Last Thursday afternoon, Jennifer Lawless held a press conference outside Representative James Langevin's campaign office to attack his support for the war in Iraq and highlight her own plan for withdrawal.  Vietnam Veteran, Steve Rabson expressed his disappointment in Langevin and introduced Lawless.

The Langevin campaign, however, decided to drown out Lawless' voice.  They tried to make as much noise as possible, running lawn mowers, air blowers, and a large dump truck.  They even went so far as to rev the truck's engine and repeatedly drive it back and forth in the small parking lot in-between the press conference and Langevin's office.  Besides the fact that this created a ridiculous amount of pollution, these antics did nothing to counter or silence Lawless' powerful message.

Even with all the background noise, Lawless thrived, screaming over the commotion with poise and determination.  What's worse, though, than making all the noise while Lawless was speaking, was doing so over the veteran's speech.  Rabson, who had prepared his remarks and courageously spoke out against the war, deserved more from an incumbent Congressman than a dump truck and lawn mowers.  He deserved respect.

There's more...

Accountability and Iraq is our frame.  We think it does really well in districts around the nation.  But it's not the only winning framework to use, the only narrative that works.  Check out this stunningly good ad from Jennifer Lawless, primary challenger to Jim Langevin in Rhode Island's 2nd district. The ad is by Laguens, Hamburger, Kully & Klose (LHKK).

While the ad doesn't use the accountability framework and doesn't touch on Iraq, there are some clear pieces you'll recognize.  She draws an incredibly strong contrast.  She picks a fight.  And she doesn't mince words on an incredibly sensitive subject.  I would add that Langevin voted against the war, so the Iraq issue isn't as potent here.  

I think this is great stuff.  What do you think?

There's more...

Jennifer Lawless, who is challenging anti-choice Rep. Jim Langevin, in the Democratic primary in Rhode Island's 2nd District, released her first ad - "Knock" - today.  It can be seen here:

bw

It is a very upbeat ad and I think it could be effective.  While her first ad, it is less of a biographical piece but tries to draw stark contrasts to her opponent.  While not heavy on policy positions or anything, she does mention that, unlike her opponent, she wants out of Iraq now, supports women's reproductive rights, and will fight back against the Republicans.  She also labels herself as "the real Democrat" - even more important for her since Lamont beat Lieberman (Lawless created a new site www.LangevinEqualsLieberman.com).  Unlike other ads that have been featured on MyDD, Lawless takes Iraq head on and proudly touts being a progressive Democrat.

There's more...

Firedoglake is doing an adwatch on netroots candidate John Courage.  Lojo has done one on Phil Angelides (media consultant Phil Carrick) and Bob Fertik has done an adwatch on his own ImpeachPAC ad.  That's neat, an organization putting up their own ad.

Ok, so here's the Courage ad, produced as an in-kind contribution by Margie Becker and Mike Nicholson".

What do you think, keeping the accountability memo in mind?

My initial thoughts are that the ad packs much more punch than the Darcy Burner ad.  Courage puts up Iraq as a core theme, and focuses on the lack of veterans care rather than putting the poor wartime leadership front and center.  The narrative flow is good, and there's new information in the ad.  

The one downside is that Courage blames 'politicians in Washington' instead of 'Republicans in Washington', and blames 'Congress' instead of 'Republican-led Congress'.  Remember, part of the data from the CA-50 accountability memo is that even 40% of Republican base voters believe that Democrats will hold Bush accountable, and in Courage's district (which just had a bunch of GOP voters added), those are the voters he needs.

Courage's ad is missing simple word, but a key one.  If candidates won't name names, voters won't trust them, just as they did not trust Busby's credibility when she said she wanted to put a strong ethics package through Congress.

What do you think?

And as always, if you want to do your own adwatch, here are instructions.

There's more...

The 'I'm the next Ned Lamont' refrain is becoming quite common among progressive primary challengers.  

So far, I've heard it from Donna Edwards, who's running against right-wing reactionary Congressman Al Wynn in MD-04, Jennifer Lawless, who's taking on conservative Jim Langevin in Rhode Island, and John Bonifaz, who's gunning for Secretary of State of Massachusetts.  All three of these candidates are taking on entrenched machine players, and trying to pull the Democratic Party closer to primary voters.

I'm particularly intrigued by Donna Edwards, who has a really powerful claim to legitimacy in her attack on Wynn.  What she says about Wynn is absolutely true.

"Albert Wynn is Maryland's Joe Lieberman."

"Wynn has taken a go-along-to-get-along approach to the Republican legislative agenda. Wynn has voted with Republicans on the Iraq War authorization, the Bush-Cheney Energy Bill, the Bankruptcy Reform Bill, and the Net Neutrality Bill. It's time for Mr. Wynn to answer for his record. Even Joe Lieberman didn't vote to repeal the Estate Tax for the wealthiest Americans."

Now, aside from his incredibly poor legislative record, is Wynn out of touch with his constituents?  That's the question, and it's a weird district so that's tough to figure out.  

If you have insight, please chime in.  And if you hear of any other candidates calling themselves the 'next Ned Lamont', put that in the comment thread as well.

Update: I'm not looking for nominations, I'm looking for non-Presidential candidates who have explicitly compared themselves to Ned Lamont or issued statements on Lamont.

There's more...