From The New DL Tip Line…
See that little link up there…?
We’ll a reader used it to submit this question:
Not a tip, just a question. Do we have a viable candidate to run against Castle? If so, who is it, why haven’t I heard about them and what are we doing to promote them. If ever there was a vulnerable year for Castle, this is it.
You haven’t I heard about them? Well, there is your answer.
Sadly, we don’t have a viable candidate to run against Castle even though he would have been pretty vulnerable this year.
We have three less-than-viable candidates in Karen Hartley-Nagle, Jerry Northington and Mike Miller. If these three pooled all of their money they would still be about $995,000 short of what it would take to run a decent race against any statewide incumbent.
I could go into details about why I think each candidate is not viable (beyond the money issue) but suffice to say that if you are dying of a gun shot wound, who cares that you also have chicken pox.
PS. With George Bush in the Mix, 2006 was the time when Castle was the most vulnerable. We botched that up in too many ways to count, but Castle dodged a real bullet two years ago.
None of them can beat Castle, and I agree our time to take him out was in 2006. Now the seat is Castle’s until he decides to retire. It is a possibility that he will stay on too long and we can run someone credible against him, ala Roth in 2000.
I think Castle is waiting to see what happens this fall. He wants to be Senator, but with the Delaware Way, he doesn’t want to challenge Carper or Biden. Carper was reelected in 2006 and won’t be up for reelection until 2012. Biden is running for reelection this year, and he of course will win, and then be appointed in some fashion to the Obama cabinet, if he is not Vice President. Governor Markell will then appoint either Beau Biden or John Carney to fill Biden’s term until 2010, when a special election will be held. I guess Castle will run then for the Senate.
But the question, if he is too old to serve as our Representative now, he will be too old to serve as our Senator in 2010.
That’s a bleak scenerio in it’s own fatalistic way.
I see Castle calling it quits after this term and trying to hand off the seat to Copeland.
Copeland’s run for Lt. Governor is a show. It is a base building operation intended to give him a running start at 2010.
The problem with the whole thing is that we are too often relying on “names” to get the job done. Copeland, Biden, Markell, Carney. Frankly, I’m tired of this shit. I want new, untested blood. Is the outlook for a Karen Hartley-Nagle bleak? You bet, but at least she knows her shit a helluva lot better than a Copeland, Castle, Carney, or Beau Biden.
The last thing we need is to continue the Delaware Way and that’s the only thing those names provide: More of the same. I hope to god the new governor doesn’t appoint Biden to fill Daddy’s seat should Daddy get a job in the president’s cabinet.
Thanks for answering the question. Maybe somehow I was hoping that Obama’s campaign had rubbed off. The change tide is still rising, even in Delaware. It would be ashame to miss the opportunity. I guess if we’ve all come to accept that Castle is here to stay, I should go stick my head back in the sand.
David, and Matthew–
I am going to work my but off for either Jerry or Karen. I was just offering my opinion on their prospects as a experienced political observer. That’s all.
We are not accepting Castle at all. And I agree with Matt about needing new leadership and opposing the Delaware Way.
David,
The system is set up to make beating an incumbent more difficult than passing through the eye of a needle.
Even under the best circumstances it is a multi-election project. Hartley ran in 2006, but failed to leverage that run by losing very poorly.
Obama will do very well in Delaware and Dem turnout should be very high. I agree that it sucks that this does not translate into an opportunity to get rid of Castle.
Jason,
I disagree. It’s not the system that’s failing. It’s the fucking morons who vote. The fucking morons who refuse to give up a little cash to help a candidate that isn’t an incumbent. People are more inclined to vote for the name they know than the name they don’t.
LOL. The system is not failing. It is working quite well as intended, thank you. What Jason is saying is that it is very very difficult to get rid of an incumbent precisely because of the reasons Matt cites. The challenger usually has no cash, and no name recognition. So unless the incumbent has really done something to piss off the voters, or unless it is a wave election (like 2006 was), it is very hard to defeat an incumbent under the best of circumstances.
You both are essentially saying the same thing.
I’m sorry, who is Matt?
This election is not 2006 and its certainly not about incumbents. This election, with the help of Obama volunteers nationwide, will see a dramatic change is the political ownership of this country. We can be part of that ownership, or we can send Castle back to have his ass handed too him routinely (which might actually prove amusing). Give the people a chance for change and they will vote.
All I’m saying is we put too much stock in a system that I don’t feel is well defined. The problem isn’t necessarily the system. It’s the voters. If, in your scenario, the voters are simply part of that system, then OK. I get your point.
Geez…I’ve been watching Olbermann to much
“You bet, but at least she [KHN] knows her shit a helluva lot better than a Copeland, Castle, Carney, or Beau Biden.”
What “shit” would that be, Mike? Do you have anything but your opinion to back it up? Do you really think someone who has virtually no experience in either the private OR public sector knows more than a) a small-business owner with several years in politics; b) a lawyer with decades in politics; c) the former state finance director; or d) …. OK, three out of four.
Partisan exuberance is one thing. Not knowing WTF you’re talking about is another.
