NY-26: Reynolds Leaves (Pricey) Vacant Seat

maybe a little research is in order (0.00 / 0)

This mostly seems like lazy reporting. It's an open seat that each party has reason to feel they can win. It could be you'll need to be a millionaire to win the seat, but it seems more likely that each party will pour in the money to be competitive.

How much has been spent on races in this district in past years? Davis being a millionaire didn't put him over the top in '06. And how much was spent on the CD24 race in '06? Arcuri's not a millionaire, as far as I know, and he won.

Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/SteveinNYC

---

by: SteveinNYC @ Sun Mar 30, 2008 at 20:25:25 PM UTC

I Don't Want This (0.00 / 0)

to be seen as a criticism in any way of the candidacy of Jon Powers, but he may want to go back and read up on the intentions of the Founding Fathers.  One of the points most historians actually agre upon is that those Founding Fathers fully expected that members of the legislature would be drawn from the landed gentry or the merchant classes, not the mass of the people.  This basically remained true long after the first major "populist" movement in the country, the rise of Jacksonian democracy.

Of course, this never meant that there was any implicit approval of the idea of buying one's way into the House (though to a very large degree, that is how many Senators paved their way to that chamber prior to the Seventeenth Amendment).

One of the most common arguments put forth in favor of wealthy candidate who can self-finance is that they cannot be bought through bribes or promises of big donations.  The problem is not with wealthy candidates themselves, per se, but with the hideously expensive cost of running for office and of the corrupting influence money plays in that sense.

---

by: The Maven @ Sun Mar 30, 2008 at 21:57:38 PM UTC

I think the Federalists intended this (0.00 / 0)

for the most part (though not even universally among that group), but the Anti-Federalists would have disagreed.

Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/SteveinNYC

---

by: SteveinNYC @ Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 00:24:15 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Poor article (4.00 / 1)

I found this Buffalo News article to be very disappointing.  The author seems to think that the race is about who can afford to spend the most.  He ignores factors like organization, campaigning, grassroots efforts, etc.  He writes that, "The eight [millionaire candidates]... are now dominating a race for a seat that pays $169,300 per year..."  Excuse me, but as an observer of this race I have seen only one candidate, the non-millionaire Jon Powers, who can in any sense claim to be "dominating" the race.  He has won the endorsement of five of the seven Democratic Committees in the district, winning every county endorsement that has been made so far.  He has built up a strong grassroots organization, and has raised more money than any other candidate.

I think that the article's author, Bob McCarthy, has missed, or chosen to ignore, the big story of 2008: that due to the internet, campaign funding has changed.  Campaigns no longer need to rely on big donors.  This is shown by the Democratic primary.  Clinton had most of the big donors lined up.  However, Obama has been able to raise vastly more than her, by relying on many small donations raised through the internet.  At this point Clinton's campaign can't pay it's bills, while Obama's has millions available.  Also due to the internet, congressional races have become national races; a candidate who can capture the imagination of people online can raise money throughout the nation (as Bill Foster in Illinois did, for example).  Powers looks like he has managed to do that, being written about enthusiastically on many of the largest blogs.
(also posted in RochesterTurning)

---

by: DanK @ Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 01:51:17 AM UTC

*Waves hands in Air* (0.00 / 0)

Didn't I say only Cash will allow Jon Powers to be taken seriously? Haven't I said that like 15 times?

You should see the accompanying graphic - individual pics of all 5 Republicans as well as Davis, Kryzan and Hochul, each with their own caption. No sign of Powers.

"The eight...are now dominating [the] race" because Powers has no money. Dominating = TV coverage in Buffalo and Rochester and mentions in the Roc.D&C and the Bflo News.

350K in this congressional race is like having a single scoop of Ice Cream in a waffle cone.

Dear Jon Powers,

Raise money, or Lose.

Big.

Love
Steve.

---

by: Stephen Nazwisko @ Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 13:08:59 PM UTC

You're wrong Stephen... (0.00 / 0)

First off, how many of those eight are declared candidates? To my knowledge, only Kryzan is.

Plus, I think the sentiment here is right. Money doesn't buy elections. I think you need to understand that point first and foremost. Yes, Davis has $3 million ready. But He spent a little over that in 2006 and Reynolds still raised over $5 million. You don't have Reynolds in this race and Davis and his money has been proven to be a non-factor in two elections thus far. It might make him competitive, but it won't make him a winner.

All of these people can dangle their money. I'm glad they have great jobs or they had great business ideas that turned out to be very profitable for them. But that doesn't make them a qualified candidate for public office. If we went solely on money, then we should be reaching out to Buffett, Gates and the Walton family to run our country.

Really, consider the point you're trying to drive home Stephen. You're essentially arguing that this seat should go to the highest bidder. This isn't an auction. Jack Davis has proven you wrong twice already. Millionaires, for the most part, aren't successful. People actually vote for the best candidate who will represent them on all the issues.  

---

by: robert.harding @ Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 13:58:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Money less important in primary (4.00 / 1)

A follow-up to my earlier post: I of course agree with Robert.  We also need to differentiate between the primary and the general election.  I suspect that for the congressional primary, turnout will be low, and will be heavily weighted to people politically active.  For this group decisions will be based less on TV commercials.  They will be more aware than the general public is about what a jerk Davis is, and will be more influenced by a grassroots type of campaign of the sort that Powers is doing. It is hard for money to buy grassroots enthusiasm.   These voters will be looking for a candidate whose views line up with their own, which will generally be liberal Democratic type views.  Davis of course doesn't fit that category.  Whether any other Democrats will, remains to be seen.  Kryzan does, but so far her campaign has been way behind Powers' in what she has done.

