Numbers for Three Potential Democratic Candidates in AL-05

I swear to goodness, (4.00 / 3)

You folks at LiA do the best political analysis out there!

---

by: Gayla @ Sat Dec 26, 2009 at 16:46:19 PM CST

Here is a question... (0.00 / 0)

If Cramer really loved to tell people he was  conservative and Girffith obviously sold the district on that fact as well...

Can Democrats win by going hard left?

Dale, I have to say you were right - mooncat

You're an entertainer son! -Parker Griffith

---

by: DaleJackson @ Sat Dec 26, 2009 at 18:06:28 PM CST

The Troll Song (0.00 / 0)

They're trollin', Trollin', Trollin'

Their comments are so swollen

Keep them dogies Trollin'

Outside!

 

No matter what the weather

Or how the ice gets thinner,

In their postings global warming is denied.

They write extended missives,

Of evidence dismissive,

Their links are all to pages that have died.

 

Move 'em on, head 'em off,

Head 'em off, block 'em out,

Take 'em on, block 'em out

Outside!

Put 'em out, ride 'em off

Ride 'em off, knock 'em out,

Cut 'em out, move 'em on

Outside!

 

They're postin', postin', postin'

Though monitors removin',

Take their comments postin'

Outside!

Don't try to understand 'em,

Just mark, delete and ban 'em,

Their paranoia's poison to your mind.

By my quick calculatin'

Nine tenths of it is spammin',

just pimpin' out a blog that we'll deride.

 

Move 'em on, head 'em off,

Head 'em off, block 'em out,

Take 'em on, block 'em out

Outside!

Put 'em out, ride 'em off

Ride 'em off, knock 'em out,

Cut 'em out, move 'em on

Outside!

Website || Twitter

---

by: Osborne Ink @ Sat Dec 26, 2009 at 18:15:40 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Wow, that was stupid. (1.00 / 1)

Dale, I have to say you were right - mooncat

You're an entertainer son! -Parker Griffith

---

by: DaleJackson @ Sat Dec 26, 2009 at 18:38:26 PM CST

[ Parent ]

No, YOU'RE Stupid (0.00 / 0)

Now we're BOTH five years old. I'm rubber, you're glue...

Website || Twitter

---

by: Osborne Ink @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 17:28:56 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Ha hahahahahaha! (0.00 / 0)

Good job!  That definitely erased the Christmas carols from my head!

---

by: Gayla @ Sat Dec 26, 2009 at 18:49:28 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Creative! (0.00 / 0)

Wasn't Clint Eastwood a hunk back then?

Or how about a little Blues Brothers for a more modern take:

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Sat Dec 26, 2009 at 19:36:59 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Osborne Ink- (4.00 / 1)

That was great. That was a great show and a great take-off.

---

by: Sundog @ Sat Dec 26, 2009 at 23:51:10 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Not much chance to find out (4.00 / 3)

Because I don't see any hard left candidates on the horizon.  The best shot for Democrats -- esp. in light of the Griffith episode -- is to nominate someone who says what they genuinely believe and whose integrity is unquestionable.

We've had too many politicians on both sides of the aisle who say whatever they think people want to hear, then after getting elected do what they damned well please, or maybe they promised so many things to different groups it's impossible to be consistent.  I've said again and again, the best practice is to figure out who you are and then run as yourself, because it will be a lot easier to govern (or legislate or judge, whatever) if you can be yourself instead of trying to remember who you promised to be.

That's why Republican-lite vs. Republican almost always yields a Republican win -- although Bush tarnished that "trust me, I'm a conservative" image a good deal.  In November it's very likely to be Democrat-lite (Griffith) vs. a genuine Democrat.  

Here's a little something to think about:  when someone like Cramer (or the late Albert Hall) says "I'm the only Democrat who can hold this seat," there's a certain self serving nature to that statement.  It's useful for them to keep people believing it's true because it sucks the air out of any primary challenges.  And the consultants who advise that only they can thread the electoral needle and position the candidate where he can win as a Democrat and a conservative are with the same breath tending to boost the perceived value of their services.  Image is everything and these people are selling image.  I'd like to see a genuine Democrat and a genuine Republican conduct a serious campaign on policy and ideas in AL-05 -- it would tell us a lot about where the district really stands.  

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Sat Dec 26, 2009 at 18:29:20 PM CST

[ Parent ]

What mooncat said. (4.00 / 1)

I would like to see a I'd like to see a genuine Democrat and a genuine Republican conduct a serious campaign on policy and ideas in AL-05 -- it would tell us a lot about where the district really stands too.  

What policy and ideas?

Affordable health care for all Alabamains.

Access to quality public schools for all Alabama students.

Jobs.  Jobs.  Jobs.  For all Alabamains. 

Comprehensive Immigration reform.

Equal rights.

Civil rights.

Human rights.

Any more?

