November 17, 2006
The Carville Claims: A Closer Look
James Carville has been generating a wave of publicity in criticizing DNC Chair Howard Dean for not sufficiently funding competitive House races. He’s claimed the Democrats could have won another dozen seats if the DNC allocated more money in the campaign’s final weeks. The DNC has pushed back on Carville’s charges. Who’s right?
14 Democratic candidates lost by 2 points or less, but many of the campaigns were funded to the hilt by the DCCC. Lois Murphy certainly can’t blame her loss in PA 06 on inadequate funding; the DCCC spent over $3 million on her behalf. Patricia Madrid (NM 01) also had plenty of money – her razor-thin loss came because of an embarrassing gaffe at a debate. Mary Jo Kilroy (OH 15), Darcy Burner (WA 08), Phil Kellam (VA 02), Christine Jennings and Tammy Duckworth (IL 06) were all among the top-funded candidates by the DCCC. (In Jennings’ case, the money was funneled through the Florida Democratic party.)
And in some conservative districts, the DCCC strategically declined to spend money because they felt national advertising from Democrats would hurt their candidates. Gary Trauner, who narrowly lost to Rep. Barbara Cubin (R-WY AL), was the “victim” of such thinking.
That leaves 6 other races where more money could potentially have made a difference. Larry Kissell, who lost by less than 1 percent to Rep. Robin Hayes (R-NC 08), certainly would have benefited from some cash; the DCCC didn’t give his campaign a dime. But it wasn’t a lack of DCCC funds, it was a lack of strategic foresight in this case.
Linda Stender did better-than-expected against Rep. Mike Ferguson (R-NJ 07), but the DCCC would have had to enter the extremely-costly New York media market. Without the benefit of Monday morning quarterbacking, would that have been a worthwhile investment?
The losing Democratic candidates that legitimately could have a beef are: Tessa Hafen (NV 03), Dan Maffei (NY 25), Victoria Wulsin (OH 02) and Eric Massa (NY 29). These candidates ran in the type of third-tier races where the DCCC was only able to fund late. The New York environment was uniquely favorable this year, and another week of attack ads against Rep. Jim Walsh (R) perhaps could have brought him down.
Tessa Hafen was a late-emerging candidate who benefited from a mini-scandal surrounding Rep. Jon Porter (R-NV 03). An earlier investment here could have helped take Porter down. And, because of her historically Republican district, Rep. Jean Schmidt managed to avoid the September attacks that her Republican counterparts received at the hands of the DCCC.
There’s realistically only four – certainly no more than six seats – that perhaps could have been won with extra cash. Extra money could have made a small difference, but certainly not to the degree that Carville has been suggesting. Dean may have made strategic blunders in the past, but his fiscal responsibility here seems like the wiser course. [JOSH KRAUSHAAR]
Posted at 12:43 PM
Comments
Carville's just upset that he's married to a Republican while the Dem majority train's leaving the station without him....
Jim J | 11.17.06 01:09 PM
 |
None of this matters, Emanuel told Nagourney yesterday that he wanted more money for...IL-06.
Bob Brigham | 11.17.06 01:37 PM
|
On the two NY races: If Carville was so concerned he could have pushed the Clintons and Eliot Spitzer more to donate to Massa and Maffei or to the DCCC on their behalf.
marcus | 11.17.06 01:45 PM
|
Perhaps Mr. Carville might have approached his friend Senator Clinton to share more of her superflous campaign funds on targetted races. Is Mr. Carville worried about the Democratic Party or hos consulting fees and the influence of the DLC? Mr. Carville must realize his philosophy is passe. The netroots supported many candidates that were ignored by Washington money men/women. Thanks to Howard Dean there were viable candidates and infrastructure in place when Republicans fell by the wayside.
Mr. Carville should consider mutual retirement for himself and his wife. We now have a great group of Progressives that will not be seduced by triangulation, the Dick Morris', or high paid beltway consultants.
Jeanne
Rocklin, CA
Jeanne | 11.17.06 01:47 PM
|
Carville is an idiot. And he's quickly becoming irrelevant and he knows it.
