Mon 16 Jul 2007
All the major FEC Q2 numbers are in and Congresswoman Jean Schmidt is in fourth place with $115,965 in net receipts and $85,169 cash on hand. Challenger Phil Heimlich has $166,384 in net receipts and $141,069 cash on hand. (Click the $$$ button on the right to get the raw numbers)
Both Republicans are lagging behind their Democratic challengers, matching a national trend. Not something I would have expected in the heart of Bush country.
This has all the makings of a cascade failure for the grand ol’ party. What a fitting end that would be to the House the Rove built.
23 Responses to “Schmidt 4th in Fundraising”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
July 16th, 2007 at 8:51 am
Am I detecting…glee between the lines?
July 16th, 2007 at 9:06 am
Well…
Personally, I’ve always felt that fundraising was overemphasized by insiders. I’m looking to the energy that candidates are bringing to the fight. In that department it’s way to early to tell. Vic is a veteran by now, but misses a lot of swings, and Black is an idealistic newbie… we all know what the 2nd does to those tasty critters
Still, it’s nice to see that the tide is turning squarly away from the Republicans. If it dies here, stick a fork in it.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:07 am
(BTW, the first bellwether of things to come was the fact that Black was running as a Democrat at all)
July 16th, 2007 at 9:13 am
Never underestimate the Schmidt, especially when its got its back against the wall.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:18 am
No under the radar chances in this race, with all these blog eyes.
July 16th, 2007 at 10:08 am
Don’t kid yourselves, Black is the republican candidate running as a Democrat so they can hold onto the seat, like the republican strategy in CT whith Lieberman. Very smart move on their part. I overheard some regulars in the WCDP and they don’t trust him and they don’t he’s that bright because he was a registered republican before the Spring primary (has he switch party affiliation yet?). Why didn’t he change party affiliation in 04 and 06? How bad did it have to get before he was smart enough to realize that the republicans were ruining the country? Who is Black going to go to after he has maxed out the Hamilton Co. crowd? He’ll have to go the republicans in the state and nationally for money. Then he’ll dance with the ones that
brung ‘im.
In a perfect world according to the goddess, there would be no challenger this time so that Wulsin could devote all her resources to taking the seat after the republican bloodbath of a primary, mean vs. meaner.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:52 pm
This ridiculous, gratuitous attack on Steve Black (in the above comment) is like the Bush foreign policy - arrogant, ignorant, and just plain wrong.
Steve has a progressive Democratic agenda. He is strongly pro-economic fairness . He believes the little guy is getting screwed and he is a big supporter of Sherrod Brown’s thinking on fair trade. He supports strong action to end the war in Iraq. He supports universal health care. He is pro-choice.
You should wait and hear him lay out the thinking about his conversion from the Republican party. I have heard him - it is real, it is honest, and it is based in deep commitment. I have heard him get right in the face of Republican demagogues in our district and tell them why they are wrong. He is like a reformed smoker preaching about the evils of smoking - passionate and convincing.
Many smart Democrats don’t believe Vic Wulsin cannot win the general election in a Presidential Campaign year. It will be much more difficult for her with a normal turnout in this heavily Republican district.
Steve Black can win and hold this district for Democrats (even against a stronger Republican than the right wing nut-case Jean Schmidt). Steve is respected and supported even by people who disagree with him because of this brains, his courage, and his track record of public service.
Steve went to law school with Tom Allen, a progressive Democratic Congressman from Maine who is running for the Senate against Susan Collins (she is supported by Lieberman). Email Congressman Allen to ask him what he thinks about Steve. You might be surprised.
Mary Huttlinger was Vic Wulsin’s campaign manager in 2006. Now she not only supports Steve - she manages his campaign. Email her to ask her why she thinks Steve is a better Democratic candidate
Please talk to Tom Allen, Mary Huttlinger, or email Steve himself before turning your guns on someone who has the brains and guts to fight for Democratic principles.
