#

“If Democrats pick Colin Van Ostern today, they are voting to elect Secretary of State [Bill] O’Brien tomorrow.”

That’s the warning of one longtime New Hampshire politico to NHJournal.com regarding Tuesday’s legislative vote for Secretary of State. Once Democrats turn the job into a plum gig for loyal partisans, it will never go back.

This is the sentiment many NH political activists and observers expressed to NHJournal as the Secretary of State election approaches.

“I hate to be alarmist, but I really believe that if New Hampshire loses its place as the ‘First in the Nation’ primary, America loses something. And if New Hampshire loses our reputation for having an even-handed, non-partisan Secretary of State, we will be in real danger of losing that primary.”

So says political consultant Josh McElveen, who has been pointing out the dangers posed by Colin Van Ostern’s openly-partisan advocacy for the office. He’s organizing a rally on Monday morning at 10:30am outside the LLB in Concord to remind legislators of what is at stake.

“If we have a Secretary of State with a partisan agenda, one who’s raised more than $250,000 dollars from partisan sources—people who gave that money with some sort of expectations—those outside of New Hampshire who want to take away our ‘First in the Nation’ status will use that against us,” McElveen told NHJournal.

Many Democrats reject the argument that electing Van Ostern in any way endangers New Hampshire’s place on the primary calendar. “Gardner did not create NH’s reputation as a state where anyone can run for President and launch a national campaign,” former New Hampshire state rep and outspoken Democratic activist Judy Reardon tweeted. “See primaries before he became SoS – 1968 (McCarthy) and 1972 (McGovern) for example.”

But the argument against Van Ostern isn’t that he’s a Democrat—Gardner is, too. Instead, the concern is over the fact that Van Ostern is a partisan political activist who was his party’s nominee for governor in 2016 and is widely expected to run for elective office in the future.

“I have kept my pledge not to use this office as a stepping stone. I’ve never run for office and I never would,” Secretary Gardner told NHJournal. “My opponent has only pledged not to run ‘in 2020.’”

At the Union-Leader, Kevin Landrigan reminds readers that Van Ostern began his campaign for the Secretary of State’s job with a pledge to “do everything in my power to help elect a legislative majority in support of [his] platform. I intend to recruit and campaign and raise money for these candidates,” Van Ostern said at the time.

He soon backed away from that pledge, but as Landrigan reports, his allies and former aides stepped up and money flowed to Democratic legislative candidates, anyway. This is hardly a surprise given Van Ostern’s background as a political operative.

Notably absent are New Hampshire’s U.S. Senate Democrats, neither of whom have endorsed Van Ostern for Secretary of State despite supporting his previous candidacies.

“This is a matter for the Legislature to decide,” Sen. Maggie Hassan said in a statement, while a spokesperson for Sen. Jeanne Shaheen’s office simply said she “is not getting involved in the race.”

“If the Secretary of State’s job devolves into a partisan political office with partisan practices like fundraising and campaigning, it will never go back,” McElveen said.

A Republican state house insider had a similar message for NHJournal: “How many times have the Democrats had control of the legislature? Something like less than 10% of the last 100 years. A vote for Van Ostern now is a vote for a hardcore conservative in 2020 when the GOP takes over the legislature.”

And another GOP activist put it even more bluntly: “They have no idea what they’re going to unleash. What—do they think we’re going to watch them elect someone like Van Ostern, and then when we take back the House, we’ll bring Billy [Gardner] out of retirement?”

A GOP majority in 2020 is hardly a certainty. What is all but certain, however, is that there will be a Republican legislative majority in the New Hampshire General Court again. And if history is any guide, in the near future.

Democrats may want to keep that in mind as they cast their votes on Tuesday.

Sen. Bernie Sanders has a new book out,“Where We Go from Here: Two Years in the Resistance, ”and he sat down with New Hampshire Public Radio on Monday to promote it. When asked if he is going to run for president in 2020, he said it depended on the reaction he got to his message that “we need an unprecedented grassroots political movement to stand up to the greed of the billionaire class and the politicians they own.”

