A very interesting post from www.Alipac.US about the state of immigration enforcement. This follows this post about the Tampa Bay Republican debate.This follows this post analyzing the best current candidate on immigration. This follows this post about the new congressional districts in Texas being redrawn so that the new seats favor the Democratic party in a Republican state. This follows this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants such as the 30,000 openly illegal immigrants in the border town of El Paso, where President Barack Obama recently bashed immigration enforcement! For more that you can do to get involved click HERE and you can read a very interesting book HERE!
And Remember when contacting public officials to please be firm but respectful. Any over the top messages could result in law enforcement action against you. Just let these politicians know that you are aware of what they have done and that you intend to remove them from office in the 2012 elections.
America's Last Stand: New Hope In The Fight Against The Illegal Immigration Invasion
by William Gheen
President of ALIPAC
http://www.alipac.us/
With an economic siege on middle class Americans that rivals the Great Depression, and a "president" who has thrown America's elections and existing laws to the wind with his dictatorial actions and authoritarian regime, morale is quite low among those fighting to save America. While illegal aliens have started to flee America faster than they are streaming in due to public hostility, fewer jobs, and a growing array of states standing up against them, Dictator Obama is doing all he can to keep his occupying army in place!
Many patriotic and peaceful Americans are giving up on the politicians all together. They are frustrated after illegal immigration control has been a top issue in American elections since 2006 and still our borders remain open with a recent report claiming 95% of illegal aliens who try succeed in getting into the US. Billions in taxpayer resources stolen away each year while thousands of Americans are slaughtered by illegal aliens enticed into America by big banks, global corporations, and traitorous Republicans and Democrats in Washington, DC, continue to side with the illegal immigrant invasion against the interests of American citizens! People have had enough and their confidence in political solutions is fading fast.
For those of you who have been thinking about quitting the fight, surrender is not an option. I will remind you all that while Obama's Amnesty decree by memo may seem discouraging to Americans and attractive to invaders, it does not have the force of law. We will never recognize or legitimize the pseudo legal status that the Obama administration is granting millions of illegal aliens. We do not have to recognize this move as legitimate because the US Constitution specifically states that immigration law is the purview of Congress and Congress has not changed the law.
Quitting the fight against illegal immigration is not an option, because if the globalists succeed in keeping millions of illegal aliens in America influencing American elections legitimately or via mass felonious election fraud, then all peaceful and political hopes of securing our borders and enforcing our immigration laws will go out the door forever. This final threshold which could be crossed soon is a point of no return.
Illegal immigration is a weapon being deployed by global players outside of the US to hit us with something that will knock us down and keep us down. It is the coup de grace, the final blow to demographically submerge America and all she has ever stood for once and for all. Do you believe you can turn away and leave the fight against illegal immigration? If so, picture in your mind America before sometime before the year 2040 when the next few waves of tens of millions of illegal aliens from gang rule third world areas adorn your town, neighborhood, and front lawn.
I'm not leaving this fight because one doesn't have to be a prophet to see the American nightmare forming right before our eyes. For those of you who are considering reducing your activism and donations, or stepping away from the battle, you need to pull yourselves together and get back on the walls! This fight is not over and you cannot surrender because the consequences of surrender are diabolical and deadly. Americans never give up; we never surrender.
How many times have we seen the tide turn unexpectedly over the last seven years that ALIPAC has been in this fight? How many of you remember in December of 2010 when the supporters of the Dream Act Amnesty had all their votes lined up to win in Washington and the final vote imminent in 48 hours? So many activists threw their hands up and said, "We are beaten! They have us now!" I remember it clearly, and I also remember reading the bill and spotting the mass Amnesty provision in it, which ALIPAC pointed out and used as a last minute strategy, reversing the course of the vote!
Remember how US Senator Lindsay Graham was seated solidly at the Amnesty table in 2010 rushing to pass it before the November elections. Graham and his buddy Senator Chuck Schumer, Janet Napolitano, and John McCain were going to make our election efforts in 2010 moot by taking over a small group of Republican senators to join with the Democrats to make Amnesty for millions of illegal aliens a fait accompli?
