Political Insider

So much for the Edwards scenario. As the New York Times said in a headline, John Edwards "abruptly" pulled out of the Democratic presidential race Wednesday, leaving many scratching their heads. If Edwards's strategy was to collect delegates in the hopes of being a force at the Denver convention, why not stay in at least six more days, through February 5, and grab a bunch more? The decision may have been a personal one. As NPR's Adam Hochberg reported, "Even a couple of days ago, Sen. Edwards and his staff were still spinning out scenarios where he could either have a last-minute comeback and start winning some states or maybe get enough delegates to be a power broker at the Democratic convention. But we understand that the senator came home on Sunday, talked with his wife, Elizabeth, and his family and decided not to go any further."

The Edwards exit, and Rudy Giuliani's departure and immediate endorsement of Sen. John McCain, leave just four realistic prospects for the major-party presidential nods: Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama on the Democratic side; McCain and Mitt Romney on the GOP side. Both races are now too close to call.

Clinton and Obama will be competing for ex-Edwards backers over the next few days, and it is very hard to predict how they will split. On its website, Time writes, "On the one hand, it should help Obama consolidate the sizable anti-Hillary contingent of the Democratic Party." But Edwards "drew more votes from Clinton than Obama in the first four contests." Asked on CNN if he would make an endorsement, Edwards said, "I haven't made that decision yet. I've told both Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton that I'd be happy to spend time with them, to talk to them about what they intend to do for America, what they're committed to do, and that I would make a decision." He added, "They're both very good candidates. But this is a conversation that needs to take place in private."

On the Republican side, the conventional wisdom is that McCain has the wind at his back, with a Florida win and the backing of Giuliani, who also appealed to moderates and those who consider national security a pressing concern. McCain probably does have the edge, especially since Republican contests are generally winner-take-all. California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is likely to endorse McCain today, despite saying on CNN just yesterday that "I have always said that I would stay out of the whole thing of endorsing anybody until our primaries are over." McCain certainly has the advantage in California, as well as New York. But many Super Tuesday contests -- Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Montana, New York, Oklahoma, and Utah -- are closed to Republican voters only. That could help Romney.

One factor working in McCain's favor -- the continued presence of Mike Huckabee in the race. Huckabee is focusing on states like Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Oklahoma, and Tennessee, which would probably be Romney states in a head-to-head race against McCain. Some say Huckabee is auditioning to be McCain's running mate, and helping to split the vote in the Deep South on Tuesday might be part of his audition.

One other potential president's odds are weakening in the wake of recent primaries -- Michael Bloomberg. I was way off when I said one month ago today that a Bloomberg run was a near-certainty. While it still seems Bloomberg is itching to run, he knows he would face tougher odds against "change" and "reform" candidates like McCain and Obama. Bloomberg may have out-"Hamlet"ed Mario Cuomo at this point, and with each passing day, the odds of a Bloomberg run shrink.

While a McCain nomination might count Bloomberg out, it increases the chances of a third-party run from the right, criticizing McCain for his departures from GOP orthodoxy and his stance on immigration. Or instead of a strictly conservative ticket, a nativist populist ticket could emerge. Dobbs for President after all?

ciceroinsider@gmail.com

In television appearances after he finished third in his native South Carolina Saturday, John Edwards was as blunt as he has been so far about the fact that his strategy now is to continue to acquire delegates in the hopes of playing a major role in a brokered convention. On CNN, Edwards said, "I am in this thing for the long haul." Edwards continued, "We clearly have a three-person race...This thing is going on a very long time." He cited Rep. James Clyburn's recent assertion that the Democratic nomination will be settled at the Denver convention, and added, "I think that's a very real possibility." Edwards said the same thing in the same words on MSNBC.

Edwards has no incentive to quit the race. He has no other political job to return to, and no prospects of returning to elected office in North Carolina in the near future. He is already on primary ballots across the country. According to the latest AP tally, he holds 58 delegates -- about one in eight of the delegates pledged to a candidate who remains in the race. While his showings may decline below the 10% mark in the primaries to come, the Democratic apportionment system means he could come into Denver with 300 to 400 delegates in his pocket.

