NM: Sen. Pete Domenici (R) to Retire Next Year
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 10:55:39 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, Virginiá, Gracile)
  NM: Sen. Pete Domenici (R) to Retire Next Year
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4
Author Topic: NM: Sen. Pete Domenici (R) to Retire Next Year  (Read 7758 times)
Padfoot
padfoot714
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,531
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #50 on: October 04, 2007, 11:38:26 PM »


This hands down the biggest reason why the Democrats lost this race.  I'm 99.99% certain that if Madrid had given an actual answer instead of taking the world's longest pause and then stuttering out talking points she would have won.  Wilson completely nailed her.  If they run Madrid for Senate they are only inviting this kind of thing to happen again.
Logged
J.G.H.
Zeus
Rookie
**
Posts: 186


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #51 on: October 05, 2007, 10:53:21 AM »


This hands down the biggest reason why the Democrats lost this race.  I'm 99.99% certain that if Madrid had given an actual answer instead of taking the world's longest pause and then stuttering out talking points she would have won.  Wilson completely nailed her.  If they run Madrid for Senate they are only inviting this kind of thing to happen again.

Don't be ridiculous, Jeanine Pirro had a much longer pause.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #52 on: October 05, 2007, 11:01:52 AM »

The dangers for the NM Dems in NM-01 has never been the quality of the bench, but rather that the biggest machine-hack Dem politician (insert name) always seems to be the candidate to get out of the highly contested primary for that seat.  That turns off the Albuquerque Democrats who lean somewhat Independent anyway, especially when faced with a center-right Republican.  If WMS hadn't been driven out of here, he'd tell y'all this.

^^^
Al, please bring WMS back. Pleeeeze.
Great Opportunity for the Democrats Smiley

BTW: Do you Americans pronounce Chavez as "Shuh-Vess" or "Chaves" (like caves) ... ?

As in Spanish. SHAH-vez. (Well, depending on the accent, some Spanish speakers would say "CHAH-vez".) Americans generally know how to pronounce common Spanish words and names.

Almost all Spanish speakers would say "CHAH-vays" (the s at the end is pronounced like an s), with the possible exception of Castilians who might use "CHAH-vayth".  So we pronounce it incorrectly, as usual Tongue

"Vayz"? Definitely not.

tSAY-zar tCHAH-vez.

tsay?  Now you're speaking nonsense, though English orthography is convoluted enough that we might be saying the same thing but in a different way Tongue.  IPA is: /sesaɾ ʧaβ̞es/
Shouldn't that begin in a voiced th? (The remainder is correct.)
Logged
ilikeverin
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,410
Timor-Leste


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #53 on: October 05, 2007, 03:39:50 PM »

Well, it depends on the dialect; Castilian Spanish would begin it with an unvoiced th (θ), I think.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #54 on: October 05, 2007, 03:45:13 PM »

Well, it depends on the dialect; Castilian Spanish would begin it with an unvoiced th (θ), I think.
Sorry, yeah, I meant unvoiced.
Logged
Verily
Cuivienen
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,663


Political Matrix
E: 1.81, S: -6.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #55 on: October 05, 2007, 04:19:26 PM »

Great Opportunity for the Democrats Smiley

BTW: Do you Americans pronounce Chavez as "Shuh-Vess" or "Chaves" (like caves) ... ?

As in Spanish. SHAH-vez. (Well, depending on the accent, some Spanish speakers would say "CHAH-vez".) Americans generally know how to pronounce common Spanish words and names.

Almost all Spanish speakers would say "CHAH-vays" (the s at the end is pronounced like an s), with the possible exception of Castilians who might use "CHAH-vayth".  So we pronounce it incorrectly, as usual Tongue

"Vayz"? Definitely not.

tSAY-zar tCHAH-vez.

tsay?  Now you're speaking nonsense, though English orthography is convoluted enough that we might be saying the same thing but in a different way Tongue.  IPA is: /sesaɾ ʧaβ̞es/

z is always pronounced like an s in Spanish, except in a few dialects.  e is always pronounced (not quite) like the "a" in "table".

In English, though, poor Cesar Chavez becomes /sizɚ ʃɑvɛz/, which isn't close at all.

(sorry if your computer doesn't properly format any of these; I can switch to X-SAMPA if you'd like)

The little t I added to the beginning is the slight "click" at the opening of Spanish words beginning with s-sounds. It was the best approximation I could come up.

