Talk Elections

Election Archive => 2010 Elections => Topic started by: redcommander on January 02, 2010, 08:48:52 PM



Title: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 02, 2010, 08:48:52 PM
So I decided to create my own, but it will just focus on Senate races for now. I will probably do one more detailed later that will include House and Gubernatorial Results.

Brett Baer  
Good Evening it is now 5:00 P.M. here in Washington as we start our 2010 election night coverage here on Fox News. I'm Brett Baer.

Kirsten Powers
And I'm Kirsten Powers.

Brett Baer
Throughout the night we will present results as well as analysis of the numerous races around the country that we strive to be fair and balanced.

Kirsten Powers
Now before we move onto our guests Frmr. Vice Presidential Nominee Geraldine Ferraro and Frmr. Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, let's view the map of the Senatorial Races around the nation.  Currently the Senate's political composition is 57 Democrats, 2 Independents, and 41 Republicans after the upset victory of Scott Brown in Massachusetts in January. Tonight there are 36 races. 18 seats are held by Democrats and 18 are held by Republicans. 5 Republicans retirements have created open seats in New Hampshire, Ohio, Kentucky, Florida, and Missouri, and 3 Democrat Retirements have occurred in Illinois, Delaware, and Hawaii.

 



Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Kaine for Senate '18 on January 02, 2010, 09:04:44 PM
So I decided to create my own, but it will just focus on Senate races for now. I will probably do one more detailed later that will include House and Gubernatorial Results.

Brett Baer  
Good Evening it is now 5:00 P.M. here in Washington as we start our Decision 2010              election night coverage here on Fox News. I'm Brett Baer.

Kirsten Powers
And I'm Kirsten Powers.

Brett Baer
Throughout the night we will present results as well as analysis of the numerous races around the country that we strive to be fair and balanced.

Kirsten Powers
Now before we move onto our guests Frmr. Vice Presidential Nominee Geraldine Ferraro and Frmr. Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, let's view the map of the Senatorial Races around the nation.  Currently the Senate's political composition is 57 Democrats, 2 Independents, and 41 Republicans after the upset victory of Scott Brown in Massachusetts in January.

I stopped reading right there.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 02, 2010, 09:16:19 PM
6:00
Welcome Back, I'm Brett Baer. It is now 6:00 here in Washington, and the polls have now closed in two states, Indiana and Kentucky. In Indiana the Republicans had hoped that with all the missteps the Democrats had taken in the past two years, that they could give Evan Bayh a truely competitive race, but it appears unlikely if pre-election polling is correct, that he will lose tonight. In Kentucky, Dr. Rand Paul an eye surgeon and son of Representative and Frmr. Presidential Candidate Ron Paul is running against Lt. Governor Daniel Mongardio. It is widely expected if polling is accurate, that he will win in that race by a comfortable margin.

6:25
Kirsten Powers
At 6:25 Fox News can now project Evan Bayh as the winner in Indiana. Despite only 30% of the vote in, traditionally Democratic areas of the state have given him a higher percentage of the vote than necessary for the race to remain uncalled.
()

6:40
Kirsten Powers
Fox News can now project that Dr. Rand Paul is the winner of the Senatorial Race to succeed Jim Bunning in Kentucky. With a 55 to 42 margin of victory at the moment, he will join his father, Dr. Ron Paul in Congress tonight if he is reelected as is widely predicted.
()

Presently the Partisan Compostion of Senate remains unchanged.
()


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Psychic Octopus on January 02, 2010, 09:22:13 PM
Well Ben, of course you stopped reading around there, that's right about where the post ended. :)

Please fix the map, Redcommander, and continue.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 02, 2010, 09:55:14 PM
Kirsten Powers
It is now 7:00, and the polls have now closed in three more states, South Carolina, Georgia, and Vermont.

Fox News at this time can project that Jim DeMint has been reelected in South Carolina. Compared to his fairly competitive 2004 margin, DeMint is expected to carry over 60% of the vote tonight.

()



Vermont is also projected to have reelected Patrick Leahy to senate in a landslide.

()


7:35
In Georgia, Fox News can now project Johnny Isakson has won a second term with current results having him winning 57% of the vote.

()

We now must go to a commercial break, but stay tuned to the number one name in news, Fox News.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 02, 2010, 10:31:42 PM
Brett Baer
It is now 7:30 in the East, and the polls have closed in two more states, North Carolina and Ohio.

Kirsten Powers
In Ohio Rob Portman has an early lead according to indications, but it is still possible for a Lee Fisher victory tonight.

In North Carolina, Richard Burr had faced surprisingly low reelection numbers this year, and it remains to be seen if Democrat challenger Cal Cunningham can pull off a win in what all indications have indicated to be a Republican favored election cycle. Currently this race is too close to call for a declaration of a win for either candidate. It should be noted that history is on Cal Cunningham's side as no incumbent in the North Carolina race has been reelected since Sam Ervin won in 1968.

North Carolina Senate Seat too close to call

()
Richard Burr

()
Cal Cunningham

At 7:57, Fox News can call Ohio for Frmr. Representative Rob Portman. Portman maintains a healthy 55 to 42 margin.




Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 02, 2010, 11:05:27 PM
Kirsten Powers
At 8:00 in the east polls have closed in 9 states, Alabama, Delaware, Illinois, Connecticut, Missouri, New Hampshire, Maryland, Florida, and Pennsylvania. At this moment we can declare Richard Shelby the winner in Alabama. Shelby only faced nominal opposition, and if projections hold, he should win reelection with about 65% of the vote.

In Maryland, Barbara Mikulski has been declared the winner. Mikulski is predicted to win with over 60%.
()


Peter Schiff defeats Chris Dodd

()

Brett Baer
It is now 8:15, and it can now be projected by Fox News that Republican Peter Schiff in the state of Conneticut has defeated incumbent Senator Chris Dodd. Although it seemed as though Dodd might have a glimmer of hope of surviving reelection through improving approval numbers, Schiff produced a number of hard-hitting savy political ads that brought back to light the number of scandals surrounding Chris Dodd. Early numbers showing a 58-40 Schiff lead. Schiff is the first Republican pickup of the evening.