The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dreams shall never die.~Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D. MA)

---

by: Redeye @ Sun Dec 27, 2009 at 09:10:29 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Policy ... (4.00 / 1)

• Jobs -- that ought to be Job 1, as they say at Ford.
• Financial regulation reform.
• Equal pay

If I were a Democrat running in a swing or conservative district, I'd look for 3 or 4 issues that constitute common ground, I'd formulate the best possible policy on those issues and beat them day and night.  It would help tremendously if progress on that small handful of issues would, in turn, open the door to doing other good things.  Like putting people back to work will improve other areas of the economy and reforming financial regulations will prevent another "too big to fail" failure in a few years.

 

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Sun Dec 27, 2009 at 10:42:00 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Not Tammy Irons (4.00 / 3)

I like her in person, but she's got vulnerabilities and really hasn't done a great deal in Montgomery yet. Sparks is interesting, but the real question is whether a candidate can get serious Democratic money. The internecine conflict on the right is going to produce a hilarious mess -- this is a huge opportunity for AL Dems, as I've argued elsewhere.

Website || Twitter

---

by: Osborne Ink @ Sat Dec 26, 2009 at 18:20:49 PM CST

Irons (4.00 / 2)

I think she'd have to move fast to establish name id outside her House district.  In this district, the winner is will need to run strong in the big population centers -- Huntsville, Decatur, Athens and I doubt most people there have ever heard of her.  That's a selling point for Parker, Sparks and esp. Paseur; she did quite well in Madison county just a year ago.

Totally agree about which candidate can secure the Democratic money.  That's a big question for Sparks, I think.  All year long we've been treated to this murmur that the power brokers in Montgomery want some other candidate -- why?  And we've been hearing for months that his fundraising has been disappointing -- why?  What's wrong with Ron?  He looks great on paper.  Will those people back him for a federal race instead of a state one?  Remember, contributions are limited to $2400 per individual (primary and general) for federal races so you need to have a lot more donors than for a state race.  Susan Parker has been there before and done a great job fundraising -- by all accounts she actually doesn't mind making the money calls.

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Sat Dec 26, 2009 at 18:40:09 PM CST

[ Parent ]

"Big population centers"? (4.00 / 1)

The two Shoals counties - Colbert and Lauderdale - cast a combined 61,512 votes (20.2% of the total) in the Fifth in the 2008 General in the House race.  This is more than either Limestone (32,774 (10.8%)) or the portion of Morgan in the district (26,729 (8.8%)). Madison cast 148,312 (48.8%) votes in the Congressional race. Lawrence added 14,375 (4.7%) and Jackson 20,254 (6.7%).  Madison is the grand prize (which may militate in favor of a Madison candidate, ceteris paribus), but the Shoals make up a bigger part of the district than either Limestone or part-Morgan.

 

I think you overestimate Irons's name recognition issue, if she chooses to get in this race.  The Florence TimesDaily and Shoals radio stations reach not only the Shoals counties, but Lawrence and most of Limestone. (35.7% of the vote totals above.)  Not only has paid media and news coverage been putting her name into a lot of the district, she is from a well known political family in the Shoals. Her uncle is current Florence Mayor Bobby Irons. That can be a plus or a minus in net terms, but it's a name recognition plus.

 

To the extent Sparks has had fundraising issues - and I think that is more a matter of chat from The Birmingham News and other non-Democratic-friendly sources than a reality - I don't see those lasting if he remains in the gubernatorial race.  He is not the dream candidate of many traditional Democratic funding sources, including AEA and trial lawyers, because, as Ag Commissioner, he has had to maintain a working relationship with ALFA. (Some argue that his ability to neutralize ALFA's traditional support of the GOP is a selling point in the governor's race.)  While these groups would have preferred someone else (see, Bedford and Judge Cobb trial balloons), they fear a Davis nomination.  Not for ideological reasons, though he's given us all reason to worry on that front.  More simply, these experienced Democratic hands worry that Davis will polarize the vote along racial lines, as Obama did, and hand both the Governor's Mansion and Legislature to the GOP. They have temporized to see if an alternative would emerge, but will likely come around to Sparks's aid, in both the primary and general.

 

Whoever gets the Democratic nomination may be able to avoid the historic myopia of the DCCC staff, if they can sell funding against Griffith (or whomever) as good pour encourager les autres.

---

by: PubliusIX @ Sat Dec 26, 2009 at 22:03:19 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Your quote: (4.00 / 1)

While these groups would have preferred someone else (see, Bedford and Judge Cobb trial balloons), they fear a Davis nomination.

