Rural Straw Poll Picks Fred Thompson and Barack Obama for President

Last week's Husker Harvest Days celebration in Grand Island, sponsored by the Nebraska Farm Bureau, included an unscientific presidential straw poll of Nebraska farmers, ranchers, agricultural workers, and their families.
 The Associated Press reports the results:

Of the 387 who voted Republican, 36 percent picked [former Sen. Fred] Thompson, 16 percent picked Sen. John McCain of Arizona and 15 percent picked Rudy Giuliani.

Of the 165 votes cast by Democrats, 35 percent were for [Barack] Obama, the U.S. senator from Illinois, 31 percent were for Sen. Hilary Clinton of New York and 16 percent were for John Edwards.

Anyone surprised by these results? How well do these numbers conform with your expectations of Nebraska voters? Personally, I see Thompson's numbers reflecting his position as flavor-of-the-month in a weak Republican field. There's no justification for his being the front-runner beyond the fact that Republicans have seen him on Law & Order and are buying into the hype that he could be the next Ronald Reagan.
 
It doesn't surprise me that rural Nebraskans would reject a smooth operator like Mitt Romney - who failed to even register in the top three. Giuliani also polled a lot lower than would be expected from his national standing, suggesting that a former New York mayor who doesn't pander completely to the religious right would be a tough sell to the Republican base in Middle America.  Honestly, if anyone knew who he was, I'd expect the sort of voters who'd attend Husker Harvest Days to favor former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee. I'll give my fellow Nebraskans enough credit, though, that I don't think they'd rally to the likes of Sam Brownback or Tom Tancredo.  As for the Democratic straw poll, it's hard to say what exactly to glean from these results. Probably what stands out the most is that the numbers simply don't support John Edwards' claim to be the only candidate who can connect with red state voters. Rather, Nebraska Democrats seem to be banking what hopes they have for a new beginning on Obama, while a number of others thumb their nose at the Republican majority by rallying to Clinton.   Either way, a black man and a woman ended up with a combined 2/3rds of the vote. Who would have guessed such a thing would have been possible in Nebraska just a few years ago?  Of course, there's no reason to put much stock in these number. For starters, it isn't a very large sample. Not to mention, the ratio of voting Republicans to voting Democrats (70% - 30%) is pretty damn disappointing - even taking into account this being an agricultural sector poll taken in the Third Congressional District.
Still, it's something to think about. Something to talk about, as well. Let's hear what you have to say.

Go to full text...

Chuck Hagel Likes Democrats' Chances of Reclaiming His Senate Seat

I suppose the following could be posturing on Sen. Chuck Hagel's part just to discourage complacence by Nebraska Republicans. On the other hand, this might be Hagel's way of emphasizing his legacy as the only Republican to have won a U.S. Senate race in Nebraska in the last 30 years. Regardless of his intent, this Hagel statement to the Lincoln Journal-Star should prove interesting to anyone forecasting the 2008 election:

"I am confident I could have won re-election," Hagel said.

Nebraska's GOP faces a challenge in retaining an open seat, he said.

"I don't know how anyone can say it's a safe Republican seat," Hagel said, in view of recent Nebraska political history. Democrats have won nine of the past 11 Senate races here.

Could Hagel have survived the primary challenge by Attorney General Jon Bruning? I'm on record thinking so but - at the same time - have no particular insight into the strange thought processes of your typical Republican primary voter.

Looking to the open field that now exists for the 2008 general election, though, Hagel is absolutely right in declaring that Nebraska's should not be considered a "safe Republican seat." On the other hand, I must again caution against the continued embellishment and exaggeration of Democrats' chances in this race should Bob Kerrey run. Kerrey's entry undoubtedly makes this a top-flight race, but his odds can't honestly be said to be any better than 50 - 50 if former Governor and current Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns gets the nomination. I could see Kerrey having a slight advantage over any other potential Republican nominees, but there's no way this race is a cake walk.

What troubles me most about these out-sized expectations is the effect they'll have should Kerrey opt-out of the race. Suddenly, Nebraska becomes a lost opportunity rather than the battleground it could and should be in 2008. Sure, without Kerrey, the race could rightfully be said to "lean Republican," but it can't be considered a safe bet for the GOP by any stretch of the imagination.

No doubt about it - Omaha Mayor Mike Fahey has the potential to beat any candidate the Republicans could put up, including Johanns. That isn't saying it would be easy...or likely....but it's well beyond plausible and should be kept in mind as the next wave of candidates declare and this exciting campaign develops.

Go to full text...

Chuck Hagel's Blaze of Glory?

By: Ryan Anderson

If you're looking for some perspective on Hagel's announcement today, you can't do much better than Don Walton's column for the Lincoln Journal Star. Eschewing for a moment the horses racing and dominos toppling, Walton stops to reflect on Hagel's service in light of the promises he made and the statements he gave during his breakout campaign in '96. The main thrust of Walton's column is that Hagel is a simple man and an honest politician who simply kept the promises he made... namely: to support the Republican Party whenever he could, to support his country's interests whenever he must, and to try and get the job done in twelve years. Fair enough. But there's another story in this piece about another Chuck Hagel: the warrior, the fighter, and, ultimately, the champion. Hagel and his team had just finished what Jim Exon later would describe as the most flawless campaign he had ever seen. Grudging praise from the Democratic political maestro and retiring senator Hagel would succeed.   During that 19 months, Hagel emerged from comparative obscurity to overcome and handily defeat the Republican and the Democrat who had been the leading vote-gatherers in their parties two years earlier.   First, Hagel caught Attorney General Don Stenberg in the Republican primary. Then, he ran down Ben Nelson, who had been re-elected governor in a statewide landslide.   In the beginning, Chuck Hagel was a Republican hero.