As Robert Novak reported Saturday, there is speculation that a President Barack Obama would name Edwards attorney general. But this plum might not be enough to sway Edwards if his delegates are needed to tip the balance in Denver -- it is hard to imagine Sen. Hillary Clinton rejecting such a bargain if her nomination was on the line. If the race is deadlocked after the primaries end, it's likely Edwards's people will start sounding out Clinton and Obama, hinting that their man really started liking the sound of "Vice President Edwards" after his 2004 run.

But there is also a scenario -- albeit a very unlikely one -- by which a brokered convention could actually turn to Edwards as the presidential candidate, especially if the GOP nomination is resolved soon. Suppose Clinton and Obama continue their scorched earth fight for delegates through the spring, with Edwards able to stay above the fray and run a more positive campaign. By the time delegates gather in Denver on August 25, both frontrunners' negative ratings would have been driven up considerably, and either would probably be able to expect an uphill general election race.

In a modern version of Gore Vidal's "The Best Man," wherein the all-but-forgotten third candidate wins a party's nomination after the two frontrunners bludgeon each other into oblivion, the Democrats could take another look at the comparatively unsullied Edwards. Again, it's highly unlikely -- but in this election, no possibility can be entirely ruled out.

ciceroinsider@gmail.com

Whether it is sanctioned strategy or not, comments from Sen. Hillary Clinton's supporters and advisers highlighting Sen. Barack Obama's youthful experimentation with drugs including cocaine are sure to backfire. Past candidates, including Bill Clinton, have gotten in trouble not so much for having tried drugs as for failing to be frank about it. Obama raised the issue himself in his 1995 memoir, and has never tried to deny it.

While a candidate's admitted use of cocaine would almost certainly sway some general election voters, it seems unlikely to be a deciding factor for Democratic primary voters. In fact, evidence suggests the Clinton team's cocaine gambit, and other recent comments by the candidate and surrogates that have angered black voters, are hurting her. CNN exit polls in Michigan Tuesday say that approximately 70 percent of black voters opted for "Uncommitted" over Clinton, the only major Democrat on the ballot. Clinton ended up with just 55 percent of the overall Michigan vote.

This does not bode well for Clinton as the South Carolina primary nears. Obama already leads there by a considerable margin, and his lead could grow. Clinton also faces two uncomfortable non-political calendar issues before South Carolina. The Martin Luther King Jr. holiday on Monday will just give Obama's backers another opportunity to revisit the racial issues. And this week marks the 10th anniversary of the breaking of the Monica Lewinsky scandal -- an anniversary sure to lead to a series of media interviews and retrospectives that may remind some voters of what they did not like about the Clinton years.

ciceroinsider@gmail.com

In 1999, when Hillary Clinton first began talking about running for the U.S. Senate representing New York, some pundits and Democratic insiders publicly suggested she hold off and run in Illinois in 2004 instead. After all, they reasoned, Clinton had roots in Illinois and no ties to New York. And then-Sen. Peter Fitzgerald of Illinois looked vulnerable. Clinton of course made the move to New York and planted the base for her future presidential run there.

By 2004, Fitzgerald had decided to retire, and the GOP nominated charismatic multimillionaire investment banker Jack Ryan -- who had gone off to teach at an inner-city school in Chicago after making his fortune -- as its candidate to succeed him. The Democrats had a four-way primary. Businessman Blair Hull, State Comptroller Daniel Hynes, and Cook County Treasurer Maria Pappas were defeated by a state senator named Barack Obama.

After Ryan won the GOP nomination, he was forced to quit the race in late July due to an alleged sex scandal involving his ex-wife, "Star Trek: Voyager" actress Jeri Ryan. The GOP essentially ceded the seat to the Democratic nominee, importing former presidential candidate Alan Keyes, who was not an Illinois resident, to compete against Obama. Obama defeated Keyes 70% to 27%, a margin of more than 2.2 million votes.

It is of course unclear what would have happened if Clinton had opted to wait until 2004 to run for the Senate in Illinois. Much of her initial success was due to her revived popularity in the wake of the Monica Lewinsky scandal, and a lot could have happened to the Clintons during four years out of office. If she did return to Illinois to run, though, she probably would have been nominated. While the GOP might not have opted for Keyes, Ryan's collapse essentially would have guaranteed her a general election win in a state that the national Democratic ticket carried by nearly 550,000 votes.