It is never sizɚ, I don't know where you're getting that from. The worst English pronunciation would be Say-zer (or maybe Sez-er for someone who had no idea what they were doing).
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #56 on: October 05, 2007, 04:37:11 PM »

Kessir?
Logged
ilikeverin
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,410
Timor-Leste


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #57 on: October 05, 2007, 05:54:21 PM »

Great Opportunity for the Democrats Smiley

BTW: Do you Americans pronounce Chavez as "Shuh-Vess" or "Chaves" (like caves) ... ?

As in Spanish. SHAH-vez. (Well, depending on the accent, some Spanish speakers would say "CHAH-vez".) Americans generally know how to pronounce common Spanish words and names.

Almost all Spanish speakers would say "CHAH-vays" (the s at the end is pronounced like an s), with the possible exception of Castilians who might use "CHAH-vayth".  So we pronounce it incorrectly, as usual Tongue

"Vayz"? Definitely not.

tSAY-zar tCHAH-vez.

tsay?  Now you're speaking nonsense, though English orthography is convoluted enough that we might be saying the same thing but in a different way Tongue.  IPA is: /sesaɾ ʧaβ̞es/

z is always pronounced like an s in Spanish, except in a few dialects.  e is always pronounced (not quite) like the "a" in "table".

In English, though, poor Cesar Chavez becomes /sizɚ ʃɑvɛz/, which isn't close at all.

(sorry if your computer doesn't properly format any of these; I can switch to X-SAMPA if you'd like)

The little t I added to the beginning is the slight "click" at the opening of Spanish words beginning with s-sounds. It was the best approximation I could come up.

It is never sizɚ, I don't know where you're getting that from. The worst English pronunciation would be Say-zer (or maybe Sez-er for someone who had no idea what they were doing).

I'd think the average American would conflate "Cesar" with "Caesar" and then choose to massacre "Cesar" just like we butcher "Caesar" Tongue
Logged
Verily
Cuivienen
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,663


Political Matrix
E: 1.81, S: -6.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #58 on: October 05, 2007, 06:02:28 PM »
« Edited: October 05, 2007, 06:04:10 PM by Verily »

Great Opportunity for the Democrats Smiley

BTW: Do you Americans pronounce Chavez as "Shuh-Vess" or "Chaves" (like caves) ... ?

As in Spanish. SHAH-vez. (Well, depending on the accent, some Spanish speakers would say "CHAH-vez".) Americans generally know how to pronounce common Spanish words and names.

Almost all Spanish speakers would say "CHAH-vays" (the s at the end is pronounced like an s), with the possible exception of Castilians who might use "CHAH-vayth".  So we pronounce it incorrectly, as usual Tongue

"Vayz"? Definitely not.

tSAY-zar tCHAH-vez.

tsay?  Now you're speaking nonsense, though English orthography is convoluted enough that we might be saying the same thing but in a different way Tongue.  IPA is: /sesaɾ ʧaβ̞es/

z is always pronounced like an s in Spanish, except in a few dialects.  e is always pronounced (not quite) like the "a" in "table".

In English, though, poor Cesar Chavez becomes /sizɚ ʃɑvɛz/, which isn't close at all.

(sorry if your computer doesn't properly format any of these; I can switch to X-SAMPA if you'd like)

The little t I added to the beginning is the slight "click" at the opening of Spanish words beginning with s-sounds. It was the best approximation I could come up.

It is never sizɚ, I don't know where you're getting that from. The worst English pronunciation would be Say-zer (or maybe Sez-er for someone who had no idea what they were doing).

I'd think the average American would conflate "Cesar" with "Caesar" and then choose to massacre "Cesar" just like we butcher "Caesar" Tongue

If they're getting "Cesar" confused with "Caesar", they'll also get "Caesar" wrong. I would not expect the average American to have that problem. (In any case, Americans pronounce "Caesar" incorrectly, too; it's Kay-sahr in Latin.)
Logged
HardRCafé
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,364
Italy
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #59 on: October 06, 2007, 01:40:28 AM »

Don't be ridiculous, Jeanine Pirro had a much longer pause.

Pirro was also never ahead.
Logged
ilikeverin
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,410
Timor-Leste


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #60 on: October 06, 2007, 08:58:12 PM »

Great Opportunity for the Democrats Smiley

BTW: Do you Americans pronounce Chavez as "Shuh-Vess" or "Chaves" (like caves) ... ?

As in Spanish. SHAH-vez. (Well, depending on the accent, some Spanish speakers would say "CHAH-vez".) Americans generally know how to pronounce common Spanish words and names.