Hagel was never a man short on energy and talent, and those gifts have served him exceptionally well in every fight he's picked and every race he's run. That's a good thing for us, and I mean it. Our political system works best when it works us the hardest. We should value worthy opponents: they force us to rethink old strategies and question old ideas. Hagel was such an opponent, and we owe him for that. It's a shame, really, to see the old gladiator lay down his sword before an opportunist like Bruning, but perhaps Hagel's got fight left in him yet. Freed at last from party allegiance and political jockeying, he's left only with that talent and that energy, that fight and that promise: to serve the interests of his state and his nation. And we need that service, now more than ever.  The spotlight may have passed from Hagel's political career, but it shines everyday on the challenges left in Iraq. As Senator, Hagel has not always shown the judgement or the courage to take whatever action neccessary to meet that challenge. But he has shown an ability to question, a capacity for growth, and in these dual qualities he has proven a potential to lead.  Well, Senator, this is your chance. Now is your time. You have the talent and the opportunity. What you haven't is an excuse. Here's hoping there's still one fight left in this dog.

Go to full text...

A Golden Opportunity: More Reactions to Hagel's Retirement

From the Omaha World-Herald:

Democrats hold a 51-to-49 majority in the Senate and they would like to extend that lead in 2008. Republicans must defend 22 of 34 seats on the ballot next year, and about a half-dozen are considered vulnerable. Democrats, meanwhile, hold 12 seats that will be on the ballot, and only one or two are considered vulnerable at this point....

"The good news for Democrats just keeps coming," said Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia, after hearing of Hagel's plans.

"The Democrats have got an enormous playing field for 2008 in the Senate. They have lots of Republicans to target and a good chance of picking up seats in the Senate," Sabato said.

From CQ Politics:

Pollster John Zogby said Hagel's retirement would complicate efforts by Republicans to regain a Senate majority, forcing them to defend an open seat in what is likely to be a tough race.

"It was already tilting against the Republicans as far as regaining control of the Senate. Now Nebraska is going to be competitive. Polls had shown recently Hagel was not a shoo-in. Now, with an open seat in a state that can go either way, it's clear that the Nebraska is another state that Republicans have to worry about," he said.

Go to full text...

NE-Sen: Hagel To Announce Retirement Monday

By: Dave Sund

Don Walton confirms it:

Sen. Chuck Hagel will announce Monday he'll not seek re-election next year.

 

Hagel also will tell an Omaha news conference he does not intend to be a candidate for any office in 2008, clamping a lid on speculation he might be pondering a late-inning presidential bid.

 

In a prelude to Monday's announcement, he conferred Friday with Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

 

Later, Hagel gathered his Washington staff together to inform them of his decision, according to sources close to the senator.

 

Hagel's departure at the end of 2008 will bring an end to a meteoric 12-year Senate ride that propelled him to national prominence as the most outspoken Republican opponent of President Bush's Iraq war policies.

Go to full text...

Nebraska Republicans Don't Care That Their Votes Won't Count???

The rejuvenated Douglas County Democratic Party held a press conference yesterday touting the Nebraska Democratic Party's 2008 Presidential caucus, scheduled for Saturday, February 9th. The press conference was obviously quite successful, earning a front-page story in the Omaha World-Herald, not to mention across the dial coverage on Omaha television (KMTV, KETV, KPTM).

This is a really exciting development for Nebraska Democrats, who are certainly taking a risk with so massive an undertaking but who ultimately have little to lose after years of our state being less than an afterthought in presidential politics. Of course, there are no guarantees the caucus will prove a tremendous success, but I think the people of Nebraska will appreciate the fact that at least one political party in our state cares enough about its voters to give them the chance to have a say in choosing their presidential nominee.

The Nebraska Republican Party may have any number of legitimate reasons for not following suit, maintaining its own presidential selection during the May primary when the race is all-but-certain to be over. It may be a matter of tradition. It may be a simple (and quite practical) acknowledgment of Nebraska's low place on the presidential totem pole. It may even reflect plain old laziness on their part, not wanting to deal with the hassle when Nebraska's Republican majority is likely to rally behind whoever has the "R" by his name on the November ballot. Who knows - they might even sense that the current crop of Republican candidates is so uniformly unimpressive that it's just not worth having a choice between them.

Whatever their reasoning, I could probably respect it. What I can't respect, though, is the insulting mockery by the Nebraska Republican Party's Executive Director, Tiffany Carlton, directed towards Nebraska Democrats just for daring to be relevant on the national stage.

  The Omaha World-Herald reported:

Although the Democrats' caucuses will come four days after Super-duper Tuesday - when more than 20 states are expected to hold primaries or caucuses - several candidates have indicated interest in competing for Nebraska's delegates, state party officials said. "We are definitely a part of the process now. Even though there's a Super-duper Tuesday going on February 5, there are so many strong candidates that we won't end up with a definite winner on that date," said Chris Jerram, chairman of the Douglas County Democratic Party....  

[Tiffany] Carlton, the GOP executive director, said it's unlikely that a Feb. 9 contest will have any real impact, with so many states choosing a nominee on Feb. 5. "Unfortunately, because so many other states have moved their caucuses forward, their delusion of grandeur is not going to happen. By February 9, the decision will be made and the Nebraska Democrats will be left standing like the kid who got left out on the playground," she said.

