With the exit of Chip Maxwell from the Nebraska 2nd District Congressional race, many supporters of Congressman Lee Terry got a B-12 shot of enthusiasm that Terry’s campaign was not doomed by the split of Republican votes.
However, the question now goes from “Can Terry win?” to “WILL Terry win?”
That…not so clear.
We have asked around a bit and the word that we get is, Uncomfortably Close.
And we aren’t talking about handshaking with Brad Ashford.
Essentially this is another Lee Terry race. It will be very, very close — either way.
And the stress is on that “either way” point, because of the clusterfrack that has gone on during the primary and since. Primaries are always divisive, but this last one got hairy, and the Maxwell goofiness didn’t help. Sides were chosen, and many will feel stuck on those for a while.
Will they come back to Terry in November?
We have to think most Republicans wouldn’t want to entrench Ashford, even if it meant an open primary in 2016. And it is not as if Terry doesn’t have a very good conservative record. And then the Cantor loss in Virginia really shows that an incumbent like Terry could be defeated in 2016, if that’s what they wanted.
Then again, an “open” primary isn’t really open if the incumbent has more than one challenger. If Terry wins in November, then GOPers really think Terry is vulnerable in 2016, more than one challenger would be likely to appear. You could see a Dan Frei and a Chip Maxwell and pick another name going up against Terry. Then you probably do the math and Terry can come out on top.
But if Terry’s not there, then you have your free-for-all where nearly every Ronny Republican who ever passed out a campaign sticker will give it their all to get in the race. (And heck, it’s the kind of job where ANYONE figures they could do it. “Can I vote yes or no on some issues? Hell yes, I could do that. Vote for me!”)
But that’s also just candidates. Does the average voter consider that stuff in the voting booth in November 2014? Probably not. They’ll really just see who they would want in more: Terry or Ashford.
But that does get to another issue: Will hard core Dems bother with Brad Ashford?
Well, only if they think Terry is really beatable.
But there’s no love in the Democrat community for Ashford.
There is a strong gut-feeling by leading Democrats about Ashford that “he’s not one of us.” The party leaders and even other candidates feel that way – and have shared that sentiment.
So will they really work to get rid of Lee Terry, even if that means they get squishy, former Republican, Brad Ashford?
Here is where our “Conspiracy Theory” comes in.
Well, it’s not so much a Consipracy as a general thought we have. We really doubt that dark meetings have been had, and that money will be supplied, etc. That being said…
Local Democrats do not want Ashford in. He is NOT their guy. He fell into this.
Our theory? They want Baby Buffett in for 2016 (or maybe 2018).
So here’s the conspiracy part:
“They” told Chip Maxwell to get out of the 2014 race, because otherwise Ashford would win, and could potentially keep the seat for a long time.
“They” then told Maxwell they will support him in 2016, so he can beat Lee Terry in a primary. Hey, if Cantor can lose, so can Terry!
Then, “they” figure they have a much better chance with Baby Buffett of taking out Maxwell than taking out Terry.
Bingo, Congressman Baby Buffett — who will garner national news as the heir to the Buffett legacy.
Ah, but who’d ever figure there’s enough will, ambition and money in Omaha to make something like that happen…
Interesting story about Julie Schmit-Albin and Nebraska Right to Life making a decision to no longer endorse candidates unless they are incumbents. The idea here is that they have to show, by their votes, that they are Pro-Life, as opposed to just answering a survey.
This isn’t a bad idea for just NRtL, but of any major group who wants to stick out their neck for a candidate. If a legislator really wants to be endorsed, they have to show their proven record. Anyone can SAY they’re pro-life, or pro-growth, or whatever.
At some point though, it might help for NRtL to say who they know they’re against. This would be helpful to voters who want to know who they definitely should not support.
Here’s an interesting one:
Remember the couple, back in 2005, who stranded themselves out in a rural area south of Omaha, strung out on meth, but couldn’t be found by 911 because of the location technology for cell phones? They ended up freezing to death, partly because of being strung out on meth in arctic temperatures, but partly because 911 couldn’t find them because they were on cell phones.
At the time there was a lot of discussion about how cell phones could and couldn’t be located and what the parameters of the technology were. Many were amazed that we hadn’t advanced on that front yet, considering most people had cell phones and many people were starting to only have cell phones, as opposed to land lines.
Well, here it is over nine years later, and it seems that a larger part of that issue is finally being addressed. The FCC has a proposal to require cell phone companies to use technology so 911 centers can locate callers even more precisely. On the one hand, if the 911 center could have pin-pointed where that stranded couple was, they could have sent help. But what about the case where an emergency cell phone call comes from a sky-scraper — say like the First National Bank building. The new FCC proposal would allow 911 to identify where the caller is, so precisely they’d know what floor they are on. This seems like the sort of thing we expect now from our technology, right?
