Talk Elections

Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion => Congressional Elections => Topic started by: A18 on December 05, 2004, 10:08:54 PM



Title: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: A18 on December 05, 2004, 10:08:54 PM
()

I counted the Independent as a Democrat, since he votes with them.

Blue = GOP, Red = Democrat
Green = no election


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: George W. Bush on December 05, 2004, 11:28:46 PM
 Is Kay Bailey Hutchinton's Seat up?


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Sam Spade on December 05, 2004, 11:32:41 PM
Yes.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Ben. on December 06, 2004, 02:56:26 AM
()

I counted the Independent as a Democrat, since he votes with them.

Blue = GOP, Red = Democrat
Green = no election


Mississippi, Tennessee and Virginia are not automatically GOP holds IMHO, VA only becomes a toss-up if Warner runs ditto with Mississippi if Mike Moore runs, Tennessee however is a toss-up what ever happens. 



Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Beet on December 06, 2004, 03:06:18 AM
Any chance of running a strong candidate against Lincoln Chafee? If I'm not mistaken he only got 53% of the vote last time.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: qwerty on December 06, 2004, 04:09:36 AM
Ben, Trent Lott will be re-elected easily. If anything the racist remarks have increased his popularity. I mean, this is Mississippi we are talking about.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Ben. on December 06, 2004, 04:55:52 AM

Ben, Trent Lott will be re-elected easily. If anything the racist remarks have increased his popularity. I mean, this is Mississippi we are talking about.


If he runs and faces a paper candidate maybe, if he retires and Moore runs then it will be close if he does run again and Moore runs i think he'd only have a slight advantage... without Moore the GOP will win easily of course. 


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: AuH2O on December 06, 2004, 11:23:27 AM
Lott would kill Moore.

Warner has no hope, he's not even in the picture for that seat.

TN is not a tossup, either. That's lean GOP unless something weird happens.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: King on December 06, 2004, 07:00:21 PM
Republican seats seem mostly safe, Dems weakest links:

Senator Cantwell (D-WA), only won by a few 100 votes last time, but now that Dino Rossi has a statewide position, her chances of facing a semi-decent opponent are slim.

Senator Bingaman (D-NM), seems safe, but the state is trending Republican plus the two GOP Representatives (most likely to run) seem popular.

Senator Nelson (D-FL), it all depends on what mood Jeb Bush is on GOP primary filing day.

Senator Nelson (D-NE), although Gov. Johanns is now in the cabinet, I still do not believe that singles him out as a contender. Many cabinet members run for office while serving, if not Nelson will still face Rep. Osbourne.

Senator Dayton (D-MN), the guy is just an embarrasment to this country. :P

Senator Stabenow (D-MI), she seems safe but she barely got by last time.

Senator Clinton (D-NY), same as Florida, it all depends on what mood Giuliani is in on GOP primary filing day.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Akno21 on December 06, 2004, 09:37:01 PM
Would Gephardt challenge Talent, or is he offically out of politics?


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Defarge on December 06, 2004, 09:46:46 PM
Clinton could beat Guiliani.  I would vote for Guiliani for President, but  not for the Senate.  Same goes for most of the state.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on December 06, 2004, 09:47:15 PM
I'm not at all afraid of Rep. Kennedy. In fact, I'd consider him the weakest candidate out of Minnesota's 4 Republican Congressman. He's just a pure party hack, there's nothing about him that makes him especially strong.

The GOP can hate Dayton all they want, but he has decent approval ratings, and like it or not Minnesota is a Dem-leaning state. I have little doubt he'll win.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Akno21 on December 06, 2004, 09:48:45 PM
I'm not at all afraid of Rep. Kennedy. In fact, I'd consider him the weakest candidate out of Minnesota's 4 Republican Congressman. He's just a pure party hack, there's nothing about him that makes him especially strong.

The GOP can hate Dayton all they want, but he has decent approval ratings, and like it or not Minnesota is a Dem-leaning state. I have little doubt he'll win.

Coleman was a party hack. He did well, albiet he had some help.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on December 06, 2004, 10:05:01 PM
Had it not have been for the media whining about that memorial he would've lost. And he would've lost had Wellstone lived.

And while he was a party hack, he didn't run as one, and he didn't have a voting record to prove it either. Everyone thought he was a moderate just because he was a former Democrat and he said he would oppose ANWR drilling (which he now flip-flopped on, and then had the gall to call Kerry a flip-flopper. That guy is human garbage)


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: nclib on December 06, 2004, 10:39:02 PM
I still think Rep. Osbourne will run for governor, but were he to run for Senate, there's not way Ben Nelson could ever win.

Still, I would expect Sen. Nelson to practically almost be a Republican the next two years, just to be safe.

Since it doesn't appear that Johanns will run, Osborne is the only candidate that would be favored against Nelson.

I don't expect Osborne to run, since in 2000, he was approached about running for Senate and said he didn't want to commit to a 6-year term.

There is a good chance Lincoln Chafee will face a primary challenge.  If he can survive that, he will stand a decent chance of being re-elected.  If not the Dems have the advantage.

If a conservative Republican wins a primary in R.I., this seat will almost certainly go Dem.

Democrat wishful thinking about TN and MS will only turn into more than that if Trent Lott retires and if Bill Frist actually does leave.  Even if they do, the states both will still lean Republican, MS more than TN.

Democrats have a better chance defeating Lott than winning an open seat in Miss.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Ben. on December 07, 2004, 03:25:39 AM


Democrat wishful thinking about TN and MS will only turn into more than that if Trent Lott retires and if Bill Frist actually does leave.  Even if they do, the states both will still lean Republican, MS more than TN.


Frist is going and Lott is likley to go either way both races will be competative, MS only if Mike Moore runs however.     


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on December 07, 2004, 11:46:02 AM
Since Chafee could easily get reelected as a Democrat, I think he's not going to risk his seat. If it appears he's facing a strong candidate and can lose, he'll switch. If he faces a potential primary challenge that could beat him, he'll switch. I'd actually rather have him as a Democrat than either of the two Democrat congressmen (Kennedy is a stupid brat and Langevin is OK on most issues but pro-life and anti-stem cell research and all that)


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Defarge on December 08, 2004, 10:19:00 PM
Nelson in FL looks extremely vulnerable.  Here are Quinnipiac's latest numbers:

    Bill Nelson will be up for reelection in 2006. Would you like to see Bill Nelson reelected senator, or would you rather see someone else elected senator?

    Reelect Nelson 36
    Someone else 40


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: 7,052,770 on December 08, 2004, 10:36:02 PM
Lott will be reelected if he runs again.  Period.

Mike Moore could perhaps beat another Republican, Pickering I'd guess, but I wouldn't bet on it.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Sam Spade on December 09, 2004, 12:02:45 AM
1.  Chafee is not an idiot.  Why would he switch parties to a party without any power and lose his influence in things, since I don't see the Republicans losing control of the Senate in 2006?  How many times have you heard from Jim Jeffords since 2002?

Given that, the most likely outcome is for the White House offers him a deal to protect his seat from conservative challengers in order for key votes on certain bills (a la Specter).

Whether this happens or not remains to be seen.

2.  I would take zero stock in polls that come out nearly two years before the election.  This goes with the NY Governor's and Senate race, as well as this Florida Senate one.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Beet on December 09, 2004, 04:07:34 PM
1.  Chafee is not an idiot.  Why would he switch parties to a party without any power and lose his influence in things, since I don't see the Republicans losing control of the Senate in 2006?  How many times have you heard from Jim Jeffords since 2002?

Given that, the most likely outcome is for the White House offers him a deal to protect his seat from conservative challengers in order for key votes on certain bills (a la Specter).

Even so, he could get hammered on those "key votes." RI is not exactly PA... and the liberal Hoeffel pulled out a respectable 41%, which was higher than he'd been polling all year. Specter on the other hand didn't get higher than he was polling. The Democrats would be crazy not to at least pressure Chafee to switch by targeting RI. If they can't put pressure on Chafee in the most liberal state in the union, that would say something.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Nym90 on December 09, 2004, 04:49:46 PM
MI is only competitive if AG Mike Cox or Rep. and former SOS Candice Miller runs, and even then Stabenow would have the advantage.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Smash255 on December 11, 2004, 12:02:25 AM
PA

Hoffel managed 41% against a moderate candidate.  If he runs again in 06, he will do better than that against the super-arch Conservative Santorum who has presided in the Senate much more Conservative than he ran in 2000..  hoffel or even any Dem that runs could win based on the moderate voters in the state (ie take the voters that voted for Specter & Kerry).  Hoffel or whoever runs in 06, will also do much better among Dems than hoffel did this year.  because of his moderate views Specter did pretty well for a Republican among Democrats no way Santorum comes close to that feat


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 11, 2004, 12:09:05 AM
PA

Hoffel managed 41% against a moderate candidate.  If he runs again in 06, he will do better than that against the super-arch Conservative Santorum who has presided in the Senate much more Conservative than he ran in 2000..  hoffel or even any Dem that runs could win based on the moderate voters in the state (ie take the voters that voted for Specter & Kerry).  Hoffel or whoever runs in 06, will also do much better among Dems than hoffel did this year.  because of his moderate views Specter did pretty well for a Republican among Democrats no way Santorum comes close to that feat

Super arch conservative. You guys are classic. If Hoeffel runs, Santorum will win. Now will Hoeffel get more than 42% of the vote, yes, of course. However, I don't think Hoeffel will be the nominee anyway. What Dems have to realize is that Santorum is popular among conservative Democrats (a large group of voters in PA especially out west).

Now whoever the Dem is might be able to pull away moderate Republican votes but other than that, not much else. I like how Dems (especially out of state Dems) make it sound so easy. "Oh yeah just take the Kerry voters and Santorum will lose." It doesn't work like that here. Hoeffel can't win. Hafer (the likely nominee) can't win. The only candidate that could beat Santorum (Bob Casey, Jr.) has ruled out a run. PA will stay Republican.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Smash255 on December 11, 2004, 12:24:14 AM
PA

Hoffel managed 41% against a moderate candidate.  If he runs again in 06, he will do better than that against the super-arch Conservative Santorum who has presided in the Senate much more Conservative than he ran in 2000..  hoffel or even any Dem that runs could win based on the moderate voters in the state (ie take the voters that voted for Specter & Kerry).  Hoffel or whoever runs in 06, will also do much better among Dems than hoffel did this year.  because of his moderate views Specter did pretty well for a Republican among Democrats no way Santorum comes close to that feat

Super arch conservative. You guys are classic. If Hoeffel runs, Santorum will win. Now will Hoeffel get more than 42% of the vote, yes, of course. However, I don't think Hoeffel will be the nominee anyway. What Dems have to realize is that Santorum is popular among conservative Democrats (a large group of voters in PA especially out west).

Now whoever the Dem is might be able to pull away moderate Republican votes but other than that, not much else. I like how Dems (especially out of state Dems) make it sound so easy. "Oh yeah just take the Kerry voters and Santorum will lose." It doesn't work like that here. Hoeffel can't win. Hafer (the likely nominee) can't win. The only candidate that could beat Santorum (Bob Casey, Jr.) has ruled out a run. PA will stay Republican.

