Another Foolish Project (Brought to Us by the Kochs)

We do our best to stay on top of everything. But jeez, how on earth did we miss this? Jon Ralston just took a trip to our archives!

So what did he find? Just this gem from October 2012 on the Koch backed AFP jumping into certain Nevada Legislature races.

Perhaps the SD 4 incident was just a "test run" meant to prepare AFP for what they're doing now. The doorhanger we found earlier this month attacked President Obama and Shelley Berkley on one side, then attacked John Oceguera and Joyce Woodhouse (the Democratic nominee for SD 5) on the other side. And now, AFP mailers are being caught attacking Justin Jones (the Democratic nominee in SD 9) and Sheila Leslie (the Democratic nominee in SD 15). It just looks too funny that, all of a sudden, AFP is playing in the very State Senate seats that Republicans must win in order to take control of the Nevada Senate. And we're still supposed to believe that AFP is some sort of "nonpartisan, educational, charitable foundation"? Yeah, right.

It's now looking quite clear as to what AFP Nevada is aiming to do. And no, it doesn't involve "charity" or "education". Rather, AFP is trying to tip several competitive federal and state level races into Republican hands. Yet in failing to file the appropriate paperwork as a political action committee (PAC) and disclose its donors, AFP may actually be violating state election law while trying to elect lawmakers! Surely, we can't be the only ones seeing the irony here?

In July 2012, AFP waded into a Democratic State Senate primary in North Las Vegas. For some reason, AFP attacked Kelvin Atkinson in a district where Republicans weren't even targeting. That really had us scratching our heads.

But when AFP sent a tour bus to Shelley Berkley's Congressional office, their actions started to make more sense (even if they still looked quite silly). It then tried to top that grandiose gesture with cheap gas. And for the grand finale of its 2012 campaign, it staged a "freedom concert" and dropped the wrong campaign literature in the wrong areas.

Oh, and did we mention AFP considers itself an "educational charity"? How on earth is any of this "educational" or "charitable"?

So why are we now talking about AFP? Take a look at how AFP operatives are boasting about themselves to Beltway media. They're essentially declaring their plan to defeat Senator Harry Reid (D) in 2016.

There's just a little problem with AFP's latest grandiose plan: It looks more like a delusion of grandeur. Ralston just aired out all of AFP Nevada's dirty laundry. And even though AFP just moved its Nevada headquarters to a new location, it took all its old dirty laundry with it. And to make matters even worse for the Koch-topus' loudest and longest reaching tentacle, AFP's chief just left the building.

Of course, AFP is still overflowing in Koch money. It just came off an outrageous Cliven Bundy love-fest. And it's preparing to make waves again in 2016.

But just because one makes waves doesn't mean those waves are beneficial. Just because one is loud and gregarious doesn't mean one is making friends and allies. Just because AFP has a ton of money to spend doesn't mean AFP is spending that money well. And just because AFP plans to carpet-bomb this state again to attack Senator Reid doesn't mean AFP won't undercut itself again in 2016 (like it did in 2010 and 2012).

"Count on Joe"

Today, let's take another trip to the always exciting Nevada Progressive archives. This time, we're traveling back to September 2011. Rep. Joe Heck (R-Henderson) was caught doing a rare town hall meeting in Summerlin. And he had to answer a tough question from the audience on his vote for Rep. Paul Ryan's (R-Wisconsin) Medicare busting austerity budget earlier that year.



Ouch. He had to resort to rhetorical pretzel twists to defend that vote... Yet he voted for another Paul Ryan austerity budget in March 2012. But after he caught some political heat for those votes later that year, Rep. Joe Heck turned around and voted against the third Paul Ryan austerity budget last year.

Now, Heck seems to be feeling the "Ryan-mentum" again. This past June, Rep. Heck had Paul Ryan write a fundraising letter for his reelection campaign. Of course, the letter contains all the usual accusations of President Obama, Senator Harry Reid (D), and Nancy Pelosi being such meanie poopyheads who won't let the "YOUNG GUNS!!!" have any fun on Capitol Hill. Oh, and Rep. Ryan "can count on Joe as a leader in the struggle to revive our economy".

How so? Was he talking about the government shutdown that yanked $26 billion out of our economy? Is he talking about the continuing denial of unemployment insurance (UI) that's hut over e million Americans (including over 37,000 Nevadans)? Is he talking about the denial of a minimum wage increase that could have given our economy the extra boost we all need? Or is he just talking about his austerity program that's been suppressing economic growth?

Income inequality is a serious problem in this nation. Don't believe us? See the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and Standard & Poors (S&P) reports. Income inequality hinders economic growth.



And Paul Ryan's austerity regime is worsening our income inequality problem. Is that what he meant when he "can count on Joe as a leader in the struggle to revive our economy"? He can certainly "count on Joe" to vote for his policies that harm the economy and hurt working families. And if that's the message they want to share with Nevada voters, we won't stand in the way of that.

The Great (GOP) Divide

Poor Ralston. He has the sads this morning. Why? Thank Cook Political Report's Amy Walter, as she penned this.

Over the last 24 years (1988 to 2012), some important trends have emerged. First, even though more states have a Republican PVI than a Democratic PVI--27 to 23--Democrats have an Electoral College advantage. Add up all the Electoral votes for states that have a Democratic PVI and all those with Republican PVI and you get the Democrats at 272 electoral votes to 266 for Republicans. Just seven years ago, Republicans had a 281 to 257 advantage in the Electoral College. So, what happened? Two states--Nevada and Colorado--flipped from red to blue.

It’s understandable, then, that Republicans--and the media--are focused on how/if the GOP can get those fast-growing states back into their column. But, are they even gettable? Colorado, which has gotten 3 points more Democratic since 2006, is the most fragile of the two with a PVI of just under one point.

Nevada, however, has gotten almost six and a half points more Democratic since 1988, and 3 points more Democratic since 2006. Nevada has also seen the Hispanic population in the state jump from 20 percent to 27 percent from 2000 to 2010. If the population increases at this rate for the next ten years, Hispanics will make up 37 percent of the population by 2020. [...]

The Romney campaign spent $8.9M on broadcast TV in Nevada during the general election to get 46 percent of the vote. In Pennsylvania, the Romney campaign spent a paltry $2.4M and got 47 percent. In other words, Team Romney spent four times as much in Nevada as they did in Pennsylvania, to get essentially the same percentage of the vote. Now, imagine that the money invested in Pennsylvania came earlier--and more intensely.

We've talked about this before. Nevada has truly become a Blue State. Sure, it's still a purplish blue hue now. However, the general trend has been a blue one thanks to changing demographics... And most Republicans' inability to change with them.

So keep that in mind as we view this.



Back in January, it looked like Republicans in Congress were preparing to jump en masse to support comprehensive immigration reform (CIR). Yet even back then, Alex Pareene and others were warning Beltway pundits not to get too giddy about this budding "great bipartisan breakthrough!" After all, the 21st Century Know Nothings are still driven by xenophobia and nativism... And they still drive the bulk of the Republican Party.