Republicans pickup Delaware


()

As the North Carolina race continues to be too close to call, Fox News now has sizable information to project at 8:23 that Republican Mike Castle has won in Delaware. This is an especially bad loss for the Democrats not only due to the Vice President serving in this seat when in Senate, but because his son is losing by a landslide margin, 60-37. Castle a popular figure and longstanding presence in Delaware politics, managed to overcome the family connections of Beau Biden, another popular Delaware politician, who unfortunately found himself with a series of campaign missteps. Delaware is the second Republican pickup of the evening.

Kirsten Powers
The big question so far tonight is whether or not Cal Cunningham will be able to win in the North Carolina race. At the moment he has 49.2 to 47.6% lead over incumbent Richard Burr. With 55% of the the vote in, Fox News will continue to keep a close eye on the results coming in from this race.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Rowan on January 02, 2010, 11:06:55 PM
Schiff wins Connecticut 58-40? Seriously?


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 02, 2010, 11:13:20 PM
That is the early projection. Numbers could change, but I don't think Dodd will be extremely electable come November.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 03, 2010, 12:07:03 AM
Brett Baer
It is now 8:30, and the polls have now closed in the state of Arkansas. Presently, the race between State Senator Gilbert Baker and Incumbent Senator Blanche Lincoln is too close to call, with early results indicating a slight Baker lead. Fox News is now ready to make several more Senate Projections.

Toomey Wins
()
In Pennsylvania, with 65% of the vote counted, Republican Pat Toomey has been declared the winner against Democrat Arlen Spector. Toomey leads Spector 52-45%. Spector formerly a Republican, was unable to defend his choice to change in political affiliation, and issue that the Toomey campaign continually brought up. Pennsylvania is the third Republican pickup of tonight.

()
In New Hampshire, Republican Kelly Ayotte, the former Atorney General of the state is projected to have won. With 78% of the votes counted, she holds a 56-42 lead.


Kirk Wins Obama's Seat
()
In Illinois, another blow has been delt to the President, this time personally, as his former senate seat has been won by Republican Representative Mark Kirk. With 59% of the votes in, Kirk is maintaing a 52-44 lead over his challenger Democrat State Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias. This is the fourth pickup for the Republicans tonight.

Kirsten Powers

8:45
()
Marco Rubio is declared the winner of the Senate race in Florida. Rubio holds a stable 56-39 lead over Democrat challenger Kendrick Meek.

Cunningham wins in North Carolina
()
In North Carolina, Democrat Cal Cunningham has defeated Senator Richard Burr with 86% of the vote in with a 50-47 lead. This is an extremely dissapointing result for the republicans has they spend several million dollars in order to help Burr win. So far tonight, Cunningham's win is the first Democrat Pickup.

Carnahan defeats Blunt
()
8:49
At 8:49 in another close race, Democrat Robin Carnahan can now be declared the winner for the senate seat held by retiring Republican Kit Bond. With 63% of the vote in, Carnahan is leading Republican Roy Blunt with 51-48. The results of this race have been extremely close for most of the hour, but Carnahan is building sizeable leads in enough counties to deny Blunt of coming back and winning. Carnahan's win puts the number of Democrat pickups to 2.

Here are the results of the Senate races so far.

()










Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: nhmagic on January 03, 2010, 01:31:26 AM
Oh my lord, I cannot wait for the real election night next year!!!  The gratifying feeling of watching us pick up so many seats.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Alexander Hamilton on January 03, 2010, 01:41:23 AM
R-NY!


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Sewer on January 03, 2010, 01:42:56 AM
this is not at all hackish


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 03, 2010, 01:52:07 AM
How can it be hackish when Dems have won North Carolina and Missouri?


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Alexander Hamilton on January 03, 2010, 01:53:55 AM
How can it be hackish when Dems have won North Carolina and Missouri?

Because omg the Republicans won seats that they are polling ahead in!


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 03, 2010, 02:00:16 AM
Kirsten Powers
8:57

Lincoln defeated in Arkansas

()
Welcome back to Fox News's coverage of Election Night 2010, I'm Kirsten Powers. Fox can now call the state of Arkansas for Republican Gilbert Baker. Blanche Lincoln had faced and extremely difficult campaign with attacks from both sides of the asile. Baker currently leads Lincoln 55-43% with 49% of the vote in. This is the fifth pickup for Republicans tonight, but with a net loss of two senate seats to the Democrats factored in, they have gained in total three senate seats so far.




Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Psychic Octopus on January 03, 2010, 02:08:34 AM
Damn, I wanted Burr to win.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Alexander Hamilton on January 03, 2010, 02:13:19 AM


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 03, 2010, 02:38:23 AM
9:00
Brett Baer
It's now 9:00, and polls have closed for Senatorial contests in Colorado, Both New York Senatorial Contests, Wisconsin, Arizona, Kansas, Louisiana, and South Dakota

Fox News can declare winners in 5 of these races.

()
In Arizona, John McCain is declared the winner against his Democrat opponent.

()
Todd Tiahrt has been declared the winner in Kansas. Tiarht like Hayworth expected a weak challenge by the democrats, and is expected to pull over 65% if our exit polling is correct.


()
In the New York A Senate race, Chuck Schumer has been declared the winner. If poll results continue, he is headed for a landslide win over his Republican opponent.

()
John Thune is declared the winner in South Dakota. If the Republicans manage to regain control of senate tonight, it is rumored he could be a possible contender for Senate Majority leader.