Now, I realize that, as her party's executive director, it is Carlton's job to be partisan. But, I don't think that partisanship should extend to actively rooting for the failure of any effort to empower the people of Nebraska and to give them more of a say in who will be their next president.

According to the Nebraska Republican Party, democracy is the true delusion of grandeur. They decided for their own voters that Nebraska Republicans would have no real say in their nomination process. And, from this response, they clearly resent the fact that Nebraska Democrats are daring to be more bold, taking a risk that shows signs of life and true concern for Nebraska voters that will only make the complacent GOP look bad by comparison.

Then again, they already look bad from Carlton's statement above. I guess they might as well get used to it now.

***Addendum*** I just added a new poll on this topic. Please tell us what you think about Nebraska Democrats' plans for a presidential caucus.

Go to full text...

Is Hagel Ready To Make It Official?

By: Dave Sund

Via Leavenworth Street, the Washington Note reports:

The word is slowly leaking out that not only is Chuck Hagel not going to run for President -- but he's not going to run for the Senate again in 2008. I'm not sure this is the final word, but Hagel is getting ready to make an announcement either this next Saturday or the one following -- and all indicators are that he is going to depart an institution that very much still needs his conscience and sensibilities.

Going to the poll that is currently on the sidebar, this falls under the "politics of Husker football," and one of those things national media types like Steve Clemons won't get. There's no way that Hagel's announcement will come on September 15. Every second of media on that day will be devoted to the Nebraska-USC game.

I don't doubt the accuracy of Clemons' sources, though, in that I think we can expect Hagel's decision to come in the next couple of weeks. There's certainly no surprise on this end: it's been a foregone conclusion since at least June. Just a question of "when," and when the Democratic field will shake out. The next two weeks should be very interesting.

Go to full text...

LD 27: Dan Marvin To Run For Legislature

By: Dave Sund

I mentioned before that this community creates an opportunity to expand our scope and dive in deeper to local races. Though the unicameral is officially nonpartisan, the reality is that partisan politics rule when it comes to standing up to Dave Heineman. A number of veterans of the unicameral will be term-limited out of office, and while it means we will be losing some dedicated public servants - and one controversial legislative giant - there is also a tremendous opportunity to gain ground and elect the next generation of progressive voices for Nebraska. There will be 26 legislative seats up for election in 2008. We'll do our best to cover them.

Dan Marvin, the city councilman who overcame some ugly Republican attacks to win his election in 2005, is running for legislature:

City Councilman Dan Marvin has worked on many of Lincoln Sen. DiAnna Schimek's campaigns, but next spring he'll be working on his own legislative campaign.  

Marvin announced Tuesday that he intends to run for the District 27 seat that Schimek will leave next year because of term limits. She was elected in 1988 and has been re-elected every four years since.  

Marvin served on the planning commission from 2002 to 2005, when he was elected to the City Council. He said he had been thinking about running for the Legislature for a while because he feels he could represent the city's interests well on the state level.  

"If I'm a strong voice for the city of Lincoln and the citizens of Lincoln, I think I can do more there than if I'm on the City Council," he said.

Go to full text...

State Senator Mick Mines Resigns

If we really want to see more progressive voices in the Nebraska Unicameral, Legislative District 18 - running from Blair to Northwest Omaha - just became a prime pick-up opportunity in November 2008 after the resignation of State Sen. Mick Mines only one year into his second term.

As Eric reports, Mines will be leaving office to set-up shop with his own lobbying firm. It seems he couldn't wait any longer to cash-in like former Speaker Kermit Brashear on all the fat lobbying contracts and legislative inexperience that abound in the post-term limits environment.

Of course, District 18 voters should be annoyed - perhaps even outraged - that Mines would abandon their interests to exercise his legislative influence in the name of corporate profits. Every voter across the state, though, should heed the warnings of this situation, which so well illustrates the dangerous expansion in corporate influence that has consumed Nebraska politics under the reigns of Gov. Dave Heineman and his predecessor, Mike Johanns.

Heineman will appoint Mines' successor for the 2008 legislative session. The example Heineman set with the appointment of Tony Fulton in November 2006 suggests he will look for a long-time partisan ideologue who can be counted on to serve his corporate agenda.

If that again proves to be the case, this is a district ripe for change where we must give the people the chance to break Heineman's lock-grip on the legislature, restoring much-needed balance to our state's democracy.

Go to full text...

Nebraska Senate Race Hits the National Radar

What do ya' know, The Washington Post's Chris Cillizza is keeping an eye on Nebraska's 2008 Senate race and actually ranks it as the eighth most likely in the country to end in a partisan flip:

8. Nebraska: Can anyone claim to know what's going on in the mind of Sen. Chuck Hagel (R)? The Fix expects him to announce his retirement from the Senate some time this fall, but Hagel has proved us wrong before. If Hagel retires, Democrats are expected to make a major push for his seat. The likely candidate is Omaha Mayor Mike Fahey, although former Sen. Bob Kerrey has also expressed some interest and might well have the right of first refusal. Republicans would quickly move to recruit Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns, a former Nebraska governor, but it's not clear that Attorney General Jon Bruning, who is already in the race, would back out. The eventual Republican nominee should be helped by the state's strong GOP bent.

That certainly reads like Nebraska's chances of being a Democratic pick-up in the U.S. Senate are being taken very seriously - perhaps more than I'd previously entertained as possible.

No doubt, that's an exciting prospect. Sure, there's a long ways to go and plenty of variables that have yet to play out before any true judgment can be made, but it's nice to know that they're thinking of us and that Nebraska isn't being written off just because we've picked up a couple of nasty voting habits somewhere along the way.

Go to full text...

