John Faso just defied the expectations of many Republicans and got 61.2% of of the vote by delegates at the party convention for the New York State Governor’s race. That means that he will be the party’s designee on the Sept. 12 primary ballot. Being the party designee is usually a nominal honor, but it could be consequential this year. This might bring Faso more money, media attention and endorsements, all of which is likely to fracture the Republicans before November. Spitzer had some $19 million dollars to spend as opposed to a combined $3 million by both Weld and Faso in January.

Story on Democratic Convention Story on Republican Convention

Also, later today there will be an interesting battle for the nomination on who will oppose Hiliary.

Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-RI) has promised to vote “no” on the Alito nomination, according to the Washington Times today. He’ll vote today to end the Democratic filibuster and eventually won’t support Alito’s nomination in the up-or-down vote. This is probably a safe bet for Chafee given the outrage in (blue) Rhode Island that could erupt if he voted yes… but it will only prove safe if he can make it through the GOP primaries this fall.

His GOP challenger, former mayer of Cranston, RI, Steve Laffey, and Dem challenger Matt Brown, have each levied attacks on Linc for being a “flip-flopper”: Laffey said that Linc has an “inability to make a firm decision, which once again made him irrelevant to the process in the Senate.” As a very conservative Republican, Laffey’s future prospects in the Senate seem especially irrelevant. On the other hand, if Laffey can wrest the GOP nomination away from Chafee because of local Republican disillusionment with Chafee’s moderate voting record (National Journal says his social policy votes are more liberal than 60% of Senators).

If the “no” vote against Alito does hand Laffey the GOP nod this fall, it “could kill the GOP’s chance of holding a seat in liberal Rhode Island,” because a Laffey candidacy would almost certainly be too conservative to win in Rhode Island.

ABC News’ The Note has two leaked strategy memos, one from each party. In my optimism, I read through them expecting something big. Lo! and behold, here it is! From the Democratic leak:

Third, pound the ball on the ground by showing that it is Democrats who will stand up for the truth and move us forward: Let’s stand for something that actually matters to people in a way that will brand the party as truly being the party of reform for the middle class. We need to appreciate that we are not in power and have no obligation to put out proposals that can be immediately implemented. Let’s keep it simple and identify three truly BIG ideas that will communicate to voters that we actually want to do something to make their lives better. Here is a halftime snack of a pu-pu platter of ideas to choose from: let’s have tax reform that eliminates taxes for those making $50,000 or less and reduce forms to one page (front and back); let’s clean up Congress by putting in place actual term limits; let’s immediately impose sanctions on Iran and keep all options on the table; let’s have an energy plan that makes the U.S. independent from the Middle East in ten years; let’s have a sin tax on the porn industry that pays for college for every kid in America that gets a B average; let’s create a string of high tech universities and colleges to meet the challenges of the flat world; let’s establish a national 401(k) (thanks, Gene).

Those are brilliant! Brilliant, I say! And when was the last time you heard anything of similar value and innovation from either party? If the Democrats ever put forth ideas like these seriously and on a national scale, I’ll walk through fire to keep the party in power.

“Sin tax”? It’s a little judgmental, and I’m not sure I’m thrilled about the First Amendment implications of such subjective law, but it’ll play like football in the Red States, and I’ll confess that on balance I actually like the idea.

Term limits? High quality education commensurate with a Thomas L. Friedman reference?

Sign me up.

This is huge, over from Black Box Voting Forums. A test election held in Florida allowed hackers to completley change the election requiring only the same kind of access needed by volunteer poll workers all over the country

.Finnish security expert Harri Hursti, together with Black Box Voting, demonstrated that Diebold made misrepresentations to Secretaries of State across the nation when Diebold claimed votes could not be changed on the “memory card” (the credit-card-sized ballot box used by computerized voting machines. A test election was run in Leon County on Tuesday with a total of eight ballots. Six ballots voted “no” on a ballot question as to whether Diebold voting machines can be hacked or not. Two ballots, cast by Dr. Herbert Thompson and by Harri Hursti voted “yes” indicating a belief that the Diebold machines could be hacked. At the beginning of the test election the memory card programmed by Harri Hursti was inserted into an Optical Scan Diebold voting machine. A “zero report” was run indicating zero votes on the memory card. In fact, however, Hursti had pre-loaded the memory card with plus and minus votes. The eight ballots were run through the optical scan machine. The standard Diebold-supplied “ender card” was run through as is normal procedure ending the election. A results tape was run from the voting machine. Correct results should have been: Yes:2 ; No:6 However, just as Hursti had planned, the results tape read: Yes:7 ; No:1

Time to dump these machines.

