Moderate GOP Sens form green coalition

[Miles]

Article.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Are Kirk and Ayotte's seats up next year? I can't remember...

[windjammer]

Lol

[Free Bird]

Awesome

[Zioneer]

Like they're actually going to vote on policies that could protect the environment. For one thing, McConnell won't let them for as long as he's Majority Leader (or even if he stays on as Minority Leader after losing the Senate eventually), and have they actually voted for pro-environment policies in the past?

[Orser67]

Graham at least has been calling for Republicans to take action on global warming for a while.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

The bigger issue was Ayotte vote against background checks & Kirk's vote against immigration reform. But, going for green energy I applaud this.

[Mr. Smith]

About bloody time; even if it is half-hearted and just a seat-saver.

[ElectionsGuy]

Didn't Ayotte get elected as a tea partier? I don't care about this issue either way, but I'm just wondering what happened between 2010 and now.

[Vosem]

Didn't Ayotte get elected as a tea partier? I don't care about this issue either way, but I'm just wondering what happened between 2010 and now.

No, Ayotte ran as an establishmentarian Republican in the primary against the Tea Party Republican, perennial candidate Ovide Lamontagne. Ayotte had previously been the appointed state Attorney General by both Republican Governor Craig Benson and Democratic Governor John Lynch, and was seen as a nonpartisan figure before she resigned in 2009 to run for the Senate (though she had always been understood to be a Republican). The fact that she consistently leads Maggie Hassan in polling probably demonstrates that at least a fragment of that reputation has survived.

[Miles]

Didn't Ayotte get elected as a tea partier? I don't care about this issue either way, but I'm just wondering what happened between 2010 and now.

She was endorsed by Palin, but otherwise wasn't very closely aligned with the tea party.

[Mehmentum]

Glad to see some Republicans are concerned about this.

[/]

FFs

[Mr. Illini]

Three FFs and an opportunist.

Having been represented by Mark Kirk since 2001, he is genuinely pro-environment. He always has been.

Ayotte has a 0% LCV scorecard (compare to Kirk's 60%). She should be ashamed of herself.

[Figueira]

Like they're actually going to vote on policies that could protect the environment. For one thing, McConnell won't let them for as long as he's Majority Leader (or even if he stays on as Minority Leader after losing the Senate eventually), and have they actually voted for pro-environment policies in the past?

Not to mention, the GOP losing the senate would inevitably involve Kirk and probably Ayotte losing.

[Vega]

Well, at least their heart is in the right place.

[Figueira]

Parts of the GOP have been getting better recently at acknowledging that climate change exists, but their proposed solutions (or lack thereof) are still terrible.

Edit: Anyway, while I don't think these Senators are the most eco-friendly people ever, it's encouraging to know that apparently this is now politically advantageous.

[Rockefeller GOP]

Lol

What is so funny?  Are you that much of a hack that you care more about Democrats looking good (and Republicans looking bad) that you can't celebrate this?  Just as with the civil rights movement and every other good policy initiative that takes a while to succeed, the more people in BOTH parties who support it, the better.

That's why I'll never understand insufferable hacks who say things like "____ is moderate on X, Y and Z, but as long as they vote for their party's speaker/majority leader, they're an HP!!"  Just putrid logic for the cause you claim to care about.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Lol

What is so funny?  Are you that much of a hack that you care more about Democrats looking good (and Republicans looking bad) that you can't celebrate this?  Just as with the civil rights movement and every other good policy initiative that takes a while to succeed, the more people in BOTH parties who support it, the better.

That's why I'll never understand insufferable hacks who say things like "____ is moderate on X, Y and Z, but as long as they vote for their party's speaker/majority leader, they're an HP!!"  Just putrid logic for the cause you claim to care about.

Tbf the majoritarian structure of the legislature lends itself to that kind of thinking quite easily, no?

[Gass3268]

Good for them, hopefully this group can grow.

[Xing]

Assuming that this isn't merely an attempt to save Kirk and Ayotte, and that this coalition will last beyond 2016, good for them. It might not be much, but it's a start.

[Maxwell]

Lamar Alexander and Lindsey Graham deserve their props, since they are from states where this position is less than popular. Kelly Ayotte and Mark Kirk, should they lose, would be replaced by Democrats who are much better on the environment.

[windjammer]

Lol

What is so funny?  Are you that much of a hack that you care more about Democrats looking good (and Republicans looking bad) that you can't celebrate this?  Just as with the civil rights movement and every other good policy initiative that takes a while to succeed, the more people in BOTH parties who support it, the better.

That's why I'll never understand insufferable hacks who say things like "____ is moderate on X, Y and Z, but as long as they vote for their party's speaker/majority leader, they're an HP!!"  Just putrid logic for the cause you claim to care about.

Or because according to the Ligue of Conservation voter, Ayotte has a lifetime score of 23%?

[Lexii, harbinger of chaos and sexual anarchy]

About bloody time; even if it is half-hearted and just a seat-saver.

[Mr. Illini]

Lol

What is so funny?  Are you that much of a hack that you care more about Democrats looking good (and Republicans looking bad) that you can't celebrate this?  Just as with the civil rights movement and every other good policy initiative that takes a while to succeed, the more people in BOTH parties who support it, the better.

That's why I'll never understand insufferable hacks who say things like "____ is moderate on X, Y and Z, but as long as they vote for their party's speaker/majority leader, they're an HP!!"  Just putrid logic for the cause you claim to care about.

The only thing that is putrid in this story is Kelly Ayotte's half-hearted attempt at appearing a moderate with re-election on the horizon.

She has a consistently anti-environment voting record in the Senate.

[pbrower2a]

Ayotte and Kirk are up for re-election. They are going to need all the help that they can get, due to approval ratings of 25% (Kirk -- the Klingons will finally get him in 2016) and 38%. In moderate-to-liberal states such numbers practically ensure defeat in a non-wave election. Contrast Senator Grassley (R-Iowa) who seems out of reach, and who could win re-election even in a wave year for Democrats.

From another thread, for illustrative purposes:

Approval polls only, except for an estimate in Utah.


White -- retiring incumbent or (should it happen) an incumbent defeated in a primary, with "D" or "R" for the party in question.
Yellow -- incumbent under indictment or with a terminal diagnosis short of the completion of his term, with "D" or "R" for the party in question.

Light green -- Republican incumbent apparently running for re-election, no polls.
Light orange --  Democratic incumbent apparently running for re-election, no polls.

Blue  -- Republican running for re-election with current polls available.
Red --  Republican running for re-election with current polls available.


Intensity percentage shows the first digit of the approval of the incumbent Senator --

"2" for approval between 20% and 30%, "3" for approval between 30% and 39%... "7" for approval between 70% and 79%.

Numbers are recent approval ratings for incumbent Senators if their approvals are below 55%. I'm not showing any number for any incumbent whose approval is 55% or higher because even this early that looks very safe.

An asterisk (*) is for an appointed incumbent (there are none now) because appointed pols have never shown their electability.

Approval only (although I might accept A/B/C/D/F) -- not favorability. I do not use any Excellent-Good-Fair-Poor ratings because "fair" is ambiguous. A fair performance by a 7-year-old violinist might impress you. A 'fair' performance by an adult violinist indicates something for which you would not want to buy a ticket.

NO PARTISAN POLLS.