Santorum is a super-arch Conservative.  My point about the split ticket Specter-Kerry voters is that the vast majority of those are either moderates tp moderate Dems, people who more than likley will vote for someone like Hoffel or any other Democrat over Santorum.  Yes I am an out-of stater, but Santorum is very conservative and cerainly more conservative than the platform he ran under in 2000.  I just have a hard time believing that the moderate voters in the state are going to vote for someone who is an extremist candidate like Santorum is.  Santorum did get some of that moderate vote in 2000, but as I said he is certainly more Conservative than the platform he ran under & IMHO will have a hard time keeping the moderate vote he had in 2000.  Democrats who were ok with Specter aren't going to vote for Santorum either.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 11, 2004, 12:40:45 AM
PA

Hoffel managed 41% against a moderate candidate.  If he runs again in 06, he will do better than that against the super-arch Conservative Santorum who has presided in the Senate much more Conservative than he ran in 2000..  hoffel or even any Dem that runs could win based on the moderate voters in the state (ie take the voters that voted for Specter & Kerry).  Hoffel or whoever runs in 06, will also do much better among Dems than hoffel did this year.  because of his moderate views Specter did pretty well for a Republican among Democrats no way Santorum comes close to that feat

Super arch conservative. You guys are classic. If Hoeffel runs, Santorum will win. Now will Hoeffel get more than 42% of the vote, yes, of course. However, I don't think Hoeffel will be the nominee anyway. What Dems have to realize is that Santorum is popular among conservative Democrats (a large group of voters in PA especially out west).

Now whoever the Dem is might be able to pull away moderate Republican votes but other than that, not much else. I like how Dems (especially out of state Dems) make it sound so easy. "Oh yeah just take the Kerry voters and Santorum will lose." It doesn't work like that here. Hoeffel can't win. Hafer (the likely nominee) can't win. The only candidate that could beat Santorum (Bob Casey, Jr.) has ruled out a run. PA will stay Republican.

Santorum is a super-arch Conservative.  My point about the split ticket Specter-Kerry voters is that the vast majority of those are either moderates tp moderate Dems, people who more than likley will vote for someone like Hoffel or any other Democrat over Santorum.  Yes I am an out-of stater, but Santorum is very conservative and cerainly more conservative than the platform he ran under in 2000.  I just have a hard time believing that the moderate voters in the state are going to vote for someone who is an extremist candidate like Santorum is.  Santorum did get some of that moderate vote in 2000, but as I said he is certainly more Conservative than the platform he ran under & IMHO will have a hard time keeping the moderate vote he had in 2000.  Democrats who were ok with Specter aren't going to vote for Santorum either.

Oh he is? Why doesn't this super-arch conservative have a super-arch conservative 99 or 100 rating from the ACU? Santorum is not an extremist.

As I stated earlier, conservative Dems and conservative Republicans will send Santorum back to the Senate. Sure the moderate vote will go more towards the Democratic nominee this time around but it won't be enough.

Oh, yeah those "Democrats that were ok with Specter" are liberal Dems who didn't vote for Santorum in 2000 and never planned on voting for him in 2006. They don't make up enough of the voting population in the state to swing the election.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Smash255 on December 11, 2004, 01:19:13 AM
PA

Hoffel managed 41% against a moderate candidate.  If he runs again in 06, he will do better than that against the super-arch Conservative Santorum who has presided in the Senate much more Conservative than he ran in 2000..  hoffel or even any Dem that runs could win based on the moderate voters in the state (ie take the voters that voted for Specter & Kerry).  Hoffel or whoever runs in 06, will also do much better among Dems than hoffel did this year.  because of his moderate views Specter did pretty well for a Republican among Democrats no way Santorum comes close to that feat

Super arch conservative. You guys are classic. If Hoeffel runs, Santorum will win. Now will Hoeffel get more than 42% of the vote, yes, of course. However, I don't think Hoeffel will be the nominee anyway. What Dems have to realize is that Santorum is popular among conservative Democrats (a large group of voters in PA especially out west).

Now whoever the Dem is might be able to pull away moderate Republican votes but other than that, not much else. I like how Dems (especially out of state Dems) make it sound so easy. "Oh yeah just take the Kerry voters and Santorum will lose." It doesn't work like that here. Hoeffel can't win. Hafer (the likely nominee) can't win. The only candidate that could beat Santorum (Bob Casey, Jr.) has ruled out a run. PA will stay Republican.

Santorum is a super-arch Conservative.  My point about the split ticket Specter-Kerry voters is that the vast majority of those are either moderates tp moderate Dems, people who more than likley will vote for someone like Hoffel or any other Democrat over Santorum.  Yes I am an out-of stater, but Santorum is very conservative and cerainly more conservative than the platform he ran under in 2000.  I just have a hard time believing that the moderate voters in the state are going to vote for someone who is an extremist candidate like Santorum is.  Santorum did get some of that moderate vote in 2000, but as I said he is certainly more Conservative than the platform he ran under & IMHO will have a hard time keeping the moderate vote he had in 2000.  Democrats who were ok with Specter aren't going to vote for Santorum either.

Oh he is? Why doesn't this super-arch conservative have a super-arch conservative 99 or 100 rating from the ACU? Santorum is not an extremist.

As I stated earlier, conservative Dems and conservative Republicans will send Santorum back to the Senate. Sure the moderate vote will go more towards the Democratic nominee this time around but it won't be enough.

Oh, yeah those "Democrats that were ok with Specter" are liberal Dems who didn't vote for Santorum in 2000 and never planned on voting for him in 2006. They don't make up enough of the voting population in the state to swing the election.

He was what a 95??  thats pretty damn Conservative.  I have a tough time believeing even Conservative Dems are going to vote for someone as out there as this guy.  Keep in mind he is far more Conservative than how he ran in 2000.  And any cross-over he got from Conservative Dems and moderate in general will probably be lost because of how far right he has become


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 11, 2004, 01:20:28 AM
PA

Hoffel managed 41% against a moderate candidate.  If he runs again in 06, he will do better than that against the super-arch Conservative Santorum who has presided in the Senate much more Conservative than he ran in 2000..  hoffel or even any Dem that runs could win based on the moderate voters in the state (ie take the voters that voted for Specter & Kerry).  Hoffel or whoever runs in 06, will also do much better among Dems than hoffel did this year.  because of his moderate views Specter did pretty well for a Republican among Democrats no way Santorum comes close to that feat

Super arch conservative. You guys are classic. If Hoeffel runs, Santorum will win. Now will Hoeffel get more than 42% of the vote, yes, of course. However, I don't think Hoeffel will be the nominee anyway. What Dems have to realize is that Santorum is popular among conservative Democrats (a large group of voters in PA especially out west).

Now whoever the Dem is might be able to pull away moderate Republican votes but other than that, not much else. I like how Dems (especially out of state Dems) make it sound so easy. "Oh yeah just take the Kerry voters and Santorum will lose." It doesn't work like that here. Hoeffel can't win. Hafer (the likely nominee) can't win. The only candidate that could beat Santorum (Bob Casey, Jr.) has ruled out a run. PA will stay Republican.

Santorum is a super-arch Conservative.  My point about the split ticket Specter-Kerry voters is that the vast majority of those are either moderates tp moderate Dems, people who more than likley will vote for someone like Hoffel or any other Democrat over Santorum.  Yes I am an out-of stater, but Santorum is very conservative and cerainly more conservative than the platform he ran under in 2000.  I just have a hard time believing that the moderate voters in the state are going to vote for someone who is an extremist candidate like Santorum is.  Santorum did get some of that moderate vote in 2000, but as I said he is certainly more Conservative than the platform he ran under & IMHO will have a hard time keeping the moderate vote he had in 2000.  Democrats who were ok with Specter aren't going to vote for Santorum either.

Oh he is? Why doesn't this super-arch conservative have a super-arch conservative 99 or 100 rating from the ACU? Santorum is not an extremist.

As I stated earlier, conservative Dems and conservative Republicans will send Santorum back to the Senate. Sure the moderate vote will go more towards the Democratic nominee this time around but it won't be enough.

Oh, yeah those "Democrats that were ok with Specter" are liberal Dems who didn't vote for Santorum in 2000 and never planned on voting for him in 2006. They don't make up enough of the voting population in the state to swing the election.

He was what a 95??  thats pretty damn Conservative. 

Actually he has an 86 rating.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Smash255 on December 11, 2004, 01:30:55 AM
PA

Hoffel managed 41% against a moderate candidate.  If he runs again in 06, he will do better than that against the super-arch Conservative Santorum who has presided in the Senate much more Conservative than he ran in 2000..  hoffel or even any Dem that runs could win based on the moderate voters in the state (ie take the voters that voted for Specter & Kerry).  Hoffel or whoever runs in 06, will also do much better among Dems than hoffel did this year.  because of his moderate views Specter did pretty well for a Republican among Democrats no way Santorum comes close to that feat

Super arch conservative. You guys are classic. If Hoeffel runs, Santorum will win. Now will Hoeffel get more than 42% of the vote, yes, of course. However, I don't think Hoeffel will be the nominee anyway. What Dems have to realize is that Santorum is popular among conservative Democrats (a large group of voters in PA especially out west).

Now whoever the Dem is might be able to pull away moderate Republican votes but other than that, not much else. I like how Dems (especially out of state Dems) make it sound so easy. "Oh yeah just take the Kerry voters and Santorum will lose." It doesn't work like that here. Hoeffel can't win. Hafer (the likely nominee) can't win. The only candidate that could beat Santorum (Bob Casey, Jr.) has ruled out a run. PA will stay Republican.

Santorum is a super-arch Conservative.  My point about the split ticket Specter-Kerry voters is that the vast majority of those are either moderates tp moderate Dems, people who more than likley will vote for someone like Hoffel or any other Democrat over Santorum.  Yes I am an out-of stater, but Santorum is very conservative and cerainly more conservative than the platform he ran under in 2000.  I just have a hard time believing that the moderate voters in the state are going to vote for someone who is an extremist candidate like Santorum is.  Santorum did get some of that moderate vote in 2000, but as I said he is certainly more Conservative than the platform he ran under & IMHO will have a hard time keeping the moderate vote he had in 2000.  Democrats who were ok with Specter aren't going to vote for Santorum either.

Oh he is? Why doesn't this super-arch conservative have a super-arch conservative 99 or 100 rating from the ACU? Santorum is not an extremist.

As I stated earlier, conservative Dems and conservative Republicans will send Santorum back to the Senate. Sure the moderate vote will go more towards the Democratic nominee this time around but it won't be enough.

Oh, yeah those "Democrats that were ok with Specter" are liberal Dems who didn't vote for Santorum in 2000 and never planned on voting for him in 2006. They don't make up enough of the voting population in the state to swing the election.

He was what a 95??  thats pretty damn Conservative. 

Actually he has an 86 rating.

Well actually 87 & he has gotten more Conservative as time has gone on.  He was #95 in 2002 & #90 in 2003, his 2003 # would be higher, but the ACU actually cited with the Dems & against the GOP  in the medicare reform bill (although for different reasons)


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 11, 2004, 01:36:12 AM
PA

Hoffel managed 41% against a moderate candidate.  If he runs again in 06, he will do better than that against the super-arch Conservative Santorum who has presided in the Senate much more Conservative than he ran in 2000..  hoffel or even any Dem that runs could win based on the moderate voters in the state (ie take the voters that voted for Specter & Kerry).  Hoffel or whoever runs in 06, will also do much better among Dems than hoffel did this year.  because of his moderate views Specter did pretty well for a Republican among Democrats no way Santorum comes close to that feat

Super arch conservative. You guys are classic. If Hoeffel runs, Santorum will win. Now will Hoeffel get more than 42% of the vote, yes, of course. However, I don't think Hoeffel will be the nominee anyway. What Dems have to realize is that Santorum is popular among conservative Democrats (a large group of voters in PA especially out west).

Now whoever the Dem is might be able to pull away moderate Republican votes but other than that, not much else. I like how Dems (especially out of state Dems) make it sound so easy. "Oh yeah just take the Kerry voters and Santorum will lose." It doesn't work like that here. Hoeffel can't win. Hafer (the likely nominee) can't win. The only candidate that could beat Santorum (Bob Casey, Jr.) has ruled out a run. PA will stay Republican.

