[EDIT -- 8:26 AM. I am changing the reporting and headline slightly to more cautiously reflect what our sources are telling us. Matthews, we have strong reason to believe, is hiring staff for a run at the Senate, although there have certainly been candidates in the past who have staffed up but subsequently elected not to run. -Nate]
Chris Matthews, it appears, is in.
FiveThirtyEight has been hearing for some time that Matthews is serious about running for the United States Senate, but it took a trip to Georgia among the Georgia-runoff-congregated and well-connected Obama organizer throng to confirm.
According to multiple sources, who confirmed the Tip O'Neill staffer-cum-MSNBC host has negotiated with veteran Obama staffers to enlist in his campaign, Chris Matthews is likely to run for United States Senate in Pennsylvania in 2010. Matthews, 62, would run as a Democrat. Arlen Specter, the aging Republican incumbent, will be 80 if he chooses to run for re-election.
Preliminary public polling suggests Matthews would start at a deficit, in part because Matthews' name recognition is lower than Specter's.
11.28.2008
Chris Matthews Staffing Up for Probable Senate Run in 2010
@ 7:30 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
93 comments
How's for a pundit putting his money where his mouth is? Good for him.
Maybe Chris can bring his Hardball style to the floor of the U.S. Senate. Best of luck to him.
Tweety and Wheezy '10.
wow first! Matthews would never get out of the primary but if he somehow became the nominee he may have a chance.
Specter will be 80 and has been fighting cancer for years. Pa, voters realize the chances of him living out another term are slim.
Better for the dems to have a political veteran running, many good democratic possibilities in the state.Matthews is on some ego trip, journalists never win when they run for office.
"journalists never win when they run for office."
Really?
Until 3 weeks ago, one could just as easily have typed:
"blacks never win when they run for President"
I just wanted to note that Specter will be 80 whether he chooses to run for reelection or not... but that's just because I'm a smart aleck.
A national TV host has a problem with name recognition?
Arlen Specter, the aging Republican incumbent, will be 80 even if he chooses not to run for re-election.
Sorry, Sylvia, I didn't see you beat me to it.
Evidently Pa. voters only watch fox. Quinnipac polled this race and it had Spector leading matthews 45-33 but over 60% didn`t know who Matthews is.
Can`t compare Obama to Matthews, Obama was a professional politician, name me a journalist that ever was elected to anything.
I would much prefer someone with a real chance of winning.
Specter had a cancer relapse this year and apparently underwent successful treatment. I wonder if running for another term is in the cards for him.
PA has the odd situation where its Democratic Senator is more conservative than the Republican. It would be too bad to lose Specter's influence on the Republican Party. I'm less than thrilled with the idea of loudmouth Matthews in the Senate.
At one time, you could have said just as reasonably that no movie star had ever been elected to anything.
The name recognition thing does seem questionable to me, though. How many people don't know who Chris Matthews is? Looking at the polls, I think it's clearly more a case of Democrats not being sold on him yet, which strikes me as a perfectly reasonable thing. I'm not so sure he'd be a very good Senator.
Evidently Pa. voters only watch fox. Quinnipac polled this race and it had Spector leading matthews 45-33 but over 60% didn`t know who Matthews is.
Can`t compare Obama to Matthews, Obama was a professional politician, name me a journalist that ever was elected to anything.
Matthews' candidacy is going to get a lot of media attention that will quickly make that up. I'm not saying he'll beat Specter, but the name recognition aspect is not going to stay the way it is.
I wonder if the Republicans would convince Tom Ridge to run, should Specter bow out.
Won't Specter be 80 regardless of whether or not he runs?
Matthews will have alot of serious challengers in the primary. Admiral Joe Sestak, Congressman from Delaware County, already has at least $3 million in his campaign chest. Matthews has not lived in PA for years.
Additionally, don't think it will be easy to beat Spector. He runs hard, has labor and urban support, gets suburban women and is considered a pretty good Senator by most Pennsylvanians.
This is a long shot. Any chance Gov Rendell runs for this?
"A national TV host has a problem with name recognition?"
Because contrary to the delusions of crazy Clinton hold-outs who need to believe that Chris Matthews single-handedly won the primaries for Obama, nobody actually watches these awful cable shows except political junkies.
Very difficult to beat an incumbent senator unless there is a big scandal. Even then, it's not easy. See Begich/Stevens race.
