UPDATE 3: It’s officially over, here are the final results:
|33,122||49.55%||Anh “Joseph” Cao, R|
|31,296||46.82%||William J. Jefferson, D|
It closed quite a bit from the 9-point lead earlier, but Cao’s margin is so strong, there won’t be any need for a recount.
Cao’s victory is a nice end to what’s been a lousy year for Republicans. Holding the district is going to be a lot of hard work on Cao’s part. Tip O’Neill used to tell incoming Congressman, “Some of you were elected by accident, none of you will be re-elected by accident.”
More importantly, congratulations to the good folks of Louisiana’s 2nd for throwing the bumb out. It’s been a painful year, but the bi-partisan purge of corruption (Ted Stevens, Tim Mahoney, and now Cold Cash) needed to be done.
UPDATE 2: Meanwhile in Louisiana 4th, this race will drag on a while. Carmouche isn’t conceding:
Carmouche said he wants to see what happens when voting machines results are rechecked on Tuesday and provisional ballots — an undetermined number of paper ballots cast when there is a problem at a polling place — are counted.
Whether there will be enough issues with the count or provisional ballots to close to “Al Franken” land remains to be seen, but given the 356-vote margin, I don’t think Carmouche is being unreasonable-yet.
UPDATE: The AP and CNN call it for Cao. I’ll be 100% certain when we see the final, a politician like Jefferson at dirty tricks.
In the Democratic-held 2nd District, Congressman William “cold Cash” Jefferson (D-LA) could be headed out just like the corrupt Ted Stevens as Republican Joseph Cao holds a significant lead:
|29,070||52.81%||Anh “Joseph” Cao (R)|
|23,891||43.40%||William J. Jefferson|
78% of Precincts Reporting
In the Republican held 4th, an open seat, things are much closer and I fully expect a recount:
|44,497||48.07%||John Fleming (R)||–|
|44,141||47.69%||Paul J. Carmouche|
100% of Precincts Reporting.
Newly reelected Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) credited Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin with firing up his base and allowing him to cruise to a victory over Democrat Jim Martin.
Chambliss heaped praise on Palin, saying she has a “great future” in the GOP.
“I can’t overstate the impact she had down here. All these folks did a great job coming in,” he said, referring to former presidential candidates Mike Huckabee and Rudy Giuliani. “They all allow you [to] add momentum to where we were in the campaign. But when she walks in a room, folks just explode.”
“The margin you see in this race, I think you can attribute to her involvement in the end,” McKoon said.
“I might point out, as I told you when we walked in, since the race is over, no one pays attention to me at all … Maybe you will walk outside with me or something later and say hello to me,” Biden said,
Republican Govs. Rick Perry of Texas, Mark Sanford of South Carolina and Sarah Palin of Alaska, led a spirited debate about the pitfalls of adding to the $10.7-trillion federal debt. “They warned that the U.S. economy could collapse”, said Governor Paterson
The most exciting politician at the National Governors Association (NGA) conference was not President-elect Barack Obama, D, nor was it the former movie action star, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, R-Calif. The politician everyone wanted was Alaska’s Gov. Sarah Palin, the former Republican vice presidential candidate.
“I still have great concerns, when much of the economic problem that we are facing today perhaps was caused by too much debt that solving those problems will not come from incurring more debt”, said Palin.
Finally, watch this…
Did Chambliss endorse Palin for 2012?
In the last couple weeks we’ve seen no shortage of sentiment implying that the GOP is in something akin to death throes, provided that it doesn’t come to resemble something other than the modern GOP. This post has been building in me for a while, but the latest piece by Ron Brownstein, titled The Bush GOP’s Fatal Contraction, kind of set me off.
Look, I’m not going to say that nothing bad happened to Republicans on November 4. I don’t need to repeat the litany of losses we suffered that day. If you’ve forgotten, read Brownstein’s piece. I’ve seen those numbers myself.
