Posted on 02/27/2014 9:29:16 AM PST by Hojczyk
I think there are 9 now that lean in our favor at least by a little. SD, WV, MT, AR, AK, LA, NC, CO, MI. We SHOULD win those, doesn’t mean we will get them all but it looks good on paper right now. CO and MI are the trickiest, the rest are Republican states.
Beyond them, not much. The Iowa race leans rat due to second tier GOP candidates, I don’t know which one to back. After that I consider the rest longshots.
NH is supposedly in play if Scott Brown. As I’ve said before I don’t like that for several reasons. He would have won the recent special election from MA and had a good chance at winning a full term this year before getting booted out in 2020. An in MA he’s acceptable, he compares favorably to say Mark Kirk who’s from a state not as liberal as MA. Theoretically we can do better in NH. At least Judd Gregg/Ayotte level.
But since the NH GOP is so pathetic they can’t find a meaningful candidate from their own state are reduced to BEGGING him to run, I won’t object. The amount of time he’s been dickering though, I doubt he’ll enter the race. If he enters put it with Iowa.
Virginia, I’m glad we’re running a somebody but it’s not really competitive right now. The potential exists but I wouldn’t expect it. Hewitt ranks these in order and has Virginia in 6th place ahead of Alaska, MONTANA ( which is top 3 or 4), Colorado and Louisiana (and Iowa which is only lean rat). That’s flat out retarded Hugh, sorry.
Minnesota, Frankenberry sucks, even say a T-Paw would beat him or Coleman but these 2nd tier candidates don’t inspire confidence.
“A lot of freepers says Kurt Bills was a disaster, and he did get crushed in the November election. But honestly, looking back on it, I don’t see how anyone else could have been an improvement. “
He did HISTORICALLY bad for a MN Senate race. Given that, I would have preferred anyone else. Paulbots are losers, period. Voters don’t like them. If McFadden is a lib, forget him. Jim Abeler is Paulbot like Bills I think. State Senator Julianne Ortman looks like the best bet to me if indeed McFadden can’t be trusted (and I wouldn’t be inclined to trust him).
Oregon, not often mentioned even as we discuss the lower chance races. It’s a ratish state but not out of range. Potential if a candidate does a good job. There appears to be 3 serious candidates to my eye. This doctor (Monica Wehby) that Hewitt mentions, State Rep. Jason Conger and former Linn County GOP Chair Jo Rae Perkins.
Not mentioned, New Mexico. Chances there aren’t much worse than Oregon I’d say. Former State GOP. Chair Allen Weh is running against the other Udall.
Illinois, not on Hugh’s list nor should it be. No one knows much about Truax. He’s not “pro-life enough” Phil? Well he never called pro-lifers the AMERICAN TALIBAN like Oberweis did in 2002, did he?
Bottom line, perennial candidate Oberdouche has a zero percent chance at winning. I don’t care if anyone thinks he’s more conservative than Truax on paper. And frankly I would question that assertion. He’s good at throwing red meat, that doesn’t mean he’d back it up. He’s “held an office” for all of a year after losing several races. Now he’s using that lone victory in a safe seat State Senate race as a stepping stone at the first opportunity, pathetic. The only opponent he was effective against was a conservative Republican State Senator whom he SLANDERED in a congressional special election primary. He then lost the GE, (Hastert’s seat, humiliating the party) and got his a$s handed to him in the November rematch.
To reiterate, he cannot win because he’s a lousy failure of a candidate. I’d give Truax at least a 1% chance. 1>0. That’s it.
for all of a year after losing several races. Now he
If you haven’t already, read my Post #54. It’s regarding the Minnesota Senate race.
I’m not a mcFadden fan at all. This is a guy who, since announcing his candidacy, skips GOP candidate debates and has a track record of ignoring inquiries from GOP activists.
Late last summer, I got a letter from him. he talked about his candidacy and asked for money. I thought “OK, this looks good.” I e-mailed and asked for extra info about him and what he stood for. His website was really lacking.