Al,
I’m not the spokesperson for KHN’s campaign. In a way, you’re right. I should just shut the hell up. However, the seething vitriol you’ve displayed toward her in the past few months on these blogs is nothing more than hilarious.
And partisan exuberance? I think I can hardly ever be accused of that!
To your point, Al. You are correct in that I shouldn’t have denigrated the four fine gentlemen in such a crude way when I compared them to KHN. All I know is I’ve met all four previously and have either briefly or lengthily had conversations with them and none of them seem as interested or as ridiculously studied on some of these issues as KHN is. So, it’s an opinion of mine derived following much conversation.
Call it “candidate exuberance,” if you will.
Sometimes I think about adding my name to the mix. I don’t seriously think about it, but it’s just that I would love to debate Castle on his performance, positions, the Bush Presidency. He is so vulnerable this year.
I think KHN will do better than some think.
I think KHN needs to get more press releases out there.
Sorry, Mike. I guess I had a brain fart with your last name.
“the seething vitriol you’ve displayed toward her in the past few months on these blogs ”
Seething vitriol? You need a new dictionary, my friend. I have consistently pointed out that KHN has never held a job that would qualify her for a position in Congress, and that positions held on issues (“ideas” if you will) don’t equal ability to get anything done. That’s not seething vitriol — those are uncomfortable truths for those of you who feel like overlooking them because you don’t like Republicans.
You, and those who gush over the fact that she holds liberal positions, are the real source of humor here.
There are dozens of lobbyists in Washington for every member of Congress. What in KHN’s background qualifies her to sort through the information they give her and fend off their blandishments?
Your response boils down to, “She gave me the time of day, and those elected officials didn’t.” If that’s your criterion, vote away. Just stop asking the less-easily-impressed to fall in line. I’m not voting for someone just because they swallowed and can regurgitate liberal boilerplate.
And she won’t do as well as some think if the GOP attack machine starts in on her private life. They might not bother, as they didn’t with that clown Miller from Lewes the Dems ran, at least not the first time. She’s a much better candidate than some, but she’s still a sacrificial lamb.
Mike,
I guess it seems that I’m being harsh on Karen Hartley-Nagle since she has a bit more of a chance at beating Castle than Northington, but I think it is more clarity than harshness.
Her chances are still vanishingly small.
Does that mean we should not work hard to beat Castle? Of course not – because keeping him under 55% would be a step toward beating him next time. The national attention to the race alone would be worth $1 million.
However, (and this is what I mean by saying she lost poorly) KHN and her crew fucked up our chances of keeping Castle under 55% last time.
Imagine where her campaign would be right now if she had said, “Beating Mike Castle is more important than me making a point about ‘fusion” so I am dropping out and asking my supporters to work hard for Dennis Spivack.” Instead she posed for pictures with Castle and said that she’d vote for Castle rather than Spivack.
That was bullshit.
Anyway…It would be night and day for her right now.
Rant over.
Al,
I could just as easily present to you a list of individuals serving in Congress who have equal or less experience than Karen. First, Carolyn McCarthy, the woman who ran and won a Congressional seat in New York after her husband was murdered and son injured in the LIRR massacre in the 90s. No experience and even fewer “ideas” and “issues” than Karen has.
And since when have I not liked Republicans, Al? I remember supporting a few in 2006 and I’ll certainly be supporting some this year. Your attempts to pigeonhole me as some liberal Democrat are totally weak and wholly without merit.
Aside from all this, I think you should consider talking to Karen. I know you’ve had her on your show in the past, but maybe hanging out with her off-the-air would get you to loosen up a bit. I’m not merely impressed because she gives me the time of day. I’m impressed because there’s some good stuff she’s presented and will be presenting.
Your continued rantings and calls for “experience” are further proof that we’ll never be able to get out of the rut known as the Delaware Way.
Jason,
Her supporters amounted to, I think, about 2% of the vote. Spivack lost by about 20%, if I recall. He had no chance in hell. Her point — as well as the point many of us made — was made and we’re all better off for it.
Bullshit.
I don’t want to go here aghain – but here I go…
It was KHN and crew going around saying that Spivack was mental that kept Castle above 55%.
Mike is not a liberal Democratic ally of mine or Jason’s, Al. He is far to independent for our tastes. 😉
Correction: If KNH’s 5,769 votes went to Spivack he would have finished with 41% of the vote and Castle would have still finished with 57%. ( 103,334 to 143,897) So she was not a spoiler from a numbers perspective.
KHN & crew’s character assassination of Spivack (saying that she felt he was going to punch her, etc…) is harder to quantify.
Jason,
There’s more than you’re telling. Spivack’s continued berating of KHN throughout the primary and general is what you’re failing to report. As well as his harassment of Michael Berg.
DD: I know Mike; I wasn’t referring to him when I mentioned people who like liberal positions.
Mike: Yes, there are cases like the LIRR widow out there. But KHN has no similar platform for publicity. There are far worse people in Congress than KHN would be — many dimbulb Republicans, for example. None of which changes a very basic equation, one that Jason is pointing out:
Low name recognition + no money = Loss. It’s really that simple.
