Posted on 03/22/2009 2:47:14 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued
Does John E. Sununu's rapid-fire post-Capitol Hill appointments to three corporate boards and a congressional oversight panel mean he won't run for the open U.S. Senate seat next year?.
Not necessarily, says Andrew Smith, an associate political science professor at the University of New Hampshire.
"It's not unusual for former politicians to take positions on boards because it allows them to keep their business contacts and make some money, but doesn't put them in a position of having a regular full-time job," Smith said.
"It kind of keeps them tied in to political and business circles and allows them to use their expertise and the connections they made over their years in politics."
Smith said that Sununu, at 44, "is in an unusual position because he is so young. But I wouldn't say that this in any way precludes a re-run for the Senate."
Since Judd Gregg announced last month that he won't seek re-election in 2010, several Republicans have emerged as potential candidates, including former Gov. Steve Merrill, former U.S. Rep. Charlie Bass, Manchester Mayor Frank Guinta and Concord attorney Tom Rath. But Rath may have reflected the general GOP consensus when he said last month he believes Sununu should have first dibs on the seat.
(Excerpt) Read more at unionleader.com ...
I don’t know what to think about this. John Sununu was a bright, capable Senator, but I don’t know if he would be the strongest candidate.
Sununu won in 2002 because the GOP brand was strong back then. Sununu lost in 2008 just because the GOP brand was poor. He lost re-election 52-44. In the potential matchup polls, Sununu is polling at 44-46. I think that is his glass ceiling. Let Sununu run for Hodges’s House seat. Then when the GOP brand improves, Sununu could go for round 3 against Jean Shaheen.
That would be one for the books - lose re-election to one senate seat and then win election to the other senate seat two years later. Don’t see that happening, though.
Sununu hails from Che-Porter’s seat. He should take her out.
No, that’s not one for the books. Slade Gorton did that in WA state back in 1988 after he lost reelection in 1986.
Slade Gordon of WA lost re-election for Senate in 1986. In 1988, Slade won the other Senate seat even while Bush I lost WA. These weird things do happen.
“That would be one for the books - lose re-election to one senate seat and then win election to the other senate seat two years later.”
It’s happened before. Democratic Senator Joseph O’Mahoney was narrowly defeated for reelection in 1952, than won a vacant seat in 1954.
Also Chapman Revercomb in west Virginia lost reelection after one term in 1948. he then won again in 1956 but was bumped by Bob Byrd in 1958. Also John Sherman Cooper in Kentucky was elected three times to the Senate and lost his bid for relection after each of the first two elections. But it is very rare to see a senator come back from political death.
Sununu should be the nominee. He is stronger than you think. Shaheen was a popular Governor in NH with broad appeal among Independents. It was an upset that he beat her in 2002.
With Shaheen no longer as his opponent, and Hodes, who is not univerally liked instead, Sununu could build a huge advantage in the 1st District, where Shaheen hailed, to overcome Hodes’ support in the 2nd to win the seat.
Futhermore, 2010 is not going to be another 2006 or 2008. With Dems in power, voters, especially in NH will want to divide the goverment, though perhaps not on the scale of 1994. In fact, in 2008, the Republicans made gains in the NH State House. Futhermore, with the Iraq War over, and deficit spending by the Democrats, the NH voters will likely be more friendly to Republicans, who they were upset with over the Iraq War and Bush’s Spending Problem.
Sununu can beat Hodes, and though he’s down 46-44 right now, 45% is what he got in 2008. He can only go up from here.
By the way, there are some well-liked State Senators in the 1st and 2nd District that could take both seats from the Democrats. Lets use the Republicans huge bench in the State to win those seats, and use the statewide guys like Sununu to go for the big ticket offices. Im pretty sure Sununu woulnd’t want to return to the House (1 in 435) after being in the Senate (1 in 100). Look for a serious run at both the house seats in 2010. Bradley is running to hold a NH State Senate seat after the newly elected Republican resigned after a DUI. With Bradley out of the picture, Frank Guinta, Mayor of Manchester (1/6 of the 1st District), is looking to run at Che-Porter. In the more liberal 2nd District, there are a couple state Senators looking to take a run at it, who could give the Dems (likely Katrina Swett, whose husband lost the seat back in 1994) a run for their money.
