Day 34: North Dakota

[memphis]

Why does ND have two solidly liberal senators that win by larger margins than Bush all the time?  It doesn't make any sense.

I'm just taking a wild guess here, as I don't know much of anything about North Dakota (except that it is cold and far away), but maybe they prefer divided government.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

As always... have a look at past elections there. Looks like the unusual election was 2000 rather than 2004.

Um, Kidder even voted for Goldwater. It hasn't voted for a Democrat since FDR.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

As always... have a look at past elections there. Looks like the unusual election was 2000 rather than 2004.

Um, Kidder even voted for Goldwater. It hasn't voted for a Democrat since FDR.

Bush's margin in Kidder (34%) certainly isn't unusually low or anything... but the number of votes Gore got in 2000 *was*; at under 200 votes it was the lowest for a Democratic candidate since 1924. The number of votes polled by Kerry in Kidder (433) looks very like the number polled by Bubba in 1996 (434).

[MHS2002]

Why does ND have two solidly liberal senators that win by larger margins than Bush all the time?  It doesn't make any sense.

Two words: Farm subsidies.

[Cubby]

Why does ND have two solidly liberal senators that win by larger margins than Bush all the time?  It doesn't make any sense.

I wouldn't call them solidly liberal. One or both of them is pro-life if I remember correctly. One of them (Dorgan or Conrad) was voted in in 1986, during the severe farm crisis that hit the midwest in the 1980's (see Iowa, 1988). On the local level the Dakotas are open to more then just the GOP. Maybe this is a remnant of the Farmer-Laborer days.

[Galactic Overlord]

Why does ND have two solidly liberal senators that win by larger margins than Bush all the time?  It doesn't make any sense.

The farm crisis helped Kent Conrad beat Republican Senator Mark Andrews by about one percentage point in 1986. The other Senate seat was held by an aging Democrat that, after he died, Conrad ran and took his seat, and Byron Dorgan, then the Congressman-at-large, ran and got Conrad's old seat.

As far as why they're still there, well, they don't run as liberals back home.  They just run as the good old boys going to Washington to help out with things like farm subsidies, etc.  Plus, no Republican powerhouse candidate will step forward and give them a run, like former Governor Ed Schafer or current Gov. Hoeven, or even any of the statewide officeholders.  It's strange, it would be like a Republican senator in Vermont or Connecticut getting a pass, but it seems ND GOP officeholders don't want the fight.

[nini2287]

Why does ND have two solidly liberal senators that win by larger margins than Bush all the time?  It doesn't make any sense.

The farm crisis helped Kent Conrad beat Republican Senator Mark Andrews by about one percentage point in 1986. The other Senate seat was held by an aging Democrat that, after he died, Conrad ran and took his seat, and Byron Dorgan, then the Congressman-at-large, ran and got Conrad's old seat.

As far as why they're still there, well, they don't run as liberals back home.  They just run as the good old boys going to Washington to help out with things like farm subsidies, etc.  Plus, no Republican powerhouse candidate will step forward and give them a run, like former Governor Ed Schafer or current Gov. Hoeven, or even any of the statewide officeholders.  It's strange, it would be like a Republican senator in Vermont or Connecticut getting a pass, but it seems ND GOP officeholders don't want the fight.

For those of us that were still in the womb in 1986, why did Conrad run for the other senate seat after already holding one?

[Platypus]

i knew someone online from steele once. Erc probably knows who I mean.

[Galactic Overlord]

For those of us that were still in the womb in 1986, why did Conrad run for the other senate seat after already holding one?

He initially was not going to seek re-election, and Dorgan was running to take his seat. But after the other Democrat died, he changed his mind and ran for that seat.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

That old senator was Quentin Burdick. I've driven on many streets named after him.

[jimrtex]

For those of us that were still in the womb in 1986, why did Conrad run for the other senate seat after already holding one?

This is from an AP Story at the time of Conrad's election
Conrad, a 44-year-old Senate freshman, shocked North Dakota Democrats in April when he declared he would keep a 1986 campaign promise and not run for a second term.

Conrad said he would not seek another six-year term if the federal budget deficit were not slashed. U.S. Rep. Byron Dorgan , D-N.D., replaced Conrad on the ticket and easily defeated Republican Steve Sydness on Nov. 3 .

But Conrad reconsidered after Burdick's death and said he would run to serve out the term. He argued his earlier pledge applied only to his own seat.
Dorgan is 6 years older than Conrad, and both were North Dakota Tax Commissioner before running for Congress.  Dorgan had been commissioner from 1969-80 when he was elected to the House of Representative.  He was succeeded by Conrad from 1981-86, when Conrad was elected to the Senate (with his one term pledge).

Dorgan after 12 years as ND's sole representative won the Democratic nomination for senator.  Quentin Burdick died on Sept 8, 1992;  Dorgan won Conrad's old seat in November; then Conrad won a special election on December 4th.

Quentin Burdick is a bit unusual.  His father Usher Lloyd Burdick was a Republican representative from 1935-1958 (with a 4-year gap when he was defeated in an attempt to be nominated to the Senate).  Quentin Burdick succeeded him as Representative, but running as a Democrat.  Quentin was then elected to the Senate in a special election following the death of the sitting senator.