He’s Still the One

Music fans know John Hall as the lead guitarist for Orleans and songwriter of hit singles like Still the One, Dancin' in the Moonlight, and Dance With Me. Activists know him as the musician who organized No Nuke concerts and released the song Power, an ode to alternative energy, just three weeks before the Three Mile Island meltdown. His fellow-citizens in upstate New York know him as a member of the Ulster County Legislature, and president of the Saugerties Board of Education. And, now, it looks like Americans might soon know this great musician and good man as Congressman John Hall (D-NY).

Hall is poised to unseat an incumbent previously thought to be invincible, Rep. Sue Kelly of the 19th District. According to Congressional Quarterly, "[Kelly] took 67 percent of the vote two years ago and has exceeded 60 percent in every election since 1998." That's why risk-averse, inside-the-Beltway Dems initially lined up behind Judy Aydelott, a lawyer and one-time Republican who they felt would appeal to the electorate as a moderate. But longtime activist Hall believed he could take his message directly to the people. And he did. He hired Amy Little, a 30-year veteran organizer on social justice issues, as his Campaign Director. (Little's career past includes raising over $30 million for Citizen Action groups and labor coalitions across the country, and serving as a National Field Director for GOTV and voter registration in 2004.) Since taking the helm of the Hall campaign, she has built a gutsy and effective grassroots organization.

Hall has a simple yet powerful message that resonates with voters. He told The Ostroy Report, "The biggest issue of the days are ending the war in Iraq, achieving universal health care with an affordable prescription drug plan and finding safe, clean, renewable solutions to our energy needs." On why he's running Hall says, "The situation in the nation and the world is at such a crucial juncture, and the stakes are so high. Right now, there are no checks and balances. I want to be a voice for creativity and honesty in solving our problems. I want to be proud, not just of our country but of our government."

The emphasis on a grassroots field operation has produced terrific results. On primary day the campaign had 400 people in the field and voting numbers were up 100 percent from the previous election. Hall defeated Aydelott by nearly 2:1, and received 49 percent of the vote in a 4-way race. The field team has now grown to 1,200 people, and it seems Hall – who flew under the radar for so long – may turn out to be the perfect stealth candidate to unseat Kelly.

Sadly, instead of celebrating Hall's ability to connect with the voters – not to mention his down-to-earth manner (see his spirited appearance on the Colbert Report) – big ticket Dems are still shying away from Hall's progressive credentials. One sign of that – 85 percent of Halls' fundraising comes from individuals contributing $200 or less.

Meanwhile, Kelly has done nothing to endear herself to the voters. Questions have arisen over her role in the Foley scandal (which broke on her 70th birthday) since she was Chair of the Page Board from 1999 to 2001. She lost her cool at an editorial board meeting when it was brought up; she literally ran away from reporters who wanted to talk to her; and she has defended and supported the Bush administration ad nauseam while building a voting record voters will love – if they love Tom DeLay!

On Sunday, the New York Times endorsed Hall as "a lawmaker of energy, steady conviction and clear principles" with an "ambitious and coherent" platform. He's also collected the endorsement of the Times Herald-Record (which has endorsed Kelly in the past). This week he will announce the Sierra Club's backing and he is heavily supported by labor.

While Kelly still has the typical big bucks of a Republican incumbent – and no one should underestimate the work that remains – the humanpower supplied by a unique coalition of labor and environmental activists could prove to be the difference on Election Day. If so, a lot of happy progressives will be dancing in the moonlight come November 7.

Comments (23)

1. FYI, the only recent poll I could find was by RT Strategies/Constituent Dynamics. It was done 10/15-16 that had Hall with a 49-40 lead with a margin of error of 3.09.

   PS--And I got here before Mask! :)

   Posted by brunowe at 10/24/2006 @ 1:25pm

2. PS--And I got here before Mask! :)

   Posted by BRUNOWE 10/24/2006 @ 1:25pm

   As always...congrats on that major accomplishment.

   Wonder why Ms vanden Heuvel left off the part about Hall "hedging his bets" on impeaching Bush to "Firedoglake", because he said "I'm trying to get elected in a historically Republican district."

   Guess even a "good man" and "long-time activist" can't go TOO "bloggy".

   Posted by Mask at 10/24/2006 @ 1:27pm

3. Wonder why Ms vanden Heuvel left off the part about Hall "hedging his bets" on impeaching Bush to "Firedoglake", because he said "I'm trying to get elected in a historically Republican district."

