Chris Matthews for the Senate?

[DaveW]

This has been rumoured for some time, but today 538.com has declared that Hardball host Chris Matthews "is in" the 2010 Pennsylvania Senate race.

Please, gawd, no...

The seat is currently held by long serving Republican Senator Arlen Specter. Specter will be a very tough opponent for whoever his Democratic challenger is. However, he does turn 80 in 2010 and may choose to retire, which would guarantee a competitive race.

But is Matthews really the best option for the Democrats? A high profile doesn't necessarily translate into popularity. And whilst his history is Democratic (once a staffer for Democratic Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill), his politics are fairly conservative. This may not seem like such a problem in Pennslyvania where Democrats often do have a rightward tilt, but it could starve him of valuable funds, particularly from the left blogosphere which has long detested him. Furthermore, Matthews hasn't been a particularly loyal Democrat either, having voted for Bush on at least one occassion. And just how will that coarse personality of his go down on the campaign trail?

In my judgement, the Democrats have better options for the seat. The worry is that Matthews's high-profile will clear the rest of the field and hand him a soft primary victory. Perhaps that explains why he's making his intentions known so early in the cycle.

 

[Hawkamania!]

Matthews would have about a 60dB minimum advantage over any opponent during a debate.

 

[Palmer Stoat]

I'm not sure what role Matthews is less equipped for: hosting a TV show or the serving in the senate.

 

[Galactic]

I REALLY hope this never happens, it would be like Bill O'reilly in the senate althoug hhe did say he was going to do everything in his power to help this president. Really quite the tw@

 

[DaveW]

More 2010 Senate news:

http://blogs.tampabay.com/buzz/2008/12/source-martinez.html?cid=141067114

Martinez won't seek re-election

U.S. Sen. Mel Martinez plans a major announcement in Orlando shortly and a highly-placed Republican source says Martinez will announce that he's not seeking re-election and that he may leave his seat in advance of the end of his term in 2010. That would open the door for Gov. Charlie Crist to appoint a replacement in advance of a wide-open Senate race in '10.​

Mel Martinez was Secretary of Housing and Urban Development for the first three years of Bush's presidency. He won Florida's Senate seat in 2004, by a little less than what Bush himself won the state. Martinez was probably always going to be a top tier target for the Democrats in 2010, but I'm a bit surprised that he's apparently not going to run for a second term.

Who's next in line for the Republicans... Jeb Bush?

 

[DaveW]

Perhaps not such a mystery after all, Martinez was polling pretty poorly according to PPP:

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2008/12/florida-senate-race.html

The fact remains though that PPP polling over the summer showed four different members of the Florida Congressional delegation extremely competitive in possible matchups against Martinez:

-Allen Boyd led Martinez 37-33.

-Ron Klein also led Martinez 37-33.

-Debbie Wasserman Schultz led him 38-37.

-Robert Wexler tied him 31-31.​

 

[Blue York]

There is talk Specter will face a tough primary against Twoomer again. Last time in '04 he only beat him by 2 points. With the rightward tilt of the Republican party I would say the crazy Twoomer will be a good chance to knock Specter over. The loss of man on dog Santorum and the shellacking McACain got this year in the presidential indicate PA don't much like their wingnuts. Matthews can talk up his chances all he likes but I think if the competition is another Santorum like crazy there will be someone else enter the race who will blow Matthews out of the water in a primary. The Democratic base does not like him.

 

[Blue York]

Martinez has been unpopular for quite a while. In fact I am quite sure he owns the distinguished title of most unpopular senator. This is actually bad news for Democrats. They may get someone who is more competitive now as it would have been an almost certain pickup opportunity.

 

[DaveW]

Primarying Specter really would be the GOP shooting itself in the foot. But as you point out, they nearly did it once before.

And I suspect you're right about Martinez. Normally incumbency is an asset, but in some rare cases it's a liability. Mark Dayton (D-MN) did a similar thing in 2006: bailed for the after one term for good of the party; and Amy Klobuchar easily retained the seat for the Democrats.

 

[DaveW]

Oh this is funny:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1208/16112.html

Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski has some Republican-to-Republican advice for Gov. Sarah Palin: If you want to make a run at the White House, keep your hands off my Senate seat.

