The Legislature's Redistricting Committee adopted a Congressional map that splits Salt Lake County three ways.
Rep. Jim Matheson tweeted that, after seeing the map, a run for U.S. Senate or Governor is not off the table for him.
Do you think Matheson will run for a statewide race, or will he run for re-election to his current seat?
Jim Matheson is smart enough to know that if he can't win in his congressional seat he certainly can't win a state-wide race.
Has nothing to gain with House seat as Republicans will retain their majority. Nothing gained as governor, real prestige and power as a senator.
Jim Matheson will run for Governor. There are too many national leadership implications in federal house or senate races. "Matheson = Pelosi" was tough to beat, "Matheson = Reid" would be impossible. Moreover, voters will not perceive any real financial risks to a Matheson governorship because Utah already has a balanced-budget requirement and the Republicans have a veto-proof hold on the State Legislature.
Incumbent Republican governors seldom lose. Jim is too far behind Hatch in raising money. He doesn't have Chaffetz's option of taking Hatch out at convention on passion with delegates
He will pick whomever he thinks is most vulnerable in a state wide race and run for it. He shouldn't be too unhappy with the district as the latest drawing shows, he maintains the liberal bastion that is SLC, and he retains Washington County which he currently represents. So he shouldn't be complaining too loudly. This seat is no more gerrymandered than the seat he is holding currently.
Hey, Jim - it's Peter Corroon calling. He wants to suggest you re-think running for Governor. Unless, of course, you've decided to retire forever from politics.
He'll be lucky to stay where he is. 2012 is not going to be the year-of-the-Democrat.
Matheson is NOT as popular as he thinks he is.
Matheson most likely loses. He's not as invincible as the Utah media would have us believe.
Matheson's carping would be easier to take if he, or the Utah Democratic Party, had bothered to actually submit a map. Don't cry that you're not getting any cake if you never showed up to the party, Jimmy's (Matheson and Dabakis).
He is popular in Salt Lake County, but state wide? No.
I think Matheson is tiring of DC and running every two years. He probably believes he can win a statewide race against the right candidate. It would be tougher to beat Hatch because of his seniority and the potential for Republicans to take control of the Senate than it would be to beat Herbert who some believe has mis-stepped and is a weak leader. Hatch would raise a lot more money than Herbert will. He would, however, be smarter to stay where he is -- unless his new district is impossible for him to win.
He remembers what happened to Wayne Owens. Utah in the Obama era will not elect a State-wide Dem. Hello re-election.
Jim Matheson has to decide to stay in the House and get beat handily by Morgan Philpot or run for Governor/Senator where he will still probably lose, but the loss won't hurt nearly as badly. Either way he gets full retirement with full benefits.
Gary is seen as weak and vulnerable. Matheson would be stupid to pass up an opportunity like this.
The current proposal is nearly as ridiculous as the rationalizations offered in it's defense. Hatch has too much money and won't be weakened by a challenge by a serious contender which makes Herbert an easier target. It would be poetic for the redistricting plan to have the unintended consequence of making Herbert run for his life.
Matheson is gutless and will take the easiest route possible. That equates to a congressional run rather than a statewide race where he knows that he will lose, badly.
He will run for whatever is easiest for him. He just wants to be elected to something. I don't think he has any loyalty to any office.
No matter what the recommended alignment is, he will complain for political reasons. He could not win a state wide race especially if Mitt Romney is the Republican candidate for President.
The final map will be close enough that he'll play it safe and run for re-election. He doesn't have the chops for a statewide race.
The new district isn't any more Republican-dominated than his old district, so he's safer seeking re-election.
Utah Democrats announced the formation of a new group to attract more members of the LDS faith to their party. How successful do you think this effort will be?
Mormons in Utah are mostly Republican because that political "ideology"more closely reflects their basic thinking than anything the Democrats have to offer.
It will change nothing; therefore, it's not even a nice idea. It's a waste of time and resources, and a bad idea
Many LDS members are not right-wing Conservatives (thank goodness!) If they know there is a place for them in the Democratic Party, I think they will be relieved they have an option. Not every Democrat is a social Progressive (a la Matheson), If they know they can support Democratic Party ideas 75-95%, they will find an all-inclusive atmosphere. I have many LDS friends who will find this to be a great solution
Great idea but they gave no real reasons why they should join the party. Once the anti-Mormon sentiment is tapered down at convention, then a real campaign could begin. Until then, the party will continue to scare off any moderate Mormon Democrats
It depends on how well the Dems follow up on their message. If they keep hammering the "it's OK to me LDS and a Democrat," especially with social media to younger voters, it could make a substantial difference in the next couple of years.
Stupid idea and it will change nothing.
Mormon Democrats have been treated badly by the leaders of the state Democratic establishment for two decades. I don't see how it changes with the new leadership which comes from and is beholden to the liberal wing of the party.