Then I hit Senator Graham in my Tea Party speech to 5,000 folks down in Greenville, South Carolina, and 8 days later Graham withdrew from the negotiating table and ran for his life. Since that speech and the resulting national firestorm and exposure, Senator Graham's poll numbers have plummeted so low he now has more support from Democrats than Republicans. He spends all his time trying to mend fences and save his political hide instead of pushing Amnesty along with his buddy John McCain.
I could go on and on about so many dramatic turns of events, from the way Arizona's SB 1070 suddenly caught the nation's attention to when the tragic murder of rancher Bob Krentz derailed a new Amnesty attempt in DC. Time and time again, this battle between patriotic Americans like us supporting the Constitution and defending American lives, security, jobs, and taxpayer resources from invasion and the globalist illegal alien invasion has ebbed and flowed.
While we can't always see the game changing things that are going to happen ahead of time, two things we need you all to be ready and ready to react to ALIPAC's calls for activism is if the Supreme Court rules in favor of Arizona's SB 1070 which would open the flood gates of like minded legislation in other states, hopefully yours.
Two other game changers are the continuing congressional investigations into the Fast and Furious Gunwalker scandal that keeps leading right back to the White House and Obama. You thought Richard Nixon was bad? At least he didn't arm illegal alien invaders with assault rifles and grenades bought with taxpayer monies as Obama clearly has. Obama may be indicted over these scandals and if he loses his reelection bid, we expect all of the court cases against our immigration enforcement legislation in South Carolina, Arizona, Oklahoma, and Utah to be dropped, clearing our way for more legislative success and more mass exodus of illegal aliens. Their departure has opened up jobs for Americans in these states already. An Obama loss in November would also hopefully put an end to the Department of Homeland Security's efforts to brand Conservative Americans as domestic terrorists.
Be ready for the game changers when they happen.
It is my strongest personal belief that this is not just a political battle, but a spiritual war between good and evil. Between those who are defending their homes and trying to conserve what is good about America and aggressive invaders who have overthrown our Republic and taken control of the Executive Branch to further their goals. If my spiritual beliefs offend anyone, then I have no regrets.
I've made it very clear that my mission is to unite Americans of every race, religion, and walk of life who represent the 80% of us who truly want our existing border and immigration laws enforced instead of any nation destroying Amnesty. I have done my best not to offend anyone and while I want to unify us and organize us, I must be open and honest about my belief that we are not getting out of this mess without God's intervention. Our fate is in His hands, and I believe seeking to do His will is essential to finding the motivation and inspiration needed to save America, God willing.
Let's all take time to pull ourselves together, consider the consequences of inaction or failure, say a few prayers for guidance, and get down to what needs to be done in 2012!
The ALIPAC 2.0 website is launched and growing in popularity each week as we make final adjustments and refinements.
It is now time to tell you more about some of the plans we have to bring victory in our fight to stop illegal immigration...
READ THE REST OF THIS EXCLUSIVE ARTICLE AND SHARE YOUR COMMENTS AT...
http://www.alipac.us/content/america...-invasion-102/
Showing posts with label Colorado Republican Party. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Colorado Republican Party. Show all posts
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Senate Preview 2010
See also
http://brianleesblog.blogspot.com/2008/11/should-conservatives-have-really-wanted.html and
http://brianleesblog.blogspot.com/2008/11/what-to-do-now-rebuilding-conservative.html
Senate Preview 2010
View
What links here
by Sean Oxendine
In light of Patrick’s earlier post on the importance of Senate recruiting, I thought it would be good to give a preliminary outlook of where things stand in the Senate. I’ve divided the Senate seats for 2010 up into three categories for each party: Seats that will be competitive no matter what, seats that could be competitive with the right national environment and/or recruiting effort, and seats that would require a major shift in the national environment to become competitive.
At first glance, the outlook is pretty grim for Republicans. Of the two competitive Senate seats for the Democrats, both probably at least slightly lean their way to start. For the Republicans, probably three of the four Senate seats for Republicans are at best 50-50. With the right combination of recruiting, retirements and national environment, this could easily get really bad, really quickly. Considering that at the beginning of this cycle only the open Colorado seat and maybe Oregon or Minnesota would be placed in the definitely competitive category, we see how important a role the environment and recruiting can play (indeed, without stellar recruiting by the DSCC of candidates who didn't intially want to run, AK, NH, NM, and VA might have had different outcomes). Similarly, in 2004, Senators Chafee, Allen, and DeWine, and potentially Talent, would have at best been in the “potentially competitive” category.
