The Fix

We chatted live on Friday with Fixistas from around the country about politics, the universe and everything.

Among the hot topics: more analysis of former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (if that's possible), a look at some of the best Senate races of 2010, and an update on the Fix's quest to become the "homeless man's Bill Simmons".

A few of our favorite questions are below. The full transcript is here. Have a great weekend and drink a gingerbread latte for us!

Gainesville, Va.: Hello Chris,

Thank you for taking my question. Do you think that Sarah Palin is sacrificing a Presidential run in 2012 for the sake of promoting her book and other self interests?

I get the feeling that she knows she doesn't have a snowball's chance in 2012 and this book and promotion are a vehicle for generating an income. She does have knack for taking advantage of the situation and milking it.

Why else would she write a book that clearly makes her look even more undesirable as a serious politician? I mean accusing Couric of badgering by asking her questions like what she reads? Good thing Katie did ask her "What is your favorite color?". This seems to be verse for Palinites and people who would buy the book just to read what else in in there. Thanks again.

Chris Cillizza: Ok, I am going to take one AND ONLY ONE question on the Palinator since I have written my fingers to the nubs about her this week.

I think that the book tour and all of the media interview -- although not one with the Fix! -- that Palin is doing at the moment are in pursuit of her financial interests and have little to do with political calculation.

Palin acknowledged when she resigned the governorship over the summer that she wanted and needed to make money and it seems to me that the way in which she has approached the book tour -- interviews with Oprah, Barbara Wawa and NO serious political reporters -- reveals that she wants to drive book sales first and foremost and worry about 2012 later.

I also think the score-settling element of the book -- against Couric, Steve Schmidt, Nicolle Wallace etc -- suggest that political considerations are not at the top of her mind currently.

Does that mean she won't or can't run in 2012. Nope. I got out of the Palin political prediction business a long time ago.

The Republican Governors Association held its annual meeting earlier this week in Austin, Texas, a gathering where -- for the first time in recent memory -- the GOP had something to celebrate: the twin victories of Govs.-elect Chris Christie (N.J.) and Bob McDonnell (Va.) earlier this month.

Of the gathering, the Post's Dan Balz wrote:

"Republican governors wrapped up a two-day pep rally on Thursday with an expression of confidence that the political winds have begun to shift in their direction, thanks to what they called a backlash among many voters against the policies of the Obama administration."

Jonathan Martin of Politico quoted Gov. Jim Douglas (Vt.), a sometime-ally of President Barack Obama, insisting that "the American people believe that the folks in Washington are overreaching, that the pendulum is swinging too far."

While these sorts of gatherings always take on the feel of a high school pep rally before the big football game -- no matter the broader political circumstances for the party -- it's clear that the victories of McDonnell and Christie coupled with the energetic (if unfocused) reaction of the party's base to the policies put in place by President Obama have given Republicans more reason for optimism today than at any time since the 2004 election.

(To be clear, that is a relatively low bar. Republicans went into the political wilderness in a major way following Bush's re-election as he grew increasingly less popular and it became increasingly more clear that the party was either unable or unwilling to break with the chief executive in any major way. Polls suggest that the Republican brand remains badly damaged in the eyes of the American public with most people still trusting Obama far more than Republicans in Congress to solve the major issues of the day.)

With 2010 right around the corner, there is significant movement in this month's Line as we seek to rank the ten Republicans with the most influence in the future direction of the party. This is not -- and should not be read as -- a list of who is most likely to get the GOP nod in 2012. It's still too early for that kind of handicapping.

As always, your thoughts are welcome in the comments section below. And, for MUCH more on the state of the GOP, check out the Post's Republican project.

To the Line!