Shaun | 11.17.06 01:55 PM
|
Carville is irrelevant. He's one of the "experts" that led the Democrats to lose control of both the House and the Senate. He opposed the 50-state strategy by Dean that can be partially credited with the Democrats winning. At every step, his suggestions have been wrong. I'm not quite certain why his opinions are even newsworthy.
Jake | 11.17.06 02:21 PM
|
With another $400,000 Christine Jennings could have hammered her Republican opponent in the final week for his dishonest TV ads. Those ads, combined with the robo-calls, definitely cost her some votes.
And does it really matter if it's 12 seats, 6 seats, or 4? We're talking about Democratic votes in Congress and more is better than less.
Owen | 11.17.06 02:35 PM
|
Carnville isn't even a member of the DNC.
He's a loser no matter where and who he's a member of.
Just another sign of desperation.
Linda*in*SFNM | 11.17.06 02:42 PM
|
Not everyone thought Stender was so far off, and the DCCC could have advertised in district using cable TV ads instead of buying in the NY market.
For goodness sakes, the DCCC didn't even poll NJ7 after August. They just didn't think it was possible, and their lack of support made that a fait accompli. (sp?)
NaR | 11.17.06 02:45 PM
|
BTW...didn't Rahm announce he was stepping down from his Chairmanship position at the DCCC after the November election?
When's he going?
Linda*in*SFNM | 11.17.06 02:45 PM
|
Carville seems to be the only Democrat to have a problem with Howard Dean. I live in one of the reddest states in the Union, and because of Howard's 50 state strategy we were able to elect six more dems to the state senate - in a state like South Dakota, that's a big deal. As far as who decided which house races would get the $$, wasn't that Rahm Emmanuel's decision? Didn't he hold the purse strings for those races? Howard Dean is to be commended, congratulated and thanked. James Carville - your 15 minutes has been up...for a while now...
Ann Horton | 11.17.06 02:48 PM
|
Carville is Hillary's boy... he along with (0 / 0)
Begala made it their personal goal to ruin Dean in the Primary in 2004. Now Rahm Emmanuel has joined the band wagon and all three are working hard to get Dean out. All of this, in the year the democrats won the house and the senate... I was sick when I saw the group holding hands and singing after it was clear the Democrats made a sweep on election night.... they thanked everyone from their wives to the envelope stuffers... but not one word to Howard Dean... The snub infuriated me because this win would never have been possible if it were not for Deans brilliant 50 state strategy, not only helping us win both houses this year but getting us a firm hold in states we would never have even thought about before the Dean strategy.
I am sending Dean Money and a thank you note. Let's end this insulting behavior from the three Clinton Clowns (Rahm, Paul B & James C).
I am not only thankful that Dr. Dean, is at the head of the democratic party, I feel privileged to have a man with integrity and high moral standards assuring the American people that the Democratic party will bring responsibility back to Washington.
There are only 2 people who's opininon on politics I trust: Howard Dean and Jon Stewart.
blue cayuga | 11.17.06 02:55 PM
|
Carville is just upset that someone else was successful. The 50 state strategy brought in 29 House seats and 6 Senate seats, enough to gain control of both houses. Don't get too greedy fellow Democrats.
Brian | 11.17.06 03:20 PM
|
If Carville had any credibility left, he's lost it.
I truly expect him to become the next Dem to cross the line and either become a Republican or at least get a job with Fox News as a "Democratic" party analyst.
ShelaghC | 11.17.06 03:54 PM
|
I think both Dean and Emanuel did a good, not great job and Carville has his points too. Let's not forget, this may have been a once in generation opportunity.
I volunteered for Duckworth in IL-06. Emanuel claims he needed another million from Dean for Duckworth's commercials the last weekend. I know he finally had a good commercial in the can for Duckworth (about Iraq) and it never made it on the air. That one unlike the other DCCC commercials would have helped every Dem candidate in Chicagoland.
