Grade Mark Udall's campaign

[morgieb]

Has to be a D or an F, IMO. Utter failure, as bad as Braley.

[IceSpear]

Worse than Braley, IMO. D.

[Panda Express]

F though if by some miracle he pulls it off thanks to his ground game, his grade will go up. (Ground game is the final project)

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

F though if by some miracle he pulls it off thanks to his ground game, his grade will go up. (Ground game is the final project)

[Consciously Unconscious]

D.  Pretty awful.  Running on abortion was not a very good idea. 

[Mehmentum]

D.  An F would be Terri Land's campaign.

[Vega]

D.  Pretty awful.  Running on abortion was not a very good idea. 

[7,052,770]

C if he wins, F if he loses.

[free my dawg]

Not Braley tier, but awful nonetheless. D.

[Person Man]

h
C if he wins, F if he loses.

A D if he loses. When did anyone win on abortion on any side of the issue at this level anyways? I mean Santorum had abortion as like #3 or 4, right? And Tom Coburn ran on Personhood on Steroids but that wasn't his main issue.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

D+ if he wins, F if he loses.

[ElectionsGuy]

He's at a D. Maybe a C if he somehow wins.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

He's run a great campaign. It's The Media that's ruined it for him.

[KingSweden]

Big fat F. He wasn't even on the radar of competitive seats at the beginning of this year. Gardner has done a terrific job and "muh abortion" doesn't cut it against a campaign of Gardner's caliber.

[Chance92]

F, easily. Braley's campaign has been atrocious, but Udall has managed to be a horrible campaigner on top of managing to throw both his name recognition and incumbency advantage out a top-story window. I'm starting to wonder if he won in 2008 more on his own merits or on Schaffer's failings.

[Niemeyerite]

An utterus failure. F.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

h
C if he wins, F if he loses.

A D if he loses. When did anyone win on abortion on any side of the issue at this level anyways? I mean Santorum had abortion as like #3 or 4, right? And Tom Coburn ran on Personhood on Steroids but that wasn't his main issue.

Democratic strategy has been either Reid 2010 and/or Bennet 2010 in most of these races, the problem is that if the GOP candidate is smooth and doesn't have a video from 1999 waiting to tank his chances, it doesn't work. On the opposite coin the Democrats then get hit for talking about abortion and distracting from the der jobs.

I think it vindicates my assessment in 2008 that he could have been beaten with a better environment, and certainly wasn't the god people were making him out to be when they were fawning over the possibly of a multistate Senate continuation of the Udall dynasty.

[7,052,770]

h
C if he wins, F if he loses.

A D if he loses. When did anyone win on abortion on any side of the issue at this level anyways? I mean Santorum had abortion as like #3 or 4, right? And Tom Coburn ran on Personhood on Steroids but that wasn't his main issue.

Sigh. "Personhood" and abortion are completely separate issues, as much as the less scrupulous Republicans try to mingle them.

[Podgy the Bear]

D or F.  One of the worst campaigns an incumbent has run. 

[Illuminati Blood Drinker]

Big fat F. He wasn't even on the radar of competitive seats at the beginning of this year. Gardner has done a terrific job and "muh abortion" doesn't cut it against a campaign of Gardner's caliber.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I give him a D - he gets downgraded to an F once he loses. 

[Bigby]

F, even though I've been wanting Gardner to win the entire time, I expected a lot better from a Udall.

[Kushahontas]

D- if he wins. F now.

[Maxwell]

D.  An F would be Terri Land's campaign.

[Suburbia]

D. Worse than Braley.