A first-term Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-IL) might not be a solid favorite for the 2008 Democratic nomination, but in this alternate 2008, she at least would not have to confront Barack Obama, who would likely be languishing in obscurity in Springfield.

ciceroinsider@gmail.com

On NBC Nightly News Monday night, Tim Russert, speaking about the Democratic presidential race, advised, "Get rid of those national polls. ... This is a toss-up. It's too close to call. There is no longer a frontrunner. There is no longer someone who is going to be coronated or inevitable. It's between Clinton and Obama, and we don't know who is going to win."

Indeed, a scenario for Sen. Barack Obama to win the nomination is beginning to crystallize. If Obama wins in Iowa three weeks from tomorrow, the momentum could carry him to a narrow upset win in New Hampshire -- especially if Sen. Hillary Clinton finishes third in Iowa. That would mean Obama could then focus on South Carolina, where he would have a strong chance at a win, as well as Florida. If he could skate past the Michigan and Nevada contests and then perform strongly on January 29, Obama would be the frontrunner going in to February 5. While Oprah Winfrey is not enough to get Obama the nomination, her presence and the candidate's recent momentum could give him the Iowa win that could set this course in motion.

It is harder to see a nomination scenario for John Edwards. Even if he wins in Iowa, which is certainly remains a strong possibility, he is weak in New Hampshire and has faded in South Carolina, where he won the primary four years ago. In fact, an Edwards win in Iowa could ultimately help Clinton, since it would continue to divide the anti-Clinton vote a bit longer as the contest goes national.

Sen. Joseph Biden and Gov. Bill Richardson could both perform well in Iowa. Surveys show Biden to be the second choice of many Iowa Democrats, and Richardson has received solid reviews as well. But it seems third place is the best possible finish either could hope for. Part of the problem is that Biden and Richardson appeal to the same constituency -- one seeking an experienced hand with a strong foreign policy background. If they were one person, that candidate might be able to pull an upset; as two, they hold each other back.

As Russert said, right now it looks like either Clinton or Obama could win the Democratic nomination. It is hard to see how any of the other candidates can do so.

ciceroinsider@gmail.com

At the Black and Brown Forum in Iowa last weekend, Gov. Bill Richardson ran through Bill Clinton's gubernatorial successes in Arkansas, then asked Sen. Hillary Clinton, "Don't you think governors make good presidents?" Without missing a beat, Clinton replied, "Well, Bill, I also think they make good vice presidents."

Was it just a joke, or was Clinton sending Richardson a message? Richardson has been careful not to be too critical of Clinton in his campaign, and many Democrats envision a Clinton-Richardson ticket. Perhaps Clinton was telling Richardson to stay the course, wait a few months, and become the number two on a Clinton-headed ticket.

Yesterday, Richardson was on MSNBC's Hardball, where host Chris Matthews observed Richardson was being "tough on her tonight, but you're usually pretty supportive of Hillary." When asked if he wanted to be on a Clinton ticket, Richardson said, "I don't want to be her running mate." Richardson later said, "You watch, I'm going to win this thing. You watch."

ciceroinsider@gmail.com

Cross posted at The Electoral Map

Arkansas is often a forgotten state. Its six electoral votes are the fewest of any state in the South and it's the smallest state west of the Mississippi River. "Arkansas is the land left over when Louisiana and Missouri were carved out of the Louisiana Purchase and what is now Oklahoma was fenced off as Indian Territory," according the Almanac of American Politics.

But in 2008, Arkansas News columnist John Brummett thinks it could be the epicenter of American politics.

Brummett wrote in a column on Tuesday that he recently spoke with DLC Founder Al From, who predicts Arkansas' former first lady is the likely Dem nominee and says there's a good chance that the GOP ticket will include Mike Huckabee.

Would this make Arkansas a Tier I battleground state? And who would win this battle of the Arkansas heavyweights?

Arkansas has been red in the last two presidential elections, but a lot of people don't realize how blue it is internally. Democratic Gov. Mike Beebe has a veto-proof Democratic legislature (a supermajority), and three out its four its members of Congress and both of its senators are Dems.

To be sure, the state has been drifting rightwards in recent elections, caused in part by changing demographics. Wal-Mart, based in the Bentonville in the northwestern pocket of the state, has attracted a new breed of voters.

