Baseball Crank
Covering the Front and Back Pages of the Newspaper
February 18, 2010
POLITICS: Kudlow For Senate?

I've suspected for some time now that the California Senate race against Barbara Boxer was basically the high-watermark Senate race for the GOP - that is, the toughest race that has a non-trivial chance to be winnable if everything breaks just right. But the recent withdrawal of Evan Bayh from his own re-election race in Indiana (not as "safe" a seat as Boxer's, given Indiana's natural Republican tilt, but an entrenched incumbent with a $13 million warchest) is a reminder, as was Scott Brown's victory in Massachusetts, that you really never know where your opportunities are until you press them.

The GOP in New York is already stretched fairly thin trying to fight a two-front war against what should be vulnerable candidates, Gov. David Paterson (who is basically doomed, but likely will be replaced as the Democratic nominee by the more formidable Attorney General Andrew Cuomo) and his Senate appointee, Kirsten Gillibrand (who should emerge successful from what nonetheless promises to be a vigorous challenge from former Tennessee Congressman Harold Ford). Former Long Island Congressman Rick Lazio is the leading contender to be Republican nominee in the Governor's race, while the Senate field lacks even a candidate as mildly well-known as Lazio, assuming George Pataki resists entreaties to run.

Now, with polls showing the generally invulnerable-seeming Chuck Schumer bleeding popularity, Republicans may open a third front if they can talk longtime CNBC/National Review economics commentator Larry Kudlow into running. Kudlow was previously mentioned as a possible Senate contender against Chris Dodd before the field lined up in Connecticut, but New Yorkers aren't generally that picky about that sort of thing, at least in Senate races. Kudlow would lock up the Conservative Party nod, which always helps.

As the Daily News warns:

Schumer is a formidable opponent. While Wall Street might not be as happy with him as it once was, he still has managed to amass a whopping $19.3 million worth of campaign cash.

Also, the polls have been mixed on New Yorkers' opinion of Schumer. A recent Q poll put his job approval rating at 58-30, while a Marist poll put him at just 47 percent - his lowest rating since April 2001.

Schumer is a relentless campaigner and, with the likely departure of Harry Reid, may end up running to be the leader of the Senate Democrats next spring. I can't say I see a realistic path to beat him, from where we stand today, and Kudlow's a political novice. That said, you gotta be in it to win it, as the saying goes; if something else comes out to drive Schumer down, you'd hate to not have a horse in the race. And even if Schumer does end up winning handily, if he's forced to devote his time and money to running his own race instead of propping up Gillibrand and other Democrats around the country, Kudlow will have accomplished something.

Posted by Baseball Crank at 12:26 PM | Politics 2010 | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0)
Comments

Schumer and his POS wife have many skeletons in their closet. A committed candidate who isn't afraid to get down and dirty could make this a surprisingly close race. No on loves Schumer. He comes across as what he is -an arrogant prick. I think a nice way to start would be educating Catholic voters about comments he made during federal judge confirmation hearings about a judge or judges being to Catholic to serve. We can then push the whole invasion of privacy thing he did by having staffers look into Republicans credot reports, etc. The financial/contract shenanigans of his wife at the various agencies she has served in as a Commissioner or other highly placed jobs and then we could start wrap harry Reid and Obama around his neck-out side NYC that might gain some traction.

Posted by: dch at February 18, 2010 1:33 PM

dch -- I am fond of my pr*ck; I do not appreciate it being compared to Chuck Schumer. I think you owe all males an apology.

Posted by: wd at February 18, 2010 3:56 PM

If Kudlow was going to run, why wouldn't he run against Gillibrand?

For that matter, if name recognition is the only thing Republicans can hang their hat on, why not stick Doug Hoffman in the race? He almost won a House seat as a terrible candidate. With more time and money, maybe he could get polished up. He represents what a lot of people want right now, even in NY: smaller government, outsider, stands up to the establishment.

Posted by: JR at February 18, 2010 4:01 PM

I don't see any way that Schumer is actually vulnerable when he can use Gillebrand as a human shield. He's pretty much guaranteed to face the second best GOP candidate, and unless that person is independantly rich, the one with the second most money by a wide margin. Plus, unlike Martha Coakley, he definitely won't be complacent or outworked.

Posted by: Jerry at February 18, 2010 4:10 PM


Larry Kudlow in the race would force Schumer to defend the Democratic economic policies. As they are undefensible and Kudlow is skilled at bringing this to light, his candidacy can only help the Republican party in New York.

Run Larry, run.

Posted by: DD at February 18, 2010 5:04 PM

The Republicans only have a chance if they can find someone who can carry NYC-otherwise we will be stuck with Chuckyou Schumer and whatever other flunky Democratic person runs. Heck, NYC even voted in a non-NYer (Hillary) instead of a native son (Lazo) when they were given a choice.

So we are doomed until we can find a good candidate.

Posted by: Lee at February 18, 2010 7:04 PM

@wd I apologize to your member and all other members for comparing them to Chuckie Schumer. Also my spelling errors-big fingers small keys.

Posted by: dch at February 18, 2010 7:48 PM

Americans interested in encouraging Larry Kudlow to run against Chuck Schumer can sign up at www.DraftKudlow.com.

THANKS!

Posted by: michaelrcaputo at February 20, 2010 2:40 PM

Kudlow is one of those clowns who makes his living BS-ing Americans about what he knows about the economy.
Point out to him that those who followed his advice lost their money, and he'll explain that those who lose their money playing the markets because they listened to idiots like him deserve to lose their money.
That explanation is as far as he'll go with his honesty.

Posted by: Berto at February 24, 2010 1:06 AM
Site Meter 250wde_2004WeblogAwards_BestSports.jpg