weigh a run (though she'd probably have to fight off Sununu a second time before then). Governor Lynch, meanwhile, is tied up with domestic issues which will alienate certain members of the party no matter what he does.
New Mexico - This state and all political players in it are dead in the water. This Democratically controlled state is far too corrupt for anyone to give its politicians serious thought in the primaries (as we saw with Governor Richardson this past election).
New York - Patterson is done but Attorney General Cuomo could pull a Bill Clinton. Cuomo's got the polls and, if he became Governor, he could easily shore up the support of New Jersey and Connecticut alongside New York in the Primaries.
North Carolina - Senator Hagan, having defeated Elizabeth Dole, wife of former Republican Presidential Nominee Bob Dole, in 2008 may be a contender in 2016. She's certainly got the campaign experience.
Pennsylvania - While Senator Specter's off the list and no one knows Sen. Casey its possible Ed Rendell wants to run for higher office. I don't like him and I don't think he'll have the early support of Democratic bloggers and news makers and, subsequently, won't have a good showing in early Caucuses and Primaries, particularly in Iowa but New Hampshire will be a problem as well. I think that Pennsylvania is out as far as Democratic Presidential Nominee in 2012.
Those are my thoughts on 2016 right now. They'll develop more as new political actors enter the scene and old players leave. I think I've covered all the bases but anyone care to share their thoughts?
In short, sites like DailyKos and FireDogLake want more advertising from the Democrats (DNC) in exchange for continued support. Up until now bloggers have supported the Democrats with minimal revenue from the party advertising. The bigger blogs want a larger slice of the pie:
I've been writing about Election 2010 since November and I know it's still early but I've decided to start declaring my support for some candidates who I think have what it takes to solve to real problems that real Americans face.
My first endorsement is for one of the most prominent equal rights activist of our time, Gavin Newsom.
The man has guts. So far this young, energetic Mayor of San Francisco has defied State Law to Do the Right Thing (promote equal rights) and been at the forefront of more Progressive Issues than any other politician in America. He's implemented a successful Universal Health Care program in San Francisco, made the streets safer and, importantly, led San Francisco in integrating Biotechnology and 'Green Tech' jobs into the city.
It doesn't hurt that the man just looks the part.
Gavin Newsom challenged the city to be greener and followed through on the challenge, whether that is through planting trees or installing more efficient lighting. That commitment to setting high standards and exceeding them will make Mayor Newsom a great Governor Newsom.
I think that Newsom has what it takes to be Governor and I proudly support his effort. But if you don't believe me you can watch his commitment to new and innovative ideas to solving difficult and complex problems on his YouTube page.
If you'd like to see this entry with pictures please click here.
Natch Greyes is a Democrat running for Senate in 2020. His campaign platform may be found at natchgreyes.com & his political opinions may be found on his Blog
The Recession does have some good aspects, its making people think twice about putting (irrational) belief before economic reality. The simple fact is: "Same-sex couples marrying in Iowa would boost the state budget by $5.3 million per year." Yeah, that's not just some number I pulled out of thin air, that's what UCLA Law School's Williams Institute estimates.
Also, according to the Williams Institute "approximately 2,917 of Iowa's same-sex couples would marry in the first three years." What does that mean? Well, since married couples are in the minority and Conservatives always argue for 'family values' wouldn't it make sense that they should support the creation of families to perpetuate family values?
It would, but, undoubtedly, Conservatives will rally against this advancement in equality. I don't doubt that before the April 24th date allowing gays everyone to marry Conservatives will attempt to rally support for some sort of amendment to the Iowa Constitution. But there is good news for equal rights advocates everywhere: "An amendment banning gay marriage would need to be approved by two consecutive legislative sessions (the 2009/2010 session and the 2010/2011 session) before going to the public in a general-election referendum. So, the earliest Iowa voters would be able to weigh in on this issue would be in November 2011."
Also, Iowa Public Radio this morning, apparently, quoted legislative leaders who said there is no time to consider an amendment to marriage this year so that November 2011 date is more likely to be November 2012, plenty of time to get the majority of Iowans to support gay marriage equal rights.
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">Natch Greyes</span> is a Democrat running for Senate in 2020. His campaign platform may be found at natchgreyes.com
Florida's going to keep a Republican Senator in 2010 if this "rumor" is correct. As of four days ago Governor Crist's approval rating was 73%, that's probably the highest of any politician in the nation and certainly higher than any Republican. (Obama's is 62% for comparison).
Crist "all but admitted" he was mulling over a bid. Oh yeah, rumors also have it that Martinez will retire before 2010, allowing Crist, as designated successor, to appoint himself. Of course, he's officially said he will arrive at a decision in May but, as we know, a week is a long time in politics and a few months is nearly a lifetime. He's already smoozing up Washington so I seriously doubt that he will not run.
If Crist enters the race we (Democrats) need not even field a candidate. That guy's a rockstar. I have no doubt that he'd win in 2010. End of story.
Natch Greyes is a Democrat running for Senate in 2020. His campaign platform may be found at natchgreyes.com and his blog may be read at natchgreyes.blogspot.com