Lets save the cheap shots for Jean Schmidt. Steve Black is an exceptionally strong Democratic candidate who is committed to public service - he deserves better.
Murphy West
OH-02 Democrat
July 16th, 2007 at 7:06 pm
Dearest Murphy:
What makes you think I haven’t heard Steve (BTW, I did hear him speak in public and he’s not ready for prime time) and that I haven’t met Mary in the previous campaign? Pray tell, what does a fellow classmate have to do with one’s party affiliation or stand on issues? Exactly what “smart” Democrats don’t believe Wulsin can win? The same “smart” ones who have not won a seat in SW Ohio in eons? But let’s take time to reinvent the wheel when we have a proven candidate for the 2nd and need good fundraising candidates for state senate in the 7th and state representative in the 35th. But of course, those seats are not important enough, huh? Ask Strickland how easy it is to get his agenda passed without the assembly.
July 16th, 2007 at 8:04 pm
If you know about Steve’s views, then why not point out where you diasagree and why, instead of launching into defamatory rants. Do you think we should stay the course in Iraq? Do you oppose universal health care? Are you against women’s reproductive rights? What specifically do you disagree with Steve abaout?
The point about Tom Allen is that he has known Steve for a long time. He knows Steves views and thinks he is a strong Democratic candidate.
Vic lost a primary to Paul Hackett. She lost the general election to a terrible candidate in a year with low Republican turnout. According to your logic about “proven candidates”, I assume you support John Kerry in the 2008 election.
Please tell me specifically why Vic is a “proven candidate” and not a “two time loser”.
If you think the State positions are so important, why don’t you encourage Vic to run for the 35th.
You are encouraging Democrats to “stay the course” in OH-02. We know how well that strategy works.
July 16th, 2007 at 8:58 pm
Wulsin supports reproductive rights, redeploying the troops from Iraq, universal health care so what make Steve a superior candidate? I don’t disagree with his views if these are the ones he holds. I don’t think he can win.
I wish Hackett would run again for the 2nd instead of the senate, and then Wulsin could have run for the 35th or the 7th. But that’s not what happened. Wulsin won the Democratic primary and came even closer than Hackett (I hope Paul runs for office again) to winning in 06. It is very rare to win the first time out and Wulsin came within a hair in a district that went overwhelmingly for Bush. We need to have something like a farm team for candidates. Ideally, newbies shouldn’t be running for federal offices. They should start out locally and then run for state offices. We have a proven candidate for the 2nd and Steve should really run for a state office. The idea that one is too good for local or state office is one we have to dispel. We didn’t have local or state office holders to run for Congress. We need to build the candidate pool. Running for a national office without experience is “stay the course” for Democrats in SW Ohio.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:11 pm
I think this is healthy.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:38 pm
Domestic Goddess…
Progress!You agree with Steve on the issues.
Your concern is that Steve is a new candidate and Vic is a “proven” candidate.
You and I just see the 2006 election differently. Vic ran against an incredibly weak Republican in an election where there were no strong Republican candidates to bring their voters out. Do you think Republicans were rushing to to polls to vote for Schmidt, DeWine, or Blackwell. My view is that if Vic cannont win when conditions are perfect for a Democratic candidate…then she can’t win.
For example if Hillary is our nominee for 2008, I believe that Republicans will come to the polls in droves no matter who the Republican Presidential candidate is. And Vic will get swamped.
You see Vic as a proven candidate…I see her as a someone who couldn’t win when conditions were perfect.
Wouldn’t the same logic you use to support Vic lead you to support John Kerry in 2008? After all, in your words, he’s a “proven candidate”. I’m sorry, but in my mind the only thing that’s proven is that Kerry lost a race he should have one. I see it the same with Vic.
Remember the Republicans had great success with Rob Portmann…a first time candidate. While I disagree strongly with his politics, he was very electable in our district.