Who else do we have? Sununu is reasonably conservative and pro-life; I like him. I would prefer to see new blood but I want to see a winner.
Bob Smith moved back to NH from FL. He is seriously thinking of running for Senate in 2010 and exposing what a RINO Sununu is. Of course Bob Smith will have little if any traction in the GOP primary. My concern is if Bob Smith run as a 3rd party candidate. Smith could drain 2-3 points from the GOP.
I think Merrill or the Mayor of Manchester would be stronger. And DJ once mentioned the state AG.
Ex-Governor Merrill or Mayor Frank Guinta.
IF Sununu is actually the stongest I’d back him but I think new blood (or old blood in Merrill) would stand a better chance that the guy that just lost to the vapid Shaheen.
I’d like to see some polling.
He would be the strongest candidate. That might be damning with faint praise, but that’s the situation.
I can’t agree with you on Sununu. By all accounts, he should’ve won again last year, especially since NH had the opportunity to see what total moonbat control of the state government under the rodents yielded, and yet they replaced him anyway. Shaheen was nowhere near as popular as made out to be, and if she had been, she’d have won back in ‘02. She was already a has-been and managed to knock off Sununu 6 years out of office. Hodes is a known factor and is already leading Sununu and that’s a bad sign. Let him run against the dreadful moonbat Che Porter instead, his old House seat. If he beats her and wins again in ‘12, then he can seek a rematch with Shaheen for the 3rd time in ‘14.
What about the state AG? Is she up for re-election, or just not interested?
The State AG isn’t elected by the people. They serve at the behest of the Governor. Kelly Ayotte was actually a Craig Benson appointee, but John Lynch opted to retain her. I imagine if she made any attempts for Congress or against Lynch, she’d promptly lose her job.
Well, two years isn’t very long for people to get a negative judgment of the Moonbats they elect. Hell they don’t even work 1/3 of the year. In fact, few elected officials get voted out after a single term. Hence, in 1996, the Democrats thought they would ride back into Majorities in the House and Senate, but they didn’t, Republicans would hold on for another 10 years.
Second, Sununu was being judged on issues at the National Level, and though a total meltdown at the State House would cause the voters to lose confidence in their Federal Democratic Party Companions, that had yet to happen by Nov. 2008. (Though we are starting to see signs of it in NH and elsewhere) Sununu was seen as a member of the ineffectual Republican Congress, and Independents, who are the largest voting bloc in the state had no use for its members.
Third, your are incorrect about Shaheen’s popularity. Shaheen had comparable favorability ratings to Sununu in 2002 and in 2008. However, NH in 2002 had a 6% Registered Republican Voter Advantage in one of the best Republican Cycles since 1994. She even led Sununu a week out from the election. He only pulled ahead in polling in the last week out, probably due to late deciders going with the national trend. It was probably the reason Sununu was able to hold the seat against Shaheen. Bob Smith was dumped in favor of the more popular John Sununu because Shaheen was seen as a favorite to beat the erratic former Senator. Sununu actually stood a chance, and squeaked out a narrow victory. By 2008, the national mood had changed, and the Republican advantage was completely erased with Republicans having just 5,000 more registered voters overall (less than 1 percent). Though they maintained similar favorability ratings, and Sununu OUT-RAN McCain (NH was supposed to be McCain’s “Second” Home State...bull of course), it wasn’t enough to hold on. You put Sununu up against Hodes, who is not well-known, and is frankly, not a very exciting guy nor candidate, Sununu will win. Plus 2010 will be a much improved year for Republicans, with Democrats now in power over everything and screwing everything up, the national and state brands of the GOP can’t hold Sununu down any longer against a lesser known and weaker candidate.
That being said, I see one other strong GOP candidate, which is Steve Merrill. He’s a little old, 62, but a strong fiscal conservative and a Former Governor, however I’m not sure of his positions on Social Issues. Though often touted, Guinta and Ayotte probably need to win in another lower level of office first before launching out for the Senate. The AG in NH is an apppointed position (no statewide electability), and Mayors are not usually good Senate Candidates in more ways than one (Bob Corker, Rudy Giuliani....)