10. Bobby Jindal: The Louisiana governor seems to be focused almost exclusively on his 2011 re-election bid and there seems to be consensus among smart Republican operatives that he will not be a candidate for president in 2012. But, he is the consensus favorite for the 2012 vice presidential pick -- no matter who is leading the ticket -- and Jindal is seen as a near-certain presidential candidate in 2016. Everyone in the party regards Jindal as a looming force and no one wants to be on the wrong side of him. That's influence. (Previous ranking: N/A)

9. John Cornyn: The Texas Senator and chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee will spend the next year in the limelight as his slate of candidates seek to start the GOP on the long road back to majority status. Cornyn deserves major kudos on the recruiting front; if he can manage to convince either North Dakota Gov. John Hoeven or former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani to run for the Senate, he could lay claim to one of the best classes in recent memory. (Previous ranking: 6)

8. Michael Steele: On one hand, Steele, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, deserves credit for making major financial investments in Virginia and New Jersey. On the other, he seems to have reverted to his form from earlier this year -- popping off in the media with impolitic statements that draw lots of negative press attention to him and the committee. Steele deserves a spot on this Line simply because of his prominence within the party and his control over the purse strings at the RNC. But, he would be ranked far higher if not for his tendency to say whatever is on his mind at any given moment. (Previous ranking: 7)

7. Bob McDonnell: Whether you are a Republican or a Democrat, it's hard to argue that McDonnell ran a picture-perfect campaign. From the very beginning he talked relentlessly about jobs while downplaying his social conservatism. The result? A massive, sweeping victory in a state where Democrats had won the last two governors races, hold both Senate seats and won in the 2008 presidential election. McDonnell -- along with pollster Glen Bolger and media consultant Doug McAuliffe -- laid out a blueprint this fall for any Republican seeking to win a swing seat in the Obama era. In doing so, McDonnell almost certainly guaranteed himself a place in the veep discussion in 2012. (Previous ranking: 10)

6. John Thune: The South Dakota Senator makes his debut on the Line thanks to a very positive column from conservative commenter David Brooks and increasing signs that Thune is working to raise his profile in advance of the 2012 race. As we wrote this week in the Fix, Thune is doing everything to put himself in position to make a real run at the Republican nomination if that's what he decides he wants to do. (Previous ranking: N/A)

1. Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour's (R) repeated refusal to say that Sarah Palin is "qualified" to be president of the United States during an interview Thursday night with "Hardball" host Chris Matthews is illustrative of the problems the former Alaskan governor can -- and likely will -- cause the party. Asked by Matthews whether Palin was qualified -- in the wake of a Washington Post/ABC poll that showed more than six in ten Americans didn't believe she was -- Barbour responded: "Well, constitutionally, she sure is." Despite repeated proddings from Matthews, Barbour would go no further. Why? There's undoubtedly some parochial political concerns involved since Barbour fancies himself a potential candidate in 2012 and doesn't want to be seen offering too fulsome of praise for a would-be rival. But, the broader point is that Barbour, as chairman of the Republican Governors Association and a past chairman of the Republican National Committee, is a card-carrying member of the GOP establishment and his unease with wrapping his arms fully around Palin is evidence of a general uncertainty from party leaders about how to deal with her. Palin is without doubt a political force but she is, as her resignation earlier this year proved, decidedly unpredictable. Barbour and other establishment leaders want to take advantage of the passion of Palin supporters but are still wary of bringing her entirely into the fold. It's a fascinating back and forth that will continue to play itself out as Palin gets more active in political races next year. (Also read: Why Stu Rothenberg is sick of Palin talk -- subscription only.)