But I don’t think its fair to say that “Bush leaves behind a party that looks less like a coalition than a clubhouse.” It is a pretty d*mn big clubhouse. In the past few years, under a Republican President’s watch, we’ve had two wars go badly, one of which a very large chunk of the country believes was unnecessary and founded on lies, a recession begin, instances of severe corruption, sex scandals, graft, massive deficit spending, and a city go under water, the financial system collapse, and a Republican President argue for a $700 billion bailout. All that was missing was plagues of locusts, and I’d have signed up for Hal Lindsay’s newsletter. The Democrats nominated not just a political candidate, but a pop culture phenomenon, who raised three quarters of a billion dollars over the course of his campaign, who ran (at least in Virginia) on a platform of ending a foreign adventure, tax cuts for 95% of the American people, a health care plan in the middle of the free market and government-run plan, and good old fashioned mom and apple pie.
The result? The Democrat got about 53% of the vote, about the same as the first President Bush got against Dukakis. Lest you think that this can all be chalked up to the racism of those darned West Virginians, Obama only ran about eight-tenths of a point behind Congressional Democrats.
In other words, about 9 in 20 voters voted for Republicans, versus 11 in 20 Democrats. In similar circumstances like 1952 and 1920, the verdict against the in-party has been much more dramatic. This is a bad result, but it is not a “chuck the social/fiscal/defense conservatives over the edge” bad result.
Brownstein continues that “[t]he consistent thread linking the 2006 and 2008 elections was the narrowing of the playing field for Republicans even as Democrats extended their reach into places once considered reliably “red.” Pardon my colloquialisms, but “well duh.” The Republican party consistently failed to perform and to produce good results over the past four years, and when it did (in Iraq), it was too late for the 2006 elections, and just in time for the business cycle to swing negative. When the Republican party was performing well, from about 2001-2003, it looked like reliably blue areas of the country like the upper midwest and the Pacific Northwest were trending their direction, while nothing was going right for Democrats. When you have power and you govern well, the country swings your way. When you have power and you don’t the country does the opposite. Very quickly, it turns out.
The results of this election should not have surprised anyone, and if they did it should have only surprised them by how well the Republicans performed given the circumstances. When you have a President with 25% approval ratings, you don’t make advances into blue states, you struggle to hold on to purple states, and you lose some ground in red states. That’s not partisanship, that’s common sense.
And Brownstein overlooks the most important fact of all when he writes:
But to win the GOP nomination, McCain embraced Bush’s core economic and foreign policies and then selected, in Sarah Palin, a running mate who waged the culture war with a zeal that made Bush and Karl Rove look squeamish. Both decisions weakened McCain’s position with centrist voters; then the financial collapse deepened the hole.
The very important fact that he overlooks is that even with Sarah Palin and McCain’s supposed embrace of Bush’s economic and foreign policies, McCain was leading Obama before the financial collapse took place (and this was well outside the time of the regular convention bounce). Obama was reduced to making snarky comments about lipstick on pigs and old dead fish and running commercials about how McCain couldn’t send e-mails. He was getting ready to drop Keating 5 ads. In other words, up until September 15, this was a very winnable race for Republicans. It wasn’t just at the Presidential level either — between the RNC and the financial collapse, every generic congressional ballot poll had the Democrats’ lead in single digits; we also had the first poll showing Republicans leading in the generic ballot since 2004. We were headed toward a three or four Senate seat loss, rather than the seven or eight one we’re looking at today. Given the overall condition of the country even pre-AIG/Lehman Brothers, that is astounding.
If McCain had pulled it off, and Obama had received only 49% of the vote and Democrats had made minimal gains in Congress or worse, the conclusion would be either (1) that Americans are racist or (2) that Democrats just can’t win the Presidency. Sorry, but the difference between a permanent Republican majority and a pup tent Republican party isn’t 4% of the vote.
Anyway, the point of all of this is to go back to something very, very important that Patrick Ruffini wrote about a week ago, and which conservatives should ponder carefully before they start excommunicating any branch of the party or otherwise seriously altering their message. He writes:
American elections are by and large not referendums on ideologies. They are contests of personality, optics, and performance in office. This goes the same for when they win or we win — whether it’s 1980, 1994, or 2006/2008. The Democrats did not have to change their ideology to win; they needed to change the charisma level of their standardbearer and needed an economic crisis and a prolonged unpopular war.
Because ideology doesn’t matter in elections, and so much of politics depends on ephemeral characteristics like personality and who was in when the economy cycled south, the parties paradoxically have relatively wide latitude to govern ideologically without fear of public backlash once they get in. This is why cries of “socialism” were so ineffective during the campaign, and likewise why Bush got most of what he wanted in his early Presidency, even before 9/11. If Barack Obama is able to adopt far-left policies and make it look like he’s making the trains run on time, the country will enter a new liberal era not by virtue of public opinion, but by acquiesence to what appears to be competent governance. In 1993-94, the Clintons tried to move the country to the left and looked incompetent in the process. It was the latter more than the former that opened a door for conservatives in 1994.
