The news is bad -- very bad -- for Senator Chris Dodd:
Connecticut Sen. Christopher Dodd trails former U.S. Rep. Rob Simmons, a possible Republican challenger, 50 - 34 percent in the 2010 Senate race, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today, as voters disapprove 58 - 33 percent of the job the Democratic incumbent is doing, his lowest approval rating ever.While we have a long way to go until November 2010, it's fairly startling to see a four-term Democratic incumbent down by 16 points in a deeply blue state. And make no mistake: this is all about Dodd's negatives, rather than anything in particular that former U.S. Rep. Rob Simmons, the declared Republican challenger, is doing. Almost half (47 percent) of Connecticutians have yet to form an opinion about Simmons, and yet, he's leading Dodd among independent voters by better than 2:1, and even picking off 27 percent of Democrats.
Matched against two other possible Republican challengers, Sen. Dodd trails both State Sen. Sam Caligiuri 41 - 37 percent and former ambassador Tom Foley 43 - 35 percent, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University poll finds.
In the Dodd-Simmons matchup, Democrats back Dodd by only 58 - 27 percent while Simmons leads 87 - 6 percent among Republicans and 56 - 25 percent among independent voters.
The incumbent's approval is down from 49 - 44 percent March 10.
It's somewhat likely that this will turn out to be Dodd's low-water mark. The AIG story, for which deservedly or not, Dodd took a lot of lumps, is very fresh in the minds of voters, and the outrage will probably fade some. Even before the AIG bonus story broke, however, Dodd was underperforming, already tied with Simmons in some polls and barely ahead of him in others; the combination of his ties to Countrywide and a presidential campaign that might have seemed pointless to his local constituents was evidently already doing damage. In any event, a seat that would ordinarily be relatively safe for Democrats now appears as likely as not to be picked off by the Republicans.
...Unless, perhaps, their nominee is someone other than Chris Dodd. Dodd has swatted away rumors of retirement (although one wonders whether polling numbers like these could give him second thoughts). But, somewhat as the Republicans seem poised to do in Kentucky with Jim Bunning, the Democrats could also attempt to force Dodd's hand by giving him a primary challenger.
Although wealthy Connecticut is not exactly ground zero for populism -- quite the opposite really -- the ideal challenger would presumably be someone who keeps the financial services industry at arm's-length, which is something easier said than done in the Nutmeg State. Someone like Ned Lamont, for instance, who is extremely wealthy and an heir to the J.P. Morgan fortune, would probably have trouble pivoting against Dodd. The same goes for Jim Himes, a former partner at Goldman Sachs.
On paper, the most compelling alternative is probably Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro, a longtime champion for working class interests. But DeLauro was Dodd's former chief of staff, and it's hard to envision her running against her old boss. Chris Murphy, however, could present a compelling alternative, as could potentially Joe Courtney.
The real question may be whether certain parts of the Democratic nerve center -- and particularly the blogosphere -- might throw their weight behind someone like Murphy. Dodd is quite popular with parts of the left for his vigorous challenge to FISA, and he is relatively liberal on most other issues. Unless the alternative were DeLauro, who is one of the couple dozen most liberal members of the Congress, this would not be a challenge on ideological grounds.
Nevertheless, politics ain't beanbag, and if the Democrats want to have any realistic hopes of picking up a 60-seat majority in 2010, they can't afford to be underdogs in states like Connecticut.

47 comments
Time to spend some time with the family! Maybe Obama can find him a job in the adm. and get him out of the senate before he is embarrassed.
The democrats really can`t afford to have a republican take the seat with Lieberman as the other senator. Knowing Dodd he won`t leave, plus a lot of people say they want a new guy when polled but on election day chicken out and end up voting for the incumbent. still looks pretty grim right now.
You're leaving out probably the most obvious Democratic candidate, whether or not Dodd pulls out: Attorney General Richard Blumenthal.
http://www.schiff2010.com
Dems in a lotta trouble: Dodd, Corzine, Patterson (NY Gov) and Deval Patrick. The northeast is crumbling.
Economic commentary to follow.
Dead Cat Bounce
I am a contrarian when it comes to the current market rally which continued today based on "good news" and positive surprises particularly with regard to factory orders.
The thing to note is that the upticks are off historically very low numbers and thus tend to overstate strength. A sort of a dead cat bounce.
