2010 US Presidential Election

[Westbrook]

Dave Dernazza
The Mix

Senate Line

Dropping Off: Pennsylvania.
Coming On: Georgia.

Bubbling Under: California, Maryland, Florida, Colorado, Michigan.


10. Georgia. Suddenly this seat is in play in a big way. Max Lobell the 3rd (Grandson of the much-beloved senior Senator) is running hard against incumbent Grace Hardin. His family name and ascertations that Hardin is a "liberal wolf in moderate sheep's clothing" is very funny, and he's been in control of his own media narrative to an incredible degree. Hardin isn't giving up, and is slamming the Lobells for nepotism, but that doesn't seem to be working at the moment. Democrats may have to inject some national cash into the race to save Hardin, but with so many other opportunities and vulnerabilities all over the map, can they do it?

9. New York. Michael Daschowitz has rebounded slightly in the newest poll, up 2 points. That gives him a tenous 5 point lead on Jay Cruger. This can be attributed to Daschowitz's support of a Department of Homeland Security, which Cruger has been reluctant to endorse. This has allowed Daschowitz to hit Cruger on national security, and the voters seem to be responding. A Democrat attacking a Republican on being soft on national security, and getting away with it? This is a weird election!

8. Indiana. Frank Barkley increasingly looks like he's lost his way. Ray Petersen has immediately opened up with both barrels, hitting Barkley on everything. Meanwhile, Damon Matteo continues to run a solid campaign, and got a big boost when the entire Indiana delegation, as well as retiring Senator Martin Warren and still-popular former Governor Jack Buckland all publicly endorsed him. Both candidates will be visited by prominent national figures-Vice President Tripplehorn is coming to campaign for Matteo this Sunday, and Senator Cody Riley is scheduled to stump for Barkley in October. This looks to be closer and closer.

7. Ohio. I'm leaving this where it is, simply because I have no other idea of where to put it. The revelation of Hayden Straus' college thesis and his recent statement that "I'm a Socialist" has given Caroline McIntosh new life, and Republicans a new angle. They're going to make "Socialist" the only campaign ad, and run it endlessly (A loop if they have to) until Election Day. It's the electoral equivalent of throwing spaghetti against the wall and hoping it sticks. Straus has been continuing his fairy positive campaigning, but suddenly his campaign doesn't look so assured.

6. North Carolina. A bad week for David McNamara and a good one for Brett Logan moves this up the board. McNamara got old, bad memories dragged up by the appearance of his former chief of staff and mistress Joy Lawrence on a local talk show. She was there to promote a book, which many in the McNamara campaign are looking forward to with all the joy of going to the dentist. Meanwhile, President Santos officially endorsed Logan, giving him a big boost (Santos is oddly popular in the Carolinas). The race is back even, with Logan at 46% and McNamara at 44%. McNamara's infidelities being brought back into the light will help Logan, but he needs to not make the mistake of focusing entirely on them again.

5. Minnesota. Jack Hunter continues to impress the people of the North Star state-In a recent poll which asked, "Who would be the more competent Senator?" 57% said Hunter. Congressman Jarod Daniels hasn't given up, but Hunter has slowly pulled away, making it look like Minnesotans are ready to give Republicanism a try.

4. New Hampshire. Scott Larkin and Mitch Lockley were officially named the nominees of their party on the 14th of September. Ummm…..Yay? The race hasn't changed much, and Larkin's Bartlet-inspired bump in the polls hasn't diminished. The Walken campaign hasn't seemed to pay a lot of attention to New Hampshire, oddly enough.

3. Missouri. Again, this race hasn't changed. Laura Shallick still leads Ken Oliom by a massive margin, and there are rumors that Oliom has essentially decided to forfeit.

2. Connecticut. Chris Casey's opened a 21-point lead against Ruth McAdam, and looks to be the next Senator from Connecticut easy. But I will say that it is interesting that the top 2 Democratic takeover opportunities are in the Northeast, while the two 2 GOP takeovers are in the Mountain West and Midwest. Signs of a growing ideological division?

1. Utah. John Degbie is done. The only way Marc Elderton could lose is if he robbed a bank live on national TV, drop-kicked a kitten, and then spit on the American flag. And even then, I'm pretty sure that Elderton could still manage to pull out a win.