Is it possible these groups also fear a Sparks nomination, and for some reason beyond ALFA?  We've all accepted that the Davis fear is based on skin color, the old "He'll drag the whole party down" concern but while we've laughed about the search for Anybody but Davis or Sparks by Montgomery insiders, the fear of Sparks doesn't have a good place to hang its hat.  It doesn't seem rational, and the Montgomery insiders may be self-serving, but they're seldom irrational.  Perhaps we should ask ourselves if they know something we don't know?  I can buy the fear that Alabama voters will become racists in the voting booth (don't necessarily accept that it's true, but I can understand the fear) but if the Montgomery crowd wants a non-black gubernatorial candidate, what the hell is wrong with Sparks?  What is his Achille's heel?

We should have pursued that question last spring, I think.

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Sat Dec 26, 2009 at 22:23:52 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Smart man, William of Ockham. (4.00 / 1)

ALFA as an agricultural lobby (and secondarily, as a profitable insurer) wants taxes which are earmarked to the ETF cut, or at least not raised.  That, alone, is enough to explain why AEA would not rush to support a candidate close to ALFA.  ALFA as an insurance company wants even more "tort reform," which explains why trial lawyers fret over someone close to it. Given these simple explanations of rational behavior, entia non sunt multiplicanda præter necessitatem tells me not to look for speculative "Achilles' Heels" or other reasons that they did not rush to Sparks's support.  Davis's closeness to the Business Council just reinforces the rationality of this behavior.  Their tilt toward Sparks, which I think is already emerging, is based on the equally rational premise that, even if they aren't wild about either as governor, if the Democratic caucuses maintain control over at least one house of the Legislature, no unfriendly governor - whether Davis, Bradley Byrne, or (arguably) Sparks is going to get any seriously anti-education, anti-consumer, or anti-worker bills to sign.

 

As to whether it's rational to fear that Alabamians are unwilling to vote for a black candidate, you only have to look at the exit polling data from the 2008 presidential election.  Obama got only 10% of the white vote. This, and Obama's overwheming percentage of the black vote, is corroborated by the near-linear correlation of black population and Obama voting percentages.

 

Mathematically, Davis would have to roughly triple the percentage of the white vote Obama obtained to have a realistic chance of winning. (The black vote turnout largely maxed out with Obama running.)

 

---

by: PubliusIX @ Sun Dec 27, 2009 at 02:01:01 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Race based voting patterns (4.00 / 1)

That's an interesting chart.  I wondered how it looked for Kerry in 2004 -- who got a smaller % in Alabama than Obama did.  Looks to me like a big part of the problem is related to the "D" after their names.  Skin color may have entered into the Obama vote in a handful of the extremely white North Alabama counties, but some of the distaste there was also related to the name and the perception Obama was a foreigner.

Democratic presidential candidates (of all colors) have a problem with white Southerners. 

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Sun Dec 27, 2009 at 15:07:56 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Who knew? (4.00 / 1)

I don't think the Montgomery crowd (?) wants a non black candidate per se, but a candidate who can win.  Candiates win by recivieng a majority of the vote.  Candidates don't win by pandering to the right at the expense of voters.  Candiates don't win by alienating the traditional base.  Candidates don't win by polarizing voters.  Artur Davis has polarized the democratic party.  Strike that, Davis has exposed the polarization within the democratic party (progressive vs conservative).

You said, 

I can buy the fear that Alabama voters will become racists in the voting booth (don't necessarily accept that it's true, but I can understand the fear)

Alabama voters can be racist in and out of the voting booth IMHO (Civil War voters).  Look at the 2008 election.  White democrats handed the state to McCain.  Davis has pandered to those same white democrats at the expense of the base (so not cool).  The question is, are there enough white democrats to elect Davis?  I submit the answer is no.  

What is Sparks achilles heel you ask?  I ask, does Sparks have an achilles heel? If he's qualified enough to be a Congressman he's qualified enough to be Governor.   IMHO he should stick a pin in the will he or won't he run for Congress baloon and stick to running for Governor.  This makes him look fickle and indecisive.  Wait, that might be his achilles heel.

The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dreams shall never die.~Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D. MA)

---

by: Redeye @ Sun Dec 27, 2009 at 09:00:55 AM CST

[ Parent ]

White Democrats did not hand this state to McCain (0.00 / 0)

There are simply not enough Democrats in Alabama to win an election without the help of independents and moderate Republicans.  Obama didn't get those groups -- although he did win their support in other states, he didn't even try here.

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Sun Dec 27, 2009 at 12:31:32 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yes white democrats did hand this state to McCain/Palin (2.00 / 1)

Numbers don't lie.  According to the exit polling President Obama recieved 10% of the white vote in Alabama.  

While I respect your opinion, I strongly disagree with this statement;

There are simply not enough Democrats in Alabama to win an election without the help of independents and moderate Republicans. 