Maybe Rahm thought he had a promise from Dean to go all in at the finish, I don't know. If that's what Carville's talking about maybe he has a point. Remember how angry people were at Kerry for having $15 million in the bank after the election in 2004? Miscommunication or something else? Seems to me if you borrow $10 million in the last month of an election that stands to be a landslide it's not for hiring field operatives in Paducah next spring. Dean should have spent it one way or another.
Rahm raised tons of money, worked tirelessly to do it and expanded the number of DCCC funded races to 4 tiers. That part was a damn good job. But because the first DCCC commercial for Duckworth was so over the top nobody believed it. It undercut Tammy's credibility and fired up Roskam's fundy base. That did more harm than good.
Carville had another important point. Stan Greenberg's polling for his Democracy Corp in October showed if Dems went positive we stood to go up by 18% instead of only 6% fighting back Rove style. I think that would have worked here in IL-06. All but the most diehard partisans were sick of this nasty election by the second week of October. We needed a lot of those low info indies that were turned off by negative ads to overcome Roskam's fundy base.
From the DCCC we got $43,000 for election day doorhangers with Tammy's name on one side and our downballot candidates on the other and we Duckworth volunteers hit some precincts two or three times on election day with those. It wasn't much but it's more than the zilch we usually get.
We got nothing from Dean here in DuPage County as far as I know. The voter lists we had for Duckworth were old and lousy and the software was worse. We have to do better. We're a red pocket in a blue state so I guess we're on our own as far as the DNC is concerned until Utah and Mississippi turn at least purple.
All I can say is we have to keep working it and our heads up. The boy king is still president and he's the gift that keeps on giving. We have some good people led by Reid and Pelosi who will hopefully pass some legislation we can be proud of and indies will appreciate. We should be able to win more seats next time and I hope a few more of them are in suburban Chicago.
markg8 | 11.17.06 03:58 PM
|
I like the 50 state strategy; this was the first year I felt like maybe there was a Democratic organization in Nebraska. People need to be asked to help, to have others to work with and to have a defined goal. To write off the intensely red states is the height of hubris, a condition endemic in Washington.
Jay Chandler | 11.17.06 04:03 PM
|
Who made Carville the Dem's mouthpiece? Who cares what he thinks?--he has no leadership position.
Dean was backed heavily by the netroots and the 50 State Parties--enough said!!
skywalker | 11.17.06 04:15 PM
|
Tammy Duckworth lost because she ran a poor campaign. It's all well and good for the people in IL and NY complain - they never lack for help. Meanwhile, places like Nebraska and Kansas and Idaho and Wyoming actually had competitive races. It's all well and good to say, "Tammy wouldn't have lost if we would have had an extra mil for attack ads," but you do realize you are saying to the Dems in Kansas, and Nebraska, and Idaho that they shouldn't have gotten ANY help at all, just to run those ads, don't you?
It should also be noted that the first state to get the two paid staffers in the 50 State Campaign was Missouri. You cannot tell me that was not instrumental in taking back the Senate. As a Missouri native (NYC'er now), I can tell you that '06 was the first election where rural Democratic parties started becoming active again, with young interested people, many of whom cut their teeth on the Dean campaign.
Carville just cannot accept the fact that he's like Rockefeller in 1966. 10 years on, maybe even less, Dean's quixotic '04 run will be viewed as Goldwater's 64 campaign. The beginning of something huge.
Herbie Poon | 11.17.06 04:51 PM
|
It appears that the DCCC is well aware of the changing, ground level Democrat perspective (which is not in favor of the old-time DCCC view and handling of the disastrous 2000,2002,2004 elections). We Democrats need to keep this in perspective: Dean knows what the hell he's doing! McAuliffe et.al. were/are totally oblivous to what the Democratic Party needs today -- they're still working in the 1960's (here I speak from experience as a former volunteer for the Democratic Party). If you're fed up with the neanderthal DCCC and their total ineffectiveness/collusion and look more seriously at Dean. There are probably some who have their doubts about Dean, but I don't know of anyone! that wants the neanderthal DCCC running the Party.
jn | 11.17.06 04:54 PM
|
markg8, you say "The voter lists we had for Duckworth were old and lousy and the software was worse."