By the way, Steve works at the same law firm as Rob Portman did. Also, Susan Dlott (Federal Judge appointed by Bill Clinton and also wife of Stan Chesley) worked there. My only point in bringing this up is that a lot of “newbies” have come out of the same background as Steve and gone on to great political achievement.
Steve Black is the Democrat version of Rob Portman. And I mean DEMOCRAT - anti-war, pro economic fairness, pro universal health care, pro-choice, etc. And he can win the general election, and stay elected, even when the Republicans throw up a stronger candidate that Schmidt or Heimlich.
Murphy West
Oh-02
A Voice Crying in the Wilderness
July 16th, 2007 at 11:29 pm
Evil Editor - but what does Mr. Editor think?
Dear Murphy - if you tell us where you are in the wilderness, we’ll get you a box of tissues and a shoulder on which to cry. Hopefully, that will dry your tears.
Interesting that you compare Steve to Portman, a republican. And my point was…..
July 17th, 2007 at 5:41 am
Goddess…
Read and think carefully.
You have already said that you agree with Steve Black on the issues. That means you agree that his political views are Democratic. Please stop taking us in circles on this.
The point I made about Portman is that he was a first time candidate who ran, won and held on to the seat. You said this couldn’t happen. You were wrong. You argued that a two time loser had a better shot.
I said Steve Black is the Democratic version of Portman in his ability to win..NOT ideology. I say Vic Wulsin is the Democratic version of Republican Harold Stassen - a perennial candidate who can’t win.
And I am still waiting to hear “what your point was….” I can’t see that you have a point, except that you prefer Vic Wulsin. Great…just please stop the hysterical, defamatory rants about Steve Black.
By the way, the “crying’ in the above quote doesn’t refer to crying with tears. It it a bibilical and literary reference to someone sounding a warning that others are not listening to. Edward Abbey, the famous naturalist and environmentalist, used it as the title of one of this books.
July 17th, 2007 at 6:29 am
Hysterical, huh? Do you call men who disagree with you hysterical? I could start name calling but that would be rude and not very constructive. The goddess is tiring of your misogynistic tirade. You really need to calm down to have a civil discussion. I simply disagree with you. I suppose by your standards, Hackett should never run again because he is a loser too. To reiterate, candidates usually have to run 2 to 3 times to win. It’s about gaining campaign experience and name recognition. Steve will have an extremely difficult time getting labor support. You may not think that is important, but it is becoming very important for Democrats. They provide a lot of volunteers. They do not trust a republican and maybe Steve has seen the light but he has been a very long time republican.
I got the quote. I was just playing with language. But if it makes you feel better to belittle me go right ahead. I will be very literal from now so there is no misunderstanding.
July 17th, 2007 at 6:47 am
I think that neither side puts themselves in a good light by being so personal, but that it’s great for my traffic
Black is going to be under a lot of scrutiny, and it will be interesting to see how things play out.
The main thing that I’d like to hear both candidates talk about concerns Piketon. Everyone likes to fudge things on that hot potato.
Black specializes in environmental law. Has he had had dealings with the Piketon cleanup site through his law firm? Where does he stand in terms of using the Piketon site to recycle or temporarily store waste?
July 17th, 2007 at 7:03 am
Domestic Goddess…
First of all, I did not call you hysterical..I only applied that adjective to your comments in post #6. Read your post again, which started this whole unfortunate discourse.
It was probably a poor choice of words, but I don’t like it when Democrats make unsubstantiated,speculative attacks on good candidates in their own party who are trying to do the right thing. Thats how I viewed your post. I apologize for any offense caused by my poor choice of words.
By the way, Murphy is a nickname given to me in the 90’s because of certain similarities to a TV character who fought a crazy Republican VP. You may be making a bad assumption about my gender.
And also, I really loved Paul Hackett as a candidate 4 years ago. But I think too much has happened in the interim for him to run and win in this election. Thats just my opinion.