But it’s a double edged sword, and shows why you should ALWAYS recruit your best candidate to run. If Tim Roemer had run against Dick Lugar in 2006 – someone considered as unassailable at recruiting time as, well, Mike DeWine – he probably would have had at least a 50-50 chance at becoming a Senator. We just don’t know how the national environment will look two years from now, and that will greatly impact who is seen as vulnerable. The situation swung wildly from Democrats to Republicans to Democrats from 1992 to 1994 to 1996, and swung pretty decisively from 2004 to 2006. It isn’t impossible to imagine Bayh or Mikulski or even Obama’s replacement being vulnerable in 2008, provided we have the right recruits in place and are running in a favorable environment.
It’s also worth noting that the famed midterm election tendency, which finds that the President’s party always loses seats in the midterm election, simply doesn’t hold as well in the Senate. While there are only three exceptions since the Civil War in the House, there are a number of exceptions in the Senate since direct election of Senators commenced in the early 1900s, including 1962, 1970, 1982, 1998, and 2002. Therefore, we probably shouldn’t expect the “midterm tendency” to bail Republicans out.
So with that said, the ratings are below the fold.
Potentially Competitive R Seats
Arizona (John McCain) – If popular Governor Janet Napolitano runs against McCain, she would make for a very competitive race, and indeed has led in some polling. If she waits until 2012 to challenge Jon Kyl, he probably cruises. Much will depend on how the Obama Administration pans out.
Kansas (Brownback Retiring) – It’s hard to believe that Kansas is potentially competitive, given that the state has elected all of three Democrats in its history, and none since 1932. But the 800 pound gorilla in the room is popular Governor Kathleen Sebelius. If she can be persuaded to run – and if Obama doesn’t select her for Agriculture Secretary or some such – she’ll be difficult, though not impossible to beat. If she doesn’t run, this shouldn’t be particularly competitive. Congressman Jerry Moran is running on the Republican side.
Iowa (Chuck Grassley) – Grassley is in his late 70s and may retire, at which point you’d have to like the Dems’ odds in a state that has been trending their way in recent elections. Grassley is something of an icon, sports a 63% approval rating, and would have to be the favorite if he runs for re-election.
Missouri (Kit Bond) – Every six years the Democrats say that they will take out Kit Bond, and every six years he’s re-elected with a votes share somewhere in the low-to-mid 50s. Maybe lightning will strike this time, as Bond is below 45% in tests against various political figures. Then again, those figures are already known statewide (Dick Gephardt, Robin Carnahan), so if Bond were really destined to lose, you'd expect them to perform much better. More importantly, none have declared.
New Hampshire (Judd Gregg) – The temptation is to say “here we go again” after John Sununu lost, but Sununu lost to a figure with about as good a brand as there is in the Granite State. Obviously if popular Governor John Lynch runs this would be a real headache for Gregg, but other than Lynch, there isn’t anyone nearly as formidable as Shaheen.
Oklahoma (Tom Coburn) – I guess if Governor Henry challenged Coburn it could be competitive, but in Obama’s worst state nationwide, I just think the odds against it are awfully high. That said, Henry’s approval rating is substantially above Coburn’s, and his term is up in 2010.
Pennsylvania (Arlen Specter) – To be honest, I just don’t see Chris Mathews posing that big of a threat to Senator Specter. If it were Minnesota, it would be a different story altogether. But we’ll see. Any number of young Democratic Congresscritters might be eying a promotion.
South Dakota (John Thune) – If Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin ran, it would at least be competitive. But word is she has her sights set on the Governor’s office.
Likely Competitive R Seats
Florida (Mel Martinez) – Given that Martinez is pulling in between 31 and 37 percent of the vote in recent ballot tests, it is difficult to see how he wins re-election in this purplish-red state. Two years is a long time, but we’ve got a lot of work to do here.