Question: Did the DNC not work this district's list up in the last year, or did they just do a poor job of it, or was it impossible to make up so much ground after decades of neglect? Also, I don't recall Cigalis getting any love from DC two years ago -- how much ground can you make up in two years? (a real question, not a rhetorical question)
Duckworth countered Roskam's BS ads with Obama's magic, positive touch. And Tammy ran a good one in the last week in her own voice. I saw a lot of them. Did they work? Uh... No.
Dean did take out a huge loan, albeit too late and half-spent, but Rahm's safe sitting colleagues sat on far too high a pile of cash. Now THERE'S a wasted opportunity!
Carville's had it out for Dean for years. Absolutely hates the guy. Spinning last week as a huge loss for the Dems due to Dean's "Rumsfeldian" incompetence is too funny not to laugh at.
Sakitume! | 11.17.06 05:40 PM
|
Carville probably initially leaked his claim to his GOP wife.
What a loser!!!
james | 11.17.06 07:05 PM
|
What Carville and other Dean detractors fail to realize is that Dean's 50-state strategy forced the GOP to spend serious money in races they thought would be cake walks. This drained resources that they've used, over and over in past elections, to far outspend the Dems in the "targeted races" Carville and other old-school Dem leaders always go on and on about. Without Dean we wouldn't have won this election and that's a fact. If the Dems would work together instead of sniping each other publically we could get a lot more done.
LT | 11.17.06 09:24 PM
|
Carville is just doing the bidding of the Clintons and the Democratic Leadership Council.
When are people going to catch on and see that the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party (the DLC) is trying to clear the path for Hillary Clinton in 2008? That's why James Carville is trying to get rid of Dean so that they can put a Clinton stooge in that post. It's why Ed Schultz smeared John Edwards today over that bogus Walmart story.
The DLC is trying to gain supremacy in the Democratic Party, because the mid-terms were as much of a rebuke of them as it was of Bush, as this article points out. The DCCC under DLCer Rahm Emanuel wouldn't fund Progressive candidates like Larry Kissell because they viewed them as a threat to their leadership.
That's what this is all about.
ST | 11.17.06 10:04 PM
|
I must be an outsider to all the comments so far.
I truly love watching Carville perform. He is by
far the best comedian in Washington. Can't under-
stand why anyone would take his verbal diarrhea
seriously. He and Mary should get their own cable
show.
Marsh | 11.18.06 02:11 AM
|
Anything that crowd from '92 around Senator Clinton does is designed to help her become President Clinton. They would take this country to hell in a hand basket to get her elected and we need to remember that when we vote in the '08 Democratic Primary.
Karin Byars | 11.18.06 05:47 AM
|
Carville is soooo 20th century.
trippin | 11.18.06 09:44 AM
|
Lois Murphy's close loss (by 3000 votes) was influenced by Republican robocalls -- perhaps they were following DCCC money? Robocalls plagued the Duckworth campaign, too -- though perhaps the DCCC pushed too hard for the wrong Democratic candidate. Carville is too close to the Clinton's and is in bed with a Republican -- enough said! (Though perhaps the DLC Clintons fear the resurgence of Howard Dean?)
A lot of us were volunteering our time because of Dean's influence and many of our candidates got in because we got people to cast more votes than the Republicans could steal. I will quote my sainted mother regarding Carville: "Let the asses bray."
Kate Anne | 11.18.06 09:51 AM
|
I think Tammy Duckworth is an example of a failure of Rahm to understand the political landscape in a district. Christine Cigalis was able to raise money and had a field presence from her previous campaign and Rahm decides to drop duckworth onto the the people instead. I think it was an error on his jusgement.
While I think dean probably made a few minor mistakes Rahm certaintly made larger tactical errors in understanding local political landcapes as an insider from Washington. Here the DCCC recruited and spent money on negative ads for John Cranle. John is a nice guy but a the ran too many DCCC funded negative ads against his opponent. Too much is too much and tv buys don't always help candidates. Also, John Cranley didn't take any risks in terms of political positions a traity that didn't endear him to a lot of progressives.
