Believe it or not, this could have been worse:

Where's he from? Palin botches tweet touting Raese

CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has thrown her support behind fellow Republican John Raese (RAY'-see), but she also temporarily relocated his U.S. Senate bid to Pennsylvania.

Raese is running in West Virginia. Democrats were quick to seize on a Tuesday message from Palin's Twitter feed that named the wrong state while touting his candidacy.

So how could it have been worse? She could have said that Raese was from Florida. Which he is. Or Colorado. Which he also is. But I'll bet Pat Toomey is plenty pissed off.

On paper, it looked like a softball. Carly Fiorina was in the friendly confines of an interview with Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace. Like many GOPers this cycle, Fiorina was among friends, choosing to make national news with the one outlet whose "journalistic efforts," more often than not, are tantamount to an in-kind contribution to the GOP.

Given a softball, Fiorina did something that most candidates simply don't do.

She whiffed.

Touting her “tough, bottom-line business executive” motto, Wallace pointed out that Fiorina also wants “to extend all, all the Bush tax cuts which would add $4 trillion dollars to the deficit...where are you going to find $4 trillion dollars to cut?” But when Fiorina retreated to recycled response of government waste and an earmarks ban, a frustrated Wallace begged Fiorina seven times to “name one single entitlement expenditure you’re willing to cut” because “that’s where the money is.” Fiorina’s only response? “You’re asking a typical political question."

Here is the video--Wallace's frustration is so painfully evident:

That same weekend, Fiorina did something else that has to be considered a very conscious slap at the teabagger wing of her own party. Given the choice of stumping with John McCain or Sarah Palin in the state of California, Fiorina chose McCain.

The only explanation for this must be that Fiorina might be trying to masquerade as a moderate. Indeed, one of her latest ads has Fiorina looking directly at the camera, telling voters how she will "not be afraid to stand up" to her own party.

In a state as blue as California, that might be smart politics. The problem for Fiorina, however, is simple. Given how long she has been paying lip service (almost entirely in platitudes) to the teabagger agenda, it is unlikely that many people in California are going to buy this reinvention of Carly Fiorina.

So, if she can't sell herself as a moderate, nor can she sell herself credibly as a teabagger, where exactly is her clientele?

It would seem that we can add Fiorina to the ever-escalating list of GOP hopefuls in November who seem to have no core principles, and are desperately hoping that they can make it to November before somebody notices.

Income inequality is starting to gather a wee bit of attention from the megamedia, although it still doesn't often make an appearance on page one or the evening news. On Sunday, The New York Times published a piece on the sixth page of the business section by Cornell University Professor Robert Frank that scratched the surface of a subject that was given a good deal more attention when practically every newspaper in the country had a labor reporter on staff.

During the three decades after World War II, for example, incomes in the United States rose rapidly and at about the same rate — almost 3 percent a year — for people at all income levels. America had an economically vibrant middle class. Roads and bridges were well maintained, and impressive new infrastructure was being built. People were optimistic.

By contrast, during the last three decades the economy has grown much more slowly, and our infrastructure has fallen into grave disrepair. Most troubling, all significant income growth has been concentrated at the top of the scale. The share of total income going to the top 1 percent of earners, which stood at 8.9 percent in 1976, rose to 23.5 percent by 2007, but during the same period, the average inflation-adjusted hourly wage declined by more than 7 percent.

Yet many economists are reluctant to confront rising income inequality directly, saying that whether this trend is good or bad requires a value judgment that is best left to philosophers. But that disclaimer rings hollow. Economics, after all, was founded by moral philosophers, and links between the disciplines remain strong. So economists are well positioned to address this question, and the answer is very clear. ...

ECONOMISTS who say we should relegate questions about inequality to philosophers often advocate policies, like tax cuts for the wealthy, that increase inequality substantially. That greater inequality causes real harm is beyond doubt.

This bears repeating until every American has heard it at least 10 times to partially counteract the propaganda from the other side that has spurred people to vote and support policies against their own interests. As Chad Stone at the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities pointed out again Monday, in the first 30 or so years after World War II, Americans in just about every income cohort saw their inflation-adjusted incomes nearly double. Then a radical change occurred, as you can see in a CBPP chart that ought to be reprinted and broadcast every single day that extending tax cuts for the wealthy remains under serious consideration. (Of course, that would require having a media that isn't controlled by the very folks who have been pushing the policies that created that skewed banana-republic income ratio in the first place.)

