Of course the DNC is spending money to defend candidates. That’s their job. How much money they’re spending where might be meaningful, but not just the fact that they’re spending it at all. A candidate with zero money is going to lose no matter how good he is.
In safe seats, parties generally don’t have to add to a candidate’s war chest. Dick Durbin is going to handle his GOP opponent himself. Franken is going to need an assist, and that means less money going to protect Pryor, Landrieu, or Hagan.
Allison Grimes won’t say if she would have voted for ACA:
In politician-speak, that means, “Yes, I would have voted for ACA.” Does she think the voters are stupid?
Maybe there’s no cotton-pickin’ reason to choose him.
The gloom and doom predictions are not to be believed. Democrats are not going to lose the Senate. I would not be surprised to see them take back the House. Then in 2016, Hillary wins the presidency, with the 2010 wave Republicans in the Senate all coming up for another vote the Democrats gain a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate and solidify their House majority. Hillary, Harry, and Nancy usher in a new wave of progressive legislation.
She does if she has any sense; it is Kentucky, after all.
I agree. There is no benefit in a Democrat in any state, but especially Kentucky, in opposing ACA or waffling on ACA, with the exception of the few Democrats who are on record as voting against it.
However, McConnell’s primary attack on her is that she’ll just be a servant of Obama and Reid. So now she seems to think she can’t be seen agreeing with them.
Of course not; Kentucky voters are stupid.
No, Alabama voters are stupid.
Kentucky voters are far more sophisticated than you would think.
Keep in mind that this is a very red state that is actually considering booting the top Republican in the Senate. That’s a lot of influence for Kentucky to give up. Could you ever see a blue state fire a Democratic leader?
And this demonstrates the sophistication of Kentucky voters…how? Sounds more like cut off your nose to spite your face.
ILLYWAA.
Swing district, leaning red. You could cite Daschle too, but he’d not equivalent for the same reason: red state.
Tru dat - the Dems all but swept the table in 2008; the only close one they lost was Georgia, which went to a runoff.
It’s weird how all three Senate classes are now pretty much at their high-water mark for one party or the other, and really only have one direction to go. We’ve discussed the 2014 class already. The 2016 class is the one where the GOP scored big gains not only in 2010, but in 2004 before that. And the 2018 class is one where the Dems picked up 5-6 seats in each of 2000 and 2006, and *still *managed to pick up a couple of seats in 2012.
I’m not sure I’ve seen a situation like this before. There’s usually been at least one class like that, but never all three at the same time IME.
A seat held by one party for 30 years and you call it a swing district.
BWAHAHAHA
And I’m sure the McConnell campaign will remind the voters of that at every opportunity and they will take it seriously. But, that is not the only consideration in play.
I’m reminded of all the Mississippi Republican-primary voters who felt safe in voting to oust Trent Lott because his replacement would of course take over as Senate party leader.
Here’s another development: Gay rights becoming something Dems can use as a wedge issue.
McCain and Romney won it and before Foley took it it was Republican for 20 years.
Even Clinton just barely won it.
By your logic, Maine is a red state because of Collins and Snowe.
And no, I wouldn’t cite Daschle because South Dakota is a seriously red state; Washington, not so much. In fact, Washington is clearly a blue state as it has gone for the D candidate in the last seven Presidential elections. It went for Dukakis in '88 for crying out loud!
Like I already said, ILLYWAA.
The Rs prior to 1965 can hardly be considered the same as today. Furthermore, the fact Foley held the seat for 30 years goes a long way toward establishing it as a reliable district for the Ds during that time. The point is that the people voting Foley out even though he was the most powerful person in the House shows you were WRONG in the original post I was responding to.
You asked, I provided an answer showing you were wrong because the people of that district did exactly that.
And BTW, my logic would actually cause me to view Maine as a true swing state based on recent elections.
In other words, ILLYWAA.