Santorum is a super-arch Conservative.  My point about the split ticket Specter-Kerry voters is that the vast majority of those are either moderates tp moderate Dems, people who more than likley will vote for someone like Hoffel or any other Democrat over Santorum.  Yes I am an out-of stater, but Santorum is very conservative and cerainly more conservative than the platform he ran under in 2000.  I just have a hard time believing that the moderate voters in the state are going to vote for someone who is an extremist candidate like Santorum is.  Santorum did get some of that moderate vote in 2000, but as I said he is certainly more Conservative than the platform he ran under & IMHO will have a hard time keeping the moderate vote he had in 2000.  Democrats who were ok with Specter aren't going to vote for Santorum either.

Oh he is? Why doesn't this super-arch conservative have a super-arch conservative 99 or 100 rating from the ACU? Santorum is not an extremist.

As I stated earlier, conservative Dems and conservative Republicans will send Santorum back to the Senate. Sure the moderate vote will go more towards the Democratic nominee this time around but it won't be enough.

Oh, yeah those "Democrats that were ok with Specter" are liberal Dems who didn't vote for Santorum in 2000 and never planned on voting for him in 2006. They don't make up enough of the voting population in the state to swing the election.

He was what a 95??  thats pretty damn Conservative. 

Actually he has an 86 rating.

Well actually 87 & he has gotten more Conservative as time has gone on.  He was #95 in 2002 & #90 in 2003, his 2003 # would be higher, but the ACU actually cited with the Dems & against the GOP  in the medicare reform bill (although for different reasons)

His lifetime rating is 87. He's not an extreme right winger.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Smash255 on December 11, 2004, 01:48:51 AM
PA

Hoffel managed 41% against a moderate candidate.  If he runs again in 06, he will do better than that against the super-arch Conservative Santorum who has presided in the Senate much more Conservative than he ran in 2000..  hoffel or even any Dem that runs could win based on the moderate voters in the state (ie take the voters that voted for Specter & Kerry).  Hoffel or whoever runs in 06, will also do much better among Dems than hoffel did this year.  because of his moderate views Specter did pretty well for a Republican among Democrats no way Santorum comes close to that feat

Super arch conservative. You guys are classic. If Hoeffel runs, Santorum will win. Now will Hoeffel get more than 42% of the vote, yes, of course. However, I don't think Hoeffel will be the nominee anyway. What Dems have to realize is that Santorum is popular among conservative Democrats (a large group of voters in PA especially out west).

Now whoever the Dem is might be able to pull away moderate Republican votes but other than that, not much else. I like how Dems (especially out of state Dems) make it sound so easy. "Oh yeah just take the Kerry voters and Santorum will lose." It doesn't work like that here. Hoeffel can't win. Hafer (the likely nominee) can't win. The only candidate that could beat Santorum (Bob Casey, Jr.) has ruled out a run. PA will stay Republican.

Santorum is a super-arch Conservative.  My point about the split ticket Specter-Kerry voters is that the vast majority of those are either moderates tp moderate Dems, people who more than likley will vote for someone like Hoffel or any other Democrat over Santorum.  Yes I am an out-of stater, but Santorum is very conservative and cerainly more conservative than the platform he ran under in 2000.  I just have a hard time believing that the moderate voters in the state are going to vote for someone who is an extremist candidate like Santorum is.  Santorum did get some of that moderate vote in 2000, but as I said he is certainly more Conservative than the platform he ran under & IMHO will have a hard time keeping the moderate vote he had in 2000.  Democrats who were ok with Specter aren't going to vote for Santorum either.

Oh he is? Why doesn't this super-arch conservative have a super-arch conservative 99 or 100 rating from the ACU? Santorum is not an extremist.

As I stated earlier, conservative Dems and conservative Republicans will send Santorum back to the Senate. Sure the moderate vote will go more towards the Democratic nominee this time around but it won't be enough.

Oh, yeah those "Democrats that were ok with Specter" are liberal Dems who didn't vote for Santorum in 2000 and never planned on voting for him in 2006. They don't make up enough of the voting population in the state to swing the election.

He was what a 95??  thats pretty damn Conservative. 

Actually he has an 86 rating.

Well actually 87 & he has gotten more Conservative as time has gone on.  He was #95 in 2002 & #90 in 2003, his 2003 # would be higher, but the ACU actually cited with the Dems & against the GOP  in the medicare reform bill (although for different reasons)

His lifetime rating is 87. He's not an extreme right winger.

he has become an extremist.  Santorum is FAR more conservative now than he was earlier in his Congressional career, hell he is even quite a bit more conservative now than he was 4 years ago when he first ran.  Thats the point I'm trying to make, is Santorum has evolved into an extreme right wing guy


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 11, 2004, 01:52:00 AM
Quote
Thats the point I'm trying to make, is Santorum has evolved into an extreme right wing guy

Extreme - Jim Inhofe, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell....

I honestly don't see Santorum as an extremist and neither do the people of Pennsylvania. They approve of his job as Senator.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Smash255 on December 11, 2004, 01:54:57 AM
Quote
Thats the point I'm trying to make, is Santorum has evolved into an extreme right wing guy

Extreme - Jim Inhofe, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell....

I honestly don't see Santorum as an extremist and neither do the people of Pennsylvania. They approve of his job as Senator.


Welll with some of the thing he has said about gays he can fit in the Falwell & Robertson category


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 11, 2004, 01:57:54 AM
Quote
Thats the point I'm trying to make, is Santorum has evolved into an extreme right wing guy

Extreme - Jim Inhofe, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell....

I honestly don't see Santorum as an extremist and neither do the people of Pennsylvania. They approve of his job as Senator.


Welll with some of the thing he has said about gays he can fit in the Falwell & Robertson category

The gay comment went alittle too far but I don't believe he hates gays as many believe he does.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Smash255 on December 11, 2004, 02:09:59 AM
Quote
Thats the point I'm trying to make, is Santorum has evolved into an extreme right wing guy

Extreme - Jim Inhofe, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell....

I honestly don't see Santorum as an extremist and neither do the people of Pennsylvania. They approve of his job as Senator.


Welll with some of the thing he has said about gays he can fit in the Falwell & Robertson category

The gay comment went alittle too far but I don't believe he hates gays as many believe he does.

his gay comments sound very much like comment Jerry Falwell has made on gays, granted he hasn't said gays caused 9/11 like Falwell did, but Santorum has had some very harsh & disturbing words about gays which pretty much mirrors what has been said by Falwell & Robertson. 

Anyway my whole point is the Rick Santorum of 2004 is without a doubt more conservative than the Rick Santorum that ran for Senate in 2000, and that will may very well pose a problem for him in the 2006 election. the support & votes he had from the more liberal republicans, .conservative Dems, and overall moderates in general may not be there in 06. A moderate Democrat can really paint Santorum as being outside of the mainstream, an extremist & basically use some of his comments to prove the point.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 11, 2004, 02:16:22 AM
Quote
Thats the point I'm trying to make, is Santorum has evolved into an extreme right wing guy

Extreme - Jim Inhofe, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell....

I honestly don't see Santorum as an extremist and neither do the people of Pennsylvania. They approve of his job as Senator.


Welll with some of the thing he has said about gays he can fit in the Falwell & Robertson category

The gay comment went alittle too far but I don't believe he hates gays as many believe he does.

Anyway my whole point is the Rick Santorum of 2004 is without a doubt more conservative than the Rick Santorum that ran for Senate in 2000, and that will may very well pose a problem for him in the 2006 election. the support & votes he had from the more liberal republicans, .conservative Dems, and overall moderates in general may not be there in 06. A moderate Democrat can really paint Santorum as being outside of the mainstream, an extremist & basically use some of his comments to prove the point.

I don't think you understand that Pennsylvanians accept Santorum's views and that's why he has some of the highest approval ratings in the state. The only Democrat that could beat Santorum is a conservative Democrat - Bob Casey, Jr. And Casey is not running so in my opinion, Santorum will keep the seat.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: danwxman on December 11, 2004, 03:14:46 AM
Quote
Thats the point I'm trying to make, is Santorum has evolved into an extreme right wing guy

Extreme - Jim Inhofe, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell....

I honestly don't see Santorum as an extremist and neither do the people of Pennsylvania. They approve of his job as Senator.


Welll with some of the thing he has said about gays he can fit in the Falwell & Robertson category

The gay comment went alittle too far but I don't believe he hates gays as many believe he does.

Anyway my whole point is the Rick Santorum of 2004 is without a doubt more conservative than the Rick Santorum that ran for Senate in 2000, and that will may very well pose a problem for him in the 2006 election. the support & votes he had from the more liberal republicans, .conservative Dems, and overall moderates in general may not be there in 06. A moderate Democrat can really paint Santorum as being outside of the mainstream, an extremist & basically use some of his comments to prove the point.

I don't think you understand that Pennsylvanians accept Santorum's views and that's why he has some of the highest approval ratings in the state. The only Democrat that could beat Santorum is a conservative Democrat - Bob Casey, Jr. And Casey is not running so in my opinion, Santorum will keep the seat.

Got a source for any recent approval ratings for Santorum? I heard they were slipping during the election season.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 11, 2004, 11:29:19 AM
Quote
Thats the point I'm trying to make, is Santorum has evolved into an extreme right wing guy

Extreme - Jim Inhofe, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell....

I honestly don't see Santorum as an extremist and neither do the people of Pennsylvania. They approve of his job as Senator.


Welll with some of the thing he has said about gays he can fit in the Falwell & Robertson category

The gay comment went alittle too far but I don't believe he hates gays as many believe he does.

Anyway my whole point is the Rick Santorum of 2004 is without a doubt more conservative than the Rick Santorum that ran for Senate in 2000, and that will may very well pose a problem for him in the 2006 election. the support & votes he had from the more liberal republicans, .conservative Dems, and overall moderates in general may not be there in 06. A moderate Democrat can really paint Santorum as being outside of the mainstream, an extremist & basically use some of his comments to prove the point.

I don't think you understand that Pennsylvanians accept Santorum's views and that's why he has some of the highest approval ratings in the state. The only Democrat that could beat Santorum is a conservative Democrat - Bob Casey, Jr. And Casey is not running so in my opinion, Santorum will keep the seat.

Got a source for any recent approval ratings for Santorum? I heard they were slipping during the election season.

The last ones I've seen were the August numbers. I have no idea how you can "hear" about approval ratings when no ratings have been released.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: zorkpolitics on December 11, 2004, 03:06:59 PM
In a mathematical ranking of the Senate produced by the Optimal Classification algorithm using 498 roll call vote, Santorum ranked 85th.   Thus 15 Senators (all Republican of course) were more conservative.

see:
Non-Parametric Unfolding of Binary Choice Data.  Political Analysis, 8:211-237, 2000



Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: danwxman on December 11, 2004, 03:48:10 PM
Quote
Thats the point I'm trying to make, is Santorum has evolved into an extreme right wing guy

Extreme - Jim Inhofe, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell....

I honestly don't see Santorum as an extremist and neither do the people of Pennsylvania. They approve of his job as Senator.


Welll with some of the thing he has said about gays he can fit in the Falwell & Robertson category

The gay comment went alittle too far but I don't believe he hates gays as many believe he does.

Anyway my whole point is the Rick Santorum of 2004 is without a doubt more conservative than the Rick Santorum that ran for Senate in 2000, and that will may very well pose a problem for him in the 2006 election. the support & votes he had from the more liberal republicans, .conservative Dems, and overall moderates in general may not be there in 06. A moderate Democrat can really paint Santorum as being outside of the mainstream, an extremist & basically use some of his comments to prove the point.