India, a nation of one billion, was able to hold an election using electronic voting. And by saying an election, I should remind you that it was an earthquake of an election leading to many changes and surprises, and because of the system they set up, none of the players questioned it. There were no complains of fraud or lost votes, no there was confidence. Is it that American’s just don’t trust anyone, or is it something bigger that the people we trust can’t be trusted.

The chief executive officer of electronic voting company Diebold who once famously declared that he would “deliver” Ohio for President Bush has resigned effective immediately, RAW STORY has learned. “The board of directors and Wally mutually agreed that his decision to resign at this time for personal reasons was in the best interest of all parties,” the company’s new chairman said in a statement.

This comes after rumors of possible fraud charges being bought against O’Dell and Diebold. Additionally after a GAO report that listed the possible ways in which the current electronic voting system could be tampered with. truthout provides an analysis of the report and some of its more disturbing findings.

The Brad Blog has excellent coverage over the resignation and imminent legal woes to face the company and O’Dell.

But back to India. The land of tech support was able to get electronic voting right, and yet we in America can’t demand or perhaps our leaders in Congress don’t think we deserve the same security. How can a nation of one billion have a better system of election than America? Back in February of 2004 the BBC put together an article explaining the Indian voting system. They even had a redundant back up system, something that our nation refuses to adopt, one can only be left asking why.

According to a release sent to The Raw Story Bush’s numbers have fallen even lower in the latest Newsweek Poll.

58 percent of Americans disapprove of the president’s handling of his job-a five-point decrease in approval since the September 29-30 Newsweek Poll. On the topic of how Bush is handling certain aspects of his job, 60 percent of those polled disapprove of the way he is handling the economy, 32 percent approve. Seventy-three percent disapprove of Bush’s handling of oil prices, 20 percent approve.

The poll has more troubling results, on the question of the direction of the country, Bush is doing even worse:

Sixty-eight percent of Americans are dissatisfied with the way things are going in the United States at this time, a seven-point drop in satisfaction since the last Newsweek Poll. Only 26 percent are satisfied.

And of course not to ignore Plamegate, the latest polling on Cheney isn’t too good either:

Fifty-two percent of Americans believe that Cheney was part of a cover up to try to prevent the special prosecutor from getting the truth about who leaked CIA agent Valerie Plame’s name to the news media, 27 percent do not believe he was involved.

And regarding the actions of Cheney and the White House Iraq Group and the reasons we are now at war:

When asked if the vice president deliberately misused or manipulated pre-war intelligence about Iraq’s nuclear capabilities in order to build support for war with Iraq-52 percent say he misused intelligence, 33 percent say he did not. Overall, 65 percent of Americans disapprove of Bush’s handling of the situation in Iraq, only 32 percent approve according to the latest Newsweek Poll.

Does anyone else remember when Bush called a 2% victory a mandate? Well what does he consider the last couple of months, sure looks like a whole different mandate to me. While Bush goes on political stunts yesterday during Veterans Day in a way to try to regain support the American people are seeing right through it. He’s exhausted all of his special backdrops, is manufactured media events, this President, his party, and his Congress have been weakened to new heights. In the coming months, and I expect shortly before or after the President’s last State of the Union before mid-term elections we will see a new Democratic plan for the country, and it’s time to put it into play.

If it’s one thing we would expect the Republican leadership to agree on it would be spending cuts. Republicans love spending cuts, cut spending, cut taxes, let the chips fall where they may, and now RawStory is reporting they can’t find enough votes to pass their own budget in the House. It seems though that this ins’t their only shortcoming, in fact it appears as though the GOP leadership besieged with scandals, corruption, and low public opinion, is falling apart at the seems. Yesterday over on DailyKos we read that the GOP has dropped plans to drill in ANWR. I mean I think it’s more than fair for us to look at this and ask what in the hell is going on. They control both houses and the White House, they’ve been wanting to drill in ANWR for years, and have been waiting for a chance to cut spending, all of their dreams are coming true, and they still can’t make things happen.

On the ANWR story:

Republican leaders in the U.S. House of Representatives abandoned, at least temporarily, a drive to open Alaska’s National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling after concluding on Wednesday the initiative was threatening passage of a huge bill to cut spending. “ANWR and OCS will be out” of the legislation, said House Budget Committee Chairman Jim Nussle, an Iowa Republican. Besides the Alaska oil drilling initiative, the House spending-reduction bill had also called for opening outer-continental shelf, or offshore areas, to oil and gas drilling.

