Daily Kos

Last night President Obama provided a bit more detail for the "Buffett Rule" he's been talking about for several months, presenting the idea that anyone making more than $1 million annually should pay at least 30 percent in taxes. The passage was punctuated by the presence of Debbie Bosanek, Warren Buffett's secretary, the woman made famous as an example of tax unfairness, because she pays more than her billionaire boss.

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor was not impressed.

“You know, I care about Warren Buffett’s secretary,” said Cantor on CBS’s “This Morning.” “I want her to do well. I want her to do better, just as I think everybody in this country should have an opportunity to achieve and pursue their dreams.” [...]

“I don’t think anyone wants to pay higher taxes. I think the reality is the reason why Warren Buffett’s secretary and so many millions of other Americans are frustrated is they see policies that have been promoted for the last three years by this White House that, frankly, don’t work,” said Cantor. “What do most people do when you reach a point and see that things aren’t working? You try something new.”

I'm sure Ms. Bosanek is delighted to know that Cantor only wishes the best for her, even though that best doesn't include basic fairness. But Cantor's problem, all of the GOP's problem, isn't Debbie Bosanek. It's the American people who really seem to like the idea of the Buffett Rule, if the Colorado voters Stan Greenburg tested are any indication. To reiterate from DemFromCT's post:

The dials spiked when the President made his strong populist pitch for the “Buffet Rule,” with Democrats exceeding 80 on our 0-to-100 scale and both independents and Republicans moving above 70. There was no polarization here, as voters across the political spectrum gave Obama high marks.

Republicans are doing their damnedest to follow the Romney line, that demanding economic fairness is an attack on capitalism and, as Sen. Marco Rubio said last night, trying to "pit Americans against each other." Here's a news flash for elected and wanna-be elected Republicans: Even Republican voters like the idea of the rich paying their fair share.

Did anyone honestly think that Mitt "Corporations are people too, my friend" Romney would turn out to be such a bad candidate? Over the past couple of days, he's sat down with voters in an effort to humanize himself by talking about the housing crisis. But instead of humanizing himself, he's unleashed junk like this:

"Well, the banks aren't bad people. They're just overwhelmed right now."

No, Mitt. They aren't bad people. Because they aren't people! For Pete's sake, Bank of America is not a person.

"The banks are scared to death, of course," he said. "They're feeling the same thing that you're feeling...

No, they aren't feeling the same thing we're feeling. They don't stay awake at night worried about how to pay the mortgage. They aren't worried about being forced to spend the night in their car because they've just lost their home. In fact, they aren't feeling a damn thing. Because they aren't human. They aren't even robots. They are companies. And the last thing we need is a president who can't tell the difference!

Reposted from Daily Kos Elections by David Nir

Hard to believe that little over a week ago, when we were deciding which questions to ask in our weekly poll, Mitt Romney looked like he was about to cruise to the GOP nomination. But if you put yourself back in that not-so-wild and only slightly crazy era, you can understand why we focused heavily on Romney in our slate of rotating questions. He may yet win (who knows?), but if he does, he certainly won't like the answers we got back.

Public Policy Polling for Daily Kos & SEIU. 1/19-22. Registered voters. MoE ±3.1% (no trendlines):

Q: Which of the following statements do you agree with more: 'Mitt Romney has strong principles' or 'Mitt Romney will say anything he has to to get elected'?

Has strong principles: 26
Will say anything: 61
Unsure: 12

Well, this one speaks for itself, doesn't it? I wish we'd had room to ask the same questions about Newt Gingrich and Barack Obama, but I'd be surprised if their "will say anything" scores are as high. (Well, Newt will certainly say any damn thing that comes to his mind... just most of it doesn't help him to get elected.)

Now, I know you remember this:

Said Mitt (infamously):

Corporations are people, my friend.

So we asked:

Q: Do you think that corporations should have the same rights as people, or not?

Should have the same rights: 24
Should not have: 56
Unsure: 20

No, my friend, it looks like they should not. Unsurprisingly, Republicans are most likely to support people-hood for corporations, but even a plurality of them (41%) don't like the idea. By the way, Romney did it again just yesterday:

“Now, the banks aren’t bad people,” Romney said. “They’re just overwhelmed right now. They’re overwhelmed with a lot of things. One is a lot of homes coming in right now that are in foreclosure or in trouble and the other is with a massive new pile of regulations.”