Wealth, a far different measure than income, but obviously not disconnected from it, also is ever-more skewed.  Economist G. William Domhoff has written about this for decades. Taking his cue from the research of Edward N. Wolff at New York University, he has recently updated some of his work.

The most recent figures (2007) show that the top 1 percent of America households own 34.6 percent of all private wealth. The next 19 percent own 50.5 percent. That leaves 15 percent of the wealth for the bottom four-fifths of the population. Historically speaking, the situation was worse in 1929 when the top 1 percent owned 44.2 percent of the wealth. In 1976, their worst year, the top sliver of Americans owned only 19.9 percent.

Stir race into that class calculation and matters deteriorate even further:

In 2007, the average white household had 15 times as much total wealth as the average African-American or Latino household. If we exclude home equity from the calculations and consider only financial wealth, the ratios are in the neighborhood of 100:1. Extrapolating from these figures, we see that 70% of white families' wealth is in the form of their principal residence; for Blacks and Hispanics, the figures are 95% and 96%, respectively.

What matters most is the inordinate power this skewed income-and-wealth ratio creates. That the wealthy are powerful and use their wealth to maintain and expand that power is not exactly news. Trying to limit that power has, after all, been the work of reformers for a long, long time. But the very fact of that skewing, coupled with ever-worsening Supreme Court's rulings that corporations are people, money is speech and contributions to electioneering can't be prohibited, has put reformers at a worse disadvantage than ever.

Finding the means of overcoming that disadvantage is crucial if we are to avoid seeing the top 20 percent own 95 percent instead of 85 percent of the wealth, with political clout to match. One key ingredient in this fight is knowing the details of what it is we're fighting, something Domhoff has been actively pursuing since 1967 when he wrote the first edition of Who Rules America?, now in its 6th revision, with an addition to the title, Power, Politics and Social Change. Not by any means is this a mere philosophical take, but a valuable, practical guide for power researchers, community organizers and other Americans determined not to let the current state of affairs continue eternally.

No reason to sugarcoat the "likely voter" (LV) numbers in the latest NBC/WSJ poll (full data here, .pdf):

A vigorous post-Labor Day Democratic offensive has failed to diminish the resurgent Republicans' lead among likely voters, leaving the GOP poised for major gains in congressional elections two weeks away, according to a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll.

Among likely voters, Republicans hold a 50% to 43% edge, up from a three-percentage-point lead a month ago. And in the 92 House districts considered most competitive, the GOP's lead is 20 points...

Mr. McInturff (R ;pollster) said the Republican lead among likely voters, if it stood, probably would yield a pickup of 52 or 53 House seats, surpassing the net gain of 39 seats the GOP needs to claim control of the chamber.

But will it stand? If you accept that the LV models are correct, the Democrats will lose the House (but not by 60 or 70.)

Hang on though. If you think the LV models are not correct, you might want to look at this:

For Democratic candidates, the poll holds some glimmers of hope. Democratic campaigns in their home districts appear to be having an impact.

In August, 46% of respondents said their member of Congress's position on national issues was most important to their vote, compared with 41% who were swayed by their member's performance in the district—an ominous number when 60% believe the nation is on the wrong track. Now, 52% said performance in the district is most important.

Moreover, 52% said their representative is part of the solution to the problems facing the country, while 35% said their representative is part of the problem.

"The Democrats may be making a good pitch on performance in their districts," Mr. Hart said.

The LV models that these polls stake their reputation on will be up for a vote, starting now and through election day. According to the NBC/WSJ poll, 5% have already voted.

Has Dewey beaten Truman, or will Truman pull it out with GOP unforced errors and too many Christine O'Donnells and Carl Paladinos as candidates? We'll see how well the pollsters did (and what the people really think) in two short weeks.

From the GREAT STATE OF MAINE...

I Voted...and ALMOST DIED!!!

It was a cold, sunny Tuesday afternoon when I Sylvester Stallone'd up the fourteen granite steps to the lobby of City Hall, Gene Kelly'd up the thirty-four marble steps to the second floor, and Lady Gaga'd my way down the hall and into the Great State of Maine stateroom. There I came eyeball-to-eyeball with a middle-aged election worker with middle-aged blonde hair. I also noticed she was wearing the Forbidden Pearls of the Magic Palace of Madagascar that I'd spent my life and fortune seeking at great human cost. I would deal with them later. For now I was just here to vote.