2. New polling in Nebraska, Louisiana and Arkansas commissioned by Health Care for America Now (HCAN), a liberal interest group pushing President Obama's plan, and obtained by the Fix shows huge majorities of voters in all three states favor the bill being debated on the floor. Eighty-eight percent of likely 2010 Nebraska voters, 84 percent of likely Arkansas voters and 82 percent of likely voters in Louisiana told Democratic pollster John Anzalone that regardless of whether they supported the health care legislation, they believed it should get a full floor debate. (Those numbers include more than two-third support among Republican and independent voters.) The release of the data comes roughly 24 hours before the Senate will vote on doing just that with 60 votes needed to get it onto the floor. And, it's clearly meant to influence the votes of the three Democrats -- Sens. Ben Nelson (Neb.), Mary Landrieu (La.) and Blanche Lincoln (Ark.) -- who have publicly wavered on the vote. Lincoln seemed to signal that she would vote with Democrats to get the bill to the floor in an email sent to supporters Thursday. "Even if the Senate decides to open debate on this measure, there will be many days and weeks of efforts to improve it and I will look forward to your comments and observations," wrote Lincoln. Meanwhile on the House side, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) is going up with ads -- with a total cost of $1 million -- in eight House districts represented by Democrats who voted for the health care bill. The ads comes just days after American United and the American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees launched similar commercials in eight districts -- and represent an attempt by liberal groups to answer the pounding these Members are taking from the 60 Plus Association and the Chamber of Commerce. The SEIU ads will run in Indiana's 2nd, 8th and 9th districts, Maine's 2nd, North Dakota's at-large seat, New Hampshire's 2nd and Virginia's 5th.

3. It's over (again) in New York's 23rd district where Rep. Bill Owens's (D) lead over Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman is beyond the number of uncounted absentee ballots, according to the Watertown Daily Times. The paper reports that Owens is now ahead by 3,105 votes with 3,072 uncounted. Hoffman has grown increasingly outspoken about the results of late, insisting that the election was stolen from him by conservative bogeyman ACORN and promising a challenge of the results. Hoffman is likely to be buoyed by a new Public Policy Polling, um, poll that shows a majority (52 percent) of Republicans nationally believe ACORN played a role in stealing the election for Owens. (Of course, PPP -- an auto-dialed survey -- also showed Hoffman beating Owens by 17 points in a poll released 48 hours before Owens won.) When all the shouting is done -- and there will be shouting -- Owens will still be the congressman from the 23rd. Republicans would better expend their energy in recruiting a serious challenger for Owens in 2010 rather than fighting yesterday's battle.

4. Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R) is up with her first ad of her primary challenge to Gov. Rick Perry, a 30-second commercial that seeks to explain to voters why -- despite past pledges to the contrary -- she isn't resigning her Senate seat. "I'm going to do everything I can to stop the government takeover of health care," Hutchison says in the ad. "And it's why I'm staying in the Senate through the primary, at risk to my political future." The aim of the ad, which will be running on broadcast and cable stations statewide, is two-fold: to put her decision in the broader "fighting for you" context and to differentiate her policy before politics approach from that of Perry. Hutchison and her team also know that Perry is going to slam the senator for her vote in favor of the TARP legislation last year and want to make sure that her work in Washington isn't an unalloyed negative for the campaign. (Perry quickly launched an ad of his own asserting that "Washington is broken" and painting himself as a problem solver.) Staying in the Senate and fighting against a "government takeover of health care" (as she says in the ad) is a good way to make Washington work for KBH in the context of a campaign.

5. The Democratic National Committee raked in $11.5 million in October, roughly $3 million for than the Republican National Committee, according to reports to be filed with the Federal Election Commission today. Both committees spent heavily in the last month on races in Virginia and New Jersey and, as a result, will show less money in the bank at the end of October than they did at the close of September; the DNC had $12.3 million on hand at the end of the last month while the RNC had $11.2 million. (Those numbers are mitigated somewhat for Republicans by the fact that the DNC carried $4.4 in debt while the RNC has no debt.) Both sides paint the numbers as a victory for their side. For Republicans, staying competitive with the DNC despite being out of the White House is a sign that their donor base is returning. For Democrats, the RNC's inability to use the energy in their base to drastically outraise the DNC bodes well for the 2010 midterms.

Is former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani weighing a Senate bid? Photo by Bonnie Jo Mount of the Washington Post

After months of relative quiet regarding the political future of former mayor Rudy Giuliani (R), the New York newspapers have exploded this afternoon with reports that not only has he decided not to run for governor in 2010 but that he plans to enter the Senate race against Kirsten Gillibrand instead.