Let’s recall that drilling in Alaska was a major campaign goal of Bush in his energy policy and now it appears as though it won’t be happening for some time.

That’s not all however. According to Republican Senator Charles Grassley from Iowa, Social Security Reform is not only off the table for this Congress, but also the next, and won’t be revisited until the next Presidential election.

Not taking into account Democratic opposition, Republican members of the Senate Finance Committee have not been able to reach an agreement on proposed changes. Grassley said he will try to get his fellow committee members to act sooner than 2009, but those efforts may be hampered by next year’s Congressional elections. “I’m pessimistic that it could come up before 2009,” Grassley said. “Doesn’t mean that I won’t try to bring it up before 2009.”

So we have a budget, energy, and now as we all knew Social Security all falling behind, not to mention approval ratings that don’t break 40%. This president is in serious trouble, and his Congress isn’t doing anything to help.

But then comes the bigger question, can we as Democrats offer a positive plan for America for the mid-term elections in 2006. One year away the media is already harping on this, we should be clear the “Contract with America” wasn’t born until six weeks before the midterms in 1994. However, and in some ways unfortunately, because they did it, the expectations gap is on the Democrats now to come out with a plan for the midterms and by the first of the new year I imagine. The question is can Reid with all of the excellent work he’s been doing to draw attention to the administrations failures, come up with a strategy to convince the American people that we will do better.

The Hotline has been reporting today that in most polls Corzine is leading in the race for Governor, and any momentum Forrester appeared to have in October seems to have come to a screeching halt. Which brings back what has been my favorite topic to debate recently, who Corzine should/would pick to fill his seat upon taking office as the Governor? Early on I suggested Codey and have largely stuck by that for a number of reasons, additionally in the running are Representatives Holt and Menendez.

Menendez appears to be an early favorite, he has lobbied hard for Corzine during this entire race, and has been filling his campaign coffers. In last quarter’s report, ending September 30th, Menendez has this year raised about $3.3 million, and has near $4.1 million in cash on hand. A friend of mine who worked for Menendez over the summer stopped into his congressional office back in September as the end of the quarter results were coming in. According to him everyone in the office seemed really positive, the over all impression was that Menendez is going to be Corzine’s pick, and they have the money to show the DSCC that they can raise. Also keep in mind that national Democrats like Menendez, a lot, he’s currently the caucus chair in the House and often seen as an up and coming star in the party. Additionally Menendez comes from a safe district, one that party Democrats would not mind putting into contention in 2006 since they should be able to easily win it back, Menendez has held his seat since 1992.

The other often floated name is Rush Holt. Holt is perhaps best known for the campaign sticker that reads “My Congressman is a Rocket Scientist”. Holt has a great record and is well respected in New Jersey and by the party, but he has a few stumbling blocks if he were to be picked for Senate. First, his district is the home of Republican candidate for Governor Doug Forrester, and is anything but safe. In a year where keeping the seats we have and building upon them is important, I imagine there will be intense lobbying from national Democrats for Holt to stay put, and wait his turn, when Lautenberg retires again. Additionally, Holt is made all the more unattractive because in comparison to Menendez he can’t raise money nearly as well. At the end of the last quarter, Holt has raised only $440,553, and his cash on hand totals only $400,677. With two strikes against him Senator Schumer and the DSCC would probably rather him not run. However, there’s often speculation in the op-ed pages that Corzine may choose Holt because of his reserved style, similar to his own. However, true as that may be, this choice will probably in large part be dictated by what Schumer wants as well, after all with everything going on we need to put our best feet forward for 2006.

So why Codey? Why should Corzine pick the man who was once only the state’s Senate President and claims to want nothing more? A lot of reasons, frankly. First, the benefits to Corzine are pretty clear. Codey is hugely popular in New Jersey, entering office after McGreevy and being in the same party still able to restore trust in the Governor’s office. Codey has managed to work positively for New Jersey and gain huge support from the people. The Newark Star Ledger in an Op-Ed on Sunday in which they endorsed Forrester said:

Like many of you, we’ve come away from this gubernatorial campaign with little affection for either candidate. Candidly, we’d rather vote for acting Gov. Richard Codey and call it a day.

People believe that Codey would be better suited to stop corruption, and think Corzine will have a tough time dealing with the party machines, also revealed in that endorsement. Codey’s popularity would make him a key force to be dealt with if he returns to the NJ legislature, and Corzine would rather not have someone contesting him in the state for popularity and power.