Well, if Bernie really wants to battle “millionaires and billionaires,” all he has to do is file his papers for the 2020 Democratic primary. The list of 33 (and counting) potential 2020 candidates includes several billionaires, including former NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg, coal-magnate-turned-green-activist Tom Steyer and Starbucks ex-chief executive Howard Schultz, along with Dallas Mavericks owner/reality TV star Mark Cuban (who may or may not be a Democrat).

When it comes to “billionaires buying elections,” Steyer is the leader of the pack. With a net worth of $1.6 billion, Steyer has been the top individual donor in two out of the last three election cycles, giving a total of more than $226 million dollars over that period.  Steyer is open in his efforts to connect his donations to environmental policies he supports.

Steyer’s $59 million in this cycle was edged out this cycle by fellow billionaire liberal Michael Bloomberg (Net worth: $45 billion), who gave $61 million, much of it through his pro-gun-control efforts. Bloomberg is just as clear that he wants his money to impact public policy on the Second Amendment.

Big spending by these billionaires, however, doesn’t seem to bother Bernie. When asked about Bloomberg and Steyer, Sen. Sanders said Steyer “is a very decent guy,” while he said he didn’t know Bloomberg personally. Then Sanders went on to add:

“The issue that concerns me–it’s not just those guys– it’s that, as a result of Citizen’s United, we have a corrupt campaign finance system. The Koch Brothers, Sheldon Adelson, they’re trying to buy elections. Billionaires shouldn’t be buying seats for themselves.”

But how is Tom Steyer, who has literally used his billions to build a campaign infrastructure many believe he will use to run for president in 2020, different from the Koch Brothers–other than the fact that they’re not running for anything, and their Americans for Prosperity Action PAC spent a measly $6.5 million this cycle?

The problem for progressives like Bernie Sanders and Liz Warren with their “millionaires and billionaires” schtick is that the Democratic Party has become the party of America’s wealthy elites. For every Republican billionaire like Sheldon Adelson (who was the top individual donor this cycle at $113 million) there are a dozen left-leaning tech billionaires like Mark Zuckerberg at Facebook and Jeff Bezos at Amazon, or rich Hollywood millionaires and movie stars, or liberal activists like George Soros, etc. etc.

The Trump GOP is the party of rural working-class Americans more than it is “millionaires and billionaires.” And making the case that the rich are stealing democracy is tough when they are (based on the numbers) apparently “stealing it” for Democrats.

And why do the Democrats even need leftover rabble rouser Bernie Sanders?  Tom Steyer is at least as populist as Sanders–if not more so. Michael Bloomberg is at least a socially liberal–once again, if not more so. And there’s a whole bevy of college-student-friendly far-Left activists like Booker, Brown and Beto who haven’t achieved AARP status yet. For a guy who should be considered top dog for 2020, Sen. Sanders current poll numbers are unimpressive.

Bernie’s real problem isn’t “billionaires.” It’s his bad luck that the last real chance he had of being the Democratic nominee was stolen from him by Hillary Clinton and the DNC.

Politico is reporting that Deval Patrick is “inching closer toward deciding on a 2020 presidential run.”

Quoting the former Massachusetts governor’s longtime political advisor John Walsh, Politico is feeding a narrative they’ve nursed for a nearly a year now–that Barack Obama and his political team want Patrick to pick up the presidential mantle.

Today, Politico reports that Patrick “is really thinking about running but hasn’t decided yet,” according to Walsh.  Last August, Politico ran a story entitled: “Obama’s Inner Circle Is Urging Deval Patrick to Run.”

According to the August piece, “Barack Obama is nudging him to run” and Patrick is “ObamaWorld’s clear and away 2020 favorite.”  At the time, Patrick was more circumspect, saying  “it’s way, way too soon to be making plans for 2020.” Fascinatingly, he gave the interview from his post-governor gig at Bain Capital, the (evil) venture capital firm founded by another former Massachusetts governor, Mitt Romney.

Some big-dollar Democratic donors who play beltway politics are reportedly pushing Patrick, too.  And Patrick advisors like David Axelrod say Deval has early state advantages due to his experience campaigning in small-town central and western Massachusetts (helps in Iowa) and the eight years as governor of New Hampshire’s southern neighbor.

