Posted on 10/03/2006 9:28:46 AM PDT by Clintonfatigued
Republican Doug Lamborn, running in the 5th Congressional District, waited until last week to formally ask his chief primary rival for his endorsement. Lamborn met with Jeff Crank, who came in second to Lamborn in a bitter, six-man primary.
Pundits say it's unusual for a candidate this late to be seeking primary endorsements, and it signals that continuing speculation about endorsements has become a problem for Lamborn's campaign.
Lamborn, an attorney and state senator, faces retired Air Force Lt. Col. Jay Fawcett in November. Both are from Colorado Springs, the heart of the 5th Congressional District.
Lamborn said Sunday he waited to approach Crank until "some of the heated feelings of the primary would have a chance to die down."
Crank said he didn't give Lamborn an immediate answer, but he assured the candidate that he wanted "the Republican team" to win in November.
(Excerpt) Read more at rockymountainnews.com ...
Former Congressman Joel Hefley and former Colorado Springs Sheriff John Wesley Anderson, who announced for Congress before Heflery decided to retire, have both refused to endorse Lamborn.
It's hard to imagine the Democrats actually winning this district, but the GOP divisions definitely aren't helping.
It's worth noting, though, that if they won this wouldn't be the most GOP seat that the Dems would hold, and that an Air Force officer is exactly what they'd want to have as their standard-bearer in this district. In terms of GOPness, I think CO-05 would be #4 if they win it.
"In terms of GOPness, I think CO-05 would be #4 if they win it."
Lamborn really p.o.'d people with his attack ad in the primary.
PS. I consider MS-04 more GOP than TX-17 because TX-17 includes a bump from the Bush home-state, home-district factor.
You're right, I totally forgot about MS-04. Stupid Gene Taylor. And I agree that the TX-17 isn't quite as Republican as its Bush percentage would indicate.
BTW, Taylor refused to vote for Pelosi for Speaker in 2003 or 2005, and hasn't voted for the Democrat Speaker candidate since 1999. And former Congressman Ken Lucas of KY-04 also refused to vote for Pelosi in 2003, and if he wins his old seat back he will have to choose between his party and his district. So perhaps the Democrats will need 220, not 218, Representatives in order to elect Pelosi Speaker.
Some Sherwood and Reynolds action for you from Political Wire. Reynolds needs some more upgrading. I think the GOP now has only a 30% of holding the House.
In PA-10, Sherwood Faces Possible Defeat
In Pennsylvania's 10th congressional district, a new Lycoming College poll shows Chris Carney (D) leading Rep. Don Sherwood (R-PA) 46.7% to 38.2%.
"The only other independent, non-partisan poll of the race, taken in late August, showed Carney ahead by seven points."
Though Sherwood is the congressman who was accused of choking his girlfriend -- and later apologized to his wife and family -- President Bush will be campaigning for him later this month.
Tennessee's race for the U.S. Senate is a dead heat between Bob Corker (R) and Rep. Harold Ford Jr. (D-TN), according to a new Middle Tennessee State University poll.
In NY-26, Reynolds in Danger
A recent poll showed Rep. Tom Reynolds (R-NY) with a tough re-election challenge in New York's 26th congressional district, but news of his links to the scandal involving former Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) forced CQ Politics to change the on Reynolds’ race against Jack Davis (D) to Leans Republican from Safe Republican.
Key observation: "Davis is wealthy and has shown no hesitation to reach deeply into his own pockets."
Update: Ben Smith says New York media today is buzzing about Reynolds' "bizarre press conference yesterday, at which he surrounded himself by small children. At one point, reporters asked if he could make the children leave so they could as adult questions, and he refused."
Americablog: "Reynolds' chief of staff, Kirk Fordham, tried to broker a secret deal last Friday to get ABC News to cover up the worst part of the Foley child predator scandal, the lurid five-plus-page instant message chat in which Foley asked a child to measure his penis and then led the child into a detailed discussion of masturbatory techniques."
I find that quote strangely amusing. I sure hope Reynolds doesn't lose, though. So I guess in that sense it's not too funny at all.
He can run, but he can't hide. The media will be after the boy now like a bunch of wolves.
Did you see the UConn poll with Shays up 5?
Ya.
I think you're talking about the same poll; Shays is up by 4% (44%-40%) among likely voters and up by 5% (46%-41%) when leaners are factored in.
Against Reynolds, Jack Davis is spending some $2 million. And the district isn't overwhelmingly Republican, as it voted for Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and John Kerry.
Nothing says polling quality like X and X unknown university polling institution. :) This goes for the Shays poll too.
Anyway, it's enough for me to push it into lean Dem, though my real temptation with all House university polls is to burn them. Unfortunately, a lot of times it's the best we get.
Maybe when I make my fortune, I'll pay Mason-Dixon to do polls of all major House races in 2028, just so this problem can be eliminated. Of course, no one will have land lines by then, so the polls will probably all be Internet (Zogby Interactive). ack.
