2006 Senate Seats

[Keystone Phil]

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.

[Keystone Phil]

WHAT WE'VE ALL BEEN WAITING FOR!



http://www.ricksantorum.com/

[phk]

Pomeroy will win easily as well.

[CARLHAYDEN]

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).

[phk]

Even targetted, they'd win.

[So the Heroes Fall]

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.

[AuH2O]

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.

[So the Heroes Fall]

Failing on some close races is not equivalent to blowing a state by 20 points.

[AuH2O]

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.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Even targetted, they'd win.

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?

[phk]

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.

[CARLHAYDEN]

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?

[So the Heroes Fall]

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.

[CARLHAYDEN]

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).

[Sam Spade]

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.

[CARLHAYDEN]

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).

[phk]

Conrad should be targetted by Alan Keyes.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Dream on.

[phk]

He was sure sharp at targetting Obama.

[Sam Spade]

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.

[So the Heroes Fall]

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.

[phk]

Perhaps they should call CARLHAYDEN for help. He could help Bush win Vermont as well.

[MHS2002]

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.

[CARLHAYDEN]

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?

[CARLHAYDEN]

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.