(Cross posted at Kos)

The grassroots movement in New Hampshire's 1st Congressional District is rumbling again and lighting may strike twice as the underdog candidacy of Carol Shea-Porter is perched to defeat Republican Jeb Bradley.

The just released UNH poll (PDF) shows a 47 - 42 lead for Bradley.  With a MOE of more than 5%, this race is in the toss-up category and, as the pollster indicated in the narrative:

"Historically, an incumbent with less than 50% of the vote in polls just before an election is likely to lose."

Many folks here are familiar with Paul Hodes great campaign to defeat Charlie Bass in NH's 2nd District and Hodes now holds a 45 - 37 lead over Bass, according to the same poll.

But the surging numbers for Shea-Porter gives the Dems one more seat to target for a WIN!  

DCCC are you calling your time-buyers?

I just saw Sen. Russ Feingold in New Hampshire and wanted to share my thoughts.  First off, I've been skeptical of Feingold for President.  Folks on this site my view me as a moderate and I'm concerned that Feingold would not play well in the General Elections, getting tarred and feathered as a tax and spend peacenik.

My deepest fear is that Feingold is another Michael Dukakis, a man I deeply admired for his intelligence but was politically tone deaf.  Is Feingold that principled liberal policy wonk that doesn't "get it" when it comes to making political decisions needed to win the Presidency?

While only time will answer this question, I'm happy to say that Feingold's stock shot way up tonight in my political handicapping of the '08 Democratic Presidential nomination.

If the far right conservatives at Fox, on Talk Radio, in Congress and the White House were true to their anti-government, "originalist" rhetoric, they would be espousing the following opinions:

The left is missing a great opportunity to create a wedge issue that will turn marginal Republican voters into Democratic votes...and that is the fact that the Republicans are ignoring the needs of our new Veterans.

Let's help Operation Truth, a group of Iraqi and Afghanistan veterans, run a Bush attack ad in the WaPO.

Here is the link:

http://www.optruth.org/main.cfm?actionId=globalShowStaticContent&screenKey=globalDefault

Like a monkey that randomly hits the key board and may eventually type a novel, sometimes crazy predictions become reality.  

McCain wants to be president but will be poison in the Republican Primaries (especially if New Hampshire passes a proposed law banning unenrolled voters from voting in primaries).  Third party challenges have historically been a waste of time and this will probably remain true for now.  But as Joe Trippi has pointed out, the internet has changed the power structure of electoral politics, giving insurgents the ability to bypass both traditional power brokers--party apparatus and the media--and generate the necessary funds to buy media and create their own organization.  Maybe '08 is to early...but it will happen.  

If McCain ran as a third party ticket, is he capable of an internet insurgency?  Well, before Dean discovered the internet, McCain raised $2 million dollars in just a few days during the 2000 primaries.  So he's got the internet mojo going on.  If he makes the announcement after the '06 elections, he has plenty of time to raise $300 million and build an organization (remember, Kerry raised $80 million or so in a couple of months).

And what if McCain teams up with one of several moderate or iconoclastic Democratic senators as a Unity Ticket?  Why would a Democrat do it...well Leiberman (no favorite of mine) has nothing to lose.  McCain/Feingold is already branded and Russ is principled (that is, politically suicidal) enough to do it.  A Nelson from Nebraska or, better yet, Florida will never have a chance at national office except in this role.  

Even one of the often mentioned '08 Dem Jr. tier wannabes may think about joining the ticket.  With Conventional Wisdom pegging Hillary as a shoe-in (but nothing is certain in politics), many see a race between Hillary and Allen or some other hard right winger.  If so, it will be a replay of the crash and burn elections we been having.  A Unity Ticket could play very well in that Hate Environment.  Of course it is a shame that McCain refused to join a Kerry Unity Ticket.  So here is today's crazy prediction...chances are it will be crazier as time goes by...but you never know.

With the latest round of WMD talk, why isn't anyone pointing out that even Bush had doubts about WMDs in Iraq? It must be me...am I reading something into this that does not exist?  Because the entire liberal community can't be missing something that I see in black and white, which exposes the myth that George Bush never doubted there were weapons of destruction in Iraq.

But on page 249 of Bob Woodward's book "Plan of Attack" Bush clearly expresses doubts of WMDs in Iraq.  Only after George Tenet screamed a silly sports metaphor (It's a slam dunk!) was Bush reassured there were WMDs in Iraq.

Peter Wehner memo outlining White House strategy on Social Security is yet another example of why conservatives are out thinking us liberals.  Yes, it is a crass attempt to end Social Security and reduce benefits, but as the left unites in opposition, the underlying ideas on which the attack sits appears to be unscathed.  In the long run, we must discredit their ideas if we ever expect to beat them.

Wehner writes, "As you know, our advocacy for personal accounts is tied to our commitment to an Ownership Society -- one in which more people will own their health care plans and have the confidence of owning a piece of their retirement. Our goal is to provide a path to greater opportunity, more freedom, and more control for individuals over their own lives. That is what the personal account debate is fundamentally about -- and it is clearly the crucial new conservative idea in the history of the Social Security debate"

Sounds like reheated Social Darwinism to me.  Let everyone be at the whim of unfettered capitalism and may the strong survive and the weak...well we gave them a chance.  But as a rhetorical framework, it sounds pretty good.  And thus far the left has done very little to develop a counter-framework that reminds people of the inequalities of the market system and the need for people (in the form of their elected government) to protect against inequalities.  That is why we have the Government guarantee a Social Security safety net for all citizens--to protect them against unstable markets--and then provides incentives for citizens to supplement their retirements with 401ks.

But instead of arguing at this most fundamental level, we're taking a reactionary approach and attacking the retrenchment of a program.  

Sadly Wehner says it best:

"But Democrats and liberals are in a precarious position; they are attempting to block reform to a system that almost every serious-minded person concedes needs it. They are in a position of arguing against modernizing a system created almost four generations ago. Increasingly the Democrat Party is the party of obstruction and opposition. It is the Party of the Past."

From a PR view point this is pretty good stuff and thus far we haven't fought back with anything near as meaty and intellectually interesting as the conservatives.  For example, Bush flatten our progressive tax code in the name of "fairness".  Well how come we don't demand fairness in the Social Security Payroll taxes?  Where someone earning $90,000 or less pays 12% in taxes while someone earning $200,000 pays less than 6% in SS taxes.  Get some number cruncher to work the numbers, but why not advocate LOWERING all SS taxes to say 10%, but extend the payroll tax to all earned income.  This gives everyone earning $90,000 or less a tax cut and will result in a net increase in SS revenues until 2075...all in the name of fairness.

We need new ideas and initiatives, because the conservatives are just our kicking ass in this department.