Down-the-ballot: Idaho field set, GOP loses candidate in MA

Yesterday was primary day in Idaho, and the field is set for the open Senate race: Larry LaRocco easily won the Democratic nomination and Jim Risch crushed a large slate of opponents to capture the GOP nomination with 66% of the vote. Both results were expected, but given how many shocking turns the race took since the Larry Craig scandal exploded last summer, it is still noteworthy that Craig did not attempt a last minute coup to get himself on the ballot.

This sets up a rematch of the 2006 race for lieutenant governor, which Risch won 58% to 39%. LaRocco has an outside chance of scoring the upset, but Risch is heavily favored to become Idaho's new junior Senator, even with the strong winds pushing Senate Democrats nationally. The race is ranked 15th in my latest Senate rankings.

A more interesting last night came from Idaho's first congressional district. Bill Sali, first elected in 2006 in a very close general election contest after winning a crowded primary with 26% of the voted, was held under 60% of the vote in this primary, testifying to the hard feelings that still linger in the state about Sali's 2006 victory. The state GOP is notoriously hostile to Sali, who is one of the most conservative House members, so much so that even Idaho Republicans are uncomfortable with him. In fact, Democrats even ran an ad in 2006 about "what Republicans are saying about Bill Sali," quoting numerous high-profile figures like the Idaho House speaker. Sali barely prevailed at the end of the day, saved by the fact that ID-01 is one of the most conservative districts in the country.

Any incumbent who finishes with an unexpectedly low total in his primary has to be considered at least somewhat endangered in the fall, so Democrats will take a closer look at ID-01 now to determine whether they can make a play for the district. The Democratic nominee will be businessman Walt Minnick, who is mounting as strong a campaign as any Democrat can hope for in Idaho. As of May, Minnick had more cash-on-hand than Sali, testifying to the fact that his challenge should be taken seriously, though the incumbent starts heavily favored. He survived in 2006 when the seat was open and he had much of the state's Republican establishment against him, and conditions are much better for him this year.

In Massachusetts, meanwhile, the NRSC suffered a dramatic blow. It is one thing for Senate Republicans to have trouble fundraising and recruiting given how dismal the national environment is for the GOP, but what happened to Jim Ogonowski is plain incompetence. Ogonowski was recruited by national Republicans to run against Senator John Kerry, whose approval ratings have not been that high since his failed presidential run in 2004. Ogonowski, you might remember, lost a surprisingly tight special election in the fall for a Democratic-leaning district, and Republicans believed he had the right profile to at least force Kerry on the defensive.

This race was of course always a long shot for the GOP but given how few Democratic-held states they are contesting (well, only Louisiana really) they were at least content to be at least fielding a credible candidate in MA. But the deadline to submit petitions passed yesterday and Ogonowski fell short 82 signatures short of the number needed to qualify for the primary ballot! Even if he had that many more, he would probably not have qualified as a petition needs a cushion of signatures as a number of them are usually tossed out.

The Ogonowski campaign insists that they have filed more signatures that haven't been processed yet, but it is unlikely that they will pass the numbers they need, particularly as fellow Republican candidate Jeff Beatty, who will now probably the party's nominee against John Kerry, is taking advantage of Ogonowski's predicament to file complaints about his rival forging signatures. This will at least guarantee that Ognowski's petition will be carefully checked.

This is not a tragic blow to Republicans given that they were unlikely to truly put Kerry's seat in play (the only poll of the race had Kerry leading by 25%). But it is the accumulation of small failures -- whether in recruitment, fundraising or simply errors in the running of campaigns -- that are putting Senate Republicans in so much trouble.

Senate diary: The Craig saga is finally over

Craiggate is finally over. Idaho Senator Larry Craig did not file for reelection by his state's deadline last week, putting an end to speculation that he might attempt to complete one more unlikely comeback. Craig had announced months ago that he would retire next year, but it was hard to fully believe him after the stunning turn-around he pulled in September. We all remember the stunning scandal that erupted at the end of August, when news emerged that Craig had plead guilty to lewd behavior in a men's bathroom.

