MyDD :: Major Schumer Bombshell?

Major Schumer Bombshell?

by Chris Bowers, Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 06:39:19 PM EST

Jonathan already posted on this, but I want took at the implications of one of Schumer's comments from earlier today:

"We have now gotten 11 of the 12 Democrats to commit to running again. [Iowa Sen.] Tom Harkin is still making up his mind," Schumer said, going on to lavish praise on the 67-year-old Democrat. "He's a great senator. He does more in a couple of years than many senators have done in a lifetime."

Whoa. I mean, just whoa. If true, this means all of the following:

John Kerry plans to run again in 2008, making all of those warchests in Massachusetts look pretty, well, useless on top of being selfish. Reminds of one of the counters to the Use It Or Lose It campaign back in October.
Ditto on New Jersey when it comes to Use It Or Lose It. Several House Democrats in New Jersey are holding onto huge sums of cash, but if Lautenberg is running again, they won't be useful until at least 2012, and probably 2014. Of course, if Lautenberg is running again, it does become slightly more difficult to hold this seat given Lautenberg's low approval ratings, although it shouldn't be a major worry consider the resilience of the Democratic Party in the Garden State.
If Biden plans to run again, he certainly doesn't have much faith in his own Presidential campaign, which he officially announced today. I also see a big opening for a primary challenge if Biden is running for President while also running for Senate. After, it was doing just that in 2000 that helped fuel the early stages of anti-Lieberman resentment in Connecticut. Thus, given his position as the chair of the foreign relations committee, he better not screw up or simply tip-toe around the edges of his Iraq oversight mandate if he wants to avoid a serious challenge.
If Tim Johnson has decided to run again, not only will his health probably end up being an issue, but it will also probably end up being an impediment to his ability to campaign. Then again, he might end up looking like a sympathetic figure because of his health, thereby avoiding a serious challenger.

Given just how big the ramifications would be, and how many different Senate races it impacts, Schumer may not have been telling the entire story when he stated that 11 of 12 Senators have agreed to run again. However, if he was giving the real down low and QT on the Senate with his statement, then it is clearly huge news.

Tags: Senate 2008, Joe Biden, Tim Johnson, Use-it, John Kerry, Frank Lautenberg (all tags)

Permalink :: 30 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Major Schumer Bombshell? (none / 0)

I don't even want Lautenberg to run again. Why should he? We need young blood.

Booman Tribune.

by BooMan on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 06:43:44 PM EST

there are 2-3 good reasons (3.00 / 1)

1. It will be easier to defend with him than as an open seat.

2. His replacement may well be less progressive -- i.e., Cong. Rob Andrews.

3. If he ever needs to step down, Gov. Corzine can appoint a replacement, right?

by Adam B on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 06:53:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: there are 2-3 good reasons (none / 0)

Not necessarily true- both Pallone, who sought the seat in '06, and Holt, who considered in '06 and is considering in '08, are both far more progressive than Andrews, and both are also more progressive than Menendez. So, basically, we need to try to NOT have Lautenburg... A Pallone or Holt candidacy would likely be easier to hold - and have better implications in the long run, than keeping Lautenburg.

by KainIIIC on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 06:55:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: there are 2-3 good reasons (none / 0)

Implicit in what I said was that the replacement would be at least as liberal as Lautenberg, who was #7 on party loyalty in the 109th in a strict mathematical analysis. But he is not a leader, and he is not young.

An open primary would be unbelievably ugly and expensive.

by Adam B on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 06:59:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Rush Holt would be a much better senator (none / 0)

Lautenberg votes the party line, but he's still not a Paul Wellstone figure.

by Terryus on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 08:45:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Agree with Adam B (none / 0)

It doesn't look like there will be a strong Republican challenger, at least not one who can raise money. Rep. Mike Ferguson (NJ-07) and U.S. Attorney Chris Christie have both announced they won't challenge.

The only sore spot for Lautenberg is his age, but he's in great shape.

Stay tuned to Blue Jersey for more.

by jrb1968 on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 09:26:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Agree with Adam B (none / 0)

Wrong on both fronts, I think. Lautenberg's most likely GOP challenger right now is Assemblyman Bill Baroni, who seems to be betting that running statewide in New Jersey alongside John McCain in 2008 will help with fundraising.

by Scott Shields on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 10:56:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Baroni (none / 0)

That's assuming Baroni makes it through '07, which is more likely than not, but he's no shoo-in. This is a Democratic district. Baroni's done some things that, if brought to the public's attention, could damage him (i.e. his fundraiser for George Allen, or telling a reporter that the mother of a soldier killed in Iraq should "find something better to do with her time" than interrupt Laura Bush at a closed campaign event).