Maybe Chris knows something we don't about Spector's plans for retirement.
Current name ID or lack of it means nothing. But I'll do anything necessary to keep Chris Matthews out of the Senate. What a disaster! And what a gift to Specter if CM wins the primary. On the plus side, his brain-disconnected on-air rantings would stop, I suppose.
Chris Matthews Staffing Up for Probable Senate Run in 2010
kill me
"This is a long shot. Any chance Gov Rendell runs for this?"
If Specter is running, not a chance; they're friends.
Tough sell. Specter is not the most partisan or ideological of Republicans; in fact, he is hated upon severely as a RINO. In addition, although an octogenarian, he's sharp as they come -- I defy you ever to catch him adrift in a "senior moment". With PA being I think the 2nd oldest state in the union, he'll get a lot of respect and why shouldn't he.
Matthews will have to rely on hyperpartisans who are motivated by things like filibuster-proof majorities -- and there aren't that many of those. Plus, I have a feeling he'll make Joe Biden seem tactful and reserved by comparison.
Now I'm a little sad Sarah Palin's not going to the Senate. Can you imagine the two of them together on a committee hearing? It would be like a sitcom.
wv: disronic. What rain on your wedding day really is.
It's a bit depressing that all the comments seem to be concerned with whether Matthews could get elected, not whether he'd be a competent Senator if he should manage to get into office.
Years ago, I would have viewed a Matthews candidacy fairly positively. His years in the Peace Corps indicate a commitment to public service, and his first two books ("Kennedy and Nixon: The Rivalry That Shaped Postwar America" in 1996 and "Hardball: How Politics is Played" in 1999) were fairly serious works, with interesting things to say about history and politics. His long-time service as a Congressional staffer and speechwriter belie counteract claims that he lacks appropriate experience.
However, in recent years, Matthews seems to have become just another grunt in the Pundope Army, where the objective is to say whatever outrageous thing will gain the most attention and the highest ratings. Occasionally a brief glimpse of an astute grown-up emerges, but most of his interviews and commentary these days seem trivial and boring. (Extensive appearance on cable shout shows must tend to turn the brain into peanut butter.) I certainly hope PA can find a better candidate.
wv: interip = angry mood induced by frustration with trying to get Blogger to accept my post (or at least give me a clue as to WHY it's not accepted.).
I like Chris Matthews and would love to see him in the Senate.
As a Democrat who voted for Obama and voted for (and will be voting on Tuesday again for) Martin:
If I lived in Pennsylvania I would proudly be casting by vote for Specter against Chris Matthews.
Matthews knows a lot more of the inside politics game in Congress and in Washington generally than most serving politicians.
Specter is done. But taking a poll now about how he does against Dem prospectives doesn't tell us much of anything.
If he gets to be senator, no one else will get a chance to speak. Mathews has the ability to be a one man filibuster.
There are a lot of politicians who want the job and they're going to try and GUT Mathews. Plus, he's not outrageously popular with the liberal base who aren't fond of him for his stands on the Iraq war over the years.
He'd have a VERY tough time winning the primary. Specter may or may not be particularly strong in 2010.
Specter Strengths:
1. Incumbent senators are hard to beat at any time. You really have to piss people off to get fired: scandals & being indicted helps. He IS really old, but that may not be enough.
2. Specter may be an old windbag but he's well regarded by many in PA.
3. There may be a mini-backlash against Obama in 2010. There's normally a "Mid-course correction" in off-year elections and for Democrats to pick up seats 3 elections in a row is almost unprecedented.
In the last 2 elections Democrats have won at least 12 seats in the Senate and over 50 seats in the House. It's getting harder and harder to push that ball continuously uphill, especially as the remaining seats tend to be in more and more red states.
Specter Weaknesses:
1. PA is an increasingly BLUE state that Obama won by 8%. Democrats will be well organized and the same GOTV strategy that won the state in 2008 will work in 2010.
2. If Obama is popular he can make the case for electing more Democrats and that will help the nominee in Democratic leaning PA.
3. Republicans' best argument "Don't let Obama get to 60 votes!" might backfire if voters feel good about Obama.
4. If 2008 was really a "realigning election" the old rules about "re-aligning elections" may be out the window: Democrats gained seats in 1930, 1932 and then 1936 was another landslide that gave Democrats the biggest majorities they ever had.