This is spot on. Republicans didn’t lose because they were too conservative, or not conservative enough, or didn’t ban abortion, or wanted to ban gay marriage. They lost because they were given the reigns of power, and they didn’t perform. If you look at the big party changes across recent American elections: 2006/08, 1994, 1982, 1980, 1974, 1966, 1958, they share a common thread: The in-party screwed up. If the Democrats screw up, all of those glowing internal exit poll numbers about Hispanics and youth and turnout and what-not will turn as depressing for them as they did in 2002 and 2004, when we were crowing about how Republicans had won 97 of the 100 fastest-growing counties.
That’s the worst thing about this election for Republicans — our fate is not really in our hands. But in the meantime, we shouldn’t act like the results from November 4 are a 1964/1984 “will we ever govern again” result, because they weren’t. What we’re doing on this site is important, and the party does need to examine how it interacts with its online communities, how it presents its message, and how it attacks the incoming administration. But that’s ultimately for what happens when we are handed the reins of power, to try and make sure we don’t screw up again. At what point in time we’re handed the reins depends as much on the results the incoming Administration is perceived as supplying as it does anything we do in the background, but in the meantime, we’ve got a pretty darned good bedrock to build upon.
Ken Rudin over at NPR has some interesting names who are coveting the open Senate seat in NY. The junior Senator was not scheduled to face re-election until 2012:
There is no shortage of Democrats who are hoping for an appointment by New York Gov. David Paterson (D) should Clinton leave to join the Cabinet. The list includes state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, who unsuccessfully sought the governorship in 2002 and who might have been looking at a primary challenge to Paterson in 2010; Rep. Nita Lowey of Westchester, who was planning to run for the Senate herself in 2000 until Clinton decided she was a New Yorker; Rep. Brian Higgins of Buffalo, who would give the Democrats an upstate presence; Rep. Nydia Velazquez of Brooklyn, the first Puerto Rican woman in the House; and environmental activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr., whose father once held the seat. Any appointee would have to face the voters in a special election in 2009.
Governor Paterson hinted to the Post that he may appoint himself.
On the undecided House races:
California 04: As the count continues, Republican Tom McClintock’s lead over Democrat Charlie Brown is up to 970 votes out of more than 312,000 counted. The incumbent, Republican John Doolittle, is retiring.
Ohio 15: In the battle for the seat of retiring Republican Deborah Pryce, GOP candidate Steve Stivers leads Democrat Mary Jo Kilroy by 149 votes.
Virginia 05: Tom Perriello (D) has increased his lead over GOP incumbent Virgil Goode to 745 votes. Perriello has already declared victory.
In addition, two Louisiana races go into December runoffs.
You can join the “Rudy for NY Governor” Facebook group here.
Man, if there is one person that deserves to be in Washington, it’s Tom McClintock, and it looks like we may get our wish.
It could be days or weeks before a winner is declared in the 4th Congressional District, a longtime conservative stronghold in Northern California where fewer than 500 votes separated the candidates Wednesday.
Democrats’ desire to grow their 34-19 majority in California’s House delegation — and pile onto their expanded majorities in Washington — hung on the outcome in the 4th district. Democrat Charlie Brown, a retired Air Force lieutenant colonel, was in a dead heat there with Republican Tom McClintock, a state senator from Southern California’s Thousand Oaks area.
McClintock led Brown by 451 votes out of 311,091 cast, according to early results from the secretary of state Wednesday. Up to 40,000 or more provisional and absentee ballots remained to be counted.
If no candidate is more than ½ of 1 percentage point ahead in the semiofficial Election Day results, county election officials will automatically begin partial manual audits. After the counties deliver their totals to the secretary of state in December the candidates will have the option to ask for a recount.
Both campaigns issued statements Wednesday supporting the vote-counting process. Each also predicted their candidates would eventually be declared the winner.
Nobody has been a better fighter for the conservative cause in California than Tom McClintock (and an FDT guy also ). If there is one more shining light in the bitterness of 2008, this may be it. I would be so proud to be able to say Congressman McClintock!