And will John McCain really be that big of a help? Especially if Giuliani is still standing? Maybe after June or by giving Baroni a convention speech. But still, nationl Republicans are angry that money went to Jersey and Michigan when it could have been put to better use in Montana and Virginia. They're not going to let that happen again. A state assemblyman's campaign against a state institution like Lautenberg is money down a rathole.

by jrb1968 on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 11:26:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: there are 2-3 good reasons (none / 0)

Andrews is very progressive. He was wrong on the Iraq War but otherwise his voting record is very good. He's a staunch supporter of labor, excellent on social issues, and almost always votes with the workers and the people and against the big corporations.

by democrattotheend on Tue Jan 09, 2007 at 05:04:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Major Schumer Bombshell? (none / 0)

Lautenberg is and has been a good senator, and I have no specific reason to want him replaced (other than his role in changing the drinking age, but that was years ago). But if he does decide not to run, I'd love to see Rob Andrews run for Senate. He's been waiting a long time, and New Jersey politics right now is so north-centric (both Menendez and Kean flunked a quiz about South Jersey during a debate) so it would be great to have one of our senators be from the southern part of the state. When I lived in South Jersey I always felt ignored by statewide politicians, and felt frustrated that I would have had to drive up north to see any of the statewide candidates speak.

by democrattotheend on Tue Jan 09, 2007 at 05:01:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Major Schumer Bombshell? (none / 0)

Andrews is going to be the one who unseats Lautenberg, he struck a deal that the NJ Dem Party would back him in 08 if he left Menendez alone. Andrews is a pragmatic yet principled progressive, and is well liked because he is not perceived as a machine politician. Holt would be good as well. Either one would make fine Senators.

by DemGenii on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 07:01:55 PM EST

Re: Major Schumer Bombshell? (none / 0)

Very well said. Andrews is one of the few South Jersey Democrats who is not in bed with Norcross' machine, and it's about time that someone from South Jersey hold a statewide office so that part of the state stops being ignored by statewide officials.

by democrattotheend on Tue Jan 09, 2007 at 05:05:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Major Schumer Bombshell? (none / 0)

Can anyone explain Lautenberg's low approval ratings to me? He strikes me as a first-rate Senator, even if he's getting a little up there. I'd personally be honored to cast a vote for a WWII vet.

Is it still about the unfortunate circumstances of his re-election? Cmon, there must be a statute of limitations for such things. :)

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 07:15:26 PM EST

Re: Lautenberg's poll numbers (3.00 / 1)

While Lautenberg's approval is below 50% in most polls, a good chunk of NJ voters don't really have an opinion of Lautenberg. A poll released today said this:

45% approve of the job Frank Lautenberg is doing.
29% disapprove of the job Lautenberg is doing.
26% have "no opinion" about the job Lautenberg is doing.

by jrb1968 on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 09:16:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Major Schumer Bombshell? (none / 0)

No politician in New Jersey has good approval ratings. The state notoriously polls funny, so for whatever reason, it's not a good measure of expected success.

by Scott Shields on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 10:59:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Major Schumer Bombshell? (none / 0)

At home, Tom Harkin, while undeclared, has been talking like he's going to run again. I think he'd like to retire at least one more ambitious Republican congressman before he gives up.

by jcullen on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 07:28:48 PM EST

Harkin is running--bet on it (none / 0)

And for the first time even, the GOP is going to give him a pass. Only token opposition. I think they've finally realized they are not going to beat him.

John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."

by desmoinesdem on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 11:33:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Mass. Implications (none / 0)

This announcement is also notable for its implications with regard to John Kerry. It means he will likely seek re-elect in 2008 and forego the presidential race...of course, he could do both if he dropped out of the White House contest before the Senate filing deadline.

Almost the entire Massachusetts delegation to the U.S. House is interested in Kerry's seat so they'll be bitterly disappointed. The next shot comes if Teddy retires in 2006.

by madorskytapir on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 07:44:23 PM EST

Re: Mass. Implications (none / 0)

Make that 2012 for Sen. kennedy; obviously, he was just re-elected in 2006.