Murkowski, up for reelection in 2010, is nervously awaiting word on whether John McCain’s former running mate will run against her in the GOP primary. But she says Palin is the one who should be nervous.

“I can guarantee it would be a very tough election,” Murkowski said in an interview.​

In 2006, Palin successfully "primary-ed" incumbent Governor Frank Murkowski. Now his daughter fears the same fate. Murkowski of course being Daddy's nepotistic appointment after he left the Senate for the Governor's mansion.

 

[Galactic]

Oh this is funny:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1208/16112.html

Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski has some Republican-to-Republican advice for Gov. Sarah Palin: If you want to make a run at the White House, keep your hands off my Senate seat.

Murkowski, up for reelection in 2010, is nervously awaiting word on whether John McCain’s former running mate will run against her in the GOP primary. But she says Palin is the one who should be nervous.

“I can guarantee it would be a very tough election,” Murkowski said in an interview.​

In 2006, Palin successfully "primary-ed" incumbent Governor Frank Murkowski. Now his daughter fears the same fate. Murkowski of course being Daddy's nepotistic appointment after he left the Senate for the Governor's mansion.

Haha here she comes

 

[DaveW]

Jeb Bush may indeed be in the Florida Senate race.

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/12/jeb_bush_ponders_florida_senat.php

 

[DaveW]

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/12/07/matthews_set_to_sign_new_contract.html

Matthews Set to Sign New Contract

According to Mike Allen, Chris Matthews will reportedly announce the signing of a new contract with MSNBC which would effectively end the talk about his potential Senate bid in Pennsylvania.​

 

[Palmer Stoat]

Jeb Bush may indeed be in the Florida Senate race.

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/12/jeb_bush_ponders_florida_senat.php

You'd have to figure that Jeb Bush, if he runs, would be warm favourite to take the Florida senate seat. Beating him would be a very steep hill for the Dems to climb, and in fact, I'd expect his candidacy to scare some of the better-known Dems out of the race altogether.

If Jeb aspires to the Oval Office, this would be the logical next move. Serve in the senate for a few years, let some of the stench of his older, dumber bro fade, and then maybe contest the 2016 presidency.

It'd be fascinating to see if he can overcome being the bro of one of the least popular presidents in US history. It's a helluva handicap.

 

[DaveW]

You'd have to figure that Jeb Bush, if he runs, would be warm favourite to take the Florida senate seat. Beating him would be a very steep hill for the Dems to climb, and in fact, I'd expect his candidacy to scare some of the better-known Dems out of the race altogether.

Concur with all that.

If Jeb aspires to the Oval Office, this would be the logical next move. Serve in the senate for a few years, let some of the stench of his older, dumber bro fade, and then maybe contest the 2016 presidency.

It'd be fascinating to see if he can overcome being the bro of one of the least popular presidents in US history. It's a helluva handicap.

Yeah... First of all, must we view a Jeb Bush Senate tilt as a springboard to a future presidential run? Hillary Clinton mk II...

I can't see it happening. For the reasons you mention. But maybe, just maybe you could make a case for it.

[crystal_ball_gazing]

One thing is that the White House switches party control roughly once every two terms. Let's assume that Obama wins a second term. That means that by 2016, the Democrats will have controlled the WH for eight years and perhaps Congress for 10 years. Voters think it's time for a change and the political environment has accordingly shifted in the Republicans' favour.

So that's the general election argument made. What about the primary? Well here Jeb's family name will be less of a liability. Perhaps in 2012, Romney or Pawlenty loses to Obama. Turns out that (according the Republican faithful) like McCain and Dole before them, their candidate just wasn't conservative enough. 2016 calls for a real conservative! Right-leaning commentators point out that the Republicans haven't won the presidency without a Bush on the ticket since 1972. Accordingly, Republican primary voters choose Senator Bush to lead the party back into the White House.

[/crystal_ball_gazing]

 

[Palmer Stoat]

Yeah... First of all, must we view a Jeb Bush Senate tilt as a springboard to a future presidential run? Hillary Clinton mk II...

I'm not sure I follow what you're saying, Dave. Hillary did use her position in the senate as a springboard for a tilt at the Oval Office.