This week, we've especially been seeing this dynamic at work. Even as the mask slipped from the 21st Century Know Nothings and their rationale for opposing CIR, many Republican politicians nonetheless stood by them and hardened their opposition to CIR.

But wait, didn't they "learn their lesson" from last November? Aren't they supposed to be rushing to support reform? Sure, many "establishment" leaders are. However, the G-O-TEA base isn't. And that tail still looks to be wagging the Big Red Dog.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

We know several Republicans have been digging for excuses to kill reform. Perhaps their most potent excuse involves a(n electoral) map. If most Republicans think their party can survive demographic changes here in Nevada and elsewhere by chasing after white voters somewhere else, they may conclude there's no need to support CIR and engage in any more "Hispandering".

All along, we've seen the biggest obstacle to immigration reform passing this Congress in the ideological fault line that divides the Republican Party. On one side, we see pragmatists who are warning the rest of their party that they risk future political irrelevancy if they're seen as a bunch of narrow-minded, old, white bigots. Yet on the other side, we see the 21st Century Know Nothings selling nativism as sound policy... And good politics.

So what happens next? We shall see. But again, the future of immigration reform likely lies in where Senator Dean Heller (R-46%) sees political opportunity... And which side he takes in The Great (GOP) Divide.

Misrepresentation

It's not easy representing such an expansive district. That's something Rep. Steven Horsford (D-North Las Vegas) has had to learn the hard way. And he's especially had to learn as Congress and the nation debate gun safety reform.

In January, Horsford was quick to endorse the entirety of President Obama's gun safety agenda. Later that month, Rep. Horsford even want on "Ralston Reports" to talk with Mr. Nevada Pundit himself on gun safety.

Yet since then, he's stepped back. Sure, Horsford still personally supports gun safety reform. However since taking office, he's been listening to constituents throughout his district to seek their input on the subject.

[... A]nyone who was listening to Horsford in the wake of December’s mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. — a galvanizing event in the gun control debate —knows Horsford promised to back an assault weapons ban in Congress. The children who had been killed with a semiautomatic rifle in Newtown were the approximate age of his daughter, Ella, he noted at the time.

“I come at this not as an elected official but as a parent,” Horsford told the Sun two weeks before being sworn in as a U.S. Congressman.

But since taking on his elected role, Horsford has repeatedly and noticeably tempered that personal conviction, suggesting his mind is not made up about the more controversial points of gun control legislation, such as an assault weapons ban.

“As a parent I have a personal viewpoint on military-style weapons not being in our neighborhoods,” Horsford said in a recent interview at his congressional office. “As a policymaker, it is my job to listen to my constituents and then vote on the legislation that comes before us to represent the view that I’ve heard from my constituents.” [...]

“Part of what I’ve experienced listening to people in my district, particularly in the rural communities, is ‘respect my right to own a gun. I live in a community where I may not have police or law enforcement protection for 30, 60, 100 miles, and I need to be able to protect myself … and I have the right to do that,’” Horsford said. “And I agree, and respect that right, and have said without wavering that that is a right that we have to respect in this process.”

Horsford tells of some Republican, National Rifle Association-member constituents who he says, once they realize he respects their Second Amendment rights, are willing to talk about getting some of the higher magazine clips and semiautomatic rifles off the streets.

But, he admits, he also has several other constituents for whom “listening to them and then voting for a ban is not going to make them feel any better.”

“I’m honestly, in the core of my job as a public servant, trying to represent the needs of all my constituents,” he said. “I take it very seriously that my job … is to represent my constituents. Not some of my constituents. Not the ones I agree with only. My job is to represent the whole district.”

Indeed, Nevada's 4th Congressional District is quite diverse and expansive. NV-04 stretches from Yerington and Ely in rural Northern Nevada all the way down to Pahrump, then crosses the Spring Mountains and Sheep Range into Clark County, where just over 80% of the district's population resides. And even the Clark County portion of NV-04 is incredibly diverse, as it stretches from exurban Mesquite to minority heavy West Las Vegas and affluent Summerlin.

So Rep. Horsford represents not just a wide swath of Nevada land, but also a wide array of views on gun violence. And he's been doing his best to show respect to all his constituents. Why can't more Members of Congress do this?

And let's not forget, this isn't a one way street. In fact, February's KLAS-SUSA poll showed that 57% of Nevadans support the Assault Weapons Ban while only 33% oppose! And not only that, but the poll showed 71-23% support among Nevadans for a state gun registry and 76-19% support for expanded background checks. Oh, and since then, multiple polls have shown 86% support for expanded background checks for gun purchases!

So why am I bringing this up now? It's important to note just how out of touch Senator Dean Heller (R-46%) is with his constitutents. Instead of talking to Nevadans from throughout the state on what they'd like to see on gun safety, he's making excuses and even using "tea party" talking points as reason to oppose what 86% of Nevadans support.

And now, because Senator Heller is thumbing his nose at 86% of his constitutents, gun safety reform may finally be dying in Congress.

As a policy matter, [Heller's excuse for joining the G-O-TEA filibuster of gun safety reform] is gibberish. Indeed, it's so wrong, it's almost insulting. There's nothing unconstitutional about background checks -- indeed, background checks must be legally permissible, since they already exist without legal controversy. What's more, fearing the creation of a national gun registry from the proposal is idiotic, given that the legislation explicitly bans such a registry. The Toomey/Manchin language strengthens the prohibition against the very registry Heller is worried about.

Also note, as recently as February, Heller called background check expansion a "reasonable step forward." Since then, he saw a poll showing 87% of his constituents support the idea. Then Heller used a ridiculous rationale to oppose the popular policy.

Of course, it's not just Heller who's been irresponsible. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell wouldn't even meet with Newtown families yesterday.

And then there are a handful of red-state Democrats who aren't just prepared to oppose background-check expansion, but are also likely to side with Republicans on the filibuster. It's not enough to vote against it; they're prepared to join the GOP in denying the popular measure a vote at all.

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), sounding very discouraged, said last night, "I honestly just didn't believe GOP Senators would turn their back on 90% of Americans. I was naive."

That's another thing to keep in mind. Not only is Senator Heller opposing any and all gun safety reform, but he doesn't even want to give these proposals a vote! He's joining the "tea party" backed filibuster on all these measures, even the background checks proposal with 86% support. Why won't he even allow a vote on the bill and related amendments?

Ask that. And remember this. And go ahead & wonder if Senator Dean Heller is actually doing anything to truly represent Nevada.

10 of 12: Your Picks

This year, I wanted to do something different. So today, I wanted to note the stories you couldn't get enough of. Here are the top 5 most viewed stories of 2012.