I don't think you understand that Pennsylvanians accept Santorum's views and that's why he has some of the highest approval ratings in the state. The only Democrat that could beat Santorum is a conservative Democrat - Bob Casey, Jr. And Casey is not running so in my opinion, Santorum will keep the seat.

Got a source for any recent approval ratings for Santorum? I heard they were slipping during the election season.

The last ones I've seen were the August numbers. I have no idea how you can "hear" about approval ratings when no ratings have been released.

What are the numbers from August? I posted an article on here a while ago that said Santorum's approval numbers were slipping.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: CARLHAYDEN on December 11, 2004, 04:15:23 PM
Republican seats seem mostly safe, Dems weakest links:

Senator Cantwell (D-WA), only won by a few 100 votes last time, but now that Dino Rossi has a statewide position, her chances of facing a semi-decent opponent are slim.

Senator Bingaman (D-NM), seems safe, but the state is trending Republican plus the two GOP Representatives (most likely to run) seem popular.

Senator Nelson (D-FL), it all depends on what mood Jeb Bush is on GOP primary filing day.

Senator Nelson (D-NE), although Gov. Johanns is now in the cabinet, I still do not believe that singles him out as a contender. Many cabinet members run for office while serving, if not Nelson will still face Rep. Osbourne.

Senator Dayton (D-MN), the guy is just an embarrasment to this country. :P

Senator Stabenow (D-MI), she seems safe but she barely got by last time.

Senator Clinton (D-NY), same as Florida, it all depends on what mood Giuliani is in on GOP primary filing day.

I must respectfully disagree in several particulars:

First, the one vunerable Republican seat is held by Santorun (Pennsylvania).  Depends on the Democrat nominee.

Second, the most vunerable Democrat is Conrad of North Dakota (he's way out of step with the electorate in that state).  It will be interesting to see if he changes his voting record in the next two years to one a little less extremely liberal.

Also, Bingaham (New Mexcio) is so far out in left-field that if the Republicans field a decent candidate, he's toast.

Nelson (Florida) needs to moderate his liberalism and hope that he doesn't face a first class candidate (like Jeb).

Its pretty difficult to see any other incumbent seeking reelection losing.

The fly in the ointment is retirements/deaths.  This can change things for a few seats.

Finally, it will be interesting to see if Jefford runs as a Democrat or an Independent in Vermont (or maybe doesn't seek reelection at all).  If he runs as an Independent and the Democrats nominate a non-joke candidate and the Republicans run a quality candidate (the current Governor comes to mind), they could pull it out in Vermont.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: phk on December 11, 2004, 04:26:58 PM
Conrad will get re-elected easily, he even won more votes than Bush did in 2000, and hes to the right of Dorgan.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: CARLHAYDEN on December 11, 2004, 04:49:25 PM
The secret that several great plains liberal Democrats had IN THE PAST was that: (1) the voters were NOT aware of the voting records (when the South Dakota voters became award of Daschle's voting record, they canned him), and (2) when they had either a Democrat President (93-00) and or a majority in their chamber (01-02) they could deliver the bacon. 

It remains to be seen if Conrad will rush to the middle in the next two years (I suspect you will see considerable movement by him in that direction, it depends how far), and if the Republicans decide to target him.

It will be particularly interesting to see if Conrad breaks with the other liberal Democrats in trying to filibuster Bush's appointments.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on December 11, 2004, 04:56:16 PM
Dorgan got reelected easily last election, so the Republicans in ND sure aren't going too well when it comes to winning Senate seats. Conrad will win easily. And Bingaman will also win easily, he's a long term very heavily entrenched incumbent who won with no problems at all in 2000.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on December 11, 2004, 05:05:18 PM
Conrad is in no danger


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: CARLHAYDEN on December 11, 2004, 05:13:19 PM
We will see.

I never cease to be amazed that lefties from the UK make pronouncements about American politics in the absence of facts and logic.

I pointed out the two factors which allowed him to win reelection previously no longer apply.

Both the ADA and the ACU are in agreement that Conrad is on the left of the Democrat party in the Senate, in what is a conservative Republican state.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on December 11, 2004, 05:22:41 PM
I never cease to be amazed that lefties from the UK make pronouncements about American politics in the absence of facts and logic.

I pointed out the two factors which allowed him to win reelection previously no longer apply.

Both the ADA and the ACU are in agreement that Conrad is on the left of the Democrat party in the Senate, in what is a conservative Republican state.

I'll ignore your first remark...
North Dakota isn't really a "conservative Republican state". It votes Republican at Presidential level, this is true, but it's also got a long tradition of Progressive Populism and general bloody mindedness.

Besides, Dorgan and Pomeroy (sp? I always get this wrong) were re-elected this year.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Sam Spade on December 11, 2004, 05:56:35 PM
Conrad is only in real danger in Gov. Hoeven runs.

North Dakota simply isn't as anti-incumbent historically as South Dakota is.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 11, 2004, 06:02:10 PM
Quote
Thats the point I'm trying to make, is Santorum has evolved into an extreme right wing guy

Extreme - Jim Inhofe, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell....

I honestly don't see Santorum as an extremist and neither do the people of Pennsylvania. They approve of his job as Senator.


Welll with some of the thing he has said about gays he can fit in the Falwell & Robertson category

The gay comment went alittle too far but I don't believe he hates gays as many believe he does.

Anyway my whole point is the Rick Santorum of 2004 is without a doubt more conservative than the Rick Santorum that ran for Senate in 2000, and that will may very well pose a problem for him in the 2006 election. the support & votes he had from the more liberal republicans, .conservative Dems, and overall moderates in general may not be there in 06. A moderate Democrat can really paint Santorum as being outside of the mainstream, an extremist & basically use some of his comments to prove the point.

I don't think you understand that Pennsylvanians accept Santorum's views and that's why he has some of the highest approval ratings in the state. The only Democrat that could beat Santorum is a conservative Democrat - Bob Casey, Jr. And Casey is not running so in my opinion, Santorum will keep the seat.

Got a source for any recent approval ratings for Santorum? I heard they were slipping during the election season.

The last ones I've seen were the August numbers. I have no idea how you can "hear" about approval ratings when no ratings have been released.

What are the numbers from August? I posted an article on here a while ago that said Santorum's approval numbers were slipping.

What were the numbers from the article? Quinnipiac had Santorum with about a 55% approval rating and the lowest disapproval numbers out of the three officials polled.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: danwxman on December 11, 2004, 06:04:37 PM
It just said his numbers were slipping and lower then Spector's.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 11, 2004, 06:06:16 PM
It just said his numbers were slipping and lower then Spector's.

Ok well if I cannot be provided with proof from the article then I can't respond.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 11, 2004, 06:45:58 PM
WHAT WE'VE ALL BEEN WAITING FOR!



http://www.ricksantorum.com/


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: phk on December 11, 2004, 07:08:50 PM
Pomeroy will win easily as well.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: CARLHAYDEN on December 11, 2004, 09:09:13 PM
I never cease to be amazed that lefties from the UK make pronouncements about American politics in the absence of facts and logic.

I pointed out the two factors which allowed him to win reelection previously no longer apply.

Both the ADA and the ACU are in agreement that Conrad is on the left of the Democrat party in the Senate, in what is a conservative Republican state.

I'll ignore your first remark...
North Dakota isn't really a "conservative Republican state". It votes Republican at Presidential level, this is true, but it's also got a long tradition of Progressive Populism and general bloody mindedness.

Besides, Dorgan and Pomeroy (sp? I always get this wrong) were re-elected this year.

They weren't targeted (i.e. they got a free ride).


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: phk on December 11, 2004, 10:14:04 PM
Even targetted, they'd win.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on December 12, 2004, 12:23:59 AM
Everything you said applied this election, and they still won easily. And there is no equivalent of John Thune in ND. There is no reason for the Republicans to target Conrad, and he will win easily.

Of course, you also thought Bush had a great shot at winning Vermont. We all know how accurate that was.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: AuH2O on December 12, 2004, 12:44:48 AM
Everything you said applied this election, and they still won easily. And there is no equivalent of John Thune in ND. There is no reason for the Republicans to target Conrad, and he will win easily.

Of course, you also thought Bush had a great shot at winning Vermont. We all know how accurate that was.

I recall some of your predictions didn't turn out so well either...

On Conrad... he's unlikely to lose or face a particularly close race, but he's not necessarily invincible. The fact it's a midterm only makes it less likely.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on December 12, 2004, 12:46:55 AM
Failing on some close races is not equivalent to blowing a state by 20 points.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: AuH2O on December 12, 2004, 12:56:52 AM
Failing on some close races is not equivalent to blowing a state by 20 points.

I guess it depends on your definition of 'close.' Coburn's margin wound up being pretty large.

Also note that, as you have continually ignored, early projections that Vermont could be close were based on a much bigger Bush win- before he blew the first debate and made it a semi-race. Turns out he would have lost there no matter what, but it needn't have been by 20.

In any case, I made well over a grand on the election, so I could only have been so wrong, no?

I did correctly call that Bush would impove in MA from 2000. Some New Englanders just didn't cooperate.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: CARLHAYDEN on December 12, 2004, 07:54:23 AM

You never provide any basis for your assertion.

Let me ask you a few questions.

1. Do you believe that North Dakota is REALLY a Democrat state that just occasionally votes Republican in Presidential elections (like say, West Virginia) and that is why you think Conrad will be reelected?

2. Do you think that North Dakota's voters are overwhelmingly to the left, and therefore they agree with Conrad's reciord?

Warning: If you try calling Conrad a "moderate" I will start posting his voting record!

3. Do you think that Conrad has the ability to provide pork for his constiuents as he did before the Republicans obtained clear control of both houses of Congress as well as the Presidency?

4. Do you think the 'new media' was just a 2004 thing and it will fade away, allowing Conrad to hide his record?


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: phk on December 12, 2004, 05:49:45 PM
1. Nope, but it is a populist state.
2. Conrad is indeed a moderate, the ACU gives him a life record of 20, 2 less than Evan Bayh
3.  Didn't Republicans control both houses of Congress, while he was senator for most of his tenure?
4. If Dorgan can get re-elected with Bush on the top of the target, than Conrad can as well.

North Dakota DOES NOT have a Thune, and Thune needed the right conditions to win in the first place.

Saying Conrad will lose is like saying Bush will win in Vermont.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: CARLHAYDEN on December 12, 2004, 09:48:32 PM
1. Hmm, populism eh.  So Republican Presidential candidates are prefered by populists since 1964?

2. I realize to YOU that Edward Kennedy is a 'moderate,' but to carry out my promise, let me begin by listing some of Conrad's votes which the voters in North Dakota won't like.

a. S.Con Res. 23 (RC 62) opposition repeal of the Death Tax.  Yeah, keeping the death tax is real popular with the family farmers in North Dakota as it will force many heirs to sell the farm to pay the taxes.

b. Malpractice Reform S. 11 (RC 264).  Oh, and yes, in your world ambulance chasers are more popular than doctors.  I suggest in reality, including North Dakota, the perspective is a little different.

c. Taxpayer Support for Abortion S. 925 (RC 267).  And sure, everyone thinks abortions are so wonderful that the taxpayers should pay for them.

3. Apparently you didn't understand my post.


From 1987-1994 the Democrats controlled BOTH houses of Congress.

From 1995-2000, the Democrats controlled the Presidency.

From 2001-2002, the Democrats controlled the Senate.

The only period during which Conrad hasn't had partisan protection was 2003-2004 (he didn't face election during that period).