 

[Marky Bunny]

BBC.CO.UK/News

Wednesday September 22nd 2010

Corbett "We will work togther with whoever gets the biggest mandate"

Liberal Democrat Leader Richard Corbett told his party conference today in Brighton that he would he been prepared "to work togther with whoever gets the biggest mandate" in the event of a hung Parliament, at the General Election which is expected to be held in the spring.
"We are a serious party, we are ready to govern, we will listern to any party in the event that the result of the next election is not decisive".
He said that he his party would fight both main parties "The Tories may have changed there leader but they have not changed much in policy as far as I can see".
He attacked the Labour government "Prime-Minister Green has failed. He has raised taxes, increased spending, but failed. We have a record deficit and we have to be prepared to deal with it".

 

[Westbrook]

The current Senate makeup is 54-44-1 (I like to think Gillette is adopting the Progressive Alliance into his own political party for future use...).

...

There's something wrong with this image, but I don't know where. The House count should be 217-217 with 1 Vacancy (215 Republicans, 215 Democrats, 4 Independents, a majority in name only!). I keep counting around 212 or 211 Democrats. I must've messed up some colors somewhere, as it's not like that in the lists I based it off of. Stay tuned as I try to fix this in the next few days (debate stuff'll take precedence). I'm pretty sure the crowd doing the 535's aren't trying to sneak in Republicans on me.

Tim, I've been running off the list that you made up on page 116. The only thing I've changed is maybe a name or two, and I've changed 1 or 2 people to a different district but in the same state. That's pretty much it.

 

[Westbrook]

Is the Republican Party Becoming More Inclusive?
by Jennifer Turner


The Democratic Party has always billed itself as a more inclusive, moderate, accepting party, and for the longest time, the Republican Party was that of the rich white man. But lately, for whatever reason, the GOP has included quite a few high-profile individuals who seem to be broadcasting the message that Republicans are becoming more Lincoln than Reagan.

Here's a few of the more prominent individuals.

Senator Liz Clark of Texas.
Clark is a fairly typical Republican. But the fact that the Republicans nominated a woman while Democrats, who have long been considered the party of women's rights,didn't....Well, that has to rankle.
"Liz Clark doesn't have the same views as a lot of women, doesn't speak for women's rights," said a high-ranking source at the Women's Leadership Council. "But the visuals are what are going to bring a lot of attention, and the simple fact that Clark has been nominated makes the party look better."

Congressman Matthew Skinner of Vermont.
The phrase "gay Republican" is quite an oxymoron in itself, or at least it was until Matt Skinner came along. Not only did he run in the Presidential race, the fact that he wasn't laughed out of the building is a sign of progress. Though the likes of Wes Burke, Mary Marsh, Edward Pratt and Libby Lassiter attacked Skinner, many of the candidates avoided conversations on his sexuality, and GlenAllen Walken himself said that Skinner's sexuality didn't matter. Skinner was even considered for Vice President, but I'm not sure that the party and the country, however accepting, are ready for that yet. But Skinner is running for the Senate, and will be the first openly gay man to join that body if he wins.

Governor Marcus Blakemore of Michigan, Governor Eric Swenson of Florida and Jay Cruger of New York.
Two of these men are running for the United States Senate, and look like they will win, while the 3rd ran for President, and could have won.
Swenson is polling ahead in his Senatorial race, while Cruger is only 5 points behind at most. If elected, they would be only the 4th and 5th black Senators in history, and the total number of African-American Senators would rise to 4, the highest number in the nation's history.
Blakemore, meanwhile, could have been President except for his assassination attempt (By a very misguided man), and would have been an excellent VP nominee. With his expertise on national security, he would be excellent in a Walken Administration.

Governor Andrew Wu of North Carolina.
Wu was considered for Vice President under any nominee, and is one of the most popular Governors in the nation. While Wu has faced heavy hits from former Carolina Panther Brett Cullner, and has been embroiled in a tough race, many expect him to survive, and begin building a national career.

The fact that the Republicans have managed to recruit and promote Clark, Skinner, Blakemore, Swenson, Cruger and Wu gives hope to high-ranking Republicans. Mack McKinlay, the Chairman of the Republican National Committee, has said that "we need more people like Matt Skinner and Marcus Blakemore." The question is, can Republicans start cutting into the traditional Democratic hold on certain groups? Or will the more extreme elements of the Republican Party scare them away? Only time will tell.

 

[KahukuMan10]

ooc: what about Geraldine Ferraro? Was she not the democratic VP nominee in 1984?