Chuck Hagel Delivers Devastating Blow to Republicans' BS

House Republican Leader John Boehner visited Nebraska this week to make appearances at a series of high-dollar fundraisers for all three of Nebraska's Republican Congressmen - who've each remained good little partisan lap-dogs despite the nationwide implosion of the Republican Party.

Taking advantage of a few news reports that suggested some minor progress in Iraq, Boehner fantasized to the Lincoln Journal-Star:

After "investing all their political capital on failure in Iraq," Democrats soon will need to adjust to signs of U.S. success, House Republican Leader John Boehner said Wednesday.... The Bush administration's surge of additional U.S. troops into combat in Iraq has been "very successful," Boehner said....  

While the Iraqi government needs to make more progress in meeting U.S. benchmarks for political accommodation and stability, Boehner said, "the Iraqi parliament has made more progress in keeping its promises than the Democrats in Congress."

I'll give Boehner credit for working in a couple of choice soundbytes. The trouble is that they're so far out of touch with reality that they can't even be taken seriously. And, who better to hammer that fact home than Nebraska's Republican Senator, Chuck Hagel:

Hagel took issue with House Republican Leader John Boehner's own assessment that the Bush administration's strategy has been "very successful" in Iraq. "Everyone is entitled to his opinion," Hagel said, "but the facts do not bear that out".... "On the same day Boehner was boldly proclaiming we were winning in Iraq, Basra was under siege by roving gangs and militias," Hagel said. "Shiite militias are in charge in the southern third of Iraq," he said. On the same day, Hagel said, as many as 500 people were killed in the north. 

"All Sunni cabinet members of Nouri al-Maliki's government are gone," he said. "There is no functioning government in Iraq." Five U.S. soldiers were killed that day, Hagel said, and the Green Zone was hit by 25 mortar attacks. "I'm not sure on what basis Boehner says the surge (of additional U.S. troops) is working," Hagel said.

Thank you to Senator Hagel for refusing to join Nebraska's Republican Congressmen in burying their heads in the sand to the harsh realities of the Iraq War. By continuing to stand with John Boehner and President Bush through four-and-a-half years of delusion and deception, Jeff Fortenberry, Lee Terry, and Adrian Smith have all proven themselves completely undeserving of the people's trust and the offices they hold.

The one point on which Hagel was wrong in his response is that Boehner is NOT entitled to say whatever he damn well pleases about the Iraq War - not when he's an elected representative with a responsibility to protect our men and women in combat and to speak the truth to the American public.

The fact that Boehner - as Minority Leader in the House of Representatives - continues selling this disastrous and failed war policy of the Bush Administration is an undeniable testament to the sad state of the Republican Party.

The fact that he speaks for Nebraska's Republican Congressmen when engaging in this deadly game of spin and deception- with their approval and with their support - should be the only call to action we need to clean house in 2008, replacing these mere Republicans with true leaders who won't betray their oath, sell their silence, and forsake our trust in the name of partisan loyalty.

Go to full text...

The Power of Silence

Friday night, Nebraska Republicans held their "Founders Day" Celebration at the Omaha Hilton with featured guest Dick Armey, former Majority Leader in the House of Representatives. According to the following Omaha World-Herald report, Chuck Hagel's political future was the talk of the evening...although it sounds like he personally received a rather cool reception. One grand question filled the Grand Ballroom of the Hilton Omaha at a Friday gathering of 280 Republican activists: What will Chuck do? ...   [T]he crowd's talk centered on whether U.S. Sen. Chuck Hagel would step down or run again and the political dominoes that would fall as a result. Hagel gave only the briefest hint when he told the crowd at the Nebraska Republican Party's Founders Day dinner: "There is no such thing as the status quo".....  Nebraska GOP Chairman Mark Quandahl said everyone expects him to know Hagel's plan, but he doesn't have a clue. "The fact is that the only person who knows for sure is Sen. Hagel," Quandahl said. The September timeline for an announcement is intact, Hagel said. It could be that he sees an opening to run for president or to seek re-election or to leave elective politics behind him. It all could come down to whether he wants to put in another six years in the Senate. "That's a big commitment," he said.   Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey described Hagel to the Republicans as "his own guy . . . He knows who he is." The line did not draw any applause from the Republicans, gathered to honor the party's most faithful volunteers. It's not a particularly good time to be a Republican - although, in Nebraska, they're still pretty well insulated from the worst effects of their party's many failures. Looking for someone to blame, it's rather ironic that Nebraska Republicans would choose Hagel, the only Republican to be elected to the U.S. Senate from Nebraska in the last 30 years. Of course, he deserves some of that blame, but only because he hasn't stood up to the disastrous course set by President Bush on more issues with greater force. If they're really looking for people to blame, though, we have three no-account Congressman as well who've enabled Bush and made mockery of their so-called "conservative values" every step along the way. Chuck Hagel may "know who he is," but it makes a certain sense for Nebraska Republicans to resent him for that fact when they have no idea who they are or what they stand for beyond holding onto power and the privileges that go with it.

Go to full text...