As for Jeb, well, I suppose he might view a senate seat as an end in itself. But personally, I'd be pretty surprised if higher office wasn't in the back of his mind -- he is a Bush after all. (And I suspect most senators at least daydream about the White House, and a stack of them -- just look at how many senators put their toes in the water this electoral cycle -- do much more than daydream.)

If he were in the Senate, I reckon he'd straightaway become a figurehead for the GOP. Of course, he'd have to rack up lots of brownie points with the electorate -- and the entire electorate, not just the GOP base -- before he'd be a plausible candidate for the Oval Office.

Probably it's beyond him. But as distinct from his brother, he's a very capable man -- so who knows? For all the Dubya-inspired disadvantages, there are still some pretty significant advantages to being a Bush.

PS: if we're gonna get the crystal ball out, I predict a Huckabee nomination in 2012 and a Jindal nomination in 2016. (Now that's some long-range forecasting.)

 

[DaveW]

I'm not sure I follow what you're saying, Dave. Hillary did use her position in the senate as a springboard for a tilt at the Oval Office.

Point taken.

As for Jeb, well, I suppose he might view a senate seat as an end in itself. But personally, I'd be pretty surprised if higher office wasn't in the back of his mind -- he is a Bush after all. (And I suspect most senators at least daydream about the White House, and a stack of them -- just look at how many senators put their toes in the water this electoral cycle -- do much more than daydream.)

If he were in the Senate, I reckon he'd straightaway become a figurehead for the GOP. Of course, he'd have to rack up lots of brownie points with the electorate -- and the entire electorate, not just the GOP base -- before he'd be a plausible candidate for the Oval Office.

Probably it's beyond him. But as distinct from his brother, he's a very capable man -- so who knows? For all the Dubya-inspired disadvantages, there are still some pretty significant advantages to being a Bush.

And being based in the country's largest swing state is no bad thing either.

PS: if we're gonna get the crystal ball out, I predict a Huckabee nomination in 2012 and a Jindal nomination in 2016. (Now that's some long-range forecasting.)

I'm a bit more sceptical of Huckabee than you are. He was well positioned this year. But despite winning a crucial early state (Iowa) he failed to gain genuine momentum. Why will 2012 be different?

 

[Palmer Stoat]

I'm a bit more sceptical of Huckabee than you are. He was well positioned this year. But despite winning a crucial early state (Iowa) he failed to gain genuine momentum. Why will 2012 be different?

Couldn't the same argument have been made about McCain? He too won crucial early primaries in 2000, yet lost. Eight years later he was the nominee.

 

[DaveW]

Couldn't the same argument have been made about McCain? He too won crucial early primaries in 2000, yet lost. Eight years later he was the nominee.

Which just goes to show how weak a candidate Huckabee was.

I think McCain won the nomination in 2008 for the same reason Kerry won the nomination in 2004. He was "electable". McCain's failed 2000 run was probably an asset in that it established some distance between him and Bush.

I just don't see what Huckabee has going for him. I thought he was a candidate with a good resume going into 2008. But the more I saw of him the less I thought of him. Those ads with Chuck Norris didn't exactly scream presidential, did they? Will he once again run as a bit of a novelty act? Won't that have worn even more thin by then?

 

[DaveW]

Here's Nate Silver's look at the 2010 map:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/12/2010-senate-rankings-revised-and.html

He paints a very rosy picture for the Democrats. Of the 10 most vulnerable seats, nine are Republican held. Difficult to disagree with much of it; I'd probably have Kentucky and North Carolina higher on the hit list.

I had been inclined to think 2010 would be a difficult environment for the Democrats. And I still think that might be the case. Here I'm obviously drawing parallels to 1994. But the seat-by-seat breakdown suggests most Democratic incumbents are fairly entrenched. In 1994, the Republicans were mainly picking up open seats in the Senate. What the GOP desperately needs (and which they've lacked in the last two cycles) is some credible challengers.

 

[Palmer Stoat]

Which just goes to show how weak a candidate Huckabee was.

I think it says more about their profile, their longevity, and their standing in the party. Areas in which I expect Huckabee to improve his position -- remember, he was starting from a very low base in the primary campaign just gone. Which is why I tend to take a diametrically opposed view to yours. Far from being unimpressed that Huckabee finished so far adrift of McCain, instead I'm impressed that he got so close with such a threadbare organisation and resources.