The fundamentals of our economy have turned poor. Unemployment sees no signs of abating -- even if a recovery is in the offing (which I doubt). As a lagging indicator it will take time for businesses to grow the confidence they need to start hiring workers back, particularly with so much governmental/legislative uncertainty.
The rapid and unprecedented expansion of the money supply being engineered by Fed Chairman Bernanke is getting very little play, even as interest rates on Treasury Debt continue to rise. This coupled with the threat of a doubling and then a tripling of the national debt has raised questions about the value of the dollar.
The prognosis for the dollar is poor and this actually can have a short term positive effect as our exports will become relatively cheaper and manufacturing and other exports can expect to pick up as foreign consumers appreciate the price decline they get. Longer term, however, the prognosis is not so good.
The exponential increase in the money supply and the deficit will have only one result: a general rise in interest rates. For a time, Bernanke can tamp this down by soaking up demand at lower rates, but even he knows that at some point he must stop monetizing the debt or threaten hyper-inflation. Right now folks seems to believe that some “reflation” is in order so people are discounting the inflationary risk, but history has shown that this kind of monetary policy, coupled with deficit spending can only result in stagflation – the painful combination of high unemployment and inflation – that we saw in the 1970s – that created untold misery until Reagan came in and cut taxes and unleashed growth while his Fed Chairmen applied much more disciplined monetary policy.
Of these matters, I know a thing or two.
Right now, believe it or not you have a world awash in cash that is seeking a home. The US Treasury still remains the safest place to park it, but sentiment can turn and turn rapidly. Already there are signs that China is seeking to acquire more in the way of tangible assets (witness its move to invest $20 billion in Rio Tinto, the world’s largest mining company). China is turning inward, thinking more and more about the potency of its own consumer market and is rapidly moving to vertically integrate it is economy and reduce its dependency on outside trading partners, including and perhaps most especially the US. My hunch is that China will increasingly begin to abandon the dollar and dollar denominated assets in favor of more tangible investments in its own infrastructure and economy and will finally permit the upward revaluation of its currency that was once long-demanded by its trading partners.
None of that bodes well for our long run future.
I expect an anemic recovery on the order of a couple of points of poz GDP growth during the first half of 2010, with little easing in unemployment that is likely to hit 10% within the next six to twelve months. Depending on when interest rates begin to rise, this recovery will choke off and we will see ourselves slump back down into a much more protracted recession that will only be overcome once the dollar is strengthened and the conditions for investment in the US are fundamentally strengthened.
None of that will come about by continuing the Bush polices of War and deficit spending that Obama seems content not merely to imitate, but to accelerate.
(You can now follow me on Twitter: PeteKent01)
"if the Democrats want to have any realistic hopes of picking up a 60-seat majority in 2010, they can't afford to be underdogs in states like Connecticut."
Well, I don't know that that's true. According to your own rankings, the Democrats still have the top six races most likely to flip a Senate seat in their favor. And they only need to gain one seat to get to sixty. Losing CT plus winning NH and PA alone would get them there.
Yes
By the way, ironically, AG Blumenthal has intended to run against Joe Lieberman in 2012.
PeteKent—
Normally, I wouldn't bother, but...
...while his Fed Chairmen applied much more disciplined monetary policy.
Of these matters, I know a thing or two.
And the name of that Fed Chairman? What was he doing while President Reagan sought the job in 1980? How is he keeping busy these days?
PeteKent,
What's with hijacking the post about Dodd to give your economic prognostication dissertation? If we want to read that, we'll go to your blog or Twitter feed or whatever you want to use for that. 538's comment section shouldn't be (for anyone, I'm not trying to pick on you) for things unrelated (directly) to the 538 post to which it's attached.
Loner,
I will say this: people like you are really only meant to listen and aborsb. I have no clue who you are (you lack "blog presence")and thus unless are polite I will not engage in discussion or debate with you.
Curious that in all of my highly analytical psot you choose one throwway nugget to comment on. And pointlessly, too, I would add.
"a presidential campaign that might have seemed pointless to his local constituents was alrady doing damage"
The typos in almost every post are marring what is otherwise an intelligent and professional site. If you can't get a proofreader, at least do a spellcheck, please!
Russel,
The Dodd story is old news. Congressional Quarterly covered this earlier.
The economy is the most important issue right now. Who the Senator from CT will be pales in comparison.
Unless the people begin to udnerstand the folly of Obama's mismanagement of the economy millions are doomed to untold misery!