I gave my name and address to the election lady. She looked up at me, then down at her list. Then up...then down. Then updownupdownupdown. No funny business was gonna happen on her watch, bub. I was starting to think I wasn't who I said I was. I pulled out my driver's license and read the name. I was me. Good.

I was handed a set of three cafeteria-tray-size ballot sheets, and then sent me off to a makeshift voting booth with a warning: "Use the black marker and only the black marker provided, or you'll leave here through that yonder winder. I shuffled to my cube, inserted a jeweler's loupe into my eye socket and got down to the business of participatory democracy.

The first oval I filled in was for Libby Mitchell for governor.  The second nod I gave was to Chellie Pingree for a second term as my congressbuttkicker. All those admonitions from my elementary school teachers to "Color inside the lines! Color inside the lines!" were paying off. My ovals were perfect---model ovals, in fact, that other voters would be proud to emulate.

I voted to make Portland's mayor an actual elected official, overturning the centuries-old process of dumping the Sacred Lobster Shells of Casco Bay onto the city council chamber floor and letting our seer choose. I voted for a bond to improve dental care in the state. I voted to approve various charter recommendations that made my eyes glaze over. And I voted to legalize the recreational use of pot, even though it wasn't "officially" on the ballot.

And that was that. I hastily sealed my ballots inside my envelope so that the voter in the cube next to me wouldn’t copy my answers (God I hate that!) and slipped it in the box marked "Stick It Here, Stupid." Then I Fred Astaire'd my way down the steps and almost got hit by a bus as I was putting my "I VOTED!" sticker on my butt while crossing the street.

Now it's your turn. If your state allows it, VOTE NOW. Kos has the handy links here if you need 'em.

And always look both ways before you cross the street.

Cheers and Jeers starts in There's Moreville... [Swoosh!!] RIGHTNOW! [Gong!!]

Steven Pearlstein:

Now ask yourself: Do you think the results of the coming election would be tilting in favor of Democrats if the "individual mandate" had been omitted from health reform, if the consumer protection agency had been dropped from financial regulatory reform and if General Motors had been left to die. Somehow I doubt it.

The dirty little secret is that most Americans don't really know what they think about the issues that so animate the political conversation in Washington, and what they think they know about them is often wrong.

WaPo:

"This is the big test election to see if voter mobilization really has an effect on turnout." said Michael McDonald, a George Mason University government professor who has tracked early voting for several election cycles. "And at least according to the very earliest early-voting numbers, people who thought the Democrats were going to roll over and play dead, that's not what's happening."...

Iowa Secretary of State Michael Mauro, a Democrat, said his party is targeting students and minority voters who supported Obama in 2008 but don't usually show up for midterm elections. Spot checks with county auditors suggest the tactic may be working.

"I don't know if the pundits have missed this, but I think there's more engagement than we were expecting," Mauro said. "There was a belief that Democrats would stay home - but they're coming out."

But the real test is WA, CO and NV.

Jon Ralston, following NV early voting:

Democrats: 31,103, or 7.4 percent

Republicans: 27,551, or 8.3 percent

So, so far, nothing out of the ordinary for a midterm.

DeWayne Wickham:

"Our numbers and our ability to organize the grassroots have to counter those millions of dollars" Republicans are using "to try to take this election," Obama told the black columnists.

A day earlier, the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies said a large black turnout could put a big dent in the loses Democrats are expected to suffer in the midterm elections.

But that won't happen unless Democrats make it clear that what is at stake in this election, more than the Congress, is Barack Obama's presidency.

Gallup's latest plunging Obama numbers (approve 48):

NY Times:

A secretive network of Republican donors is heading to Palm Springs for a long weekend in January, but it will not be to relax after a hard-fought election — it will be to plan for the next one.

Koch Industries, the longtime funder of libertarian causes from the Cato Institute  to the ballot initiative that would suspend California’s landmark law capping greenhouse gases, is planning an invitation-only, confidential meeting at the Rancho Las Palmas Resort and Spa to, as a confidential invitation says, "develop strategies to counter the most severe threats facing our free society and outline a vision of how we can foster a renewal of American free enterprise and prosperity."

Politico:

MOMENTS OF ZEN: President Obama will tape a segment on "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" next week and hit the road the weekend before the midterm election, but he will otherwise be absent from the campaign trail in the homestretch to Nov. 2.