The Hagel "Purge"

Don Kuhns draws our attention to a blog post by Matthew Yglesias deserving of our consideration: When Joe Lieberman faced a primary challenge for the sin of relentlessly supporting a catastrophically failed policy, the political establishment reacted as if this was the End Times. Now that Chuck Hagel is facing a primary challenge for the sin of mildly gesturing toward the idea that maybe we should avoid catastrophically failed policy, nobody seems to care. To this, Kuhns asks "Why isn't the media focusing on Hagel's "purge"? It's true that the 2008 Nebraska Senate race is pretty far off the RADAR for the natonal press. Some of this has to do with the Presidential race leaving little oxygen in the room for down ballot politics. Then, there's the simple fact that the Nebraska primary is still 9 months away. We bloggers and blog readers have to remember that Ned Lamont's challenge to Lieberman wasn't exactly making headlines in August 2005. Also, Lieberman had run on the Democratic presidential ticket in 2000 and for the presidency in 2004 - making him far more of a national figure than Hagel. There's also the added difficulty that there's little to report but speculation until Hagel makes his 2008 intentions clear. Finally, more than simply blaming the media, we have to give credit to the Right-Wing noise machine for its portrayal of Lieberman as a man being martyred for daring to take an unpopular but supposedly principled stand. If people want to see the "purging" of Hagel covered to the same extent, someone has to speak on Hagel's behalf. It probably falls to left-wing blogs and the Democratic Party to do some of the legwork and start spreading the word that Republican Party activists are a bunch of war-mongering zealots who are out to destroy a decorated combat veteran and true American hero like Sen. Hagel. Of course, by embracing Hagel in that fashion, we'd essentially be conceding our votes to him. Unless we're willing to play these games and give Hagel that sort of leverage (looking at his voting record, there's no way we should), we can't honestly expect this race to receive the same sort of coverage as Lieberman-Lamont.

Go to full text...

Three-Time Loser Hal Daub Still "Undecided"

by: Dave Sund

When last we saw Hal Daub, he was embarking on a 93 County "listening tour" of Nebraska. Evidently, after 87 counties, he's still undecided. As he considers a run for the U.S. Senate, Hal Daub is winding down his listening tour across the state. The former Omaha mayor and congressman said that after visiting 87 of Nebraska's 93 counties, he is still undecided about whether to seek the Republican nomination, but he plans to make a decision this fall. "I may not be a candidate," Daub told 16 people gathered Thursday at a Fremont coffee shop before presiding over discussions about the Iraq war, illegal immigration and rural economics. It's been difficult from the outset to figure out what, exactly, Hal Daub's motivation is in seeking this Senate seat, and why he's going about it in this way. Everyone in political circles has assumed that Daub's going to run if Hagel drops out, but Daub's "listening tour" seems to be his way of running without really running - to seem like he's running against Chuck Hagel when in actuality he has no intention of doing so. Daub, known as someone who loves to talk, has been crisscrossing the state for the past few months with a blue pen and notebook, asking questions and scribbling down voters' comments. He said he is interested in hearing voters' concerns and, even if he does not run, he will sit down with Gov. Dave Heineman and Hagel and discuss what he's learned. Is Hal Daub the de facto establishment candidate in this race? Is he hoping to gain the favor of Hagel and - more importantly - Heineman to take the Republican nomination? Or is he the stalking horse for the only candidate the Heineman faction can count on to beat Bruning - Mike Johanns? Time will tell - Hal Daub gave himself a Labor Day deadline to make a decision. I suspect we'll know a few more things by that date, as well.

Go to full text...

Preparing For 2008

by: Dave Sund

So, my first couple of posts here are going to be along these lines: what we're doing, where we're going, etc. I'm pretty excited about the possibilities of this website, and I feel that there's a lot of things we can do that we just couldn't do before. In 2006, the amount of attention paid to the races by our Nebraska blogosphere virtually mirrored the amount of coverage it got in the media. Jim Esch got a couple of mentions by Kyle, and I wrote a couple of diaries that got a few comments at Daily Kos, but for the most part, he didn't get much publicity even from the folks who were paying attention. Maxine Moul's campaign had a few problems getting media attention (the cookie-cutter campaign certainly didn't help), and didn't really distinguish herself. And there wasn't a mention of lower-ballot races. The vast majority of the focus from the two major progressive sources at the time was on Scott Kleeb and Ben Nelson, with David Hahn thrown in there for good measure. The reason for this? The limitations of the platform. Major media sources were saturated with Nelson vs. Ricketts, so it was pretty hard to ignore. As the summer months came, more and more progressives fell in love with Scott Kleeb as a candidate. One blogger can only do so much.  Which is why this is such a tremendous opportunity for growth, not only in the ideas and nature of Nebraska's progressive blogosphere, but in the progressive movement as a whole for this state. Instead of just Kyle, or Ryan, or myself, we have an entire community at our disposal. If there's a story out there that you feel isn't getting attention: bring it to our attention. If there's a candidate out there that needs our support, or if you are that candidate, post a diary. The best thing about this new platform is that you can contribute a great deal to the discussion. Strength in numbers.

For the past several months, I've had a laser focus on the U.S. Senate race, and I have, on more than one occasion, called it the single most important race in 2008 in Nebraska. But that is not to say that the other races are not important, and that's part of the point: we have an opportunity to look at the whole board, and shine a spotlight on races that might not get much attention otherwise. Our near-misses in 2006 should not be viewed as failures or aberrations, but as a sign of what can be done. Scott Kleeb fell short in a district where no one gave him a chance at all. But instead of writing this district off, and giving the seat to Adrian Smith for life, Democrats like Lisa Hannah of Smith Watch decided to get active, and hold Smith accountable. And though nothing is official, Scott Kleeb strongly hinted last week to the Yearly Kos Convention in Chicago that he is eying a rematch against Smith. There's the energy that came with Jim Esch's campaign, a desire for real change that fell just short. A cynic or an outsider could see that as a triumph of money in politics, but the reality is that the grassroots took a candidate with no money, no name recognition, an inexperienced staff, and a completely unconventional campaign strategy and propelled him to a better finish than anyone in this district had in about a decade. Can we capture the same energy with a different candidate? Time will tell, but I sincerely hope that we don't have to worry about it. Because Jim Esch is exactly the type of person who should represent us in Congress. The greatest opportunity for growth, though, comes in the way we cover the races for legislature. Even in the local media, there is very little in the way of coverage. There's little reason why we can't devote time to covering legislative races, now that we have the platform. In 2008, we are losing longtime veterans of the unicameral. But in their place we are beginning to see young, progressive individuals step up to answer the call. It's my hope that in the next several months, we can tell the story of all of our candidates, young and old alike.