Despite the disregard for due-process and the difference in the treatment Craig received from his caucus compared to that reserved to Sen. Vitter just months before, the situation did not look good for Craig who announced on September 1st he would resign effective September 30th. It took people a few days (until September 4th) to realize that Craig had said he "intended to resign" rather than he would resign, leaving himself room to not honor his word. But that clever trick allowed Craig to survive, as the media was satisfied with having claimed the Senator's head and Craig survived the storm. Three weeks later, he confirmed people's suspicions and announced he would be staying in the race... an unthinkable development a few weeks earlier. In that context, it would have been entirely in character for Craig to attempt to pull one more surprise and jump in the race for his party's nomination...

With Craig's now certain departure, the November race will oppose former Representative LaRocco, a Democrat, to a Republican nominee (most probably Lieutenant Governor Risch), who will start off favored given the state's very strong GOP bent. LaRocco's only path to victory was that Craig's shadow keeps haunting Idaho Republicans and drags whoever his party's nominee is down with him, and the ideal scenario would have naturally been that Craig attempts a comeback in the polls.

Note that Craig is still not done making news, since he is still trying to withdraw his guilty plea, having appealed the decision of a lower court to the Minnesota Court of Appeals. Depending on how big a legal push Craig keeps making, Idaho Democrats can hope to keep Risch in difficulty, but the best scenario the DSCC can probably hope from this race is to force the GOP to play defense and spend resources.

Meanwhile, in New Jersey, Republicans are still working to find a challenger to Senator Frank Lautenberg who they believe is very vulnerable, due (ironically) to his age. They lost their candidate in early March when real estate developer Anne Estabrook withdrew due to health reasons. Despite the fact that a state Senator is already running, Republicans want to recruit someone who can self-fund a campaign: For the past few cycles, the GOP has been wasting a lot of money in this state (both in senatorial and presidential elections) and getting nowhere once votes are counted in November, however promising polls looked earlier in the fall. It is thus understandable that the NRSC does not want to empty its coffers here but would like still to put the DSCC on the defensive thanks to a self-funder.

The result: a new wealthy candidate, Andrew Uranu, is now ready to jump in the race and contest the nomination to be decided in June. Republicans seem excited, and Democrats don't appear particularly worried. For now, therefore, a typical New Jersey election and, thus like most contests in the state, one to watch closely.

Congressional news: Speculating about Tom Davis, and polls of Senate races

Now that OH-05 has been resolved and that the GOP is celebrating, the political world can turn its attention back to other congressional races.

Starting with Virginia's 11th district. The last we heard from Tom Davis, his wife was crushed in her re-election campaign to the Virginia House of Delegates, losing by a large margin in a blue-trending area. But is Davis himself running for re-election?

He had been preparing for years to run for Senate, and his time appeared to have come when John Warner retired. But Davis ended up withdrawing from the race when former Governor Jim Gilmore made clear he would challenge Davis and the state committee decided to choose its nominee via a convention not a primary. Since then, there has been a ton of speculation as to whether Davis will be running for re-election in the House after all -- but nothing definte.

And now comes news that Tom Davis held a major political fundraiser tonight, which would indicate that he is running again. He already has $1 million in the bank as of the end of the third quarter -- and why would he be raising more money if he did not intend to run next year? That would actually be quite surprising at this point, as most rumors have had Davis leaning towards retirement, especially after his wife's loss.

On the other hand, Davis is still refusing to say whether he will run again, and mid-December is not a time representatives still hesitate if they are sure they are running. VA-11 is blue-trending territory in Northern Virginia, and it will be pretty much impossible for Republicans to keep if Davis bows out. Even if he runs again, it will probably be a tight race. You can be sure the NRCC is trying to convince Davis to stay in.

We also got two Senate polls this evening, though I'm not sure how much stock to put in either:

• A poll from Colorado was reported tonight on Colorado Confidential, and it says Mark Udall is up 2% on Bob Shaffer. The poll was conducted by Research for Change, Inc.

What is strange to me about the poll is not the result -- it is very much what we have seen in every Colorado poll, and the race is definitely a toss-up, contrary to most people's expectations -- but the way the group that conducted it is spinning the results, as the internals reported insist on Udall's strength among his base and his appeal to moderates and Republicans, as well as on Shaffer's weakness among his base. Reading the description, one could believe that Udall was found to lead by 10%! In any case, the bottom line is that Colorado is tight.

