December 15, 2004

THE UNRE-ELECTABLE GREAT DEMOCRATIC HOPE?:

Poll shows Granholm job, favorability ratings have dipped (AP, December 13, 2004)

Granholm's marks for the job she's doing as governor also have dropped, with 52 percent giving her a positive job rating, 45 percent a negative rating and 3 percent undecided. In August, 63 percent gave her a positive job rating, 35 percent a negative rating and 2 percent were undecided.

In 2006 the Democrats face the daunting task of defending freshman Senate and gubernatorial seats in MI.

Posted by Orrin Judd at December 15, 2004 4:26 PM
Comments

That's too bad. Jenny Granholm grew up over my back fence in San Jose, California (moved there at age twelve from Vancouver, BC). Sweet lookin' little minx, lemme tells ya.

I always wished the best for her. I think she has rather underwhelmed I'm afraid. I would think that, given the wreckage of the Democrats today, it's practically an open vacuum for any new blood, even if she was born Canadian. (I wonder if she would be in different shape if she was eligible for the Big Chair. Hillary sans baggage, if you will.)

Anyway, I hope she wins again.... 'cause I and my family liked her and I owe her that. But I really would like to see her seize the day, and give my GOP a run for it's money, idea-wise, which virtually any second-tier Democrat can do right now given the right energy. The Varsity sure hasn't done much to trumpet about lately.

Posted by: Andrew X at December 15, 2004 4:53 PM

(Oops, Point-of-fact - She was four when she moved to California. I dunno why I wrote twelve, but that's around how old I was when I knew her as a teenager.)

Posted by: Andrew X at December 15, 2004 4:57 PM

Another great hope lost to the Grey Davis syndrome.

Posted by: ed at December 15, 2004 5:48 PM

"defending freshman Senate and Gubernatorial Seats" is not all that daunting a task with all the help from the Teachers and Auto Unions. The same article that pointed out Granholm's drop in popularity also pointed out that she's ahead of Engler's numbers at this point in his term. Now that's an apples-to-oranges comparison, but Governor Barbie is every bit as charming and politically shrewd as the last Democratic President. Add to the fact that in Michigan women still vote for women just because their women and any Democrat who doesn't get loud on gun control (which she hasn't) walk to victory. Also the Michigan GOP has no candidates. Stabenow, while not quite as charming, hasn't done anything stupid enough to throw away the incumbency or the Democratic advantage. I would love to be wrong, but I don't see either one losing in '06

Posted by: MarkD at December 15, 2004 8:33 PM

I tend to agree that winning even one of these seats with a relatively short bench would be daunting, but three pieces of hope:

1. Minnesota 2002: Dem state, Republicans capture both Senate and Governor's seats.

2. Granholm was expected to coast to victory against a LG with the unfortunate name "Postumus." Despite consistently leading the polls by double digits, she won by about 4 points.

3. Remember the Romney-O'Brien and Ehrlich-Kennedy governor's races of 2002. Female Democrats lost in liberal states because they were perceived as lacking executive ability. Granholm might be easy to paint with the same brush if she continues to sputter.

Posted by: AC at December 15, 2004 8:50 PM

Barring a serious political blunder Granholm will probably, I'm sad to say, win re-election in '06. The GOP doesn't have a viable alternative to her.

As for Debbie (Levin Lackie) Stabenow, she is beatable. She has not been an effective US Senator. Calling her a back bencher is generous. I've heard 3 or 4 names mentioned as GOP candidates.

Posted by: Dave W. at December 15, 2004 9:23 PM

Granholm is a media concoction and confection (sorry, Andrew X; I'm sure she's a nice lady). Does anyone remember Kathleen Kennedy Townsend as the next-Vice-President-of-the-United-States-and-future-President media wet-dream?

Posted by: Fred Jacobsen (San Fran) at December 16, 2004 12:29 AM

Sounds like she's unbeatable if she'll run on her looks as a four-year old. Does sound a bit pedophiliac though.

Posted by: Steve at December 16, 2004 1:21 AM

Uh huh. Shoulda seen her at nineteen.

Impressed the hell outa ME, no foolin'.

Posted by: Andrew X at December 16, 2004 8:11 AM

Fred:
Your long distance view from San Fran is inaccurate. She had the political good fortune of running against a "no name" Lt. Gov., who didn't seem like he really wanted to win, and a 12 year Engler record. My hunch is that she's reached the height of her political career, but there's no sign that her career will end on 1/1/07.

All Kennedy's are always "the next vice-president of the US and future President media wet dream." Granholm is NOT a Kennedy.

It is strange hearing her husband referred to as "the First Gentleman."

Steve:
I lothe being in the position of a Democrat, but, I must (since she's gov. of my state). She didn't run on her looks or act like a 4 year old in '02 and she won't in '06.

Posted by: Dave W. at December 16, 2004 8:22 AM

Granholm was a beauty contest winner so she doesn't lack ruthlessness.

The GOP has been taking a beating in Michigan lately from my understanding, losing state legislature seats. Stabenow won because she ran against Spencer Abraham who was a terrible candidate and as we can see, a cipher in the Cabinet now. I would imagine that if she ran against a GOP congressman from the Detroit media market like Rogers or Miller she'd get squashed.

Posted by: Bart at December 16, 2004 9:23 PM
« REMEMBRANCE OF THINGS HAPPILY PAST: | Main | DOES SHE HAVE TO JOIN THE NEA?: »