UPDATE: Another race that has gone unnoticed, Duncan Hunter Jr. successfully kept his father’s congressional seat in GOP hands. A fine victory for a good man, and the son of one too.
Congressional Republicans significantly underperformed in comparison to the McCain/Palin ticket. In fact, some of them owe their re-election to the Presidential ticket.
OR– With 75% reporting, Smith (R) leads Merkley (D) by 15,143 votes.
AK– With 99% reporting, Stevens (R) leads Begich (D) by 3,353 votes.
MN– With 100% reporting, Coleman (R) leads Franken (D) by 571 votes. Expect a recount.
For those of you who are satisfied that the Democrats did not reach the magic 60 seats in the Senate, be careful not to gloat. Just about all of the Democratic seats up for grabs in the 2010 Senate elections are VERY safe. The Republicans will have at least 9 seats that will be seriously contested by the Democrats. Vitter, Bond, Voinovich, Burr, Specter, Isakson, Bunning, Martinez, and maybe an open seat in Arizona (McCain).
The Democrats currently hold a 80 seat majority in the House of Representatives (252-152), but this could grow to as much as a 85 seat majority when the final districts are reported and the run-off elections take place.
– The Republican party does not have a single Congressman in the northeastern United States, and were defeated in most of the open seat contests across the country.
– The Republicans gained back Tom Delay’s old suburban Houston seat, defeating Rep. Nick Lampson.
– The Republicans displayed great strength in south Florida, defending all their seats and gaining back Mark Foley’s old seat.
Electoral College predictions by 1pm Tuesday. For now, the other races.
There are eleven Governor’s races this year: WA, MT, UT, ND, MO, IN, WV, NC, DE, VT,and NH. Only five are of interest.
MO: This race became interesting when incumbent Matt Blunt decided not to run for re-election. That set up a primary runoff between Sarah Steelman (who if elected could have run with Sarah Palin in 2012/2016 on my “all impure thoughts” ticket) and Kenny Hulshof. Republicans picked Hulshof. Apparently choosing a member of the most unpopular legislative bodies since Cromwell’s Long Parliament wasn’t a winning strategy, as he is being walloped in the polls by a Democratic candidate who generally loses his statewide races. Nixon 56, Hulshof 44.
IN: Gov. Mitch Daniels looked vulnerable for most of his term, but has turned it around and leads former Congressman Jill Long Thompson by a wide margin. Daniels 59, Thompson 41.
VT: Gov. Jim Douglas (R) will win his 3-way race. The problem is, if he doesn’t get to 50%, it goes to the (heavily Democratic) legislature. Most observers think that since Double will likely win by 20+ points the legislature will keep him. I’m not so certain.
NC: In a normal year, Pat McCrory (R) would beat Bev Perdue running away. He’s out campaigned her, out debated her, and out worked her (“I can out-learn you. I can out-read you. I can out-think you. And I can out-philosophize you. “). Plus, Democrats have held the Governor’s mansion for almost 20 years, a run which is unusual in any state. But as everyone knows, this is not a normal year. The polls are tight, but most polls show movement toward Perdue, though both are under 50%. Look for Perdue to squeek this out, 51.5-48.5.
WA: Similar story as NC. Rossi is a great candidate, and the polls have been close, but with Gov. Gregoire hovering around 50%. In a normal year, he’d win, but I think she’ll win surprisingly easily this year, 53-47%.
This is hard to predict. In 2006 we had a plethora of good district-by-district polling. This year, we’re left with pretty intermittant SUSA polling, campaign polls, and Kos/R2K polls (which even Jerome Armstrong has labeled as not salvageable, at least in the national iteration). And weird things are going on. For one thing, as I’ve noted before Democrats are not performing in the generic balloting as they would if you expected them to pick up another 30 seats. Stu Rothenberg is my favorite House handicapper, but SUSA has races like NY-26, and KY-2 as double-digit Republican leads, even as he classifies them as tossups.
On the other hand, the NRCC sure is spending and cutting as if it expects a debacle, and Virgil Goode is running negative ads against his opponent, a sure sign he expects a close race.