The second poll comes to us from Idaho, and was conducted in mid-November for state Rep. Nicole LeFavour, a Democrat who was considering entering the race and decided not to shortly after. Some of the results were just leaked, and they are slightly encouraging for Democrats:

• In a generic ballot test, a "Democratic candidate" beats a "Republican candidate" 42% to 36%.
• In the name ballot, Lt. Gov. Jim Risch defeats Democrat LaRocco 48% to 34%.

No one expects Idaho at the top of Democratic opportunities, and at this point I think Republicans are pretty safe -- the seat is ranked pretty far down in my latest Senate Rankings. But with numbers like this LaRocco can certainly hope to keep things competitive: Risch, who is much better known, is under 50% -- and the very red state is clearly not very happy with the GOP right now. Remember that Governor Otter barely won the open governshorship last year, showing that Republicans can't take things for granted.

While Risch is heavily favored, Democrats can at least hope to force the RSCC to defend the state and spend valuable resources here. Expanding the map has always been the name of the game for the DSCC.

Doolittle closer to the door, Craig slipping back in

• Rep. Doolittle and his aides subpoenaed
  

Doolittle is shaping up to be the Ted Stevens of the House, and not just because his house was also searched by FBI agents. Doolittle is under investigation for his connections to lobbyist Jack Abramoff, and news keeps strolling in about allegations against him. This week, Doolittle and six of his aides were subpoenaed, in part for 11 years of records that could establish what kind of relationship he and his wife entertained with Abramoff. This clearly indicates that the Justice Department is showing no sign of slowing down the investigation, and that news like this will constantly come in over the next few months.

Doolittle has decided to not obey the subpoena, and fight it in court, arguing that this is a breach of the separation of powers. Whether or not he succeeds at this, the court fight will likely take months and be a very costly distraction for Doolittle who intends to run for re-election.

Such developments are actually great news for the Republican Party. The GOP's worst nightmare is to end up with Doolittle as its nominee. CA-04 leans heavily Republican and an open seat would almost certainly favor the Republican candidate. But with Doolittle weighted down by corruption charges, Democrats are confident they will pick-up the seat. Doolittle said a few weeks ago that he fully intends to run for re-election, but he has to survive a very contested primary first. The Republican Party sure is hoping that Doolittle either resigns or loses the primary, and news like this subpoena make such an outcome much more likely.

• Expanding the map to AL-02

When Republican Rep. Terry Everett announced he was retiring last week, I did not even bother mentioning it here. AL-02 is a very Republican district, and it seemed unthinkable the Democrats would want to compete for the seat when they have so many other opportunities more ripe for pick-up. But TPM reports that the DCCC is very seriously looking at this seat, and trying to recruit some top-notch candidates: Montgomery Mayor Bobby Bright (Bright seems to have been approached by both the GOP and Democrats; and though he appears to have more ties with the Democratic Party, what does that say about his politics?) and the state's Agriculture Commissioner Ron Sparks, who had considered jumping in the (non-open) Senate race earlier this year. If Democrats manage to make districts like this one competitive, it would wear out even more the already very thin Republican resources.

• Larry Craig keeps us guessing

Has Senator Craig now entirely given up on his intention to resign at the end of the month? A few days ago, it appeared that Craig would not resign on September 30th as he had said he would, and that he would wait for the MN judge to render a decision (probably some time next week) on whether Craig can withdraw his guilty plea. But Craig's lawyer has just implied that the Senator's ultimate decision has nothing to do with the judge's decision. Here is the relevant exchange between MSNBC's Chris Matthews and Stanley Brand:

MATTHEWS: Stan Brand, is your sense that the senator may well be able to hang on until the end of his term?

BRAND: I — think that’s conceivable, especially if he gets some type of relief in Minnesota. But I don’t think it depends on that.

Is it even worth asking what it would depend on anymore, given how many stunning turns this story has taken so far?

Shocking Development in Idaho

We thought the Larry Craig scandal was over, and that the senator's resignation last Saturday had buried the story and pretty much ensured that the GOP would keep the seat in next year's elections. Well, think again. Tonight comes news that Craig is reconsidering his resignation.