()
Jay Dardenne is projected by Fox News to be the winner in Louisiana. Lousiana Secretary of State Dardenne defeated incumbent David Vitter in the primary, and has proven throughout the campaign to be an effective campaigner against Democrat Charles Melancon.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Ronnie on January 03, 2010, 02:48:14 AM
Well, this sure is...unconventional.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 03, 2010, 02:55:43 AM
9:25
Kirsten Powers

()
The New York-B race is still too close to call, but with current voter projections in Wisconsin, Fox News calls Russ Feingold the winner in that contest. He leads Republican Terrence Wall 53-45 with 43% percent of the vote in.


9:42
Norton wins in Colorado

()

Brett Baer

At 9:42, Fox News can project that the winner in Colorado is Frmr. Lt. Governor Jane Norton. With 48% of the results in, Norton leads Democrat Michael Bennett 57-41. This is the sixth Republican pickup of the night.

 


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Sewer on January 03, 2010, 03:03:33 AM
Yay Feingold!!


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 03, 2010, 03:11:23 AM
9:54

Gillibrand Defeated in New York

()

Kirsten Powers
In a close race, that originally started out as a clear Gillibrand lead, Republican Liz Feld, Mayor of Larchmont has been declared the winner of the New York Senate-B race by Fox News. With 62% of the vote in, Feld leads Gillibrand 50-48. Gillibrand's lower than average results for a Democrat in New York City are credited with a Feld win. New York-B is the Seventh Republican pickup of tonight. Presently the composition of the Senate is 51 Democrats, 46 Republicans, and 2 Independents. Whether or not Republicans will be able to pull of the number of wins necessary to regain control of the Senate remains to be seen, but if they do, the net gain would be greater than that in 1994.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 03, 2010, 03:22:14 AM
10:00

Good Evening again, I'm Brett Baer here with continuing coverage of Fox News's coverage of the 2010 Mid-term elections. Right before break we called the senatorial race for the New York-B seat for Republican Liz Feld. Before we announce the next states that have closed their polls, let's take a look at the results map of Senatorial races around the country.

()


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 03, 2010, 03:39:03 AM
10:02

Brett Baer
Fox News can now project results in the following races:

()
In Idaho, Mike Crapo has been reelected. Exit polling show a victory of over 80% of the vote.

()
In Iowa, Chuck Grassely is projected to have won. Democrats had hoped to have given him a competitive contest, but early results and exit polls predict a victory for him around 60%.

Dorgan defeated by Hoeven

()

In one of the most costly and media covered races in the nation, Fox News projects that Governor John Hoeven will have defeated incumbent Bryan Dorgan. With 18% of the vote in, Hoeven is leading Dorgan 59-36. Hoeven's win is the Republican eighth pickup of tonight.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: California8429 on January 03, 2010, 01:28:37 PM

 can project that the winner in Colorado is Frmr. Lt. Governor Jane Norton.
 

Boo


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 03, 2010, 03:37:06 PM
10:15
Kirsten Powers
()
Fox News can project that Incumbent Senator Bob Bennett has been reelected in Utah.

10:35

Reid defeated in Nevada
()
It is now projected that Harry Reid has been defeated in the state of Nevada by Republican Danny Tarkanian. With 48% of the vote in, Tarkanian is leading 55-39.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Vosem on January 03, 2010, 04:01:53 PM

 can project that the winner in Colorado is Frmr. Lt. Governor Jane Norton.
 

Yay!


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 03, 2010, 05:11:25 PM
11:00
Brett Baer
Welcome Back to Fox News, Polls have just closed in California, Oregon, and Washington.





Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Edu on January 03, 2010, 05:55:29 PM
So, according to this the republicans take back the senate? Or is my math wrong?


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Chancellor Tanterterg on January 03, 2010, 06:29:42 PM
Redcommander, please go flaunt your stupidity/hackary elsewhere, thanks!


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Small Business Owner of Any Repute on January 03, 2010, 08:36:54 PM
Liz Feld looks like she's a mess.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Meeker on January 03, 2010, 08:45:15 PM
roflmao


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on January 03, 2010, 09:21:05 PM
Okay, well its a revolutionary concept, the content however is imperfect.

For one, I highly doubt Schiff will win the CT GOP primary. If he does, Dodd will survive.

There is no way Burr or Blunt is losing in a landslide of this proportions. Whatever there issues are, they would be carried to victory on the slant of the year alone.

New York's class I seat is not going to be lost to anyone except maybe either Rudy or Pataki and definately not to some mayor from some small town. If the Mayor of Yonkers couldn't get 35% against Hillary Clinton, a smaller town mayor isn't getting over that either.

Next, there has been no primary polling in Nevada, that I have seen so far and my guess would be that Sue Lowden would have a slight advantage over Tarkanian but since that is in the air I won't criticize your call on that.

Lastly the polling we do have in Kansas says that Jerry Moran is leading Tiarht narrowly with most of NE Kansas undecided and they will decide the winner. Moran leads the Western part of the state and Tiarht in the SE portion. I think Moran would have the edge in NE Kansas but in such an instance I think for credibility purposes alone, you should go with the current polling data.

Finally some of your margins are bit out of left field.


Other then those issues, its great and again a revolutionary concept. :)


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Sewer on January 03, 2010, 10:03:27 PM
this is not a revolutionary concept


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Kaine for Senate '18 on January 03, 2010, 10:07:24 PM

Actually, it is.  We've never had a timeline done like this, for Congressional elections before.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: War on Want on January 03, 2010, 11:34:00 PM

Actually, it is.  We've never had a timeline done like this, for Congressional elections before.
We've had people do this sort of thing for congressional elections in their own timelines. Yawn.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Barnes on January 03, 2010, 11:46:17 PM
I just look at this scenario, and I laugh, and laugh, and laugh. 

No offense to you, redcommander, really, I'm not trying to be a mean person. :)


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Lunar on January 04, 2010, 03:34:30 AM
If Brown wins the special, he still has to win reelection in November, right?


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Meeker on January 04, 2010, 04:00:51 AM
If Brown wins the special, he still has to win reelection in November, right?