Oy! But that's hardly the worst of it. Romney's certainly gotten himself into a world of trouble thanks to this:

“It’s probably closer to the 15 percent rate than anything,” Mr. Romney said. “Because my last 10 years, I’ve—my income comes overwhelmingly from some investments made in the past, whether ordinary income or earned annually. I got a little bit of income from my book, but I gave that all away. And then I get speaker’s fees from time to time, but not very much.”

That "not very much"—amazingly only the second-worst self-inflicted wound in this statement—turned out to be $374,327. (At least, last week it did. With Romney's recent tax returns now public, the figure is actually more like half a million bucks.) That inspired us to include this question:

Q: Do you think that someone who makes $370,000 in one year has made a lot of money, or not?

A lot of money: 81
Not a lot: 15
Unsure: 4

I'd love to meet that 15% who thinks making $370 large is "not a lot of money." Maybe they could give me some of it. Again, as you'd expect, people who have this skewed view tend to be Republicans and conservatives. By the way, an income of $370K in a single year would put you in, yes, the top 1%. Yet fifteen times that many think being in the 1% doesn't mean you've made "a lot." Bizarrely enough, that actually squares with a poll from last fall which showed that 13% of Americans believed themselves to be in the top 1%. Still, I don't think Mitt Romney's on to a winning game plan here.

And finally, our weekly approval/favorability ratings:

Why the drop? Our pollster Tom Jensen explains:

Obama’s numbers are down mostly because he’s weaker than usual with young voters and Hispanics. That's just going to happen every now and then. He’ll probably bounce back next week.

Here's PolitiFact bending over backward to fudge the facts enough to give President Obama a "half true" on a completely true statement. In the State of the Union, Obama said "In the last 22 months, businesses have created more than 3 million jobs. Last year, they created the most jobs since 2005." This is, PolitiFact agrees, a 100 percent true statement—more than 3 million private sector jobs have been created in the last 22 months, and last year the most private sector jobs were created since 2005. So how do you look at this factual statement and come up with "half true"?

Easy, if you're PolitiFactory of Bullshit!

PolitiFact feels that Obama "implicitly credited his administration policies" with the job creation, since he also said "In the six months before I took office, we lost nearly four million jobs. And we lost another four million before our policies were in full effect." PolitiFact's response is that "labor economists tell us that no mayor or governor or president deserves all the claim or all the credit for changes in employment." Which might be relevant had Obama attempted to take all the credit for the jobs created. But, if you go all the way back to the specific statement they were allegedly fact-checking, you'll note that Obama said "businesses have created more than 3 million jobs." He specifically attributed job creation to businesses. In the paragraphs PolitiFact quotes for the context that allegedly shows him implicitly claiming credit, he did not cite a single specific job-creating program. Instead, he cites an agreement, yet to be fully implemented, to cut the deficit (which, if you're economically literate, you'll know is a bad idea for job creation in this economic climate anyway) and "new rules to hold Wall Street accountable, so a crisis like that never happens again," another statement that looks forward—in this case to keeping the economy strong—but does not claim credit for the recently created jobs.

PolitiFact claims to exist to check facts, yet here they take a straightforward factual statement, acknowledge that it's true, and then engage in contortions to find a way to call it only half true by inventing meanings that are not in the words Obama spoke. In a sense, though, it's good. The "lie of the year" started to destroy PolitiFact's credibility, and the quicker they finish the job, the better for all of us.

Newt's latest broadside:

Newt Gingrich took a dig at Mitt Romney and his tax returns in an appearance at the Univision candidate forum in Miami.

When asked about Romney's position on immigration, Gingrich said that deporting all undocumented immigrants is unrealistic.

"You have to live in a world of Swiss bank accounts and Cayman Island accounts and making $20 million for no work, to have some fantasy this far from reality," Gingrich said.

As Alexander Burns noted, it's also a fantasy for anyone to believe the issue of Mitt Romney's tax returns is over and done with. But that's what Romney's team says they believe:

Mitt Romney's campaign is firmly operating as if the former Massachusetts governor's tax returns, which dogged him throughout the South Carolina primary, are now an issue of the past.

Speaking just hours after Romney released his 2010 tax returns and estimates for 2011, spokesman Eric Ferhnstrom was already trying to move on.

"As far as we are concerned, we put it to bed," he said, at a campaign stop in the outskirts of Tampa.