5. "Sando Sez 'No Health Care for You!'"- June 29, 2012

This was when Governor Sandoval hinted that he may not agree to the Medicaid expansion provision of the Affordable Care Act. Now, however, he's said he will allow it... But wants to institute a co-pay?! This story will probably have at least a few more up's & down's in 2013.

4. "What John Lewis Said"- September 6, 2012

During the Democratic National Convention, civil rights icon and Rep. John Lewis (D-Georgia) warned the audience about the ongoing threat of voter suppression done in the name of "needing ID".

3. "Why 'Tea Party' Abandoned Its Own Rally"- July 19, 2012

In July, AFP attempted to throw a "tea party" outside Shelley Berkley's Congressional office. Instead, progressive counter-protesters far outnumbered the AFP crowd. And in case that wasn't enough, police ordered AFP to move their bus because they had never obtained a permit to park there. This was the first in a series of high-profile embarrassments for AFP.

2. "Nevada Democrats Finish with 7.17% Voter Registration Lead"- October 19, 2012

After 7 months of intense voter registration statewide, Nevada Democrats managed to turn a slight and diminishing voter registration advantage into a rather dominant 7+% and 90,000+ raw vote lead. And so far, it looks like the folks at Valley View are determined not to let this slip away.

1. "Finding Elizabeth Halseth"- February 19, 2012

As discussed earlier, this was the story that shook up the trajectory of the race for #NVLeg this year. With one resignation over a salacious affair, Republicans lost their chance of retaking the State Senate.

And these were your top 5 stories of 2012.

10 of 12: Congress

Yesterday, we discussed the amazing developments in #NVLeg this year. Today, it's time to jump up to the federal level and take a look at Congress.

Actually, the story of #nvhouse 2012 began in 2011 when redistricting was very much up in the air. And with a new "ungerrymandered" map being approved by the courts, the playing field was suddenly scrambled as politicians on both sides had to play a round of "Musical Chairs" to see where they'd land.

Meanwhile in the current session of Congress, all sorts of crazy emerged, particularly from the G-O-TEA run House. For one, the "War on Women" raged on as the radical right demanded more prodding into women's private lives. In addition, there were multiple attempts at repealing "Obamacare" and take health care away from millions of Americans. Oh, and while Nevada and other states were busy pursuing more renewable energy and green jobs, Congress was fighting over a recipe for economic and environmental disaster. And they never managed to address the "job creation" they promised to deliver (in 2010). And both Dean Heller & Joe Heck were at the center of all of this.

So this year, voters had a(nother) chance to have their say on all of this. In addition, some Nevada voters had the opportunity to chime in on the new NV-04 Congressional seat. And oh my, what a race that was. Danny Tarkanian tried yet again to land a steady paycheck with a solid pension a high elected office, and this time he attempted to do so by banking on his famous last name acting as a chameleon... And by smearing Steven Horsford. Yet despite Baby Tark's desperate attacks (aided by a last minute push by the likes of AFP), Horsford ultimately managed to win NV-04 and do so by a more comfortable margin than most everyone had expected.

Yet in the end, both Heller & Heck got lucky. With just enough "down-ballot drop-off", they managed to survive... Though Heller only did by the skin of his teeth and with less than 50%. But already, both of them are facing a major dilemma as the new Congress is about to begin. With President Obama reelected to a second term (with the help of Nevada) and the "Fiscal Cliff" fast approaching, will they let their party leaders cut a budget deal with Obama and Harry Reid? Or will they (again) cast their lot with "tea party" extremists by voting to push America "Off the Cliff" and into recession?

The story of the 2012 election cycle may be over, but the cast of characters here are destined to make waves again as the 113th Congress is about to begin.

10 of 12: Caucus Fracas

Around this time last year, we reflected on "The Rise & Fall of the 'New' Nevada GOP". Early on in 2011, everything seemed to be going so well for Nevada Republicans. They had finally ridden themselves of "top of the ticket troublemakers", and they seemed to be turning a corner with fresh faces in leadership.

Well, that grand old elephant honeymoon didn't last long. And as 2012 began, that became crystal clear. What was supposed to be Nevada Republicans' special moment in the spotlight instead became a total train wreck. And what was supposed to be "Mitt Romney's big night" instead became #CaucusFracas2012.

Funny enough, he unintentionally pointed out the greatest weakness of Nevada Republicans. Ever since 2008, they've been obsessing over ideological purity instead of even attempting to show any real interest in governing. We saw it in 2010, when they embraced extremism and tried to shove the most radical US Senate candidate we've ever seen down our throats. And we saw it again last year, when they were more interested in playing political games than solving our state's problems. It's really all about their radical "tea party" ideology for them. And by making Mitt Romney embrace it, they're only sowing the seeds of their own defeat this fall.

Oh, and by the way, NBC News now officially projects Mitt Romney to win the G-O-TEA Caucus tonight. Wow. What a surprise! ;-)

But again, this "victory" is looking increasingly pyrrhic. As we talked about yesterday, President Obama is proving that his vision of economic recovery and rebuilding is one that really works. So what does Mitt Romney have to compete with this? Lies? Radical right extremism? Donald Trump?

My prediction actually did come true. For one, Rick Santorum managed to upstage Romney by turning a trio of supposedly "meaningless beauty contests" into a "game change" moment that forced Romney to actually compete for the Republican nomination. And while that ultimately wasn't enough to keep Romney from claiming the nomination, what happened in February forced Romney to run so far to the radical right that he made himself unelectable in the general election.

And if that didn't add enough insult to injury, this most certainly did.



The caucus process itself melted into pure chaos as voters were being turned away, counting turned into controversy, and out-of-state media looked in horror as the Nevada Republican Party began to unravel. But perhaps above all else, this was a major turning point for Nevada Republicans... As we saw the beginnings of "The Second Ron Paul Revolution.



So they succeeded in hijacking the Nevada Republican Party. They then failed at actually leading it somewhere (other than abject failure). We saw the writing on the wall back in May.

[... W]inning elections doesn't happen by just demanding "purity" and throwing a temper tantrum when that doesn't happen. Believe it or not, temper tantrums don't win elections.

This is something we often have to grapple with on the left, but now we're seeing this unfold on the right at a level that I've never seen before. As much as some grassroots folks on the left and the right love to see epic ideological battles unfold at party conventions and purge all "unsavory moderates" out of their respective parties, the fact of the matter is that doing that gets us no closer to winning elections. (If anything, that HURTS efforts to win elections.) While it's always important to promote the values we believe in and hold fast to them, we can't punish political parties for focus[ing] on party building while perhaps shirking "ideology enforcement" duties. After all, the first responsibility of a political party is to build the infrastructure necessary to win elections.

At times, we on the left have not seen eye to eye with Nevada State Democratic Party leaders. And yes, we sometimes get irritated when they seem to favor moderate candidates over "BOLD PROGRESSIVES!!!" However, most of us also realize that getting 70-90% of what we want is far better than getting nothing, so we leave Fantasy-land behind and return to the real world & return to working the field to win elections.