That is not true.  My spouse pointed out that Jesse Jackson, Jr. carried Alabama in the Presidential election without the help of independents and moderate republicans.  BTW, who exactly are the "independents"?  I mean what exactly is their political philosophy?  Are they pro choice or anti choice?  Are they pro labor or anti labor?  Are they pro LBGT rights or anti pro LBGT rights?  What do they stand for?  What/who are they against?  The same goes for "moderate republicans", who are they and what do they stand for?  Who are they for or against?  I wish politicians and candidates would stop pandering to the so called moderates/independents at the expense of the traditional base.

You said;

Democratic presidential candidates (of all colors) have a problem with white Southerners. 

 

The reason democratic presidential candidates (of all colors) have a problem with white Southerners is because the democratic party is considered the N word loving party.  The G word loving party.  And the baby killing party.  That's why it bugs me to no end when so called democratic candidates pander to the so called independents and moderate republicans at the expense of minorities, our LBGT bothers and sisters and a women's right to chose to have a safe, legal, abortion with a nod, nod, wink, wink. 

The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dreams shall never die.~Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D. MA)

---

by: Redeye @ Sun Dec 27, 2009 at 22:41:36 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Jesse Jackson carried Alabama (4.00 / 2)

in the presidential primary - NOT a general election.

Mooncat's quote, which you referenced, is about the general election, not the primary.

I'm not short.  I'm fun size!!

---

by: countrycat @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 11:18:18 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Democratic base and the need to reach out (4.00 / 1)

1)  In 1988, Jesse Jackson won the Democratic primary in the state--43% of the vote, with Al Gore receiving 37% and Dukakis receiving 7%.  Almost twice as many voters voted in this primary compared to the Republican primary (where George H.W. Bush handily carried the state).  However, the voting demographics and political factors have changed over the past 20 years in the state: (a) there has been growth in areas of the state that trend Republican--suburban Shelby County, suburban Baldwin County, Huntsville-Madison County; (b) the Republican party has become better organized statewide over the past 20 years (remember, the GOP really did not make a move in state elections until 1986).

2)  Based on previous elections, the Democratic base in Alabama does not comprise a large enough share of the electorate to win.  At this point, Alabama is roughly a 40-40-20 state in the breakdown between Dems-GOP-Ind.  This estimate probably expands the Democratic side by a a few points.

A few elections that I used to come to this conclusion were from both the 2006 and 08 cycles (results drawn from here).

2006 Ag. Commissioner--Sparks 59.07%, Libscomb 40%
(This is probably the best indication of the Republican base in the state--those who vote for Republican candidates dependably)

2006 Governor's race--Baxley 41.6%, Riley 57.4%
2006 SoS race--Worley 42%, Chapman 57%
2008 Senate Race--Figures 36.5%,Sessions 63.4%
2008 President's Race--Obama 38.7%, McCain 60.3

Based upon these three results, the Democratic base in Alabama comprises somewhere between 35-40% of the electorate--the voters who are reliable Democrats in each election.  Of course, this varies depending on factors such as incumbency (which helped Sessions & Riley), campaigning (after the primary, Obama spent at most 5 minutes in Alabama--they conceded the state rather early), and other factors (for example, in 2006 Worley was attacked for ethics complaints and mismanagement).

Based upon this, to win general elections, Democrats have to pivot and reach out to voters in the center.  Independents and moderate voters have a variety of reasons for choosing the way they do, and there is not one simple paradigm that explains how they vote (you can't define them as pro-choice, pro-life, etc.).  Some concerns would include jobs and economic opportunity, education.  Some are concerned about the state's image looking forward (for example, Fob James turned off voters with the chain gangs, the strong opposition to evolution, and antagonizm to the federal government).  I'd imagine that many of these voters are not trusting of the state government, though they might be willing to trust if given a reason.  However, many of these voters will respond to a message that will protect and promote economic growth, education, and good government.

---

by: csduke @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 11:39:58 AM CST

[ Parent ]

How come democrats are always the ones reaching out??? (0.00 / 0)

Democrats have to reach out to the center, the independents, the moderates, the conversatives, the blue dogs, the republicans.  How come nobody every reaches out to the democrats? 

I'm tired democrats reaching out and drawing  back a nub. That's why we're (democrats/liberals/progressives) in the blank blank mess we are in.  It's why we don't have universal health care.  It's why our troops are in a Q'W"agmire in Iraq and Afghanistan.  It's why we have debt as far as they eye can see.  It's why we have segregated, under funded public schools.  It's why we have record deficits and massive forclosures. It's why we have GITMO and FISA.  It's why we have a conservative leaning United States Supreme Court.  It's why we have political prosecutions and an InJustice department instead of a justice department.  It's why we have record unemployment.  It's why our borders aren't secure.  It's why we don't have immigration reform.  It's why a womans right to reproductive choice is in jeapordy.  See what I mean?  Stop reaching out to these people!  Let them reach out to us for a change.

Redeye Rant over and out.