They truly haven't a clue.

8:26 AM PT: Greg Sargent's take: "Romney is half right when he says his critics are putting capitalism on trial. This election is putting his brand of capitalism on trial."

8:43 AM PT:

As you may have seen, yesterday Nancy Pelosi said that "there's something" that she knows about Newt Gingrich that will ensure he never becomes president. It was an obvious setup to help Newt Gingrich (if you're Newt, who better to have as a foil than Nancy Pelosi?) but Mitt Romney in his infinite boneheadedness fell into the trap anyway earlier on Fox:

CARLSON: Mr. Romney, what does Nancy Pelosi know if it would be such a bombshell as to why Newt Gingrich couldn't be president?

ROMNEY: I wish I knew what that was [laughter]. I'd tell people what it is right now.

But that's one of the reasons why I'm saying that all of the records that were part of the ethics investigation, all of the transcripts, all of the records have to be made public.

Not just the final white-washed report but the full record, the reason that 88% of the Republicans in the House voted to reprimand their own Speaker..... we need to understand why that is, and those records need to be released, because you know that if Nancy Pelosi knows those things right now, she will hand them to Barack Obama's campaign if Speaker Gingrich were our nominee.

To give you an idea how stupid and desperate this is of Mitt Romney, imagine if during the 2008 campaign, either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton had taken something Newt Gingrich said about the other, and used it as an attack. Unthinkably dumb, right? Well so was this.

Moreover, Romney seems to think that Pelosi was suggesting she knew something about the ethics investigation and Newt Gingrich. But in the very same interview, she also said that everything that is important about the investigation has already been released. "I think the public record speaks for itself," she said. "I don't know if there's any reason to go further than that. But read the public record."

Maybe Nancy Pelosi really does know something, but the way she phrased her comments —plus the fact that she made them to the GOP's new boogieman, John King—strongly suggests to me that she was setting up a trap for Mitt Romney—and he walked right into it. And unless something better comes along, Newt Gingrich will take advantage of it during tomorrow night's debate.

7:33 AM PT: And Newt Gingrich (predictably) isn't flinching, challenging Pelosi to say what it is that she knows. "I have no idea what's in Nancy Pelosi's head. If she knows something, I have a simple challenge: Spit it out."

During the State of the Union yesterday, President Obama made specific reference to a major issue brewing since the Occupy movement started: economic fairness. During the speech, pollster Stan Greenberg and company looked at reaction from Colorado voters:

This was not the easiest audience for Obama; although slightly more participants voted for him than McCain in 2008, it was a significantly Republican-leaning group (44 percent Republican, 32 percent Democratic). At the outset, these voters were split 50/50 on Obama’s job performance and just 50 percent gave him a favorable personal rating. But the President gained ground after the speech; his job rating rose 8 points and his personal standing jumped 16 points, to 66 percent favorable.

Check out this short "dial" video during the speech (the red line is Republican):

Greenberg tweeted during the process:

 

More:

The dials spiked when the President made his strong populist pitch for the “Buffet Rule,” with Democrats exceeding 80 on our 0-to-100 scale and both independents and Republicans moving above 70. There was no polarization here, as voters across the political spectrum gave Obama high marks. And Obama’s framing of the economic challenges facing the country through the lens of post-World War II America was particularly effective. He also received high marks for his proposal to change the tax code to encourage “insourcing” instead of “outsourcing,” his call to change our “unemployment system” to a “re-employment system” and his appeal to make it easier for entrepreneurs and small business to grow and create jobs.

The Republicans are caught in a box. If their (mostly) tea party-fueled candidate, Newt Gingrich, wins the primary, they lose.

And if he doesn't, the elite message from Romney also loses.

What's a poor rich elite candidate to do?

Reposted from Comics by Tom Tomorrow

Click for larger image.

I decided to take a week off from the Republican primaries and other assorted nonsense in order to address the pressing matter of "five-fingered" footwear. The other naked-themed items leapt out at me around the same time. I don't have a problem with minimalist shoes or other back-to-basics products, but I do find them curious cultural artifacts. Simplicity has major authenticity in this cluttered world. (Somewhat-related strip here.)

While researching this strip, I learned that Naked juices are owned by PepsiCo and Odwalla by Coca-Cola. It's like a high-end fruit drink proxy war!

Get a signed print of this cartoon from the artist.