Go to full text...

Hagel to Retire?

The right-wing's favorite journalistic jackass, Robert Novak, reports: Sen. Chuck Hagel, the Senate's toughest Republican critic of President Bush's war policy, has not ruled out a campaign for the GOP presidential nomination and will use the August recess of Congress to make up his mind.   A major reason for the unexpectedly strong professions of support for Rep. Ron Paul's libertarian-conservative candidacy is that he is the only announced Republican presidential candidate opposed to the invasion of Iraq. Hagel as an anti-war candidate might attract a broader base of support than Paul. He has received many offers of financial support should he run.   Hagel must decide what to do in 2008: to run for president, to run for Senate re-election, or to get out of politics. The betting in the Senate Republican cloakroom is that he will retire, but Hagel has given no signal of his intentions and tells friends that he has yet to make a decision. So, basically, Novak has nothing new to say beyond what's been said over and over and over and over since Hagel's infamous non-announcement in March. And, apparently, neither do I.

Go to full text...

Signs of Life in "Hagel for President"???

It may not mean a damn thing, but - after two months without a single update - the year-and-a half-old Chuck Hagel for President 2008 blog is up and running once again. Of course, that blog is an unofficial site, but it's unofficial in the same way as the Jon Bruning for Senate blog that recently went online.....meaning that it's not directly tied to the campaign but exists as little more than a feeder for its message and a generator of hype for its candidate.

So, what can we take from blogger "Charlie's" sudden resurgence of activity? He explains his absence as a result of "moving," but it's hard to disregard the stench of death that's surrounded Hagel's presidential ambitions which couldn't have allowed for much cheerleading and enthusiasm. But, suddenly, Charlie is back at it again - with a mostly fresh NY Times piece and a brand new Robert Novak Political Report trumpeting the possibility that Hagel might yet enter the race.

During my own hiatus, the NY Times reported:

[W]ith the Republican presidential field turned upside down, and a wide-open battle for the party’s nomination unfolding over the next six months, could there suddenly be room for a candidate who opposes the [Bush] administration’s war policy?

That’s what Senator Chuck Hagel is trying to conclude. Mr. Hagel, a Nebraska Republican, has long been among the loudest Iraq critics in his party, a position that he said was “very, very lonely over the last four years.” His conservative voting record has been overshadowed, in the eyes of many faithful Republicans, by his forceful criticism of how Mr. Bush has handled the war.

These days, Mr. Hagel is no longer feeling so alone.

As he walked across the Capitol, one day after the latest chapter of the Senate war debate ended, he said he is receiving fresh encouragement to consider a presidential candidacy. He intends to study the landscape and disclose his intentions “in the next few weeks.”

“There is no Republican presidential candidate with this point of view. There might be an opening for me on this,” Mr. Hagel said. “I’ve had three very significant Republican fundraisers come to me this week, all of whom said I should look at running.”

Of course, later in the same article, Hagel admits that he marched in July 4th parades in Nebraska expecting to get "booed and called names." It's hard to imagine that Hagel would suddenly find the faith he lacked in his own chances last spring just because his constituents refrained from throwing tomatoes and cabbage at his head.

Still, there definitely seems to be something here, with Novak telling readers:

Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) is still considering the possibility of a presidential campaign as an anti-war candidate and soon will make his decision. He could make a splash in the primaries.

One can't help wondering if the splash Novak imagines isn't better characterized as a belly flop. It's certainly possible, however, that the Republican establishment for which Novak speaks is starting to wake to just how dire a situation they face in 2008 - to the point that they'd welcome a candidate like Hagel who could never truly be called an "anti-War" candidate but who might be able to pass himself off as "anti-Bush"...despite his being Bush's most consistent supporter in the U.S. Senate.

Assuming such an "anti-Bush" candidate could survive a primary, that would be a pretty strong credential to carry in to the general election when two-thirds of the country actively disapproves of Bush's job performance. Bush would quickly go from lame-duck status to the victim of ritual sacrifice by a Republican Party blaming him for its ruin.

In essence, Hagel might be considered "the Doomsday Option" for a Republican Party trying to get as far away from Bush as possible.

I'll be the first to admit that the Republican Party's current slate of Presidential candidates is a pretty lackluster bunch who are doing themselves few favors with their total failure to articulate any plan for Iraq that isn't rehashed from the Bush Administration's 4 year-old talking points. But, this most recent "Hagel for President" hoopla stretches the limits of political fantasy pretty damn far. One can imagine him angling for a V.P. slot as a Republican to temper another candidate's Iraq idiocy, but Hagel wouldn't be joking that he doesn't know where he belongs politically if he remained a serious contender for the top of the Republican ticket.

Do other opportunities exist on an independent ticket? Sure - in theory. But, more than likely, these recent articles, along with the renewed rumblings at the Hagel for President blog, are little more than Hagel's attempts at maintaining relevance and a place in the public eye to make himself more appealing when the casting call begins for running mates and cabinet positions.

