Very clear choice for 2016- Ayotte vs Shea-PorterNew Hampshire has two congressional districts-- a red-leaning one (NH-01 with a PVI of R+1) and a blue-leaning one (NH-02, with a PVI of D+3). Obama won both districts in 2008 and 2012:
• 2008• NH-01- Obama- 186,561 (53%)- McCain- 163,941 (46%)• NH-02- Obama- 198,261 (56%)- McCain- 152,591 (43%)• 2012• NH-01- Obama- 179,148 (50%)- Romney- 173,419 (48%)• NH-02- Obama- 190,413 (54%)- Romney- 156,499 (44%)
It's been somewhat ironic that the stalwart progressive and advocate for New Hampshire's working families and middle class, Carol Shea-Porter represents the red-leaning 1st, while centrist New Dem Ann Kuster, a Wall Street pawn, represents the much bluer 2nd district. And last month, with the GOP pouring massive amounts of money into the state, Senator Jeanne Shaheen lost NH-01 and beat Scott Brown in NH-02, giving her a 250,722 (51.6%)- 234,846 (48.4%) victory statewide. The tragedy in the state was that while the conservative in the blue district (Kuster) was reelected, the progressive in the red district (Shea-Porter) was defeated, very narrowly, by former Congressman Frank Guinta 51.8% to 48.2%. Kuster, like the rest of the shills from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party was one of the minority of Democrats to break ranks and vote for Boehner's CRomnibus, which included a dangerous Wall Street deregulation Republicans and New Dems have been pushing for on behalf of their corporate donors. Shea-Porter, despite representing far more difficult political terrain, voted against the CRomnibus, calling it "a win for special interests, and a bad deal for middle class taxpayers." This is what Shea-Porter told her constituents the day after the vote:
Of course Congress had to keep the government open, but it should have been done by passing a Continuing Resolution that funded the government, but didn’t contain these harmful provisions. I strongly opposed the CROmnibus bill, which would hurt working Americans by allowing big-money bailouts for banks and rolling back already-inadequate campaign finance laws.In 2008, I voted against the bank bailouts and for policies that saved us from a depression. I am deeply concerned that this bill calls for a taxpayer-funded bailout for irresponsible institutions if they get themselves in trouble again. The bailout provision is just one of a number of special-interest victories in this bill. Another would raise campaign contribution limits, giving a small number of wealthy individuals even more leverage to drown out our middle class voices. Putting American taxpayers on the hook and gutting campaign finance laws is unacceptable, so I voted no.
For the Democrats to take back the Senate in 2016, the seat held by Kelly Ayotte is universally considered essential. The DSCC has been trying to recruit centrist Governor Maggie Hassan, who isn't jumping at the chance so far but is widely expected to agree to do it. If she doesn't, though, Beltway Democrats are eyeing Kuster. Grassroots Democrats in New Hampshire may have an entirely different idea-- someone who represents their values and their interests: Carol Shea-Porter, who, unlike Kuster, has been able to win elections in red-leaning areas. 2016 is likely to be a very good year for Democrats in New Hampshire, especially if Hillary Clinton is at the top of the ticket. The most recent poll for Bloomberg shows Hillary beating every Republican contender in New Hampshire. She beats Jeb Bush 47-39%.WMUR political analyst Jim Pindell explains why the Beltway Democrats who want to recruit Kuster have it all wrong and why they should be putting their efforts behind Shea-Porter:
Since 2006, New Hampshire has been the most swing of swing states in the entire country. Nearly every two years since then there has been a violent move from Democrat to Republican. This should have taught us a lesson by now about how New Hampshire politics works lately: What matters most is if a candidate can win a primary, the general election atmosphere cannot be controlled.There is no better example of this concept that Shea-Porter’s three repeat contests with Republican Frank Guinta. The reason voters had the same choices three different times is because neither of these candidates could be defeated in a primary and then they won or lost against each other depending on the political mood of the year.This is what makes Shea-Porter really interesting as a U.S. Senate candidate in 2016. Should she ever consider it, she definitely has more of a path to victory than Kuster and maybe even Hassan.Shea-Porter might be the most prominent true progressive ever elected to major office in New Hampshire in a century. She owns the label. She was running for office talking about the “99 percent” five years before it became the rallying cry for Occupy Wall Street protesters.Her liberal positions matter because in a typical low-turnout Democratic primary for the Senate in 2016 a well-run liberal campaign is the one that will win.Kuster showed how this played out in 2010 when she ran was the well-funded progressive challenging perceived Democratic front-runner Katrina Swett. In the years since progressives have lost favor with Kuster. One group, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, strongly backed Kuster in 2010 and 2012, only to totally drop her once she starting voting in Congress.As one top Democratic put it to me: Shea-Porter would beat Kuster 10 to 1 in a Democratic primary for the Senate. Sure, Kuster can raise more money, but Shea-Porter has the Democratic base locked down in the state’s 1st Congressional District and would be favored in the more liberal 2nd Congressional District.In 2012, when Hassan ran for governor the first time, she faced a challenge from the left. Hassan’s opponent, former state Sen. Jackie Cilley, lacked fundraising and no one really knew who she was, reasons that she wasn’t a perfect candidate. Hassan deserves credit for that win. What few know, however, is that Hassan was flown to Washington and encouraged to take on Shea-Porter in a Democratic Primary. Hassan turned down that idea. In the end, two other Democrats did challenge Shea-Porter, but dropped out before they could even put their name on the ballot.And unlike Hassan and Kuster, Shea-Porter is won't be in office next year and has nothing to lose by running.Until she takes her name out of contention, watch Shea-Porter.
If Shea-Porter decides not to run for the Senate seat, she is likely to oust teabagger Frank Guinta, just like she did in 2012 when she beat him 171,356 (50%) to 158,482 (46%), with several thousand more votes than Kuster got in NH-02, despite Kuster's much easier terrain and despite Obama's much bigger win in NH-02.