 

[Marky Bunny]

I have always said that the our story has had the same story until the events of 1985/1986.
Although maybe in our story,Mondale picked someone else as his VP.

 

[Westbrook]

Um....Ooops. I forgot about Geraldine Ferraro. My bad, fixing it now.

 

[Westbrook]

I discovered a problem. While working on the 535 for Delaware (a nice, easy assignment), it said that Tom Landis was the junior Senator. But in the show, it said he was from Maryland, and he mentioned that he had a House on the Chesapeake.

Now, I could see a Congressman losing and moving to another district and winning once, maybe twice. But any more than that is kind of out there, even for our universe.

So.....I'm kind of at a loss of what to do.

 

[Tim Thomason]

I discovered a problem. While working on the 535 for Delaware (a nice, easy assignment), it said that Tom Landis was the junior Senator. But in the show, it said he was from Maryland, and he mentioned that he had a House on the Chesapeake.

Now, I could see a Congressman losing and moving to another district and winning once, maybe twice. But any more than that is kind of out there, even for our universe.

So.....I'm kind of at a loss of what to do.

Yeah, I saw that problem awhile ago. Landis has a politicalbio written on him firmly placing him in Delaware (from New Castle, on Delaware Bay).

In the episode Landis mentions Chesapeake Bay and talks about how beautiful a place it is (implying but not stating he's from there). Congressman Simmell stops by and says:

I don't care, it's got his name on it. He's delivering Chesapeake Bay to Maryland. They are going to reelect him.​

By "they," the assumption is that he means Maryland. But, it's not out of the questions that Delawareans might like a bit of Chesapeake Bay cleanup.

See this map:

That's the state of Delaware, and that "little" bay on the left about the same length of Delaware is the northern majority portion of the Chesapeake Bay. Easily within driving distance. What happens with Chesapeake Bay, good or bad, could very well impact the Delaware economy, tourist business, future dealings with Delaware Bay (the nearest other major estuary), and a variety of other factors. A Congressman (perhaps with a second home in Maryland?) working across party lines to help his neighboring state, especially if it has the likelihood of affecting his own state's well-being, could very well expect a re-election boost if successful.

That all being said, he was written as a Maryland Congressman. But they were vague enough that him now being a Delaware Senator (and retroactively a Delaware Congressman) is not out of the question, in my opinion.

Landis is from Delaware (not the heavily implied Maryland), Coles is from North Carolina (not the implied South Carolina), Pierce is from Massachusetts (not the implied Rhode Island). We're far more specific than the show. Thank god.

 

[Westbrook]

Thanks Tim. He'll be in the next 535 as soon as it's written, and then the northeast is done. I'm thinking that Alaska should be saved for last.

 

[Westbrook]

HOURS OUT FROM THE FIRST DEBATE, WHO HAS THE LEAD?
by Will Kaeding.

It seems as though the Presidential race between GlenAllen Walken and Matt Santos has been going on forever, that they've engaged in a thousand skirmishes. But tonight will be the first time that the two men meet face-to-face.

So, what should we expect from the candidates?

The most recent set of polling has the race close, with Walken holding a slight lead at 51%, while Santos is at 49%. Several states are up in the air, including Texas and Pennsylvania, and Democrats seem poised to gain across the board on the lower downstream races.
The polls say that 58% of Americans believe that Matt Santos will do more to reform health care, education and immigration. But it also says that 48% of Americans believe he hasn't done enough, is ineffective as a leader, and is unwilling to make hard choices.
On the other hand, 60% of Americans say that GlenAllen Walken is a strong leader, would better protect the country from attacks, is better on taxes, and is more willing to make "hard choices." But 45% say that Walken is too partisan, wouldn't reform health care or education, and are worried about his health.

With that in mind, the question becomes how each candidate can win the debate
Matt Santos is going to have to persuade the audience that he's still in charge, and can reverse the problems of the past. The fact that the economy is rebounding helps a lot, while the implementation of the Antwerp Plan (Assuming that nothing goes wrong) will alleviate a lot of concerns about foreign policy. Expect the current President to talk a lot about domestic, pocketbook/kitchen-table issues (Pardon the cliche), like health care, education, the economy, even immigration. The Santos-Vinick style of debate (Even if he loses, the President has that to fall back on) did wonders for the President 4 years ago, and he probably needs to be in top form like then to get a win. Of course, there are two more debates, so if anything is flubbed, then he gets another pair of chances.