Maria Comella, a spokeswoman for Giuliani, released a statement insisting that no decisions -- about the Senate or governors races -- have been made; "When Mayor Giuliani makes a decision about serving in public office, he will inform New Yorkers on his own," added Comella.

According to conversations with several Giuliani insiders, the Mayor has not made up his mind yet although a run for either governor or Senate is not likely. Interestingly, a Senate bid appears to be the more likely choice if Giuliani decides to get back into the political game, note the sources.

A Giuliani Senate candidacy would be news to most national Republicans who say they have heard or seen little in recent weeks to indicate that the mayor is actively considering a challenge to Gillibrand.

Of course, Giuliani's near-universal name recognition in the Empire State coupled with a vast national fundraising network built during his 2008 run for president make him far less dependent than a typical Senate challenger on entities like the National Republican Senatorial Committee and its ilk.

On its face, the Senate race is a more winnable race for Giuliani. Gillibrand was appointed to the seat by Gov. David Paterson (D) earlier this year and remains a somewhat unknown commodity statewide. The White House, however, has done much to strengthen Gillibrand's hand -- most notably getting Rep. Steve Israel to bow out of a primary challenge to her.

While Paterson is deeply unpopular and trails Giuliani by double digits in most general election polls, there is almost no political person -- of either party -- in the Empire State who believes that he will be the Democratic nominee for governor. That title is almost certain to fall to state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, who, although he has yet to give any signal of his interest in the race, holds a huge lead over Paterson and is regarded as near-lock next November as well given the Democratic lean of the state. Giuliani would also have to beat former Rep. Rick Lazio in a primary for governor, a doable but not simple task.

What remains to be seen is whether Giuliani, the consummate chief executive (for both good and ill), wants to become a member of the minority party in a chamber that proudly touts its reputation as the world's greatest deliberative body. Giuliani has already run for Senate once -- an abbreviated bid against Hillary Clinton in 2000 -- and those close to him say he misses the political game.

Still, the Senate seems an odd fit for someone with Giuliani's interests and approach to politics and governing. Our bet? Giuliani stays in the private sector, biding his time for a race that's a better fit.

That's the number of points separating Florida Gov. Charlie Crist and former state House Speaker Marco Rubio in their Republican primary fight for the seat of retiring Sen. Mel Martinez (R), according to anew survey conducted by Research 2000 for the liberal Daily Kos blog.

Crist leads Rubio 47 percent to 37 percent in the survey, a huge change from January when Crist held a wide 57 percent to 4 percent edge over Rubio (state Attorney General Bill McCollum took 11 percent) in a similar Research 2000 poll.

A Quinnipiac University poll released in late October showed a similarly rapid narrowing of Crist's margin from 29 points in August to just 15 last month.

That Rubio has made up so much ground without spending any real money on voter contact -- television or radio ads, direct mail etc. -- should be very worrisome to Crist as it seems to suggest considerable softness in his numbers. In other words, the more Republicans look closely at Crist, the less they like what they see.

Crist has struggled mightily over the past month or so to square some of the positions he has taken as governor -- particularly his support for President Barack Obama's economic stimulus package -- with the prospect of a serious primary challenge from his ideological right in the form of Rubio.

These numbers will almost certainly aggravate those problems for Crist while simultaneously handing even more momentum to Rubio who, by all reports, is raking in money hand over fist in recent weeks as he capitalizes on his newfound status as a conservative cause celebre.

While the race is clearly moving in the wrong direction for Crist, assuming all is lost for the governor is an overreaction.

"We are confident that as we start a dialogue with voters
about Charlie Crist's vision of less government and more freedom that he will take to Washington, and, as voters learn who the real Marco Rubio is, Charlie Crist will undoubtedly be the next U.S. Senator from Florida," said Crist communications director Andrea Saul.