So here’s what I think. Republicans pick up FL-16, TX-22, NH-01, PA-11, LA-06, and AL-05. Democrats get AK-AL, AZ-01, FL-24, NY-13, NY-25, OH-16, VA-11, NC-08, NM-01, NM-02, MI-09, IL-11, CO-04, PA-03, OH-15 (too bad), NY-29, NE-02, CT-04, FL-21, MD-01, MI-07, and WA-08. I’ll also say that there are an additional 6 seats they will pickup where sleepy incumbents did not erect a sufficient defence, for a net pickup of 22. But it’s mostly guesswork here at this point.
The big storyline is whether Democrats can get to 60. It’s a false storyline, because Arlen Specter, Susan Collins, and Olympia Snowe will join with Democrats on many issues, and more than a few Democrats will join with Republicans on issues (I’m looking at you, Ben Nelson). But it makes for good theatre. Onwards!
We’ll set aside the eleven seats for each party generally regarded as safe.
AK: Most polls show a surprisingly close race for a Senator just convicted of eight felonies. Interestingly, Lisa Murkowski led in all of one poll in 2004 before pulling it out. Won’t happen here. Begich 56, Stevens 44.
CO: Mark Udall is way to the left of this state, but it doesn’t matter in a year like this. Schaffer’s never been above 44 percent in a poll. Udall 57, Schaffer 43.
GA: Saxby, you shouldn’t have voted for the bailout bill when you were up for re-election in this populist state. Chambliss 49, Martin 48, and it heads to a runoff which Chambliss wins.
KY: McConnell’s numbers have improved, and Obama isn’t going to help Lunsford any. McConnell 54, Lunsford 46.
LA: Polls have shown a tightening, and Jindal has cut an ad for Kennedy, indicating he doesn’t think it is hopeless. Still, it probably isn’t enough, and a huge black turnout will crush Kennedy’s hopes. Landrieu 52, Kennedy 48, but don’t rule out an upset here.
ME: One of the Democrats’ best hopes early on never really panned out. Collins 56 Allen 44.
MN: One of the toughest races to call. Only the Strib poll has Franken ahead, and it historically tilts Democratic. Independent Dean Barkley is a wildcard here, since they tend to underperform nationally, but overperform in MN. Still, I gotta say Coleman 52, Franken 48 (2PV).
MS: Wicker seems to be pulling away in this special election. On the one hand, high African American turnout could help Musgrove, on the other hand, the fact that candidates don’t run with party labels could diminish the impact of this somewhat. Wicker 54, Musgrove 46.
NH: An interesting race. Sununu is waaaaay down, which is never a good sign. But Shaheen is dancing around 50%, and the case can be made that she is the incumbent for all intents and purposes in this race. But not a strong one. Shaheen 55, Sununu 45. Too bad. Sununu is a good Senator.
NM: See CO. Udall is too far to the left for the state, but he’ll still win walking away. Udall 57, Pearce 43.
NC: This is one where the DSCC’s cash edge really hurt. Mason Dixon has Dole up 1, but the difference is the number of undecideds; Dole’s 46% doesn’t inspire confidence. Hagan 52/48.
OR: The interesting thing is that the voting is basically done in this mail-in state. Merkley hasn’t ever cracked 50% in non-partisan polling, but only Rasmussen has Smith above 43%. I hope Rasmussen knows something the rest of us don’t, because Smith is a good Senator as well. Merkley 54%, Smith 46%
VA: Will Mark Warner top 60%? My guess is he will. Warner’s career will be interesting to watch, as he ran and governed as moderate Republican, quite frankly. Will he get on board with the Obama plan? Wil he be able to win 60% next in this purple state with a voting record on the left of the Senate? Time will tell. Warner 63%, Gilmore 37%. Time for Virginia Republicans to start rebuilding.
The congressional landscape looks bleak for Republicans this year, as Democrats are poised to pad their majorities in both houses of Congress in just three short days. What will things look like when the dust settles? Here are my projections:
According to the polling averages over at Real Clear Politics, the Republican-held open seats in Colorado, New Mexico, and Virginia are all poised to go to the Democrats by double-digits. Mark Warner and Messrs. Udall and Udall will almost certainly be heading to the United States Senate in January.