Murphy West
OH-02 Democrat
“You Say Potatoe, I Say Potato”
July 17th, 2007 at 7:30 am
Well, if the Democrats manage to tear each other to ribbons, we all know who the beneficary of that will be.
I at least agree with Domestic Goddess about one thing: it would be good to calm down and reintroduce civility into this debate. Unfortunately, however, DG is the one who has tried again and again to turn it into a shouting match. For example: what Murphy West said was not, by any stretch of the imagination, a “misogynistic tirade.” That’s just mudslinging, and I regret to say, mudslinging and shouting seems to be DG’s specialty. (We’ve seen so much of that in politics, and just look at where it’s gotten us.) So I don’t blame MW for not responding to that remark. It isn’t worthy of a response.
Whenever I see nasty and outrageously untrue personal attacks, such as those leveled by DG against Steve Black and MW, I have to wonder why, and the answer is not hard to figure out. Dishonesty and mudslinging are the favored debating tactics of politicians who want to mislead the electorate. I think people have had enough of that.
Looks to me, from DG’s tone, that Steve Black has already shown himself to be a formidable candidate, and Vic and her supporters are feeling very threatened. Rightly so. But if all Vic’s supporters have to offer to counter Steve Black’s candidacy is nastiness and low blows–and that is really all that DG has contributed to this discussion–I would have to conclude that Vic is in deep trouble and knows it. There is now a Dempocratic candidate that is electable in the 2nd District, and as Vic has repeatedly demonstrated, she is not it.
Steve Black is.
July 17th, 2007 at 9:53 am
Shouting would be in all caps in these forums. What is unsubstantiated? He wasn’t a registered republican? That is not an attack (although in some circles I guess it could be taken that way). Look at the last cycle and how they attacked Democratic candidates who were lawyers. Those were attack ads.
I said it is rare that a first time candidate wins. Portman ran in very republican district and had tremendous support from his party’s machine. It’s a huge uphill battle for a Democrat in SW Ohio. That’s what makes Wulsin’s percentage in the last election so very impressive. And it does not help that ODP and the DCCC did not think the 2nd was winnable and so came in very late with support when they saw the poll numbers. Democrats need to take a lesson from the GOP and treat every seat up and down as winnable and worthy of support.
July 17th, 2007 at 12:19 pm
I’LL SHOUT!
It’s really pathetic when DG can’t see beyond the good of the party and realize that all anyone cares about and SHOULD CARE about is WHO as a Dem can win this seat.
Vic didn’t win in a perfect setting for Dems in 2006 and won’t be able to in more hostile years like 2008.
I don’t like to say Vic almost won -I’d rather say - Jean almost lost. Actual WINNING is the only thing that counts in the end.
Do you think people will forget Vic and gay marriage?
Do you think people will forget Vic wants to place extra taxes on our gas?
Do you think people will forget Vic doesn’t have a message or plan outside of health care?
Do you think people will wonder if Vic SHOULD win will she revert to her 2005 liberal antics causing us to relose the seat in 2010?
Do you think people will FORGET the only reason she boosted fundraising at the end of 2006 was because of OUTSIDE SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS? People in southern OH don’t like outsiders telling them what to do.
A lot of people are invested in this race to take back the seat from Republicans and KEEP IT!
IT IS ALSO PATHETIC that a so-called democrat - DG - in unwilling to recognize Steve Black for what he is a man with ideals that reflect the demoratic party, real leadership experience in Southern Ohio, a proven record of bipartisan leadership, experience dealing with tough issues, and respect FROM BOTH PARTIES - THAT MY FRIEND WILL WIN AND KEEP THIS SEAT WITH A “D” AFTER HIS NAME.
This seat can’t be won with just deomcratic votes IT WILL TAKE DEMOCRATIC, INDEPENDENT AND REPUBLICAN VOTES TO WIN - and Vic couldn’t do it — I believe Steve Black can — his fundraising shows he has the support of both democratic and republican activists — maybe like you should be DG — they are willing to put aside finger pointing, name calling, and party labels and look at the individual who can get the job done for families in SOuthern Ohio. Because Jean Schmidt sure as hell isn’t doing it.