Reposted from Daily Kos Elections by David Nir Leading Off:

• AZ-04, AZ-01: Hah, this is pretty entertaining:

Arizona Rep. Paul Gosar asked House candidate Paul Babeu to run in his home district as far back as the fall in order to avoid a Republican primary, both campaigns confirm to POLITICO.

But Babeu, a Pinal County sheriff and Iraq war veteran, told Gosar he was "insane" and began preparing for a campaign in the new 4th District.

"I looked at him and said, 'Are you insane? I don't live there. That's your district.' And he said, 'Paul, you're a rock star. You can win this seat. You're law enforcement and you're military. "I said, 'Paul, the best person to defend District 1 is the District 1 congressman,'" Babeu recalled in an interview with POLITICO Tuesday.

"I saw somebody who is frightened, who is more interested in his own political future," he said of a conversation that he recalls began in October.  "He was trying to clear the field. So whatever he wanted to do, everybody defers to him. Well, that's not how America works. He may be a congressman, but to come in and think he's just going to tell people what they're going to do, that's now how this process works."

4Q Fundraising:

• TX-Sen: Ted Cruz (R): $1.1 mil raised, $2.9 mil cash-on-hand

• VA-Sen: Tim Kaine (D): $1.65 mil raised, $3.3 mil cash-on-hand

• WV-Sen: Sen. Joe Manchin (D): $495K raised, $2 mil cash-on-hand

Senate:

• MN-Sen: PPP tests the Senate waters in the Land of 10,000 Lakes and finds, as usual, that Democrat Amy Klobuchar is in excellent shape as she heads for re-election this year. Perhaps more interestingly, her junior colleague Al Franken, who won by a famously small margin in 2008, looks surprisingly good in 2014 against two of Minnesota's sorry-ass presidential also-rans: Michele Bachmann and Tim Pawlenty. Click the link for our full post with all the numbers at Daily Kos Elections.

• NY-Sen: After peddling a mountain of bullsh*t about the origins of an entire blog's worth of junior-grade Maxim-style posts that were lurking in plain sight on his company's website, TheLadders.com founder Mark Cenedella finally decided he could say with certitude who was responsible… and the answer is "himself." Cenedella still claims he doesn't know who wrote what, trying to put most of it on a deceased former roommate. He also accused Dem Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand's campaign of feeding this story to the New York Times; probably right, since I doubt fellow Republican George Maragos has the chops to suss something like this out. But best of all, he attacked Gillibrand for waging "a smear campaign against a private citizen." Homey, you have no idea what's coming, do you?

Gubernatorial:

• LA-Gov: Talk about getting an early start: Even though Bobby Jindal was just re-elected to a second term last November, Agriculture Commissioner Mike Strain says he plans to run for governor when the seat is next up (and Jindal is term-limited out) in 2015. I suppose he might also be jockeying for position in case, say, Mitt Romney taps Jindal as his VP nominee and wins, but that's not looking especially likely at the moment.

• MD-Gov: If you are interested in getting an early read on the 2014 gubernatorial race in Maryland (which will be an open-seat affair, since Gov. Martin O'Malley will be term-limited), this Baltimore Sun piece has a roundup on some of the key players and how much money they've been raising. The big dog in terms of cash-on-hand is AG Doug Gansler, though Howard County Executive Ken Ulman, state Comptroller Peter Franchot, and Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown are all amassing serious warchests. All of these men, by the way, are Democrats: Republicans have only held the governor's mansion for a single four-year term in the last forty-plus years. (Trivia: The last Free State Republican gov before Bob Ehrlich? Spiro Agnew.)

House:

• AL-05: This may be the lulziest poll of the cycle so far. As you know, turncoat chump Parker Griffith, who got spanked in 2010's GOP primary after switching parties months earlier, somehow figured it would be a good idea to stage a comeback… yes… in the GOP primary. Well, the guy who thoroughly whomped Griffith last time, Mo Brooks, is out with an internal from Public Opinion Strategies showing him with a comical 71-14 lead over the hapless ex-congressman. I just hope someone titled the polling memo "Parker Griffith Can Lose."

• AR-02: Former state Rep. Jay Martin tells Max Brantley of the Arkansas Times that he's actively considering a run against freshman GOPer Tim Griffin, making him the first Democrat to even get this far along the decision-making process. Martin's last bid for public office was an unsuccessful run for the Lt. Gov. nomination 2006, where he finished a very distant fourth. The man who won that primary (and later the general), Bill Halter, has also had his name tossed around by the Great Mentioner for this race, but so far as I'm aware, hasn't made any public statements about a possible run.