NH has been different in that regard, though. On occasion, they've voted in Democrats, but have often swept them out after a fairly brief time. 2008 was a historic precedent because not since the 1977-79 had they grabbed a 3-1 federal majority and not since 1841-1845 (not a typo) did the Dems retain all the House seats for two elections in a row. Two years was enough for the voters to toss Republicans Craig Benson from the Governorship and Chuck Douglas from Congress (though Douglas had some personal problems, unlike Benson, who never had enough time to show what he could do and had the dreadful misfortune of having the Man on the Mountain disintegrate on his watch, not as if that was his fault, but bad political and psychological karma). Also, too, I don't believe since the 1800s the Dems have retained majorities in the legislature in both bodies for two elections in a row, either.
"Third, your are incorrect about Shaheen’s popularity. Shaheen had comparable favorability ratings to Sununu in 2002 and in 2008. However, NH in 2002 had a 6% Registered Republican Voter Advantage in one of the best Republican Cycles since 1994. She even led Sununu a week out from the election. He only pulled ahead in polling in the last week out, probably due to late deciders going with the national trend. It was probably the reason Sununu was able to hold the seat against Shaheen."
My point about Shaheen is that with 6 years out in the political wilderness without portfolio, running a rematch would be difficult, but she upended Sununu who was perpetually mired in stagnant ratings. He should've beaten her as the incumbent, but he didn't. It's why I don't favor him to go for the open seat.
"You put Sununu up against Hodes, who is not well-known, and is frankly, not a very exciting guy nor candidate, Sununu will win."
See, I just don't agree here. Hodes is known now (unlike in past cycles), and he jumped from a 7% victory in '06 to a 15% one in '08. That should've been a closer race and wasn't. Even Che Porter increased her margin of victory in a rematch with Jeb Bradley. If Hodes is already leading Sununu now, I don't really expect that to change unless there ends up a dramatic collapse for the "D" party label, but I don't think we should take the risk. I have no problem letting Sununu go after Porter, but the open seat is way too risky now.
"That being said, I see one other strong GOP candidate, which is Steve Merrill. He’s a little old, 62, but a strong fiscal conservative and a Former Governor, however I’m not sure of his positions on Social Issues."
I'd like to know myself on the latter, but I think I'd rather give him a shot at it. He at least left office with good approvals and did well at the ballot box.
"Though often touted, Guinta and Ayotte probably need to win in another lower level of office first before launching out for the Senate."
Manchester Mayor (as the largest city) is a high-profile office in the state. Guinta deposed a supposedly-popular Dem incumbent. He could easily run for Congress, Senate or Governor (and he can do so without risking his office, since the elections for Mayor are in odd numbered years). Ayotte is a bit trickier since she hasn't held a job where we know how she'd do in actual vote-getting, although that didn't stop Warren Rudman, who went from AG to the U.S. Senate (albeit with a 4-year interval).
"The AG in NH is an apppointed position (no statewide electability), and Mayors are not usually good Senate Candidates in more ways than one (Bob Corker, Rudy Giuliani....)"
I think you mean good Senators as opposed to candidates. Some Mayors have made it quite far (Pete Wilson went from San Diego Mayor to the Senate; Dianne Feinstein from ex-SF Mayor to the Senate; Dirk Kempthorne from Boise Mayor to the Senate; Richard Lugar from Indianapolis Mayor...; Hubert Humphrey from Minneapolis Mayor; Norm Coleman from St. Paul Mayor; Ed Zorinsky from Omaha Mayor; Pete Domenici from Albuquerque Mayor; Joe Clark from Philadelphia Mayor; Linc Chafee from Warwick Mayor; Corker from Chattanooga; Jake Garn from Salt Lake City). Of course, Corker wasn't the preferred candidate of the Conservative base as we regarded him as a RINO (I voted for his opponent, ex-Congressman Ed Bryant), although now he's moved slightly to the right of Lamar! Alexander. It's not fair to lump in Giuliani, since his health scare forced him to withdraw. We don't know if he would've edged out Hillary (although I think he might've lost by a very narrow margin).
