Talk Elections

http://bangordailynews.com/2012/03/01/politics/elections/angus-king-mulling-run-for-senate/?ref=relatedSidebar (http://bangordailynews.com/2012/03/01/politics/elections/angus-king-mulling-run-for-senate/?ref=relatedSidebar)

Looks like he's seriously considering a run and with Michaud (arguably a stronger candidate than Pingree) out of the race, could this possibly be a real fight for the Dems to win?

I operate under worst case scenario with this stuff so the second Snowe announced she was leaving, I counted it as an automatic Dem pick up. Who knows what could happen now especially if the GOP nominates a mainstream candidate...

If he runs, my only comment is as follows: Hell. The f**k. Yes. Seriously, I'm almost certain I'll prefer him to anyone either state party can churn out.

King would probably win any three way race.

Who would he caucus with?

He endorsed Bush in 2000, Kerry in 2004, and Obama in 2008.

I think nobody, if only to prove a point (he's always tried to remain very neutral between the parties), but in practice he's closer to the Democrats, if not by much.

I'd prob support King if he did run.

Me too)))

Why does Maine have so many independent candidates?

Because they're cool.

Endorsed. Especially since Michaud's not running.

Senator King would be a dream come true.

He hasn't been elected in over a decade, I'm not sure how that would work out. A Senate campaign as an independent is a lot different a gubernatorial one. He'd have to pick a caucus in order to get any committee assignments, so independent doesn't really go as far as it really seems it would.

Seeing as how he endorsed Kerry in 2004 and Obama in 2008, he would probably caucus with the Democrats.

It would be pretty cool if we consistently had at least 2 independents in the Senate for 12 years (and at least one for 18).

I have often wondered why those two independents don't just start their own caucus. Do the Senate rules contain a provision explicitly stating that you must have x number of members before you found a new caucus?

I'd support him. Congress needs more independent voices. I feel he'd be a damn good senator. IIRC, he's a liberal on social issues.

ANd he'd probably caucus with democrats :)

In the case he doesn't run, do you think Elliot Cutler could win that seat as an indep.?

King should stay out.

A battle between left-wing Democrats and right-wing Republicans will be far more productive than pretending some independent can come to Congress and fix the problems which stem from our electoral and campaign finance systems.

A two-way would also almost inevitably end in a massive political bitchslap right over Maine's collective head, because I'm all but certain whoever else they'd elect would be horrible.

Just anecdotally, it looks like King was stronger in liberal areas both times he ran for Governor.

https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?fips=23&year=1994&f=0&off=5&elect=0
https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?fips=23&year=1998&f=0&off=5&elect=0

King is a moderate Democrat without the D next to his name.

Is he running as an indie? Or for ironies sweet, sweet sake, a Reform Party candidate?

Because one is a centrist and the other is the most far left guy in the Senate.

Well, yeah, but wouldn't it make a statement about "bipartisanship" and "independent thinking" and all that?

Bernie Sanders isn't an independent because he beleives in bipartisanship. He is an indy because he thinks the Dem are GOP lite. Lieberman is an indy because he was GOP lite and the base got tired of that. Plus they would probably disagree on foreign policy, quite a lot.

^^^^^^^^^^^
This. Plus he realizes it would be catastrophic for the Dems if were representing Vermont as an official member of the Progressive Party. It's more a political statement on Sanders's part for him to be an independent, than trying to harm the Democrats' political image like Lieberman has.

I don't think forming a caucus would do you any good in power terms or win you any committee assignments unless you were the official minority.

Yep King should win this and it will turn the Senate on its head if he is the tie-breaking vote.

King is announcing tonight that he will run for the seat. Wow.

Leans Democratic to Toss Up.

King's donated to Obama's re-election campaign.
http://www.pressherald.com/news/King-has-made-up-his-mind-Pingree-hasnt.html

Something makes me doubt that he's really going to caucus with the GOP. That said, I'd support him over Baldacci or Pingree.

Though it's lost some of its former glory in recent years, I support Angus King's moustache joining Jon Hoeven's in the United States Senate.

Endorsed with all the endorsement power in my being, because I have no doubt both state parties' candidates will objectively blow. I look forward to having a second actually-independent Independent in the Senate.

I'm a democrat for King :) It'll be a democrat vs. King. And King will win with the support of about 1/3 of republicans, 2/3 of independents and about 15-20% of democrats, IMHO.

Safe Independent.

I doubt the GOP's candidate will be strong enough to win a three-way race like LePage did.