Then again, Hagel's baffled before by doing the unexpected . . . and sometimes the downright idiotic (i.e. the non-announcement national press conference in March). Far be it for the New Nebraska Network to stand in his way if he chooses to provide more entertainment in our little corner of the republic.

Go to full text...

Chuck Hagel's Identity Crisis

Nebraska Republican Party's Standard-Bearer Tells Audience, "I don't know what party I belong to any more."

Much has been made of Sen. Chuck Hagel's Hamlet-like ruminations of his political future that have become deliberately more vague and indecipherable as his day of reckoning approaches.

Understanding Hagel's position of pre-eminence in the Nebraska Republican Party, longtime observers of the Nebraska political scene have had a hard time taking seriously rumors of Hagel leaving the Republican Party. Although he's been quite open with his displeasure at the current state of the GOP - admitting to Newsweek that this is not the Party he originally joined during the Vietnam War - talk of Hagel actually changing affiliation has always seemed the stuff of Internet hype and raw speculation . . . until now.

The Washington Post's political blogger, The Sleuth, reports (with thanks to Leavenworth Street for the heads-up):

Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) returned the love last night to his good friend Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.), helping the underdog Democratic presidential hopeful kick off his book tour.

Biden, during the CNN-YouTube debate last month, said he would pick Hagel if he had to choose any Republican to be his running mate. So it was fitting that last night Hagel introduced Biden at a book party hosted by a nominally bipartisan group of senators.

Looking out over a sea of Democratic faces, Hagel, according to attendees, joked, "Hell, I don't know what party I belong to any more."

Of course, the report suggests that Hagel may have been speaking in jest, but I don't think a lot of Republicans are likely to find this particular "joke" very funny. In fact, it's hard to imagine how Hagel's statement could be taken as anything but a clear indicator that he really has though about leaving the party in which he is Nebraska's titular head.

Every joke has a hint of truth to it. When asked point blank earlier this summer whether he would leave the Republican Party, Hagel seemed dimissive of the notion - although he refused to completely rule out an independent bid for the Presidency or Vice Presidency. Now, one almost has to take this comment as crossing over from keeping his options open to active consideration.

Still, the idea of Hagel leaving the Republican Party remains almost utterly ridiculous for those of us in Nebraska who know his voting record and who witnessed the way he pushed for cookie-cutter Republican Pete Ricketts' election in 2006. If he isn't happy with the direction of the Republican Party, how could Hagel have ever campaigned so vigorously for Ricketts - a man whose entire campaign was waged in defense of protecting the Republican status quo that Hagel now claims to be raging against?

This is why it's hard to take Hagel seriously. Still, he's an intelligent man who seems to understand which way the winds are blowing politically. The fact that he'll talk so openly - even making jokes - about leaving the Republican Party is a very bad sign for its future fortunes - certainly on the national level and perhaps even here in Nebraska. A Republican Party that doesn't have room for Chuck Hagel - a man who won re-election in 2002 with over 80% of the vote - has to have lost a lot of those voters along the way.

Jon Bruning and other pretenders-to-the-throne are making their moves for Hagel's Senate seat by going after the hardcore Republican base that feels betrayed by Hagel. But, what of all the Nebraskans who aren't simple-minded partisans? What of the voters who have voted for Hagel in the past and share his concern about the monstrous and soulless state of the the modern Republican Party? What becomes of these voters in 2008? They already rejected Pete Ricketts in 2006 - who had Hagel's complete backing. Why would Nebraskans now flock to another generic Republican for whom the only appreciable difference is a fuller head of hair and a smaller bank account?

Chuck Hagel doesn't know what party he belongs to any more. Politically, that's a fascinating statement that opens a world of possibilities. But, probably the most important question is not what this foretells of Hagel's political future but rather how well it reflects the sentiments of the majority of Nebraska voters.

If Hagel doesn't know where he belongs, there's a lot of Nebraskans out there who have recently been voting Republican who feel exactly the same way. They've already proven their independence from the simple politics of hyper-partisanship in 2006 - by overwhelming numbers. Why shouldn't we expect them to demonstrate the same level-headed common sense in 2008?

Nebraska voters might just be waiting for a reason to vote Democratic in 2008. How foolish of us would it be if we didn't give them that chance because we failed to see Hagel's political frustration not as a personal dilemma but as representing an entire voting bloc that is up for grabs and looking for a better way?

The true power and true potential of Hagel's statement isn't what it says of his intentions. No, what's important to remember is that Chuck Hagel doesn't know what party he belongs to any more . . . and he isn't alone.

Go to full text...

Following Nebraska's Lead?

Okay, so technically this was Maine's idea, and we Cornhuskers were about twenty years late in adopting it as our own (the Pine Tree state first passed their electoral reform in 1969, we followed in 1990). But in the long, long, long struggle to fix our nation's flawed system for electing presidents, that twenty year delay makes us wild-eyed radicals of reform.

I'm talking about a proportional system for awarding electoral votes for president, and apparently I'm not the only one talking. Word has it that such reform is a real possibility for the 2008 presidential election in the states of North Carolina and California, large states with relatively small but significant pockets of red and blue that could fundamentally shift our pathetically static political battlefield:

North Carolina:

North Carolina is one step closer to eliminating its winner-take-all method for distributing its 15 electoral votes, a move that would probably help Democrats score again in the state's presidential sweepstakes.....

A candidate would get one electoral vote for each congressional district he or she carries. The candidate who wins statewide would take the remaining two votes.