Meanwhile, in New Hampshire and Alaska, Democrats Shaheen and Begich are both on the cusp of double-digit territory over their respective opponents, Sen. Sununu and Sen. Stevens. A good rule of thumb in a Senate race to determine whether or not an incumbent will hold onto his or her seat is to examine whether or not the incumbent is able to cross the 50% threshold in the pre-election polling, the logic being that the undecideds almost always break for the challenger. Based on my recollection, this held true in 2002, 2004, and 2006, and will probably hold true this year as well. As such, a ten-point deficit for Sununu and Stevens is a death knell for both. Add two more seats to the Democratic column.
In Oregon, Democrat Merkley only leads Gordon Smith by 5 points in the RCP average, but Smith is an incumbent stuck at 43%. Another pickup for the Democrats.
In North Carolina, Liddy Dole has proven that she is no Bob Dole with her lackluster single term in the Senate, leading to a tough reelection fight that culminated in a disgusting ad attempting to invalidate her opponent’s fitness for office based on her religious beliefs. Unlike her husband, Dole has proved herself a horrid politician who went nowhere fast in the 2000 GOP presidential race and who is only currently in the Senate due the Republican tide of 2002. Dole is an incumbent hovering in the mid-40s and her opponent is pushing 50%. Stick a fork in this one.
In the great state of Minnesota, Sen. Norm Coleman is an example of a perfectly reasonable, clean, competent, halfway decent Republican officeholder who may lose his seat to a joke of a candidate due to the toxins that the Republican brand currently exudes. But recent polling suggests that even Minnesotans may not be so crazy as to reject a center-right Republican over an unqualified leftist entertainer. According to RCP, three of the last five polls show Coleman ahead. Both Rasmussen and Research 2000 show movement in Coleman’s direction, so much so that Coleman now leads Franken in the RCP average. The presence of a major third party candidate means that the normal 50% rule for an incumbent doesn’t apply, meaning that this race could go either way. Still, due to last minute movement towards Norm, I am going to call this race for Coleman by a hair. Republican retention.
The three GOP seats that remain endangered are all located in the South. In Mississippi, Sen. Wicker appeared to be in trouble for awhile, often trailing Democrat Musgrove and frequently polling below 50%. But the senator has just hit 50 in the RCP average and now leads his opponent by double-digits. GOP hold.
In Kentucky and Georgia, both Mitch McConnell and Saxby Chambliss are hovering in the danger zone between 45 and 50%. But both have managed to maintain modest leads over their respective Democratic opponents as well. Both are probably close enough to 50 that they’ll both beat the Democrats to the finish line, though Georgia is certainly one of those cases where all the polls could be wrong due to increased African-American turnout that would make the likely voter models obsolete. Still, based on Chambliss’ consistent lead over his opponent, I’m calling both Kentucky and Georgia for the Republicans.
Finally, in Louisiana, Republicans have been making hay over Gov. Jindal’s endorsement of GOP candidate John Kennedy. While this could be a sleeper race, the hype feels more like conservative wishful thinking and a desire for Jindal to do something big and propel himself into the national spotlight. Democrat hold.
As such, I am predicting a 2009 Senate comprised of 58 Democrats and 42 Republicans, provided that Joe Lieberman continues to caucus with the Democrats.
Admittedly, I haven’t followed the race for the House with the same tenacity that I’ve followed Senate races and the presidential race. I will be awaiting the projections of my R4’08 colleague Sean Oxendine on this issue. Until then, I will have to rely on Scott Elliott’s work, which was strikingly accurate over the last couple of election cycles. Scott predicts a House with 258 Democrats and 177 Republicans, which seems to be in line with the conventional wisdom right now. Note that the bulk of the seats Republicans are losing are located in the North and the West, regions in which the GOP needs to regain relevance in order to become a national party once more.
Thoughts? Comments? Have your own projections? Fire away.
It seems Senator Thompson and the RNC Bus Tour are making an effort to target one congressman in particular, as shown in today’s released radio ad for the 12th district:
Former U.S. Senator Fred Thompson (R-TN) is appearing in a new :60 radio spot that begins airing throughout the 12th Congressional District today.
The following is Senator Thompson’s portion of the just released commercial:
“This is Fred Thompson. Whether it’s condemning Marines or insulting his own constituents, John Murtha has apparently forgotten who he works for.
This year folks in the 12th District have a choice.
Retired Lieutenant Colonel Bill Russell will be a strong, outspoken voice for families, fiscal responsibility and our values.
Bill Russell will serve in Congress with honor as he served his country before.”