Almost all Spanish speakers would say "CHAH-vays" (the s at the end is pronounced like an s), with the possible exception of Castilians who might use "CHAH-vayth".  So we pronounce it incorrectly, as usual Tongue

"Vayz"? Definitely not.

tSAY-zar tCHAH-vez.

tsay?  Now you're speaking nonsense, though English orthography is convoluted enough that we might be saying the same thing but in a different way Tongue.  IPA is: /sesaɾ ʧaβ̞es/

z is always pronounced like an s in Spanish, except in a few dialects.  e is always pronounced (not quite) like the "a" in "table".

In English, though, poor Cesar Chavez becomes /sizɚ ʃɑvɛz/, which isn't close at all.

(sorry if your computer doesn't properly format any of these; I can switch to X-SAMPA if you'd like)

The little t I added to the beginning is the slight "click" at the opening of Spanish words beginning with s-sounds. It was the best approximation I could come up.

It is never sizɚ, I don't know where you're getting that from. The worst English pronunciation would be Say-zer (or maybe Sez-er for someone who had no idea what they were doing).

I'd think the average American would conflate "Cesar" with "Caesar" and then choose to massacre "Cesar" just like we butcher "Caesar" Tongue

If they're getting "Cesar" confused with "Caesar", they'll also get "Caesar" wrong. I would not expect the average American to have that problem. (In any case, Americans pronounce "Caesar" incorrectly, too; it's Kay-sahr in Latin.)

No, that was my point.  Americans pronounce Caesar wrong.  Thus, when we are confronted with "Cesar", we do what is natural to English speakers and try to pronounce it close to a word we already think we know ("Caesar"), kind of like how we mispronounce "epitome" (we recognize "epi" and "tome" and put 'em together... whoops Tongue).  Hence, "Cesar" being pronounced /si.zɚ/.  I'd assume the news media is better about this, though (it seems like all of them have been taking Introduction to Spanish Pronunciation due to the boom in Hispanics Tongue)
Logged
JohnnyLongtorso
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,798


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #61 on: October 07, 2007, 09:47:34 AM »

With Richardson and Udall out, I'd have to give the edge to Heather Wilson, unfortunately.

Her House seat, on the other hand, will be the Democrats' to pick up.
Logged
Adlai Stevenson
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,403
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #62 on: October 07, 2007, 11:10:35 AM »

With Richardson and Udall out, I'd have to give the edge to Heather Wilson, unfortunately.

Her House seat, on the other hand, will be the Democrats' to pick up.

At the outset she might have the edge, but given that the election will be taking place against the national backdrop of the Presidential race I think the Democratic candidate will be favoured; the Democrats have a deep and wide bench for this seat.  And if neither Richardson nor Udall is the candidate (which is not even a given yet), then there are still the likes of Chavez, Denish, or even Madrid.  I agree that NM-1 is the Democrats to lose in 2008, however, given that it was drawn specifically to elect a Democratic candidate. 
Logged
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,621
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #63 on: October 07, 2007, 11:20:12 AM »

If Madrid can't beat Wilson in a congressional race in a Democratic year, how will she beat Wilson statewide in a year that will be less favorable to Democrats?
Logged
Adlai Stevenson
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,403
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #64 on: October 07, 2007, 11:27:57 AM »

If Madrid can't beat Wilson in a congressional race in a Democratic year, how will she beat Wilson statewide in a year that will be less favorable to Democrats?

Don't quote me on this, but I remember reading a post on here that if their 2006 race had been statewide then Madrid would probably have beaten Wilson.  The fact is that Heather Wilson had a remarkable talent at winning re-election in NM-1; she and her campaign team knew how to win in the district and how to mobilize certain voters and the issues to run on etc.  She had a proven track-record in NM-1 and was a battle-tested and entrenched incumbent.  But the dynamics would obviously have been transferred to a statewide race, and obviously will be so even more because its 2008, not 2006 (if she ended up facing Madrid). 

Personally, I think Madrid should probably run for NM-1 again rather than for the Senate.  If Richardson and Udall's word is good, then Chavez would be the best candidate.   
Logged
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,621
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #65 on: October 07, 2007, 11:39:00 AM »

I'd add that NM-1 went 51-48 to Kerry while the state went only 50-49 to Bush. The state is actually a more favorable climate for Wilson to run in.
Logged
Adlai Stevenson
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,403
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #66 on: October 07, 2007, 11:53:12 AM »

I'd add that NM-1 went 51-48 to Kerry while the state went only 50-49 to Bush. The state is actually a more favorable climate for Wilson to run in.