Here are some excerpts from the latest Harper's Index (not yet on-line):

And, oh yes, the percentage of Americans under age 25 who would read a text message while having sex? 11.

• • • • •

At Daily Kos on this date in 2008:

Tonight's Rescue is brought to you by Alfonso Nevarez, YatPundit, dadanation, shayera, vcmvo2, grog, and pico.

Diary Rescue is all about promoting good writers, so remember to subscribe to diarists whose work you enjoy reading.

• mikepridmore connects the dots between Karl Rove and his long-standing relationship with the Chamber of Commerce in Unmasking Rove and the Chamber. (vcmvo2)
• Is Japan Underrated? According to randomfacts, 5 key errors have misled economists into believing Japan's woes were worse than they actually are. (Alfonso Nevarez)
• ladywithafan's First Diary: My letter to GA. Attorney General, will give you a headache while highlighting the mess that is the foreclosure crisis. (grog)
• Ojibwa presents one of the first great civilizations to settle the Mississippi in Ancient America: Cahokia. (Alfonso Nevarez)
• DaNang65 has some Some Good News for Indian Country involving affordable housing for disabled Native American vets. (grog)
• As Congress continues to defer the dreams of young immigrants, Elisa asks, Why Do Moms DREAM? (Alfonso Nevarez)
• As part of the EcoJustice series, boatsie reports on efforts to plant trees and better manage local flooding in Los Angeles: ecojustice: "where am i needed, how can i help?" (grog)
• FullChat uses some good, old fashioned, quantitative research to remind us why the GOP has no credibility on the economy. (Alfonso Nevarez)
• Teenaged Pundit has the perfect tonic for you if the election campaign reading has you down: Two Weeks. (dadanation)

jotter has High Impact Diaries: October 18, 2010.

brillig has Top Comments - Heard After School Edition.

Please suggest your own and use as an open thread.

Amid rain, thunder, and lightning here in SoCal (a phenomenon we see in this part of the state about once every other year), there is also no small amount of turbulence on the polling front. No small amount of volume, either, as we head north of the half century mark yet again. The final tally for a wet Tuesday afternoon: 52 polls.

And what does that deluge of data reveal? Well, in the world of internal polling, the NRCC unloads a prodigious dump, with numbers that are predictably wretched for Democrats.

However, non-partisan polling tells a different story today, with a trio of House Democrats looking better now than they have ever looked in this cycle. News on the Senate and gubernatorial front also shows marked improvement for the blue team.

All that (and more!) in the Tuesday edition of the Wrap...

THE U.S. SENATE

• California Senate (SurveyUSA):

  Sen. Barbara Boxer (D) 46%, Carly Fiorina (R) 44%, Others 6%

• Colorado Senate (Ipsos/Reuters):

  Ken Buck (R) 48%, Sen. Michael Bennet (D) 45%

• Illinois Senate (Anzalone Liszt--D):

  Alexi Giannoulias (D) 41%, Mark Kirk (R) 36%, Others 7%

• Kentucky Senate (Bennett Petts Normington--D):

  Jack Conway (D) 49%, Rand Paul (R) 47%

• Maryland Senate (Gonzales Research):

  Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D) 55%, Eric Wargotz (R) 38%

• New York Senate "A" (New York Times):

  Sen. Charles Schumer (D) 61%, Jay Townsend (R) 21%

• New York Senate "B" (New York Times):

  Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D) 50%, Joe DioGuardi (R) 25%

• North Carolina Senate (PPP):

  Sen. Richard Burr (R) 48%, Elaine Marshall (D) 40%, Others 3%

• Oregon Senate (PPP/DK):

  Sen. Ron Wyden (D) 56%, Jim Huffman (R) 40%

• Pennsylvania Senate (PPP):

  Joe Sestak (D) 46%, Patrick Toomey (R) 45%

• Washington Senate (PPP):

  Sen. Patty Murray (D) 49%, Dino Rossi (R) 47%

• Wisconsin Senate (St. Norberts College):

  Ron Johnson (R) 49%, Sen. Russ Feingold (D) 47%

THE ANALYSIS: It is hard to find a better polling day for Senate Democrats in recent weeks, if not months. Indeed, you have to go back to August to find a poll showing Jack Conway in the lead in Kentucky. Furthermore, you have to go back to May to find a poll with Joe Sestak staked to even a fractional lead over Republican Pat Toomey. The best news, perhaps, is for Wisconsin's Russ Feingold, who is close to being all-square with Ron Johnson in today's poll from St. Norbert's College. What's more: the SNC poll had the GOP up nine in the gubernatorial race, and up fourteen on the generic congressional ballot. Therefore, it is going to be very tough for the doubters to impeach this particular poll.