• AZ-08: You can cross a couple of names off the list to replace Rep. Gabby Giffords: Former Arizona Gov. and current Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano says (through a spokesman) that she has "no intention" of running for Congress. (Didn't even realize anyone was asking her.) More plausibly, Giffords' husband, recently retired astronaut Mark Kelly, confirmed that he won't run this year, either. (An earlier report in Politico cited an unnamed Giffords aide who said the same thing.) However, Kelly didn't rule out a bid for office in the future. Also on the Democratic side, Roll Call mentions one new possibility: Pima County Supervisor Ramon Valadez.

Meanwhile, Politico's Jonathan Allen makes a heads-up catch: Jesse Kelly, the 2010 GOP nominee who nearly defeated Gabby Giffords, has filed a new statement of candidacy with the FEC, designating his existing campaign committee as one he plans to use for the 2012 elections. Kelly had launched a rematch bid almost immediately after he lost last time but suspended his campaign after Giffords was shot. A spokesman said just the other day that Kelly had been living and working in Texas but still owned a home in Arizona, so presumably this means he intends to return and run in the special election.

For our super-comprehensive canvass of the potential special election candidate field, see this post.

• CA-01: I had sort of been wondering whether retiring Rep. Wally Herger's attempt to coronate a successor in the form of state Sen. Doug LaMalfa would actually work. It turns out the answer may be "no." Former state Sen. Sam Aanestad is reportedly exploring a bid and could join LaMalfa, the man who took over his Senate seat in 2010 after Aanestad was term-limited out, in the Republican primary. Aanestad also made a failed bid last cycle to wrest the GOP Lt. Gov. nod from appointed incumbent Abel Maldonado (who later lost to Democrat Gavin Newsom).

• CA-21: We finally have a candidate! John Hernandez, the CEO of the Central California Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, announced on Monday that he'd join the race for the open 21st Congressional District—a very competitive and winnable seat but one where Team Blue had struggled to find a standard-bearer after state Sen. Michael Rubio dropped out. Republican Assemblyman David Valadao has had the field to himself and has been raising a lot of money, something Hernandez recognized when he said: "We have a lot of catching up to do with Valadao." Meanwhile, another Democrat, former state Sen. Dean Florez, still hasn't made up his mind. In a three-word email, he said: "Nope. Still pondering." Seriously, dude, time to decide.

• CO-05: So you've probably heard that obnoxious GOP Rep. Doug Lamborn is skipping the State of the Union address. BFD, as far as I'm concerned—haters gonna hate. But what you may not have known is that a few days ago, Lamborn drew a primary challenge from consulting firm owner Robert Blaha, who reportedly may be able to self-fund. So you have to wonder if Lamborn, a widely-disliked guy who twice in three tries has won his party's nomination with only a plurality, is pulling this SOTU stunt because he's concerned about Blaha.

• FL-06: A second Republican has filed to run in the 6th CD in the space of a week, though it sounds like state Sen. Steve Oelrich is pretty convinced his turf will wind up in a new congressional district and not the one currently represented by GOP Rep. Cliff Stearns. (Clay County Clerk of Court Jimmy Jett jumped into the race on Friday.)

• IL-08: Democrat Raja Krishnamoorthi just received an endorsement from the 47,000-strong Chicago Regional Council of Carpenters—as well the support of the president of a local teachers union, Mike McGue of IFT Local 504. What's interesting about that second one is that it probably means McGue wasn't able to bring his entire executive committee on board for Raja, but it also probably means his union won't be backing Tammy Duckworth, either.

• IL-10: AFSCME's Illinois Council 31, which represents "100,000 active and retired members," just endorsed activist Ilya Sheyman in the Democratic primary. Last week, a local teachers union, which the Sheyman campaign says is the largest union in the 10th CD, also gave him their backing.