If Wilson runs in either next year, I believe she will face a tougher climate than she ever has. 
Logged
HardRCafé
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,364
Italy
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #67 on: October 08, 2007, 12:03:09 AM »

Don't quote me on this, but I remember reading a post on here that if their 2006 race had been statewide then Madrid would probably have beaten Wilson.

Well, gosh, it must be true if someone said it here.  Who was it, BRTD or opebo?
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #68 on: October 08, 2007, 11:31:19 AM »

In NM-01, the local political blogs seem to be saying that it is almost assured that Bernadillo County sheriff Darren White will run for the seat, as he is already talking to the big politicos in DC.  A couple of other GOP candidates including a State Rep. in the area (whose name escapes me) may be interested also, so he may not have clear sailing to the nomination.

On the Dem side, there were already at least 4 candidates in the race (that I recall), and I'm sure others will join in.  Rumors also have it that Patty Madrid may be interested in re-running for the seat (rumors also have her interested in the Senate seat too).  If she ran for NM-01, she would be the first Hispanic candidate to enter the contest, probably making her the early favorite IMHO.
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #69 on: October 09, 2007, 03:56:19 PM »

Confirmed:  Darren White (R) will be running for NM-01 open seat. 

http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/1007/GOP_lands_top_recruit_to_run_for_Wilsons_seat.html

Just in case no one's been aware, City Councilman Martin Heinrich (D) has been running for the seat for about five months and raised $180,000 in the last quarter.  He was considered the top challenger prior to Wilson's leaving, even though the usual suspects weren't exactly that happy.  Many other Democrats are mulling bids, including Patty Madrid, State Rep. Al Park, former State Health Department Secretary Michelle Lujan Grisham,, heck even State Treasurer James B. Lewis, among many others...
Logged
MarkWarner08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,812


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #70 on: October 09, 2007, 10:15:40 PM »

Confirmed:  Darren White (R) will be running for NM-01 open seat. 

http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/1007/GOP_lands_top_recruit_to_run_for_Wilsons_seat.html

Just in case no one's been aware, City Councilman Martin Heinrich (D) has been running for the seat for about five months and raised $180,000 in the last quarter.  He was considered the top challenger prior to Wilson's leaving, even though the usual suspects weren't exactly that happy.  Many other Democrats are mulling bids, including Patty Madrid, State Rep. Al Park, former State Health Department Secretary Michelle Lujan Grisham,, heck even State Treasurer James B. Lewis, among many others...

Has anyone noticed that first-time candidates for congressional office with a background in prosecution or law enforcement tend to win tough House races? Mike Arcuri, Dave Reichert, and Brad Ellsworth all come to mind. Maybe it's the combo of charisma, self-possession, and confidence that helps them sway voters. Perhaps it's due to more superficial reasons.

A poi sci professor once noted that candidates for elective office with more attractive physical attributes has a higher chance of victory than their less attractive counterparts. This theory was later debunked with the 2005 election of Jean Schmidt to Congress.
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #71 on: October 09, 2007, 11:43:42 PM »

Confirmed:  Darren White (R) will be running for NM-01 open seat. 

http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/1007/GOP_lands_top_recruit_to_run_for_Wilsons_seat.html

Just in case no one's been aware, City Councilman Martin Heinrich (D) has been running for the seat for about five months and raised $180,000 in the last quarter.  He was considered the top challenger prior to Wilson's leaving, even though the usual suspects weren't exactly that happy.  Many other Democrats are mulling bids, including Patty Madrid, State Rep. Al Park, former State Health Department Secretary Michelle Lujan Grisham,, heck even State Treasurer James B. Lewis, among many others...

Has anyone noticed that first-time candidates for congressional office with a background in prosecution or law enforcement tend to win tough House races? Mike Arcuri, Dave Reichert, and Brad Ellsworth all come to mind. Maybe it's the combo of charisma, self-possession, and confidence that helps them sway voters. Perhaps it's due to more superficial reasons.

A poi sci professor once noted that candidates for elective office with more attractive physical attributes has a higher chance of victory than their less attractive counterparts. This theory was later debunked with the 2005 election of Jean Schmidt to Congress.

Well, it's certainly not the most unreasonable theory I've ever heard (and I think I've heard it before as well).  When exactly is the last time an Attorney General has lost a run for an open Senate or Governor's seat, anyway?  I think it's been quite a while.