   Right Mask, because it's all about impeachment!!

   Posted by brunowe at 10/24/2006 @ 1:30pm

4. Right Mask, because it's all about impeachment!!

   Posted by BRUNOWE 10/24/2006 @ 1:30pm

   Uh, BRUNO....yeah...atleast to the Blogoshere and Bush-Obsessed Left it is.

   Ask them how important (1-10) getting Bush impeached is.

   (BTW, Hall was smart to do so. Outside of the Blog/Bush-Obsess...impeachment is a loser politically. Pelosi knows it!)

   Posted by Mask at 10/24/2006 @ 1:38pm

5. Impeaching the Dumbass....not important

   Investigating the carbuncle that the WH has become...10

   Posted by leftofcenter at 10/24/2006 @ 2:11pm

6. Posted by LEFTOFCENTER 10/24/2006 @ 2:11pm

   Impeaching the Dumbass....not important

   Investigating the carbuncle that the WH has become...10

   Exactly LOC, though as I've said before, the first is all too likely to follow from the second. Mask is right about one thing; the general public is not yet in favor of impeachment and as a current electoral issue it is a non-starter in most districts (though in some heavily Democratic districts that might be different.) The real point is that on ce the investigations begin, and exactly what BushCo has been up to is exposed, we're all too likely to see public opinion swing around to favor impeaching both Georgie-boy and Cheney. So angry might they become that even "President Pelosi" will look good, especially (and here's where Mask's native political instincts don't go far enough) if she's seen as having been "reluctantly brought by the facts" to favor impeachment after the election. Then it seems to be (no matter the political calculus involved) a decision that is for the good of the country. If that comes to be the public perception, no Democratic Congressperson or Senator and all but the most partisan Republican Congresspeople and Senators will find no real political choice viable except support of impeachment and conviction.

   By the way Mask, I don't buy your "the (liberal) blogosphere is all for impeachment. From what I've been seeing (and I frequent a lot of the left-leaning political blogs) many in that group would be more reluctant to recommend impeachment. They well know that a lame duck BushCo struggling against the investigations and Congressional action (and especially legislation) would be a political windfall. Going into 2008, that kind of behavior from BushCo (and who among us thinks they'd behave any other way?) would allow them to paint all Republicans as obstrutionist and reactionary, standing in the way of the will of the American people. That's a powerful message to take into an open presidential election, especially if the Republican nominee has been less than cooperative himself. Either way I think it's a winning situation for the Democrats, whether they are brought to a "reluctant" impeachment(s) or get a lame duck obstructionist.

   Posted by Stwriley at 10/24/2006 @ 2:52pm

7. As for impeachment: If there is no basis for the impeachment of Bush (or any others) why are Republicans (and the right generally) so concerned about it?

   Posted by Woody Fan at 10/24/2006 @ 3:08pm

8. Posted by STWRILEY 10/24/2006 @ 2:52pm

   STW, as someone on the Other Side, I'd consider an honest broker...

   I'd really like you to investigate that in depth, and get back to me.

   I've been around the "blog block" a few times. And the preponderance of the Left, even moderates, who want Bush (and Cheney simultaneously if possible) impeached seems like a 70-30 ratio to the ones who simply "want investigations" or "BushCo to be a lame-duck".

   If I'm wrong...glad to hear it. Because I think it would be disasterous for Dems, both electorally in 2008 and in linking themselves to a rabid "cult of anti-personality" whose primary focus is on Bush and revenge for 2000/2004.

   Posted by Mask at 10/24/2006 @ 3:18pm

9. If I'm wrong...glad to hear it. Because I think it would be disasterous for Dems, both electorally in 2008 and in linking themselves to a rabid "cult of anti-personality" whose primary focus is on Bush and revenge for 2000/2004.

   Posted by MASK 10/24/2006 @ 3:18pm

   You are posturing here. Do you really believe that the Dems would devote all of their time on impeachment. The Dems have been out of power for more than they like to admit. There will be promotion of "other" issues" that will play toward 2008. Bet on it!

   Mid terms are interim. Power lies in 2008 and I'm wagering that they deal the right cards.

   Posted by doumer at 10/24/2006 @ 8:25pm

10. Posted by MASK 10/24/2006 @ 3:18pm

    I think you mistake peoples desires, with their politics. I think most would probably agree with the basic ideas outlined by STWRILEY. But this not preclude us wishing him impeached. Or keep people from wondering what impeachment is for, if not this asshole administration.