If King says he'll caucus with the Democrats, Republicans shouldn't forget about this race - nominating someone who could keep the far right while also being able to get at least a portion of moderates could make this a close, three-way race.

The man hasn't won an election since 1998. It's anything but safe.

And yet, fourteen years after winning that election, his favorability rating currently stands at 62%.

Excellent. My most favorite candidate in the state (we have similar views and both are Indies to boot...)

And that's not even counting for the fact that the entirety of his old voter base from the 90s will almost certainly still remember and support him.

PPP says that King has a 62% favorability.

He also gets 1/3 of Dems in their poll, 1/4 of Reublicans and more than 50% of Independents.

If we use PPP's previous samples of 40D, 35R and 25I, King currently has about 35-37% support in the Senate election. Because about 15% will be undecided, it's fair to say that King is currently ahead in the race by anywhere between 5% and 10%.

King leads in a three way matchup.

King (I) - 36%
Pingree (D) - 31%
Summers (R) - 28%

http://bangordailynews.com/2012/03/06/politics/poll-shows-king-would-win-three-way-race/ (http://bangordailynews.com/2012/03/06/politics/poll-shows-king-would-win-three-way-race/)

Patty Murray doesn't rule out backing King.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/senate-races/214425-top-senate-dem-doesnt-rule-out-backing-independent-ex-gov-in-maine (http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/senate-races/214425-top-senate-dem-doesnt-rule-out-backing-independent-ex-gov-in-maine)

Ha, cut losses and run. She's turning out far more competent as DSCC chair than Menendez was, I'll give her that.

Just what Democrats need. Another Lierberman.

Smart move, its better to have a Lieberman than a LePage like character in the Senate as a result of the left vote being split.

Hmmm...

Actually King made a number of small gaffes today that suggest he might be a little rusty, 14 years after his last election.

Pingree not running. SAFE King??

Given Baldacci is the Maine Dems' only other big name option and he's likely still not very popular with voters, pretty much what you said.

Looks like there'll be something good to watch on election night after all.

Definately.  Menendez should have never gotten Brad Ellsworth to run in Indiana, when polls showed him a certain loser against any GOP candidate.  They should have just left Coats basically unopposed so that Ellsworth could keep IN-08 for Democrats. 

Yes! :D

He can borrow all my King for Senate banners from AFE if he wants.

How is he another Lieberman?

I guess because he's not a real Democrat, which still makes it a stretch to assume that he's a troll whose primary focus is to go out of his way to damage the Democratic Party.

King didn't endorse McCain/Palin either.

He endorsed Bush. That's even worse.

What? No it's not. He endorsed Bush in 2000. A lot of the following political alignment and discourse have been products of Bush's first term. Bush's 2000 run among other things trumpeted a 'humble' foreign policy, for instance...

His foreign policy was only one aspect of his platform though. Bush was still very much a social conservative in 2000.

The only important thing now - King will, probably, win. Right now i don't see neither Democrtic nor Republican candidate able to beat him. As Senator he will likely vote as moderate-liberal Democrat (Herb Kohl-type). That's fine enough with me.

I might be misremembering 2000 (I was very young), but were social issues particularly trenchant at that point?

Despite Clinton's lingering popularity, both parties wanted to clean the slate after the Lewinsky debacle.  Republicans tried to play the moral high ground as best they could, with 'compassionate conservatism' as GWB's buzzword throughout the campaign.  Meanwhile, the Democrats gave us Joe Lieberman and Tipper Gore.

That's what I thought. I meant it didn't seem like there was a stark division on such matters going on between the campaigns the way there was in 2004.

Indeed, the VP debate between Lieberman and Cheney was seen as more of a luncheon between old friends than a knockout deathmatch.  But then that's pretty much why Lieberman was put on the ticket in the first place.

King just endorsed Obama for reelection so I guess he won't be caucusing with the Republicans anytime soon.

They were. Though the main "social issue" was gun control.

Bush in 2000 ran on a fairly sane platform, actually, and if he'd governed halfway competently as the candidate he ran as he might have been an okay President.

Bush even criticised some Republicans for wanting to "balance the budget on the backs of the poor". Can you imagine one of the current candidates saying something like that without getting booted out of the party for being a Marxist RINO?

I prefer a real independent over a "moderate Republican".

"Independent" is not ideological category, "moderate" - is. It's absolutely impossible to compatre them - that would be something like comparing scissors and apples.

Ever tried trimming your toe nails with an apple?