I’m not quite as hard on Sununu. If you look at 2008, it was just a bad year overall for Republicans. If you look at McCain’s vote percentages in many areas, Republicans in tight races downballot ran at or behind them. Schaffer in CO got 42% against a moonbat from Boulder, McCain got 45%. Zimmer in NJ finished at about McCain’s 42%. Johanns in NE got about a point more than McCain. Pearce in NM, he finished about five points back from McCain. Chambliss in GA initially finished three points behind McCain, who only got 52%. Cornyn ran about half a point behind. Steve Stivers, the Republican who ran against Kilroy in OH-15, got 45%, the same amount McCain got in the district. Virgil Goode in VA-5 lost with 49.89%, while McCain won the district with little better, about 51%. Thelma Drake’s loss in VA-2 also tracks very close with McCain. Even Coleman, who (arguably) finished ahead of Franken, got 42% of the vote, two points behind McCain’s 44%. Sununu’s loss actually fits the pattern, except he managed a point better than McCain, and Shaheen ran three points behind Obama.
You said it yourself, the country probably didn’t even know the Democrats had the Congress and were still blaming Republicans for everything. Given that NH threw out Republicans here and there in 06, their attitude in 08 wasn’t surprising. A lot of our House 08 losses were in places we barely scrapped by in 06. They just weren’t interested in giving a Republican another chance, unless he made a really, really good case for himself, and it was because of the financial crisis. If you look at Shea-Porter, she was down in the polls against Bradley, but when the Lehman Brothers fiasco happened, she moved ahead.
I’d still prefer a different candidate than Sununu, but his fate wasn’t much different than many other Republicans, even incumbents.
It’s not that I oppose Sununu’s return to politics, I just rather him set his sights lower and make a House return in ‘10 that could permit him to seek a rematch against Shaheen in ‘14 (after 4 years in the House). Merrill seems to have more of a statesmanslike aura about him and doesn’t carry any ‘06/’08 taints. Of course, it could still be potentially risky because the state isn’t with us right now, but that would be the problem with any candidate we run.
Yankee Republicans are think they can rise again in New England. They see a potential pickup of 10 seats in the Northeast. The 2 NH seats, John Hall, and Michael Accuri are prime targets.
Hall is gonna have a strong opponent this time? Good.
Accuri did not in 2008 and he nearly lost anyway.
Freshman Eric Massa comes from one of two McCain supporting districts in the state. He needs to be targeted. Bishop in NY-1 didn’t win by a great margin, his district is GOP friendly. The new Staten Island rat will be tough to beat I wager. The Island Republicans are pathetic.
Moonbat Pingree only won by 10 points in Maine’s first district.
The freshman rat in NJ, Adler should be targeted as well.
PA has a several potential targets.
My bad that’s 4 McCain districts in NY. 26 29 13 and 3
2 of the 4 are rat held.
Also George Pataki is polling even with Gillibrand (while King trails badly).
King ought to just forget about it. We don’t need to lose NY-02 just because King wants to be a sacrificial lamb. Run Pataki.
“Also George Pataki is polling even with Gillibrand”
Pataki hadn’t even considered running for office again until NRSC Chairman John Cornyn approached him about it. Word has it, Pataki is leaning against running, but hasn’t ruled it out. If the ‘Rats fortunes continue to dip, Pataki may even more open to the idea.
Pataki isn’t one of my favorites, but if he can deliver the seat in this Dem state, let him have a go. King is clearly a bust.
King’s is the third district. Carried by McCain and Bush (and Gore, Bush ran terribly in NY and NJ in 2000 for some reason). We could lose it of course but it would be pretty pathetic to lose. Perhaps it will elect a better Republican than King.
Clintonfatigued: “Pataki hadn’t even considered running for office again until NRSC Chairman John Cornyn approached him about it. Word has it, Pataki is leaning against running, but hasn’t ruled it out. If the ‘Rats fortunes continue to dip, Pataki may even more open to the idea.”
Nice to see Cornyn trying to do his job.
Now they are saying Pataki is thinking about running for Governor again. (Guliani trails Cumomo by just 10, Patterson is DOA). That would not be helpful for either race.
Most of New York State is Democrat, but the part of Long Island that King represents (specifically, the eastern half of Nassau County) is a strongly Republican favored district. (indeed, until the Dem landslide of 2006, EVERY member of the Nassau County Board was a Republican). It's NOT a swing district and we certainly don't "need" Peter King as the nominee to be "electable" in that Congressional district. An occasional Dem may manage to carry the 3rd anyway, but this is a rare occurrence.