• MI-14: Yet another politician is jumping into the already super-crowded 14th District Democratic primary: ex-state Rep. Mary Waters, who joins Reps. Gary Peters and Hansen Clarke, as well as Southfield Mayor Brenda Lawrence, who just entered the race the other day. Waters very nearly succeeded in dethroning then-Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick in the old 13th in 2008, but Kilpatrick hung on with a bare 39-36 plurality win thanks to the clown-car effect. (Kilpatrick was nevertheless defeated the following cycle by Clarke, who managed the difficult feat of overpowering an even more crowded clown car.) As Kathleen Gray of the Detroit Free Press notes, though, Waters has faced some difficult times since then:

[S]he pleaded guilty in 2010 to a misdemeanor count of filing a false tax return related to a bribery scandal involving her one-time boyfriend Sam Riddle. She tried to withdraw her plea, but the U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed the plea last year and Waters was sentenced to one year of probation.

Peters has to be pleased at this latest development, though: He's the lone white guy in the race, and he's probably counting on a fractured vote in order to win in this black-majority district.

• MO-04: Here's a little more background on Teresa Hensley, the Cass County prosecuting attorney who we mentioned the other day plans to challenge GOP freshman Vicky Hartzler.

• NC-06: The vultures are circling: Guilford County Commissioner Billy Yow, who previously said he wouldn't consider a challenge to Rep. Howard Coble in the GOP primary, has reversed course and is now considering the race. Coble, as you know, is 80 years old, has recently had health issues (including a longer-than-expected hospitalization for an unspecified "upper respiratory infection"), raised almost no money last year and has very little in the bank. Plus, his seat was seriously rearranged during redistricting and he now only represents 43% of the new 6th. So even if he does run again, a lot of Republicans who are tired of waiting to move up will be thinking long and hard about trying to take advantage of the situation.

• NY-19: Ah, damnit. State Sen. Greg Ball, who has been hammering fellow Republican Rep. Nan Hayworth relentlessly since at least August (and mostly from the left, too), finally decided that after all that, he won't challenge her in the primary. Instead, Ball plans to seek re-election. Last cycle, he also bailed on a run in the 19th, but once again, Ball's out.

• PA-04: Two more Republicans have entered the race for this newly open seat: York County Commissioner Chris Reilly and attorney Sean Summers. They join state Rep. Scott Perry and police sergeant Ted Waga.

• PA-12: D'oh! Looks like all those supposedly in-the-know sources who claimed Republican state House Majority Leader Mike Turzai would run for Congress didn't know so much after all. But in the end, Turzai decided not to make a bid after all, and seeing as candidate filing began on Tuesday, it would be difficult for anyone else to jump into the race at the last minute. But Republicans do already having someone running here: attorney Keith Rothfus, who ran a strong race in 2010 in the old 4th (which makes up the bulk of this district). Indeed, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette says Rothfus's refusal to defer to Turzai was a key reason he bailed. Considering Rothfus refused to make way for establishment choice Mary Beth Buchanan last cycle (he actually walloped the former US Attorney in the primary 67-33), I can't imagine why Turzai thought he'd behave any differently now.

Meanwhile, on the Democratic side, here's another big union get for Dem Rep. Mark Critz: He just secured the backing of the United Steelworkers, to go along with his endorsement from the United Mine Workers the other week.

• PA-17: Longtime Blue Dog Rep. Tim Holden may finally be put to the ultimate test this cycle. With the 17th District getting much, much bluer—it went from McCain +3 to Obama +15—it seemed very likely that Holden would face a more liberal challenger in the Democratic primary, and now he is. Scranton attorney Matt Cartwright, who said last month that he was "seriously considering" the race, has now officially jumped in. Cartwright is a first-time candidate but seems to be at least somewhat well-connected. He's also a plaintiff's attorney and may have some personal wealth, though that's definitely not clear. Holden didn't have a ton of cash on hand as of Sept. 30 ($268K), but he's a strong campaign and will have DCCC protection if he needs it, so Cartwright will face what is very much an uphill battle here.

• WV-02: Somewhat to my surprise, state Del. Jonathan Miller followed through on plans he first announced last May and filed to run against Rep. Shelley Moore Capito in the GOP primary. I don't get this, though, because Miller is only 27 years old and raised just $10K in 2011. Since he won't be able to run for re-election, this means he'll get pounded by Capito, piss off the state's most powerful Republican elected official, and probably terminate his career. Is he that bored already? Well, this is probably the best explanation: Last year, when he declared his challenge, he said: "God is calling me to run for this office now. ... And I know he will be with me the whole time."