The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dreams shall never die.~Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D. MA)

---

by: Redeye @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 13:46:33 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Jesse Jackson and Barack Obama both won the Democratic PRIMARY in Alabama (0.00 / 0)

Neither won the general election here, which would have required the help of independent/moderate voters.  Of the two, Obama might have been able to convince independents to vote for him, even in Alabama, but we have so few electoral votes it wasn't worth the investment to make his case here. I don't say he would have won Alabama -- no Democrat has done that since 1976 -- but he could have closed the gap had he made an effort.

Obama got 39% of the vote in Alabama last November.  That's about the same as the % of self-identified Democrats in this state.  You can't blame his loss here on white Democrats or Democrats of any color at all -- he simply didn't win voters outside the Democratic base.  And I'll say this again because you seem to be missing this point: DEMOCRATS CAN'T WIN IN ALABAMA WITH THE BASE ALONE.  WE NEED TO PERSUADE INDEPENDENTS AND MODERATES TO SUPPORT OUR CANDIDATES.

I don't give a fig for purity.  I want to govern.  Winning is the essential step.  Persuasion is the way to make it happen, not ranting. 

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 11:45:55 AM CST

[ Parent ]

How? (0.00 / 0)

I stand corrected on the Jesse Jackson/primary/general point.  It's no excuse, but I read the comment on my blackberry and I mis-read the statement.  The point I was attempting to make though was Jesse Jackson won the Alabama primary because of democratic unity.  

But the question remains,HOW do we (democrats/progressives/liberals) PERSUADE INDEPENDENTS AND MODERATES TO SUPPORT OUR CANDIDATES. without compromising and capitulating our core values, principals and agenda over to them?

Heck I want to win too, but are we really the winners just because the elected official has a D behind their name (Parker Griffith, Bobby Bright, Artur Davis)?  I still believe candidates run as conservative/blue dog/moderates in an attempt to play both ends against the middle.  Conservative to get the Civil War Vote, democrat to get the African American/minority/LBGT  vote with a nod, nod, wink, wink.

You call it purity, I call it unity.  

I say winningjust to say we won is not really winning when the losers turn the winners into the losers and the losers into the winners.  

Who benefits by going along to get along?  Not we progressives/liberals/democrats that's fer sure.

I firmly disagree with your assement President Obama "didn't make an effort here".  He came to Selma, Huntsville and Birmingham.  And if he didn't make an effort in Alabama  don't blame him, blame his Alabama campaign chair/team.   

 

The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dreams shall never die.~Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D. MA)

---

by: Redeye @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 13:28:07 PM CST

[ Parent ]

You would be surprised who us Independents are (0.00 / 0)

I'm one and I'm a black male who is also bisexual and very socially progressive on most issues key issues (women rights, pro-choice, same-sex unions, hate crimes legislation, climate control, caps on urban sprawl and renewal of urban areas, education reform), but have voted Republican before and a couple of times in the past.  However, I don't like how their is always the purity ruler of the Democratic party which is why I'm not one.  Also the allegience of the AEA with Democratics in this state bothers me as well as the allegience of ALFA with conservative Democrats and Republicans.  I believe in the idea that if one wants progress then you have to be pragmatic and work with those on both sides and find those who are on the "opposite side" to be sway to empathy and vote in favor of your issues.  Some Independents are more bizarre on stances and will basically code themselves as one, but really are obstructionist Republicans if not full blow Libertarians (which I hate with a passion). 

"Hypocrites are those whom pick and choose prejudices while giving accolades for their own..."

"It is what it is."  

http://blkindependent.blogspot...

---

by: kayman @ Tue Dec 29, 2009 at 12:39:44 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Some numbers you could put in red (4.00 / 3)

or peg with a footnote, an asterisk, or whatever:

• Parker, Madison County, 2002 (36.3%): Whoever the Democrats nominate for this seat has to beat this figure in Madison County to win. And this '02 matchup will situationally resemble the matchup of a Susan Parker/Parker Griffith contest, in that it will pit her against an incumbent member of Congress.
• Parker, Money raised, 2002 ($1.1M): You can look at this number as the glass half empty, or the glass half full.  Given the conventional wisdom of that year that she didn't have a chance, it's a creditable effort. It's hard to get people to give to a long shot.  On the other hand, in terms of what it takes to beat an incumbent senator, it's woefully inadequate. I'm inclined to take the half-full approach, if only because this is going to be a similar uphill fight against preconceptions of the DC media. (CQ flipped the race to "Republican Likely" the day Griffith switched.)
• Paseur, Lauderdale County, 2008 (66.7%): If you saw this number by itself, you'd be impressed.  But it represents a dropoff from her number two years earlier (71.4%), and this in a county where she was an elected official for nearly 20 years.  Normally, I'd be trying to find out if something happened on the ground. I haven't heard of anything.
• Paseur, money raised, 2008 ($2.2M) This looks impressive, but you have to remember that the Democrats could nominate a stuffed deer for the Supreme Court and trial lawyers would give it a million dollars. Comparing this figure to the others is a serious apples-and-oranges issue.
• Sparks, total district vote (55.2% and 60.6%): Better than the numbers of either of the others.  Sparks has led the Democratic ticket statewide in both of his runs for Agriculture Commissioner, as demonstrated in this map of the 2006 general election.
• Sparks, total donations ($200K and $375K): This is the flip side of the Paseur apples-and-oranges comparison. Ag Commissioner is not a big-money race; candidates seldom buy TV, and there aren't that many donors with potential benefits from a candidacy.  Of the money spent in this race, a lot of it is spent by agricultural groups like the Cattlemen's Association and ALFA communicating with their own members, and these numbers are "off book" on finance disclosure.
• While we are making apples-and-oranges comparisons, the three state legislators mentioned defeated their Republican opponents in 2006 by comfortable margins: Hinshaw took 66.1%; Irons took 65.1%, and Robinson got 99.% against write-ins, without Republican opposition.