Now I didn’t really expect nor want detailed explanations of all of his policy positions - just a little more color as to what he stood for.
Never got a reply. I guess other GOP activists have had the same problem.
The only redeeming quality about him is that he is self-funding and actually has raised very respectable cash. But sometimes those are the most dangerous candidates. They’re a mile wide and an inch deep. I fear that is what McFadden is.
“The Iowa race leans rat due to second tier GOP candidates, I don’t know which one to back.”
Sam Clovis is the conservative choice. Ernst may be acceptable to some degree.
Do not trust McFadden. The guy is total slime. He’ll be worse than Kelly Ayotte.
Yeah, back Truax in Illinois. Its thebe st we’ve got and Oberweiss is a Tommy Thompson waiting to happen. Who knows, perhaps Democrats in Chicago are sick of getting shot. In a wave, Truax might pull out one of those chance victories.
Yeah, I'd hardly consider "held an office" to be an advantage in this race when he's literally only held it for a few months before seeking another one (even Phil admitted Oberweis should have waited longer), and he's won a whopping 1 out of 6 times he's sought elective office, including losing twice in a "safe" Republican district that went Republican before AND after he was the nominee (Hastert's seat)
Also, since he's now "held an office", he can no longer run on the "outsider" and "not a politician" and "untainted principled conservative" stuff he did in the past, like Adam Andrejewski and Milton Wolf have done to woo voters.
Now that Oberweis is a State Senator, he has a track record, and not all of it is good. For example, Truax is running to the right of Oberweis on pension reform. Oberweis was one of the GOP Senators who caved and voted with Madigan on the phony pension "reform" bill that just kicked the can down the road so it wouldn't hurt the Dems this election cycle:
http://voices.suntimes.com/import/chicago/truax-attacks-oberweis-on-pension-vote/
And ironically, for all the fire-breathing Oberweis did in 2004 to establish himself as a "hard liner" on immigration, it looks like Truax is to his RIGHT on this issue. Oberweis says he would be OKAY with an immigration "reform" bill that granted visas for illegals to stay in the U.S. as long as it didn't provide a "path to citizenship" for them, while Truax flat out opposes ANY "immigration reform" bill dealing with illegals already here until border security is resolved.
Bottom line: not only does Truax have less baggage and a better shot at defeating Durbin, I also think he's more conservative and would make a better Senator.
Republicans will gain U.S. Senate seats in IA, LA, NC, SD, MT, and AK.
Yes, Doug Truax ever called pro-lifers the AMERICAN TALIBAN. Since Oberweis is a state senator, he’ll win that primary. In Nov., Durbin will get 65%.
Unfortunately I think Phil's prediction of the U.S. Senate race in Illinois is pretty accurate. (I will add that after Durbin gets 65%, Oberweis' fan club will blame everyone BUT Oberweis' campaign for the result, and gear up to run him again in 2016)
I hope Phil's prediction on the other Senate races is true though. That would be some pretty sweet victories after we've taken no more than 2 seats from the RATs every election cycle. :-)
“Yes, Doug Truax ever called pro-lifers the AMERICAN TALIBAN.”
Never. Yes. And Oberdouche did.
It’s curious why you want him to win the primary even though you know he’s gonna badly lose.
Would badly lose, in November that is.
I hope Sen. Oberweis will win the primary because, in Nov., he’ll get a higher percentage than Truax would get.
We were a bit disappointed when he weakened during the shutdown, and I worry about anyone coming out of Weld county in regards to immigration stance.
I disagree. Oberweis has a very high unfavorable rating with Illinois voters, there is a large chunk of voters who dislike him and won't vote for him under any circumstances. Truax is a blank slate so he could sway more voters to support him.
I agree that Truax is a blank slate, and that’s his problem. Since few people know about him, few people will vote for him, in Nov.
Why would someone vote for Republicans? They abandoned or lost social issues. They abandoned or lost fiscal issues. They support ACA and amnesty. They are pretty open about hating conservatives now.
If McConnell is the majority leader, I predict the will impeach Cruz. Somehow he will be removed from office.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.