I am further surprised that you are so wound up over Black’s voting history - Black isn’t “registered” as anything - FYI you don’t register to vote with a party in OHIO your party affiliation is designated by primary votes. SO MAYBE he has Voted for Dems in the past not just in primaries. WE DON’T KNOW!!!
But MOST IMPORTANT — as democrats we are a party of INCLUSIVENESS, DIVERSITY, RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCES - YOUR HOSTILITY AND EXCLUSIVITY AGAINST someone with differing views REFLECTS NONE OF THAT!
If we were smart — we would look at the reality of the situation and support the candidate who can win and keep this seat with a D after their name. A just for the record there ARE LOTS OF Members of COngress who have won and are still in Congress after a FIRST TIME run — do a little research.
This is really frustrating because “IF” DG’s type of thinking and reasoning reflect how most dems in SO OH think then it is a clear reason why Dems in OH-02 can’t and won’t ever win this seat.
July 17th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
You go right ahead and shout CrazeDem! As if using all caps to make a point is the same thing as saying “stupid, stupid, stupid” and deliberately twisting and misinterpreting MW’s remarks. Is that the kind of behavior that we can expect from Vic in the upcoming campaign? I think the voters deserve a whole lot better discussion of the issues than one that degenerates immediately into name calling and dishonesty.
Anyway, I couldn’t agree more. The point is to WIN THE SEAT FOR THE DEMOCRATS. The point is not which Democrat fulfills one person’s litmus test of what a “real” Democrat is. And I do not deny for an instant that Steve Black is not nearly as far to the left as Vic Wulsin — for heaven’s sake, almost no one is to the left of her. I think Steve Black’s middle-of-the-road Democrat approach is much more likely to appeal to a broad spectrum of voters than Vic’s far left rhetoric. And you’re right about another thing, too: does anyone seriously believe that Vic’s support of gay marriage will be forgotten by Mean Jean in the campaign? Vic has taken a lot of positions that are not in sync with the thinking of the voters of the 2nd District. And you can’t unring those bells. Mean Jean will ring them again and again…
And just because Mean Jean is wildly and deservedly unpopular does not mean that she can’t win. She is an incumbent. Incumbents have a built-in advantage. And Mean Jean certainly can and will win if the Democrats shoot themselves in the foot by getting into a big fight over who is more Democrat than thou. Please. Let’s not hand the election to Mean Jean anymore. Let’s get behind the Democrat who can appeal to a broad spectrum of voters and can UNQUESTIONABLY beat her: Steve Black.
July 17th, 2007 at 5:32 pm
Well I just hope the man gets a decent suit and gets some public speaking lessons.
No amount of cash can change the effect of first impressions or the big mountain of obstacles Stevie’s got to overcome.
Who the heck are all these Steve Black cheerleaders….You didnt know who the man was last year and the year before.
and just who has he beat before that makes you so sure he can beat jeanie? Unquestionable???..that is reaching a tad bit babe.
Wulsin aint my favorite but Black has not come close to showing us he is should be Plan B…. yet.
July 18th, 2007 at 1:24 pm
BTW, I am not part of the Wulsin campaign, just a supporter. I have no idea how her campaign will be run. If the election comes down to gay marriage, God help us all. With the war in Iraq, the economy and lack of medical insurance, the republicans can try to beat the dead horse of GGG but I think the curtain is pulled way back on that one. No one is buying anything the republicans have to say any more. Look at the polls.
Running as republican lite or as DLC hasn’t worked. A Democrat should be progressive and liberal, otherwise just vote republican and we all know how well that’s worked for us. Progressive policies have been very good for the country, SSI, GI bill, Medicare, Civil Rights, etc. I will shout about that.