Kentucky (Jim Bunning) – Bunning barely scraped by against unknown State Senator Dan Mongiardo in 2004. He’ll have a heckuva time holding this seat against likely opponent Ben Chandler in 2010, without Presidential coattails to support him. The 40-44 approval rating isn’t great news for him, but McConnell just won re-election with a similarly upside-down approval rating (but Bunning is no McConnell).
North Carolina (Richard Burr) – After seeing what happened to Elizabeth Dole, who lost to a relative no-name by a margin much greater than Obama was carrying the state, one has to think Burr, who has generally sported similar approval ratings, is in real trouble. Expect Burr to spend a lot of time in this state, defending a seat that has switched between Republicans and Democrats in every election since 1974.
Ohio (George Voinovich) – Two words: Mike DeWine. Voinovich’s approval rating is above 50%, which is better than DeWine can say, and he won’t have the Bush albatross to the same extent that DeWine had. But Ohio Democrats are on a roll, and Voinovich is having trouble getting above 40% in ballot tests.
Not Competitive at this time R Seats
Alabama (Richard Shelby) – unless the 74-year-old Shelby retires or commits an unforgivable gaffe (see Allen, George), its hard to see him going down to defeat.
Alaska (Lisa Murkowski) – If the last couple of cycles have shown anything, it is how difficult it is for a Democrat to win in Alaska. In 2004 and 2006 Democrats have had high hopes of stealing a statewide office from Republicans, only to have them dashed. Unless Murkowski becomes a convicted felon, she should be safe, and even then it appears it would be a 50-50 proposition.
Georgia (Johnny Isakson) – Obviously anything can happen (see Chambliss, Saxby), but it is pretty difficult to imagine Isakson falling below 50%, especially without Obama at the top of the ballot.
Idaho (Mike Crapo) – Assuming he avoids airport bathroom stalls, he should be handily re-elected.
Louisiana (David Vitter) – Yes I know about the hooker. I also know about the 67% approval rating he was sporting in the wake of the scandal (and 55% in July of this year). Given the thin Democratic bench and, um, demographic shift, I don’t see this going anywhere.
South Carolina (Jim DeMint) – Nothing for Democrats here.
Utah (Bob Bennett) – Nah.
Potentially Competitive D Seats
Arkansas (Blanche Lincoln) – Its pretty amazing that the state that was one of John McCain’s strongest states has elected all of one Republican Senator since Reconstruction, but for historic reasons there is no Republican Party here to speak of. Lincoln is one of those Senators who is probably rooting for Norm Coleman and Saxby Chambliss, because she doesn’t want to be tagged as the deciding vote for every piece of controversial legislation that goes through the Senate. Against a no-name opponent she garnered 56% of the vote in 2004; depending on how the Obama administration and Republican recruiting fare, it could get worse for her this year. But given that the GOP failed to mount a challenge to Senator Mark Pryor this year, this could go either way.
California (Barbara Boxer) – Even though California is a very blue state, you have to consider any Senator with an approval rating below 50% to be potentially vulnerable. That’d be Barbara Boxer, a.k.a. Dianne Feinstein’s consistently less popular Senate counterpart. A lot will depend on recruiting here, but I wouldn't really hold my breath.
Connecticut (Chris Dodd) – I struggled mightily with this one. After all, Connecticut is a solidly blue state, and the GOP’s best shot, Governor Jodi Rell, is likely not running. But it is hard to ignore the Countrywide scandal hovering over his head, and it is likewise hard to ignore his upside-down 43-46 approval rating. If the GOP can find a credible candidate – no small task – it could make a race out of this.
Hawai’i (Daniel Inouye) – Inouye has been involved in Hawai’i politics since statehood; it is no exaggeration to say he is a legend. The only reason this is listed as potentially competitive is that he is 86 years old at this time, and Republicans have a potentially credible candidate in Governor Linda Lingle. It’s hard to see Lingle taking on Inouye – she’d likely wait until 2012 to take on the less popular Daniel Akaka (who will be 90), but if Inouye retires or if his health fails, she could make a race of this.