If Obama succeeds in righting the economy and passing health-care he's going to be the most popular president since Lyndon Johnson in 1965 (before Vietnam).
Then Democrats can convincingly make the case that "we deserve more power to complete the job."
Other journalists have done well: two at the national level were Warren Harding and Grant's VP Henry Wilson.
I've been watching Matthews since Hardball was on CNBC. Based on what I've seen of him, I think he would make a decent senator.
He's definitely a character, but I think he's a bit more complicated than many probably think. I'd vote for him simply because I think he's somewhat more sympathetic to regular working class Americans than most so-called "liberal" media figures (despite his prep-school background).
Of course I can't vote for him from here in Ohio, but I might make a few small donations if he got serious about running.
Think Brad has is right...Gov Rendell owns this State.
After Mayor, Governor...where else can Ed go?
Think this possibility of a Senate seat is why Rendell is not getting anything in the new administration.
Don't think Spector is going to run and if he does, Rendell would beat him.
Let me just say one thing about this news: Go Sestak!!!!
Mr. anti-feminist doesn't belong anywhere near the US Senate. How can I contribute to Sestak's primary campaign?
I do respect that at the very least he's going to do more than stop criticizing the politicians and actually do something about it. He is definitely a long shot, but as Cugel outlined above, he's not an impossibly long shot. If Hillary Clinton has taught us anything, it's that 2 years out it's just too hard to judge what the end results will be.
w.v.: misher- That sounds like a good fake last name.
Doesn`t anybody think Spectors health will be a big issue in 2010. He has has several bouts with cancer and at 80 his chance of living long enough to serve out his term are slim.
He should retire and enjoy what time he has left, his life expectancy is not anywhere near 8 years, there is a possibility he could be gone by 2010, hope not but it`s possible.
Well, I think he wants to die as a Senator. Many of these people never want to leave office no matter what occurs. His health will still likely be a factor.
"It's a bit depressing that all the comments seem to be concerned with whether Matthews could get elected, not whether he'd be a competent Senator if he should manage to get into office."
It is discouraging alright and it would be nice if competency trumps other qualities in a public office aspirant. But it is politics we are discussing here, and that electability of lack thereof concern is not preposterous.
A well intended politician with bright ideas is not going to be able to implement sh!t if he cannot get elected. Any clear thinking politician knows this and veteran politicians typically use the same logic to size up an opponent early into the game ... but it can backfire as we saw with HRC vs. BHO.
Heck, McCain even tried vicariously to exploit that line of reasoning with the Palin 'energize the base' pick.
Obama turned out too radical of a sample ... LOL!
I think Matthews worships politics-the-game too much. I'd expect him to be on the theatrics team, orchestrating filibusters, walk-outs and the like. He just gets so excited about that stuff. I couldn't even guess what kind of public policy he'd get behind. The Republicans would do well to run a woman against him to stimulate his borderline inappropriate fascination with non-white guys in politics.
I guess you can tell I'm not a fan.
I suppose Sen. Tweety kinda has a nice ring to it... but I'm dumbfounded that he might have name recogniton problems in Pennsylvania. Did all the 'bitter' small town folk go and blow all their money on shotguns instead of getting basic cable?
Well, now we have a better idea why Chris so blatantly favored Obama in the 08 cycle, and also why he failed, as his long track record on tv suggested he would, to carry water for McCain in the fall. Looks like he's trying to cash in now for all that cushy coverage he gave Barack on his show for nearly two years as he consistently trashed his chief primary opponent.
But a problem for him in a state that Hillary won, is whether his insane rants against HRC will come back to haunt him with women voters in PA.
Strange guy.
Also he's shown over the years a "complicated" attitude towards Nixon, on display in his factually unreliable "Kennedy and Nixon" book. When filmmaker Ollie Stone came out with his "Nixon" in the mid-90s, Chris arranged to have only pro-Nixon people on to trash Stone and his film -- with Chris eagerly joining the pile on. Was that just sucking up to ex-Nixon aide Roger Ailes, the guy (iirc) who brought him to cable when Ailes ran CNBC back then?
Re his Peace Corps service, I recall that Matthews either admitted or strongly implied that it was a way for him, in the mid 1960s, to avoid military service and Vietnam, as opposed to the motivation of public service. Nice gig, if you could get it, so Chris likely had some solid connections.