Steve B | 11.18.06 10:06 AM
|
Why didn't James complain about the former head of the dnc, terry macawful. He lost race after race for YEARS! Dean is a godsend.
mary van dutne | 11.18.06 10:45 AM
|
Dean led the effort and gained 29 Congressional seats and seven Senate seats. The Congress is once more in the hands of the people. The strategy paid off. Not only were Democrats elected to Congress, but also to many state houses and local positions.
The Dean led DNC doesn't get all the credit; the self destructing Republicans helped. Dean helped lead the Democrats into the Republican vaccuum and had his candidates commit as few gaffes as possible.
Could they have won more seats? Sure, but only if they utilized what we know today. Now let's move on and provide the best government the nation deserves.
Mr. Fusion | 11.18.06 12:51 PM
|
If you listen, you will heard that Dean supporters give RE and CS all the credit in the world. It's those who hang out in DC who feel some need to come out publicly and bash Howard Dean. But those in DC need to get use to us, because we are not going away.
As Dean said, we do not represent old words like "Liberal"; just like GWB, obviously, doesn't represent the word "Conservative" -- with the highest spending in history, under a GOP Congress, and without a single veto.
What we DO represent is the DEMOCRATIC wing of the Democratic party. You cut off our wing, James Carville, and we promise you you'll spite your own face. Rahm distanced himself from James. Enough said.
Carville is now OFFICIALLY just a big, fat, loud mouth. As a "face" of the Democratic Party -- GONE! And, good riddance.
Jan | 11.18.06 01:18 PM
|
Carville is also green with jealousy. The British Labor Party asked Dean to advise them on their upcoming elections - Dean has stepped into what Carville regards as his territory.
jinny | 11.18.06 03:06 PM
|
Carville is on the mark when it comes to the lack of funding by the DCCC to some candidates who had a chance but were ingnored by the DCCC. Eric Massa, who ran in the NY 29th, was one of these. I was offended recieving emails over and over requesting money to support this candidate or that candidate because they were the ones chosen as having a chance to win. Why would I send money to them when we had a viable candidate here in the NY 29?. Why wasn't he helped?
Dan Kane | 11.18.06 11:58 PM
|
Carville is on the mark about Dean, however, for the wrong reason. It's not for his failure to pony up to extend the targetting to 3rd tier candidate, but for his record of political ineptitude. Jeez, how do you spend $52mn on your own campaign and end up with yee-hah!
The 50 state strategy, which completely ignores election fundamentals and demographics, his proven inability to raise funds, and inept message delivery are the real reasons it's important to now look for a replacement. Dean's appeal and strategy has been to place himself as a choice between tainted washington dem insiders and purer dem outsiders.
However, this false choice ignores the reality that the future democratic party hegemony will be decided more by a democratic controlled congress over the course of the next two years, than expanding the role of the Idaho democratic party.
Dean's strategy is to maintain his factotum position by using the state party apparatus, who enshrined him in the first place, and who he now subsidizes, to mask a mediocre record and to keep himself politically viable. It's time for the DNC to look toward someone else who can capitalize on the dems improved fortunes by focussing on the big enchilada, the presidency in '08.
demavatar | 11.20.06 12:41 PM
|
Howard Dean's 50-state strategy, which was ridiculed by so-called "experts" like Carville -- who hasn't won a race in 12 years -- is largely responsible for helping the Dems take back Congress.
And don't forget governorships and statehouses. Because of Dean, Democrats won in places the party had abandoned years ago.
So the Democrats win, and Carville looks for a scapegoat.
In NJ-7, the DCCC danced around all year and didn't do squat for Linda Stender until the final weeks of the campaign. That's the fault of Rahm Emanuel, not Dean (as this blog post recognizes).
And most of Linda's boots on the ground were volunteers from Democracy for America -- the organization that Dean started and that his brother now runs. Without Dean supporters, Linda wouldn't have even come close. Don't be surprised if she runs again in '08.
tunghoy | 12.03.06 08:32 AM
|
Post a comment
The Watergate · 600 New Hampshire Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20037
202-739-8400 · fax 202-833-8069
NationalJournal.com is an Atlantic Media publication.
