If Richard Shelby never switched parties

[Sir Mohamed]

If Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) didn't switch parties the day after the 1994 GOP revolution, how long would he have survived as conservative Dem running for reelection? My bet is up to 2010. He would have won 1998 and 2004 easily, but not sure about 2010 even though he was a conservative Dem.

[UncleSam]

He’d have struggled in 2004 and gotten clobbered or retired in 2010.

[OSR stands with Israel]

He loses in 2004

[smoltchanov]

2004 - may be, 2010 - no. Polarization became too high...

[Gracile]

He probably would have retired in 2004.

[Sir Mohamed]

He loses in 2004

I'm sure he would have won that year again, just as Zell Miller would have won in GA.

[Stranger in a strange land]

He loses in 2004

I'm sure he would have won that year again, just as Zell Miller would have won in GA.

There was still enough ticket-splitting that he could have won in 2004. He would have lost in 2010 though.

[President Johnson]

He loses in 2004

I'm sure he would have won that year again, just as Zell Miller would have won in GA.

There was still enough ticket-splitting that he could have won in 2004. He would have lost in 2010 though.

Agreed. Winning 2004 would have been likely, 2010 not so much. Nevertheless, don't forget that Mike Beebe won a landslide reelection as governor of Arkansas that year. However, gubernatorial races are less nationalized than senate elections. So I'm not 100% sure how that would have played out. He could not have won in 2016 though.

If Shelby had taken the same or similar political positions than he has, staying within the Democratic Party would have made little sense for him, even putting electability aside. It's better to switch, if you vote 80% with the other party.

[ElectionsGuy]

2004 is the only question mark here. If he would've survived that, he would've come to his senses and switched Republican. In 2010 as a Democrat he would've got defeated. Not blanched, but beat nonetheless.

[Continential]

He would narrowly lose in 2010 by a 45-53 margin as Ron Sparks lost by arround a 56-42 margin.

[Roll Roons]

Fairly sure he loses in 2004, given that every other Dem seat up in the Deep South flipped.

That's only because all the Democratic incumbents retired - Burr, DeMint, Martinez and Vitter all underperformed Dubya, while Blanche won comfortably. Edwards may not have survived 2004 because he was generally awful, but Hollings, Breaux and Graham certainly would have been fine, and I see no reason Shelby wouldn't have as well, though 2010 is a different story.

[Yellowhammer]

1998, 2004 if he's lucky.

[Dr. MB]

He'd still be in the Senate today.

[PAK Man]

I think he would have survived in 2004. 2010 would have been a challenge but I think he would have narrowly pulled it off. But he probably would be gone by 2016.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

BNH Campbell also switched parties and became a pro-choice Republican.

[The Mikado]

He'd retire in 2004, IMO, just because he'd be way out of line with the rest of the caucus by then and Breaux's quest to cash in rather than sit as part of a party that is way out of line with you would definitely appeal to him by then.

He'd probably be hanging out with Breaux as a superlobbyist for the rest of the 2000s.

[Del Tachi]

He'd retire in 1998.

It makes no sense for Shelby not to switch, so if for seem reason he doesn't it's probably because he's just going to retire instead of face a potentially challenging reelection.

[Badger]

He’d have struggled in 2004 and gotten clobbered or retired in 2010.

[Rookie Yinzer]

He'd retire in 1998.

It makes no sense for Shelby not to switch, so if for seem reason he doesn't it's probably because he's just going to retire instead of face a potentially challenging reelection.

Republicans won statewide in Alabama after 1998. I see no reason why he would have retired then. He would have scraped out a 1-2 victory in 2004 before retiring or losing by 8 in 2010.

[brucejoel99]

He'd retire in 1998.

It makes no sense for Shelby not to switch, so if for seem reason he doesn't it's probably because he's just going to retire instead of face a potentially challenging reelection.

Republicans won statewide in Alabama after 1998. I see no reason why he would have retired then. He would have scraped out a 1-2 victory in 2004 before retiring or losing by 8 in 2010.

This.

[Former President tack50]

Write in: He loses a Dem primary at some point.

[smoltchanov]

Write in: He loses a Dem primary at some point.

Unlikely before and including 2010, probably moot - after...

[Senator Incitatus]

Imagine he loses to Roy Moore in 2004...

[Esteemed Jimmy]

He’d have struggled in 2004 and gotten clobbered or retired in 2010.

[Del Tachi]

He'd retire in 1998.

It makes no sense for Shelby not to switch, so if for seem reason he doesn't it's probably because he's just going to retire instead of face a potentially challenging reelection.

Republicans won statewide in Alabama after 1998. I see no reason why he would have retired then. He would have scraped out a 1-2 victory in 2004 before retiring or losing by 8 in 2010.

Statewide elections =/= U.S. Senate elections, which are predictably more nationalized and higher-profile.  There's no way Shelby wins in 2004, and he'd face a steep uphill battle in 1998. 

2004 was a great year for the GOP in the Deep South - they picked up 5 Senate seats.  Shelby would be no more lucky.