The guy is one piece of work, but if he gets the nom, he'd be facing another curious fellow with a tarnished record (magic bullet theory) and a tendency, like Chris, to disingenuously play the political game.
Given that stark choice, I'd probably lean towards getting rid of the Magic Bullet Man. But I'd prefer Dems give me another option.
Everything depends on Specter here. 80 is really fuckin' old. I'm sure he's thinking about how little time he has left, and is weighing which is the better way to spend it: doing what he loves for a living, or being with his family. If his family is anything like mine, he'll go with the first one.
Unlike Ted Stevens, Arlen Specter is neither extremist nor corrupt, as far as anyone can tell. This makes him much harder to unseat in a head-to-head contest, even if Matthews has star power to bring to the fight. Although I do tend to favor the Democrat in most match ups, in this one, I'll call it for Specter if he decides to run. If he drops out, it depends on who's running as the GOP candidate. Still, two years is a looooong time.
One thing forgotten.
Spector will face a probable primary challenge from a candidate funded by Club for Growth.
The fundies hate Spector with a passion.
Also, Matthews is unlikely to survive the primary as a large number of Dems will be lining up to run, unless Rendell interferes again.
Can you imagine if he gets on the Foreign Relations Committee and has to question Clinton. His impact on her campaign was negligible, I think, but he really did act like he was obsessed with her for years. And she rightfully called him on it on national TV.
In general, I think far too much of what Tweety cites as what 'Americans are thinking' is his own thoughts that neither entirely owns nor entirely rejects. Until and unless he faces up to himself, he'll be at best a mediocre Senator.
This is absurd. Matthews is famously undisciplined, can't keep his mouth shut, has problems with strong women and minorities (identifying with them, speaking for them). He won't survive a serious primary. There's just too many years of him saying stupid shit on tv to throw in his face.
aimai
I'd vote for Chris. He obviously has a good knowledge of politics and knows both how the game works and what people want. He may be outspoken, aimai, but maybe that's what is best. Politicians too often hide behind the veil of words and rhetoric and that gives them too much wiggle room. Politicians can get away with a lot of things by just clarifying themselves (see: "The fundamentals of our economy are strong.") and if we had more outspoken politicians who get right to the point, as Matthews does, there would be more accountability and clarity in Washington.
Specter is probably through.
If he retires, there will be a big primary, that will feature at least one "moderate" Republican and at least one Sarah Palin hard right type in a superficially normal package.
Specter's replacement will probably be a very centrist Democrat. If he retires and a very moderate-to-liberal Republican is nominated, there may be a serious battle.
If Specter himself runs he will probably lose (dull old guy associated with the ancien regime of Bush, whether fairly or not), and if a whackjob replaces him in a primary, it will be a cakewalk for a Democrat.
The Democrat primary will thus be very competitive, as the chances of the winner being elected are good.
I find it hard to believe that Matthews would be the Democrats strongest candidate against Specter. Hell, I'm not even sure I'd vote for Matthews over Specter if I lived in Pennsylvania. And, I would hate to waste an excellent opportunity to add another Democratic Senator by running a weak candidate. Make no mistake, Specter is a prime target in 2010. Of all the Republican Senators up for re-election in 2010, Specter has the toughest environoment as Pennsylvania is the most Democratic leaning state.
Spector will face a probable primary challenge from a candidate funded by Club for Growth.
The fundies hate Spector with a passion.
If it didn't work in 2004, it's hard to imagine it working in 2010.
Matthews is a hateful twit and would be a weak candidate.The only bright side is if he runs and loses in the primary maybe that's would get him off TV for good? I hope so.
He's at the point now where he may be off TV already. MSNBC can't have a news program host who is actively recruiting campaign personnel.
Don't be surprised if he is not on as early as next Monday.
Quoting from a good article about this from:
http://thenewagenda.net/2008/11/26/chris-%E2%80%9Ctingles%E2%80%9D-matthews-unpopular-with-home-state-voters/
"Among all voters [in Quinnipiac University Polling Institute poll] 45% chose Specter, 33% chose Matthews, and the rest were undecided or declined to respond. A full 25% of Democratic voters indicated they would jump ship and vote for Specter against Matthews, while only 9% of Republican voters said they would do the reverse. Independent voters overwhelmingly preferred Specter over Matthews, 45% to 27%. Women voters of all parties preferred Specter over Matthews 49% to 35%"
Like I said, bad and weak candidate...