However, as NHJournal has reported, early polling has Patrick in single digits in the Granite State (despite eight years of coverage in the area’s biggest TV market), and when Sen. Liz Warren’s name is added, Patrick’s support drops to 4 percent.

Do polls six months before the midterms really matter? Of course not. But it does show that, for the moment, Washington, DC politicos and publications are more excited about the Patrick run that New Hampshire’s Democrats are.

Democratic State Sen. Lou D’Allesandro (author of the new book Lion Of The New Hampshire Senate) tells NHJournal: “I don’t think Patrick would capture the attention of NH Democrats.  He didn’t spend a lot of time here and I don’t believe he has been back since he left office.  As you know, the Bernie followers are very active.  It remains to be seen as to what the field will look like.”

UPDATE: Longtime Democratic activist and media personality Jim Braude tells NHJournal that Patrick would be a strong candidate in the Granite State. “Deval Patrick is maybe the best campaigner I’ve ever seen,” says Braude, who along with his broadcasting partner Margery Eagan hosted Gov. Patrick’s monthly “Ask The Governor” radio program during his eight years in office.

“Speechifying and one-on-one, he’s tailor made for Iowa and New Hampshire. Throw in the fact that he’s a liberal who business types can relate to and you’ve got a candidate,” Braude says.

She says she’s not running.

He’s in the middle of a “pay-offs to porn stars” story that would kill any conventional politician.

And yet the (very) early tea leaves from the “First in the Nation” primary state already point to the match-up many pundits dream of:

President Donald Trump vs. Sen. Elizabeth Warren in 2020.

Let’s take a moment to insert all the standard disclaimers: We haven’t even gotten to the midterms yet, two years is a political eternity, Sen. Warren could (theoretically) lose her re-election bid in November, President Trump could (less theoretically) be unable to seek re-election due to incarceration, etc.  The fact remains that the new poll from Suffolk University aligns with the emerging conventional wisdom:  Democrats want Liz Warren and the GOP is going to stick with Donald Trump.

In his analysis of the numbers. Suffolk University’s David Paleologos notes how Sen. Warren’s strength draws from virtually every other major Democratic candidate.

“When we first asked likely Democratic primary voters in New Hampshire who they would prefer—and we left Liz Warren’s name off the list— we got the expected results:  Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders well ahead of the pack of list seven possibilities:

Biden 30%

Sanders 25%

Booker 10%

Patrick 8%

Harris 6%

Gillibrand 3%

McAuliffe 2%

“Then we introduced Sen. Warren’s name to the mix,” Paleologos told NHJournal, “and she cleared the field:

Warren 26%

Biden 20%

Sanders 13%

Booker 8%

Harris 4%

Patrick 4%

Gillibrand 2%

McAuliffe 2%

According to Paleologos, what makes Liz Warren’s position so strong is that “looking at the cross tabs, what we see is that all of the candidates lose something to Elizabeth Warren. Most of the candidates lose about one in five core supporters between scenario one without Warren and scenario two. And [former Massachusetts governor) Deval Patrick and Bernie Sanders lose a very big share of their voters.”

If Warren were merely strong in New Hampshire because of geography, the implications would be as significant. Instead, her strength is ideological–she’s the first choice (by far) of the voters looking for a nominee on the left end of the Democrats’ spectrum.  Plus, the fact that a third of Biden voters would jump on her bandwagon shows she’s strong with more old-school Democrats as well.

“On the progressive side, it appears voters are saying ‘Sanders had his chance,'” Paleologos suggests. “Elizabeth Warren is a little bit younger, a woman who has been carrying the challenge to big business, big dollars in politics.  And you may have some Hillary Clinton supporters who, if given the choice, either gravitate to Biden or to Warren, but not to Sanders.”

And that’s how Sen. Warren wins the nomination: Progressive voters, a few establishment voters, and some Hillary voters still smarting from the Bernie vs. Hillary fallout.  What about President Trump?

Two months ago, a New Hampshire poll gave him a narrow six-point lead over Gov. John Kasich. In the new Suffolk poll, he’s crushing all comers:

Trump beats Kasich 68-23 percent;

Trump beats Sen Jeff Flake 72-15 percent;

Trump beats Sen. Marco Rubio 65-23 percent;

Trump beats Mitt Romney 63-28 percent.