I think McCain won the nomination in 2008 for the same reason Kerry won the nomination in 2004. He was "electable". McCain's failed 2000 run was probably an asset in that it established some distance between him and Bush.

Yes, no doubt the notion that McCain might be able to escape the general GOP miasma helped him, though it proved mistaken in the end.

I just don't see what Huckabee has going for him. I thought he was a candidate with a good resume going into 2008. But the more I saw of him the less I thought of him. Those ads with Chuck Norris didn't exactly scream presidential, did they? Will he once again run as a bit of a novelty act? Won't that have worn even more thin by then?

The Chuck Norris ads were a lame attempt at being hip and breaking the standard-politician mould. They probably didn't work -- but I'd be loath to judge a politician on a few misconceived ads. In fact, I think it's Huckabee's willingness to take a few risks and look a little silly that's one of his strengths.

He's actually a very smooth performer in my view. He has personal charm and eloquence utterly lacking in Palin and Romney. I also wonder if his unorthodox economic views (esp for a Republican) might find a bit more resonance given the downturn.

And he now has a couple of years to add a bit more heft to his foreign-policy views -- and anywhere else where he may be a bit threadbare -- before the perpetual campaign really revs up again.

Maybe he will crash and burn -- these things are hard to predict. But as David Schwartz would say, "he's a got a lot weapons in his arsonry".

 

[DaveW]

Agree to disagree on Huckabee then. I just don't see where the depth is. (And I think the corniness is a cover for that.)

But back to the Senate contests, it's never too early to start watching the polls again.

I'd probably have Kentucky and North Carolina higher on the hit list.

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2008/12/nc-senate-2010-cooper-leads-burr.html

 

[Galactic]

Huckabee scares the bejesus out of me, because he appears like he would be a totally reasonable rationale president until you realize he brings a marriage of economic populism which hides his Christian fundamentalism. Bush was bad when it came to religion and politics, but I think Huckabee is a freakn nuke that looks like a jelly donut. IMO, if there is a god, Huckabee will never have more influence than he does already. It would be like electing a Wahhabist

 

[Richo83]

Huckabee scares the bejesus out of me, because he appears like he would be a totally reasonable rationale president until you realize he brings a marriage of economic populism which hides his Christian fundamentalism. Bush was bad when it came to religion and politics, but I think Huckabee is a freakn nuke that looks like a jelly donut. IMO, if there is a god, Huckabee will never have more influence than he does already. It would be like electing a Wahhabist

Anyone who seriously considers putting Norris in his cabinet has issues.

As someone (dave or stoat, can't remember) said, having Jeb would be a good thing shoring up a weak seat. I disagree though that Jeb is more intelligent than George, I know dubya says some god-awful things but Jeb is dumb as dog-s***.

 

[Galactic]

Anyone who seriously considers putting Norris in his cabinet has issues.

As someone (dave or stoat, can't remember) said, having Jeb would be a good thing shoring up a weak seat. I disagree though that Jeb is more intelligent than George, I know dubya says some god-awful things but Jeb is dumb as dog-s***.

You know its kind of a fantasy of mine to see Chuck fly kicking Nancy Pelosi and round housing a few others I wont bother mentioning, but on a serious note, he should stick with Texas Ranger and those late night ab workout adds.

I've personally seen enough of the Bush's and Clintons to last me for about the next 6 lifetimes...actually no, if I never saw any of them again, it would be too soon. Oh you can also add the Kennedy's to that list as well. JFK is long gone, unfortunately he wont be replaced by any of the remaining family. As much as I think people seem to think he will, esp around my area. As for Bush's, I can't quite put my finger on it, I honestly dont think they(the Jr boys) are as stupid as they come accross to the public.The father was quite well spoken compaired to his son's. I dont know what happend. Too much partying? It seems like the genetics got weaker over time in the vocab area. G.W gets in front of a camera and just looses it.I've seen and heard footage of him give good speeches(I know ) at non political events,fund raisers and the like. Its seem under pressure he just craps himself. Can you imagine Gorge W in a question time environment? ......................... Bahahahahaha! He'd be hiding under the table shivering.I would love to see a good few of the American house and senate in question time actually,again another fantasy.