North Dakota (Byron Dorgan) – John Hoeven, John Hoeven, John Hoeven. If Hoeven runs, this race would be something of the irresistible force hitting the immovable object. I can’t find a recent poll for Senator Dorgan, but last time it was measured (2006), it was 75-21 (and hovered around 70 for most of the year. But Hoeven’s is even higher, at 86-10, and he was last elected with a 74-24 advantage over his Democratic opponent. If we can convince Hoeven to run, this will be our best chance to defeat a Senate Democrat for the first time since 2004. No, that’s not a typo. Then we’d just have to get Ed Schaefer to run against Kent Conrad in 2012.
Washington (Patty Murray) – The original “mom in tennis shoes” has been in the Senate for three unimpressive terms. With the Bush Administration behind us, it might be possible for a candidate like Dino Rossi or Mike McGavick to knock her off. Still, her approval rating (for now) is at 55%, so it would be no small feat.
Wisconsin (Russ Feingold) – This is another one I debated, but given that Feingold couldn’t get above 55% of the vote against a weak candidate in 2004, and sports a tepid 53-45 approval rating, I can't say that this is in the bag for him. Paul Ryan would be a nice recruit here.
Likely Competitive D Seats
Colorado (Ken Salazar) – While Colorado has lurched to the left of late, I believe that a large part of that is due to the state’s visceral reaction to the Bush Administration. Salazar would likely be vulnerable regardless of who was President, since the most recent Democratic polling has him under 50%, with an approval rating under 40% (and a similar disapproval rating). Liberals may primary him as well. Either way, this will likely have some degree of competitiveness, regardless of recruiting efforts.
Nevada (Harry Reid) – Harry Reid dodged something of a bullet with Jon Porter’s defeat in 2010. Still, there are statewide Republicans who may challenge him, including Lt. Gov. Brian Krolicki. Reid’s approval rating hasn’t been measured recently, but last time it was tested, it was a horrendous 32-51 split. As the face of Senate Democrats, he has a tight rope to walk in a state that has hewed close to the national average in recent elections.
Not Competitive At This Time D Seats
Delaware (Joe Biden’s Successor) – Delaware isn’t a particularly competitive state for Republicans, and they have a very, very thin bench here. It would take a recruiting coup and a major blunder by the appointee to make this competitive at this time.
Illinois (Barack Obama’s Successor) – This is better for the GOP than Delaware, but not by a lot. The only difference is the GOP has some credible candidates, but unless Blagojevich picks himself and/or the Obama Administration tanks, neither of which is impossible, this is simply a very tough state.
Indiana (Evan Bayh) – Again, being the deciding vote on cloture on a number of measures isn’t really what he wants, but it is hard to imagine him tanking so badly that he loses. Some people say that Bayh may retire but that seems extremely unlikely to me, as he’d have to get a real job.
Maryland (Barb Mikulski) – Unless Gov. Ehrlich runs and the economy collapses (even more), it is just hard to see Mikulski retiring (although she is 74) or losing. She hasn’t fallen below 60% of the vote in any race since her unsuccessful Senate bid in 1974.
New York (Chuck Schumer) – Senators with 60% approval ratings don’t lose unless they are in states with heavy bases for the other party. That ain’t New York.
Oregon (Ron Wyden) – Maybe Wyden will retire, but the bench is thin and we just lost a strong Senate candidate to a fairly weak candidate. Wyden’s approval rating isn’t anything to write home about – about 54-34 – but it should do the trick.
Vermont (Patrick Leahy) – It’s amazing to think that Patrick Leahy is only 70 years old, given that he’s been in the Senate since I was in diapers. It’s also amazing to think that his initial win was regarded as a fluke in a state that had never elected a Democrat to the Senate. Anyway, if Jim Douglas ran this seat might be competitive, but more likely it would end up the way it ended up in 1992, when Douglas lost to Leahy by ten points.
http://www.thenextright.com/sean-oxendine/senate-preview-2010
http://brianleesblog.blogspot.com/2008/11/should-conservatives-have-really-wanted.html and
http://brianleesblog.blogspot.com/2008/11/what-to-do-now-rebuilding-conservative.html
Senate Preview 2010
View
What links here
by Sean Oxendine
In light of Patrick’s earlier post on the importance of Senate recruiting, I thought it would be good to give a preliminary outlook of where things stand in the Senate. I’ve divided the Senate seats for 2010 up into three categories for each party: Seats that will be competitive no matter what, seats that could be competitive with the right national environment and/or recruiting effort, and seats that would require a major shift in the national environment to become competitive.