What seems weird about the Matthews run is that he would work far better as an insurgent or 3rd party candidate, rather than as one from the in/majority party. Dems will likely be looking for someone to support Obama and other Senate Dems. Matthews' fashions himself in part as a faux-Howard Beale type. Not sure how this works.
The media type to look for though is Lou Dobbs - maybe for NY Gov next year or Sen, or more likely, either a GOP or independent run for President in 2012.
I don't know how I'd feel about the idea of Sen. Chris Matthews, but I would definitely like to see some good journalists go into politics.
Good journalists excel at:
- researching and understanding important issues in society
- explaining the issues so regular people can understand
- intelligent and thoughtful debate
- investigating and publicizing problems
- skillful questioning to sort through spin and uncover the truth
- working with a team to accomplish goals even under pressure
- keeping the public good as their top priority
I think these are all qualities that would make a good member of Congress.
So for example... when Hillary heads off to State, I'd love to see Bill Moyers fill the rest of her term. Or, given that Ted Kennedy's age and health may not permit him to run again in 2012, how about Sen. Rachel Maddow?
Anyone know where I can find approval/disapproval ratings for senators?
Remembering Chris Matthews' giddy exclamations after the second Obama-McCain debate, I shall now paraphrase him:
"Some voters might find that....BRACING"
However, imagine what FAUX NEWS would think if someone from MSNBC became a senator. Bill O'Reilly might have to move to a small, red state.
*
WOO HOO!!!
I used to not mind Dobbs' show but the last few times I've watched it all he does is complain about "THE EVIL MEXICANS ARE RUINING OUR COUNTRY!" for the whole damn show. So I've stopped watching it.
I wouldn't mind seeing Moyers in politics, he's one of the few journalists I can stand. Most of them are so idiotic now.
As a moderate, Ohio Democrat; I've never minded Specter that much. In fact, I've routinely appreciated his ability to question the Bush Administration and hold decent committee hearings for the public.
Chris Matthews is extremely intelligent, knows how the system works, and would bring a great deal of passion with his opinions if elected.
I don't necessarily agree with Matthews all of the time, but I think that his voice would be a welcome addition to the Senate if he was able to openly question the polices and practices of the Obama administration as much as he did the Bush administration and McCain campaign.
A retired Specter could possibly reflect on the Warren commission findings in more detail for all of us?
Does anyone even know what Matthews' politics are? I know he's a Democrat, but not much beyond that. It's hard to imagine he could run as a liberal and win, given Specter's popularity & moderateness, and the fact that Pennsylvania's nominally Democratic. Specter will win unless his health forces him to withdraw.
Mark my words: If Spector is healthy enough to run again, he will win. Period. As a leftwinger, I wouldn't vote for him myself if I were a Pennsylvanian (I'm a New Yorker), and there are of course several things in his record that leftwingers and partisan Democrats can resent, but I expect him to cooperate quite a bit with Obama, while criticizing him when he considers it warranted. He may even prove to be a crucial vote in favor of Obama Supreme Court appointees, if Obama appoints anyone liberal enough to be controversial. So while a majority of Democrats will vote for the Democratic candidate, a combination of a large majority of Republicans, a smaller majority of independents, and a large minority of Democrats will vote for him, much as the opinion poll above shows.
Specter could also lose the primary to a fundie/Club for Growth pick-in 2004, Specter won the primary 51-49. And that was with conservatives like Rick Santorum & George W. Bush backing him, and an opponent who was to the right of Santorum and trailing badly in general election matchups. A slightly less conservative candidate could be a credible threat.
Anything to get him off tv.
*PLEASE NOTE:
Back in April during the Pennsylvania Democratic Primary, Chris Matthews strongly hinted on The Colbert Report that he would run for Arlen Specter's Senate seat in 2010.
Start watching the clip at 4:22...
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/165840/april-14-2008/chris-matthews
Puke. Well, he is a Democrat, which explains why his thigh tingled from Obama. He was one of the good old sexist white male Democrats who bashed Clinton for no apparent reason.
Hmm...
I don't know what to think about this. Specter isn't that bad, but if we're going to replace him, I don't want him to be Bob Caseyesque, and we CAN elect a progressive if our state just voted for Obama by 11 points.
Of course I'm not complaining about Casey...ANYONE is better than Santorum.