I don't think so. The seat isn't scheduled to be up regularly until 2012.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Lunar on January 04, 2010, 04:02:17 AM
If Brown wins the special, he still has to win reelection in November, right?

I don't think so. The seat isn't scheduled to be up regularly until 2012.

Ah yes maybe I'm just confusing this process with how recently appointed Senators all have to run in 2010.  So Gillibrand has to run in 2010 and 2012 I believe.

lol at Brown winning though


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on January 04, 2010, 05:39:03 AM
<3

Keep chugging, man.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 04, 2010, 06:59:21 PM
11:05

Brett Baer

()

Fox News has now received enough polling results to declare that Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon will be elected to a second term in senate. Wyden has not faced a strong challenge since he was first elected in a 1996 special election and faced Gordon Smith. He should if polling is correct win with over 60% of the vote.



Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 04, 2010, 07:02:19 PM
Okay, well its a revolutionary concept, the content however is imperfect.

For one, I highly doubt Schiff will win the CT GOP primary. If he does, Dodd will survive.

There is no way Burr or Blunt is losing in a landslide of this proportions. Whatever there issues are, they would be carried to victory on the slant of the year alone.

New York's class I seat is not going to be lost to anyone except maybe either Rudy or Pataki and definately not to some mayor from some small town. If the Mayor of Yonkers couldn't get 35% against Hillary Clinton, a smaller town mayor isn't getting over that either.

Next, there has been no primary polling in Nevada, that I have seen so far and my guess would be that Sue Lowden would have a slight advantage over Tarkanian but since that is in the air I won't criticize your call on that.

Lastly the polling we do have in Kansas says that Jerry Moran is leading Tiarht narrowly with most of NE Kansas undecided and they will decide the winner. Moran leads the Western part of the state and Tiarht in the SE portion. I think Moran would have the edge in NE Kansas but in such an instance I think for credibility purposes alone, you should go with the current polling data.

Finally some of your margins are bit out of left field.


Other then those issues, its great and again a revolutionary concept. :)

Well I wouldn't say it's impossible for Gillibrand to be defeated by an unknown person like Feld. Al D'Amato came out of nowhere and won in 1980.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Kaine for Senate '18 on January 04, 2010, 07:13:37 PM
Well I wouldn't say it's impossible for Gillibrand to be defeated by an unknown person like Feld. Al D'Amato came out of nowhere and won in 1980.

2010 won't be a 1980, and 2010 New York is not 1980 New York.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 04, 2010, 07:29:29 PM
11:50

Murray defeated in Washington

In what has been a close race tonight for Patty Murray, Fox News can now estimate that she has been defeated by King County Sheriff Sue Rahr. This is the tenth pickup for Republicans tonight. Rahr is leading with 51% of the vote in, 50-47. Currently the Senate composition is 50 Democrats, 48 Republicans, and 2 Independents. Now if Republicans can pick up the Senate seat in California, where results have indicated the race as too close to call at the moment, and the open seat in Hawaii, then they will have regained control of the United States Senate narrowly. However they would still run into problems with control if a tied vote were to occur as the 2 independents caucus with the democrats.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 04, 2010, 07:31:02 PM
Well I wouldn't say it's impossible for Gillibrand to be defeated by an unknown person like Feld. Al D'Amato came out of nowhere and won in 1980.

2010 won't be a 1980, and 2010 New York is not 1980 New York.

It is in this scenario.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 04, 2010, 07:36:10 PM
12:00

Kirsten Powers

Hello, and welcome back to Fox News, currently polls have just closed in the last Two Senatorial Contests of the evening in Hawaii and Alaska. The race in California remains too close between Republican Steve Poizner and Democrat Barbara Boxer.

12:03

()
At this time Fox News is confident enough to project Incumbent Republican Lisa Murkowski as the winner in Alaska. Murkowski is leading her democrat opponent 55-41%.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 04, 2010, 07:42:14 PM
12:24

Brett Baer


Barbara Boxer Defeated

()

It can be projected that in California, Republican Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner has defeated Democrat Barbara Boxer. Poizner as some of our viewers may remember ran originally for Governor, but was convinced to switch over to the Senate race upon sagging poll numbers in the Primary Race. Poizner leads Boxer with 78% of the vote in, 51-45.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: CPT MikeyMike on January 04, 2010, 07:50:20 PM
I would love to see Boxer go down in flames but it's not going to happen.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Kaine for Senate '18 on January 04, 2010, 08:04:57 PM
I would love to see Boxer go down in flames but it's not going to happen.

Much of this timeline is highly improbably, but I give it points for creativity.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on January 04, 2010, 08:09:16 PM
lol lol lol lol lol


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 04, 2010, 08:25:27 PM
12:49

Republicans Win back Control of the United States Senate

Lingle Wins Senate Seat in Hawaii

()

Kirsten Powers

In what could be the most devastating loss for the Democrats, Fox News can now project Governor Linda Lingle the winner of the senate seat of retiring Senator Daniel Inouye. Inouye originally stated his intentions to run for reelection, but citing family concerns, retired earlier this year. Lingle leads her democrat opponent 56-38 with 52% of the vote in. This loss in the President's home state gives control of the United States Senate to the Republican Party in their biggest net gain of seats since the Reagan landslide of 1980. The Senate will now be composed of 47 Democrats, 51 Republicans, and 2 Independents. It may become necessary however for a tie breaking vote by Vice President Biden on certain bills if deadlock occurs.

Here are our the Voting Results at our coverage conclusion.