Anyway, as I pointed out before, White is a very legitimate candidate because he's won Bernadillo County-wide elections twice (which mirrors and encompasses the CD) and because of his position as sheriff, which means he appears a lot on TV and is thus a well-known face to the locals.  His status as an involved politico in Albuquerque GOP politics could be a negative (he chaired the Bush-Cheney reelection in 2004), but it could also be a positive (I don't see him being at any loss for funds).

I think you know as well as I do that most of the insider Dem NM politicos always had as their doomsday scenario that Domenici retired and Wilson replaces him, with White taking over NM-01.  I don't know whether I agree with the trajectory (or the likelihood at either end), but it is worth mentioning.
Logged
MarkWarner08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,812


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #72 on: October 10, 2007, 12:32:34 AM »

Confirmed:  Darren White (R) will be running for NM-01 open seat. 

http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/1007/GOP_lands_top_recruit_to_run_for_Wilsons_seat.html

Just in case no one's been aware, City Councilman Martin Heinrich (D) has been running for the seat for about five months and raised $180,000 in the last quarter.  He was considered the top challenger prior to Wilson's leaving, even though the usual suspects weren't exactly that happy.  Many other Democrats are mulling bids, including Patty Madrid, State Rep. Al Park, former State Health Department Secretary Michelle Lujan Grisham,, heck even State Treasurer James B. Lewis, among many others...

Has anyone noticed that first-time candidates for congressional office with a background in prosecution or law enforcement tend to win tough House races? Mike Arcuri, Dave Reichert, and Brad Ellsworth all come to mind. Maybe it's the combo of charisma, self-possession, and confidence that helps them sway voters. Perhaps it's due to more superficial reasons.

A poi sci professor once noted that candidates for elective office with more attractive physical attributes has a higher chance of victory than their less attractive counterparts. This theory was later debunked with the 2005 election of Jean Schmidt to Congress.

Well, it's certainly not the most unreasonable theory I've ever heard (and I think I've heard it before as well).  When exactly is the last time an Attorney General has lost a run for an open Senate or Governor's seat, anyway?  I think it's been quite a while.

Anyway, as I pointed out before, White is a very legitimate candidate because he's won Bernadillo County-wide elections twice (which mirrors and encompasses the CD) and because of his position as sheriff, which means he appears a lot on TV and is thus a well-known face to the locals.  His status as an involved politico in Albuquerque GOP politics could be a negative (he chaired the Bush-Cheney reelection in 2004), but it could also be a positive (I don't see him being at any loss for funds).

I think you know as well as I do that most of the insider Dem NM politicos always had as their doomsday scenario that Domenici retired and Wilson replaces him, with White taking over NM-01.  I don't know whether I agree with the trajectory (or the likelihood at either end), but it is worth mentioning.

It would truly be nightmarish for Democrats to lose open Senate and House races in an election cycle where their prospects are good, if not great. The Democrats who brush off Wilson's chances simply because of her indirect connection to the convoluted U.S attorneys scandals, two words: watch out. This Rhodes Scholar has been a dogged worker her entire life -- counting her out now would be a grave misjudgment of her ability to preserve.

 The strongest (plausible, that means no Bill Richardson) Democratic candidate for the U.S Senate is Diane Denish. The problem for Democrats is that Ms. Denish has showed no interest in the Senate; moreover, she's raised over $1 million for a bid for the gubernatorial mansion. It's quite unlikely that she'd turn down a run for governor, a position that would make her the most powerful woman in NM history, for a bid for the Senate that she quite possibly would lose.  Unlike Claire McCaskill, who Chuck "The Architect" Schumer dissuaded from running for MO gov. in 2008, Denish has never lost statewide. 

Tom Udall, Diane Denish, and Bill Richardson are the three  Democratic candidates in NM who can beat Heather Wilson in a neutral political environment. For the DSCC, it all comes down to Big Bill's performance in the early primary states.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,695
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #73 on: October 10, 2007, 01:09:11 AM »

When exactly is the last time an Attorney General has lost a run for an open Senate or Governor's seat, anyway?  I think it's been quite a while.

IL 2002

Also OH 2006 although that was the primary, but of course, there's no doubt Petro would've lost the general as well.
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 #74 on: October 10, 2007, 01:50:57 AM »

Well, it's certainly not the most unreasonable theory I've ever heard (and I think I've heard it before as well).  When exactly is the last time an Attorney General has lost a run for an open Senate or Governor's seat, anyway?  I think it's been quite a while.

Erm, Virginia (Kilgore) 2005?  Pennsylvania (Fisher) 2002?
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4  
« 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 0.072 seconds with 12 queries.