(You can now follow me on Twitter: PeteKent01)
PeteKent—
My day is done. Mostly you're boring, but occaisionally you're a smile.
Of these matters, I know a thing or two.
Gales of laughter
PeteKent-
I find you to be a hack. Not because you hold an opinion that conflicts with mine but because you spew your talking points and opinion at inappropraite times with a demeanor that is less then flattering to even a high schooler. Keep it on topic or keep it in your twitter feed. Posting random comments on a topic driven forum is called spam or trolling.
I also lack "blog presence", so feel free not to reply.
I think it would be a shame to lose someone as knowledgeable about finance as Dodd. And I think Dodd has done a great job pushing for taxpayer protections since the beginning of this bailout mess (what little was good in the TARP legislation we owe in large part to Chris Dodd).
It is ironic that the person with the most effective voice in favor of executive compensation limits in the bailout negotiations has been caught up in the AIG bonus scandal he was trying to prevent. For this I largely blame the media, which reported the story as "Senator Dodd blocked bonus provisions" rather than "Senator Dodd reluctantly agreed to soften his stance on bonus provisions."
All that said, it is not looking good for Chris Dodd.
Pete Kent -
Your economic and political prognostications are exactly as valuable as the time-telling of a broken clock.
It is not that you are "right" or "wrong", but that you are guaranteed to say the same thing no matter what the actual situation.
You will always predict that Democrats are in trouble in any election, regardless of evidence.
You will always claim that economic policy of Democrats is doomed to fail, regardless of evidence or analysis.
You may rarely be right by coincidence, but you provide no actual information.
Every cycle there is clucking about this senator or that. Dodd will be able to rehabilitate his brand and win comfortably. Remember the registration is heavily in his favor, and the Republicans offer nothing to move moderate voters off their blue trend.
Rosa DeLauro looks like a really creepy zombie.
PK:
Are you arguing that we can "save" our way to economic recovery? Just curious.
A primary challenger could backfire. If Dodd survives a nasty primary challenge, it could weaken his support among Democrats, making things tougher in the general election.
Plus, I liked the Chris Dodd I saw in the primaries. He took a much harder line against the constitutional abuses of the Bush administration than most of the others. I thought his presidential bid was making a contribution. Do his constituents not see it that way?
Bryce - he picked up his family and moved to Iowa for several months. Not the best way to impress your homestate constituents. Add that to his self inflicted wounds with his Countryside deal and the poor way the AIG bonus story was handled on his part, and you can see why he's in deep trouble. The AIG stuff is really too bad because he was the one who wanted tough anti-bonus language in the stimulus, but Treasury wanted it out. Ultimately he listened to Treasury and the whole thing blew up in his face.
E-Dub:
I am not arguing that we save our way to recovery. I understand well enough the so-called paradox of thrift.
Recoveries do not follow from deficit spending. That creates bubbles that ultimately burst into inflation b/c most government spending is wasted/wasteful and fails to anything other than ignite demand. It is rarely self-sustaining.
Creating massive deficits coupled with explosion in the money supply is a sure fire way to create a temporary inflation which will conflagrate a degree of economic activity -- but ultimately all you are doing is causing prices to rise as more dollars chase relatively the same amount of goods and services (you have to carefully balance the money supply with economic activity or the result is merely higher prices). This is what you are seeing now. All the money ("liquidity", whatever) out there is seeking a place to come to rest and the stock market is inflating with just about everything else.
The only way to promote true and lasting recovery is to create conditions that foster private investment in businesses that create jobs. That is most easily done by appropriate tax policy.
My recipe: create a lower tax climate, give business proper incentives and watch the prosperity materialize.
We tried this Keynesian stimulus nonsense all throughout the mid 60s and 70s to ill effect. Compare that with the Kennedy, Reagan and (yes even) the Bush tax cuts and you see how history provides a simple guide.
Obama is intent on re-making the economy according to his own jury-rigged corporate statism model where the government is actively involved in picking winners and losers in business and there is close cooperation between certain industries and the government. This is economic Fascism and it has historically lead to disastrous results.
Obama appears to be a very self-confident man who will stumble over his own stubbornness. Recall what such persistence did for George Bush.
(follow me to a better world on twitter: PeteKent01)
@ P. Kent
A) I have "blog presence" so you are going to have to listen to me.
B) This thread is about Sen. Dodd and the 2010 elections. If you have "blog presence" then surely you can post your "ideas" there.