As for winning statewide, the latest numbers show Pataki tied with Gillibrand, each at 41% apiece and the remaining NY voters undecided. But when matched up against unlikeable pro-terrorist thug Peter King, Gillibrand leads by a lopsided 47%-23% vote. (certainly fulfilling my earlier prediction that if King is the nominee, he won't even get 40% of the vote) So now we pretty much have an answer to neverdem's earlier post from National Review Columnist Mark Hemingway -- , "Challenging Gillibrand - Can Peter King do it?" The answer is similar to "Run a Jewish Synagogue - Can Yassir Arafat do it?"
Now mind you, I'm no Pataki fan -- either he or King would be mediocre RINO Senators, but there's no doubt at this point which one would be a viable U.S. Senate candidate, and it sure ain't Peter King.
All that aside, we SHOULDN'T discourage King from throwing his hat in the ring, because if he runs we'll finally be rid of one of the biggest backstabbing RINOs in Congress. Based on the record of the 3rd district, we should be able to not only keep the 3rd in GOP hands, but make sure a reliable, mainstream conservative will represent that district instead.
All-in-all, a Peter King Senate campaign is a win-win for us as long as he LOSES the nomination: we get a viable U.S. Senate candidate, and a U.S. Congressional seat goes from RINO to conservative.
Peter King would be a terrible Senate candidate -- not only would he alienate independents with his anger, bully tactics and seedy past, but his fawning love of the Clintons and constant trashing of conservatives would probably ensure he'd lose the votes of some people who normally vote Republican by default.
Still, I don't know if I could bring myself to vote for the pro-abortion liberal Pataki (especially the way he basically gutted the conservatives who were instrumental to him first being elected Governor, after he had been in office for a few years) over pro-life liberal Peter King. But I know there's no way I'd support King for Congress, let alone for higher office. He's a stain on the GOP that needs to be removed ASAP.
But hey, since some freepers delude themselves into thinking Peter King is a "conservative" Congressman (mainly because he votes the "right way" on abortion and immigration), maybe voting for a third Republican in the Senate race (a reliable pro-life conservative) would "split the conservative vote" with King and ensure that credible candidate George Pataki is nominated. In other words, I could follow my conscious, my conservative candidate would lose, Peter King would also lose, and New York would gain an acceptable "moderate Republican" Senator.
Ironic, eh?
You’re correct that Peter King is far from being the ideal Congressman. But you’re missing a couple of points. First of all, George Pataki hasn’t decided to run, and in fact is still leaning against it. If he changes his mind, than we should of course rally around him, in spite of his shortcomings. But if Pataki stays in private life, than King at least gives us an outside chance. As for his Congressional district, there’s a good chance it won’t even exist in 2012. In fact, the ‘Rat takeover of the state Senate is a major reason he’s thinking of a Senate candidacy.
Cuomo is not running for Governor. NY Dems must have received a lot of flak from blacks about dumping on of their own.
Huh ? The NY Dems will have to dump Paterson. He loses to almost any halfway decent Republican.
I’m shocked, he thwaps Patterson in the polls. Great news, Patterson is a loser.
We mustn’t write off gaining a couple seats in the NY senate. It should be a priority for the state party.
indeed, until the Dem landslide of 2006, EVERY member of the Nassau County Board was a Republican
Which board are you talking about? The county legislature has a few black districts, it had rats before 2006. Currently 10-9 rat and they have the county executive. But King's district is the more Republican part, compared to the 4th district which sends moony McCarthy.
Now mind you, I'm no Pataki fan
Me neither he was not a good Governor (well compared to his successors....but not really) and proved himself to not be a conservative as he once claimed (and he once beat a liberal RINO state senator in the primary, running to her right) . I'd rather see how good or bad Guiliani would be in the Governorship than have Pataki run for Governor again as he is reportedly considering also.( Or they could try to see once and for all who's is bigger and run against each other while fracturing an already weak state party.)
If neither are conservatives I'll take the one who can win over the one who would probably lose 60-40.
The poll I saw BTW showed Pataki would easily beat King in the primary. Though King could use the life issue to his benefit.
If I were a NYorker I'd vote for a third Republican (a conservaive) in the primary, but only if possibly unviable King was trailing Pataki comfortably.