Hey! Al Gore was a journalist before he started his political career. So don't tell me journalists can't win. And he DID win in 2000!
sfergus483
Since you thought I was smoking something in an earlier post, I thought I should call you on a few things in yours. First of all, Lou Dobbs would be running for governor of New Jersey, not New York. Second, even though he at one point called himself a lifelong republican and donated to Bush in 2001, he would most certainly not be running as a Republican. For Governor or President. If he did run as a Republican, he wouldn’t get much Republican support. Other than immigration, his views are more characteristically liberal. He’s pro-choice, pro gay marriage, pro regulation at least to an extent, pro trade union, pro raising the minimum wage, pro separation of church and state, and he’s been critical of the Bush administration on just about everything from Homeland Security to the environment. The only way the GOP would support him is because they want the governorship or presidency at any cost. But it would have about as much effect as running a Democrat under the GOP name. In the end, they still wouldn’t have a Republican in office. He would run as an independent, as he has slammed both parties repeatedly. He may run for Governor of New Jersey. I doubt he ever runs for president.
As for Chris Matthews, if his chances don’t look good running as a Democrat, which anyone who’s ever watched his show can clearly determine he is, he would have zero chance running as a third party or independent candidate.
I think Matthews would certainly make an interesting senator, and he definitely knows his stuff. Imagine if Franken wins the recount in MN and Matthews wins PA in 2010. The senate would never be the same!
Would you consider subscribing to our site? http://thenewrepublicans.net - Thanks.
jdizzle, what are Lou Dobbs' positions on taxation and other budgetary matters? Because in the Northeast, it still is not unusual for governors to be relatively liberal on social issues. George Pataki, Governor of New York before Spitzer, was consistently pretty solidly environmentalist, pro-choice, pro-gay rights, pro-civil rights, and not associated with the Religious Right, but his policies on taxes and expenditures were very regressive. Wasn't Christie Whitman pretty similar to that when she was Governor of New Jersey? And from what I've gathered, Governor Mitt Romney of Massachussetts was perhaps even more liberal and more willing to raise state taxes (though he called them "user fees"). We could go down a list. There are Republican governors of Connecticut, Vermont, and Rhode Island, and I don't believe any of them are Religious Right, homophobic, union-bashing lockstep Bushies. Nor do I think any Republicans of that kind have much chance to win statewide elections in the Northeast or Mid-Atlantic region (New England plus NJ, PA, Maryland, Delaware, maybe even VA) anymore.
@thatmarvelousape
I see. I'm not sure if you were calling me a ‘Clinton hold-out’, by the way, but I can assure you I'm not. It can be hard to gauge these things sometimes all the way from Australia.
Michael I get what you mean about regional differences among the political parties. That is why I don’t believe, if Dobbs were willing to run for president, he would get much support from the Republican base under the GOP banner. The Republicans of the red states would see that there isn’t much difference between him and whoever the generic Democratic opponent would be (which would likely be Obama in 2012 because Dobbs’ age would most likely limit him from running after that). He would be considered more “mavericky” than even John McCain.
Dobbs has stated he is fiscally conservative, but Clinton turned out to be one of the most fiscally conservative presidents in a long time, whereas Bush has been anything but. He is very much pro middle class and has been very critical of wealthy CEOs and the like which would lead me to believe he isn’t exactly Republican in his taxation views. He is very much in favor of immigration reform, as anyone who has ever seen his show realizes, and against gun control, but other than that, I haven’t heard him say much that would indicate he is a Republican, but a lot that would indicate otherwise.
This is going to be a superficial statement, but I can't stand his voice... :-/
-- Cris
My site: Obama Wallpaper Archive
I think Matthews would actually have a decent chance in a multiple-candidate field Primary precisely due to his likely ADVANTAGE in name recognition and the fact that he is especially well-known in the Philly area and SE PA really dominates the vote in a Democratic Primary to an even greater extent than in a General Election.
If Matthews goes one-on-one with a Pittsburgh area, or Western/Central Pennsylvania Democrat in the Primary, he'll likely have a real advantage.