And this is why Orrin Johnson is panicking. Ron Paul's supporters care deeply for their libertarian beliefs, and they're set to accept nothing less than full fealty to those beliefs. But in pursuing complete ideological purity, they're also set to lose a whole lot of elections because they simply don't care about that stuff. This is why Nevada Republicans are in such dire straits. And it should serve as an important lesson to all the rest of us trying to balance ideological wishes with political reality.

Again, we could see what was coming. So while "The 'New New' Nevada GOP" focused on such important matters as worshipping at the altar of Ron Paul, the top money people, the "consultant class", and even the entire Washoe County Republican Party proceeded to obtain a "divorce" from "The Real Nevada Republican Party" in order for the RNC to "make it rain" on them. And while the Ron Paul Party succeeded in revering their "dear leader" in their own special way, Dean Heller and other top Nevada Republican politicians just ran away from the entire party.

That's why they could not stop this from happening. And that's ultimately why they could not stop this from happening. And that's why Nevada Republicans may be resigned to this for a while (longer).

Back in September, we noticed Nevada Republicans' glaring lack of field. The "power player" consultants ultimately opted to spend more on media advertising while "the real Nevada Republican Party" continued its increasingly time-honored tradition of extraordinary infighting. The few victories Republicans enjoyed on November 6 were more despite the party, not because of it.

So what will Nevada Republicans do to move forward? The above mentioned consultants are floating around the idea of some sort of "permanent Team Nevada" to circumvent the real state party. Others want to continue plotting a plan to finally wrest control from the Ron Paul acolytes who have been spinning the party out of control (perhaps because they're ideologically opposed to any kind of central control?). Meanwhile, the Ron Paul acolytes and their teabagger allies are already threatening primary challenges to Brian Sandoval and all other Republicans they deem "impure". So basically, get ready for another cycle full of G-O-TEA mayhem. [...]

But can Republicans ultimately remain relevant with this level of chaos continuing indefinitely? I have my doubts. It's just not sustainable to set up a "shadow party" to get out the vote, outsource other party functions (like sending mailers and producing yard signs) out of state, and allow "top of the ticket" candidates to continue running their own operations completely separated from the party while avoiding the actual party like the plague. Something's got to give. We'll just have to wait and see what happens in the coming months as the Nevada Republican Party nears its final implosion (and first chance of actual rebuilding).

And this, my dears, is the sad and sordid tale of the Nevada Republican Party in the 2012 Presidential Cycle. We can only sit back, grab some popcorn, and see what kind of spectacular drama unfolds in G-O-TEA Land in 2013.

Need Any More Proof That Nevada Is a Blue State?

Last Tuesday, Dean Heller (barely) won election to a full term in the US Senate. Now remember this fact. It will actually help explain what he told The Reno Gazette-Journal over the weekend.

“I just think Obama relates better to the average person in the state of Nevada, as opposed to Romney,” Heller said.

“And I think at the end of the day, that candidates do matter and I think that was a reflection of (Election Day) and why Obama did so much better,” Heller said. “He is an excellent speaker. He understands what the average middle class family is thinking.”

Oh, and he also said this.

Many Nevada voters could relate to an “Obama-Heller ticket,” Heller said. When Heller first mentioned the need for Obama voters to also support him, the feedback was swift.

“In fact, after I made that comment, I had a number of people approach me and say they went for the Obama-Heller ticket,” Heller said.

Oh, really? Did he actually say that? This can't be the same Dean Heller who catered to every whim and fancy of the "tea party". So what happened?

Long story short: Heller became "Mr. 46%". And he now recognizes that Nevada is indeed a Blue State.

Jon Ralston could barely contain his disgust this morning. After all, Heller ran as Nevada's official "tea party" BFF for so long. Yet now, all of a sudden, he has so much respect for both President Obama and his new best friends in "The Obama-Heller Social Club"? Give Ralston a break.

He hates Obamacare, but he has Obamalove.

That's the latest incarnation of the ever-adaptable Dean Heller, the senator who just won election by 12,000 votes and now is marveling at the skills of the president who just won an electoral landlside.

Couldn't he have waited a decent interval to make it seem like a gradual evolution and not pure opportunism?

The maverick secretary of state who morphed into a far-rightie after Sharron Angle almost beat him six years ago and is now back to being Dean No Labels after another near-death experience is a clear case of nurture over nature.

What is his true nature? What does nurture him beyond the politics of the moment?

So at this point, who is Dean Heller? No really, who is he and what does he stand for? Does he stand by what he said last year and early this year, when he wanted to keep the radical right in his corner? Or is he genuinely interested in bipartisanship, cooperation, and (GASP!) moderation now?

Regardless of whether or not "The New & Improved Moderate, Post-partisan Dean Heller!" is for real, he again reveals the new political reality of Nevada. We are indeed a Blue State. And the only way Nevada Republicans can survive going forward is by adapting to this new reality. So will other Republicans follow Heller's example?

We'll have to wait and see... But in the mean time, don't be surprised if/when the "TEA" troops arise (again) to try to stop any kind of "moderation". Whatever happens in the Nevada GOP in the coming months, it won't go down without a fight.

Why Nevada Has Been Becoming a Blue State

So the election is over. And there is quite a bit of Blue on our map. So what is our state now? I think we all know the answer... But don't tell certain campaign consultants and media figures (afraid of losing all that big campaign cash).

Rest easy, Nevada. We’re still a battleground state.

At least so say political operatives on both sides of the aisle.

Admittedly, they may have a bit of a vested interest in saying so. Presidential battleground status opens the spigot to tens of millions of advertising dollars. [...]

President Barack Obama last week won Nevada convincingly for the second time. In fact, his margins in 2008 and 2012 far exceeded former President George W. Bush’s Nevada margins in 2000 and 2004.

Democrats have 90,000 more registered voters than Republicans. They have a well-financed party structure in place — an organization noticeably absent on the Republican side. And they have control of the state Legislature.

Some might say that doesn’t sound like the metrics of a true swing state.

Indeed, it’s starting to sound a lot like New Mexico — previously a battleground state before turning convincingly blue beginning about four years ago and disappearing from the presidential campaign radar screen.

Indeed, our similarity to New Mexico is quite striking. So are we there yet?

Perhaps not. But at the very least, Nevada is now at roughly the same place on the political spectrum as Michigan, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania: "swing states" that are increasingly out of reach for Republicans due to organizational weakness and ideological rigidity.

By contrast, a large number of electorally critical states – both traditional swing states like Iowa and Pennsylvania and newer ones like Colorado and Nevada – have been Democratic-leaning in the past two elections. If Democrats lose the election in a blowout, they would probably lose these states as well. But in a close election, they are favored in them.

The Republican Party will have four years to adapt to the new reality. Republican gains among Hispanic voters could push Colorado and Nevada back toward the tipping point, for example.