4. Let me repead, as you apparently did not understand my pervious posts.  Dorgan got reelected because he was NOT targeted in 2004.  If he keeps up his liberal habit, he will be targeted in 2010 (assuming he doesn't decide to retire).

Oh, and BTW, do you have any idea who John Hoeven is?


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on December 13, 2004, 12:10:36 PM
I used to live in the most right wing county in North Dakota that has a significant population. Lived there for 9 years. People like Conrad. They know he's a liberal. They don't care because they aren't political junkies. There's a reason why you don't hear about massive protests or activism on either side in ND. Because of this while most people are probably Republicans, they don't get too partisan outside of presidential elections. Democrats with good constituent services, like all 3 members of the delegation, are popular. Conrad wins easily because he is well liked, and he will win in 2006.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: CARLHAYDEN on December 13, 2004, 05:29:32 PM
I used to live in the most right wing county in North Dakota that has a significant population. Lived there for 9 years. People like Conrad. They know he's a liberal. They don't care because they aren't political junkies. There's a reason why you don't hear about massive protests or activism on either side in ND. Because of this while most people are probably Republicans, they don't get too partisan outside of presidential elections. Democrats with good constituent services, like all 3 members of the delegation, are popular. Conrad wins easily because he is well liked, and he will win in 2006.


First, most politicans are likeable (if they weren't, they probably wouldn't be sucessful).  From what I have heard, Conrad is likeable.

Second, most people do NOT follow politics very closely and as the national media does NOT generally give much attention to Senators like Conrad, the only information in the past people had was from their local newspaper (and to a lesser degree) and televeion news.

Politicians like Conrad have cut deals with local media in their states to cover up (i.e. not publish their records) and merely publicize them when the cut a ribbon at the opening of a sewage treatment plant funded by the federal government (or some other such probject).

So, NO they do NOT know that Conrad is a liberal (although it is nice that you can admit he is, perhaps you can educate the other poster on this matter of this).

Third, the 'constituent service' which has in the past been a crucial factor in getting liberal Democrats reelected in conservative Republican areas just doesn't work well any more for the reasons I cited (i.e. they do NOT control the levers of power any more).


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Sam Spade on December 13, 2004, 06:10:33 PM
Senatorial races in the Dakotas are usually decided on which candidate will get the most amount of agricultural pork into the states.  Democrats have a built-in advantage on this.  Dorgan and Conrad are liked because they're nice people and because they fulfill this requirement nicely.

Still, the people of North and South Dakota are fundamentally conservative, if you make the Senate races into a national issue.  Daschle made the mistake of becoming too public of a figure and opening himself up to this line of attack. 

Thune was a good, well-liked and well-known candidate and beat him upon the judges issue (which he brought up constantly).  He also promised South Dakota that he would still bring in the agricultural pork to shore up that problem.

South Dakota is also more historically anti-incumbent and took to this in getting rid of Daschle this year (as it did McGovern previously).  The same tactic can be used in North Dakota, but it's fundamentally harder because 1. North Dakota is less anti-incumbent, 2. Dorgan or Conrad don't occupy public, national positions.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: CARLHAYDEN on December 13, 2004, 07:48:43 PM
Senatorial races in the Dakotas are usually decided on which candidate will get the most amount of agricultural pork into the states.  Democrats have a built-in advantage on this.  Dorgan and Conrad are liked because they're nice people and because they fulfill this requirement nicely.

Still, the people of North and South Dakota are fundamentally conservative, if you make the Senate races into a national issue.  Daschle made the mistake of becoming too public of a figure and opening himself up to this line of attack. 

Thune was a good, well-liked and well-known candidate and beat him upon the judges issue (which he brought up constantly).  He also promised South Dakota that he would still bring in the agricultural pork to shore up that problem.

South Dakota is also more historically anti-incumbent and took to this in getting rid of Daschle this year (as it did McGovern previously).  The same tactic can be used in North Dakota, but it's fundamentally harder because 1. North Dakota is less anti-incumbent, 2. Dorgan or Conrad don't occupy public, national positions.

Sam,

You touch upon two of the critical points I made:

First, Conrad is no longer in a position to deliver the pork as he previously was able to do, and

Second, while in previous elections the electorate was ignorant of Conrad's actions in Washington, the new media has changed this.  Moreover, there are few vunerable Democrat seats up in 2006, so the Republicans are likely to focus on two or three (Conrad, Bingaman and possibly the Washington Senate seat if the Democrats 'find' enough votes in King county to install Gregoire).


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: phk on December 13, 2004, 08:07:27 PM
Conrad should be targetted by Alan Keyes.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: CARLHAYDEN on December 13, 2004, 08:26:26 PM
Dream on.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: phk on December 13, 2004, 08:27:58 PM
He was sure sharp at targetting Obama.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Sam Spade on December 13, 2004, 08:38:44 PM
Senatorial races in the Dakotas are usually decided on which candidate will get the most amount of agricultural pork into the states.  Democrats have a built-in advantage on this.  Dorgan and Conrad are liked because they're nice people and because they fulfill this requirement nicely.

Still, the people of North and South Dakota are fundamentally conservative, if you make the Senate races into a national issue.  Daschle made the mistake of becoming too public of a figure and opening himself up to this line of attack. 

Thune was a good, well-liked and well-known candidate and beat him upon the judges issue (which he brought up constantly).  He also promised South Dakota that he would still bring in the agricultural pork to shore up that problem.

South Dakota is also more historically anti-incumbent and took to this in getting rid of Daschle this year (as it did McGovern previously).  The same tactic can be used in North Dakota, but it's fundamentally harder because 1. North Dakota is less anti-incumbent, 2. Dorgan or Conrad don't occupy public, national positions.

Sam,

You touch upon two of the critical points I made:

First, Conrad is no longer in a position to deliver the pork as he previously was able to do, and

Second, while in previous elections the electorate was ignorant of Conrad's actions in Washington, the new media has changed this.  Moreover, there are few vunerable Democrat seats up in 2006, so the Republicans are likely to focus on two or three (Conrad, Bingaman and possibly the Washington Senate seat if the Democrats 'find' enough votes in King county to install Gregoire).

Maybe.  For Republicans, the key seats to focus on trying to turn over are Nelson in FL, Nelson in NE (if a suitable challenger can be found) and Dayton in MN.  Then I would look at the seats you mentioned.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on December 13, 2004, 09:08:28 PM
They know Conrad is a liberal because the Republican sacrifical lamb candidates in the past have reminded them. Your typical North Dakotan knows he's pro-choice. I've seen campaign against him before saying exactly what you mention, and they didn't work.

As for the local media, lol, you obviously have never read the Fargo Forum. It's a Scaife-owned pure right wing rag. If that's favorable, lol.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: phk on December 13, 2004, 09:53:50 PM
Perhaps they should call CARLHAYDEN for help. He could help Bush win Vermont as well.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: MHS2002 on December 13, 2004, 11:42:43 PM
Who could possibly challenge Conrad in 2006? I lived there 1998-2002 and the only person who had a chance of beating him then was former governor Ed Schafer. Unless he runs or unless current governor John Hoeven decides to run, seems like Conrad should have an easy time of it.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: CARLHAYDEN on December 14, 2004, 07:10:38 AM
Who could possibly challenge Conrad in 2006? I lived there 1998-2002 and the only person who had a chance of beating him then was former governor Ed Schafer. Unless he runs or unless current governor John Hoeven decides to run, seems like Conrad should have an easy time of it.

First, if you go back you will see that I specifically mentioned Hoeven as a likely candidate.

Second, are you denying that Conrad's ability to provide the pork in the past was a major factor in his reelection?

Third, are you assserting that the average voter in North Dakota agrees with Conrad's votes?

Fourth, could it be that the majority of the voters never really knew how Conrad was voting?

Fifth, has Conrad has a series of hapless Republican opponents in the past because he could deliver the pork?


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: CARLHAYDEN on December 14, 2004, 07:23:22 AM
Senatorial races in the Dakotas are usually decided on which candidate will get the most amount of agricultural pork into the states.  Democrats have a built-in advantage on this.  Dorgan and Conrad are liked because they're nice people and because they fulfill this requirement nicely.

Still, the people of North and South Dakota are fundamentally conservative, if you make the Senate races into a national issue.  Daschle made the mistake of becoming too public of a figure and opening himself up to this line of attack. 

Thune was a good, well-liked and well-known candidate and beat him upon the judges issue (which he brought up constantly).  He also promised South Dakota that he would still bring in the agricultural pork to shore up that problem.

South Dakota is also more historically anti-incumbent and took to this in getting rid of Daschle this year (as it did McGovern previously).  The same tactic can be used in North Dakota, but it's fundamentally harder because 1. North Dakota is less anti-incumbent, 2. Dorgan or Conrad don't occupy public, national positions.

Sam,

You touch upon two of the critical points I made:

First, Conrad is no longer in a position to deliver the pork as he previously was able to do, and

Second, while in previous elections the electorate was ignorant of Conrad's actions in Washington, the new media has changed this.  Moreover, there are few vunerable Democrat seats up in 2006, so the Republicans are likely to focus on two or three (Conrad, Bingaman and possibly the Washington Senate seat if the Democrats 'find' enough votes in King county to install Gregoire).

Maybe.  For Republicans, the key seats to focus on trying to turn over are Nelson in FL, Nelson in NE (if a suitable challenger can be found) and Dayton in MN.  Then I would look at the seats you mentioned.

Nelson of Florida is definitely vunerable IF he doesn't mend his ways (I find it fascinating that southern Democrats in the Senate cast so many hard left votes knowing their constituents disagreed), which to some extent I think he will, and IF he draws a major opponent (say Jeb Bush).

Nelson of Nebraska is fairly well attuned to the voters of Nebraska, and it will be pretty hard for any canidate to beat him.

Dayton of Minnesota is a thoughtless left-wing slimebag.  However. he's from the Minnesota. Pretty tought country for Republicans now that the DFL in that state has largely rocovered from its previous suicidal attempts.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: MHS2002 on December 14, 2004, 11:31:17 AM
Who could possibly challenge Conrad in 2006? I lived there 1998-2002 and the only person who had a chance of beating him then was former governor Ed Schafer. Unless he runs or unless current governor John Hoeven decides to run, seems like Conrad should have an easy time of it.

First, if you go back you will see that I specifically mentioned Hoeven as a likely candidate.

Second, are you denying that Conrad's ability to provide the pork in the past was a major factor in his reelection?

Third, are you assserting that the average voter in North Dakota agrees with Conrad's votes?

Fourth, could it be that the majority of the voters never really knew how Conrad was voting?

Fifth, has Conrad has a series of hapless Republican opponents in the past because he could deliver the pork?

First, didn't see that part about Hoeven.

I really don't think the average voter in North Dakota cares what Conrad's posititons are. As long Conrad continues to bring home the yearly farm pork, he could vote like Hilary Clinton and it wouldn't really matter. I'm not going to disagree with your beliefs that North Dakotans don't know (or care) what Conrad's votes are, because more often than not that's the case.

The only way Conrad could lose his seat is either he can't bring home the pork or someone like Hoeven can challenge Conrad on the issues while promising to bring home the bacon. For Conrad to lose his seat it will take something along the lines of Thune-Daschle, as SamSpade mentioned. I am not trying to disagree with most of what you say, I'm just saying it's going to be a tough task for anyone to knock Conrad out come '06. If the status quo holds (in terms of pork, etc) then Conrad is probabky going to win.



Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: phk on December 14, 2004, 03:05:47 PM
Carl should go help Conrads challenger win a county at the very least.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Dave from Michigan on December 14, 2004, 03:14:53 PM
the republicans should go after Stabenow too.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: 12th Doctor on December 14, 2004, 03:21:59 PM
I would point out that if Dean does become chairman of the DNC, the Democrats are going to lose another handful of seats (maybe as many as 5) in '06.  If the status quo is maintained and the national Democrats don't cmapign for the southern Senate candidates, or in Michigan, then the Dems might gain some seats.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: phk on December 14, 2004, 03:29:50 PM
Why not let the South secede?


