Nelson (D-Ne) raises less than Bruning (R-Ne)

[Omaha Steve]

Source: Omaha World Herald

By Robynn Tysver

Democratic U.S. Sen. Ben Nelson raised a respectable chunk of change in the third quarter of this year, but came in second in the race for dollars in his U.S. Senate bid.

Nelson raised $443,000 in July, August and September — less than Republican frontrunner Jon Bruning who raked in $583,000 in cash — according to financial reports the campaigns released this week.

Nelson, one of Congress' most vulnerable Democratic incumbents, is considering running for a third term. He has said he is leaning toward a run, although he has made no final decision.

Five Republicans are running to try to tackle Nelson in next fall's election, including Bruning, the Nebraska attorney general, State Treasurer Don Stenberg and State Sen. Deb Fischer.



Read more: http://www.omaha.com/article/20111014/NEWS01/710149868#nelson-raises-less-than-bruning

[Politicalboi]

1. Can't Nelson be primarried?

We need to get rid of him. DINO!

[SoapBox]

3. Ditto to the DINO.

...there is not ONE good Dem in the state to run against him and the Thugs?

[Politicalboi]

5. There's got to be somebody

Hell even Joe the not plumber is running. And Joe doesn't even live in the district he's running for.

[DesertDiamond]

6. Um. It's Nebraska.

[backtomn]

10. This would be much better...........

....than just watching him lose to a Repub.

[Freddie Stubbs]

13. Do you think that Nebraska is likely to elect someone more liberal than Nelson?

[kenfrequed]

16. as if it matters

Yeah, lets support the Dino all the way. Then, to keep his name pure he will pull an Evan Bayh and decide not to run two weeks before his state convention and keep all the damned money he raised and go into lobbying and write stupid friggin books about how the Democrats are too far to the left.

Sheesh.

Battered wives syndrome much?

[Freddie Stubbs]

18. So, what is the solution in a very red state like Nebraska?

Just give up and cede the state to the Republicans?

[kenfrequed]

19. Send the money to actual democrats

Or try to use it to take a Senate seat in a state that isn't that damned red. All Nelson does is give the republicans cover and disrupt any semblance of party unity. And if Nelson looks at the polling numbers and is losing he will pull an Evan Bayh and go right to work as a bankers lobbyist.

[Freddie Stubbs]

20. There is no way in hell we can keep the Senate if we wright off states we have already won

[kenfrequed]

25. This is one seat

And Nelson (and the blue dog morons) have actually cost us congress in 2010 by folding to the republicans and holding up any progressive change thereby giving no enthusiasm and nothing to run on. Unquestioning support causes democratic leadership to throw money away on useless candidates like Blanche Lincoln despite the fact her primary challenger was running much better.

Screw the Blue dogs. Run against the wealthy and against Wall Street Greed and we will win!

[FBaggins]

30. There are at least TEN Democratic seats in play

Probably more like twelve. About half of them pose this same dilema (nominate a true progressive and lose... or have a chance at winning with less-than-ideal).

Hawaii just moved from an almost sure thing to a tossup in the last few days.

We don't have extra seats to play with.

[ellisonz]

40. Hawaii is only a tossup to political consultants.

It's a sure thing.

Linda Lingle has a toxic legacy in the state.

See my post: Down Down Down with the Hawaii Senate Candidacy of former Gov. Linda Lingle

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2102087

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

34. If you consider Nelson a "win."

[shcrane71]

36. Lee Terry was sponsoring a bill to open up LPFM licenses from the FCC

If some progressive group actually could get ahold of a few of those licenses (which usually go to right-wing evangelical Christian groups) in the panhandle, and then start broadcasting left-leaning talk radio then maybe the political winds in Nebraska would change. Honestly, when the likes of Rush Limbaugh monopolized the AM airwaves in the 1980s, Nebraskans became more conservative.

Oh, and AM radio stations are much easier to pick up than FM radio stations out on the plains.

[Telly Savalas]

38. Nelson's predecessor Bob Kerrey was more liberal

I'll certainly concede that it's incredibly unlikely that such a figure will emerge in the next couple of months, run a successful primary, then win in the general election.

However from a long term strategic perspective, we give up too much ground if we assume that it's impossible for anyone but the most conservative Democrats to win in traditionally red states. If we're sensitive to the types of personalities that can win in such areas and keep an open eye for opportunities, we can steadily make advances. It's something we have to do. So long as we think that guys like Nelson are the best that can be had in half of our states, then we're doomed to have bad government indefinitely.

[FBaggins]

14. Sure! As long as you're willing to lose the race in the primary

rather than having a shot at a DINO winning the seat.

Because there sure isn't any hope of getting someone more progressive into office.

Keep in mind that there are now no fewer than ten Democratic senate seats in danger next year. Moving a race from tossup to solid R doesn't help things.

[kenfrequed]

17. Why should we ever run on anything?

I mean why even have a platform or a party if we are just going to have Nelson ignore it anyhow? I wonder if there wouldn't be more value in party solidarity and bargaining posture than to have our positions compromised before we even make it to the bargaining table. Hell if we don't have a position as a party we will always look weaker than the republicans.


I say abandon Nelson and put the money in the senate seats of Democrats that actually vote with us.

[FBaggins]

23. You have to WIN a seat before your platform makes any difference at all.

It does the party no good to run "pure" candidates in every race only to be the permanent minority.