GlenAllen Walken, meanwhile, needs to remind people how bad things were under Santos for the longest time, the failure of the education and health care plans, and the collapse of the economy. He needs to present every inch of command and leadership that he possessed for the 3 days as President. Walken needs to make sure that the country knows that we're less safe under Santos, less organized, less rich, less free.

Right now, Matt Santos needs to lay out a coherent, active agenda. Walken has to as well, but has the utterly unanticipated ability of being able to play himself as both insider and outsider. For the moment, give a slight edge to Santos, who has been under the bright lights and performed well before. But no matter who you're rooting for, this will be a contest to watch.

 

[disputed]

electoralmath.com, Thursday September 23rd

1.With both candidates holed up preparing for the debate tomorrow night it’s been left to some of the campaigns’ top supporters to lead the TV exchanges over the past couple of days. Bill O’Reilly hosted a heated debate between Missouri Governor Henry Shallick and the Governor of California Kevin Clarkson and over on Morning Joe Oregon Congressman Will Bailey ran headlong into the feisty exchange with Ohio Congresswoman Ruth Norton-Stewart. Both are worth checking out if you get a few seconds.
.
2.There has been widespread acclaim for the debate performance of Jay Cruger in his Senate debate with Mike Daschowitz last night. Cruger certainly used all of his TV know how and done a great job of turning every question against his opponent. Audience figures were pretty low based on the overnights but it’ll be interesting to see if Cruger can leverage any benefit from last night.

3. St. Paul Mayor Jack Hunter is up today with a new ad attacking Congressman Jarod Daniels over his support of potential Cap and Trade (or Cap and Tax as Hunter calls it). The ad says that Daniels has voted for it twice already and would be very keen to push it if he gets to the Senate.

4.In one of the more bizarre developments of the cycle thus far Nevada Governor Dan Carrington has taken some fire from animal rights groups after joking that he “never hit his children but didn’t mind whipping his horse” during an interview for a parenting magazine. A small self funding animal rights candidate, Mary Taylor, is running for Governor and has apparently spent $10,000 dollars of her own money taking out a newspaper ad highlighting Carrington’s comments.

5.Dancing with the Stars news and Ray Sullivan survived the first week on the show and seems to have been installed as the 2nd favourite in Vegas to win it. The big question seems to be whether he can beat off competition from San Diego hold out Wide Receiver Vincent Jackson to win it!

6.Bit of a surprise in New Hampshire this morning when a new poll suggested that surprise GOP nominee Holland Mainwaring is only 6 points off incumbent Kurt Breech. Mainwaring who stunned everyone by shooting the gap between Marie Bridley and Lawrie Ricker has promised to spend a big chunk of his fortune in his bid to unseat Breech.

7.Apparently there is much consternation in the Santos camp over news that Jon Bon Jovi has refused to appear at the Santos campaign election night event. Bon Jovi has spoken out on a number of occasions at his disappointment over Santos’ inability to achieve healthcare or education reform.
​

 

[Westbrook]

Locations, Nominees and Keynote Speakers at National Conventions.

1986:
Democrats: Los Angeles, California.
President-D. Wire Newman, Governor of Alabama.
Vice President-Roland Pierce, Senator from Massachusetts.
Keynote Speaker-Howard Stackhouse, Senator from Minnesota.

Republicans: New Orleans, Louisiana.
President-Joseph Furman, Senator from Texas.
Vice President-Jim Hohner, Governor of Illinois.
Keynote Speaker-Owen Lassiter, Former Governor of California.


1990
Democrats: Chicago, Illinois.
President-D. Wire Newman, President of the United States.
Vice President-Roland Pierce, Vice President of the United States.
Keynote Speaker-John Hoynes, Congressman from Texas and US Senate candidate from Texas.

Republicans: Miami, Florida.
President-Owen Lassiter, Former Governor of California.
Vice President-Lewis David Eisenhower, Congressman from Ohio.
Keynote Speaker-George "Hawk" Fuller, Senator from Kentucky.


1994:
Republicans: Kansas City, Missouri
President-Owen Lassiter, President of the United States.
Vice President-Lewis David Eisenhower, Vice President of the United States.
Keynote Speaker-Caleb Burgess, Governor of Georgia.

Democrats: San Francisco, California.
President-Roland Pierce, Former Vice President of the United States.
Vice President-Barry Goodwin, Former Governor of Maryland.
Keynote Speaker-William Wiley, Senator from Washington.