Adam Smith, ace reporter for the St. Pete Times, penned a fascinating column offering Crist five pieces of advice on how to battle back against Rubio. Among them: "govern", "aggressively start questioning Rubio's record" and "Lay off the 'I'm more conservative' stuff, because nobody buys it."

Smith's most important piece of advice to Crist? "Show some principle." Crist's life in electoral politics reveals a desire to try to be everything to everybone. He has largely avoided taking on controversial fights for fear that they would impact his sky-high approval ratings. But, voters don't like politicians when they act like politicians and so the best thing Crist can do is decide what he believes in and talk about that relentlessly between now and the Aug. 24, 2010 primary.

Will he do it? The Kos numbers show that if Crist doesn't start making some changes soon, he is in real danger of being washed away by Rubio's momentum.

With so much attention being paid to former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's book tour, we decided to put our political nerd cap on -- ok, fine, we always wear it -- and go inside the numbers of where she's stopping and why.

All told, Palin is making 31 stops in 25 states. Florida will see the most of Palin (three stops) while she will make two appearances each in Idaho, Indiana, Ohio and Texas. Palin will make not a single stop in populous states like California or Illinois.

The conventional wisdom that Palin is largely sticking to Republican-friendly areas is accurate if you look at the 2008 presidential performance of the counties in which she is stopping. (A full list of counties and the presidential results in each are after the jump.)

Of the 31 counties, just 11 were carried by President Barack Obama last November. Obama's best performance in a "Going Rogue" county came in Hennepin County (Minneapolis, MN) where he won 64 percent; he took 59 percent in Franklin County (Columbus, OH), Cumberland County (Fort Bragg, NC) and Orange County (Orlando, FL).

The remainder of the counties in which the Palin road show will visit range from leaning Republican -- Allen County (Fort Wayne), where she will stop today, went for McCain with 52 percent -- to strongly favoring the GOP. Five of the counties where Palin will stop to hock her book -- Kootenai (Cour d'Alene, ID), Chaves (Roswell, NM), Benton (Richland, WA), Sumter (The Villages, FL) and Roanoke (Roanoke, VA) -- went for Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) with 60 percent or more in 2008.

Of course, from a purely commercial perspective, Palin's focus on Republican-leaning areas makes sense as it increases the number of books she can sell and the size of the crowds she can draw.

Whether there is a subtle political motivation within the tour, is, like many things related to Palin, extremely difficult to divine. Politico's Ben Smith, who is on the road with Palin wrote this morning that "the stop in Grand Rapids felt like a political campaign event, not a book tour. For a woman written off as a disorganized celebrity on a tour run by monomaniacal book publicists, Palin and her aides were clearly thinking politics."

And yet, Palin's closest advisers -- to the extent there are any -- insist that a 2012 run for president is simply not in her calculus at the moment and that seeing the book tour through a purely political lens is a mistake.

What's clear is that careful consideration went into the cities, counties and states that Palin would visit on the "Going Rogue" tour. But is it a financial consideration, a political one or a little of both?

1. Michigan Democratic Rep. Bart Stupak, the author of an amendment to the House health care bill that would ban federal funding from being used for abortions, has become a whipping boy of fellow Democrats on the campaign trail of late. New Hampshire Rep. Paul Hodes, who is running for retiring Sen. Judd Gregg's (R) seat next November, sent out an e-mail to his supporters Wednesday asking them to sign a petition insisting that the Stupak amendment be stripped from the final bill. (It is not currently in the Senate's version being carried by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.) "This amendment goes further than any other federal law in restricting a woman's right to choose," writes Hodes. "That's why I voted against it and that's why I'm fighting to ensure it is not included in the final bill."Cheryle Jackson, the president of the Chicago Urban League and a Democratic candidate for the Senate seat vacated by President Obama, is holding a press conference tomorrow in Chicago where she is expected to denounce the Stupak amendment. And, New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand called the amendment "discriminatory" and represented a "grave risk" to women. The strong reaction against Stupak -- and his measure -- highlights the fissures within a Democratic party that has seen its longtime base on the east and west coasts expand rapidly into the deep south and the mountain west in recent cycles. Many of the House Members elected in 2006 and 2008 voted for the Stupak amendment (64 Democrats voted yes) and may find themselves in a significant political peril if the final bill is stripped of such language. It's the problem of a big majority -- a problem Republicans would love to have but a problem nonetheless.