Other Races:

• NY-St. Sen: No matter how you slice it, Senate Republicans in New York have a huge cash lead over Democrats, something like 5-to-1. Click through for the Albany Times Union's full run-down. (Though I disagree with something PIRG, the group which conducted the analysis, did: They subtracted debts owed from cash-on-hand, which doesn't make sense to me. The whole reason you take on debt is precisely so you don't have to give up your cash.)

• WI Recall: The four Republican state senators who are facing recall elections collectively have quite a bit of cash-on-hand: $734K in total. But the good news is that half of that total belongs to the guy we have by far the smallest chance of taking out, Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald. The rest have from $112-$134K apiece—good change for a legislative race, but not a sum that can't be overcome.

• WV-LG: West (By God) Virginia is one of the few states in the nation without a lieutenant governor elected as such—an issue which came to the fore in 2010 when Gov. Joe Manchin was elected to the Senate. State Senate President Earl Ray Tomblin became acting governor, but the state's high court ruled that his service could only be temporary and that a special election had to be held to fill the remainder of Manchin's term. That's created a pain-in-the-neck situation where two gubernatorial elections will take place in back-to-back years, so legislators are now proposing a constitutional amendment which would create the post of Lt. Gov. (In case you were curious, there are five states with no LG at all, courtesy Wikipedia: Arizona, Maine, New Hampshire, Oregon, and Wyoming. In Tennessee, as in West Virginia, the head of the state Senate serves as LG.)

Redistricting Roundup:

• AZ Redistricting: KingofSpades takes us on an excellent, fact-filled walkthrough of Arizona's new congressional map, complete with statistics provided by DRA.

• ID Redistricting: This is getting juicy. Despite the (Republican) state Attorney General telling them they couldn't do so, Idaho GOPers claim they've gone ahead and removed two Republican members of the redistricting commission they feel have been insufficiently hardline and add that they'll appoint two new members. What's going to make this extra-awkward is that both of supposedly ousted commissioners, ex-state Rep. Dolores Crow and ex-state Rep. Randy Hansen, both say they plan to show up to work at the panel's next meeting on Thursday. So it seems like this whole matter is likely to wind up before the state Supreme Court, which can determine whether Republicans do indeed have the power to replace commissioners at will.

• KY Redistricting: It was less than a week ago that Democratic state House Speaker Greg Stumbo expressed optimism that a quick deal could be worked out with Republicans on congressional redistricting. Now, as the Louisville Courier-Journal's Tom Loftus, both Stumbo and the Senate's lead negotiator, GOPer Damon Thayer, say "there is a growing possibility the two chambers will not resolve their differences and that the matter will have to be resolved in court."

• NY Redistricting: FYI, new legislative maps are supposedly coming out Wednesday morning. They will go up on LATFOR's website. While you wait, you can check out this teaser of what the brand-new, GOP-created 63rd state Senate district will supposedly look like.

Recapping yesterday's action:

It was a light schedule yesterday, due to the State of the Union address. The House got through four of its five suspension bills, and adopted the Capps motion to instruct conferees on the Payroll Tax Cut Continuation Act. The Senate named a courthouse, and congratulated the North Dakota State University football team for winning the 2011 National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I Football Championship Subdivision title. So that's nice.

And then, there was the State of the Union address.

Looking ahead to today:

The House returns to work, but only briefly, to finish up the fifth suspension bill from yesterday, take up a Gabby Giffords-sponsored bill under suspension before she leaves the House, and consider a motion to go to conference on yet another FAA bill. Last vote expected by 11:00 a.m., and then it's out for the rest of the week for the House Democratic Caucus legislative issues conference.

Wow.

The Senate, on the other hand, does not return to work today. Why? Not sure. But they're planning to be back tomorrow.

Today's floor and committee schedules appear below the fold.

From the GREAT STATE OF MAINE…

Fresh Paneling

I didn’t think there'd be so much naked unicorn racing at Netroots Nation this year.

Correction: Drat. It was just a dream. (But, if you're curious, Jotter won by a horn.)

Anyway. In 19 weeks, Providence, Rhode Island will become the national epicenter of progressive word, thought and deed as thousands of, well, "us" descend on the City by the Narragansett Bay for the Netroots Nation 2012 convention June 7-10.

This year we're fighting for nothing less than the soul of America---to take our country back by moving in a new direction today for a brighter tomorrow so real Americans can win the future by putting country first so we can be country strong and run through amber waves of grain as we crush Republicans with such fury that they lay down and whimper like the dogs they are. [P'too!] Plus excellent speakers, parties and swag bags.