THE U.S. HOUSE

• Arizona-03 (PPP/DK):

  Jon Hulburd (D) 46%, Ben Quayle (R) 44%

• Florida-02 (Susquehanna--R):

  Steve Southerland (R) 50%, Rep. Allen Boyd (D) 38%, Others 5%

• Florida-08 (On Message--R):

  Dan Webster (R) 46%, Rep. Alan Grayson (D) 30%

• Illinois-17 (NRCC Internal Poll--R):

  Bobby Schilling (R) 44%, Rep. Phil Hare (D) 41%

• Maine-01 (Pan Atlantic SMS Omnibus):

  Rep. Chellie Pingree (D) 49%, Dean Scontras (R) 33%

• Maine-02 (Pan Atlantic SMS Omnibus):

  Rep. Mike Michaud (D) 49%, Jason Levesque (R) 29%

• Massachusetts-04 (Kiley--D):

  Rep. Barney Frank (D) 56%, Sean Bielat (R) 37%

• Massachusetts-10 (NRCC Internal Poll--R):

  Jeff Perry (R) 44%, Bill Keating (D) 42%

• New York-19 (Monmouth Univ):

  Rep. John Hall (D) 49%, Nan Hayworth (R) 48%

• New York-20 (NRCC Internal Poll--R):

  Chris Gibson (R) 48%, Rep. Scott Murphy (D) 45%

• Ohio-06 (NRCC Internal Poll--R):

  Rep. Charlie Wilson (D) 40%, Bill Johnson (R) 40%

• Ohio-15 (Public Opinion Strategies--R):

  Steve Stivers (R) 51%, Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy (D) 39%

• Oregon-05 (NRCC Internal Poll--R):

  Scott Bruun (R) 44%, Rep. Kurt Schrader (D) 42%

• Pennsylvania-03 (Fabrizio McLaughlin--R):

  Mike Kelly (R) 56%, Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper (D) 39%

• Pennsylvania-10 (NRCC Internal Poll):

  Tom Marino (R) 41%, Rep. Chris Carney (D) 37%

• Utah-01 (Dan Jones and Associates):

  Rep. Rob Bishop (R) 67%, Morgan Bowen (D) 22%, Others 4%

• Utah-02 (Dan Jones and Associates):

  Rep. Jim Matheson (D) 57%, Morgan Philpot (R) 31%, Others 3%

• Utah-03 (Dan Jones and Associates):

  Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R) 67%, Karen Hyer (D) 19%, Others 2%

• Virginia-09 (NRCC Internal Poll):

  Rep. Rick Boucher (D) 44%, Morgan Griffith (R) 44%

• Washington-03 (American Viewpoint--R):

  Jaime Herrera (R) 51%, Denny Heck (D) 38%

• Wisconsin-07 (We Ask America--R):

  Sean Duffy (R) 46%, Julie Lassa (D) 39%

THE ANALYSIS: If, on balance, the numbers in the House races don't look pretty today, it is likely because about half of the numbers emanate from Republican pollsters. Many of those polls, for what it is worth, have been contradicted...and recently...by public polling. For example, SUSA had Rick Boucher up double digits in VA-09 just a few days ago, and last week's installment of polls from The Hill had Denny Heck within two points of Jaime Herrera in WA-03. Public polling, meanwhile, shows three House Democrats doing better than ever. Even in conservative Utah, Jim Matheson looks better than ever. Meanwhile, all the way across the country, Mike Michaud's once-tenuous lead is now up to twenty points, according to a new poll out today. Finally, Monmouth puts sophomore Democrat John Hall in a position he has not seen at all during this campaign--the lead (albeit by a single point).