In Utah, these things are either/or, unfortunately. If you attract the Mormons, the non-Mormons and certainly the ex-Mormons will turn away. Just like Utah-BYU rivalry.
Until they distance themselves from their stances on abortion, gay marriage, and other social issues, they are going to struggle in Utah.
Frankly, it's not the Utah Democratic Party that will kill this effort, it's the national Democratic Party. Most Mormons are far too conservative to be nodding their heads in agreement when Debbie Wasserman-Shultz or Chuck Shumer open their mouths.
The problem is the Democrat message. People see what the President is doing and leading members of Congress, and they want nothing to do with it.
I'm thinking of starting a group to attract more Democrats to the LDS Church. I think I'll be at least as successful as this effort will be.
They can meet, but they still won't be well-received by Demo delegates who will tend to be more liberal than most Demo LDS politicians. The LDS Church will not bend on gay marriage, and, more and more, the LGTB group is taking over the Demo Party, and will draw a line in the sand that Demo LDS members will not cross.
Liberal Dems hate Mormons-- good luck with that!
In spite of how nice Ben McAdams is, when you have screechers like Dabakis, it's not going to do much to improve the image.
I think there are plenty of LDS ready to come out of the closet if warmly welcomed by Democrats.
It won't work. We've been down this road before. Ask the McConkie's, Howell's and Pignanelli's about forming a moderate/Mormon caucus. It's destined to fail.
LDS Democrats have been longing for some outreach. This is the match that will light a fire.
Too many Mormons do not realize that Jesus was not a Republican or an anything else politically for that matter. I don't see them buying into it.
Until the public grows disenchanted with the job the Repubs are doing, they won't replace them with Dems. A year from now, after the "cutesiness" of this move by the Dems, voters will be looking at who is leading the tickets -- Obama and Romney. It doesn't take a genius to figure out who most Utahns will be supporting.
It would have a lot better credibility and chance for success if the promoter was an active LDS member.
It will take a First Presidency announcement during Conference to make a difference.
As long as Democrats keep the caucus-convention delegate system, they have no chance of widening their tent.
Respondents include -
Fred Adams, Stuart Adams, Jess Agraz, Scott Anderson, Patrice Arent, Bruce Baird, Tom Barberi, Heather Barney, Steve Barth, Jeff Bell, Tom Berggren, Mike Bertelsen, Ron Bigelow, Rob Bishop, Laura Black, Jim Bradley, Ralph Brown, Ken Bullock, Chris Bleak, Curt Bramble, Ralph Brown, Aaron Browning, Dave Buhler, Ken Bullock, Ric Cantrell, Maura Carabello, Rebecca Chavez-Houck, Kay Christensen, David Clark, Thomas Clay, Peter Corroon, Fred Cox, Lew Cramer, Gene Davis, Richard Davis, Brad Daw, Alan Dayton, Margaret Dayton, Mike Deaver, Brad, Dee, Joseph Demma, John Dougall, Randy Dryer, Donald Dunn, Becky Edwards, Scott Ericson, Jessica Fawson, Janice Fisher, Wendy Fisher, Lorie Fowlke, Ronald Fox, Jordan Garn, Luke Garrott, Dave Gessel, Natalie Gochnour, Robert Grow, Karen Hale, David Hansen, Neil Hansen, Joe Hatch, Jeff Hartley, Deidre Henderson, Lyle Hillyard, Randy Horiuchi, Bruce Hough, Scott Howell, Miriam Hyde, Allison Isom, Eric Jergensen, Mike Jerman, Roger Johnson, Michael Jolley, Gordon Jones, Leslie Jones, Kirk Jowers, Brian King, Scott Konopasek, Chris Kyler, Fred Lampropoulos, Douglas Larson, David Litvack, Larry Lunt, Matt Lyon, Ben McAdams, Gayle McKeachnie, JT Martin, Jason Mathis, Karen Mayne, Derek Miller, Rob Miller, Ethan Millard, Brett Millburn, Karen Morgan, Mike Mower, Holly Mullen, Wayne Niederhauser, Mike Noel, Ralph Okerlund, James Olsen, Val Oveson, Scott Parson, Kelly Patterson, Frank Pignanelli, Jason Powers, Joe Pyrah, Mike Reberg, Jill Remington Love, Lauren Richards, Holly Richardson, Robin Riggs, James Roberts, Luz Robles, Ross Romero, Don Savage, Bryan Schott, Jay Seegmiller, Patrick Shea, Randy Shumway, Soren Simonsen, Jeremy Slaughter, Carol Spackman-Moss, Howard Stephenson, Mike Styler, Todd Taylor, Juliette Tennert, Gary Thorup, Kevin Van Tassell, Royce Van Tassel, Michael Waddoups, Chuck Warren, Christine Watkins, LaVarr Webb, Todd Weiler, Alan West, Ted Wilson, Carl Wimmer, Mike Winder, Thomas Wright