I also agree that Harkin is likely to run for one more term.

by madorskytapir on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 07:45:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Major Schumer Bombshell? (none / 0)

The diffence beetween NJ and MA congressmen, more MA congressmen really want the seat but the NJ guys are willing to primiry the incumbent senator. If Lautenburg runs he gets probably one to three chalengers if he doesn't run we have probably two or more serious dems running for the seat.

by rtaycher1987 on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 08:17:11 PM EST

Re: NJ Primary (none / 0)

As of now, there haven't been any rumblings about a NJ primary challenge.

by jrb1968 on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 09:10:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Major Schumer Bombshell? (none / 0)

christ. sounds about right. but just imagine how much money people are gonna have "someday" when the time is right. Then we'll kick some ass!

by Lucas O'Connor on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 08:20:37 PM EST

South Dakota (none / 0)

Our only problems come up in this state if Rounds runs. If Johnson retires (which apparently he won't), Herseth'll run and win, if he doesn't, he'll beat a second rate challenger.

If Bill Janklow hadn't committed manslaughter, we'd be in a bit of a pickle in that state.

by Terryus on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 08:47:57 PM EST

Re: Major Schumer Bombshell? (none / 0)

(1) Tim Johnson certainly has not decided what he's going to do in 2008. Schumer may have gotten a commitment from him before the stroke, but he's in no position now to be committing to 2008.

(2) Senator Rush Holt. Better yet, President Rush Holt (I wish...).

(3) Lautenberg should re-retire. I have nothing against him, but we need new blood, and it's better to get a new incumbent in the spot now than wait until he is forced to retire in a less favorable environment.

NJ Hussein Independent

by NJIndependent on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 08:50:59 PM EST

Re: Holt (none / 0)

I'm a big fan of Rep. Holt (he's my congressman), but if Lautenberg is out, it will be between Pallone and Andrews. They've been in Congress longer, have collected more chits with party leadership, and have bigger warchests. For now, Holt's only chance is an appointment, which would still be contested by Pallone or Andrews, I think.

by jrb1968 on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 09:33:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What probably is going on (none / 0)

My guess is that only Harkin has actually told Schumer that he may not run in '08 -- the others have either not taked to him or have told him something like "At this point I plan on running again."

One note on Lautenberg -- he announced his last retirement almost two years out from the election, so if we don't hear anything from him in the next couple of months, then expect him to run again -- though it is known that he hates raising campaign money. Another possibility is that he may wait to announce his retirement for a while to limit the number of people who decide to get in and leave the nomination to Andrews or whoever.

In any case expect at least a couple of retirements on the Dem side despite the Schumer claim.

by Ian in DC on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 09:01:00 PM EST

Cats Arch Their Backs (none / 0)

to scare off enemies by looking bigger than they actually are. Schumer may just be trying to keep Republicans from thinking about these seats until as late as possible. Which would be a good strategy.

by Professor Foland on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 10:07:19 PM EST

Re: Cats Arch Their Backs (none / 0)

I agree that Schumer's trying to scare off Republicans in NJ, SD, and MT (and maybe MI and WV too).

I wonder if he's also trying to lure Steve King into challenging Harkin; if he does, Harkin will win easily, and someone less bat-shit crazy will get King's seat. A Harkin staffer I talked to a couple months ago was talking like the senator was looking forward to running again. Also, Harkin will probably enjoy his committee chairmanship too much to give it up after two years.

Race to 270: Tracking presidential elections since 2004.

by bschak on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 10:23:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Major Schumer Bombshell? (none / 0)

When Corzine appointed Menendez, Andrews was looking like he was going to primary him for sure. Then a deal was struck, in exchange for Andrews backing Menendez, Corzine, Menendez and the state party would support Andrews if he chose to primary Lautenberg.

by DemGenii on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 10:54:12 PM EST

If SD is among the 12 Schumer was talking about (none / 0)

then he is full of shit.

There is no way Tim Johnson has consented to run again UNLESS it was before his hemorrhage, and that would simply not be applicable now. So either Schumer is lying, or he is misleading us.

I wrote an extensive diary regarding what can likely be inferred about Johnson's condition -- click on my username and you'll see it (it's my only diary on MyDD so far). Unless the reporting on the story is totally off base, I would be shocked if Johnson ran again.

by scottso on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 11:07:39 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.