What you perceive as “vitriol” is my attempt to inject some realism into the discussion. In my experience, people who talk up impossible fantasies with the same zeal they approach doable cases cost themselves, and progressives in general, a great deal of credibility.
The mainstream establishment in this state is just dying to prove that you, and the Delaware blogosphere in general, are a bunch of nut jobs.
No offense intended, but when you drop f-bombs every other sentence, they use that stuff to justify denying every blogger official media status. Newspaper and radio reporters have credibility, unjustly in some cases, because a professional organization has entrusted them. Bloggers have to earn credibility with each thing they write. Say things like “she knows her [stuff] better than those guys” and your credibility flies out the window. You’re in education, so maybe you place greater weight than I do on being able to rattle off a lot of facts and figures. In fact, I never talk to politicians to find out that stuff.
Politics, Bismarck remarked, is the art of the possible. KHN has no idea what is and what is not possible, because she has no background on which to base her candidacy.
As for talking with her, I’ve talked with her off-air as much as I’ve talked with any of the candidates you named. My impressions, needless to say, do not match yours.
I’ve said this before: She’s a nice lady, seems very bright and would make a fine public servant. I do not understand why she abandoned her first, achievable goal, election to the General Assembly, for one that most would consider unachievable. If she was running for the General Assembly I would endorse her wholeheartedly.
Me, the average voter who knows enough about politics to be dangerous, doesn’t give a shit about the GOP attack machine, the experience level of a candidate or their ability to swallow and regurgitate. I simply want Bush & Co., Castle included, out on their ass, or better yet on trial. No one, experienced or not, could possibly do any more damage to our country than the current morons in charge (Pelosi, Reid and Hoyer included).
Castle = Bush vote after vote after vote. Tie Castle and Bush together in a neat little package and the Dems, new and old, will crawl out of the woodwork to bury him.
Spivack ran a bad campaign but he not running this time and neither is Berg.
All I’m saying is that KHN made some poor choices last time and that is a fact.
Al,
Well fuck! I’m going to have to clean up my act.
Al,
Am I giving up by saying I agree with most of what you’re saying?
“I simply want Bush & Co., Castle included, out on their ass, or better yet on trial. ”
That’s nice, but it doesn’t answer the question “Why KHN”? In fact, that’s her basic positive: People like Jason have been tying Castle to Bush for quite a while now.
Even though you don’t care, David, I’ll drop something else into the conversation: Real politicians in the Democratic Party have access to polling data, which would show whether Castle is truly as vulnerable as the progressive community thinks he is. None of them decided to chance a run. Do you think an ambitious young politician would pass up a shot at an aging, vulnerable Republican? I don’t. I doubt Matt Denn really would rather spend 8 years as Lt. Gov. than as a U.S. Rep, and if the polling showed he could win the federal job, he’d be running for it.
My guess is that the polling showed Castle with high approval ratings. You can chip away at that with negative advertising, but if you’re not close enough, that’s pointless. And KHN doesn’t have the money to do that necessary negative advertising anyway.
Mike: Not at all. I just think that if you want to defeat Castle, there are smarter ways to go about it than cheerleading. A 527, say, attacking issues that tie Castle to Bush would be one. Campaign finance limits would not apply. I’m sure someone like Brian Selander could help you there more than I could. But good gosh (see how clean I can be), get more creative!
Al,
Back in early 2007, the polling showed that Castle was borderline vulnerable. He had decent approval ratings (high 50s), low unfavorable ratings, but the reelect v. consider someone else number was 49 v. 38, respectively. That is just under the danger line for an incumbent. Incumbents are considered safe is they are over 50 in reelect numbers.
If Carney, Markell, or Denn wanted to run, they could have at that moment. Neither did, not because the polling for them was bad, and not because they would have lacked money, but because of the notion of the “Delaware Way,” which is strongly enforced by the press and other establishment forces.
Castle’s polling only improved throughout 2007 and 2008, where now the Cook Report and other polling organizations consider Castle’s seat to be “safe Republican.”
Which leads back to response #1. Lather, rinse, repeat. It was worth asking anyway.
Thanks, DD. Didn’t know you had the polling numbers or I would have just asked you. Seems odd that his re-elect number would improve over the past two years. Any idea why?
Also, I would have thought Carper’s challenge of Roth would loosen up the mutual admiration society a bit.
Well, Castle had just been reelected, but by his lowest total ever, and at the time there were still stories circulating about his “stroke.” Also, the Democratic Congress was new and at the height of its popularity before it was revealed they could do nothing really to stop Bush.
My theory is that if we had a credible candidate emerge with strong name ID and funds, Castle’s poll numbers would not have improved. I think the lack of any candidate emerging on the Democratic side actually improved Castle’s numbers. Voters, when asked, would rather go with the devil they know than the one that doesn’t even exist. So Castle really did nothing to improve his position.
He has held off another stroke pretty well, I think. Give credit where credit’s due.
LOL. Now that is just mean.
Hey, give Geek a break. He got fingered yesterday. 😛
Anyone remember Biden/Boggs? Like a horse race when the dark horse burns through and wins….even if it’s just nose it’s a win!