THE GUBERNATORIAL RACES

• California Governor (SurveyUSA):

  Jerry Brown (D) 47%, Meg Whitman (R) 40%, Others 8%

• California Governor (Tarrance Group--R):

  Jerry Brown (D) 46%, Meg Whitman (R) 46%

• Colorado Governor (Reuters/Ipsos):

  John Hickenlooper (D) 46%, Tom Tancredo (I) 35%, Dan Maes (R) 14%

• Georgia Governor (Insider Advantage):

  Nathan Deal (R) 45%, Roy Barnes (D) 40%, John Monds (L) 5%

• Maine Governor (Pan Atlantic SMS Omnibus):

  Paul LePage (R) 33%, Libby Mitchell (D) 28%, Eliot Cutler (I) 14%

• Maryland Governor (Gonzales Research):

  Gov. Martin O'Malley (D) 47%, Robert Ehrlich (R) 42%

• Ohio Governor (Quinnipiac):

  John Kasich (R) 51%, Gov. Ted Strickland (D) 41%

• Oregon Governor (PPP/DK):

  John Kitzhaber (D) 48%, Chris Dudley (R) 47%

• South Carolina Governor (Crantford and Associates):

  Nikki Haley (R) 43%, Vincent Sheheen (D) 41%

THE ANALYSIS: Team Strickland was quick to lay the wood to the new Q poll numbers in the Buckeye State. They are skeptical (and, it would seem, justifiably so) about Quinnipiac's finding that John Kasich has a 27-point lead among Independents. They also point out the fact (tweeted plenty earlier today), that Strickland's internals have the Democrat up two...and even Kasich's internals have Strickland down by just two points. In other news, it looks like former SC state Democratic Chairman Dick Harpootlian might have had a legitimate beef when he complained that lack of national support was denying Democrats in a winnable race--a new poll out of the Palmetto State has Democrat Vincent Sheheen closer than he has ever been to GOP poster child Nikki Haley. Meanwhile, even GOP pollsters can't find a poll putting their candidate out front--the best they can muster is a Meg Whitman tie. A poll which was rebutted within hours by a SUSA poll showing Brown ahead by seven points, with only 5% of voters undecided.

THE RAS-A-POLL-OOZA
The House of Ras doubles up on a Tuesday, with a quartet of their own polls supplemented by seven different races sponsored by Fox News and conducted by their Pulse Research subsidiary. In most cases, the numbers reflect a tightening, relative to where the Ras-sies had these races previously. This is particularly true in Colorado, Kentucky, and Florida, where they more than halved the lead for Republican Marco Rubio from just last week.

Still, you can't keep the Ras-sies down: they are pretty much the only pollster left that has John Raese up on top of Joe Manchin in West Virginia.

CA-Gov: Jerry Brown (D) 48%, Meg Whitman (R) 43%, Others 4%*
CA-Sen: Sen. Barbara Boxer (D) 48%, Carly Fiorina (R) 44%, Others 3%*
CO-Gov: John Hickenlooper (D) 45%, Tom Tancredo (C) 40%, Dan Maes (R) 10%*
CO-Sen: Ken Buck (R) 46%, Sen. Michael Bennet (D) 45%*
FL-Sen: Marco Rubio (R) 43%, Charlie Crist (I) 32%, Kendrick Meek (D) 20%
KY-Sen: Rand Paul (R) 47%, Jack Conway (D) 42%
MI-Gov: Rick Snyder (R) 54%, Virg Bernero (D) 34%, Others 4%
MO-Sen: Roy Blunt (R) 49%, Robin Carnahan (D) 43%, Others 3%*
NV-Gov: Brian Sandoval (R) 56%, Rory Reid (D) 37%, Others 2%
WV-Sen: John Raese (R) 48%, Joe Manchin (D) 45%*

(*)--Fox News/Pulse Opinion Research polling

   This Rescue Diary covers the period from 6 PM, Monday, 10/18 to 6:00 PM EDT, Tuesday, 10/19

Today's Menu Includes :
72 Diaries Overall

- 16 On House races

- Covering 13 individual Districts in 11 states

- 32 On Senate races

- Representing 8 different states

- 12 On Various election races and ballot issues

- Encompassing Governor, Secretary of State, Local, and more

- 12 General election-related diaries

And be sure to follow the Election Diary Rescue on Twitter

Stop in and have a look around!

The nightly Election Diary Rescue is a collection of work written over the previous 24 hours by fellow Kossacks, many of whom are, themselves, candidates for office. Our crew would love to collect more of your work, particularly on those candidates or election-related items that may not be seeing as much daylight.

But if you can't contribute a diary of your own, at the very least please click the link below and just check out the provided summaries of today's compilation. Overall we have 72 to diaries to choose from tonight. You might be surprised, as many of these are on topics or people that don't receive Front Page or rec list attention, but are very worthy of our support.