Matthews appears to have an odd collection of issue positions/ideological commitments. I think he'd be best classified as an idealistic, yet moderate/liberal Democrat. Were he elected, and I think he very well could be electable, he'd likely rank toward the center of the Democratic Caucus in the Senate in terms of his overall floor voting behavior, but he'll be somewhat idiosyncratic or iconoclastic. In other words, I think Matthews' votes would not fit the pattern of either a more typical moderate Democrat like Evan Bayh, or a strong liberal Democrat like Russ Feingold, or even Chris Dodd or Chuck Schumer.
jdizzle, I was addressing your comments about Lou Dobbs running for Governor of New Jersey, not President. There's a world of difference between the two.
You're absolutely right that Clinton was a fiscal conservative, and certainly a deficit hawk compared to the disastrous supply-siders (Reagan and GW Bush). George HW Bush, who lots his reelection campaign in large part because he raised taxes, was also way more fiscally responsible (though inept at dealing with a recession) than either of the most recent 2-term Republican Presidents.
But back to Dobbs. Do you suppose he could run as a Democrat?
not ok
So Mathews, the girly guy who gushed endlessly over the antics of george w on the Lincoln, the guy who is so close pals to Tom Delay wants to run as a Democrat?
Better he runs as a 'Pug and fights Spector for the seat he holds in the party clser to his hearts desire.
I love this! Now Tweety's gonna see every word he utters in print, and he'll have learn how to deny, deny, deny!
At least he's smart enough to be enlisting Obama staffers for his campaign.
Thanks for making him squirm a bit!
Michael
Sorry, I intended to address the issue of Dobbs as a candidate for president and governor because that’s what sfergus483 was talking about but I just talked about him as a candidate in general for the second part. Obviously there is a world of difference between the two. On the national level, I would say Dobbs looks more like a Democrat. On the local level, being the Northeast, he is definitely more conservative than your average Democrat, but still more liberal than your average Republican. His favorite issue, immigration reform, doesn’t hold the kind of weight in New Jersey as it would in a border state. That doesn’t leave a whole lot of his positions for conservatives to get behind. Not that there is an abundance of them in New Jersey, but I think he would have a hard time winning a primary. That said, I think he would certainly win over a lot of Democrats in a general election, the same way Pataki and Romney were able to win two solidly blue states. I don’t see him running as either. He has blasted both parties on many occasions and he would look a little foolish running for either one, especially given his desire to be the voice of independents. I never watched his show during Clinton’s presidency, but I know he left CNN temporarily because he thought the network was too supportive of Clinton. Seeing his show during Bush’s presidency, I NEVER would have guessed that he gave him $1000 for his first campaign. I don’t live in New Jersey, but if I did, I would consider voting for Dobbs, but only if he ran the way he speaks his mind, as an independent.
Chris Matthews would bring nothing more than the status quo. Chris Matthews has close ties with the Council on Foreign Relations' Richard Haass. He even admits to such a claim here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XO4DuMcrVpE
I can see Chris winning based on the relations to this organization alone.
God Bless America.
Peace and Justice,
Johnny
Matthews' time (if he ever had a time) has come and gone.
Any primary opponent will have no trouble finding plenty of video clips of him attacking Democrats and Democratic positions (not to mention his misogynistic comments). He would end up looking like the second coming of Dick Cheney.
Matthews would spend the entire primary campaign on defense.
If this is true, Matthews ought to step down from his reporting role at MSNBC and declaring himself to be the demcrat hack and shill that we have long known him to be.
No oner he had his head so far up Obama's butt all year and went all atingle when he heard him speak!