Indiana Evan Bayh 57% Republican Opponent 40%
Kentucky Rand Paul 55% Daniel Mongiardo 43%
South Carolina Jim DeMint 61% Democrat Opponent 37%
Vermont Patrick Leahy 68% Republican Opponent 29%
Georgia Johnny Isakson 56% Democrat Opponent 42%
North Carolina Cal Cunningham 49% Richard Burr 47%
Ohio Rob Portman 53% Lee Fisher 45%
Alabama Richard Shelby 66% Democrat Opponent 31%
Delaware Mike Castle 58% Beau Biden 39%
Missouri Robin Carnahan 52% Roy Blunt 47%
Connecticut Peter Schiff 59% Chris Dodd 37%
Maryland Barbara Mikulski 62% Republican Opponent 36%
Florida Marco Rubio 55% Kendrick Meek 38%
New Hampshire Kelly Ayotte 54% Paul Hodes 44%
Oklahoma Tom Coburn 59% Democrat Opponent 36%
Pennsylvania Pat Toomey 52% Spector 43%
Illinois Mark Kirk 51% Alexi Giannoulias 46%
Arkansas Gilbert Baker 56% Blanche Lincoln 41%
Arizona John McCain 69% Democrat Opponent 27%
Kansas Todd Tiahrt 65% Democrat Opponent 32%
South Dakota John Thune 57% Democrat Opponent 39%
Louisiana Jay Dardenne 54% Charles Melancon 43%
New York A Chuck Schumer 67% Republican Opponent 35%
New York B Liz Feld 51% Kirsten Gillibrand 43%
Winsconsin Russ Feingold 52% Terrence Hall 46%
Colorado Jane Norton 57% Michael Bennett 40%
Idaho Mike Crapo 87% Democrat Opponent 11%
Iowa Chuck Grassley 61% Democrat Opponent 36%
North Dakota John Hoeven 60% Bryan Dorgan 38%
Oregon Ron Wyden 63% Republican Opponent 34%
Alaska Lisa Murkowski 54% Democrat Opponent 42%
Utah Bob Bennett 73% Democrat Opponent 30%
Washington Sue Rahr 53% Patty Murray 45%
Nevada Danny Tarkanian 56% Harry Reid 38%
California Steve Poizner 51% Barbara Boxer 44%
Hawaii Linda Lingle 57% Democrat Opponent 37%



()

Brett Baer
From Fox News, I'm Brett Baer.

Kirsten Powers
And I 'm Kirsten Powers and we wish you all a Good Night. Continuing coverage and analysis will be continued by Studio B.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on January 04, 2010, 08:28:08 PM
Now that we are done with this ridiculous and entirely pointless thread, what comes next?


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on January 04, 2010, 08:38:18 PM
Now that we are done with this ridiculous and entirely pointless thread, what comes next?

I know what comes next. Democratic landside in 2016. Dems pickup 13 seats. lol


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 04, 2010, 08:45:55 PM
Now that we are done with this ridiculous and entirely pointless thread, what comes next?

I know what comes next. Democratic landside in 2016. Dems pickup 13 seats. lol

It all comes down to candidate recruitment. The only thing ridiculous about this thread is that I gave North Carolina to the Democrat who I think is the most electable running. Also I threw in a few retirements and candidates that probably won't happen or run.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on January 04, 2010, 08:47:40 PM
Now that we are done with this ridiculous and entirely pointless thread, what comes next?

I know what comes next. Democratic landside in 2016. Dems pickup 13 seats. lol

It all comes down to candidate recruitment. The only thing ridiculous about this thread is that I gave North Carolina to the Democrat who I think is the most electable running. Also I threw in a few retirements and candidates that probably won't happen or run.

Look up 1986. This map is even right now. If a landslide GOP victory occurs it will mean the Dems have fewer seats and thus a good map in 2016 to make big gains off of.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 04, 2010, 08:50:41 PM
The map is similar. A 2010 result like that would definitely set up a highly favorable map for democrat gains in 2016. That's part of the reason I set up Democrat pickups in Missouri and North Carolina. Burr will probably win reelection, but those two pickups would give the GOP two places to run offensive in 2016 against defensive in the rest of the country in my scenario.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on January 04, 2010, 09:04:33 PM
Now that we are done with this ridiculous and entirely pointless thread, what comes next?

I know what comes next. Democratic landside in 2016. Dems pickup 13 seats. lol

It all comes down to candidate recruitment. The only thing ridiculous about this thread is that I gave North Carolina to the Democrat who I think is the most electable running. Also I threw in a few retirements and candidates that probably won't happen or run.

THAT's the "only" ridiculous thing about this Republican masturbatory fantasy?


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on January 04, 2010, 09:05:27 PM
The map is similar. A 2010 result like that would definitely set up a highly favorable map for democrat gains in 2016. That's part of the reason I set up Democrat pickups in Missouri and North Carolina. Burr will probably win reelection, but those two pickups would give the GOP two places to run offensive in 2016 against defensive in the rest of the country in my scenario.

Then it was a pretty good idea.

To be honest I would be happy if we got 45 seats in 2010 and be content with that. If Obama flounders we can reap the benefits of having a very favorable 2012 map. For instance why waist Hoeven in 2010 when he can take out Conrad in 2012 who is contacted to one of Dodd's scandles. There is Nebraska, and Rehberg can knock out Tester. Thats 48. Sam Graves, Jo Ann Emerson, Todd Akin or Jim Talent can challange McCaskil. Polling recently dones shows that despite Macaca, George Allen has positive approvals and leads Jim Webb. There are other candidates as well such as Governor Bob McDonnell if he is popular and Eric Cantor. Bill Nelson could retire in 2012 and the GOP bench in FL is teeming with good candidates. Thats 51 and not considering possibilities for retirement of Dems like Bob Casey, Debbie Stabenow, Herb Kolh, etc etc.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Edu on January 04, 2010, 10:25:45 PM
WTF?