The general election is another story, there cash is essential.  But since there are relatively few congressional races that are competitive, and this is one of them, there will be big bucks coming in for whoever the Democratic nominee is.  Money from the DCCC, big donors (mostly from out of the district) and, this year more than ever before, from national internet fundraising.

Dan

---

by: DanK @ Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 15:03:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

4 things (0.00 / 0)

1) Turnout will not be that low for this years primary (compared to other primaries); it will be high in Erie County because the District Attorney's race is going to be a huge draw (really), and the 61st SD and 26th CD are going to be TV ad level races as well. People will show up.

2) Powers needs to spend 1 Million + to beat Davis and Hochul. They are going to spend that, he needs to keep up.

3) Davis lost because he was a bad candidate, not because he spent too much money.

4) Jon Powers isn't running against Jack Davis. Davis is irrelevant because he's a loser. He's running against Kathy Hochul.

5 months ago, Hochul carried the Erie County portion of NY26 62-38 in her first run for County Clerk. Republicans outnumber Democrats in that area, and her opponent was well funded and airing a barrage of TV ads.

---

by: Stephen Nazwisko @ Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 17:07:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Uhh... (0.00 / 0)

Didn't you debunk point number two with point number four?

2) Powers needs to spend 1 Million + to beat Davis and Hochul. They are going to spend that, he needs to keep up.

And then...

4) Jon Powers isn't running against Jack Davis. Davis is irrelevant because he's a loser. He's running against Kathy Hochul.

Which is it? First you tell us that he needs $1 million to beat Davis and Hochul. Then you tell us he isn't running against Davis.

Also, Hochul's county clerk race is meaningless in this race. Even if she carries Erie County, the other six counties will matter. So your focus on the Erie County portion of this is overlooking the whole district which, to my knowledge, Hochul (and Davis) hasn't really appealed to.

As for your third point, no one ever said he lost because he spent too much money. But the proof is in the pudding. He spent a ton of money and didn't win.

And when did Kathy Hochul declare her candidacy again? (Sarcasm)

---

by: robert.harding @ Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 17:29:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Highest bidder? (0.00 / 0)

no, i'm not saying it SHOULD, I'm saying it WILL.

Also, Davis didn't prove me wrong, he was outspent twice and lost twice.

---

by: Stephen Nazwisko @ Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 17:11:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Doesn't sound like that to me... (0.00 / 0)

You seem to be saying that it should. And there is no evidence that it will. Hochul is relatively unknown outside of Erie County. Davis proved in 2004 and 2006 that money won't win this district. What haven't you learned?  

---

by: robert.harding @ Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 17:30:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

response. (0.00 / 0)

This is the final thing I'll say on all of this because I've said it all before in the 5 or so threads we've bantered on this.

Davis lost because he's a bad candidate, not because he spent too much money. He didn't even air TV ads in Rochester, which covers part or all of 4 of the district's 7 counties. If anything, he would have been better off spending more money, or at least spending it smarter. He can spend all the money he wants this year, he'll lose the primary because no one wants him anymore, just like W couldn't win reelection with a billion dollars to spend. It's a special situation.

I would never say that money should dictate candidates. I hate that thinking, and there are cases where it screws up candidates. But when was the last time you saw a candidate win any district with more than 75,000 people after being badly outspent? This is our system, and good people hate it, You hate it, I hate it, but it is what's in place. If you can find a way to win largescale elections while being badly outspent, please, let me know. But Jon Powers can not possibly knock on enough doors and attend enough parties to win this race without a massive mail and TV campaign; the district is too big.

Powers needs to raise a truckload of money or he is going to be badly outspent. It's not about being personally wealthy, it's about having a good fundraising base and a lot of funds available.

Powers has a good fundraising base, but he has very little cash on hand. He needs to call in his big supporters to do big dollar fundraisers for him, and then call up rich people and ask for money with no strings attached (you would be shocked how well that works). He's not doing either, I know, I asked him when he met out committee a few weeks ago.

Unless Powers finds a million bucks to spend - on the primary - Hochul will be the Democratic nominee (if she runs). End of story. She's a woman, she plays well in Erie County, and while only 30% of the General Election electorate is in Erie County, 50-60% of the Democratic Primary electorate lives in Erie County (if not more). People in Erie County a) are way more likely to be Democrats in the first place, b) are use to voting in primaries, and c) will be motivated to turnout by the other races in the area. Then she'll win a huge chunk of the women voters in the other 6 counties, and with her TV ads, some men as well.

I predict Kathy Hochul will be the Democratic Nominee if she runs. I'll stop posting about about it, because it's wearing thin; let it play out, and we can discuss the role of money and gender in this race after the fact.

---

by: Stephen Nazwisko @ Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 18:06:21 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sorry... (0.00 / 0)

But it wouldn't be "end of story" if Hochul runs. She might be appealing to those from Erie County, but again, she's fairly unknown in other parts of the district. Her money might be great to you, but people want to see her in the flesh. That will matter. After all, don't you think Jack Davis would have had a bigger impact if he pounded the pavement? I think so.

You keep repeating that you hate thinking that money would impact a race, but here you endorsing that same theory. And again, Kryzan should be appealing to women voters in this district as well but she isn't.

To my knowledge, Hochul hasn't reached out to other counties to explore her possibilities. She would have to do that. If she doesn't, she will crash and burn with Jack Davis. Erie County alone won't win it for her.

---

by: robert.harding @ Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 20:27:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]