---

by: PubliusIX @ Sat Dec 26, 2009 at 18:59:10 PM CST

Thanks. (4.00 / 2)

I was hoping you would jump in on this thread.

Everyone looking at the past history of candidates in Alabama state elections would be wise to remember that the finance regulations are very different.  Individuals and PACs can contribute virtually limitless amounts to candidates for Alabama state races.  Limits are much lower for a federal race, so you have to touch a lot more people.

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Sat Dec 26, 2009 at 19:45:04 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Sparks is a No Go (4.00 / 2)

I am not from AL-5 so take this for what it is worth: But I fail to see Sparks as a viable candidate for these reasons:

1 - The basic platform of any Congressional candidate is "I am going to Washington to take care of the home folks" - how the hell do you convince AL-5 voters you will take care of them if you will not even live in the District with them?

2 - Other political figures have endorsed Sparks for governor. To put it another way, they have spent some of their political capital on him. He then quits the race for gov? How could any other group feel comfortable endorsing or supporting him?

3 - It would look like he is running from a tough fight if he bails out of the gov race. Is that a man you want representing you in Washington?

4 - He establishes himself as someone who wants an office, any office.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
Edmund Burke

---

by: Old Prosecutor @ Sat Dec 26, 2009 at 20:46:07 PM CST

#s 3 and 4 are real problems for Sparks (4.00 / 1)

The Senate misfire in 2007 and the dance with Folsom earlier this year laid the groundwork for those memes -- which he doesn't want to feed.

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Sat Dec 26, 2009 at 20:59:03 PM CST

[ Parent ]

In perspective ... (4.00 / 2)

I am not sure you can fault a politician for testing the waters, and then choosing another course based on a realistic evaluation of the circumstances.  I think Sparks correctly sensed that the DSCC had no intention to seriously fund a challenge to Sessions, despite the buzz his name generated in the blogosphere. I no more consider this a "misfire" than I consider it a "misfire" when Susan Parker walked back her exploratory feelers for the 2008 Congressional race, after she determined that the DCCC really, really wanted Parker Griffith (oops!).

---

by: PubliusIX @ Sun Dec 27, 2009 at 02:55:19 AM CST

[ Parent ]

experience in Federal fundraising (4.00 / 3)

is very important. I've worked with a number of state candidates that tried to make the jump and fail because of their insistence that they can win without money. you have to be committed to call time in Federal races with the contribution limits. Susan Parker knows what is needed in that regard.

I think she would be a great candidate and my first choice. Sparks is an intriguing choice though.

I don't know what kind of interest Paseur has. She's a great campaigner though and would be a quick study. She's accustomed to tough races.

---

by: gradyw @ Sat Dec 26, 2009 at 21:41:01 PM CST

The time is right.... (4.00 / 2)

I think it's way past time that we had more women candidates for statewide. Anyone who knows me knows how I feel about the opportunity Dems missed by not investing in Susan Parker in 2002.

I think she would be a great candidate to run for the vacated Dem seat. Was she so burned that by national Dems that she would even tried again is a real question, but she is far and away the best choice of those listed. 

 

Money may be the Mother's milk of politics, but it is the arsenic of Democracy.

---

by: Dardango @ Sat Dec 26, 2009 at 23:59:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Amen! (4.00 / 1)

Women are more effective lawmakers than men according to a new study:

The study, which examined the performance of House members between 1984 and 2004, found that women delivered roughly 9 percent more discretionary spending for their districts than men.

...

The researchers also found that women introduced more legislation than men who served in their same districts, often hitting the ground running in their first terms.

 

“We find that, on average, women sponsor about three bills more per Congress per term than their male counterparts,” said Anzia. “They co-sponsor more bills than other members, and they also obtain more co-sponsors for their own bills.”

...

