I don't usually blog, but I felt a need to today.  Day after day I read people ripping at one Democrat Presidential candidate or another.  Sure having the best person for the job would be nice, but I'd be okay with any of the Democratic front-runners.  Granted, some more than others.  I'd rather have the worst Democrat front-runner than the best Republican candidate be our next president.  I hope that is something most of us can agree on.  

While there isn't much we can do about the presidential races outside of donations and commentary, why not focus on something we can do?  I've seen a strong online effort to draft DeFazio to run against Gordon Smith for the senate seat in Oregon over the past week or so.  I am amazed to say the least by the organized effort to gather support.  

I hope this is something we could re-create and produce to draft some of the strongest candidates to run against Republican incumbents.  If we get a Democrat president, what's the point if we don't have a senate who can pass bills we need?  I'm not terribly worried about our senate majority, but it would be nice to beef it up a bit in this more than opportune time.  

I've made an analogy for the 2008 races.  The third debate in 2004 of Bush and Kerry, a lot of people say Bush won because he wasn't reduced to tears.  If we get that same look on the 2008 senate races, we could blow them out.  If people think a Republican win would be to hold 15 of 21 seats, we win no matter what.

Another thing about drafting strong candidates.  As long as we give them hell everywhere, we'll divert resources from places of greater need.  Sources of money will be more inclined to give up on some of the frontline candidates and help the second line of Republican targets.  

Currently for candidates for 2008 Senator elections, it looks like we'll be running... Possibly Peter DeFazio in Oregon, Al Franken in Minnesota, Possibly Tom Allen in Maine, Possibly Steve Marchand in New Hampshire, Possibly Kathleen Sebelius (Spelling?) In Kansas, Probably Larry LaRocco in Idaho.  We need to make sure these candidates get drafted to run, unless that candidate is already running or there is a better candidate in that state.

We also need to find candidates who are best fit to wage a hard campaign against current incumbents.  Please comment with prospective candidates in these states.  

After we set the games and matches for 2008, then we can really turn the pressure on to the Republican side for the 2008 elections.  I'm excited to say the least.  

This year is an "off year" for elections in the United States. Still, there are important elections out there, several of which have potential national implications. Basically, we've got three states (Kentucky, Lousiana, and Mississippi) holding gubernatorial elections, and four states (Louisiana, Mississippi, New Jersey and Virginia) electing state legislatures. Of these, I want to spend a few minutes focusing on my state, Virginia.  Specifically, I want to discuss why I believe Virginia is important, both in its own right as well as in the context of national politics for 2008 and beyond.  I also want to highlight our netroots success in raising over $11,000 for Virginia Democratic candidates - with the fantastic help of the great people at ActBlue - in just under 4 weeks.

Please join me after the "jump."

Okay, so it's one night late.  I've been waiting so long to put up that headline.  Now that it's finally be called. Burns. Allen. My shortest diary ever.

by 2400 votes out of 2.3 M

I saw the last webb-Allen debate and I was diasappointed. There is so much to say and so many obvious things; but I saw no passion or go for the kill from Webb. Intellectual talk doesn't help with stupid Americans. They need simple and one line catch sentences and they need you to repeat.

Think of Bill Clinton's quote - Americans will prefer "Strong and wrong to weak and right"

Webb was right and weak in that debate. Against Allen, that doesn't cut it. You got to get in the trenches and get in hand to hand combat. Steve Jarding did that early on and he dissapeared all of a sudden.

What's next from Karl Rove, President Cheney and their weak little errand boy, George W. Bush?

We know they want to fight the election over who is tougher in the "war on terror".  We know they will try to do to other Democrats what they did to Sen. Max Cleland in 2002.  We know they pushed a vote on it this week and peeled off some Democrats who are good at reading polls and bad on standing for principles.  We know they have lead a campaign to blame 9/11 on Bill Clinton.  So, what's next?

I expect something from their message machine about a base igniting issue involving gays.  Is is possible to link the "war on terror" to hatred of gays?  The message might be something like -- we need to be strong morally to fight the "war on terror" so let's make everyone more secure by defending marriage.  We know they will use wedge issues.  Those who are prematurely pronouncing George Allen dead should remember that there is a statewide vote for an amendment to the Virginia Constitution enshrining discrimination against gays.  Allen is going to use this.  Jim Webb has a strong stance against discrimination.