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Ogre Mage on January 05, 2010, 07:52:49 PM
11:50

Murray defeated in Washington

In what has been a close race tonight for Patty Murray, Fox News can now estimate that she has been defeated by King County Sheriff Sue Rahr. This is the tenth pickup for Republicans tonight. Rahr is leading with 51% of the vote in, 50-47. Currently the Senate composition is 50 Democrats, 48 Republicans, and 2 Independents. Now if Republicans can pick up the Senate seat in California, where results have indicated the race as too close to call at the moment, and the open seat in Hawaii, then they will have regained control of the United States Senate narrowly. However they would still run into problems with control if a tied vote were to occur as the 2 independents caucus with the democrats.

lol this is so preposterous it has to be either a joke or a hallucination.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 05, 2010, 10:44:15 PM
You're telling me Sue Rahr wouldn't be able to make a competitive race against Murray? Washington isn't as democratic as say California or New York, a Republican could win there statewide if they build enough support in King and Pierce Counties.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on January 05, 2010, 10:48:11 PM
You're telling me Sue Rahr wouldn't be able to make a competitive race against Murray? Washington isn't as democratic as say California or New York, a Republican could win there statewide if they build enough support in King and Pierce Counties.

Washington's probably more Democratic than either California or New York. At any rate, Murray's entirely entrenched.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Rowan on January 05, 2010, 10:56:03 PM
Who the fock is Sue Rahr?


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on January 05, 2010, 10:57:04 PM

Sheriff of King County. Why she would win a statewide election is beyond me.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: redcommander on January 05, 2010, 11:26:25 PM
Sh has the fundraising, political support, and a successful record in public office that could win statewide.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Ogre Mage on January 06, 2010, 03:03:53 AM
You're telling me Sue Rahr wouldn't be able to make a competitive race against Murray? Washington isn't as democratic as say California or New York, a Republican could win there statewide if they build enough support in King and Pierce Counties.

Yes, I am telling you that Sue Rahr would not be able to make a competitive race against Murray.  Any reasonable WA political commentator would laugh at such a notion.  The only offices that Republicans win county-wide in King County are Sheriff and Prosecutor.  They lose badly when they run for other offices.  I would point to the King County Executive race, held in an off-off election cycle, where Dow Constantine defeated Susan Hutchison 59-41.  The office of Sheriff and U.S. Senator are not even remotely similar.  A sheriff does not have to take positions on controversial social issues like abortion.  They do not have to explain complex federal legislation to constituents.

Murray has a massive name recognition advantage outside of King County and King County itself is extremely partisan toward Democrats, especially in U.S. Senate races. 

In 1992, Murray ran against Rep. Rod Chandler, a 5-term GOP congressman whose district included part of King County.  She defeated him 54%-46%.

In 1998, she ran against Rep. Linda Smith, a 2-term GOP congresswoman from SW Washington.  Murray defeated her 58%-42% and won 6 counties east of the Cascades (Rahr has no base in Eastern Washington either).

In 2004, she ran against Rep. George Nethercutt, a 5-term GOP congressman from Spokane.  She defeated him 55%-43%.

A poll from Feb. 2009 showed her defeating Attorney General Rob McKenna 55%-39% and Rep. Dave Reichert 53%-40%.  Both men have declined to run against Murray.

Do you really think Rahr is a more formidable candidate than any of these individuals?  If so, why?  Can you name a major non-partisan analyst who thinks Murray is vulnerable?  Why would Sheriff Rahr want to run against Murray when Murray got $1 million dollars for gang and youth violence prevention in King County?

Quote
Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) announced that she has included $1 million for important youth violence prevention efforts in Seattle and King County.  The Senate Commerce, Justice and Science Appropriations bill contains $300,000 for the Seattle Youth Violence Prevention Initiative (SYVPI), $300,000 for the King County Sheriff’s Office School Resource Officers Program (SRO), and $400,000 for the King County Sheriff’s Office Gang Intervention Initiative.

    "This funding will help teenagers in Seattle and King County find the connections they need to succeed in school and in life and keep them out of violent gangs and the criminal justice system." said Senator Murray. "It will help keep our schools and our streets safe."

Gangs pose a growing threat in Seattle and King County and both have experienced rising gang activity over the past year.  The 2009 National Gang Threat Assessment indicates increased gang activity in the Pacific Northwest and reports that in some communities gangs are responsible for as much as eighty percent of all violent crime.

These programs are proven responses to violence and gang activity that threaten public safety and our children’s future.  The SYVPI targets communities in the southeast, southwest, and central areas of Seattle with higher concentrations of youth violence than other areas of the City and brings together a coalition of law enforcement, mentors, churches, schools, social services providers and community leaders to provide prevention services for at-risk youth.  The SYVPI will enhance safety for these families and increase the likelihood that their youth will finish school, engage in positive activities, and become contributing members of their communities.

“The time has come for the city and our community to fundamentally change our overall strategy on preventing youth violence,” said Mayor Greg Nickels.  “I am asking neighbors, families, schools, churches, service workers and community members to come together and join our efforts.”

The King County Sheriff’s Office School Resource Officers Program places full-time deputies in schools and serves over 23,000 K-12 students in King County.  School Resource Officers help develop safety and security policies and are often able to stop arguments before they erupt into violence in our schools and on our streets.  This funding would enable this ongoing program to meet the growing security needs in King County schools and the expectations of parents and students regarding school safety.

“Demand for the SRO program has grown annually for the past 10 years,” said King County Sheriff Sue Rahr.” It is an exceptional community-based program that builds critical and life-long relationships between cops and our kids. Especially in tough economic times, our school administrators, teachers and our kids need the cops in the hallways as mentors, leaders, and protectors.”

The King County Sheriff’s Office Gang Intervention Initiative includes a new comprehensive Gang Intervention and Juvenile Detention Diversion Program.  The Gang Intervention Initiative is intended to prevent juvenile gang activity through intervention, mentoring, education, and enforcement.  Through a collaborative approach, this program will leverage and coordinate the expertise and resources of the King County Sheriff’s Office, county government, the courts, non-profit organizations, and the community to address the challenges of gangs and juvenile delinquency in a proactive and comprehensive manner.