Well, some of the cell phone carriers and their associations are pushing back on the plan. Too fast, they say, or somesuch.
Look, we understand limitations on technology. But in 2014, this is something most of us would expect — and are frankly surprised doesn’t already exist. Just get it done and bill us all the extra buck a month.
Want to know who is ahead in the Governor’s race?
Polls? Blogs? Word of mouth?
Nah. Just look to see who wants eighteen — EIGHT-FRIGGEN-TEEN! — debates, between the candidates.
Yes, that would be Chuck Hassebrook. (The guy who’s behind.)
Pete Ricketts, on the other hand, is happy with the 2+ that have already been scheduled. And here’s the reality: that “+” that’s factored in there is probably too many already.
One debate, you gotta have. Two debates, is usually good. By the third absolutely NO ONE is listening or watching or paying attention.
(Well, except for the campaign staffs, the occasional bloggers — yippee! another 2 hours of our lives melted away! — and the 5th grader who gets to ask the question, “How will you help to see that agriculture is important to Nebraska?” Oh wait, sorry, that was from one of the news anchors. The 5th grader will ask, “Can you say something positive about your opponent?”. Nope, still from a newspaper columnist. We’re fairly sure the 5th grader will ask something related to Kool-Aid, TV dinners or the Reuben sandwich, but don’t hold us to that. The previous two questions though? GUAR-AN-TEED.)
And heck the Senate debates will be even more awesome because there are FOUR candidates! FOUR! Ben Sasse, Domina, Jim Jenkins and then the other guy who always ends up on our Twitter feed. You looking forward to the Senate debates? “Here is my four part question (with 2 subparts for each question) regarding Obamacare and the VA. You have 19 seconds to respond.”
We will say that the OWH’s Mike’l Severe did a nice job as the moderator of one of the primary debates, but again, it’s not like anyone really listened.
Hassebrook hopes to have 20-30 debates so he can pick out a Ricketts quip or two to sell to voters that proves Pete is part demon, part Ohio State fan.
Good luck on all that Chuck.
Did you catch the U.S. Senate committee report on Jane Kleeb and her astro-turf groups (first reported on by Nebraska Watchdog)? The report essentially points out that Kleeb’s “Bold Nebraska” (you know they’re “bold” because it’s right there in their name) is supported by millions of dollars from out-of-state radical enviro groups.
The report states, in part:
In advancing their cause, these wealthy liberals fully exploit the benefits of a generous tax code meant to promote genuine philanthropy and charitable acts, amazingly with little apparent Internal Revenue Service scrutiny. Instead of furthering a noble purpose, their tax
deductible contributions secretly flow to a select group of left wing activists who are complicit and eager to participate in the fee-for-service arrangement to promote shared political goals. Moreover, the financial arrangement provides significant insulation to these wealthy elite from the incidental damage they do to the U.S. economy and average Americans.
They point out how Jane Kleeb sells herself to the progressive radical enviros as an “authentic” face.
The irony of Bold Nebraska’s grassroots image, as evident in Kleeb’s comments, is that it is nothing more than a cover for wealthy and distant non-Nebraskan interests who seek to advance a political agenda without drawing attention to the fact that they, too, are outsiders with little interest in or connection to the state. One of these outsiders is none other than Tom Steyer, who has a strong conflict of interest in opposing Keystone XL due to his financial stake in a competing pipeline called Kinder Morgan. Despite claiming that he would sell off all interests in the Kinder Morgan pipeline by late 2013, it was still unclear as of June 2014 whether Steyer followed through on that promise.
Oh but didn’t you see??? Jane got six people to march from a sand pit to the Solar Barn to protest Big Oil!!! So see! Nebraskans DO hate the pipeline! Or something. (And then they jumped into their Silverados and drove the 45 miles home.)
ICYMI, here is the latest Ben Sasse video entitled, “Border Crisis”:
Somewhere Dave Domina is cussing and kicking dirt in circles.
Hey, how’s that for a healthy post?
Now here is some fun for those of you who had hoped to see other things discussed in the past few weeks:
No cheating! Noooo cheating:
Name Chuck Hassebrook’s running mate.
Yeah, that’s what we thought.
And YOU read political stuff!
Think the average voter has even a minuscule thought on that subject?
A sincere thanks to all of you who read and comment, on all sides of the issues.
You’re keeping political discussion alive in Nebraska!