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Dave from Michigan on December 14, 2004, 03:33:27 PM
I have a feeling Stabenow will win, because no decent republican will run against her.  There are several good candidates that could beat here, but don't want to give up there safe seats.  I think Candice Miller would be the best choice.  She was secretary of state for 8 years, and now is a congresswoman from Macomb county.  But it's unlikely she will give up her safe seat.  I think most of them are waiting and hoping Carl Levin decides not to run again in 2008.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: phk on December 14, 2004, 03:49:33 PM
Why did Spencer Abraham go down in 2006, in the first place?


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on December 14, 2004, 04:30:31 PM
A lot of races will depend on national trends... oh... and retirements... here's an early guess:

ME: Safe GOP, unless Snowe runs for Governer
VT: Safe Ind.
MA: Yaaawn... Safe Dem
RI: If Chafee is the victim of a primary upset it's a dead cert Dem gain. If not, Leans GOP
CT: Yaaawn... Safe Dem
NY: If Rudy runs it's a tossup. Otherwise safe-to-lean Hillary Party (bah, humbug...)
NJ: Depends how the Gubernatorial mess goes, yadda, yadda, yadda.
DE: Yaaawn... Safe Dem
PA: Tossup. The amount of money that'll get spent here is frightening...
MD: Yaaawn... Safe Dem
WV: Yaaawn... Safe Dem, unless Byrd leaves the Senate... in which case it depends on the candidates (though unless the WVDems  up (which has been known) it should be a fairly easy hold)
VA: Yaaawn... Safe GOP... unless Warner runs.
FL: Tossup. See PA. Senator Bush?
MS: I'd be very suprised if Lott ran and lost (I can dream though) but Mike Moore would make it competative. No idea what'll happen if Lott retires.
TN: I *think* Frist has decided to leave the Senate. Tossup pending candidate announcements.
OH: Yaaawn... Safe GOP
IN: Yaaawn... Safe GOP
MI: With a strong GOP candidate would be a tossup. Probably Leans Dem though.
WI: Yaaawn... Safe Dem
MN: The GOP will try, but I'd be suprised if Dayton lost
MO: Will probably go with the national trend
TX: Yaaawn... Safe GOP
NM: Yaaawn... Safe Dem
NB: Leans Dem... for now at least
ND: Unless the GOP can get themselves a star candidate (which I doubt) it's another yaaawn...
MT: Depends what the New Gov does. For now it's Leans GOP.
WY: Yaaawn... Safe GOP
UT: Yaaawn... Safe GOP
AZ: Yaaawn... Safe GOP
NV: Yaaawn... Safe GOP
CA: Yaaawn... Safe Dem
WA: Has the Gubernatorial saga ended yet? If Rossi loses the Senate race is a tossup
HI: Yaaawn... Safe Dem

In addition to that, it's possible that Bunning is "retired" soon. If that happens the race would depend on candidates (although I'd hope Fletcher would appoint himself... if only to see him get slaughtered)


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Ben. on December 14, 2004, 04:39:45 PM

In addition to that, it's possible that Bunning is "retired" soon. If that happens the race would depend on candidates (although I'd hope Fletcher would appoint himself... if only to see him get slaughtered)


Aparently Bunning has already filled in paperwork to run in 2010! He'll be gone by then i would imagine, Kentuckys loss i guess :) 


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Jake on December 14, 2004, 08:40:39 PM
Why did Spencer Abraham go down in 2006, in the first place?

Are you a physic?


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: The Dowager Mod on December 14, 2004, 08:54:24 PM
Don't bet on Wisconsin being safe dem.
Kohl still hasn't announced and tommy thompson is around.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: phk on December 14, 2004, 10:48:38 PM
whose tommy thompson?


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 14, 2004, 11:16:02 PM

Former Governor of Wisconsin and outgoing Secretary of Health and Human Services.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: TeePee4Prez on December 15, 2004, 03:16:08 PM
Yep, he's running! WOO HOO!!!


EDITORIAL for December 16, 2004

Oh won’t you stay?

When he held his "final news conference" last week as the congressman for most of Northeast Philly, Joe Hoeffel proved that he is calling it quits way too early.

Mr. Hoeffel is a genuinely nice, pleasant, intelligent man with a good deal of potential to do a good deal more for Northeast Philadelphia, Montgomery County and the entire nation. His imminent successor in the U.S. House of Representatives, Allyson Schwartz, hopefully will do a fantastic job doing the people’s business, but Mr. Hoeffel, at just 54 years old, is too young to abandon his constituents. Mr. Hoeffel squandered the opportunity to go great things on an ill-conceived bid to unseat a Pennsylvania legend, Sen. Arlen Specter, last month.

Mr. Hoeffel likely would have made mincemeat out of Mr. Specter’s foe in the Republican primary, the far-right Pat Toomey, but Mr. Specter squeaked out a primary win and crushed Mr. Hoeffel in the Nov. 2 general election.

Mr. Hoeffel should have stayed put in the House, put in a few more terms as an outspoken advocate for The People, and then run for the Senate. Here’s hoping he will spend the next two years making tons of money as a lawyer in the private sector and then come back refreshed and ready to serve the public in 2007 — as Sen. Rick Santorum’s successor.



()


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 15, 2004, 03:26:53 PM
Yep, he's running! WOO HOO!!!


EDITORIAL for December 16, 2004

Oh won’t you stay?

When he held his "final news conference" last week as the congressman for most of Northeast Philly, Joe Hoeffel proved that he is calling it quits way too early.

Mr. Hoeffel is a genuinely nice, pleasant, intelligent man with a good deal of potential to do a good deal more for Northeast Philadelphia, Montgomery County and the entire nation. His imminent successor in the U.S. House of Representatives, Allyson Schwartz, hopefully will do a fantastic job doing the people’s business, but Mr. Hoeffel, at just 54 years old, is too young to abandon his constituents. Mr. Hoeffel squandered the opportunity to go great things on an ill-conceived bid to unseat a Pennsylvania legend, Sen. Arlen Specter, last month.

Mr. Hoeffel likely would have made mincemeat out of Mr. Specter’s foe in the Republican primary, the far-right Pat Toomey, but Mr. Specter squeaked out a primary win and crushed Mr. Hoeffel in the Nov. 2 general election.

Mr. Hoeffel should have stayed put in the House, put in a few more terms as an outspoken advocate for The People, and then run for the Senate. Here’s hoping he will spend the next two years making tons of money as a lawyer in the private sector and then come back refreshed and ready to serve the public in 2007 — as Sen. Rick Santorum’s successor.



()

Ha! Hoeffel would have made micemeat out of Toomey....suuuure. You have to love these editorials. So what paper was it, BL? (Yeah due to the new name change, that's what I'll be calling you.) The Inquirer...The Daily News...? To them, anyone to the right of Chaka Fattah is far right.

Then they say he's an advocate for the people. Wow...a never ending comedy. This "advocate" had one bill passed while serving in the U.S. House and it was the renaming of a post office.

And where exactly in that editorial did it say he was running again? I can't find it.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: TeePee4Prez on December 15, 2004, 03:36:26 PM
Didn't show the full one I read in print.  If you read the one in print, it strongly hints at a Hoeffel run.  It seems the online version is edited.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 15, 2004, 03:43:43 PM
Didn't show the full one I read in print.  If you read the one in print, it strongly hints at a Hoeffel run.  It seems the online version is edited.

Hoeffel has always hinted at a run. Everyone knows that. I thought this article was saying that it was official.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: CARLHAYDEN on December 15, 2004, 05:03:54 PM
Who could possibly challenge Conrad in 2006? I lived there 1998-2002 and the only person who had a chance of beating him then was former governor Ed Schafer. Unless he runs or unless current governor John Hoeven decides to run, seems like Conrad should have an easy time of it.

First, if you go back you will see that I specifically mentioned Hoeven as a likely candidate.

Second, are you denying that Conrad's ability to provide the pork in the past was a major factor in his reelection?

Third, are you assserting that the average voter in North Dakota agrees with Conrad's votes?

Fourth, could it be that the majority of the voters never really knew how Conrad was voting?

Fifth, has Conrad has a series of hapless Republican opponents in the past because he could deliver the pork?

First, didn't see that part about Hoeven.

I really don't think the average voter in North Dakota cares what Conrad's posititons are. As long Conrad continues to bring home the yearly farm pork, he could vote like Hilary Clinton and it wouldn't really matter. I'm not going to disagree with your beliefs that North Dakotans don't know (or care) what Conrad's votes are, because more often than not that's the case.

The only way Conrad could lose his seat is either he can't bring home the pork or someone like Hoeven can challenge Conrad on the issues while promising to bring home the bacon. For Conrad to lose his seat it will take something along the lines of Thune-Daschle, as SamSpade mentioned. I am not trying to disagree with most of what you say, I'm just saying it's going to be a tough task for anyone to knock Conrad out come '06. If the status quo holds (in terms of pork, etc) then Conrad is probabky going to win.



First, my key point was that Conrad is no longer in a position to bring home the pork!  Democrats control nothing nationally, except some circuits of the federal judiciary.

Second, in the interest of increasing the Republican edge in the Senate (to prevent filibusters), Rowe will recruit candidates in selected races (North Dakota, New Mexico and Florida) such as Hoeven.

Third, while Conrad WAS able to hide his voting record for years from the average citizen of North Dakota, with the new media, it will be a lot harder.

If you have some friends in North Dakota, ask they if they can tell you how Conrad has been voting on matters in Congress.  Odds are they will be unable to cite a single vote (that's the way Conrad likes it).


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: phk on December 15, 2004, 06:38:15 PM
I'll bet $5, Conrad will win.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on December 15, 2004, 10:58:59 PM
Yep, he's running! WOO HOO!!!


EDITORIAL for December 16, 2004

Oh won’t you stay?

When he held his "final news conference" last week as the congressman for most of Northeast Philly, Joe Hoeffel proved that he is calling it quits way too early.

Mr. Hoeffel is a genuinely nice, pleasant, intelligent man with a good deal of potential to do a good deal more for Northeast Philadelphia, Montgomery County and the entire nation. His imminent successor in the U.S. House of Representatives, Allyson Schwartz, hopefully will do a fantastic job doing the people’s business, but Mr. Hoeffel, at just 54 years old, is too young to abandon his constituents. Mr. Hoeffel squandered the opportunity to go great things on an ill-conceived bid to unseat a Pennsylvania legend, Sen. Arlen Specter, last month.

Mr. Hoeffel likely would have made mincemeat out of Mr. Specter’s foe in the Republican primary, the far-right Pat Toomey, but Mr. Specter squeaked out a primary win and crushed Mr. Hoeffel in the Nov. 2 general election.

Mr. Hoeffel should have stayed put in the House, put in a few more terms as an outspoken advocate for The People, and then run for the Senate. Here’s hoping he will spend the next two years making tons of money as a lawyer in the private sector and then come back refreshed and ready to serve the public in 2007 — as Sen. Rick Santorum’s successor.



()

Ha! Hoeffel would have made micemeat out of Toomey....suuuure. You have to love these editorials. So what paper was it, BL? (Yeah due to the new name change, that's what I'll be calling you.) The Inquirer...The Daily News...? To them, anyone to the right of Chaka Fattah is far right.

Then they say he's an advocate for the people. Wow...a never ending comedy. This "advocate" had one bill passed while serving in the U.S. House and it was the renaming of a post office.