States like Wisconsin, New Hampshire and Iowa are overwhelmingly white – but also highly educated, with fairly progressive views on social policy. If Republicans moderated their tone on social issues, they might be more competitive in these states, while regaining ground in Northern Virginia and in the Philadelphia suburbs.

Finally, some of the Democrats’ apparent advantage in the swing states may reflect Mr. Obama’s voter targeting and turnout operations –which were superior, by most accounts, to John McCain’s in 2008 and Mr. Romney’s in 2012.

It is not my job to give advice, but the next Republican nominee might be well served to remember that the party won the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote in 2000, when George W. Bush and Karl Rove put more emphasis on the “ground game.” But the Republicans seemed to be at a disadvantage in the last two years when their candidates put less of an investment into it.

If the parties continue down the same paths, however, this won’t be the last election when most of the swing states turn blue.

Nate Silver makes a very good point here. Republicans can at least theoretically turn back this tide by moving closer to policy sanity and investing in a better ground game. But unless and until they do that, Nevada, along with these other peripheral and increasingly Blue tinted "swing states", will continue to be favorable territory for Democrats.

Now certainly, this does NOT mean that Nevada Democrats can now sit back and rest on their laurels. The NV-Sen and NV-03 races of this cycle certainly serve as cautionary tales. Against flawed candidates who struggle to define themselves and use a strong message, Republicans can still eke out wins here.

But again, Dean Heller is now "Mr. 46%". And Joe Heck barely crossed over 50%. And despite all the Republican Legislature Leaders' efforts to smear Vaseline on the camera, they still failed to retake the State Senate and grow their ranks in the Assembly. And perhaps most notably, Steven Horsford convincingly beat back a well funded right-wing effort to elect Danny Tarkanian in NV-04. Nevada most definitely has been changing.



And this leads us to the other reason why Republicans have been losing their grip over Nevada: Demographics. Clearly, Nevada Republicans paid a price for their support for "The War on Women", extreme anti-immigrant and anti-Latin@ policies, discrimination against LGBTQ families, and additional policies that alienate historically oppressed minorities. Now that these minority communities are becoming "majority makers", Republicans are in deep trouble.

And Nevada remains a Blue State.

First Thoughts on the Morning After

Yes, I still have a hangover from yesterday. And I still have so much cleaning to do today. But now, it's all over. The votes have been counted.

And right now, Coolican is required reading on understanding what happened here in Nevada.

Democrats have won the national popular vote in six of the past seven presidential elections. In Nevada, this move to the Democratic column has been more recent but also swifter. President Barack Obama’s comfortable victory here —despite the terrible economy, joblessness and housing market — illustrates that Nevada isn’t much of a presidential swing state anymore. Hence, my suspicion that we won’t continue to be inundated with TV ads every four years.

The demographic trends working against Republicans nationally are even fiercer here. CNN exit polls show that Hispanics constitute 18 percent of the electorate, up from 15 percent in 2008 and 2010, and Obama won nearly 70 percent of those voters. And, every day, more and more Hispanics become citizens or turn 18, and nearly all of them recoil from the GOP’s strident positions on immigration, but also from its conservative economic policies.

As we've discusses before, demographics matter. And since the demographics of Nevada have changed so much in the last two decades, we're a different state. Yet Republicans still haven't adapted to that.

And what's made it even worse for them has been their lack of good field. Because Nevada Democrats have been so great at building a solid field operation in this state, they ran into so much success in GOTV. Certainly, "The Reid Machine" delivered yet again.

However, it wasn't fully complete. Dean Heller and Joe Heck somehow hanged on last night, though Heller "won" with only 46% of the vote. "Tea Party, Inc." outfits spent many millions of dollars on attacking Shelley Berkley and John Oceguera. And it looked like many of those attacks stuck. And it looked like they were able to deliver a few Legislature seats to Republicans as well.

However, Democrats will end up keeping both houses of the Nevada Legislature. And despite the "TEA" fueled attacks on Steven Horsford, he is still finalizing a decisive victory over Danny Tarkanian. And President Obama won Nevada by a bigger margin than most pundits had expected. All in all, not so bad for Nevada Democrats.

Looking forward, Democrats here have had to learn some lessons the hard way when it comes to responding to "TEA" fueled ad attacks. Yet despite that torrent of money thrown onto our TV screens and mailboxes, we still ended up seeing a whole lot of Blue here last night. As I said all along this cycle, Nevada remains a Blue State.

Preliminary Early Voting Report

Now that early voting has come to an end, we can start analyzing the numbers. Clark County and Washoe County have posted new data, so let's take a look at the state's two population hubs.

In Washoe (Reno), the final in-person early vote count reached 111,190 people in total. 44,402 Republicans voted early in-person compared to 45,043 Democrats. But when the mail-in (or absentee) ballot count from yesterday is included, Republicans take a 451 raw vote lead. That makes for an almost final Republican turnout advantage... Of 0.004%, about on par with voter registration there.

In Clark (Vegas), the final in-person early vote count reached 436,631 people. 140,727 Republicans voted early in-person compared to 210,431 Democrats. Again, not all the mail-in ballots have been counted yet, so the full numbers are not here yet. But when yesterday's mail-in ballot count is included, here's where we are for now: Democrats have a 70,670 raw vote lead, or a 14.62% turnout advantage. This is just a tick below Democrats' 14.95% voter registration advantage in Clark County.

And here are some in-person early voting stats for the various swing districts in Clark County. (I've yet to find mail-in stats for districts within the county.) In NV-03, Democrats closed with a 5,018 raw vote lead, or a 2.79% turnout edge (slightly above 2.11% registration edge). In the Clark County part of NV-04, Democrats closed with a 27,112 raw vote lead, or a 19.03% turnout advantage (which is above the 17.61% voter registration advantage there). And in the key State Senate Districts which will determine control of the Nevada Legislature next year, Democrats closed in-person early voting with a 7.27% lead in the Henderson-Green Valley based SD 5 (almost 2% above registration), an 8.38% lead in the Las Vegas-Summerlin based SD 6 (just over 1% above registration), and an 8.65% lead in the Southwest Valley based SD 9 (about 0.5% above registration). Republicans' one bright spot (compared to all the rest in Clark) lies in SD 18, where their 0.01% turnout lead is at parity with voter registration there.

So we'll have to wait for the Secretary of State's next report for the updated mail-in ballot count. But so far, it looks like Nevada Democrats are making a strong close to early voting here. Yesterday's statewide lead was about 7% (on par with registration), and the new Clark & Washoe data suggest that statewide number won't be dropping today.

Scenes from the Campaign Trail in Nevada

Today is the last day of early voting in Nevada. After today, the only day left for voting will be Tuesday. Yet while we have one more day of early voting to occur, we now have a much better sense of where things stand in this final stretch.

Just this morning, Jon Ralston posted this.

Democrats gained about 6,000 voters on the penultimate day of early voting in Clark County while Republicans won Thursday in Washoe County by about 200 votes.