Researchers say the small number of female members may have something to do with their effectiveness. Women who run and win are likely the most politically ambitious and talented of their pool, having potentially overcome hurdles including voter bias and self-doubt about their ability to win.

I'd love to see a female member of Congress from Alabama.  Until now, the 7th district looked like the best hope for that, but there are certainly some strong women positioned for a run in AL-05.  Susan is probably the strongest candidate and is very well aligned with what I'd want in a representative -- honest, smart, hard-working. 

 

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Sun Dec 27, 2009 at 11:04:38 AM CST

[ Parent ]

About the Achilles heel (0.00 / 0)

Does anyone know anything about Sparks' personal life? I have heard he has been married 3 times. Is this a problem? 

---

by: Sundog @ Sun Dec 27, 2009 at 00:00:49 AM CST

Is it half of what you see, and none of what you hear? (0.00 / 0)

I remember hearing in 1970, when the Wallace smear campaign against him was at its high tide, that then-governor Albert Brewer's daughter was pregnant by a black man.

 

According to alacourt.com, he was married once, and divorced in 1993 in DeKalb County. His campaign bio makes no reference to a subsequent marriage.  My memory is that he had a regular girlfriend (for lack of a better term) who stayed behind in Fort Payne when he first moved to Montgomery as Assistant Commissioner in 1999; the relationship ended four or five years ago.

---

by: PubliusIX @ Sun Dec 27, 2009 at 02:40:17 AM CST

[ Parent ]

How do you know that? (4.00 / 1)

I ask because that because that suggest something is being hidden. Just the way that reads.

 Honestly I hope not because I feel of the two Sparks is the one who could make hay out of "running against Mobile" in a way that Davis can't.

 

---

by: jacool @ Sun Dec 27, 2009 at 10:01:33 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I don't have any understanding of Sparks' marital history (4.00 / 1)

A couple of years ago I heard he was unmarried -- my thought was he's kind of old to be un- (I assumed never) married.  Later someone told me he had kids from a previous marriage so that made more sense.  Then last year a friend who was at the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver was going on about having spoken at length to Ron Sparks' wife there.  Cognitive dissonance!  Based on the description, I believe she meant the woman next to him in the photo at right -- who is (I think) a girlfriend, and from what others say, a girlfriend of somewhat long standing.  His campaign bio makes no reference to any marriage at all, just to children and grandchildren.

Honestly, it just never ocurred to me that his marital status or history would be of interest, but maybe it's something we should ask about, if only to clear up the confusion.

 

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Sun Dec 27, 2009 at 13:37:58 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Do divorces matter? (4.00 / 2)

I know there was a time when divorce was thought to be a career ender for a politician, but we seem to be past that.  St. Ronnie Reagan was divorced; John Kerry was divorced.  Parker Griffith was divorced, and there was a certain swinger flavor to that one which his friends worried about, but the Republicans never brought it up in 2008.

How many divorces before it becomes an issue?  Or is one enough if there's something particularly salacious or ugly about it?  

How about affairs?  Obviously, Republicans thought Bill Clinton's should have mattered enough to get him to resign, but it hasn't mattered for a whole bunch of Republicans.  Nowadays, the word is that Griffith has been unfaithful in his marriage much more recently and they still welcome him with open arms -- and I confess I don't care that much if he's fooling around with his staff, consenting adults and all that.  

Do divorces and fidelity matter for politicians only in what they say about judgement and character?  Is it more likely to be damaging if the hypocrisy is clear?  Or if there's an attempt to hide the truth? 

Does a history of smoking pot (inhaling optional) matter?  What about a history of DUI, or just a bad driving record?  Are there standards for politicians or can we accept them with serious flaws?  And is one party more accepting than the other?

One plain vanilla divorce wouldn't matter to me.  Three seems like a lot.  I have several friends who have been through 3 divorces and judgement and temperment (or just temper) seem to enter into it.  No, I wouldn't vote for them as dogcatcher.

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Sun Dec 27, 2009 at 11:29:13 AM CST

[ Parent ]

The alacort research is interesting. (4.00 / 1)

If Sparks has only been married once, that would be great. Three times is too many. Supposedly one of his ex-wives used Dana Jill Simpson as her attorney. The case is also sealed. It is not usual for divorce cases to be sealed. More information from everyone please.

---

by: Sundog @ Sun Dec 27, 2009 at 11:00:06 AM CST

i don't want to be in business of making (4.00 / 1)

judgment calls on how many times somebody has been married.  

---

by: gradyw @ Sun Dec 27, 2009 at 11:33:20 AM CST

[ Parent ]

gradyw, you are right. (4.00 / 1)

It only matters  about marriage etc. before the election. After the election, when we like someone, what they do morally can be overlooked. I would hate for us to blindsided, however, if Republicans know something we don't know.

---

by: Sundog @ Sun Dec 27, 2009 at 16:48:10 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Griffith gone and DJack is back? (4.00 / 2)

Interesting.

