IN-WTHR/Howey Politics Indiana: Bayh +4 (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 25, 2024, 10:59:51 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 Senatorial Election Polls
  IN-WTHR/Howey Politics Indiana: Bayh +4 (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: IN-WTHR/Howey Politics Indiana: Bayh +4  (Read 3281 times)
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


« on: September 11, 2016, 01:42:05 AM »

Oh but the Republicans should clearly defund Indiana because it is a hopeless case and instead spend the money in states where they are facing a uphill climb from the top of the ticket. Roll Eyes

Lesson for the wise, money flows like water and Indiana is the path of least resistance. Nobody cares what your last name is anymore.

 If Warner's near defeat wasn't enough shock therapy, than perhaps Bayh losing 50-48 will be. Young has two months to convince undecided Republicans in a state that has never been too kind to the Clintons, to vote for a Marine (Tongue) over a Clinton shill dropped back in after ditching the state.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


« Reply #1 on: September 12, 2016, 11:53:48 PM »

We'll see who is right in November but, remember, many of the people discounting Bayh discounted the prospects of Donnelly defeating Mourdock in 2012. If surnames weren't important anymore, Casey wouldn't walk to victory in 2012, Warner's non-campaign in 2014 would have gone down in flames etc. These things still matter...

Donnelly was going to lose until Mourdocks gaffes.

Actually, I almost cited Casey's 2012 performance in my post. It was rather unimpressive. He basically hid behind the shield of Obama's margin with a slight over-performance in NE PA and Lehigh Valley, accounting for the slightly higher percentage. He lost his support in West Central, NW and SW PA he had in 2006.

If the Casey name meant something to those "Casey Democrats", who voted for him and for Rendell in 2006, and positively adored his father, then Casey would have won them in 2012 as well. Instead it was a party line vote with a slight hometown boost in his home region. In PA, that is all you need, but any Democrat could do that in 2012 barring a really crappy candidate.

However, this is not PA we are talking about here.

It is a long time Republican state (2008 aside), that will be carried probably by double digits by Trump of all people. The Democratic nominee is viewed by most Republicans to be a crook and the Democratic Senate candidate has decades of ties to said nominee, ditched the state after casting an unpopular vote to cash in Clinton style, and has not had a serious opponent since Reagan was President.

Strickland was the Clinton shill and he will lose decisively for what he said about Scalia

He should of kept the owners on McConnell's obstruction. And he would be in the position Bayh would be in. Tossup/IN.

Being a Clinton shill is viable in Ohio, assuming you plan to coast to victory on a potential Hillary win in the state. However, that does not apply to Indiana.

Now to be sure, I expect Bayh will keep it much closer than anyone else and perhaps just in that victory has been achieved for the Democrats, diverting resources. But his name is not going to give him immunity from the political reality.

WI, IL, IN are safe Dem to me anyways and Dems need 1 more flip.

This is like saying Wisconsin was Safe Republican in 2012 once Tommy Thompson survived his primary.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
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 0.02 seconds with 13 queries.