It appears the Democrats, who now lead in Clark by 60,000 voters, will have somewhere in the neighborhood of about a 40,000-voter lead --perhaps slightly more -- in Nevada going into Election Day. If partsian voting patterns are predictable and if independents are, as credible polls show, relatively close, the GOP will need a huge turnout Tuesday for Mitt Romney to have any chance. And it also means that U.S. Senate race could be a nail-biter.

Turnout will be greater than what it was four years ago. In 2008, 392,427 people voted early; this year, with one day left, it's at 388,456.

Here are the totals for Clark, including mail ballots:

Democrats -- 205,878, or 47.6 percent

Republicans -- 144,745, or 33.5 percent

Others -- 81,345, or 18.9 percent

So how did this happen? Let me show you.







There has been a whole lot of canvassing. And we've especially been seeing plenty of canvassing in the Southwest part of the Las Vegas Valley. There are many Democratic voters here. But since there are so many new neighborhoods yet so few early voting sites, Nevada State Democratic Party organizers and volunteers have been working at a furious pace to turn out Democrats to vote early for President Obama, Shelley Berkley, John Oceguera, and the local candidates.

But of course, this hasn't been all. There's also been a large contingent of volunteers coming into the office to do GOTV ("get out the vote") phone calls to reach people who possibly couldn't be reached by the canvassers. There have even been a few very special guests dropping by this week to call with the local volunteers.





Yep, both Shelley Berkley and John Oceguera stopped by Nevada Democrats' NV-03 field office in Henderson to thank volunteers. Berkley brought pizza to make sure everyone was well fueled. And Oceguera hit the phones to personally call voters along with the volunteers.

And that's not all. Yesterday, another special guest came to Southern Nevada to pump up Democrats and encourage (even more of) them to vote. Oh, and it just so happened he met us at an athletic field right next to an early voting site.







And here's an excerpt of President Obama's speech at CSN Cheyenne.



So it's been quite an exciting week. And with early voting wrapping up tonight, there's even more work to do with the final round of GOTV for Tuesday. But so far, it looks like Nevada Democrats are prepared for the home stretch. They opened well, but they also have to close well. And that starts today.

La Importancia del Voto Latino

I know we've been constantly discussing the importance of Latino voters in deciding this election, but I just can't stress enough how critical they will be... And really, already are. Today, we're given another reminder courtesy of Latino Decisions.

Overall, Obama has the support of 73% of all Latino registered voters, compared to 21% who favor Romney. The 52-point gap matches the largest gap among Latinos this year, also found in the October 1 tracking poll.

For the ten weeks the impreMedia-Latino Decisions poll has been taken the most important issue for Latinos consistently has been the economy and the latest release revealed that Romney and the Republican party have been unable to convince Latino voters that they will be better at improving the it. Seventy-three percent of Latino voters trust Obama and the Democrats to make the right decisions to improve the economy compared to only 18% that trust Romney and the Republicans.

“The poll shows that this year we can anticipate record participation among Latino voters,” said Monica Lozano, CEO of impreMedia “It looks like the “Sleeping Giant” has woken up.”

Over the past weeks the number of Latinos who say they are certain to vote has gone from 81% to 84% and now 87%. At the same time, the percent who say they are more enthusiastic in 2012 has grown from 36% to 40% and now 45%. The percent who describe themselves as “very enthusiastic” has gone from 51% to 56% to 59% in the last three weeks.

And apparently, 8% of Latino voters nationwide have already voted early. Expect that number to rise this week, especially here in Nevada once more temporary early voting sites open in heavily Latino neighborhoods in East Las Vegas and North Las Vegas (starting Wednesday).

So why is this happening? Well, remember what we discussed in February...

Look at how far Willard Romney has gone. He's been endorsed by the extreme right Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach (R), the guy perhaps most responsible for Arizona's and Alabama's extreme anti-immigrant statutes as well as someone with well documented ties to white supremacist groups. [...]

Mittens not only opposes comprehensive immigration reform, but he also virulently opposes the DREAM Act, and he's been confronted by Latin@ students over it. And if that weren't bad enough, Romney's economic policies would also hurt Latino families if enacted by stripping away their health care, taking away opportunities to attend college, and destroying Social Security. Oh, and he also has long standing ties to Former California Governor Pete Wilson (R), the guy who ran on the extreme anti-immigrant Prop 187 and ultimately killed whatever chances California Republicans had of ever winning the Latino vote again.

And no matter how much Mitt Romney keeps trying to spin his own record away, the vast majority of Latino voters refuse to forget. This keeps coming back to bite Romney where it hurts the most.

This also has to be scaring Dean Heller. After all, his poll numbers among Latino voters here in Nevada have been falling along with Romney's. And his now infamous comments on immigration reform at the last NV-Sen debate continue to haunt him.

Nevada truly is a dynamic state. One aspect of our state that continues to change fairly rapidly is our demographics. It provided an unexpected twist (to the East Coast based media pundits) to our US Senate race in 2010. And it may yet doom Nevada Republicans again in 2012.

Second Weekend of Early Voting Breakdown (& Forecast for the Final Days)

Yesterday, early voting slowed down in Clark and Washoe Counties. In Clark County, the Democratic turnout advantage ticked down a bit to 16% (49-33). But in Washoe County, Democrats' turnout advantage actually ticked up to 2.5% (42.6-40.1). So far, Democrats have likely extended their raw early vote turnout lead to at least 30,000 statewide.

Here's what Bloomberg had to say about the general early voting trend here.

In two of the most competitive states in the U.S. presidential race -- Iowa and Nevada --Democrats are building a significant advantage in early voting. [...]

Thus far in Nevada, where an even larger proportion of the vote has been cast than in Iowa when compared to the 2008 vote, Democrats have accounted for 45.4 percent, according to the Nevada secretary of state’s office. Republicans have accounted for 37.2 percent and independent voters for 17.4 percent.

Heavily Democratic Clark County, Nevada’s most populous and where Las Vegas is located, has seen people registered with the president’s party cast 121,298 early and absentee ballots, compared to 81,512 for Republicans, through Oct. 27.

And their figures don't include yesterday's early vote totals. And in regards to the early vote totals here in Clark County, I have a theory as to why Democratic turnout was off a bit yesterday... And may remain lower today and tomorrow. Basically, look at where the early voting is happening. Yesterday, early voting started in Sun City Anthem. And for the next two days, there will be temporary early voting sites there and at Sun City Summerlin, Boulder City, and Mesquite. So long story short, Republican turnout is probably strengthening slightly because early voting is happening in Republican strongholds.

However, starting Wednesday we'll see temporary early voting sites shift more to East Las Vegas and North Las Vegas. So as long as Democrats turn out their voters there (in what are the big Democratic strongholds in the Las Vegas Valley), Democrats can still close the week, and early voting, quite well. We'll just have to wait and see exactly what happens this week.