Good to see the Dems have a variety of options. I have heard of a lot of good potential candidates, Judge Paseur ran strong in a high profile race just last year, Rep Randy Hinshaw is always a strong candidate, Susan Parker is well known and respected, Steve Raby has experience in D.C., and Anthony Daniels is smart and hardworking. Harrison is a Democrat's Democrat. 

No dis to those I haven't mentioned, just not as familiar with them.

 

---

by: Go Blue @ Sun Dec 27, 2009 at 11:07:18 AM CST

That's what happens when you take a holiday ... (4.00 / 1)

Come back and the whole world is topsy turvy!

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Sun Dec 27, 2009 at 12:51:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Any word on Anthony Daniels? (4.00 / 1)

I was really impressed by him when he was in the primary earlier this year.

I'm not short.  I'm fun size!!

---

by: countrycat @ Sun Dec 27, 2009 at 15:40:25 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Interesting indeed. (0.00 / 0)

Radio Boy is unbanned and Redeye's front page piviledges are revoked.  Talk about a topsy turvy world.

I agree with all of your assesements Go Blue.  Hinshaw and Parker are very both democrat's democrats like Harrison and Daniels is hardworking.

Harrison would be great, but I'm skeered he would mobilize the republicans if you know what I mean.

Slightly off topic, but if you haven't seen the Hardball awards in Speaking Out News, here is your chance. 

As we close out the year and the decade, 2009 has been a year of change, but the Hardball Awards remain the same. Yes, it's the time of year for giving and we want to make sure that those who deserve get what that deserve. After all, our winners have worked so hard all year and they deserve something other than a lump of coal for their efforts.

You can also read about the democratic party's response to Parker Griffith's betrayal.

"Alabama Democrats have a deep political bench in the 5th District and we will nominate a formidable challenger to fill this seat next year." If Congressman Griffith survives a Republican Primary battle next year, he should be prepared to bring his lunch if he hopes to hold this seat in November of 2010. Our folks are motivated to right this wrong." Turnham stated.

The state party also called on Parker Griffith to return the thousands of dollars of Democratic donations he has raised.

I'm sure Parker Griffith is falling all over himself trying to answer the call to return the thousands of dollars of Democratic donations he has raised.  *Big snark*

 

The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dreams shall never die.~Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D. MA)

---

by: Redeye @ Sun Dec 27, 2009 at 23:02:10 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Susan Parker (4.00 / 1)

IMHO he should stick a pin in the will he or won't he run for Congress baloon and stick to running for Governor. This makes him look fickle and indecisive. Wait, that might be his achilles heel.

 

Susan Parker is the best shot. She's from the area, has name ID, she will work and most importantly, she's a TRUE Dem! I think she has a great shot to beat the Republican nominee.

Ron Sparks should end this congressional stuff ASAP. His quote to the AP last week made him look like a flip-flopper. I know a lot of people have handed this race to Davis already, but the fact is we haven't even gotten to crunch time yet. If Ron doesn't fumble it away he can still win.

However, when you come across as politically calculating and self-serving that can hurt your support. We already have a guy like that running for Governor in the Democratic primary & we don't need another one.

---

by: VIP @ Sun Dec 27, 2009 at 13:48:11 PM CST

I tend to agree about Susan Parker being the strongest candidate (4.00 / 2)

Oh how I wish she had run in 2008!

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Sun Dec 27, 2009 at 15:09:44 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Another possible plus... (4.00 / 2)

I think the national attention that the Griffith departure will give the Dem who runs for the seat some national attention which could be a real plus with a politically "attractive" candidate like Susan Parker.

Money may be the Mother's milk of politics, but it is the arsenic of Democracy.

---

by: Dardango @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 00:05:13 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Correction (4.00 / 1)

national attention from the Griffith departure...

Money may be the Mother's milk of politics, but it is the arsenic of Democracy.

---

by: Dardango @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 00:06:47 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I agree with VIP and Dardango (4.00 / 1)

VIP you said;

 I know a lot of people have handed this race to Davis already, but the fact is we haven't even gotten to crunch time yet. If Ron doesn't fumble it away he can still win.

Psst Ron!  The next time someone from Washington D.C. calls to talk about you running for Parkers's seat, just hang up.  They are not your friends.

Dardango you said;

I think the national attention from the Griffith departure will give the Dem who runs for the seat some national attention which could be a real plus with a politically "attractive" candidate like Susan Parker.

Yep!  It would be Susan Parker goes to Washington the redux.  A "democrats demorcrat (h/t GoBlue) who will represent ALL the people of Alabama in Congress and restore honesty and inegrity to the Alabama Congresssional delegation.  A real Steele Magnolia.

Run Susan Run!

Please.

The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dreams shall never die.~Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D. MA)

---

by: Redeye @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 09:54:20 AM CST

[ Parent ]