Nationwide

Former Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chair Martin Frost has some advice for his successor at the DCCC and the heads of the Democratic National Committee and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee: run a candidate in every district across the country next year.

It’s time to throw out the traditional playbook and be bold as you plan for the 2006 elections. There is a real possibility that next year’s contest will be a landslide for Democrats and you need to be prepared to win.

Specifically, Emanuel and Schumer should file candidates for every single Congressional seat and ever single Senatorial seat in the country, even those that have traditionally been Republican. And the DNC should be encouraging state legislative leaders throughout the country to take similar action on the state house and senate levels.

In 1964, Democrats picked up 37 House seats. Republicans picked up 54 House seats, in 1994. At the depths of the Great Depression in 1932, Democrats picked up 90 House seats. History could repeat itself in 2006, but only if Democrats expand the playing field.

[...]

Now back to the strategy of the 2006 election. Ever since losing the House and Senate in 1994, Democrats have narrowed rather than expanded the playing field. The theory was to concentrate resources in those races where we had the best chance to win. That strategy was successful for House Democrats in 1996 and 1998 when we picked up a total of 14 seats despite being badly outspent by Republicans. But it didn’t get us back into the majority and it led to a stalemate in the next three elections. Senate Democrats picked up a few seats last time around, but ultimately were dealt a significant loss in 2004.

It’s now time to shoot the moon. Recruit and file everywhere and then late in the cycle decide which races present the best opportunities. Be prepared to win some seats that you don’t deserve because the “force is with you.”

If necessary, the Party should pay the filing fees to encourage some candidates to enter the fray. Remember that the Republicans elected some “accidental Congressmen” in 1994 that only lasted one term — like those who defeated Dan Rostenkowski and Jack Brooks — but were there when they took control.

Although I don't think Frost is breaking any particularly new ground here -- other Dems have been saying the same thing for quite some time now -- this article is reflective of the new trend in Democratic thinking. And although this could lead to the problem of spreading money too thinly across the nation, perhaps it is time for the Democrats to try to "shoot the moon."

Oregon

Oregon's Democratic Governor Ted Kulongoski, facing reelection next year, has raised slightly more than $400,000, reports Dave Hogan for The Oregonian. Nevertheless, this puts him behind not one but two of his Republican challengers.

With eight months to go until the May primary, Gov. Ted Kulongoski and his challengers have raised more than $1.3 million, according to campaign finance reports filed Monday.

[...]

Most of the money raised has been collected by Kulongoski, a Democrat, and Kevin Mannix of Salem and Ron Saxton of Portland, two Republicans who also ran for governor in 2002. Through the start of this month, the three had collected more than $400,000 each.

Saxton had raised the most, but he knows that campaign money doesn't guarantee a victory with voters. Saxton raised nearly $2 million for the May 2002 primary, more than any other candidate, but he lost to Mannix. Kulongoski then defeated Mannix in the November 2002 election.

The numbers for the three candidates are as follows:

• Saxton -- $470,619
  
• Mannix -- $452,503
  
• Kulongoski -- $413,324

While it's true that the Republicans will spend all of that money and more on a bitter GOP primary and that neither of Kulongoski's Democratic primary challengers has raised more than $20,000, this filing should carry some warnings for the Governor's reelection campaign. If he wants to avoid a difficult election season next year, he might want to raise a lot more money this year.

Montana

New polling from Rasmussen Reports seems to indicate that GOP Senator Conrad Burns is a bit weaker than many inside the Beltway seem to think.

In his bid for re-election, Republican Senator Conrad Burns currently attracts 51% of the vote and holds a double digit lead against two potential challengers--State Senate President John Tester and State Auditor John Morrison.

The first Rasmussen Reports Election 2006 survey in the state finds Tester earning 38% of the vote and Morrison 39%.

[...]

For both Democrats, name recognition is much lower--nearly half of all voters have no opinion. For Tester, the numbers are 28% favorable, 25% unfavorable, and 46% no opinion. Morrison is viewed favorably by 30%, unfavorably by 23%, and 47% have no opinion.

The low name recognition of his challengers means that the [race] is all about Conrad Burns at this time. But, that will change as the Democrats' select their nominee and voters learn more about him.

Do not get me wrong -- 51 percent is not a bad place for an incumbent to sit. Nevertheless, this race offers the Democrats more of an opportunity than many others across the nation, so Chuck Schumer and the folks at the DSCC should strongly consider dumping a lot of money into the state once the Democratic primary voters choose their candidate.