Scenes from the Campaign Trail in NV-03

Late last night, we saw another Clark County update on early voting turnout here. Countywide, Democrats now have a 17.70% turnout advantage. In NV-03, Democrats have a 4.79% turnout advantage as of last night. In the Clark County portion of NV-04, Democrats so far have a 22.13% turnout advantage. And in the key State Debate Districts 5, 6, 9, and 18 which will determine control of the Nevada Legislature next year, Democrats so far have turnout advantages of 7.99% (SD 5), 10.83% (SD 6), 8.01% (SD 9), and 1.02% (SD 18). Overall and in most parts of Clark County, Democratic turnout continues to overperform voter registration.

So how is this happening? As we discussed last Sunday, it's all about the field now. We saw this on display again yesterday when local Sierra Club volunteers knocked doors in the Green Valley (aka SD 5) neighborhoods of NV-03 with John Oceguera. Everyone took part in turning out more Democrats to vote early...







And afterward, the candidate himself joined some volunteers in making "Get Out the Vote" (GOTV) phone calls!

And that's not all. Throughout last week, the local Nevada Democratic "Super Organizer" and local volunteers also canvassed the expansive and just recently developed Southwest part of the valley (aka SD 9). Since there were not as many early voting sites in the Southwest Vegas Valley as in other parts of the valley during the first week of early voting, it was imperative to reach these neighborhoods and turn out as many Democratic voters as possible.

And yes, John Oceguera himself also stopped by last Sunday to walk here himself. He's certainly taking his campaigning seriously.







There's clearly been plenty of work done by Nevada Democrats in the past week. But in the end, they're hoping all this work will be rewarded in President Obama and Shelley Berkley winning, along with the local Congressional and Legislature candidates. And so far, it looks like Nevada Democrats are laying the groundwork for just that. We'll just have to wait and see how Week 2 of early voting continues.

El Voto Latino

We've talked extensively about the importance of Latino voters in this election. Today, we're given at least a couple more reminders of this.

First off, we have the new Latino Decisions poll and some very interesting numbers there.

After a slight decline in last week’s poll, Obama’s support is back up near his previous high 3 weeks ago. When asked who they would vote for if the election were held today, a combined 71% of respondents were certain or likely to vote for Obama, compared to 67% last week and 72% two weeks ago. A combined 20% were certain or likely to vote for Romney, compared to 23% last week and 20% two weeks ago.

One of the most interesting electoral stories over the last two weeks may be that while the overall national polls show Romney making noticeable gains on Obama, among the Latino electorate Romney gained only 3 points during his rise, but lost those 3 points back this week and stands at 20%. And a very important footnote to the national polls – if they are not accurately polling and counting Latino voters which will comprise 10% of all voters, they may be overstating Romney’s numbers by 2 or 3 points.

At the very least, this may explain the strange national poll numbers that occasionally pop up. If their likely voter screens are excluding too many Latin@ voters, just as most public polls of Nevada do, then the actual reality on the ground may be different from what's being said on the cable shows. And it explains why President Obama's campaign isn't breaking a sweat over the above mentioned national polls.

However, at least some from the national media are taking a closer look at what's happening here in Nevada. And perhaps they're starting to realize what's actually occurring on the ground.

“Before President Obama made his decision to go forward with deferred action, it was pretty dismal,” said Vicenta Montoya, an immigration attorney and Democratic activist. “I was going to vote for Obama but it wasn’t going to be with grand enthusiasm.”

Now Obama’s order has fired up Montoya and others in East Las Vegas, a swath of shopping centers, tire shops and weathered ranch houses sprawling east from the Strip. It’s the neighborhood of the often-unionized people who make Sin City function: housekeepers, card dealers and taxi drivers.

For some, Obama’s order pulled them into politics. Earlier this month, Hector Rivera’s father asked him what he was going to do with his future. Rivera, a high school senior who was brought into the United States without authorization when he was 5, went to the East Las Vegas Obama campaign office and volunteered.

The teenager already has applied for documents allowing him to work under Obama’s program. “It’s an opportunity for me and future generations,” said Rivera, 17, imagining how his own unborn children could benefit someday. “Even though they’ll be born here, I want to get a better job to give them a better opportunity so they can live a better life.”

Others, like Sergio Solis, have suffered economically but see the president as on their side. Solis had to close a restaurant in Southern California and move here to work as a salesman for an energy company. But, after approvingly mentioning the DREAM Act, Solis said it will take time to correct the country’s course following the eight years of the George W. Bush administration.

“This building here, I can dynamite it and destroy it in five minutes,” Solis said, gesturing to a supermarket where he was handing out brochures. “But I can’t build it back up in five minutes.”

This is a major reason why both Mitt Romney and Dean Heller are in serious trouble here. Like the rest of the G-O-TEA, they have embraced the anti-Latin@ xenophobia of their "base". And now, they are paying the price as Latin@ voters keep their distance from the Nevada G-O-TEA.

As I've been saying all along, this may be the ultimate factor in pushing Nevada (again) into the blue column this fall.

First Weekend of Early Voting Turnout Report

In case Saturday didn't provide enough drama and surprise, we can see even more amazing numbers in today's early vote report. Here's where we stand after the first weekend of early voting:

- In Clark County, 22.46% more Democrats than Republicans voted early in the first two weekend. To put things into perspective, Democrats finished with a 14.96% voter registration advantage earlier this month.

- In NV-03, Democrats built a 9.42% turnout advantage this past weekend. Here, Democrats closed voter registration with a 2.11% registration advantage.

- In the Clark County portion of NV-04, Democrats so far have a 29.39% turnout advantage. For all of NV-04, Democrats finished with a 13.27% registration advantage.

- We also saw interesting early voting turnout numbers in the key State Senate districts which will determine control of the Nevada Legislature next year. In the Henderson-Green Valley based SD 5, Democrats reached a 12.90% turnout advantage. In the Las Vegas-Summerlin based SD 6, Democrats hit a 20.09% turnout advantage. In the Southwest Vegas Valley based SD 9, Democrats reached a 9.93% turnout advantage. And in the Northwest Las Vegas based SD 18, Democrats reached an 8.04% turnout advantage. With the one exception of SD 9, Democrats dramatically overperformed voter registration in all the other competitive Senate seats.

- And finally, after two days of early voting Democrats have so far managed to produce a 9.79% turnout advantage in Washoe County. Early this month, Republicans (!!!) actually closed with a tiny 0.005% voter registration edge.

So in the first two days of early voting here in Nevada, Democrats have run up a major turnout advantage in the two most populous counties in the state. This is certainly a good start for them. So what's to come this week? We'll just have to wait and see what happens.

This is How Elections Are Won.

Here in Nevada, early voting started yesterday. And it was truly a momentous occasion. Not only did people turn out to be among the first in this state to cast ballots, but the lines (and the determination of these voters to stay in line to vote) were truly awe inspiring!

Late last night, Jon Ralston leaked the Clark County and Washoe County early vote numbers.