At first glance, the outlook is pretty grim for Republicans. Of the two competitive Senate seats for the Democrats, both probably at least slightly lean their way to start. For the Republicans, probably three of the four Senate seats for Republicans are at best 50-50. With the right combination of recruiting, retirements and national environment, this could easily get really bad, really quickly. Considering that at the beginning of this cycle only the open Colorado seat and maybe Oregon or Minnesota would be placed in the definitely competitive category, we see how important a role the environment and recruiting can play (indeed, without stellar recruiting by the DSCC of candidates who didn't intially want to run, AK, NH, NM, and VA might have had different outcomes). Similarly, in 2004, Senators Chafee, Allen, and DeWine, and potentially Talent, would have at best been in the “potentially competitive” category.
But it’s a double edged sword, and shows why you should ALWAYS recruit your best candidate to run. If Tim Roemer had run against Dick Lugar in 2006 – someone considered as unassailable at recruiting time as, well, Mike DeWine – he probably would have had at least a 50-50 chance at becoming a Senator. We just don’t know how the national environment will look two years from now, and that will greatly impact who is seen as vulnerable. The situation swung wildly from Democrats to Republicans to Democrats from 1992 to 1994 to 1996, and swung pretty decisively from 2004 to 2006. It isn’t impossible to imagine Bayh or Mikulski or even Obama’s replacement being vulnerable in 2008, provided we have the right recruits in place and are running in a favorable environment.
It’s also worth noting that the famed midterm election tendency, which finds that the President’s party always loses seats in the midterm election, simply doesn’t hold as well in the Senate. While there are only three exceptions since the Civil War in the House, there are a number of exceptions in the Senate since direct election of Senators commenced in the early 1900s, including 1962, 1970, 1982, 1998, and 2002. Therefore, we probably shouldn’t expect the “midterm tendency” to bail Republicans out.
So with that said, the ratings are below the fold.
Potentially Competitive R Seats
Arizona (John McCain) – If popular Governor Janet Napolitano runs against McCain, she would make for a very competitive race, and indeed has led in some polling. If she waits until 2012 to challenge Jon Kyl, he probably cruises. Much will depend on how the Obama Administration pans out.
Kansas (Brownback Retiring) – It’s hard to believe that Kansas is potentially competitive, given that the state has elected all of three Democrats in its history, and none since 1932. But the 800 pound gorilla in the room is popular Governor Kathleen Sebelius. If she can be persuaded to run – and if Obama doesn’t select her for Agriculture Secretary or some such – she’ll be difficult, though not impossible to beat. If she doesn’t run, this shouldn’t be particularly competitive. Congressman Jerry Moran is running on the Republican side.
Iowa (Chuck Grassley) – Grassley is in his late 70s and may retire, at which point you’d have to like the Dems’ odds in a state that has been trending their way in recent elections. Grassley is something of an icon, sports a 63% approval rating, and would have to be the favorite if he runs for re-election.
Missouri (Kit Bond) – Every six years the Democrats say that they will take out Kit Bond, and every six years he’s re-elected with a votes share somewhere in the low-to-mid 50s. Maybe lightning will strike this time, as Bond is below 45% in tests against various political figures. Then again, those figures are already known statewide (Dick Gephardt, Robin Carnahan), so if Bond were really destined to lose, you'd expect them to perform much better. More importantly, none have declared.
New Hampshire (Judd Gregg) – The temptation is to say “here we go again” after John Sununu lost, but Sununu lost to a figure with about as good a brand as there is in the Granite State. Obviously if popular Governor John Lynch runs this would be a real headache for Gregg, but other than Lynch, there isn’t anyone nearly as formidable as Shaheen.
Oklahoma (Tom Coburn) – I guess if Governor Henry challenged Coburn it could be competitive, but in Obama’s worst state nationwide, I just think the odds against it are awfully high. That said, Henry’s approval rating is substantially above Coburn’s, and his term is up in 2010.
Pennsylvania (Arlen Specter) – To be honest, I just don’t see Chris Mathews posing that big of a threat to Senator Specter. If it were Minnesota, it would be a different story altogether. But we’ll see. Any number of young Democratic Congresscritters might be eying a promotion.