C) Your statement "recoveries do not follow from deficit spending" is demonstrably false. For example, what do you think happened during WWII? It was deficit spending during the war (by the government) that pulled us out of the crisis of the 1930s - not the war itself (as some conservatives seem to think).
D) In sum, I get the feeling you don't know what you're talking about, however of course you have a right to comment here. Maybe next time though you can save your thoughts for a post that actually has something to do with the economy. There are a lot of those here at fivethirtyeight, and people might actually listen to you rather than getting annoyed at you, which is a good thing for your "blog presence," such as it is.
PeteKent said...
. . . and thus unless are polite I will not engage in discussion or debate with you.
Hey everyone!
We should all give all our scorn, disdain, and be most impolite to the ego who fashions himself as 'PeteKent', and maybe he will totally ignore 538.com and just go away, back to the (so-called) FreeRepublic, Drudge, RedState, or whatever the title of the lunatic fringe site he gets most of his 'talking points'.
@PeteKent
First of all this is a topic about Chris Dodd and the CT senate seat. Under normal circumstances I wouldn't do this but I find some of your economic points worthy of a reply that I have to give them.
Ok so you claim that "recoveries do not follow from deficit spending." Well I hate to break this to you but the way out of the Great Depression was massive deficit spending on WWII.
Next you state that "fails to anything other than ignite demand" I can only imagine that your missing word between to and anything is do. So taking this into account you are saying that spending does nothing but ignite demand...Well that demand is the basis of supporting industry which is therefore able to hire workers who buy more therefore cycling into an improving economy
Your next point I find the most difficult of all. "Create a lower tax climate." Alright well here's my problem with that. If you create a business and you're losing money, well you're not paying much in taxes. If you're going to make a million dollars a year you're still going to start the business even if after taxes that is 700 thousands dollars. Lower taxes don't foster any new business growth or investment, all they do is rapidly increase the deficit which you are so genuinely concerned about.
"Give business proper incentives"
Well my problem with this is that businesses already have incentives, profit. A business makes a profit for doing well, there is no need to give them a greater incentive. That is why capitalism works, because it's not forced by government. There is no reason to provide incentives for business as they already have them.
Didn't Chris Dodd's father run as a pro-war independent in either '70 or '72 after a long period in the Senate? He won, if I remember rightly (I certainly know that the Democrat didn't win).
@ Foregone Conclusion
Per his Wikipedia article and some other stuff, Thomas Dodd ran as an independent in '70 after initially choosing not to run because of a corruption scandal (he had been censured for financial misconduct prior to that). He lost as did the Democrat, and Republican Lowell Weicker won the Seat. Weicker would later be defeated by Joe Lieberman, and even later than that would endorse Howard Dean for president (which tells you something about how different the 2004 GOP was/is from the 1970 one).
Also Thomas Dodd was a conservative Dem and definitely a hawk on Vietnam, but I think his decision to run as an independent had much more to do with his corruption scandal than his foreign policy views.
Seriously, guys; get the Greasemonkey script for Firefox that blocks 538 trolls. The only time I read about PeteKent is when I have to listen to you guys trying to rebut him, and if you read anything he said during the campaign, you would know that he has no clue what he's talking about and no interest in being educated. You're wasting your time.
As for this post, short answer: yes. Long answer: hell yes.
Russ said -
Your next point I find the most difficult of all. "Create a lower tax climate." Alright well here's my problem with that. If you create a business and you're losing money, well you're not paying much in taxes. If you're going to make a million dollars a year you're still going to start the business even if after taxes that is 700 thousands dollars. Lower taxes don't foster any new business growth or investment, all they do is rapidly increase the deficit which you are so genuinely concerned about.
I've often laughed at the right wing claim that people won't want to make more money if they have to pay taxes on it.
Certainly, if incremental taxes are massively high, that might stifle money-making efforts, and a tax cut might help, but we're nowhere near that in the US today.
On the topic of Dodd -
He has to GO, plain and simple. Too bad, he actually did some good and took some courageous stances, and surely had little to do with financial abuses.
Nevertheless, if you become very unpopular, you must be challenged in a primary. That's just the way it has to work.
aadsfasdfasdfadsf
Yes, they should primary him. And Dodd shouldn't resist. Connecticut want both their senators replaced. There's no reason one of them has to be a RushPiglican.
Saying that, give him some time to improve his situation. You never know.