Earlier this year Codey was forced to step a side for Corzine in the 2005 run for the party’s nomination for governor. Corzine, who funded himself, simply had more money and more resources than Codey could match at the time. Additionally, I speculate that Codey knew he had the popularity to raise the money if necessary, and use the podium of the governor for the same, but Codey must’ve made some kind of deal with Corzine to step aside. It’s worth noting that until recently Codey also remained silent in support for Corzine during the campaign, after recent talks however, Codey has been on the trail supporting the Democrat for office.

Finally, the Democrats realize just how popular he is it’d be a way to keep a senate seat that will be contested by a formidable Republican, Tom Kean Jr., and keeps all of New Jersey’s democratically held House seats safe. According to the Hotline,

At a recent event, Codey says DSCC chair Chuck Schumer (D-NY) pulled him aside to whisper in his ear: “The most popular one always becomes the candidate.”

It appears as though the ball is very much in Codey’s court, and I predict he will be the first name called by Governor Corzine if he wins the election. Corzine would be repaying Codey for his help, getting a political opponent out of the state, and not be forced to make a king between other candidates who have expressed great interest; much of Codey’s appeal after all is his humility. We’ll soon find out, but as I’ve said, don’t be surprised to see Senator Richard Codey coming to DC soon.

Bob Taft, the governor of Ohio, has plead no contest to breaking state ethics laws. Even by democrats there appears to be few calls for him to resign or be impeached. It appears that he will serve out the remainder of his term despite these actions. I’m not sure how the people of Ohio think- but I’ll wager that in NJ there might be come call for our governor to resign if he was convicted of a crime while in office.

I am not sure thought that his is the motivation of the Dems in Ohio; I think it may be fear toward angering the swing voters, so the strategy is to allow the guilty verdict to speak for itself. However, I am not foreign to the benefits of him staying in office. If Taft resigned, a new governor with a (presumably) cleaner record would take over. However, now Democrats face a scandal that can be used to our advantage in the Ohio state elections, especially in what appears to be a larger GOP scandal that I do not really understand. I think that there should be a lot of talk from the Ohio Dems about this scandal; it should be constantly spoken about. This, without a call for resignation may allow for the Dems to be in the best position possible next year for state and house races. Overall, a careful strategy pointing out faults and scandal without upsetting swing voters will put Ohio more in play.

One could argue that we should have an impeachment trial that will bring up everything we want and allows for more potential. Considering our recent success in Ohio, how crucial that state was in 2004 and how its dynamic is changing, we should put our gamble on a more aggressive stance. I am just not sure it gains us anything. If Taft resigns or is removed from office we get a cleaner Republican who will turn around and run for governor. If we just continually bring up the corruption, we gain all that without the formality of a trial that will alienate some voters. I think what we need is a democrat primary race that is not very bloody— that gets a unified democratic candidate quickly. Then we can turn around and fight a state GOP that is floundering in its own corruption headed by a convicted criminal.

This one comes from dKos, apparently Reid says we will not target a Republican running for Senate in Nevada, obviously he’s not running for Reid’s seat. From the story:

I think there’s no way any GOPer in Reid’s position would show him the same sort of courtesy. I feel like we’ve been exposed to this lesson countless time over the past 5 years, so why haven’t we learned it? Mary Landrieu, Max Cleland, etc., etc. Moreover, at most, the GOP will go easy on Reid and Reid alone when he’s up for re-election (which, in any event, isn’t until 2010). Look, I like the job Reid has been doing - I think he’s held the caucus together pretty well, and he’s certainly been a damn sight better than Tom Daschle. But if he’s looking to save his hide at the expense of giving up a chance to knock off a vulnerable Republican, then I’ve got a problem with that.

I agree with DavidNYC’s points, except that, and perhaps a reader could show me otherwise, I personally believe part of not heavily targeting Nevada may have something to do with the lack of a strong Democratic candidate in NV. Reid with the DSCC has a tough job ahead, trying to defend three open seats and build a larger caucus, I think he’s right to say we can’t squander resources on every race just because the person is weakened, we have to have a strong Democrat challenger to run as well.

Our focus in 2006 is defense and gaining as many seats as we can, and in each instance we need to make sure our candidate is a strong contrast to the Republican nominee, and clean, because ideally we’re going to be pumping lots of nationally raised money into campaigns as they need them. We need to make sure these candidates have a fighting chance, before we invest the kind of time and energy required to win a Senate race. If we were in the majority, I’d be in total agreement with DavidNYC, but we’re not, and we need to pick our battles very carefully.