After the 1990 redistricting, the 5 main Long Island (outside NYC) districts had to be moved into 4. At the time, 3 Dems (1st-3rd) and 2 Republicans (4th & 5th), held them. They reconfigured them enough that three incumbents decided to hang it up (Dem Bob Mrazek in the 3rd, whom I believe had his district cut up the most; Republicans Norm Lent in the 4th and Ray McGrath in the 5th). When the dust settled, only Dem George Hochbrueckner in the 1st survived. Rick Fazio ousted Tom Downey in the 2nd (as his district became too Republican and he had the check-kiting scandal problem). Peter King had a semi-vigorous primary challenge in the new 3rd (which was largely the old 4th, so he succeeded the Republican Lent).
But the ugly battle was in the new 4th (old 5th), between Jewish Republican David Levy and Catholic Republican and outsider Dan Frisa, both hailing from differing GOP factions. Levy beat Frisa and went on to win the general by an underwhelming margin. Frisa never stopped running and attacked Levy for not being aggressive enough. Frisa had also run afoul of the machine by endorsing a Dem candidate in '93. But he managed to beat Levy by 54 votes in a primary rematch in '94 and rode the anti-Dem wave to a victory over the same Dem that Levy beat in '92 (with Levy taking 9% as the Conservative Party nominee that Frisa didn't get from him, but Levy didn't campaign and conceded it to Frisa). The GOP establishment was not happy with Frisa and didn't do much to help him in the general, though he didn't need it. Ironically, Barone wrote in the '96 Almanac of American Politics, in one of his bigger errors, surmising Frisa would be able to hold on for a long time due to his aggressiveness (and supposed outsider image), but of course, he lost (and by an embarrassing 58-41% margin) to the ex-RINO loony Carolyn McCarthy, who rode the corpses of her husband and other victims of the Long Island RR Shooter, to Congress. She had actually planned to initially run against Frisa in the GOP primary (where she surely would've lost). All things considered, I rather wish Levy had stayed put, he might've kept the seat since he had stronger backing from the machine (he got an average 87% from the ACU for his two years, Frisa got an 88%, but he dropped from 96% in '95 to an 80% in '96, so you could see where he was headed).
I always thought Levy was a RINO and that’s why Frisa ran. Ooops. So it was factional huh? And Frisa backed some rat? Blah on him and my retroactive support goes to Levy.
I used to read a column Frisa wrote. (And I still read the blog of Bush and McCain hating anti-Iraq, pows still in nam conspiracy theorist Paleo-Con John LeBoutillier who was a remap victim himself I believe in 1982, I used to dislike him, now less so cause he was right about Bush)
The second and fourth lean rat now but the first district should be ours for sure. Only a GOP gaff by Grucci it to the rats in 2002. In 1950 it was the “Dear King Letter” which you probably have heard of
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,813765,00.html
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,813575,00.html
Silly stuff can sink congressman.
Heck, he was talking about running for Martinez's open seat here in FL only just over a month ago! He does get around!
Regarding Levy, he was really never in long enough for me to form an opinion one way or another. The only serious charge that Frisa levelled in '94 was that he was "ineffectual." But for heaven's sake, he'd just been elected and was a backbencher in a minority party. You don't acquire power overnight (unless you're the False Messiah). Levy was a Hempstead Councilman aligned with Joseph Mondello (the Nassau Co. Chmn). Frisa was a NY Assemblyman who had opposed Mondello (and was supposedly backed by Mondello's corrupt predecessor, Joseph Margiotta) after he claimed that Mondello would support him for Ray McGrath's seat. Frisa made a slanderous allegation against Levy that he stole $56,000 from HUD. Levy beat him 53-41% in '92. The Dems might very well have won the seat because of that battle, but they had a brutal and high-spending primary between 2 candidates that the victor prevailed by just 51-49%. The Dem, Philip Schiliro, actually outspent Levy by a 5-to-2 margin, but got to 46% with a Right-to-Lifer getting 4% and Levy got 50%.