1998:
Republicans: Memphis, Tennessee.
President-Lewis David Eisenhower, Vice President of the United States.
Vice President-Robert Bennett, Senator from Alabama.
Keynote Speaker-GlenAllen Walken, Congressman from Missouri

Democrats: New York City, New York.
President-Josiah Bartlet, Governor of New Hampshire.
Vice President-John Hoynes, Senator from Texas.
Keynote Speaker-Gabriel Tillman, Governor of California.


2002:
Democrats: Las Vegas, Nevada.
President-Josiah Bartlet, President of the United States.
Vice President-John Hoynes, Vice President of the United States.
Keynote Speaker-Andrew Thorn, Senator from New York.

Republicans: Detroit, Michigan.
President-Robert Ritchie, Governor of Florida.
Vice President-Jeff Heston, Senator from Utah.
Keynote Speaker-Jack Stephens, Governor of New York.


2006:
Democrats: San Diego, California.
President-Matthew Santos, Congressman from Texas.
Vice President-Leo McGarry, Former Secretary of Labor from Illinois.
Keynote Speaker-Carol Gelsey, Congresswoman from Florida.

Republicans: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
President-Arnold Vinick, Senator from California.
Vice President-Ray Sullivan, Governor of West Virginia.
Keynote Speaker-Mike Reed, Governor of Ohio.


2010:
Democrats: Jacksonville, Florida.
President-Matthew Santos, President of the United States of America.
Vice President-Wendell Tripplehorn, Vice President of the United States of America and Former Senator from South Dakota.
Keynote Speaker-Sam Seaborn, United States Senate candidate for California.

Republicans: Dallas, Texas.
President-GlenAllen Walken, Former President of the United States and Speaker of the House from Missouri.
Senator-Liz Clark, Senator from Texas.
Keynote Speaker-Cody Riley, Senator from Alabama.

 

[Marky Bunny]

Governor Jack Stephens of New York for the GOP in 2002.
From what we saw in 2006, there was NO keyspeaker at Dem convention.

 

[Westbrook]

Well, there had to be somebody. Even with all of the nomination jazz, somebody would have had to step up and give the "Rah rah, here's why we should elect the generic nominee" speech.

The problem is, everyone was divided on the floor, so it would have to be a neutral Democrat, so someone from the Bartlet Administration?
Or maybe Santos' "Farewell" Address served as a keynote?

 

[Marky Bunny]

What about Carol Gelsey, after all Gelsey's name is mentioned as VP to replace McGarry that same year!!!
Dems for 1990 Peter Hamlinn Former Governor of Florida
Rep for 1998 Florida Senator Ralf Framhagen

 

[Westbrook]

Hmmmm......Very intriguing. From the way it looks, Gelsey is only the 2nd woman to give a keynote, but that could easily be overlooked by the convention fight..... Alright, it is done! But we have to be able to figure out how to retconn her in.

Thanks Mark!

 

[KahukuMan10]

Traditionally, the keynote speaker is someone who has grasp on the future of the party. So Thorn made sense in 2002 and he'll get bigger as time goes on. Riley has a big future ahead of him obviously. Etc...

I personally think Wiley should be the Keynote speaker in '90, not '98. He might not have been as high profile, but a Keynote speaker isn't supposed to be. And he'd already have served in the senate for 8 years, in contrast to 16. And then to replace him in '98 would be... Gave Tillman?

He was mentioned at various times throughout the show, although he never made an appearance until the 6th season. He was running after California had a Republican governor(Bridges) for going on 13 years. And a republican in the governorship for the previous 20 years in total. He definitely fits the profile.

And for the republicans in '98, why not Mr. Walken? Or Robert Royce. Both were younger at the time and have become big names.

 

[Marky Bunny]

Very good suggestions!!!
Are we all ready for the debate!!!

 

[Westbrook]

I put Wiley in '98 because I figured that Bartlet would want to make it up to him somehow for choosing Hoynes, but I do like the Tillman idea. I'll use that. Hmmm...I'll go with Walken for '98. They would be just coming off of the Republicans recapturing the majority, and Hohner would have a spot, so that works.

I still need someone for the '90 Dem convention.....I kind of like using Hoynes here, with Hamlinn as a 2nd. Hoynes would have been running for the Senate for the 1st time, and the party would want to show off the future.