This infighting crap has gone way too far. Why isn't anybody busting any heads?
First Arizona, now here.
Yea I had the other figure
Although both the Shays and the Sherwood poll agree pretty closely with the Constituent Dynamics polls in those districts. Could be goor or bad not that I think about it, actually :)
Touche. Your response makes a good bit of sense and is one reason why I'm not discounting the poll (or the Shays one), just stating my concerns about university polling in general.
The only uni poll that is really above the dreck in terms of methodology, poll conducting, etc. is Quinnipiac. I respect Q pretty much across the board, except in Florida, where I trust no one except for the aforementioned Mason-Dixon.
Which reminds me (off-topic), there are three states you should automatically be extremely leery of any company that polls there, except Mason-Dixon, and those are New Mexico, Wisconsin and Florida, for future reference. A lot of states have leans in their polling (NJ polling normally leans too Republican (exception 1993), CO polling used to normally lean too Democrat, but in the last election most certainly didn't, etc. etc.). And there are some states that just poll normally almost all the time, like Ohio, Pennsylvania and Texas. But these three states (NM, WI and FL), more than all others that are watched constantly, give haphazard, contradictory and sometimes dead-wrong results which can screw up any election-watcher. And then there's the factor of small states that are rarely polled except by uni polls (RI for example), where I wouldn't trust a poll out of, period.
Which gets me back to my main point. Uni polls have a level of distrust from me like no other. Would you trust a poll that was being conducted by a bunch of paid undergrad or grad students who have no idea how to properly talk to people on the phone? There is a science to it.
Besides, before this poll, I didn't even know Lycoming had a college, much less a statistic department or a polling institute. Maybe it's dead-on in its numbers. But I wouldn't count on that being because of its polling expertise.
October 03, 2006 In CA-48, Pombo in Trouble Rep. Richard Pombo’s (R-CA) is in serious danger of being defeated in California’s 48th congressional district, according to a new Greenberg Quinlan Rosner (D) poll. Jerry McNerney (D) currently leads Pombo by two points, 48% to 46%. CQ Politics says "a major flurry of late-campaign activity by national Republican strategists on behalf of" Pombo -- "and a visit to the district Tuesday by President Bush to raise still more for the incumbent -- are signs that victory is far from locked down for the Republicans." As a result, CQ has changed its rating on the race to Leans Republican from Republican Favored.
I had a feeling the Pombo seat would be getting some buzz again soon. That's because I downgraded the CA-11 race for the same reason I had such a dim view of the KY-03 race: A liberal rabble-rouser upset the DCCC candidate-of-choice in the primary. So, I'm bumping Pombo back up a bit, but I'd like to see an independent poll before getting too carried away. After all, this is the same McNerney that Pombo beat by 20% or so in '04.
Oh, and to be clear, the reason I had that feeling is because of the recent poll that showed a fairly tight race in KY-03.
Fairly tight races in KY-3 tend to be the norm, except last time. The Pubbie is a talented incumbent. I don't see her losing much of her fan club. Pombo is in a different category, but of course it is a Dem poll, which is why CQ has it still lean GOP. But the GOP big guns going there suggest that the poll is not a wild card. As I said, Pombo is now a rather poor fit for this district. The Bay area RINO's are pouring in, along with some folks even more hostile, like oh the horror, environmentalists and Greenies and who knows what else. Cattle create methane gas, which destroys the ozone layer, and beef is bad for you anyway. Just a little leitmotif for you. The district is just too close to the Bay.
One of the savants around here opined that the GOP has a 10% chance to hold the House, I said 30% (maybe 25% is more like it given the latest), and your odds are ... ?
I give the GOP about 33% odds to hold the House.
You are the Dr. Pangloss on this one. :) But that is about where I am, minus a few points, assuming the latest storm blows over. The Pubbies are getting a bum rap on Foley, but such is life.
The influx of GOP strategists says something. The publicly released "internal" poll says less than nothing, other than it's fundraising time.
I would say more, but absent a halfway-decent independent poll, we are merely guessing.
Damn it.
When I saw him read his statement after the scandal hit, I did not find him that great myself. But you were given more to "work with" than I was, admittedly.
Well, in today's political environment I give the GOP about 0% odds of holding the House, but I give about 33% odds of something happening between now and November 7 to turn things around. This could include: a major terrorism-related event, a sex and/or corruption scandal involving a leading Democrat, national average gas prices below $2/gal., etc., etc. Perhaps my odds are too high, but in my view there are still things that could turn this around, but it would take something very major, and it's important to bear in mind that RNC still has about $30 million more than the DNC.
If we lose the House, one silver lining may happen. Bush's approval ratings may rise in the next 2 years with him vetoing liberal bills.
If this stupid loser can't give "an immediate answer," he should never be considered for office in the Republican party again. This election is a trial by fire for our country. Any "Republican" who doesn't play on the team has forfeited all respect. This is more important than personality, even personal honor. Get with the program NOW, Crank.
You're right. Watch their hands.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.