What happened in the next 2 years went as follows. Frisa "broke" from the Nassau machine and endorsed the Dem candidate for the Nassau County Exec (to really thumb Mondello & Co. in the eye) in '93. Frisa used direct mail and his own personal footsoldiers (as Barone put it) from his Assembly races (he had had to give up his Assembly seat to run for Congress in '92) but didn't wage a media campaign, so essentially nobody was paying a lot of attention to what was going on. I think the machine believed Levy was secure, and that was a big mistake. Frisa initially led by a minor 276 votes in a modest turnout primary, but after a recount the number kept shrinking until it hit 54. Levy demanded a do-over because of alleged irregularities, but the courts shot it down. The Dems sensing a fantastic opportunity because of that ugly internecine battle, bribed the ineffectual nominee out of the race and installed Schiliro again (mainly because of fundraising prowess, and he was a disciple of Henry Waxman). Had it been '96, Schiliro might've prevailed, but even outspending Frisa 2-to-1, he got only 37% of the vote (and turnout was WAY down from 1992, especially by the Dems, Schiliro got 35,000 fewer votes than he did 2 years earlier, Frisa got 23,000 fewer than Levy did in '92, but Levy got 15,000 running on the RTL line, a sizeable protest vote, to say the least, at 9%, especially given he had given up active campaigning). Frisa became the only member of the Class of '94 to oust a GOP incumbent in the primary.
"I used to read a column Frisa wrote. (And I still read the blog of Bush and McCain hating anti-Iraq, pows still in nam conspiracy theorist Paleo-Con John LeBoutillier who was a remap victim himself I believe in 1982, I used to dislike him, now less so cause he was right about Bush)"
LeBoutillier was actually the youngest member of the class of 1980 (at 27). Redistricting shouldn't have mattered that much, because those areas still leaned Republican. However, at that time, L.I. had to shed that 6th seat and essentially it and the then-3rd were merged. Initially, it appeared he and fellow freshman GOP incumbent Greg Carman would have to run against each other (Carman literally bought the seat in '80 out from under a Dem Watergate Baby, Jerome Ambro, in a district that was drawn specifically for a Republican back when the GOP still had total control of the legislature and Governorship back in '72. Carman outspent Ambro, who actually got the Dem and RTL lines, by over $1 million to $120,000). Then Nassau boss Joseph Margiotta (who was about to be convicted of extortion) got Carman to retire in exchange for a federal judgeship, which he got in early '83 (US Court of International Trade).
That assist from Margiotta should've assured LeBoutillier a 2nd term (and LeBoutillier didn't lack for money, either). But LeBoutillier made too bombastic an entrance in '81 and pissed the wrong people off, namely Speaker Tip O'Neill. O'Neill made it his personal mission to stomp the little pissant and run his ass out of Congress. He charged LeBoutillier with having a real "contempt" of Congress (especially of O'Neill, who LeBoutillier blasted as "fat, bloated, and out of control - just like the federal budget !"). LeBoutillier projected more the attitude a lot of the elites charged us with in '94, being anti-government, etc., although O'Neill compared him more to a character in an F. Scott Fitzgerald novel, like the idle rich (LeBoutillier's district, of course, was the one Fitzgerald featured in "The Great Gatsby"). O'Neill badly hunted for someone to take him out, and he found a local Suffolk County legislator named Bob Mrazek. LeBoutillier apparently harmed himself with tv ads calling for putting a major federal pen in Alaska to house hard-core criminals. I think ultimately he may have been a bit too bombastic for the district. But LeBoutillier still outspent Mrazek ($550k to $320k), but the key was turnout. There was actually higher overall turnout in '82 than there was in '80 (but part of that was because of the merging of the districts, so not unusual when taken into consideration). LeBoutillier ran just 6,000 votes behind what he got in 1980, but Mrazek ran 13,000 (!) votes ahead of the Dem incumbent that LeBoutillier ousted, winning by a fair 52-46% margin.
O'Neill was so pleased that Mrazek got a key (and highly rare) spot on Appropriations. Mrazek had a closer race in '84, where he won by just 51-48%, but that was sadly an example of so many seats where the GOP won for President but couldn't convert wins to Congress. His opponent in '88 & '90 was Robert Previdi, who Peter King beat in the reconfigured 3rd in the '92 primary.