2. The 60 Plus Association, a conservative leaning group, is keeping up its campaign against House Democrats who voted for President Obama's health care bill, with a national cable advertising buy launching today. "What does health care reform mean for seniors?" asks the ad's narrator. "A new report from the agency which runs Medicare says it could be devastating." The ad goes on to suggest that the president's plan could mean $500 billion in Medicare cuts and limited access to care for seniors. "Don't make us pay for health care reform by cutting Medicare," says one elderly man in the ad. "Seniors won't forget," pledges an older woman. The ad campaign, which is costing 60 Plus $500,0000 according to a source familiar with the buy, comes on top of $5.5 million in spending since August by the group -- all of which has been aimed at voters 65 and older. Targeting seniors is smart politics as older voters are extremely reliable voters in low-turnout midterm elections. If seniors turn against the Obama heath care plan in large enough numbers, there will be a number of very nervous Democratic members heading into 2010.

3. And even more on the health care front...The Democratic National Committee is going after Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) for "using every trick in the book to delay a fair debate and vote on reform," according to an email from DNC executive director Jen O'Malley that will be sent to supporters today. A video of McConnell's alleged "mistruths" accompany the email, which is being sent to the full 13 million-plus person list managed by Organizing for America. (Watch the video for a guest appearance by Democratic strategist Michael Feldman.) These sorts of appeals are aimed directly at the party's base, seeking to energize them in what has been a long slog with no certain end date in sight.

4. The National Republican Senatorial Committee outraised its Democratic counterpart in October but still stands at a nearly two-to-one disadvantage in terms of cash on hand, according to reports to be filed at the Federal Election Commission. For October, the NRSC brought in $4 million as compared to $3.7 million for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. Despite that fundraising edge, the DSCC actually increased its cash edge between September and October; at the end of last month the DSCC had $11.3 million in the bank while the NRSC had just $5.8. Republicans point out that the DSCC is well behind their 2008 pace when, at this time, the committee had more than $23 million on hand. Still, the DSCC's current cash edge is nothing to sneeze at particularly when you consider the number of big and expensive states -- Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Missouri -- that are hosting competitive Senate races this cycle.

5. While former Alaska governor Sarah Palin's traveling road show continues -- making a stop today in Fort Wayne, Indiana -- there's new evidence that Democrats will use her to attack aspiring Republican candidates in 2010. Evidence: Connecticut Democrats sent around a quote on Wednesday from former ambassador Tom Foley, who is running in a Republican primary for the right to challenge Sen. Chris Dodd (D), saying he would "certainly welcome her" to the state to campaign on his behalf. "We'd welcome Sarah Palin to Connecticut, too, especially if she 'goes rogue' while she's here," joked state Democratic party spokeswoman Colleen Flanagan. It's a near-certainty that other Republican candidates running in high profile statewide races will be forced to answer the question of whether they want Palin to campaign with them -- especially those running in blue states like Delaware, Illinois and Pennsylvania.

That's President Barack Obama's job approval rating in the latest Quinnipiac University poll, the first time one of the rare times he has dipped below the critical 50 percent in a national survey since taking office in January.

Already too much and too little -- simultaneously -- is being made of the Q poll numbers.

Too much in that one poll is just that -- a single snapshot in time that should be seen as a portion of the overall political picture not mistaken for the picture itself.

