has a very good chance to be the first Democrat to win the 9th District since 1996 and probably the first progressive candidate to ever win there.

I'm matching all donations to my Judy Baker (MO-09) ActBlue page up to $300 between now and September 30th at 5PM.

Donate here and your contribution will be worth double!

http://www.actblue.com/page/waynemo

"So I think the PUMAs serve a legitimate purpose. They are saying that the primary contest was rigged which is not the way a democracy is supposed to work."

I fail to see the legitimate purpose in the PUMAs spreading this claim since the primary contest was not rigged and since democracy worked as it was intended to work.

There is nothing noble in people who would throw our nominee under a bus just because they wanted another Democratic candidate to win the nomination more.

Obama won my county 60% to 36% and I don't live within 100 miles of either Kansas City or St. Louis.

In fact the counties he won are enough to win a general election. You get votes based on the number of people who vote for you, not on the amount of land mass that votes for you.

Btw, your link to Judy baker's site is her old state rep. campaign site. Her congress campaign site is here. Granted it is just a site to launch her congressional bid and not much more than that now, but it is more than anyone else in either party has for the MO-09 right now.

http://www.judybakerforcongress.com/

I also recently added her to my ActBlue page. Right now Judy Baker and Lyndon Bode are the two Democratic challengers for MO-9 listed on ActBlue. Baker has raised $14,000 from 59 contributors, Bode has raised 400 dollars from 4 contributors on ActBlue. I imagine Gaw will get on ActBlue soon as well.

http://www.actblue.com/page/waynemo

Don't underestimate Judy Baker. She is a serious candidate too. While she is more liberal than the district, the fact that she is married to a popular Baptist minister and was herself a Baptist Sunday School teacher and a health care expert before becoming a state rep. makes her a more attractive candidate than the typical liberal.

She also raised $103,000 from November 28, 2007 when she entered the race against Hulshof to December 31, 2007 when it was assumed that she was running against Kenny Hulshof. No doubt she will raise even more serious cash now that it is an open seat. Anyone who can raise at the clip of 100K per month against a multi-term incumbent has to be considered a serious candiate.

Her fundraising numbers here:

http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary .asp?ID=MO09&Cycle=2008

Baker and Gaw are both serious candidates and one other serious candidate Wes Shoemyer is also being talked about as a possible contender.

The fact that Democrats like Gaw and Shoemyer are considering jumping into a contested primary challenge to fight for the open seat should be a sign that this is a democratic opportunity.

National pundits overrate the Republican lean of MO-9 because the Democrats did not seriously contest the district in 2002, 2004 or 2006 and the only people running were weak candidates who raised no money and had no political experience. This allowed Hulshof to run up bigger margins than were really warranted by the district's demographics.

I think Judy Baker could be the next Nancy Boyda. Keep an eye on her and on this race.

AZ 08--Giffords vs. Huffman

MD 04--Wynn 55% to 45%

MD Sen--Cardin 53% to 47%

Rhode Island Sen--Chaffee 54% to 46% over Laffey

WI 08--Kagen

Rumors here:

Not much Joementum in the absentees and good turnout numbers in some more presumed Lamont-friendly  areas.

http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/

Also they're reporting very high turnouts already approaching 50% in Mansfield which is Lamont country.

I don't know if I buy the prediction that the finalk turnout number there will be 80%, but even if 70% that's amazing!

http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/a rchives/2006/08/supertuesday_a.html

"UPDATE: Epling reports that as of 4:30, the three precincts were now reporting turnout of 38%, 45% and 48%. Asked what the final numbers would be for the whole town, Epling stuck to her prediction of around 80%, noting that they had over 200 absentee ballots in hand."

Lamont 54.2
Lieberman 45.7

I still remember the gleeful celebrations across the blogosphere of Kerry's impending victory over Bush based on exit polls. People were already posting "Why we won" commentaries on Kerry's superior GOTV effort in their blog diaries before a single vote had been counted.

The blogosphere celebrations of Lieberman's demise seem similarly premature.
 

If Lieberman loses the primary by say a 63% to 36% margin (and I don't think he will), I think he drops his independent bid. If he loses say 54% to 46% he obviously stays in.

The Republicans really will get less than 20% of the vote if Schlesinger stays on the ballot. The Republicans made the same mistake in CT that Democrats usually make in a lot of places. They looked at Lieberman, saw a three-term incumbent in a state that leans blue, and failed to put up even a remotely plausible candidate writing the seat off as "unwinnable" and focusing their efforts elsewhere.

Thus the Republicans have a non-serious candidate heading their ticket who lacks the backing of his own party. If he stays on its Lamont vs. Lieberman. Obviously the Republicans will try to push off Schlesinger, but that may require some difficult political and legal maneuvering at this point.  

Right now they have a terrible candidate in Schlesinger who has polled from 9 to 18% and would finish a distant third in a race that would really be Lamont vs. Lieberman with the Republican playing spoiler and hurting Lieberman.

If the Republicans push Schlesinger off the ballot,  Democrats will unite behind whomever wins the primary thus if its Lamont, Lieberman will probably steal votes about equally from both sides while finishing 3rd out of three.

I think whomever wins the Democratic primary is going to win in November.

wouldn't Bush have had to have about a ten point lead three days ago.

And if so, shouldn't we see a huge jump to Kerry tomorrow?

If those one day samples are accurate I'll be disappointed with anything less than Kerry +2 in tomorrow's overall tracking poll.

Kerry went up 3 points in one day (Zogby is a three day tracking poll) in Ohio.

Yesterday it was Bush 47% Kerry 42%

Kerry actually gained 4 points total in Ohio if you count that Bush also dropped 1.

My guess is that means Kerry will lead there in tomorrow's tracking poll.

Kerry gained in Florida as well, but lost in Colorado which seemed high for Kerry to begin with.

For Democrats its 76.9 Kerry, 18.4 Bush (not 28.4 Bush).

Also look at Kerry's 20 plus point (?!) advantage among independents in Florida.

Something is odd there..