The Washington Post wrote in 2005 that Bentonville is pulling in "professionals from amenity-rich cities like New York, San Francisco, Atlanta and Miami, who bring not only their six-figure salaries, but an appetite for Jaguars, sushi, pet day-care centers, Gucci shoes and Chanel sunglasses."

Still, it's generally a state of rural Democrats. Brummett told me in an email that Al Gore lost Arkansas because his "environmentalism frightened farmers." He added that Democrats who win "make a connection through a blend of economic populism, cultural conservatism and inoffensiveness to the farm and business communities."

Bill Clinton made that connection. Can Hillary?

The polling indicates that she would have a head start. A University of Arkansas survey taken October 7-18 found that a generic Dem candidate leads a generic GOPer 49-31%. It also found that 35% named Hillary Clinton in an open-ended question of whom they support. Huckabee took just 8%.

So I asked Brummett who would win a Hillary v. Huckabee election, both in Arkansas and nationwide. He emailed back this prediction:

"Hillary - here and nationwide. In Arkansas, because of Bill, because of damage to Republicans from Bush and because of Huckabee's lack of a substantial base in the state. Even the state Republicans don't like him.

"Nationally, because it's a Democratic year, because of the war, because of certain economic factors and because she can't be freshly smeared with negative attacks as Kerry was and Dukakis [was] long before -- since people have heard plenty of bad stuff already, and are kind of inured to it in her case."

At the very least, Brummett's saying that Arkansas will be competitive.

But there's also a question of whether the candidates pay attention to Arkansas. Are its six electoral votes really important enough to spend significant time and money? Brumett thinks so, noting that Al Gore lost the 2000 election by only five electoral votes. He added, "Arkansas' six electoral votes were as decisive as Florida."

After briefly climbing into the double digits in some Iowa and New Hampshire polls, Gov. Bill Richardson's presidential campaign seems to have plateaued. The latest RCP Average in Iowa has Richardson at just 7.6%, not that far ahead of Sen. Joseph Biden, who has been making recent gains in the state and now pulls an average 5.0%. In New Hampshire, where Richardson was not long ago threatening John Edwards's hold on third place, Richardson now averages just 6.5%, while Edwards is at 12.5%. Richardson has also been working hard in Nevada, a state not far from his own New Mexico, but the most recent poll there has him at just eight percent.

These are not deadly numbers in a race that still have several months to go, and where both Edwards and Sen. Barack Obama show some vulnerabilities in their efforts to become the main alternative to Sen. Hillary Clinton. But there are other signs of difficulties ahead for Richardson. In their most recent ranking of the Democratic candidates, NBC's Chuck Todd and the Atlantic Monthly's Mark Ambinder dropped Richardson from fourth place to sixth, saying his problem is that "he's a terrible liberal; it's not in the guy's DNA. He's trying to become the anti-war candidate but doesn't seem like a credible messenger."

Richardson's promise to begin a full U.S. pullout from Iraq as soon as he takes office may be backfiring on him. Richardson's supporters are those who see him as a competent, experienced foreign policy hand, and they grimace when they hear him talk like Rep. Dennis Kucinich. Last month, Richardson's South Carolina campaign co-chairman, state Rep. Fletcher Smith, defected to Biden, citing Richardson's vocal shift leftward on Iraq. "We do not need a Vietnam-style evacuation," Smith said. In a September American Research Group poll in South Carolina, Richardson was at five percent, Biden two; a month later, ARG found Biden at six percent and Richardson down to one.

The second problem for Richardson is his desire to not harm his relationship with the Clintons. Richardson has never been an attack-dog campaigner, and as Clinton's rivals turn up the heat against her, Richardson has been notable for his refusal to do so. Richardson has said repeatedly that he has no interest in the vice presidency, but he is said to be on Clinton's list and he is obviously keeping his options open.

It is highly unlikely that Bill Richardson will be the Democratic presidential nominee. He therefore faces the same dilemma ex-Gov. Mark Warner did in Virginia: run for the U.S. Senate or hold out for a possible veep nod? With Warner opting for a Senate bid, Richardson's vice presidential stock has increased, though Hillaryland may be more interested in Ohio's popular Gov. Ted Strickland, who might boost her over the top in the state that kept Sen. John Kerry out of the White House. Meanwhile, Roll Call says this morning that Richardson "remains an overwhelming favorite in the Senate race" according to a new poll.