One seat I failed to mention was Gary Ackerman's 5th. When he won the seat when it was a Queens-based 7th in the early '80s, the problem came around by 1992 when it had to take in more heavily GOP areas (including the old North Shore that LeBoutillier had represented, very rich WASPy areas that were much different than Ackerman had represented). In merging a few seats together (as Barone said at the time, you'd have to be a good swimmer to reach all the parts of the district in a contiguous fashion), there were 3 people that could run in it, and that included Ackerman, Jim Scheuer (who had represented two totally different areas of NYC on separate occasions), and Mrazek. But why didn't the latter two run ? Well, because they were involved in the check-kiting scandal. Mrazek had a massive 920 overdrafts (!) and Scheuer had 133 (but he was also in his 70s and tired). Ackerman himself had 111, but he served on the Ethics Committee and deliberately leaked a list of the 24 worst abusers (for which he just came up short on), so he essentially (and unethically) sandbagged his colleagues (an often cited point that as nasty as Democrats are to Republicans, they can be even more vicious against each other).
Even free from facing 2 fellow Dem incumbents, Ackerman went through a brutal Dem primary. He faced an old librarian who was a mother of a Dem campaign consultant, and she apparently exhausted her life savings (a half-mil) into trying to defeat him. She held him to a 60-40% margin. IIRC, an old librarian beat the RINO apostate Mike Forbes in the 1st in the Dem primary, which finished his career. Ackerman still had a crapload of money, however, and he used it against a credible GOP opponent who was a young (31) legislator who had formerly worked for Tom DeLay named Allan Binder. But money was the key, and Binder couldn't match it (being outspent $917k to $123k), but Ackerman won by an underwhelming 52-45%. If Grant Lally, who was Ackerman's opponent in '94, had gotten the same number of votes Binder got in '92, he would've beaten Ackerman. Alas, the district got more and more Dem, so '92 was the high-water mark, the Republican only got 30% in 2000. Under the current lines, only 2 Republicans have even challenged him since 2002, and they each got 28% and 27% respectively.
Regarding the Joe Hanley/Kingsland Macy letter, I hadn't recalled it, but I may have read about it. The Dem managed an upset, Ernest Greenwood (though at 66 coming into office, no spring chicken), by all of 135 votes. Greenwood had been a Republican just prior to the election (just like Carolyn McCarthy) and had lost office running as one. But his victory was short-lived as he was beaten (60-39%) by Stuyvesant Wainwright, a young 31-year old attorney and WW2 vet (who was nearly 40 years Greenwood's junior). Wainwright turned 88 back on March 16th, and is part of the class of '52 (which also includes Robert Byrd) that is still alive today. There are zero members of Congress alive from any previous years before January 1953. Wainwright got swept out (by just 3,000 votes, a literal 50-50% split) in the JFK wave of '60 by Dem and future columnist Otis Pike (who also turns 88 this year). It was a rematch from 1958, which saw Wainwright beat him by a solid 15% margin, so that was peculiar (I don't know the circumstances for the loss). Pike set the record for the longest holder of the 1st district in NY history at 18 years, retiring in 1979 (which then returned to the GOP column).
Most of McCarthy's district is comprised of middle class (blue and white collar) Catholic folks, with large Jewish populations in the Five Towns and Cedarhurst.
There really aren't any "black districts" on the board per se, other than the one that covers Hempstead (which was covered by a white guy with a vowel when I was a child, despite its racial composition).
The biggest changes in Nassau have been the increase in the Asian population (on the North Shore, particularly around Lake Success) and Latinos around the district. Its really more a case of the white Catholics moving back to the center-left in both Nassau and Suffolk (to say nothing of the NY-area in general).
Nassau Republicans haven't been conservative since the Sprague days, both the pols and the residents.
BTW: Peter King isn’t much of a conservative either.
Adler’s district includes several heavily ‘Rat areas in South Jersey. McCain only won a handful of townships/cities/boroughs south of I-78 and west of the coastal counties. The Philly ‘rats have been pouring over the Whitman bridge for some time, which is why Gloucester and Burlington Counties haven’t gone GOP since 1988.
McCain got 47% of the vote in NJ-3 and the Republican nominee got 48%. Certainly that puts it on the target list. It ain’t no rat bastion.
“There really aren’t any “black districts” on the board per se, other than the one that covers Hempstead (which was covered by a white guy with a vowel when I was a child, despite its racial composition).”
There are 2 black guys on the board, I just assumed their districts were therefore black.
A black suburb of Chicago (Bellwood 88% black) has a White Mayor named Pasquale. I predict he will lose the upcoming election.
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.