[kenfrequed]

24. Ah yes

The "you are a purist" argument again. My favorite.

Precisely how does this waste of a senator benefit his party and his people? And don't you imagine there might be some time at some point where we actually run AS Democrats and Do Democratic things?

Seriously, he is one guy and I think we stand a better chance of holding the other senate seats if we put the money that is defending him towards other damned candidates. Let this blue dog tick go and lets use the Occupy Wall Street and tax the wealthy messaging to go after Republican seats harder.

[FBaggins]

26. Simple.

He votes with us more often than he votes with them.

If you can't see the benefit there... you need help.

That's what a "purist" is. Someone who thinks that if you don't vote with us down the line... you're no better than someone who votes against us all of the time.

And don't you imagine there might be some time at some point where we actually run AS Democrats and Do Democratic things?

What you miss is that a conservative in France is very different from a conservative in the US. The average democrat in NY isn't much like the average democrat in SD. Democrats in NE deserve to be represented too.

This is the US Senate we're talking about. WY get's the same power as CA. There's no way to craft a majority in the US Senate without winning plenty of seats in states that simply won't elect a more progressive democrat. Absent a major scandal, your only choice is between a moderate democrat and a conservative republican. Just as the republicans have to put up with Snowe/Collins/etc.

[kenfrequed]

28. uhm

Actually some years he votes against us more than he votes with us. It depends on the year you pick. He can only be counted on to screw us over and is a tool of the banks.

I recommend checking WHEN he supports us and when he doesn't.

[FBaggins]

29. Dodging the point, eh?

Is 50 better than 0 or isn't it?

When it comes time to organize the Senate. Does his vote go to Reid or not?

These things matter whether you care to admit it or not.

[DJ13]

32. Im in complete agreement

The letter after his name means little if he is always on the other side when it really counts.

[SkyDaddy7]

31. What good would it do...Its Nebraska

[red dog 1]

39. K&R

[valerief]

2. What's the difference between them? One's a Republican and the other's a Republicrat. nt

[russspeakeasy]

4. Hey, Ben, use some of the money you were paid for your votes.

You can change the spelling of your name to "been".

[Rainbowreflect]

7. The best thing about Ben is the far right here really hate him.

[russspeakeasy]

27. No, the best thing about ben is he is flexible; he will sell out to anyone.

[jwirr]

8. He is between a rock and a hard place but if it appears he is going

to lose anyhow he should use what votes he has left for getting those jobs we need. As the protesters are saying - go down fighting.

[Swede Atlanta]

9. Good riddance Ben.........

He isn't a Democrat so we may just as well have our opposition in plain sight by giving that seat to an (R) Republican.

[Frances]

15. That is the kind of thinking that gave us George W

When will people ever learn how our political system works?

There was a difference between W and Gore, no matter what Nader says

There is a difference between the most backward Dem and the most progressive Repub

A progressive Repub (if one existed) would vote for Republican leadership who would control the agenda of the senate and the house.

[davidwparker]

22. That was the 5-4 Supreme Court, remember. A Nader

vote didn't mean a Gore vote. A Nader vote could also mean I'm voting, rather than sitting it out.

[24601]

44. Just recall that Bush v. Gore wasn't just one vote. The "5-4" was

only about the procedural remedy - that no constitutionally valid recount could be completed by a December 12 "safe harbor" deadline.

On the far more important constitutional question, seven justices (including Breyer and Souter) agreed that there was an Equal Protection Clause violation in using different standards of counting in different counties.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_v._Gore

Personally, I've never forgiven Gore for cosing Nader the election.

[davidwparker]

21. I'd like to see all who jointed with the 'cons over health

care to LOOSE.

[lobodons]

11. With the Majority at stake DINO's are welcome

Better to have a few DINO's AND the Majority than no DINO's and McConnell with the gavel.

[Mz Pip]

35. I know you're right

though it is frustrating to have a Dem who won't even vote to bring the Jobs Bill to the floor. :banghead:

[Romulox]

43. If they vote with Repubs, they form no "majority" with us. See the Single Payer debacle, e.g. nt

[AndyTiedye]

12. "Citizens United" Means that the Republicans Will Always Have More Money

They're just getting warmed up. The huge checks haven't even started coming in yet.

If we're going to win any elections at all, we're going to have to do it with 1/2 or 1/4 of the money that the Republicans will be spending.

[Yupster]

33. Obama lost Nebraska by 15 % in 2008

It will probably be worse this year.

I don't know how Nelson wins if Obama loses the state by 20 %.

A note -- Nebraska gives its electoral votes by congressional district and in 2008 Obama refused federal matching funds and raised $ 750 million. He spent largely in the Omaha district and won that electoral vote.

McCain took $ 85 million in federal matching funds. This left McCain at a huge financial disadvantage which meant he couldn't spend anything on safe states like Nebraska.

That won't happen again this time. Both Obama and his Republican opponent will have plenty of money to compete everywhere.

I expect Nebraska to be more like 60-40 than the 56-41 it was in 08.

Under that scenario, I don't see how Nelson wins.

PS - same goes for Scott Brown. I don't see how he wins when Obama won it last time 62-36 and will probably win it by that much again. Maybe 60-40 if Romney is the nominee.

[mdmc]

37. better get out my checkbook

lol

[Jack Rabbit]

41. One more time with feeling . . .

If the voters want a Republican, they'll choose a bona fide Republican.

[w4rma]

42. Do.Not.Care. (nt)