The deadline to file for the New Mexico Senate race is February 12, which theoretically would let Richardson try his presidential luck through the February 5 primaries and then switch to the Senate contest. Such a late and obviously opportunistic move would get his Senate run off to a bad start, however. If he does prefer the Senate route to a possible V.P. nomination, it may be more likely that he will stick it out through Iowa, New Hampshire, Michigan (January 15), and Florida and South Carolina (January 29), then end his presidential campaign, endorse Clinton, and file for Senate.

What happens if Richardson skips the Senate campaign, is not picked to be the Democratic vice presidential candidate, and the Democratic ticket then wins the White House? Richardson could hope to become secretary of state -- but that's another race where he would be neck-and-neck with Biden.

ciceroinsider@gmail.com

New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner continues holding his cards close to his chest on the matter of the date of the state's leadoff presidential primary. In a Friday interview with NPR's Day To Day (which can be heard here), Gardner said he will set the date "some time after" November 2, the end of the candidacy filing period. However, he also told the New Hampshire Union Leader last week that a December primary is increasingly unlikely.

Both major parties are planning their Iowa caucuses for January 3, so New Hampshire would have had to jump the queue to move to December. A pre-Iowa New Hampshire primary would have helped Sen. Hillary Clinton, who holds an 18.6-point advantage in the New Hampshire RCP Average, a lead that expands with each new poll. Clinton also leads most Iowa polls, but by much smaller margins. Also, the uncertainties of the caucus structure make a John Edwards or Sen. Barack Obama win there all the more likely.

A "New Hampshire first" calendar would probably have given Clinton a convincing win that might have boosted her in Iowa, or at least overshadowed a loss there as the calendar shifted back toward Clinton-friendly states. Still, while Hillaryland might have preferred this calendar, they did not seem to really expect it, and they believe their New Hampshire firewall can withstand an Iowa defeat. The possible peril for Clinton: If she stumbles to a third-place finish in Iowa on January 3, will the following media storm push Edwards or Obama into serious New Hampshire contention less than a week later?

CNN reports Brian Wolff will become the new executive director of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

"Wolff is credited with playing a key role in helping devise the campaign strategy Democrats employed in their successful effort to wrest control of the House from Republicans for the first time in 12 years."

Roll Call has more on the staffing moves.

He "will be joined at the DCCC by one of incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's, D-California, top aides. Jennifer Crider, who is widely respected by the Capitol Hill press corps, will head the DCCC's press shop as communications director. Wolff and Crider will work for Rep. Chris Van Hollen, the new DCCC chairman."

In Kentucky, they say, "Birds are the sweetest....Thoroughbreds are the fleetest.....but Politics in Kentucky is the damnest!"

With embattled Governor Ernie Fletcher (R) expected to face one serious primary challenges and potentially another, Lt. Governor Steve Pence and recently defeated U.S. Congresswoman Anne Northrup, the Democrats in the Commonwealth of Kentucky have been slowly getting their act together. First Louisville Mayor Jerry Abramson and State Auditor Crit Luallen bowed out of the race. Then, word came yesterday that as expected, U.S. Congressman Ben Chandler, grandson of a popular former Governor, would not seek a rematch with Fletcher who defeated Chandler in 2003.

Now as a number of Democrats in the state position and repositiion, all eyes turn toward former Governor Brereton Jones who after passing a bill to allow the Governor of Kentucky to seek reelection, didn't seek reelection himself. He served from 1991-1995 and left office with the highest approval rating of any Kentucky politician. Jones also has a pet issue that will endear him to the contributors in the state, tax relief for race horses, not the gaming industry. Being a self-made millionaire, it gives him the convience of waiting a little longer than the other candidates. But Jones may not look at a Governor's race, but a race for U.S. Senate in 2008.

Some political experts talked to Jones about challenging U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell recently. There are even rumours that around Washington, D.C. has been circulating a poll recently showing Jones is like Bob Casey, Jr. in Pennsylvania, in the fact he would start and end a race with McConnell with a built-in double digit lead.

Jones is staying quiet for the moment about any race. One thing is that if Jones doesn't challenge McConnell, one or two of the potential top tier candidates for Governor may defer a Gubernatorial bid to challenge McConnell.