South Dakota (John Thune) – If Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin ran, it would at least be competitive. But word is she has her sights set on the Governor’s office.
Likely Competitive R Seats
Florida (Mel Martinez) – Given that Martinez is pulling in between 31 and 37 percent of the vote in recent ballot tests, it is difficult to see how he wins re-election in this purplish-red state. Two years is a long time, but we’ve got a lot of work to do here.
Kentucky (Jim Bunning) – Bunning barely scraped by against unknown State Senator Dan Mongiardo in 2004. He’ll have a heckuva time holding this seat against likely opponent Ben Chandler in 2010, without Presidential coattails to support him. The 40-44 approval rating isn’t great news for him, but McConnell just won re-election with a similarly upside-down approval rating (but Bunning is no McConnell).
North Carolina (Richard Burr) – After seeing what happened to Elizabeth Dole, who lost to a relative no-name by a margin much greater than Obama was carrying the state, one has to think Burr, who has generally sported similar approval ratings, is in real trouble. Expect Burr to spend a lot of time in this state, defending a seat that has switched between Republicans and Democrats in every election since 1974.
Ohio (George Voinovich) – Two words: Mike DeWine. Voinovich’s approval rating is above 50%, which is better than DeWine can say, and he won’t have the Bush albatross to the same extent that DeWine had. But Ohio Democrats are on a roll, and Voinovich is having trouble getting above 40% in ballot tests.
Not Competitive at this time R Seats
Alabama (Richard Shelby) – unless the 74-year-old Shelby retires or commits an unforgivable gaffe (see Allen, George), its hard to see him going down to defeat.
Alaska (Lisa Murkowski) – If the last couple of cycles have shown anything, it is how difficult it is for a Democrat to win in Alaska. In 2004 and 2006 Democrats have had high hopes of stealing a statewide office from Republicans, only to have them dashed. Unless Murkowski becomes a convicted felon, she should be safe, and even then it appears it would be a 50-50 proposition.
Georgia (Johnny Isakson) – Obviously anything can happen (see Chambliss, Saxby), but it is pretty difficult to imagine Isakson falling below 50%, especially without Obama at the top of the ballot.
Idaho (Mike Crapo) – Assuming he avoids airport bathroom stalls, he should be handily re-elected.
Louisiana (David Vitter) – Yes I know about the hooker. I also know about the 67% approval rating he was sporting in the wake of the scandal (and 55% in July of this year). Given the thin Democratic bench and, um, demographic shift, I don’t see this going anywhere.
South Carolina (Jim DeMint) – Nothing for Democrats here.
Utah (Bob Bennett) – Nah.
Potentially Competitive D Seats
Arkansas (Blanche Lincoln) – Its pretty amazing that the state that was one of John McCain’s strongest states has elected all of one Republican Senator since Reconstruction, but for historic reasons there is no Republican Party here to speak of. Lincoln is one of those Senators who is probably rooting for Norm Coleman and Saxby Chambliss, because she doesn’t want to be tagged as the deciding vote for every piece of controversial legislation that goes through the Senate. Against a no-name opponent she garnered 56% of the vote in 2004; depending on how the Obama administration and Republican recruiting fare, it could get worse for her this year. But given that the GOP failed to mount a challenge to Senator Mark Pryor this year, this could go either way.
California (Barbara Boxer) – Even though California is a very blue state, you have to consider any Senator with an approval rating below 50% to be potentially vulnerable. That’d be Barbara Boxer, a.k.a. Dianne Feinstein’s consistently less popular Senate counterpart. A lot will depend on recruiting here, but I wouldn't really hold my breath.
Connecticut (Chris Dodd) – I struggled mightily with this one. After all, Connecticut is a solidly blue state, and the GOP’s best shot, Governor Jodi Rell, is likely not running. But it is hard to ignore the Countrywide scandal hovering over his head, and it is likewise hard to ignore his upside-down 43-46 approval rating. If the GOP can find a credible candidate – no small task – it could make a race out of this.
