I don’t know anything about MN politics so that’s why I just left that one up for grabs.
Speaking as a Virginian I do not think Allen will lose his seat. . . I may have been hasty in saying he was safe but I think he’ll win by 4-5%.
I try not to put too much credence in polling this far out.
For example, after Menendez was appointed in NJ polling showed that voters said they’d elect him to a full term and that they favored him over Thomas Kean 44% to 28%. In more recent polls (the 44-28 was in December, this more recent one being in January) Kean was shown as being favored 42% to 35%, with a large percentage undecided.
I’ve not even touched the U.S. House, just labelling all the truly safe districts would take me the better part of an evening, and then trying to break down the elections would be even more difficult considered we’re so far out we have no idea how many of the primaries are going to come down.
Again, I want to hold off on Tennessee until Frist actually says he’s not running in the hear and now. I’ve always heard him take the stance that he won’t seak a third term, but I’ve heard Roger Clemens say he’s putting up the cleats about four times now ;). Considering the fact Frist would probably win in a cinch, and his retirement might created a seat-in-play, I wouldn’t be surprised if he might run to help insure the Dems don’t have much of a shot at the Senate.
Huh. That’s the first I’ve heard of Frist not retiring. He better be carefull with his presidential aspirations, he wouldn’t want to be seen as a flip-flopper.
Isn’t the primary race for his seat already underway? Does anyone know when the TN Senate has a cut off date to declare?
I’m very confident that, barring any major revelations to the detriment of Casey, Santorum is going to get the gate.
If Santorum isn’t safe in a state as conservative as Pennsylvania nobody is.
With the Abramoff scandals, the President’s lack of coattails (this being a lame-duck election), and the general sleaziness of the Republican Party over the last few years which people are sick of I think the Democrats have a real good shot at getting a small majority.
I don’t think it’s very likely the Dems get a small minority in the Senate. A 6-seat swing is a tough thing under any circumstances.
They have to win literally every single “contested” election they have, all of their contested seats have to be defended and all of the GOPs contested seats have to be lost.
If the Dems pull a majority in the senate I hope people will recognize it for the political marvel that it is. It’ll be a huge upset akin to Truman over Dewey.
Corruption isn’t a Congressional issue? Granted, the White House is plenty corrupt, but as the Abramoff affair is proving, the Congressional Republicans are as corrupt as they come. It’s a national issue, it’s a Congressional issue, it’s a big winner for the Dems, who, although they have not been choirboys historically, look MIGHTY damn good next to the festering pile of sleazebags that constitutes the Republican Congressional leadership.
Also, basic competence is a Congressional issue. The Republicans have fucked up left and right this year on the economy, on disaster preparedness, you name it. The Dems still have a nice smell from the Clinton administration, whose hallmarks were peace and prosperity.
The Dems can win big on these issues if they have brains enough to promote them.
They’ll have to deal a lot harder if their majority gets smaller. Right now they can pick off a few maverick Dems to get their legislation passed. If things go in the Dems’ favor … and they probably will … the Pubbies will have to go after more hardcore Dems to get legislation passed.
No, as has already pointed out, nationalizing the Congressional worked beautifully for the Pubbies via the Contract with America. It can work for Democrats, too.
If that were the only issue the Dems have, you might have a point. And besides, everybody knows the Iraq war belongs to Bush and Co. in a way damn few wars have ever belonged to an administration. I guarantee you Iraq will lose the Republicans some votes in Congressional races. No one wants more of this shit, and that’s what a vote for a Republican will get you.
Of course it is…in fact, that’s what the GOP pounded the Dems on to win in 1994. You seem to have lost track of the flow of messages and responses that led to that last statement, so I’m going to recap:
You posted: Make the election a national referendum on Bush.
Martin Hyde posted: Bad idea, congressional elections are won on local issues.
Mil Tan responded: The GOP won in 1994 on national issues.
To that, I responded that they won on national Congressional issues, not by campaigning against the president.
If the Dems can make hay out of Republican congressional malfeasance, then a national strategy definitely has a shot…of they’re organized enough and disciplined enough to stay on-message. But that’s not the subject of the post you responded to.
While I wish Hackett had stayed around I wouldn’t be so quick to write off Sherrod Brown. Brown has already won twice in state wide races (for Secretary of State) and he’s originally from Mansfield, not the Cleveland area.
Hackett was basically forced out due to fundraising issues. His cash-in-hand was low enough that it made clear that Brown would eventually beat him up. In the end, in a big state like Ohio, $$$ for campaigns is a strong controlling factor.
Because they’re not running for president. They’re running for Congress. Slamming the president leaves their actual opponent pretty clean…even if he did generally back the president. If they’re going to go negative, then it needs to hit the proper target to be effective.
How did Watergate affect the outcome of the 1974 Congressional election (which, of course, did not take place until after Nixon had resigned)?
I’m seriously asking. I’ve done some googling and I can’t seem to find any info, not even in the Wikipedia, on whether the Dems gained or lost net Congressional seats in November 2004.
I did, and that was way before Abramoff, before Plamegate, before Schiavo and all the other Republican high points after the 2004 election. I even offered him $100 per net seat, but he didn’t trust himself to pay up if he lost big.
(because Republican partisans would JUST HATE that.)
And on a practical note, if the Senate and House Republicans have been voting in lockstep with the Bush Admin. on his issues then it should be very easy to point out that any given Republican Congresscritter has voted for Bush programs right down the line, making HIM or HER as culpable as Bush for all the shit we’ve been through.