Trump lost New Hampshire, though narrowly, to Hillary Clinton in 2016. It’s a state more known for it’s moderation than it’s bombast, where candidates with names like Bush, McCain and Romney tend to do well. For Trump to be dominating like this, Paleologos notes, is a sign that he’s in no real danger within his party.

Once again: It’s early, it’s politics and it’s Trump.  But if you are hoping for a Trump vs. Warren throwdown in 2020, we are well on our way.

“Let’s do this thing!”

So said former Attorney General Eric Holder on Comedy Central’s The Daily Show Tuesday night when asked about a presidential run in 2020. Holder was admittedly being flippant, but the former Obama administration official then confirmed to host Trevor Noah that he’s giving the idea of a White House run serious consideration.

Holder made similar comments on MSNBC the same night: “I’m thinking about it, but I’ve not made any determinations. I’m focusing on the work I’m doing with the National Democratic Redistricting Committee and trying to deal with gerrymandering.”

Holder may not have made any determinations, but he has made some concrete plans to come to New Hampshire and speak at “Politics and Eggs,” hosted by the St. Anselm College Institute of Politics and the New England Council, on Friday June 1st.  This event is a mandatory stop on the New Hampshire #FITN political circuit, and the 2018 list of attendees already includes Sen. Jeff Flake, former Gov. Martin O’Malley and Weekly Standard founder Bill Kristol (scheduled for next month).

What sets Eric Holder apart is his openness about his intentions. “Julian Castro did the same thing–and I think that’s smart,” St. Anselm IOP’s Executive Director Neal Levesque told NHJournal.com.  Castro hasn’t appeared at a Politics and Eggs event (yet), but he did visit the St. Anselm campus and speak to students in February.

“Everybody knows why people like Eric Holder are up here,” Levesque says. “It’s not like they’re coming to New Hampshire just for breakfast.”

Bill Kristol may not be the only political pundit on the GOP’s possible 2020 POTUS list.  William Gheen, head of the influential immigration security group Americans For Legal Immigration (ALIPAC) has called on author and provocateur Ann Coulter to enter the race.  And he’s serious.

“I wish she would announce today,” Gheen told NHJournal.com on Wednesday.  “Her message should be ‘I’m running on Trump’s platform, except I’m serious about it.’”

ALIPAC isn’t a major player in the political money game—donating just $209,000 during the 2016 cycle—but it is influential among grassroots immigration activists.

The question is whether there’s a disaffected wing of the GOP primary electorate on Trump’s right to match the unhappy establishment GOP voters who would tend to support potential primary challengers like OH Gov. John Kasich or AZ Sen. Jeff Flake.

“When President Trump first ran, some of my members said ‘Why would you endorse him? He’s got no record on immigration. We don’t know if he’s conning us.’ And I said ‘Look, the guy’s running on our platform. If he diverges from that, I’ll be the first one to call him out.’ And I am,” Gheen said.

Gheen said if Ann did run, she’d likely focus on Iowa rather than the Granite State. “We’ve got a lot of strength out there on the immigration issue with leaders like Rep. Steve King,” Gheen said.

So how would mmigration activists in New Hampshire react to an Ann Coulter run? If Rep. Ann Copp (R-Merrimack), an activist on border security issues, is any indication, not well.

“Sink like a stone,” was Copp’s take on a Coulter candidacy in the Granite State. “We love Trump,” Copp said of New Hampshire conservatives. “I’m an ‘Always Trumper,’ not a ‘Never’ one.”

So far, no comment from Coulter herself—though she did take some shots at President Trump Wednesday night on Lou Dobbs’ Fox Business Channel TV show. Coulter calls Trump a “shallow, coarse ignoramus” (she meant it as a compliment. Seriously.) who was willing to tell the truth because he didn’t care what the elites thought of him. “Now all he wants is for Goldman Sachs to like him. I don’t know what happened. But that’s a different president.:

“I haven’t changed,” Coulter said. “He has.”

But has he changed enough to turn Coulter into a candidate?  Is she willing to run? Well, she does have some experience in the Executive Branch.  Fictional, but still experience: Remember Vice President Coulter from Sharknado 3: Oh, Hell No?”