And where exactly in that editorial did it say he was running again? I can't find it.

what makes you so sure Toomey would've won when Kerry won Pennsylvania? Why would anyone vote for Kerry and then Toomey? Why was Toomey such a great candidate?


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: phk on December 15, 2004, 11:21:12 PM
Energized the religous.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 16, 2004, 04:23:49 PM
Yep, he's running! WOO HOO!!!


EDITORIAL for December 16, 2004

Oh won’t you stay?

When he held his "final news conference" last week as the congressman for most of Northeast Philly, Joe Hoeffel proved that he is calling it quits way too early.

Mr. Hoeffel is a genuinely nice, pleasant, intelligent man with a good deal of potential to do a good deal more for Northeast Philadelphia, Montgomery County and the entire nation. His imminent successor in the U.S. House of Representatives, Allyson Schwartz, hopefully will do a fantastic job doing the people’s business, but Mr. Hoeffel, at just 54 years old, is too young to abandon his constituents. Mr. Hoeffel squandered the opportunity to go great things on an ill-conceived bid to unseat a Pennsylvania legend, Sen. Arlen Specter, last month.

Mr. Hoeffel likely would have made mincemeat out of Mr. Specter’s foe in the Republican primary, the far-right Pat Toomey, but Mr. Specter squeaked out a primary win and crushed Mr. Hoeffel in the Nov. 2 general election.

Mr. Hoeffel should have stayed put in the House, put in a few more terms as an outspoken advocate for The People, and then run for the Senate. Here’s hoping he will spend the next two years making tons of money as a lawyer in the private sector and then come back refreshed and ready to serve the public in 2007 — as Sen. Rick Santorum’s successor.



()

Ha! Hoeffel would have made micemeat out of Toomey....suuuure. You have to love these editorials. So what paper was it, BL? (Yeah due to the new name change, that's what I'll be calling you.) The Inquirer...The Daily News...? To them, anyone to the right of Chaka Fattah is far right.

Then they say he's an advocate for the people. Wow...a never ending comedy. This "advocate" had one bill passed while serving in the U.S. House and it was the renaming of a post office.

And where exactly in that editorial did it say he was running again? I can't find it.

what makes you so sure Toomey would've won when Kerry won Pennsylvania? Why would anyone vote for Kerry and then Toomey? Why was Toomey such a great candidate?

Have I not addressed this point earlier? Why did people vote for Gore and Santorum? Democrats are partisan in this state when it comes to the Presidential race but when it comes to Congress/Senate/local offices, many don't mind voting Republican.

Whether you like it or not, this is a conservative state. Toomey's beliefs are more in line with what this state's voters believe than Hoeffel.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Smash255 on December 16, 2004, 11:52:23 PM
Yep, he's running! WOO HOO!!!


EDITORIAL for December 16, 2004

Oh won’t you stay?

When he held his "final news conference" last week as the congressman for most of Northeast Philly, Joe Hoeffel proved that he is calling it quits way too early.

Mr. Hoeffel is a genuinely nice, pleasant, intelligent man with a good deal of potential to do a good deal more for Northeast Philadelphia, Montgomery County and the entire nation. His imminent successor in the U.S. House of Representatives, Allyson Schwartz, hopefully will do a fantastic job doing the people’s business, but Mr. Hoeffel, at just 54 years old, is too young to abandon his constituents. Mr. Hoeffel squandered the opportunity to go great things on an ill-conceived bid to unseat a Pennsylvania legend, Sen. Arlen Specter, last month.

Mr. Hoeffel likely would have made mincemeat out of Mr. Specter’s foe in the Republican primary, the far-right Pat Toomey, but Mr. Specter squeaked out a primary win and crushed Mr. Hoeffel in the Nov. 2 general election.

Mr. Hoeffel should have stayed put in the House, put in a few more terms as an outspoken advocate for The People, and then run for the Senate. Here’s hoping he will spend the next two years making tons of money as a lawyer in the private sector and then come back refreshed and ready to serve the public in 2007 — as Sen. Rick Santorum’s successor.



()

Ha! Hoeffel would have made micemeat out of Toomey....suuuure. You have to love these editorials. So what paper was it, BL? (Yeah due to the new name change, that's what I'll be calling you.) The Inquirer...The Daily News...? To them, anyone to the right of Chaka Fattah is far right.

Then they say he's an advocate for the people. Wow...a never ending comedy. This "advocate" had one bill passed while serving in the U.S. House and it was the renaming of a post office.

And where exactly in that editorial did it say he was running again? I can't find it.

what makes you so sure Toomey would've won when Kerry won Pennsylvania? Why would anyone vote for Kerry and then Toomey? Why was Toomey such a great candidate?

Have I not addressed this point earlier? Why did people vote for Gore and Santorum? Democrats are partisan in this state when it comes to the Presidential race but when it comes to Congress/Senate/local offices, many don't mind voting Republican.

Whether you like it or not, this is a conservative state. Toomey's beliefs are more in line with what this state's voters believe than Hoeffel.

Santorum in 2000/ and the Santorum campaign of 2000 was MUCH LESS Conservative than the Santorum of 2004, and Toomey.  Santorum of 2000 was able to get mixed ticket votes, Santorum of 2004, and Toomey would not be able to get those mixed ticket votes. 

What do you think is the reason bush was campaigning for Specter???  He liked the guy??  Liked his politics??  NO.  It was because with Toomey on the ticket it would    1.  bring out more liberals which would hurt Bush's chances and 2. Their would be a much better chance of the GOP losing a senate seat with Toomey on the ticket as opposed to the more moderate Specter.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: TeePee4Prez on December 17, 2004, 01:27:22 PM
Good points Smash.  It seems like PA Conservatives are the most whiny and it will kill them in the long run.  Had it not been for Bush/Santorum rescuing Specter, Toomey would have won and Hoeffel would have in turn made mincemeat out of him as the Northeast Times eluded to.  The elft would have turned out even greater for the Dem ticket and I do not see many Kerry-Toomey crossovers except in maybe the Lehigh Valley, but it wouldn't be enough to swing the state.  Had Toomey won, the AFL-CIO would have definitely backed Hoeffel and the DSCC would have infused massive amounts of $$$$.     


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on December 17, 2004, 01:30:27 PM
you know, when you consider the AFL-CIO endorsed Specter and the DSCC did not give Hoeffel that much money, it is a major accomplishment that he topped 40%. Far better than Specter's last opponent. Therefore he's clearly a much better candidate than Phil will admit.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 17, 2004, 02:03:05 PM
you know, when you consider the AFL-CIO endorsed Specter and the DSCC did not give Hoeffel that much money, it is a major accomplishment that he topped 40%. Far better than Specter's last opponent. Therefore he's clearly a much better candidate than Phil will admit.

Far better than Specter's last opponent? His last opponent received 38% of the vote so Hoeffel didn't do "far better."


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 17, 2004, 02:07:29 PM
Yep, he's running! WOO HOO!!!


EDITORIAL for December 16, 2004

Oh won’t you stay?

When he held his "final news conference" last week as the congressman for most of Northeast Philly, Joe Hoeffel proved that he is calling it quits way too early.

Mr. Hoeffel is a genuinely nice, pleasant, intelligent man with a good deal of potential to do a good deal more for Northeast Philadelphia, Montgomery County and the entire nation. His imminent successor in the U.S. House of Representatives, Allyson Schwartz, hopefully will do a fantastic job doing the people’s business, but Mr. Hoeffel, at just 54 years old, is too young to abandon his constituents. Mr. Hoeffel squandered the opportunity to go great things on an ill-conceived bid to unseat a Pennsylvania legend, Sen. Arlen Specter, last month.

Mr. Hoeffel likely would have made mincemeat out of Mr. Specter’s foe in the Republican primary, the far-right Pat Toomey, but Mr. Specter squeaked out a primary win and crushed Mr. Hoeffel in the Nov. 2 general election.

Mr. Hoeffel should have stayed put in the House, put in a few more terms as an outspoken advocate for The People, and then run for the Senate. Here’s hoping he will spend the next two years making tons of money as a lawyer in the private sector and then come back refreshed and ready to serve the public in 2007 — as Sen. Rick Santorum’s successor.



()

Ha! Hoeffel would have made micemeat out of Toomey....suuuure. You have to love these editorials. So what paper was it, BL? (Yeah due to the new name change, that's what I'll be calling you.) The Inquirer...The Daily News...? To them, anyone to the right of Chaka Fattah is far right.

Then they say he's an advocate for the people. Wow...a never ending comedy. This "advocate" had one bill passed while serving in the U.S. House and it was the renaming of a post office.

And where exactly in that editorial did it say he was running again? I can't find it.

what makes you so sure Toomey would've won when Kerry won Pennsylvania? Why would anyone vote for Kerry and then Toomey? Why was Toomey such a great candidate?

Have I not addressed this point earlier? Why did people vote for Gore and Santorum? Democrats are partisan in this state when it comes to the Presidential race but when it comes to Congress/Senate/local offices, many don't mind voting Republican.

Whether you like it or not, this is a conservative state. Toomey's beliefs are more in line with what this state's voters believe than Hoeffel.

Santorum in 2000/ and the Santorum campaign of 2000 was MUCH LESS Conservative than the Santorum of 2004, and Toomey.  Santorum of 2000 was able to get mixed ticket votes, Santorum of 2004, and Toomey would not be able to get those mixed ticket votes. 

What do you think is the reason bush was campaigning for Specter???  He liked the guy??  Liked his politics??  NO.  It was because with Toomey on the ticket it would    1.  bring out more liberals which would hurt Bush's chances and 2. Their would be a much better chance of the GOP losing a senate seat with Toomey on the ticket as opposed to the more moderate Specter.

Hey Smash, even if Santorum is more conservative than 2000, why are his approval ratings some of the highest and disapproval ratings lowest? You make it seem like his conservativism will hurt him so why isn't it hurting him. Santorum's approval ratings are always ignored by Dems when they try to make their case about the 2006 race.

As for Bush supporting Specter, yes it was done because Bush thought it would hurt his chances. In reality, I don't think there would be a big difference. Liberals came out to vote against Bush anyway. If Toomey was the nominee, that wouldn't cause more of them to come out.

As for Toomey's chances being worse than Specter's chances, I can agree with that and so would anyone else. However, I still believe that Toomey could have won.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 17, 2004, 02:10:10 PM
Good points Smash.  It seems like PA Conservatives are the most whiny and it will kill them in the long run.  Had it not been for Bush/Santorum rescuing Specter, Toomey would have won and Hoeffel would have in turn made mincemeat out of him as the Northeast Times eluded to.  The elft would have turned out even greater for the Dem ticket and I do not see many Kerry-Toomey crossovers except in maybe the Lehigh Valley, but it wouldn't be enough to swing the state.  Had Toomey won, the AFL-CIO would have definitely backed Hoeffel and the DSCC would have infused massive amounts of $$$$.     

How would Hoeffel make micemeat out of Toomey? Put your biased aside and look at this state. You wouldn't have seen a bigger turnout for liberals just because Toomey was on the ticket. If Toomey had won the nomination, I agree that the AFL-CIO and DSCC would have put more money into this race but just as 2006 will prove, that won't be enough.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Smash255 on December 17, 2004, 11:15:35 PM
Yep, he's running! WOO HOO!!!


EDITORIAL for December 16, 2004

Oh won’t you stay?

When he held his "final news conference" last week as the congressman for most of Northeast Philly, Joe Hoeffel proved that he is calling it quits way too early.

Mr. Hoeffel is a genuinely nice, pleasant, intelligent man with a good deal of potential to do a good deal more for Northeast Philadelphia, Montgomery County and the entire nation. His imminent successor in the U.S. House of Representatives, Allyson Schwartz, hopefully will do a fantastic job doing the people’s business, but Mr. Hoeffel, at just 54 years old, is too young to abandon his constituents. Mr. Hoeffel squandered the opportunity to go great things on an ill-conceived bid to unseat a Pennsylvania legend, Sen. Arlen Specter, last month.

Mr. Hoeffel likely would have made mincemeat out of Mr. Specter’s foe in the Republican primary, the far-right Pat Toomey, but Mr. Specter squeaked out a primary win and crushed Mr. Hoeffel in the Nov. 2 general election.

Mr. Hoeffel should have stayed put in the House, put in a few more terms as an outspoken advocate for The People, and then run for the Senate. Here’s hoping he will spend the next two years making tons of money as a lawyer in the private sector and then come back refreshed and ready to serve the public in 2007 — as Sen. Rick Santorum’s successor.



()

Ha! Hoeffel would have made micemeat out of Toomey....suuuure. You have to love these editorials. So what paper was it, BL? (Yeah due to the new name change, that's what I'll be calling you.) The Inquirer...The Daily News...? To them, anyone to the right of Chaka Fattah is far right.

Then they say he's an advocate for the people. Wow...a never ending comedy. This "advocate" had one bill passed while serving in the U.S. House and it was the renaming of a post office.

And where exactly in that editorial did it say he was running again? I can't find it.

what makes you so sure Toomey would've won when Kerry won Pennsylvania? Why would anyone vote for Kerry and then Toomey? Why was Toomey such a great candidate?

Have I not addressed this point earlier? Why did people vote for Gore and Santorum? Democrats are partisan in this state when it comes to the Presidential race but when it comes to Congress/Senate/local offices, many don't mind voting Republican.

Whether you like it or not, this is a conservative state. Toomey's beliefs are more in line with what this state's voters believe than Hoeffel.

Santorum in 2000/ and the Santorum campaign of 2000 was MUCH LESS Conservative than the Santorum of 2004, and Toomey.  Santorum of 2000 was able to get mixed ticket votes, Santorum of 2004, and Toomey would not be able to get those mixed ticket votes. 

What do you think is the reason bush was campaigning for Specter???  He liked the guy??  Liked his politics??  NO.  It was because with Toomey on the ticket it would    1.  bring out more liberals which would hurt Bush's chances and 2. Their would be a much better chance of the GOP losing a senate seat with Toomey on the ticket as opposed to the more moderate Specter.

Hey Smash, even if Santorum is more conservative than 2000, why are his approval ratings some of the highest and disapproval ratings lowest? You make it seem like his conservativism will hurt him so why isn't it hurting him. Santorum's approval ratings are always ignored by Dems when they try to make their case about the 2006 race.

As for Bush supporting Specter, yes it was done because Bush thought it would hurt his chances. In reality, I don't think there would be a big difference. Liberals came out to vote against Bush anyway. If Toomey was the nominee, that wouldn't cause more of them to come out.

As for Toomey's chances being worse than Specter's chances, I can agree with that and so would anyone else. However, I still believe that Toomey could have won.

You keep quoting that Santorum has some of the highest approval ratings in the state, but you don't show any proof of that.  Awhile back I saw two different polls, (wish I could find them) one poll had Santorum''s approval in the mid-upper 40's another one had him at 53 I believe.

Point about Toomey, is I just don't see how anyone as Conservative as Toomey would have gotten much in the way of split ticket votes.  Thats basically the main reason why Specter won because of the large number of moderates & Democrats that voted Kerry/Specter, that group is NOT going to vote Kerry/Toomey.  Now some in that group did vote Gore/Santorum as you mentioned earlier, however as I pointed out Santorum in 2000 & especially the campaign he ran in 2000 was MUCH MORE moderate than he is now, and MUCH MORE Moderate than Toomey.  Santorum was able to garner those split ticket voters in 2000, by running a more moderate campaign.  Toomey was running a very Conservative campaign (which is what Santorum will most likley run in 06, well because he simply can't run as a moderate anymore).  The factr Toomey would of ran as a Conservative would have hurt him with the moderate and Democratic split ticket voters that voted for Santorum in 2000 & Specter in this election (& that same group will also hurt Santorum in 06)


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 18, 2004, 01:12:05 AM
Quote
You keep quoting that Santorum has some of the highest approval ratings in the state, but you don't show any proof of that.  Awhile back I saw two different polls, (wish I could find them) one poll had Santorum''s approval in the mid-upper 40's another one had him at 53 I believe.

I have proof. From http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x11378.xml It's from August but it's the most recent one taken.

TREND: Do you approve or disapprove of the way Rick Santorum is handling his job as United States Senator?

 
                     App       Dis     DK/NA

Aug 18, 2004   52      30      18

 


Quote
Point about Toomey, is I just don't see how anyone as Conservative as Toomey would have gotten much in the way of split ticket votes.  Thats basically the main reason why Specter won because of the large number of moderates & Democrats that voted Kerry/Specter, that group is NOT going to vote Kerry/Toomey.  Now some in that group did vote Gore/Santorum as you mentioned earlier, however as I pointed out Santorum in 2000 & especially the campaign he ran in 2000 was MUCH MORE moderate than he is now, and MUCH MORE Moderate than Toomey.  Santorum was able to garner those split ticket voters in 2000, by running a more moderate campaign.  Toomey was running a very Conservative campaign (which is what Santorum will most likley run in 06, well because he simply can't run as a moderate anymore).  The factr Toomey would of ran as a Conservative would have hurt him with the moderate and Democratic split ticket voters that voted for Santorum in 2000 & Specter in this election (& that same group will also hurt Santorum in 06)

How was Santorum much more moderate? You keep saying this but show me no proof (sound familiar :P ). Seriously though, I'd like to know how he was "more moderate." In my opinion, he's always been the same conservative that he is now.

As for Toomey, I don't think you understand the point that this states likes conservatives. The approve of Santorum and Toomey is from the same wing of the GOP as Santorum.

But for argument's sake, let's use the BRTD logic that Kerry voters would automatically go against Toomey. In that case, how would Toomey get crushed? Kerry in PA - 51%   Bush in  PA - 49%.  Now Hoeffel would get all the Kerry voters (in this scenario) and Toomey would get the Bush voters. 51-49 is "making mincemeat" out of the other candidate? And remember...this scenario wouldn't have been likely to happen. Many Kerry voters (especially in western PA) like to vote Democrat for President pretty much all the time but they vote Republican in local and statewide offices.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: HarrisonL on May 07, 2019, 01:14:35 PM
So yeah basically 2006 Senate Elections were epic.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: S019 on May 07, 2019, 01:16:32 PM
You could tell from that post, how much trouble Santorum was in

Also we have now learned that high approval=/= reelection (Santorum, Brown, Heitkamp)


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Co-Chair Bagel23 on May 07, 2019, 01:26:48 PM
You could tell from that post, how much trouble Santorum was in

Also we have now learned that high approval=/= reelection (Santorum, Brown, Heitkamp)

WDYM? Sherrod Brown won reelection.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: S019 on May 07, 2019, 01:27:29 PM
You could tell from that post, how much trouble Santorum was in

Also we have now learned that high approval=/= reelection (Santorum, Brown, Heitkamp)

WDYM? Sherrod Brown won reelection.
You could tell from that post, how much trouble Santorum was in

Also we have now learned that high approval=/= reelection (Santorum, Brown, Heitkamp)

WDYM? Sherrod Brown won reelection.

Scott Brown (MA)


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Co-Chair Bagel23 on May 07, 2019, 01:36:38 PM
You could tell from that post, how much trouble Santorum was in

Also we have now learned that high approval=/= reelection (Santorum, Brown, Heitkamp)

WDYM? Sherrod Brown won reelection.
You could tell from that post, how much trouble Santorum was in

Also we have now learned that high approval=/= reelection (Santorum, Brown, Heitkamp)

WDYM? Sherrod Brown won reelection.

Scott Brown (MA)

Ah, I see, thanks.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Xing on May 07, 2019, 01:40:04 PM
Senator Bingaman (D-NM), seems safe, but the state is trending Republican plus the two GOP Representatives (most likely to run) seem popular.

(D-NM) but the state is trending Republican

(NM) but the state is trending Republican

(NM) the state is trending Republican


Wow, who would've guessed that just because a state flipped Republican by less than 1%, that doesn't mean it's actually trending Republican long term? Just goes to show how well Atlas assumptions stand the test of time.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: OSR stands with Israel on May 07, 2019, 02:07:36 PM
Senator Bingaman (D-NM), seems safe, but the state is trending Republican plus the two GOP Representatives (most likely to run) seem popular.

(D-NM) but the state is trending Republican

(NM) but the state is trending Republican

(NM) the state is trending Republican


Wow, who would've guessed that just because a state flipped Republican by less than 1%, that doesn't mean it's actually trending Republican long term? Just goes to show how well Atlas assumptions stand the test of time.

And I dont it even trended Republican because NM I believe only swung 1% GOP in 2004 while the entire nation swung 3% GOP


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: S019 on May 07, 2019, 02:24:24 PM
Had it not have been for the media whining about that memorial he would've lost. And he would've lost had Wellstone lived.

And while he was a party hack, he didn't run as one, and he didn't have a voting record to prove it either. Everyone thought he was a moderate just because he was a former Democrat and he said he would oppose ANWR drilling (which he now flip-flopped on, and then had the gall to call Kerry a flip-flopper. That guy is human garbage)

News flash: Coleman was a moderate


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: S019 on May 07, 2019, 02:25:01 PM
()

I counted the Independent as a Democrat, since he votes with them.

Blue = GOP, Red = Democrat
Green = no election

That independent is Joe Lieberman, even by this point, he was basically a DINO


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: S019 on May 07, 2019, 02:25:43 PM
()

I counted the Independent as a Democrat, since he votes with them.

Blue = GOP, Red = Democrat
Green = no election


Mississippi, Tennessee and Virginia are not automatically GOP holds IMHO, VA only becomes a toss-up if Warner runs ditto with Mississippi if Mike Moore runs, Tennessee however is a toss-up what ever happens. 




This is hilarious in hindsight


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: S019 on May 07, 2019, 02:28:48 PM
Nelson in FL looks extremely vulnerable.  Here are Quinnipiac's latest numbers:

    Bill Nelson will be up for reelection in 2006. Would you like to see Bill Nelson reelected senator, or would you rather see someone else elected senator?

    Reelect Nelson 36
    Someone else 40
Until Katherine Harris ran

Question for Atlas: Does Mark Dayton survive if he ran for reelection

I say no, he probably gets the Tim Hutchinson treatment,losing a favorable state for his party in a favorable year for his party


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: HarrisonL on May 07, 2019, 02:36:44 PM
Nelson in FL looks extremely vulnerable.  Here are Quinnipiac's latest numbers:

    Bill Nelson will be up for reelection in 2006. Would you like to see Bill Nelson reelected senator, or would you rather see someone else elected senator?

    Reelect Nelson 36
    Someone else 40

This aged well.... since Nelson demolished Katherine Harris with over 60% of the vote.


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: Joe Republic on May 07, 2019, 02:45:29 PM
FTR, Santorum ended up the least popular US senator out of all 100 by the time of the election. (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=47650.0)


Title: Re: 2006 Senate Seats
Post by: OSR stands with Israel on May 07, 2019, 03:27:25 PM
()

I counted the Independent as a Democrat, since he votes with them.

Blue = GOP, Red = Democrat
Green = no election

That independent is Joe Lieberman, even by this point, he was basically a DINO


The independent was Jim Jeffords , Lieberman didn’t become an Indie until he lost the primary in 06