The days are dwindling to a precious few and every race, every issue every vote matters as much as it ever has. Take a look and see what tonight EDR has in store...

(Tonight's compilation and more after the jump............)

Well, this is kind of embarrassing for a sitting member of Congress who just participated in a major financial reform overhaul.

Earlier this year, as the financial reform debate was taking shape in D.C., one idea on the table, promoted by U.S. Sen. Maria Cantwell and U.S. Sen. John McCain, was reinstituting the Glass-Steagall Act, a Depression-era reform that put a firewall between Wall Street investment banks and Main Street commercial banks....

On Saturday, Rep. Reichert, for his part, was caught at a candidate forum at the Newcastle chamber, clueless as to what Glass-Steagall even is....

Question from the audience: “I agree with you that overregulation is not a good thing, but do you think that they should reinstate The Glass-Steagall Act and at least separate the banks’ ability to gamble with our money?”

Reichert:

“Well, the Glass-Steagall Act is one that I’m not familiar with. I’m sorry I have to go back and look at that, but I do agree it’s something that we haven’t dealt with on the House side in committees that I’ve had, so I’d be happy to look at that and come back and give you an answer on that.”

Watch (and note what sounds like an incredulous laugh when Reichert admits his ignorance):

And that's after the questioner gave him a big fat clue: "at least separate the banks’ ability to gamble with our money?” Not to mention the months and months of debate over financial reform in Congress this year, which Reichert seems to have missed. Maybe he was just waiting for his leadership to tell him how to vote and not really paying attention to the debate.

In contrast, here's Dem candidate Suzan DelBene back in June in an interview with PubliCola, arguing for a modern version of Glass-Steagall."

We could help raise the IQ in the House at least marginally by booting Reichert and by helping Suzan DelBene get to Congress.

The most winnable race of the cycle the DSCC has ignored is the Senate race in North Carolina, where the party committee took one look at Democrat Eliane Marshall's cash on hand numbers and decided to go play elsewhere. And yes, after the second quarter, it was bleak. After her protracted primary, Marshall had less than $200,000 in the bank compared to incumbent Republican Richard Burr's $6 million.

Yet we've seen the last several cycles that the money race isn't really about who has more, but whether the challenger has enough to get his or her message out and a political environment that is receptive to that message.

In North Carolina, Burr has never established any semblance of real popularity, and as such, was always a prime target. Yet Marshall's money situation spurred Democrats to ignore Burr's weaknesses -- a decision that they may regret in two weeks:

The good news for Marshall is that she's picking up undecided voters and closing the gap against Burr. She now trails by 8 points, 48-40, after facing a 13 point deficit against Burr three weeks ago. She's starting to shore up her support with the base, getting 73% of Democrats compared to 65% in the previous poll.

And that base is getting larger as the level of interest from Democratic voters picks up with the election moving closer. In late September the likely voter pool for this year voted for John McCain by a 9 point margin, suggesting a massive drop in Democratic turnout given that Barack Obama actually won the state. Now the likely voter pool reflects an electorate that supported McCain by 4 points, still pointing to a decline in Democratic turnout but perhaps not as massive as it looked like it would be earlier in the cycle.

What changed? Like PPP notes, Democrats are coming home. And Marshall is finally on the air, after enduring seven weeks of unanswered Burr attack ads. Despite the disparity in the air war, Burr is still below 50 percent, and Marshall seems to be sucking up all the undecided votes.

Furthermore, 6.2 percent of the vote is already in thanks to North Carolina's early voting. Among the 126,899 ballots received, Democrats have cast 43.5 percent of them compared to 38.8 percent for Republicans.

This one ain't over.

Elaine Marshall for Senate

With the notable exception of California, Democrats are getting good polling news in virtually every competitive Senate campaign. One result of this is that the Senate Snapshot now projects 53 Democratic seats as the most likely outcome if the 2010 elections were completed today.

Senate Competitive Campaigns Chart

Margins are based on the simple average of all published polls in which the majority of interviews were conducted on or after October 8th. No polls will be removed form the averages between now and Election Day. Only campaigns closer than 12.0% are listed. All polls used in the averages are taken from Pollster.com. Click here for the Senate Snapshot methodology.