Democrats also decisively defeated Republicans in first round of absentee ballots, usually a GOP strength, posted in Clark County: 8,976-7,448, or 46-38. So raw number in Clark so far: Dems, 27,364-17,036. That's 52-32, or 5 points above the registration edge.

So: After one day -- remember it's only oen day! -- using absentees and early votes in Clark and early votes in Washoe (don't have absentees yet), the Democrats have an 11,000-vote lead statewide. Let's see where we go from here. [...]

The Washoe numbers: 48-38, or 4,604-3,619 (Actual registration: 38-38)

Yes, it's only one day. But if it continues like this, Nov. 6 is going to be a very bleak day for Republicans in this state.

Yes, I know. These numbers seem so wildly unbelievable. But really, it happened!

Let me explain to you how it happened. Let's start with this scene at the Galleria Mall in Henderson.



Yes, all these people were actually waiting to vote. Oh, and I was one of them!



And that wasn't all. Throughout the day, Nevada Democrats were making calls and knocking on tons of doors to turn out voters for President Obama, Shelley Berkley, and all other Democrats down the ballot. And most of the voters in this middle class neighborhood just up the freeway from the Las Vegas Strip were happy to see the volunteers at their doors... And they made their plans to vote early.







Funny enough, yesterday evening I saw a group of Republicans canvass this very neighborhood as well. They were dropping Mitt Romney and Dean Heller literature... At DEMOCRATIC doors! And the Democrats in that neighborhood were none too pleased.

And when the "Team Nevada" Republican canvassers were finished, they were picked up by a big white "paddy wagon". No really, I kid you not!

Meanwhile, another set of Democratic canvassers were coming in for the final round of "EGOTV" (early get out the vote) for the day. After all, today is another day of early voting. And there are still many more Democratic voters to turn out.

Believe it or not, this is how elections are won.

Nevada Democrats Finish with 7.17% Voter Registration Lead

Yes, you read the headline correctly. The final voter registration report is here. And here's what's in it:

- Statewide, Nevada Democrats now have a 90,187 raw vote advantage. And yes, that makes for a 7.17% advantage. Back in March, Democrats only had about a 4% statewide edge. And it was even smaller earlier this year.

- In Washoe County, Republicans' voter registration edge has narrowed even further. It's now a mere 1,169 raw votes, or 0.005%. In March, Republicans had a 1.76% edge.

- In Clark County, Democrats are closing with a 127,471 raw vote lead, or a 14.96% advantage. In March, Democrats had an 11.68% advantage countywide.

- In NV-03, Democrats are closing with a 7,066 raw vote lead, or a 2.11% edge. In March, Republicans actually had a tiny 0.01% edge.

- In NV-04, Democrats are closing with a 41,094 raw vote lead, or a 13.27% advantage. In March, Democrats had a 9.91% advantage.

- There are also some eye popping numbers in the key State Senate Districts which will determine control of the Nevada Legislature next year. In the Henderson-Green Valley based SD 5, Democrats have gone from a mere 3.92% registration edge in March to a 5.38% lead now. In the Las Vegas-Summerlin based SD 6, Democrats have gone from a 4.36% advantage in March to a 7.12% lead now. In the Southwest Vegas Valley based SD 9, Democrats have risen from a 4.86% lead in March to an 8.10% advantage now. In the West Reno based SD 15, Republicans have gone from a 2.04% edge in March to a tiny 0.01% edge now. And in the Northwest Las Vegas based SD 18, Republicans have fallen from a 2.39% advantage in March to a tiny 0.01% edge now.

So clearly, all of Nevada Democrats' hard work in the field paid off considerably. Now, it's all about turnout. And there's already been quite a lot of work to prepare for that.

NV-Sen: Maybe "Newspaper" Can't Save Heller?

Another day, another crazy "newspaper poll". Today, the "newspaper" is claiming Dean Heller has taken a 6% lead overall in the Senate race... And that he's doing so because he's supposedly leading (??!!) among Latino voters and is running close in Clark County. Come on, now. You know what's coming next.



Here's what Ralston says.

"Newspaper" shows Heller up 6. Also: He's winning Latinos by 8, indies by 25 and close in Clark. Welcome 2 fantasyland: http://t.co/V5ZEL0KC

And here's what I say. Again, most public pollsters have a bad habit of undersampling likely Democratic voters. And in particular, Survey USA (the company the "newspaper" now uses for polling) is notorious for paying no interest whatsoever in ensuring it has the proper demographics. There's really no reason to whip into a fury over lousy polls.

It seems like Shelley Berkley herself is not. Instead, yesterday she met with The Las Vegas Sun editorial board to discuss why she believes she has what it takes to serve as one of Nevada's US Senators.

Berkley also took Heller to task for supporting a Republican-backed budget that would reconfigure Medicare, turning the program into a subsidy that Democrats have charged is a voucher program for anyone under age 55.

“That’s not Medicare,” Berkley said. “It’s some version of health care for older Americans, but it’s not Medicare.”

Heller, who has not responded to invitations to address the Sun’s editorial board, has said he was proud of his two votes for the budget in question, commonly referred to as the “Ryan budget” after the congressman and now-vice presidential candidate who wrote it. He has also argued that the changes to Medicare within it are necessary to the long-term sustainability of the program, and do not upset the fundamental object and purpose of the Medicare program.

Berkley listed her positions on energy development (she’s in favor of investing in renewables), small business (she wants to keep their taxes low) and tourism promotion (she wants more visa waivers and travel tax credits) as her biggest selling points for improving the economy in Nevada. [...]

On immigration, Berkley repeated that she would not vote in favor of a compromise bill that did not include a pathway to citizenship for certain undocumented immigrants.

There you have it. This is honestly another big reason why I doubt Heller is doing all that well here in Southern Nevada. He doesn't even want to meet with the editoral board of the one legitimate newspaper in this town! In addition, he's been skipping candidate forums and other opportunities for Clark County voters to meet him. And, of course, he's been struggling as of late to hide his "tea party" sympathies from voters.



Remember this. It's far more insightful than what we're seeing in that other "newspaper" today.

11:00 AM UPDATE:

Here's what Ralston just caught.

I'm not surprised the Shelley Berkley campaign folks decided to release their internals with the "newspaper" (Sen. Dean Heller plus 6) and Rasmussen Reports (Heller plus 7) polls released today.

Neither of those surveys has been close to accurate in Nevada -- although perhaps 2012 will be the exception -- and Mellman nailed the 2010 race. He has Berkley, for whom he is working, up 3. [...]

All about turnout now and Mellman's models are as good as they get in Nevada.

Yep, yep, yep. The top lines are 41% Berkley (D) & 38% Heller (R) with 5% for the IAP candidate and 11% undecided. While I suspect the IAP candidate may not actually get that high of a vote count come November 6, on the other hand we're talking about a Mark Mellman poll here. He nailed the NV-Sen 2010 results when almost every other pollster choked. This shouldn't be taken lightly.