It all started on the Sunday morning political shows, where Arlen Specter pointed out that Craig had said he was intending to resign, and not that he was resigning. He then actually defended Craig, breaking with most Republican leaders:

I´d still like to see Sen. Craig fight this case. He left himself some daylight when he said he ´intends´ to resign in 30 days. I´d like to see Larry Craig go back to court, seek to withdraw his guilty plea and fight the case. I've had some experience in these kinds of matters since my days as Philadelphia district attorney, and with the evidence, Sen. Craig wouldn't be convicted of anything.

Most people took Specter's comments as semantics, but news today that Specter had called Craig last week to tell him he was willing to help changes everything. The always quotable Idaho Statesman got its hands on a voicemail Craig left on the wrong machine (could this story get any weirder?):

Arlen Specter is now willing to come out in my defense, arguing that it appears by all that he knows that I have been railroaded and all that. Having all of that, we have reshaped my statement a little bit to say it is my intent to resign on Sept. 30.

And so the story goes on. Craig's new lawyer now intends to take back the guilty plea, and go to trial. This was Craig's best option to start with, and he gave it up in the vain hope his arrest would not go public. As I wrote last week, the charges against Craig were very weak, and the police report was full of holes. So Craig's new plan is to try to make this all go away in court, and if he succeeds, he will not resign from the Senate... and presumably run for re-election next year!

This would put Republicans in a bind. Their defense for why they piled on Craig and not on Vitter is that Craig has actually plead guilty. But if Craig succeeds to be deemed non guilty, what would the Republican leadership do? If they still press for his resignation, or help a primary challenge, won't they have to do the same against Vitter, or will they abandon all pretense and engage in open homophobia?

And for Democrats, this is obviously great news. As reported in my Senate Rankings, the only way for Democrats to make this race competitive is for Craig for run again, as an open seat would favor Republicans dramatically. But if the GOP gets buried in a divisive and very very ugly primary contest, look for Democratic former Rep. LaRocco to actually become a serious contender.

Update

Withdrawing a guilty plea might not be so simple after all. From CNN's Jeffrey Toobin:

He can make a motion to withdraw his guilty plea. … Under Minnesota law, there — as I understand it, there are only two grounds on which you can have a guilty plea withdrawn. One is coercion, that you were forced somehow to plead guilty. The other is incompetence, that you didn't understand what you were doing, you didn't understand English, you were under mental illness. I certainly don't believe that Craig's situation falls within either of those.

Evening Diary: Warner prepares high-stakes announcement

• Virginia: Is John Warner running for re-election?

Tomorrow will be a huge day for Senate news. Virginia's Senator John Warner has called a press conference at 2pm to announce whether or not he will run for re-election. This announcement is going to likely decide whether Virginia has a Democratic or Republican Senator come 2008: If he runs again, John Warner will likely face only token competition; but if he retires, Democratic will have a significant edge in the state because of the likely candidacy of former Governor Mark Warner.

So is he or isn't he? Amazingly, (John) Warner has managed to maintain the suspense, as there have been no leaks or credible indications of what he is going to announce. The conventional wisdom over the past few weeks has been that Warner would retire, but the Politico quoted Virginia Republicans today that expected Warner to run again. Warner has not acted like a politician running for re-election and has raised very little money, fueling speculations he is on his way out.

Check Campaign Diaries tomorrow afternoon to find out whether Democrats can expect to pick up this seat, or whether it has become a lost cause.

• Iowa Caucus

I reported earlier today that ARG's Republican poll showed Romney up 10% on Guiliani, with a stunning thirteen point rise to 14%. Later in the day, a ONE poll had very interesting numbers for the Republican contest:

• Romney leads with 35%, followed by Giuliani at 12% and Thompson and Huckabee tied at 11%. Just like in the ARG poll, McCain has collapsed in the single digits.

First off, Huckabee does seem to be on fire. He is in a virtual tie for second place, and has catapulted himself very near the first tier on the strenght of his Ames second-place alone. But the most important lesson of this poll is Thompton and Giuliani's weakness - much more so than Romney's strength. Giuliani and Thompson are not only behind, but they are also posting atrocious numbers. They're almost in single-digits!

Clearly, their decision to skip the August Straw Poll is hurting them badly. The Iowa Republican are punishing those who skipped Ames, and rewarding those who showed up. Can Giuiliani and Thompson recover from the impression that they are neglecting Iowa? Or is the Iowa electorate set up snubbing them right back?