One question needs to be asked is assuming Dodd decides to run for re-election in 2010 but loses re-election to Rob Simmons ie (Carol Mosely Braun in 1998) can a strong fresh face Democrat win the seat back in 2016- perhaps US Rep Chris Murphy.
Looking at other vulnerable Democratic seats.
Roland Burris(IL)will lose in a primary to IL State Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias- protege of President Obama- Giannoulias is favored to win in the November general Election. Assuming US Rep Mike Castle(DE)decides not to run. AG Beau Biden is favored to hold on to his father's former US Senate Seat. Appointed Democratic US Senators Mike Bennett(D-CO) and Kirsten Gillibrand are favored to get re-election. Harry Reid(D-NV)will win re-election due to weak GOP opposition.
Democrats are favored to pick up Republican seats in Missouri,New Hampshire and Ohio plus unseat vulnerable Republican incumbents in Kentucky,and North Carolina. as well as in Pennsylvania.
Yes, Robby, that script is wonderful. Sometimes I wish it could be made to filter out posts that respond to trolls, too.
Dodd is toast. He's way out of touch with CT voters and he won't be able to get out from under the Countrywide scandal. I suspect he will announce his retirement early next year. If he doesn't, he'll definitely be challenged in a primary and likely lose. Blumenthal won't challenge him. He's CT's great lost hope, always backing away from any race he isn't fully confident he'll win. Had he followed through the door Lamont opened last year, he'd be a senator now.
BTW, Lowell Weicker won when the anti-war democrat, Duffy, split the democratic vote with independent Thomas Dodd, the censured incumbent and former Democrat. (He retired and then changed his mind.) Weicker turned out to be one of the most liberal Republicans ever to serve in the Senate (he was the maverick McCain pretends to be). Lieberman, true to form, defeated Weicker by running to the right of him.
@ Dale
Had he followed through the door Lamont opened last year, he'd be a senator now.
???
How so?
The CTers I talked to were really pissed off he moved his family to Iowa.
What is Jim Maloney- the former Danbury area US Congressman who lost his seat in 2002 during the Member vs Member redistricting process against Nancy Johnson. Any chance he will run for the US Senate.
This is Dodd's decision to make. If I were he, I would step aside and allow someone else to get the nomination for this seat. What really matters here are the issues, and if it looks like certain defeat in the general election if he's the candidate vs possible success for another Democrat that would handle the issues the same way Dodd thinks they ought to be handled, especially if the Republican challenger would deal with the issues in a way Dodd finds distasteful, then I would step aside.
He could say he wants to retire and spend some time with his family, then select an heir that matches his ideals and endorse that candidate for the primary election. He gets to save face this way without causing the direction the country is going in to shift away from the path he desires for it.
And it would still be democratic-the electorate can decide if his heir is worthy or not int he primaries.
Has Dodd declared he will run yet? I am wondering if he will. He ran hard for President in the early stages in 2007/8, was prepared to move to Iowa, even with a reelection due two years later. Doesn't have the ring of a guy who wants to stay in the senate forever?
I'd hold off assuming NH and PA are going to go Dem in 2010. Specter always finds a way yo survive and he will yet again. Obama's wild unprecedented spending might be the thing that wakes NH up from its Democratic brainwashing of late - Hello, isn't frugality that state's trademark?
As for Dodd, he is in trouble but has time to recover. In my opinion he's far from the most vile of the liberal Dems, and it would be really hard to see CT having (sort of) two Republican Senators. Though I guess Maine does so who knows.
@Opus 132
Had Blumenthal entered the Democratic primary last year after Lamont's effort made it clear how vunerable Leiberman was among Democrats, I believe he would have beaten both Lamont and Lieberman for the nomination and then in the general election, he would have won handily.
Maybe someone in the Obama administration will quietly drop a hint to Dodd that if he retires soon there is an ambassadorship to Barbados open.
Unfortunately, Dodd has the money and the connections to buy the primary-TV ads in CT are absurdly expensive. Dodd has the financial industry at his back, which is enough to just outspend any opponent.
The only way Dodd could survive is if the recession is over by mid-2010 and his challenger(s) turn out to be incompetent candidates or have their own massive scandals.
Will Dodd have a chance if the DSCC ties whoever the Republican nominee is with Former Connecticut Governor John Rowland or Former Waterbury Mayor Philip Giordano.
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,
Post a Comment