    Personally, I would like to see them impeached, indicted for war crimes and hung....but that's just me. And I'm not running for anything, so I can say what I want. I would surely tone down my rhetoric, if where trying to appeal to a broad base of voters.

    Try not to confuse the two. (Sounds like a smart ass comment I would normally make to you, but I am serious).

    Eric

    Posted by Malcontent at 10/24/2006 @ 8:47pm

11. You are posturing here. Do you really believe that the Dems would devote all of their time on impeachment.

    Posted by DOUMER 10/24/2006 @ 8:25pm

    No...that's exactly what I was NOT saying. I agree with you. They need to prove they can GOVERN, not seek revenge for their Bush-obsessed base.

    Posted by Mask at 10/24/2006 @ 9:55pm

12. Posted by MALCONTENT 10/24/2006 @ 8:47pm

    Eric, already heard Pelosi CASTIGATED on Air America for her "60 Minutes" interview and "no impeachment when I become Speaker" comment.

    The base are a WEE bit more than "desirous" of impeachment...they'll scream bloody murder at "Speaker Nancy" if they don't get. Mark the words!

    Posted by Mask at 10/24/2006 @ 9:56pm

13. they'll investigate.

    if they find any wrong doing they'll impeach.

    there not just going to impeach him for lying about a blow job in a grand jury convened on trumped up charges.

    it's not our way

    Posted by Will C. at 10/25/2006 @ 09:27am

14. Damn you Katrina, now I can't get that damn song out of my mind, he's still the one...Bah.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 10/25/2006 @ 09:49am

15. Posted by WILL C. 10/25/2006 @ 09:27am

    Then why did Nancy Pelosi, soon to become "Speaker Nancy", say that there would be no impeachment if she became Speaker, WILL?

    Was she lying to Lesley Stahl?

    Posted by Mask at 10/25/2006 @ 10:04am

16. when Bush nixed nation building and proclaimed himself the uniter, was HE lying?

    I answered your Pelosi question on another thread.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 10/25/2006 @ 10:11am

17. Posted by JOHANNESROLF 10/25/2006 @ 10:11am

    You speaking for WILL now, JOHANN?

    and does comparing Pelosi to Bush....help Pelosi??!?!?

    Posted by Mask at 10/25/2006 @ 12:58pm

18. With democratic majorities in one or both chambers: investigate, impeach, imprison!

    Posted by lewwelge at 10/25/2006 @ 3:21pm

19. Posted by LEWWELGE 10/25/2006 @ 3:21pm

    LEW...were you not paying attention?

    Pelosi?...Lesley Staahl?..."60 Minutes"?..."no impeachment if I become Speaker"?

    Posted by Mask at 10/25/2006 @ 4:04pm

20. We've been together since way back when Sometimes I never want to see you again But I want you to know, after all these years You're still the one I want whisperin' in my ear

    You're still the one I want to talk to in bed Still the one that turns my head We're still having fun, and you're still the one

    I looked at your face every day But I never saw it 'til I went away When winter came, I just wanted to go Deep in the desert, I longed for the snow

    You're still the one that makes me laugh Still the one that's my better half We're still having fun, and you're still the one

    You're still the one that makes me strong Still the one I want to take along We're still having fun, and you're still the one (yes you are!)

    Changing, our love is going gold Even though we grow old, it grows new

    You're still the one that I love to touch Still the one and I can't get enough We're still having fun, and you're still the one

    You're still the one who can scratch my itch Still the one and I wouldn't switch We're still having fun, and you're still the one

    You're still the one that makes me shout Still the one that I dream about We're still having fun, and you're still the one...

    Posted by John_A at 10/25/2006 @ 5:35pm

21. katrina. you will further cement your "hipness" status by making a correction by your stating that you "forgot" that indeed the great john hall did NOT write Dancin' in the Moonlight; and that you KNEW that his late Orleans bandmate wells kelly wrote said song when Wells was in a pre-orleans band called king harvest.

    Posted by jlmadorsky at 10/25/2006 @ 5:52pm

22. A, that's nice. it must be said however that the song was a hit not because of the lyric, but the melodic hook, which is also the reason I can't get the damn thing out of my mind.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 10/25/2006 @ 6:28pm

23. So when Dave Matthews runs in 2023, 2024, whatever...

    Are we going to get "Ants Marching" stuck in our heads too!?!?

    Posted by Mask at 10/26/2006 @ 12:34pm