Right now---but only for another six days---you have an opportunity to shape the agenda at NN12. Whether you're interested in big-picture discussions of economics, energy, civil rights, elections, foreign policy etc., or more intimate meta conversations on how the progressive netroots can guide the direction of the big-picture topics, your moment is now to let your wings take dream.

Netroots Nation Executive Director Raven Brooks has the nitty gritty:

Your submissions will help us create an inclusive and engaging agenda, while also helping shape the national dialogue for progressives in the coming months.

It's easy to submit an idea. Click here for the guidelines and submission form.

When you're brainstorming topics, here are a few things to consider: How does my idea help the broader progressive movement? How will it empower activists to take what they've learned and use it for the greater good? Do my proposed panelists represent diversity---of ethnicity, gender, geography, age and viewpoint? Does the session engage an underrepresented community and reach out to other activists who may not yet identify with the Netroots?

The deadline for submissions is Tuesday January 31, 2012.

The organizers are hosting a special webinar tomorrow, Jan. 26, at 2pm ET to answer questions and fill in details about the panel submission process. Click here to RSVP.

So pour yourself a stiff one (it's 5 O'clock somewhere) and think about what your dream panel would look like. (The 2011 agenda is here if you want some inspiration.) Then write it up and send it in. Yours might be the standing-room-only event everyone talks about afterward.

P.S. To register for NN 12, click here and for hotel info click here.

Meanwhile, Cheers and Jeers starts below the fold... [Swoosh!!] RIGHTNOW! [Gong!!]

Visual source: Newseum

Look at the headlines and let's talk about whither the Occupy movement. But... but... they have no concrete demands!

WaPo:

President Obama warned the nation Tuesday that the decades-old promise of a secure and rising middle class is under threat because of growing disparities between the rich and everyone else in America.

Andrew Rosenthal/NY Times:

“In 2008,” he said, “the house of cards collapsed. We learned that mortgages had been sold to people who couldn’t afford or understand them. Banks made huge bets and bonuses with other people’s money. Regulators had looked the other way, or didn’t have the authority to stop the bad behavior.”

“It was wrong,” the president said. “It was irresponsible. And it plunged our economy into a crisis that put millions out of work, saddled us with more debt and left innocent, hard-working Americans holding the bag.”

It was startling, frankly. I haven’t seen the president this combative since before his inauguration.

William A. Galston:

Throughout his speech, Obama invoked the principles of fairness, collective action, and common purpose.  Conspicuously absent was the theme on which the Republican Party rests its case—namely, individual liberty—a contrast that prefigures a 2012 general election waged over clashing partisan orientations as well as competing accounts of the president’s record.

Dana Milbank:

Gingrich himself remains so unpopular that his own chances of beating Obama seem dim: His 29 percent favorability rating is about where it was before he was dumped as speaker by his House colleagues in 1998. But by making Romney as unpopular as he is, he has made Obama look good by comparison.

Gingrich has long regarded himself as a “transformational figure” in world history, and now he’s about to prove it: For the second time in his career, he is about to reelect a Democratic president.

National Journal:

Today's United Technologies/National Journal Congressional Connection Poll showed Democrats with an 11-point lead over Republicans in a generic ballot question asked to registered voters. When asked if they would "rather see the Republicans keep control" of the House or see "the Democrats win enough seats to take over control of the House," 48 percent chose the Democrats, and 37 percent chose the GOP.

Stan Greenberg (GQR) on focus group in CO during SOTU:

Nate Silver on the Mitch Daniels response:

Josh Marshall:

The speech Mitch Daniels is giving is certainly better than what we’re hearing on the primary trail. That said, it’s for a very different audience — the American middle, as opposed to Republican primary voters. Daniel is also an impressive figure in his own way. I mean that. But, My God, not in a running for president kind of way. The idea that Daniels would be seen now by many Republican as a White Knight who could save them from Newt and Mitt is a testament to how weak they see the current field.

EJ Dionne:

I’ll have more to say about the politics of this speech in my column tomorrow. But it would be a lovely change of pace in Washington if Republicans would take a look at ideas that Obama proposed that they would surely enact in some form if a president of their own party had proposed them in a State of the Union speech.

One of the best parts of the speech was exposing the GOP for the obstructionists they are.