Hawai’i (Daniel Inouye) – Inouye has been involved in Hawai’i politics since statehood; it is no exaggeration to say he is a legend. The only reason this is listed as potentially competitive is that he is 86 years old at this time, and Republicans have a potentially credible candidate in Governor Linda Lingle. It’s hard to see Lingle taking on Inouye – she’d likely wait until 2012 to take on the less popular Daniel Akaka (who will be 90), but if Inouye retires or if his health fails, she could make a race of this.
North Dakota (Byron Dorgan) – John Hoeven, John Hoeven, John Hoeven. If Hoeven runs, this race would be something of the irresistible force hitting the immovable object. I can’t find a recent poll for Senator Dorgan, but last time it was measured (2006), it was 75-21 (and hovered around 70 for most of the year. But Hoeven’s is even higher, at 86-10, and he was last elected with a 74-24 advantage over his Democratic opponent. If we can convince Hoeven to run, this will be our best chance to defeat a Senate Democrat for the first time since 2004. No, that’s not a typo. Then we’d just have to get Ed Schaefer to run against Kent Conrad in 2012.
Washington (Patty Murray) – The original “mom in tennis shoes” has been in the Senate for three unimpressive terms. With the Bush Administration behind us, it might be possible for a candidate like Dino Rossi or Mike McGavick to knock her off. Still, her approval rating (for now) is at 55%, so it would be no small feat.
Wisconsin (Russ Feingold) – This is another one I debated, but given that Feingold couldn’t get above 55% of the vote against a weak candidate in 2004, and sports a tepid 53-45 approval rating, I can't say that this is in the bag for him. Paul Ryan would be a nice recruit here.
Likely Competitive D Seats
Colorado (Ken Salazar) – While Colorado has lurched to the left of late, I believe that a large part of that is due to the state’s visceral reaction to the Bush Administration. Salazar would likely be vulnerable regardless of who was President, since the most recent Democratic polling has him under 50%, with an approval rating under 40% (and a similar disapproval rating). Liberals may primary him as well. Either way, this will likely have some degree of competitiveness, regardless of recruiting efforts.
Nevada (Harry Reid) – Harry Reid dodged something of a bullet with Jon Porter’s defeat in 2010. Still, there are statewide Republicans who may challenge him, including Lt. Gov. Brian Krolicki. Reid’s approval rating hasn’t been measured recently, but last time it was tested, it was a horrendous 32-51 split. As the face of Senate Democrats, he has a tight rope to walk in a state that has hewed close to the national average in recent elections.
Not Competitive At This Time D Seats
Delaware (Joe Biden’s Successor) – Delaware isn’t a particularly competitive state for Republicans, and they have a very, very thin bench here. It would take a recruiting coup and a major blunder by the appointee to make this competitive at this time.
Illinois (Barack Obama’s Successor) – This is better for the GOP than Delaware, but not by a lot. The only difference is the GOP has some credible candidates, but unless Blagojevich picks himself and/or the Obama Administration tanks, neither of which is impossible, this is simply a very tough state.
Indiana (Evan Bayh) – Again, being the deciding vote on cloture on a number of measures isn’t really what he wants, but it is hard to imagine him tanking so badly that he loses. Some people say that Bayh may retire but that seems extremely unlikely to me, as he’d have to get a real job.
Maryland (Barb Mikulski) – Unless Gov. Ehrlich runs and the economy collapses (even more), it is just hard to see Mikulski retiring (although she is 74) or losing. She hasn’t fallen below 60% of the vote in any race since her unsuccessful Senate bid in 1974.
New York (Chuck Schumer) – Senators with 60% approval ratings don’t lose unless they are in states with heavy bases for the other party. That ain’t New York.
Oregon (Ron Wyden) – Maybe Wyden will retire, but the bench is thin and we just lost a strong Senate candidate to a fairly weak candidate. Wyden’s approval rating isn’t anything to write home about – about 54-34 – but it should do the trick.
Vermont (Patrick Leahy) – It’s amazing to think that Patrick Leahy is only 70 years old, given that he’s been in the Senate since I was in diapers. It’s also amazing to think that his initial win was regarded as a fluke in a state that had never elected a Democrat to the Senate. Anyway, if Jim Douglas ran this seat might be competitive, but more likely it would end up the way it ended up in 1992, when Douglas lost to Leahy by ten points.
http://www.thenextright.com/sean-oxendine/senate-preview-2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