Republicans called the bill politically motivated and a way to attempt to eliminate their stranglehold on electoral votes in the state. House Minority Leader Paul Stam estimated that Democrats could receive three of the state's electoral votes if the new system took effect with the 2008 elections, with the outcome close in two other congressional districts

California:

A Republican-backed ballot proposal could split left-leaning California between the Democratic and GOP nominees, tilting the 2008 presidential election in favor of the Republicans... "If this change is made, it will virtually guarantee that a Republican wins the White House in 2008," [Democratic consultant] Lehane said in an e-mail. Nineteen of the state's 53 congressional districts are represented by Republicans. President Bush carried 22 districts in 2004, while losing the statewide vote by double digits.

Little surprise, of course, that the two parties support this plan when it benefits them and oppose it when it doesn't. What with a Republican state Senator in North Carolina decrying "This is a political act" and some liberal bloggers labeling the California initiative an "Attack on Democracy", you'd think there's nothing objective or principled at all about the struggle to make our elections fairer and more representative.

But the truth is the electoral college isn't fair, isn't representative, and isn't serving the best interests of anyone (unless you happen to be a professional political consultant or the head of a major national party). It's an undemocratic institution meant to smooth the transition from colonial monarchy to representative democracy, and after some 200 years of this nonsense it's time for the training wheels to go.

Since there's little hope and even less enthusiasm for amending this problem at the Constitutional level (where it really belongs), our best course of action for now is to embrace the Maine-Nebraska model and incorporate proportionalism into our existing electoral process. Such reform is imperfect and slow, but it's better than doing nothing at all.

Is it fair to ask one party to take an electoral hit (say, in the solid red state of North Carolina, or the Democratic stronghold of California) while waiting on the rest of the nation to maybe/possibly/hopefully follow suit? No, it's not fair. But that's what makes it objective, that's what gives this plan principle.

If we're not willing to forgo short-term political gain for reform that benefits democracy itself, then we don't deserve a party and we certainly don't deserve the presidency.

It's rare to see Nebraska described as a "trendsetter". Here's hoping this case proves an exception.

Go to full text...

Chuck Hagel: Casualty of War?

Sen. Chuck Hagel made some enlightening remarks in today's Lincoln Journal-Star that might just be the best indicator yet of where he's at mentally and emotionally looking at the 2008 elections:

Hagel said he willingly accepts whatever political price he may be asked to pay for opposing a president of his own party on the war.

“A senior statewide Republican politician berates me now around this state on Iraq and immigration,” Hagel noted.

Attorney General Jon Bruning already has entered the 2008 GOP race for Hagel’s Senate seat. Hagel said he still has not decided whether he’ll seek re-election to a third term.

“I may be a political casualty before people figure this out,” Hagel said. “I’m prepared to take that risk. I accept that. I couldn’t do it any other way.

“Your career could be ended,” he said. “But you’re here to do what you think is right.”

Hagel hasn’t ruled out the thought of a 2008 presidential bid. “Is there a place I could fit in nationally where I could make a difference,” he wondered, “maybe even be elected president?”....

No matter what he decides to do, Hagel said, he will not withdraw from the policy arena. “Whatever I do, I want to continue to have the opportunity to influence the world and the outcome of policy,” Hagel said. “That does not have to be within politics, as Bob Kerrey and others have demonstrated.”

Berated by Bruning. Still imagining the presidency. Ready to follow Bob Kerrey's footsteps, perhaps even trading places (Hagel's not heading into Academia, but you know what I mean).

As for Hagel's willingness to be martyred by the Republican Party over the Iraq War, it's impossible to know whether that's a genuine stand on principle or a calculated political risk, but it sure is a refreshing contrast from the silence of our Republican Congressmen and Bruning's pandering to the far right-wing.

If President Bush doesn’t change policy in Iraq, the Congress will force change through its appropriations power this autumn, Sen. Chuck Hagel said...

“The American people have left Bush on this,” Hagel said, “and many Republicans will not stay with him now” if he doesn’t change course.

“The political reality is coming down the track, and my Republican colleagues know it.”

On Iraq, the time of reckoning is at hand. Chuck Hagel knows it and hasn't been afraid to say so. The question is whether his fellow Republicans - especially those in his home state - have any real understanding of what's truly at stake, or are they so sheltered in their partisan bubble that even after 50 months they're still incapable of acknowledging this war for the disaster that it is.

And, for Nebraska's purposes, here's maybe the most interesting question of them all - just when Republicans seem ready to break from Bush on Iraq, does Jon Bruning really believe he can position himself for a Senate seat by riding Bush's tattered, lame-duck coattails straight into 'stay the course'-oblivion? When the tide has already turned, does Bruning really think it smart to condemn Hagel and make an enemy of him for having had both eyes open and daring to speak the truth?

Of course, this is Nebraska. Maybe the real question is just how far removed from reality and lost to their partisanship our average Republican voter truly is. For that answer, the coming months will be most telling as the fall approaches and our empty suit Congressmen meekly position themselves on the most important issue of our day.

What will our Timid Trio of Lee Terry, Jeff Fortenberry, and Adrian Smith have to say? How will their supporters respond? How will the rest of Nebraska respond? The time is now to stand up and be heard - to force the change of course that Hagel predicts. Where is the pressure? Where is the outrage? With these Congressmen, do we really expect them to take the initiative? Have we given up on reaching them? If so, have we given up on beating them? Or - despite all the polling data - at the end of the day, do we really just not care what happens in Iraq?

If so, the true casualty of this war will be a far more tragic loss than Hagel's political career but rather the loss of our faith in the character of the American people and the genius of democracy.

Have a safe and happy Independence Day tomorrow. Celebrate that patriotic spirit. Then, live it, and - by doing so - earn it.

Go to full text...