Seat Outcome Odds Chart

Even though Democrats only lead in enough campaigns to reach 52 seats, the comparatively narrow Republican leads in Nevada, Kentucky, Pennsylvania and Colorado make 53 Democratic seats the most likely outcome. Also, polling averages are independent variables, even if campaigns aren't.

***

Even though it has yet to be reflected in House polling, Democrats are definitely improving in the Senate battlegrounds. In addition to Illinois, where Democratic chances appear to be improving quite dramatically, the biggest movement over the past few days has come at the expense of a trio of right-wing primary favorites: Pat Toomey in Pennsylvania, Ken Buck in Colorado, and Rand Paul in Kentucky.

All three have, at some point, engaged in high-profile primaries against “establishment” Republicans. All three could boast mid- to high-single-digit advantages until recently, but now lead by 2% or less. So, the tea party didn’t just hand us the Senate seat in Delaware, and keep Harry Reid alive in Nevada. They are screwing up practically the entire Senate battleground for Republicans. Too bad Chuck DeVore didn’t win in California.

How awesome would it be for Democrats to pull off 54, 55 or even 56 Senate seats, because the tea party overplayed the Republican hand? With new polls today showing both Joe Sestak and Jack Conway ahead, that could really happen.

Please, toss in another $10 to Orange to Blue candidates. Let’s keep riding our own enthusiasm wave.

There's nothing the GOP fears most than broad voter participation.

A new group is airing an ad in Nevada telling Hispanic voters not to vote.

The president of Latinos for Reform, Robert Desposada, is a conservative political consultant and political analyst for Univision, but he said the ad is a sincere effort to express Hispanic frustration with the Democrats failure to deliver on immigration reform.

""We're saying what a lot of people are feeling. "It's the only way for Hispanics to stand up and demand some attention," Desposada said, adding that he also couldn't ask voters to support Sharon Angle.

Ha ha ha! The best for Latinos to show their disapproval is to completely tune out of the political process! That'll show them! It's a brilliant tactic!

I have suggestions for Desposada's next round of ads. There should definitely be one asking social conservatives to stay home, because abortion is still legal. By tuning out of the political process, their anti-choice cause will get a huge boost.

Then how about one targeting McCain voters. They certainly didn't get the candidate they wanted, what with Obama winning and all. So sitting out this election will send a powerful message and McCain will suddenly be president. For reals!

And how about an ad targeting anyone thinking Obama was born in Kenya. There has been NO PROGRESS in Congress getting Obama impeached for being a Kenyan communist. They can make their anger heard by doing nothing on Election Day!

But this is the reason Latinos are being targeted:

For the third straight week, the share of Latinos professing an intention to turn out has climbed. This week, 75.1% of Latino registered voters indicated they were “almost certain” to turn out, and this number has increased almost 10% over four weeks ago.

Given that Democrats win Latinos 2-1 or even 3-1, it's bad news for Republicans if they turn out. Pretty powerful motivation to keep them home, huh?

Incidentally, Univision refused to air the ad. It was so craven and stupid, they couldn't bring themselves to take the cash. And quite ironically, this story is ALL the rage in Spanish-language circles. The GOP has just given Democratic GOTV efforts among Latinos a massive boost.

To everyone who fretted that the AquaBuddha ad would backfire on Conway:

A new Democratic poll shows Democrat Jack Conway surging in the Kentucky Senate race. The Bennet, Petts and Normington poll, conducted for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and shared with The Fix, shows Conway at 49 percent and Republican Rand Paul at 47 percent - Conway's best showing in a poll since late June. The poll was conducted Sunday and Monday, a day after Conway's campaign launched a controversial new ad which became the topic du jour in a debate on Sunday night.

Yes, I get that the pundits get sad whenever a Democrat throw a punch. And yes, I know many progressives get nervous around religion, and would rather cede it to the GOP.

But get this -- the ad wasn't for the pundits, it wasn't for nervous liberals, and it wasn't for anyone that doesn't live and vote in Kentucky. And while there's no way to say "the ad is helping Conway", these numbers certainly suggest that it didn't hurt him. Given the race he's run so far, I'm willing to give Conway and his campaign the benefit of the doubt on its choices.

Conway is running a tough, aggressive race. He's got Rand Paul on the ropes and literally freaking out. We can win this, so let's focus on getting Conway across the line, and not whether his ads violated your delicate sensibilities.

The Jerry Brown campaign began airing this fantastic ad on television statewide today, according to Calitics:

Best ad of the cycle so far?