• The Bathroom Scandal

Republicans are continuing to pressure Craig to resign. Today, NRSC Chairman Ensign joined many House members and a few Senators and called for Craig to step down, realizing that this scandal would likely not have any impact on the 2008 Senate races if Craig just goes away quietly. Not that Ensign called for Vitter's resignation after last month's straight prostitution scandal.

In related news, the Minneapolis Airport released the audio tape recording of the conversation between Senator Craig and Karsnia, the police officer who arrested him! The WaPo summarizes the tape's content. Noteworthy elements: Craig explicitely maintains he denies the charges but that he will plead guilty to avoid going to court; Karsnia accuses Craig of lying; and he then expresses dismay at politicians like Craig that make "[us go] down the tubes." He goes on to declare that, "I expect this from the guy we get out of the 'hood. I mean, people vote for you."

• Death penalty commutation in Texas

Texas Governor Perry commuted the death penalty of a man about to be executed not for actually killing someone, but only for being an accomplice to murder - or rather for failing to prevent a crime he supposedly should have foreseen. It is rare for a Governor (especially ones in Texas...) to commute death penalty sentences, so that this decision was rather unexpected.

Pushing Craig out of the closet, and out of the Senate

Is the Larry Craig story starting to make anyone else uncomfortable? Don't get me wrong, I believe this scandal is definitely newsworthy: Craig did plead guilty after all, and a sitting US Senator who pleads guilty of anything requires coverage. This also reveals his social conservative stance to be so hypocritical that it should definitely be exposed. It is unconceivable for anyone to argue today that Craig's homosexuality is private behavior when Craig-type social conservatives believe that private acts of gay sex should be criminal offences (remember the outrage over the Lawrence v. Texas decision?).

That said, no one can deny that the details of this scandal are somewhat troubling. Not only do they reveal an unnecessary crack down on gay cruise spots (are bathrooms really the place airport cops should be sent to patrol in this day and age?), but the arrest itself was done on little to no evidence: Craig tapping his foot and putting his hand under the stall door - which is at the very worst a vague gesture of intent. I have little doubt what Craig was looking for, but that does not mean any process that makes him look guilty is defensible.

I am not at all convinced that the undercover officer was justified in arresting him, nor that these charges would have held in court. The police report, which I linked to earlier today, appears to be a classical example of police overreaching. The Politico's Roger Simon does a great job of debunking that report. He shows that the police officer drew quick conclusions basically because he was looking for a crime and was ready to construct one at all costs. After all, neither Craig's looking to see if there was someone in the stall, nor his taking his bag in the stall with him could possibly be regarded as that suspicious! So much of this could have been challenged if a defense attorney had looked into the case on behalf of Craig. But, as we know, Craig panicked at the thought of seeking counsel and making the charges public, and the police report stood unchallenged. And naturally, no one in the media is questioning the facts of the case. After all, what the police say is always truth.

The Republican reaction to this scandal is also quite scandalous. McCain and Coleman called for Craig's resignation today, before Craig was stripped of his committee assignments and while Romney completely abandoned his campaign's former Idaho chairman and declared his actions "disgusting." Yes, Craig has made an embarrassment of himself and of his party. Yes, he has demonstrated to what monstrous depths of self-loathing gay Republicans can stoop. But what in this case makes the Craig scandal more outrageous than Vitter's admission last month that he had used the services of a notorious DC prostitution ring? I do not recall McCain or Coleman calling for Vitter's resignation, nor Vitter being forced to resign from Senate committees. The major distinction between Craig and Vitter is that the latter acknowledged adulterous relations, while the former plead guilty to a misdemeanor. But I am somewhat doubtful that this is what accounts for the dramatically different levels of moral outrage awakened by the Vitter and Craig scandals. While this is certainly a shame, the fact of the matter is that Vitter was engaged in straight sex, while Craig was engaged in (gasp!) gay behavior - a much more devious and sinful vice for social conservatives.

Craig is responsible for much of what is happening to him. If he had been more open about his sexuality, none of this would have happened and he would not have to cruise sketchy public bathrooms for a quick blowjob. But we still have to acknowledge that the stigma of his sexuality is also what is getting him in so much trouble with this scandal - both because of the police officer's romanesque imagination when it comes to homosexual behavior and because of the Republican Party's basic homophobic instincts.