“We have learned that simply focusing on the enforcement aspect of a problem is not enough,” said King County Sheriff Sue Rahr.  “We have to approach the resurging gang and youth violence problem with a comprehensive strategy that touches the lives of vulnerable children and families before they are recruited into the ranks. We have to work with our courts and provide on-the-street alternatives for kids to juvenile detention. We have to commit to be there for them from the time they leave the front door to the time they return to the front door—wherever home is.  And we have to actively engage the entire community to make it all work.”

The funding was included in the fiscal year 2010 Senate Commerce, Justice, and Science Appropriations Bill, which passed in the Subcommittee today and will now move to the full Appropriations Committee. Senator Murray is a senior member of the Appropriations Committee.
http://murray.senate.gov/news.cfm?id=315022 (http://murray.senate.gov/news.cfm?id=315022)


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: nhmagic on January 07, 2010, 02:31:00 AM
Republicans in Washington have given up on Murray.  She'll be in the seat until she retires or dies and she won't retire in Dorgan-fashion.  Ogre Mage is completely right - I had hopes in 2004 that Nethercutt could beat her, as he took on Foley earlier and beat him, but eastern Washington republican support can't defeat western Washington.  I learned that early on and learned to trust my friend from Washington (also a republican) on these issues.  Plus, if Rossi couldn't defeat Gregoire in a great republican year (04) - it aint happening, except for when McKenna runs against Cantwell in 2012 and defeats her (should he want it). 

Washington is like Indiana, its a traditionally democratic state deep to its core, only moving in gigantic waves (like Obamas) and only tenable to a republican candidate from the west coast somewhat in line with the radical enviro movement.  It's not a democratic state like California, or Oregon, or Maine where republicans can fare pretty well still (if they try).


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Meeker on January 07, 2010, 02:38:44 AM
I'm literally laughing out loud at the Washington nonsense going on in this thread.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Lunar on January 07, 2010, 02:43:48 AM
I'm literally laughing out loud at the Washington nonsense going on in this thread.

It's almost as ridiculous as the California nonsense, except, because of some Rasmussen poll numbers that mean little showing Boxer under 50%, the CA nonsense has gone mainstream to the point where a deeply flawed candidate (Carlyfornia) and a far-rightwing uncompromising [but honest] nutjob (Devore) are considered credible against a candidate like Boxer, who, while not beloved, possesses the resources to fully capitalize on her opponents' flaws and thus win in a state that's as rightfully Democratic as Kansas is Republican.  

I don't like to deal with electoral issues so racially, but frankly, unless someone can at leas theorize how the GOP is going to recapture the minority vote, they will have a hard time winning federal races in CA until they can at least articulate it.  Putting it into practice is another thing, of course, but in order for the GOP to escape from ImaginationLand on the West Coast, they need to at least go through the motions of trying to win.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Badger on January 07, 2010, 10:49:31 AM
I'm literally laughing out loud at the Washington nonsense going on in this thread.

Not to give this fantasy thread any pantea of credibility, but I never realized Murray's electoral history has been so weak. She's broke 55% only once, and never 60%. I realize Washington's vote tends to be more polarized, but in a wave election......?


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: RI on January 07, 2010, 12:02:56 PM
I'm literally laughing out loud at the Washington nonsense going on in this thread.

Not to give this fantasy thread any pantea of credibility, but I never realized Murray's electoral history has been so weak. She's broke 55% only once, and never 60%. I realize Washington's vote tends to be more polarized, but in a wave election......?

Which wave election has she been a candidate in? I don't see one.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: nkpatel1279 on January 07, 2010, 01:30:45 PM
Since getting elected in 1986 with less than 51% of the popular vote against a second/third tier GOP challenger-  Harry Reid-NV won re-election in 1992.  with 51% of the popular vote against a second/ third tier GOP challenger. narrowly won re-election in 1998 against John Ensign by a squeeker margin.  In 2004- Won Re-election by a landslide.  In 2010- Reid is expected to face a tough re-election campaign- but will survive due to weaknesses of his GOP challenger.
Since getting elected in 1992.
Republicans considered Boxer(CA),Murray(WA) and Feingold(WI) vulnerable in 1998. but Boxer(CA) defeated Matt Fong by a 53-43 percent margin. Murray(WA) defeated Linda Smith(WA) by a 58-42 percent margin. Feingoln(WI) narrowly won a close race due to his refusal to recieve soft money help from the DSCC.  In 2004- Republicans gave Feingold a free pass- He won re-election by a 56-44 percent margin against Tim Michaels.  Boxer(CA) defeated Bill Jones by a 58-38 percent margin. Murray(WA) defeated George Nethercutt-(WA) by a 55-43 percent margin.
CA,WA,and WI are more blue than it was in 2004. Republicans don't have a credible challengers against Boxer(CA),Murray(WA),and Feingold(WI).


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Ogre Mage on January 07, 2010, 04:03:09 PM
I'm literally laughing out loud at the Washington nonsense going on in this thread.

It's almost as ridiculous as the California nonsense, except, because of some Rasmussen poll numbers that mean little showing Boxer under 50%, the CA nonsense has gone mainstream to the point where a deeply flawed candidate (Carlyfornia) and a far-rightwing uncompromising [but honest] nutjob (Devore) are considered credible against a candidate like Boxer, who, while not beloved, possesses the resources to fully capitalize on her opponents' flaws and thus win in a state that's as rightfully Democratic as Kansas is Republican.  

I don't like to deal with electoral issues so racially, but frankly, unless someone can at leas theorize how the GOP is going to recapture the minority vote, they will have a hard time winning federal races in CA until they can at least articulate it.  Putting it into practice is another thing, of course, but in order for the GOP to escape from ImaginationLand on the West Coast, they need to at least go through the motions of trying to win.

hee hee.  That is quite an accurate description of the state of both the CA and WA GOP.

