Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has been unable to dig himself out of a pit of poor poll numbers, and the latest survey from Daily Kos/Research 2000 is no different. The four-term Nevada senator trails two potential GOP challengers, Danny Tarkanian, son of former UNLV coach Jerry, and Sue Lowden, who is resigning from her post as chair of the Nevada Republican Party to focus on a bid for Senate.

Just 36% hold a favorable opinion of Reid, while 52% view him unfavorably. Pres. Obama's viewed favorably by 48%, with 41% holding an unfavorable opinion of him. Also, less than three-fourths believe Obama was born in the U.S., and 52% favor a public option being included in federal health care reform.

Lowden 44
Reid 41
Und 15

Tarkanian 45
Reid 40
Und 15

As a corollary to my last post, Illinois Comptroller Dan Hynes launched his primary challenge to Democratic Governor Pat Quinn yesterday with a clear - if potentially problematic - message: Read My Lips: I'm Going to Raise Taxes.

Hynes knocked Quinn by casting the state's budget deficit as a "leadership deficit," suggesting he would step into and fill this void by a combination of raising taxes on those making over $200k as well as raising taxes on "'luxury' items, such as tanning salons, auto rentals, health clubs, pet grooming, limo services and dating services."

In an interesting piece of political jujitsu, Hynes lambasted Quinn for his failed efforts to increase the state's income tax, calling it "punishing" to the middle class.

For his part, Quinn responded by bragging that he'd been the first to propose an increase in the state income tax and that Hynes was a late comer to the tax raising party.

Hynes's "raising taxes is political leadership" shtick may work well in a Democratic primary, but I'm not sure how it will play in a general election - even in a blue state like Illinois. Cook County already has the highest sales tax in the country, as well as astronomical property tax rates that give a lot of folks - irrespective of their political affiliation - serious heartburn.

Given the crappy economy, the public's generally sour mood and its specific disgust with the state's endemic corruption and the left over fumes of the Blagojevich administration, building your candidacy as a Democrat around the issue of raising taxes doesn't strike me as the smartest campaign strategy.

On Time.com yesterday Tim Padgett reported on the factors behind the first net outflow of population in Florida (ie. more people moving out of the state than into it) in 63 years.  Not surprisingly, a rising tax burden played a major role:

"It's difficult for the working middle class to justify living here," Mike Jones, president of the Palm Beach County Economic Council, conceded to the South Florida Sun-Sentinel. "As much as they may love the sunshine, as you squeeze them out, they may find it in their best interests to move." [snip]

Homeowners, especially in Broward and Miami-Dade, have been falling out of their flip-flops in recent days as they open their preliminary property-tax notices to find increases of 15% or more. That's sizable in a low-income region where the median property-tax bill is already some $3,000, and it's doubly frustrating given that property values have slid by some 25% during Florida's housing bust. Residents have barely digested the recent news that their hurricane-insurance premiums, which can top $5,000 a year for most South Florida homes, will rise 10% a year for the next three years (vital, officials claim, for handling claims from the next big storm). And their public utility, Florida Power & Light (FPL), is lobbying the state for a 30% rate hike (vital, FPL execs insist, for upgrading infrastructure). "It all seems out of control to people here at the time when they can least absorb it," says Dr. Jose Valladares, president of the conservative Fair Property Tax for All in Miami-Dade.

A few thousand miles to the north in Michigan, Governor Jennifer Granholm is being pressured to follow the same disastrous formula:

A newly formed coalition of education, labor and social service agencies calling itself A Better Future for Michigan said this morning the state should reform its tax structure and raise nearly $3 billion a year in new revenue rather than relying on spending cuts to balance the budget.

The group proposes to increase taxes on business by $600 million, raise $1.65 billion by taxing "luxury items" such as entertainment and recreation (who knew going to the movies was a "luxury?"), and scoop up another $600 million by boosting the state income tax rate on high earners by more than 58% (from 4.35% to 6.9%).

Michigan is no stranger to population outflow: for eight consecutive years the state has seen more people leave than enter, representing an exodus of a staggering 465,000 residents. That's a lot of tax payers to say goodbye to.

Obvisously, Michigan has had a unique and unfortunate situation with the implosion of the US auto industry. But still, simply raising taxes on individuals and businesses will only compound the state's fiscal sickness, not serve as its cure.  What the state really needs is a nonpartisan panel of business experts to come in and provide a blueprint to help the state turn things around and start attracting people and businesses instead of driving them away.

Easier said than done, I know. But drastic circumstances call for drastic measures. There's no question that the political leaders in the state have failed to find ways to mitigate and/or reverse the state's decline, and it's hard to see how any new approaches could be much worse.

Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) is facing challenges from both parties as he runs for a sixth term, this time as a Democrat. His challengers, Rep. Joe Sestak (D) and former Rep. Pat Toomey (R), are teaming up in an effort to oust the senator -- last night they met in Allentown for a joint health care forum, then shared a beer together.

Both candidates still have their work cut out for them, according to a new Franklin & Marshall College Poll (Aug. 25-31, 562 RV, MoE +/- 4.1%). Specter leads Sestak by 26 points in the Democratic primary and Toomey by 8 points in a general election matchup.

Dem Primary
Specter 37 (+4 vs. last poll, June)
Sestak 11 (-2)
Und 46 (-2)

General Election
Specter 37 (+8 vs. last poll, April)
Toomey 29 (+3)
Und 25 (-9)

Toomey 26
Sestak 22
Und 46

They're both also still unknown to most voters -- 73% said they hadn't heard enough about Sestak to have an opinion about him, and 63% said the same about Toomey. As for Specter, who's been in the Senate since 1980, 35% hold a favorable opinion of him and 42% an unfavorable opinion. These numbers are up a few points since June.

One potential hiccup for Specter is the down economy. Just 33% feel Pennsylvania is headed in the right direction, while 59% say it's on the wrong track -- numbers like these can cause the electorate to go for a change in the ballot box. Also, President Obama's job approval rating is down to 47% from 55% in June.

In the RCP Averages, Specter leads Toomey by a third of a point; Specter leads Sestak by 18.0 points; and Toomey leads Sestak by 3.7 points.

“When people are anxious and angry, they look to their leaders for a way to channel that anger that is productive. That is part of what leadership is. (But) this president and his leadership team believe that leadership is channeling hope, and even touching anybody's anger and anxiety is off limits. It's the politics of Dukakis." - Emory University psychology professor Drew Westen.

An alert from the Washington Post Writers Group that syndicates George Will's column:

George F. Will is writing a column that will serve as a corollary to the piece the other day that demanded an end to the U.S. presence in Afghanistan. The Afghanistan column has touched off a fresh debate and was the single most-read piece on washingtonpost.com. His next column, which we believe may have an even greater impact, will be sent Thursday for immediate Web publication and print publication on Friday, Sept. 4. You will want to put this column on your Web site immediately, and make space on your page on Friday. We suggest setting up a reader forum. When you see the subject, you'll know why. The column demonstrates bold thinking on an issue that has been in the news for a long time. Watch for it.

Washington Rep. Jim McDermott, quoted by the Seattle Times:

In his first town-hall meeting on the current health-care effort, McDermott, D-Seattle, expressed anger over what he views as scare tactics from foes of any health-care reform.

"If you can scare people, you can make them do anything," he said. "Everything you hear is about: 'You're going to lose something, someone's going to take something away from you.' Some of these things are reprehensible, and it's all being done to scare people."

You don't say, Jimmy? Here's the estimable liberal Congressman in February 2005 talking about President Bush's proposal to allow people to divert part of their Social Security payroll tax into a private account:

No one has ever seriously proposed dismantling the program--- until now....We know what the Republicans want to do. Cut taxes, cut benefits, cut your economic security.

Paul Burka asks if you can recognize the GOPer who has "the best chance to hold" the Texas Senate seat being vacated by KBH. Burka's clues:

–This candidate has a large, enthusiastic constituency that goes beyond the boundaries of his district and his state.
–This candidate won't have to spend a nickel on name ID.
–This candidate has $2,742,426 cash on hand.
–This candidate is totally in touch with the GOP base, as it evolves further and further to the right.
–This candidate has demonstrated an amazing ability to raise money on the Internet: He raised $4.2 million in a single day during his campaign for president (albeit short of his goal of $10 million).

Click here for the answer, if you haven't already guessed.

Dana Summers of the Orlando Sentinel:

For quite a long time, Scott Rasmussen was the only pollster showing Republicans leading on the Congressional ballot, just as he was the only one showing Obama with sub-55% approval ratings. In late July, NPR showed Republicans with a one-point lead, and a few days ago, Pew research showed Democrats with a one-point lead. Given the Republicans' tendency to overperform the generic polling, that's a win for Republicans.

Now Democratic polling firm PPP shows Republicans with a four point lead over Democrats in the generic ballot. Perhaps more disturbing for Democrats, they show Congressional Democrats with approval ratings similar to those of Republicans.

To put this in perspective, from 2005 through 2009, Republicans led in exactly one (1) generic ballot poll. In 2004, they led in nine samples all year. Even in the mini-tsunami of 2002, Republicans fared poorly in the generic balloting. With the PPP poll, Republicans will likely take the lead in the RCP average.

In 2005-06 people were slow to come around to the idea that Democrats could pick up the 15 seats they needed to take control of Congress, much less the 30 they eventually won. I'm really starting to wonder if we're not seeing a similar effect in 2009.