For Democrats in Mississippi, the only thing awaiting them is putting together the winning team for 2007 & 2008, and it appears another bastion of the Republicans will fall. Already, preparing for the Governor's race, some candidates are bowing out in favor of the clear front runners. Former U.S. Congressman Wayne Dowdy (D), who lost a bid for U.S. Senate in 1988 to Trent Lott (R) and current State Democratic Party Chairman, has bowed out - soon to be followed by Secretary of State Eric Clark (D), to clear the way for the "Big Three" as former Governors Ronnie Musgrove, Ray Mabus, and former Attorney General Mike Moore are known.

The rumours out of Mississippi have the makings of a dynamic ticket of Former Governor Ray Mabus seeking a second term for Governor in 2007 with a ticket mate of none other than former Governor Ronnie Musgrove. In addition, in 2008, Democrats would turn to former Attorney General Mike Moore, the winning attorney in the landmark suit against the Tobacco Companies, to be their nominee for U.S. Senator in 2008.

Both former Governors lost narrowly to populist Republicans whose promises of smaller government turned their administrations sour in the end. Mabus lost to Kirk Fordice in 1991, after a bruising primary fight with Dowdy who was attempting a comeback. After that, Mabus served as U.S. Ambassodor to Saudi Arabia under President Clinton as well as a key spokesperson for former U.S. Senator Bill Bradley in his Presidential bid in 2000. Mabus still retains the ability to draw a crowd and is well liked by the African-American, Labor, and rural Farm Communities of the Delta. This could be a significant coalition to unseat first term Governor Haley Barbour. As one Mississippi legislator states, "Ray (Mabus) has that suave charm that forces you to like him, even if you don't agree with him."

At the recent Neshoba County Fair stump speaking, a must for all Mississippi politicos, Mabus took a direct stab at Barbour, pointedly remarking, "We teach our children not to cheat in schools. Its time to teach the politicians to stop cheating our schools!" With a mix of Biblical references and oratorical flourish, Mabus outshined Barbour and did severe damage to what could become a knock down, drag out romp on his comeback to the Governor's mansion.

Governor-Elect Mike Beebe (D) of Arkansas is getting off to a cash-rich start in office as Governor. After defeating three opponents by a twenty point spread, which after a twenty-four year political career was his first contested election, the new Democrat Governor-Elect is celebrating in an "un-Democratic" way.

According to the Arkansas Times, platinum sponsors of Beebe's inaugaral can pay a whopping $25,000 to guarantee 4 tickets to a private reception with Beebe and twenty tickets to the Inaugaral Ball with a reserved table. $15,000 gets you two tickets to the private reception and 15 tickets to the ball but no table. Patrons who only give $2,500 get two tickets of admission for standing room only. No public reception like Andrew Jackson once held on being inaugarated as President in 1829, or more recently Ann Richards inaugarated as Governor of Texas in 1991, is planned at this time.

This is the first time since 1995 that Democrats in Arkansas have celebrated the inaugaration of a Governor. In comparison, at wannabe Presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee's second inaugaral in 2003, $125 bought access to a dinner and the ball, though package deals of $2,500 to $10,000 guaranteed a private reception and tables at the inaugaral ball.

Update: The power of the blogs continues to show itself. The Beebe Transition team states those prices are for "sponsors" at the event. However, according once more to the Arkansas Times, tickets for the ball will be $100. Also, there now will be a more populist public events, as well as a party with Beebe the night before the Inaugaral with the modest sum of $25, both cheaper than the Huckabee affair. Tickets will be mailed in Mid-December, according to Zac Wright, Beebe's Press Secretary.

Beebe also set the record of $7 million raised and spent for a Gubernatorial bid in Arkansas. By comparison, Bill Clinton spent $1 in 1990 achieving a fifth term as Governor of Arkansas. Prior to being Governor, Beebe in an unprecedented move was elected Attorney General without any opposition in 2002. Prior to that, he served twenty years in the Arkansas State Senate. Beebe was Majority Leader and President Pro Tempore and has possessed a rather progressive voting history as State Senator. Though he rode to the Governorship on a down-home, folksy, populist appeal, Beebe's political history suggests he'll be somewhat a progressive populist in the mold first fashioned by Governor Sid McMath in 1948 and emulated by Dale Bumpers in 1970 and Bill Clinton once he returned to the Governor's office in 1982.

The Salt Lake Tribune shows how Democrats made significant gains in Western states over the last dozen years.