情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,
^^ nice blog!! ^@^
徵信, 徵信網, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 感情挽回, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 挽回感情, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信, 捉姦, 徵信公司, 通姦, 通姦罪, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 捉姦, 監聽, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 外遇問題, 徵信, 捉姦, 女人徵信, 女子徵信, 外遇問題, 女子徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 徵信公司, 徵信網, 外遇蒐證, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 外遇沖開, 抓姦, 女子徵信, 外遇蒐證, 外遇, 通姦, 通姦罪, 贍養費, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信公司, 女人徵信, 外遇
徵信, 徵信網, 徵信社, 徵信網, 外遇, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信, 女人徵信, 徵信社, 女人徵信社, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 女人徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社,
徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 抓姦, 離婚, 外遇,離婚,
徵信, 外遇, 離婚, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信社, 征信, 征信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 征信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信,
^^ very nice
徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,
徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,
外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇外遇 外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇 外遇
外遇
外遇 外遇
外遇
外遇 外遇外遇
外遇
外遇 外遇外遇 外遇 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 ,
外遇 外遇 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇
クレジットカード 現金化
キャッシング
インプラント
網頁設計
水 通販
会社設立
留学
コンタクトレンズ
アルカリイオン水
ダンボール
アダルトＤＶＤ
アダルトＤＶＤ
無料出会い
出会い系サイト
アダルトサイト
アダルト
艾葳酒店經紀公司提供專業的酒店經紀, 飯局小姐,領檯人員,領台,傳播妹,或者想要到台北酒店、林森北路酒店,私人招待所,或者八大行業當酒店PT,酒店公關,酒店兼職,想去酒店上班, 日式酒店,制服酒店,ktv酒店,禮服店,整天穿得水水漂漂的禮服酒店,鋼琴酒吧當酒店領檯,酒店小姐,公關小姐??,還是想去制服店當上班小姐,水水們如果想要擁有打工工作、晚上兼差工作、兼差打工、假日兼職、兼職工作、學生兼差、兼差、打工兼差、日領工作、晚上兼差工作、酒店工作、酒店上班、酒店打工、兼職、兼差、兼差工作、酒店上班等,想了解酒店相關工作和特種行業內容,想找打工、假日兼職、兼差打工、或晚班兼職想擁有快速賺錢又有保障的工作嗎???又可以現領請找專業又有保障的艾葳酒店經紀公司!
艾葳酒店經紀是合法的公司工作環境高雅時尚，無業績壓力，無脫秀無喝酒壓力，高層次會員制客源，工作輕鬆，可日領、現領。
一般的酒店經紀只會在水水們第一次上班和領薪水時出現而已，對水水們的上班安全一點保障都沒有！艾葳酒店經紀公司的水水們上班時全程媽咪作陪，不需擔心！只提供最優質的酒店打工,酒店上班,酒店打工環境、上班條件給水水們。
水水們妳有缺現金、有卡債、缺錢卡奴的煩腦嗎?想到日本留學日本打工嗎?妳是工讀生找工作??想要擁有高時薪又輕鬆的夜間兼職工作,打工機會和,假日打工,兼職工作日領假日打工的機會嗎??想實現夢想卻又缺錢沒錢嗎!??整天還在煩腦如何賺錢有什麼賺錢方法,和賺錢最快方法!?,想要打工,日領工作,短期打工,兼差工作,打工兼差工作嗎!?,
請加入我們艾葳酒店經紀公司工作單純輕鬆”高時薪”又可日領徵想要當傳播妹,上班小姐,酒店兼差,酒店兼職,歡迎學生打工,!!!
加入我們實現夢想就從現在開始^__^
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,
The survey found that consumer 3G wholesale china from the crowd of view, the buyer 25 to 40 years old mainly white-collar workers, accounting for about 40%, followed by consumer groups of students, accounting for about three into. According to statistics, 3G wholesale products in sales, compared with a 2G mobile phone sales are still a wide gap between, but since June has been, 3G mobile phones increase in the average monthly buy products for more than 50%, "11" period due to holiday business, the increase of more than 150%. Pk that the "11" after the peak sales of 3G handsets likely to usher in more stable growth.
From cell phones users to see the specific situation of occupational segmentation in 2009, accounting for 19.5% of students dropped 21.2 percent over last year, other types of occupations than those last year, the proportion of Internet users cheap cell phones increase. White collar crowd from last year's 29.2% increase to 38.9% this year, accounting for 9.7 percentage points up to replace the student groups cellphone users as one of the biggest occupational hierarchy; blue-collar crowd from last year's 13.9% to 18.9% this year, accounting for rose by 5.0 percentage points, showing that mobile phones users by a group of students to the occupational groups a significant trend in the development. Ereli advice that, cheap cell phones and mobile phone users Internet users monthly income distribution of age, education, occupational distribution has strong correlation with high spending capacity of white-collar workers and some students in the crowd will be a huge cell phone china online potential consumer groups.
By comparing the traditional Internet users, Internet users to iResearch found that the traditional white-collar-based, cell phones wholesale, corporate general staff accounted for 18.9%, higher than the 5.6% of the wholesale cell phones users accounting; and discount cell phones users in the years students and blue-collar workers accounted for significantly more than the traditional Internet users, respectively, accounting for 19.5% and 18.9%, higher than the traditional Internet users Students and blue-collar workers accounted for 7.8% and 5.1% respectively.
Post a Comment