A look back at recent Quinnipiac data suggests not all that much has changed in terms of Obama's standing with the public. Way back in early August, Quinnipiac showed Obama at 50 percent approval and 42 percent disapproval -- numbers that are a near facsimile of the 48 percent/42 percent score in the most recent poll.

And, when the Q poll is compared to the broad swath of data on the job approval question, it appears to be slightly lower than the average:

And yet, it's also possible to make too little of the Q poll. While Obama's name won't be on the ballot in 2010, the midterms will mark the first time that the majority of the country has a chance to send a message about how they think he is doing.

Given that, it genuinely matters to vulnerable Democrats in the House and Senate whether Obama's job approval number is at 55 percent or 45 percent in ten months time.

Under the first scenario, Obama is either a net positive or neutral for most candidates running under the party banner; under the second, he has the potential to drag down some Democrats -- particularly those running in Republican-leaning districts and states.

At issue is whether the Q poll is an aberration built on the difficulties Obama faces domestically (health care) and in foreign policy (Afghanistan) at the moment or a predictor of polls to come in which the president's job approval number will continue to trend more negative.

Democrats have to hope the former scenario comes to pass while Republicans have bet heavily on the latter. The great thing about elections is that in 349 days we'll know which side was right.

West Virginia Sen. Robert Byrd (D) became the longest serving member of Congress ever today -- marking 51 years in the chamber.

That astonishing record got us to thinking about the long history of those who have served in the House and the Senate and who -- among the thousands and thousands who have paced the floor -- is the single best legislator of all time?

There are a handful of those regularly mentioned in that conversations -- Sens. Lyndon Johnson (Texas), Ted Kennedy (Mass.) and Henry Clay (Ky.), Rep. Sam Rayburn (Texas) -- but we want to hear the opinions of Fixistas too.

Post a video response below or offer your nomination -- and why -- in the comments section. The best video nomination will get its own post later this week.

By Chris Cillizza  |  November 18, 2009; 2:13 PM ET  |  Permalink  |  Comments (88)
Categories:  House , Senate Share This:  E-Mail | Technorati | Del.icio.us | Digg | Stumble

Posted at 10:45 AM ET, 11/18/2009

Short Takes: Jindal stockpiling cash for '11

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal. AP Photo/Bill Feig

Eyebrows in Washington were arched --if not fully raised -- from a story in the New Orleans Times-Picayune earlier this week that detailed Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal's (R) aggressive fundraising schedule in advance of his 2011 re-election race.

Jindal spent Monday raising cash in Houston and then traveled to Michigan yesterday to fundraise for that state's Republican party. As the Times-Pic reports, Jindal has kept up a very active travel schedule in recent months, hitting Florida, Texas, Arkansas, Connecticut, New York, California and Mississippi.

Advisers to Jindal caution not to read too much (or much of anything) of national import into Jindal's level of activity in recent months, insisting that his only goal is to raise massive amounts of cash for his re-election bid in 2011.

Those sources note that while Jindal ended last year with $3.5 million in the bank and there is no obvious Democratic opponent on the horizon, he is taking the better safe than sorry approach given that in 2007 there were two self-funders in the race who spent millions against him.

Left unsaid but no less true is the fact that national Democrats will do everything in their power to put someone serious up against Jindal to try to slow his momentum and keep him occupied heading into 2012.

As we have said before, it's hard to see Jindal as a serious 2012 candidate in his own right since he has pledged to run for re-election in 2011 and it's close to a logistical impossibility to be in Shreveport and Sioux City at the same time.

That doesn't mean, however, that Jindal's aggressiveness on the fundraising front in advance of his re-election race doesn't have some national implications. Traveling the country to raise money helps build and expand the sort of national cash-collecting operation that any serious candidate for president -- in 2016 or beyond -- will need.

By Chris Cillizza  |  November 18, 2009; 10:45 AM ET  |  Permalink  |  Comments (30)
Categories:  Governors , Short Takes Share This:  E-Mail | Technorati | Del.icio.us | Digg | Stumble