Scoles stepped in at the last minute in 2004, when Weldon's opponent was called into Iraq. Having all of 90 days to campaign, along with about $25,000, Scoles received 42% of the vote. This time, he is in early, and gave the impression that he really plans to come out swinging against Weldon.

When I asked Scoles what were issues that he thought most mattered to the residents in his district, the very first thing he said was healthcare, and how to pay for it. He also mentioned that in a district with a higher than average amount of people collecting social security, that keeping the program out of the hands of privateers was big.

(And, as Scoles noted, in a vote that came down to a single Congressman, Weldon voted for CAFTA, the trade deal that seems to be unloved by virtually everyone. Along with CAFTA, and Weldon's vote for the Bankruptcy Bill, it is pretty clear that a tag of "opponent of working people" will be hung around the Congressman's neck.)

Overall, Scoles seemed down to earth, sharp, and dynamic. A perfect candidate in a district that continues to trend blue. And with Rendell and Casey sure to push Dem turnout in all of the Philly burbs, this could be the perfect chance to knock off Weldon.

Finally, a little background on Weldon:

He recently came out with a book, that basically blames the Clinton Administration for 9/11, and for ignoring Muhammed Atta, the chief 9/11 hijacker. The trouble with his accusations? Well, it looks like he basically just making them up, or relying on incredibly unreliable sources. Weldon has already started to retract parts of the book. Nice.

There were also big questions raised in 2004, about how much money Weldon is steering to his daughter in big, fat consulting contracts, sometimes to buddies of war criminals.

The district is interesting because it leans Republican even though the views of a great many of it's voters may not line up all that well with the views of the national Republican Party. The continued loyality has quite a bit to do with history, family tradition and a pretty potent Republican machine with deep patronage roots. No doubt, this makes for an uphill climb for any Democrat. On the other hand, the district hasn't gone for a Republican in a presidential race since the 1980's - the last of the Rockefellers I suppose.

As for the conference call, I was impressed with Paul Scoles. He demonstrated a breadth of understanding on issues both local and national. He was able to navigate topics from the war in Iraq to the Haverford School District (where he lives) with knowledge and ease. I made a few crass comments about the Democratic party's chances of beating Curt Weldon the other day. Let's just say that I think a good, knowledgeable candidate like Paul just might make what I suggested unnecessary.

Paul Scoles jumped into the 2004 race late, when our candidate was deployed to Iraq. He outperformed historical standards by getting 41.4% of the vote. Still, that is not enough to attract the attention of the DCCC. The DCCC prefers to fund races that fall in the 55%-45% range.

But that leaves a lot of seats without any support: Walter Ludwig, a former aide in Howard Dean's presidential campaign, has calculated that Democrats failed to mount serious challenges to about 120 House Republicans in each of the last three elections -- and that those Republicans contributed $63 million to colleagues in closer races.

"The fact that we are basically giving up on a quarter of the House in every cycle is just appalling," said Ludwig, who has formed a political action committee called Project 90 to support Democratic challenges in heavily Republican districts. LA Times

Walter was on the call last night, and he is taking an active interest in several of our Pennsylvania races. But our efforts are not without controversy. One part of the blogosphere is attacking us because of our association with Simon Rosenberg. (I have no association with Simon). Meanwhile, party insiders think we're nuts: