If the Senate ends up 50-50
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 05:11:39 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Congressional Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiį, Gracile)
  If the Senate ends up 50-50
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: If the Senate ends up 50-50  (Read 1792 times)
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,806


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 02, 2010, 09:34:49 PM »

How likely is it that Ben Nelson, Joseph I. Lieberman, or another member of the Democratic caucus switches their organizational allegiance?
Logged
Psychic Octopus
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,948
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 02, 2010, 09:39:25 PM »

Lieberman would have nothing to lose from switching, really. A case can be made that he is actually better liked among Republicans then Democrats, plus there is no way he is winning his primary in 2012, after opposing Obama. I'm not sure whether he would go through with it, but it definitely is a possibility.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 02, 2010, 09:42:40 PM »

Lieberman would have nothing to lose from switching, really. A case can be made that he is actually better liked among Republicans then Democrats, plus there is no way he is winning his primary in 2012, after opposing Obama. I'm not sure whether he would go through with it, but it definitely is a possibility.

Per my intuition, it was more of a possibility for Joe to caucus with the GOP before folks like Castle, Simmons, and Campbell were eliminated.
Logged
Psychic Octopus
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,948
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 02, 2010, 09:46:21 PM »

Lieberman would have nothing to lose from switching, really. A case can be made that he is actually better liked among Republicans then Democrats, plus there is no way he is winning his primary in 2012, after opposing Obama. I'm not sure whether he would go through with it, but it definitely is a possibility.

Per my intuition, it was more of a possibility for Joe to caucus with the GOP before folks like Castle, Simmons, and Campbell were eliminated.

Perhaps, but I don't really see why their elimination would make him hesitate to do so, especially if the GOP makes a deal allowing him to keep his beloved chairmanship.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 02, 2010, 09:52:31 PM »
« Edited: October 02, 2010, 09:56:51 PM by Torie »

Lieberman would have nothing to lose from switching, really. A case can be made that he is actually better liked among Republicans then Democrats, plus there is no way he is winning his primary in 2012, after opposing Obama. I'm not sure whether he would go through with it, but it definitely is a possibility.

Per my intuition, it was more of a possibility for Joe to caucus with the GOP before folks like Castle, Simmons, and Campbell were eliminated.

Perhaps, but I don't really see why their elimination would make him hesitate to do so, especially if the GOP makes a deal allowing him to keep his beloved chairmanship.

Fewer somewhat congenial to quite congenial (Castle), chaps would be around for Joe to commune with, is the reason. But if Kirk wins, he will have a congenial there, along with the Maine sisters, and Brown, and maybe will get along with Ayotte, so I certainly don't exclude it for that reason, plus the one you mentioned - power.
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,806


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 02, 2010, 09:54:04 PM »

I assume Lieberman's political career is over in 2012 anyway. It's up to him what he wants to do with his last 2 years. My sense though is that he was always most attracted to the neocon wing of the GOP.
Logged
RainMan05
Rookie
**
Posts: 24
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 02, 2010, 09:56:26 PM »

I assume Lieberman's political career is over in 2012 anyway. It's up to him what he wants to do with his last 2 years. My sense though is that he was always most attracted to the neocon wing of the GOP.

Of course, but what makes you think he can't win re-election as an Independent/Republican so long as he is the alternative to the Democrat?
Logged
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,522
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 02, 2010, 09:58:33 PM »

What about Snowe?  Obama and company could make noise about negotiations with her in order to keep Lieberman in line if he threatened to switch.  She probably has even less to lose by switching, especially if LePage wins this fall.  

She could get Spectered, but that would be much less likely if she were the deciding vote for control of the chamber.  Of course you could also argue that she wouldn't get Castled if she was Republican #51, but Castle himself very well could have been Republican #51 this year...      

Logged
Capitan Zapp Brannigan
Addicted to Politics
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,088


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 02, 2010, 10:01:52 PM »

Lieberman would have nothing to lose from switching, really. A case can be made that he is actually better liked among Republicans then Democrats, plus there is no way he is winning his primary in 2012, after opposing Obama. I'm not sure whether he would go through with it, but it definitely is a possibility.

Per my intuition, it was more of a possibility for Joe to caucus with the GOP before folks like Castle, Simmons, and Campbell were eliminated.

Perhaps, but I don't really see why their elimination would make him hesitate to do so, especially if the GOP makes a deal allowing him to keep his beloved chairmanship.

Fewer somewhat congenial to quite congenial (Castle), chaps would be around for Joe to commune with, is the reason. But if Kirk wins, he will have a congenial there, along with the Maine sisters, and Brown, and maybe will get along with Ayotte, so I certainly don't exclude it for that reason, plus the one you mentioned - power.
He can hang out with John McCain and Lindsey Graham, his BFFs.

Lieberman is much more likely to switch than Ben Nelson in that scenario.
Logged
tpfkaw
wormyguy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,118
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.58, S: 1.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: October 02, 2010, 10:03:24 PM »

Lieberman is hated by everybody at this point.  If he runs again, he shouldn't file to run in a primary.  Scratch that - he should even bother to file to run at all.
Logged
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,522
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: October 02, 2010, 10:05:09 PM »

Come to think of it, a party switch might be a tantalizing choice for Mark Pryor, especially if Lincoln finishes under 40% next month.
Logged
○∙◄☻„tπ[╪AV┼cVź└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,615


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: October 02, 2010, 10:07:35 PM »

There seem to be at least 4 total DINOs on every issue, so the Republicans will have an effective majority with only 47 Republicans.
Logged
Psychic Octopus
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,948
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: October 02, 2010, 10:09:25 PM »

What about Snowe?  Obama and company could make noise about negotiations with her in order to keep Lieberman in line if he threatened to switch.  She probably has even less to lose by switching, especially if LePage wins this fall.  

She could get Spectered, but that would be much less likely if she were the deciding vote for control of the chamber.  Of course you could also argue that she wouldn't get Castled if she was Republican #51, but Castle himself very well could have been Republican #51 this year...      
Possible, I guess, but Snowe is still personally popular in Maine if I recall correctly, and that could give her hope in 2012. Also, they can't offer Snowe much, because Snowe would become the Chairwoman of the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship if the GOP assumes control, and wouldn't get the position if she switched and became a Democrat. Snowe might switch if her position is hopeless and the Democrats are willing to accept her as their candidate, though.

Still I agree, I think Snowe will either get primaried or retire in 2012, unless the national environment is different.
Logged
tpfkaw
wormyguy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,118
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.58, S: 1.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: October 02, 2010, 10:10:17 PM »

And there are 4 total RINOs on every issue, except for the one that matters the most (entitlement reform), on which there are at least 25 total RINOs, so they really wouldn't.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: October 02, 2010, 10:19:14 PM »

Just saying, Maine isn't Delaware. I mean, there aren't a lot of incredibly conservative
pockets here in New England.
Logged
Psychic Octopus
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,948
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: October 02, 2010, 10:27:53 PM »

Whoa, what? Specter was facing a loss in the general even if he got out of a primary (he wouldn't have). Snowe will cruise to victory. The establishment will do a lot more to keep a sitting Senator than they did for even Mike Castle. They had a chance to do this in 2006 and didn't despite the CfG targeting others. Collins hasn't been seriously challenged either and I see no reason for that to happen. It was clear Murkowski was in trouble after Daddy went down. Sitting Senator since 1994 gives you a certain stature that doesn't come with being simply an establishment supported candidate for Senate.
Not neccessarily from the vantage point of spring 2009. Back then it was very concievable that he would win re-election, and most Democratic insiders believed it. I'm not too sure about Snowe surviving based on the RINO hunt, and she is, of course, the most prominent "RINO." While I do not know many conservatives outside of LePage that would challenge her, people come out of the woodwork. But certainly, the establishment will see this one coming, and definitely will attempt to prop up Snowe. I am not a soothsayer. I just think that at this point, seeing "safe" candidates go down left and right, that it isn't hard to imagine Snowe being removed.
Logged
cinyc
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,721


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: October 02, 2010, 10:29:40 PM »

Lieberman caucuses with the Republicans.

Per my intuition, it was more of a possibility for Joe to caucus with the GOP before folks like Castle, Simmons, and Campbell were eliminated.

I really don't get the "moderate hero" fascination with Simmons or Campbell.  Neither McMahon nor Fiorina seem like fire-breathing conservatives to me (especially McMahon).  They just had the benefit of being able to self-fund without the burden of having previously held public office in an anti-incumbent cycle.
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,806


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: October 02, 2010, 10:32:34 PM »

Lieberman would get primaried. Rainman said it himself-- he voted for Obamacare, so he showed his "true colors" (according to the tea party which apparently decides GOP primaries now). wormguy's also right-- no one likes him. At least people like Castle, Murkowski et. al had their party establishments behind them. Lieberman sacrificed the loyalty of his own top staffers to go on his ego trip. It's over now. I'd be very surprised if he was still in the Senate after 2012.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: October 02, 2010, 10:33:58 PM »
« Edited: October 02, 2010, 10:37:15 PM by Torie »

Lieberman caucuses with the Republicans.

Per my intuition, it was more of a possibility for Joe to caucus with the GOP before folks like Castle, Simmons, and Campbell were eliminated.

I really don't get the "moderate hero" fascination with Simmons or Campbell.  Neither McMahon nor Fiorina seem like fire-breathing conservatives to me (especially McMahon).  They just had the benefit of being able to self-fund without the burden of having previously held public office in an anti-incumbent cycle.

They were congenial with Joe, both on substance (e.g. pro choice), and style (intellectual).

But yes, Joe has said he quite liked the wrestling queen (and did not exclude the possibility that he might endorse her), but then it is hard to dislike her. She is an interesting character, with a lot of moxie.  She might have been a better candidate against Boxer, than the one we have, come to think of it.  Maybe.  
Logged
Psychic Octopus
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,948
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: October 02, 2010, 10:37:54 PM »

Whoa, what? Specter was facing a loss in the general even if he got out of a primary (he wouldn't have). Snowe will cruise to victory. The establishment will do a lot more to keep a sitting Senator than they did for even Mike Castle. They had a chance to do this in 2006 and didn't despite the CfG targeting others. Collins hasn't been seriously challenged either and I see no reason for that to happen. It was clear Murkowski was in trouble after Daddy went down. Sitting Senator since 1994 gives you a certain stature that doesn't come with being simply an establishment supported candidate for Senate.
Not neccessarily from the vantage point of spring 2009. Back then it was very concievable that he would win re-election, and most Democratic insiders believed it. I'm not too sure about Snowe surviving based on the RINO hunt, and she is, of course, the most prominent "RINO." While I do not know many conservatives outside of LePage that would challenge her, people come out of the woodwork. But certainly, the establishment will see this one coming, and definitely will attempt to prop up Snowe. I am not a soothsayer. I just think that at this point, seeing "safe" candidates go down left and right, that it isn't hard to imagine Snowe being removed.

What "safe" candidates?

LePage wouldn't challenge her.

Democrats had a target on Specter for 2010 and he would've likely lost to a D if not an R. Well, he did lose to a D. Smiley

Castle, Murkowski, etc.

Yeah, LePage will be Governor, but like I said, people come out of the woodwork. We'll see though.

Hmm, that is interesting. If Specter had won the Republican nomination this year (not happening) I wonder how he would be faring against Sestak.
Logged
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,522
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: October 02, 2010, 10:39:46 PM »

Whoa, what? Specter was facing a loss in the general even if he got out of a primary (he wouldn't have). Snowe will cruise to victory. The establishment will do a lot more to keep a sitting Senator than they did for even Mike Castle. They had a chance to do this in 2006 and didn't despite the CfG targeting others. Collins hasn't been seriously challenged either and I see no reason for that to happen. It was clear Murkowski was in trouble after Daddy went down. Sitting Senator since 1994 gives you a certain stature that doesn't come with being simply an establishment supported candidate for Senate.
Not neccessarily from the vantage point of spring 2009. Back then it was very concievable that he would win re-election, and most Democratic insiders believed it. I'm not too sure about Snowe surviving based on the RINO hunt, and she is, of course, the most prominent "RINO." While I do not know many conservatives outside of LePage that would challenge her, people come out of the woodwork. But certainly, the establishment will see this one coming, and definitely will attempt to prop up Snowe. I am not a soothsayer. I just think that at this point, seeing "safe" candidates go down left and right, that it isn't hard to imagine Snowe being removed.

What "safe" candidates?

LePage wouldn't challenge her.

Democrats had a target on Specter for 2010 and he would've likely lost to a D if not an R. Well, he did lose to a D. Smiley

I could theoretically see LePage himself mounting a challenge.  It would be a lot more likely if he was further along in his tenure as Governor, though.  He could conceivably go after Collins in 2014,  but it would be surprising if the Tea Party has anywhere near today's clout by the time 2014 rolls around, especially if there's a GOP president.
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderator
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: October 02, 2010, 11:10:00 PM »

I still think Lieberman has more power to wield in the Democratic caucus, using his Democratic seat on committees to needle his colleagues who didn't pay proper deference to his greatness and to pick at Obama, rather than jumping ship to the Republicans and creating any number of conflicts he can't paper over.
Logged
Psychic Octopus
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,948
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: October 02, 2010, 11:26:42 PM »

Whoa, what? Specter was facing a loss in the general even if he got out of a primary (he wouldn't have). Snowe will cruise to victory. The establishment will do a lot more to keep a sitting Senator than they did for even Mike Castle. They had a chance to do this in 2006 and didn't despite the CfG targeting others. Collins hasn't been seriously challenged either and I see no reason for that to happen. It was clear Murkowski was in trouble after Daddy went down. Sitting Senator since 1994 gives you a certain stature that doesn't come with being simply an establishment supported candidate for Senate.
Not neccessarily from the vantage point of spring 2009. Back then it was very concievable that he would win re-election, and most Democratic insiders believed it. I'm not too sure about Snowe surviving based on the RINO hunt, and she is, of course, the most prominent "RINO." While I do not know many conservatives outside of LePage that would challenge her, people come out of the woodwork. But certainly, the establishment will see this one coming, and definitely will attempt to prop up Snowe. I am not a soothsayer. I just think that at this point, seeing "safe" candidates go down left and right, that it isn't hard to imagine Snowe being removed.

What "safe" candidates?

LePage wouldn't challenge her.

Democrats had a target on Specter for 2010 and he would've likely lost to a D if not an R. Well, he did lose to a D. Smiley

Castle, Murkowski, etc.

Yeah, LePage will be Governor, but like I said, people come out of the woodwork. We'll see though.

Hmm, that is interesting. If Specter had won the Republican nomination this year (not happening) I wonder how he would be faring against Sestak.

Castle... he lost the nomination to someone who won the nomination in 2008 already. Not as big as you all make it out to be. The whole her being a total moron thing is what complicates it.

Murkowski... look what happened to Daddy.

This is nothing new, happens all the time. These candidates aren't safe. Murkowski has never broken 50% in Alaska.

Castle was percieved as a lock for the nomination, and I can't picture many people thinking that Murkowski would go down. I'm talking about the primaries, not the general. And I actually support Joe Miller, and I am glad that Murkowski went down. What I'm trying to say is that we shouldn't assume that Snowe will be the nominee, when other candidates have gone down with similar beliefs to her. A significant help to her will be LePage's endorsement, and luckily for her she was two years to prepare for her primary.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: October 02, 2010, 11:33:57 PM »

Lieberman caucuses with the Republicans.

Per my intuition, it was more of a possibility for Joe to caucus with the GOP before folks like Castle, Simmons, and Campbell were eliminated.

I really don't get the "moderate hero" fascination with Simmons or Campbell.  Neither McMahon nor Fiorina seem like fire-breathing conservatives to me (especially McMahon).  They just had the benefit of being able to self-fund without the burden of having previously held public office in an anti-incumbent cycle.

Nothing moderate hero about it -- the simple fact of it is that Simmons and Campbell would have made excellent Senators, and their opponents just weren't as good for reasons unrelated to ideology.
Logged
Dan the Roman
liberalrepublican
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,458
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: October 02, 2010, 11:54:22 PM »

There is no shortage of potential conservative challengers to Snowe. With a clean elections law that provides basic funding for any campaign if you can raise 250$ and the ability to pay yourself the salary of the position you are running for there are a lot of people in Maine politics who are in the business of professionally losing elections. Scott D'Amboise, Snowe's current opponent is one prominent example though having seen Christine O'Donnell raise two million in a week he is now onto the bigger scam of defrauding Conservative activists across the country in an effort to defeat an arch-rino.

Heck, even Lepage generally used to run for office every six months for about a decade before his opponent tried to feel up a teenager and he snuck in. And to be frank his primary win was based on the same type of nationalized campaign. He may decide to quit town early and go for the senate.

In fact, Snowe's saving grace will likely be that too many crooks will try and cash-in on the bonanza and let her slip through. Which is just as well for them.

I realize I am cynical, but to anyone who has worked in Maine politics at all,the adjective grassroots in regards to a candidate, whether of the Tea Party or Maine People's Alliance variety almost invariably means a crook.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.058 seconds with 13 queries.