For the record, I almost would like to see Carlyfornia run against Boxer, because it would be a high-profile contest with good entertainment value, probably ending with Carlyfornia's vehicle going dramatically over the cliff in Thelma & Louise like fashion.  Carlyfornia's biography is so open to attack (especially in this economy) that the partisan in me would like to see the attacks that Boxer (an experienced street fighter) would cook up.  I'm not familiar with Devore, but that would probably be a quieter race.  It seems Boxer has beaten those types before without much difficulty.

I'll try to respond to Badger's post later.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Ogre Mage on January 08, 2010, 03:22:00 AM
I'm literally laughing out loud at the Washington nonsense going on in this thread.

Not to give this fantasy thread any pantea of credibility, but I never realized Murray's electoral history has been so weak. She's broke 55% only once, and never 60%. I realize Washington's vote tends to be more polarized, but in a wave election......?

You are correct that Washington is very polarized.  By some measures we are one of the most polarized states in the nation. (http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2008/10/polarized_states.php)  However, that means Murray's base is polarized too and not open to persuasion from the other side.  After he lost, Nethercutt said, "There was an absolute protective network across the Puget Sound area that I don't think wanted to look at any other leadership options."  An oversimplification, but the statement has some truth to it.

It is extremely unusual for a senator to break 60% in Washington state -- Sen. Slade Gorton won 56%-44% in the Republican landslide year of 1994.  Murray has faced solid opposition (two of her opponents were 5-term Congressmen) and her 55%-43% beating of Nethercutt in a slightly Republican-leaning year is impressive by Washington state standards.  Cantwell's 2006 victory over McGavick (57%-40%) would be considered a full-scale blowout.

Murray probably would have lost had she been up for reelection in 1994, but she has grown much stronger and more entrenched since then.  She's a skilled retail politician and has strong support among the key Democratic constituencies in the state due to her solidly liberal voting record and advocacy.

Murray's other strong base of support is business.  This is largely due to her position as a senior member of the Senate Appropriations Committee and isn't something she often talks about to her liberal base.  But Boeing, Microsoft and Weyerhaeuser are among her biggest donors.  Appropriations has perhaps been her most major area of concentration as senator.  My post about Murray's funding for the King County Sheriff's Office is a good example of the problem facing her potential opponents.  Many law enforcement officers might under other circumstances lean Republican.  But when Murray is providing that kind of funding for their office, it can change attitudes.  Hundreds of agencies across the state have been the beneficiary of her work.

So her potential Republican opponents are basically left with the staunch anti-government/tax crowd (a moderately powerful force in Washington state) and religious conservatives (very weak) for support.  That's not good enough for a victory here.  Her current potential opponents are political non-entities and while that might be enough to beat an incumbent who is unpopular in a wave election, Murray is not unpopular.


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Badger on January 12, 2010, 08:57:39 AM
I'm literally laughing out loud at the Washington nonsense going on in this thread.

Not to give this fantasy thread any pantea of credibility, but I never realized Murray's electoral history has been so weak. She's broke 55% only once, and never 60%. I realize Washington's vote tends to be more polarized, but in a wave election......?

You are correct that Washington is very polarized.  By some measures we are one of the most polarized states in the nation. (http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2008/10/polarized_states.php)  However, that means Murray's base is polarized too and not open to persuasion from the other side.  After he lost, Nethercutt said, "There was an absolute protective network across the Puget Sound area that I don't think wanted to look at any other leadership options."  An oversimplification, but the statement has some truth to it.

It is extremely unusual for a senator to break 60% in Washington state -- Sen. Slade Gorton won 56%-44% in the Republican landslide year of 1994.  Murray has faced solid opposition (two of her opponents were 5-term Congressmen) and her 55%-43% beating of Nethercutt in a slightly Republican-leaning year is impressive by Washington state standards.  Cantwell's 2006 victory over McGavick (57%-40%) would be considered a full-scale blowout.

Murray probably would have lost had she been up for reelection in 1994, but she has grown much stronger and more entrenched since then.  She's a skilled retail politician and has strong support among the key Democratic constituencies in the state due to her solidly liberal voting record and advocacy.

Murray's other strong base of support is business.  This is largely due to her position as a senior member of the Senate Appropriations Committee and isn't something she often talks about to her liberal base.  But Boeing, Microsoft and Weyerhaeuser are among her biggest donors.  Appropriations has perhaps been her most major area of concentration as senator.  My post about Murray's funding for the King County Sheriff's Office is a good example of the problem facing her potential opponents.  Many law enforcement officers might under other circumstances lean Republican.  But when Murray is providing that kind of funding for their office, it can change attitudes.  Hundreds of agencies across the state have been the beneficiary of her work.

So her potential Republican opponents are basically left with the staunch anti-government/tax crowd (a moderately powerful force in Washington state) and religious conservatives (very weak) for support.  That's not good enough for a victory here.  Her current potential opponents are political non-entities and while that might be enough to beat an incumbent who is unpopular in a wave election, Murray is not unpopular.

Yes, the polarization giving Murray a strong floor of support over 50% in all but a wave year is what I meant. Thanks for the in depth analysis, Ogre! I assume you believe that baring a 94 style wave Patty's safe (and possibly even then)?


Title: Re: Redcommander's 2010 Election Senate Results Timeline
Post by: Ogre Mage on January 12, 2010, 03:56:50 PM
Yes, the polarization giving Murray a strong floor of support over 50% in all but a wave year is what I meant. Thanks for the in depth analysis, Ogre! I assume you believe that baring a 94 style wave Patty's safe (and possibly even then)?

You're welcome.  Murray is entrenched.  I don't see her becoming seriously vulnerable unless at least two of the following three factors emerge:

1.  A 1994 style Republican wave
2.  A Murray scandal which damages her approvals
3.  A top-tier challenger (say, Rob McKenna)

There is some chance that #1 might happen, but #2 and #3 are remote.  The WA GOP bench is extremely thin.  Murray's warchest is very formidable and her approvals are solid.  And she is not afraid to use her resources to define her opponents before they can get traction.  At this point, challenging her is a suicide mission.