Early voting began Monday.
It’s Kansas, so we probably need a microscope to view the likelihood of a Dem upset. (Or maybe a really long piece of paper to print all the zeroes to the right of the decimal point before you get to that ‘1’ at the end.) But no harm in having a thread for it anyway.
Politico: House Republicans pump last-minute money into Kansas special election
This despite the fact that Thompson, the Democrat in the race, had asked the state party for $20K for mailers, and was turned down.*
I still don’t think there’ll be an upset in Kansas on Tuesday, but, seriously, WTF?!
*ETA: The point about the mailers is that (a) Thompson’s campaign didn’t have that sort of money to begin with, and (b) didn’t get any help from the state party, so (c) they’re running this campaign on a total shoestring.
Maybe they’re thinking about the special election for the New York 23rd in 2009. It should have been one of the safest districts in the country; it had literally never elected a Democrat to the House. But in a surprise upset, Democrat Bill Owens won the election.
Once again, the so-called Democratic Party showing that it doesn’t actually care about contesting elections, and the thing wearing the Republican Party’s clothes showing that it does care, very much.
There’s a reason one side wins all the time.
This is Kansas. The state Democratic Party is claiming they don’t HAVE twenty grand in the bank to give him, and at this point in the election cycle, that’s not implausible. The party put quite a lot into the 2016 elections (with some success in state legislative races), and rebuilding the coffers will take time. It’s not like we’ve got plenty of big-name Dems here just handing the party money.
It could be worse. There was one election I voted in in Montana where the Democratic candidate made a point of the fact that he was spending literally no money on the campaign. We’re not talking “didn’t have 20 grand to spend on mailers”, here: We’re talking “didn’t spend 20 bucks to register a domain name for his website”.
That race, I voted for the libertarian.
Is there a meaningful distinction between voting libertarian and baying at the moon? I see elections as between A and B. You can vote for C, knowing they can’t win but in reality you’re depriving either A or B of a vote and yourself of that choice between A and B.
At one time the KS-4 vote was looking close, but the Republicans have unleashed a torrent of negative ads. Since the Democrats won’t put money into the race, he will lose. And what else would one expect from a state that voted for Brownbeck twice?
The federal party does, though, and they aren’t giving anything either.
Angus King, Bernie Sanders, and Jesse Ventura all won races as third parties. Sometimes enough people vote for candidate C that he does win.
Yeah, that’s the part that irritates me. They couldn’t find $40K between the sofa cushions as seed money for this race, just to give the guy a chance in an off-year? (Ditto MT-AL.)
Seriously, putting some money into these races would be a good way to get people like me to send money to the DNC/DCCC/etc. because it would show they were interested in bringing the fight to the enemy, so to speak.
They don’t have much else to dump money into, this year, and this would build up their brand with all of us who are marching and showing up at town halls and calling our Congresscritters regularly, and give us a reason to send money to the party for 2018.
Instead, it looks like I’ll be picking out individual candidates to donate to, once again. It’s a lot of hassle, but if I give money to the national party, I just don’t trust them to use it well.
ETA: If Thompson loses by single digits, the DNC etc. will go a long time without seeing a dollar from me.
King was a lifelong Democrat. Sanders never faced a Democratic opponent for US Senate. Ventura was a genuine odd duck.
None of these were libertarians. No libertarian will ever win any major elected office.
He’s also won the Democratic nomination in every recent election. He’s just chosen not to accept the nomination after winning it.
Anyone know when the polls close in KS-4?
FYI, here’s how last November went down in this district when Pompeo was running as an incumbent…
Party Candidate Votes %
Republican Mike Pompeo (Incumbent) 166,998 60.67
Democratic Daniel B. Giroux 81,495 29.61
Independent Miranda Allen 19,021 6.91
Libertarian Gordon Bakken 7,737 2.81
Total votes 275,251 100
Republicans outvoted Dems 2:1 less than six months ago. While I would love to see the Democratic Party take the fight to wherever the fight is, this looks like a place where we’ll run pretty hard into the law of diminishing returns after very few dollars are spent.
In a race like that, is there a meaningful distinction between voting democratic and baying at the moon? All I could do was bay anyway, so I chose to bay for a guy who was at least making an effort.
And even if a race like this would hit diminishing returns after very few dollars, that just means that you spend those few dollars. It’d probably be worth it in avoiding the bad publicity to drop those few tens of thousands of dollars.
NYT has it as a (narrower than last fall) Republican win with Estes getting 53.3% and Thompson at 45% with 619 of 620 precincts reporting.
I just came in here to post that. Here it is in table form… (unofficial but probably pretty close to the correct final tally)
Ron Estes Republican 60,945 53.3%
James Thompson Democrat 51,467 45.0
Chris Rockhold Libertarian 1,971 1.7
So we went from R+30 six months ago to R+8 today. This is not great news for team R, but special elections are weird. I’ll be so bold as to predict that we won’t actually see a 22 point swing towards team D in the next national election.
Man Special Elections are frustrating.
If all the Dems that had voted in November had bothered to turn out, they would have crushed it.
Of course, that assumes Rep votes hadn’t changed. Although they were only 1/3 was turnout was in November, and that’s with the National Conservative Celeb Squad promoting their candidate.
In case anyone was wondering (probably not) here is the partisan advantage of two party share for the last four house elections in KS-04.
2010 R+23
2012 R+33
2014 R+33
2016 R+35
The last three were particularly consistent and without actually doing the math today’s result of R+8 is almost certainly statistically significantly different from recent elections. The reasons for this and whether or not it is sustainable are certainly debatable.
In passing, read something about the winner talking up his unexpected victory, how all the liberal media were so sure he couldn’t win, but he sure showed them! I got the impression that he wasn’t kidding, but its hard to be sure with people who have no discernible sense of irony.