Replies

Corrections:

There is no Democrat in Pennsylvania who can take on Santorum. He will clobber whoever runs against him in 2004.

Please don't buy the liberal bias that Pennsylvania is Democrat-friendly. We are not, and the General Assembly is evidence of the fact.

Judd Gregg is a very popular New Hampshire politician who will breeze over any Democrat. Guys, Republicans picked up seats in the New Hampshire House and Senate, extending our already 2-1 lead in one body. We're back to the early 20th century in New Hampshire.

Bennett, Bond, Brownback, Crapo, Grassley, Gregg, McCain, Nickles, Shelby, Specter, and Voinovich are shoo-ins.

We might have possible problems with Bunning, Campbell, Fitzgerald, and the Alaska seat.

Even then, who can beat Bunning now that Patton is gone? Who can beat Campbell now that we've proven Colorado is solid GOP territory? Who can win Alaska? It was supposed to lean Democrat. Fitzgerald is our only vulnerable seat.

In contrast, those Democrats seats provide a lot of opportunities where we do very well-Nevada, Georgia, North Carolina, South Dakota, North Dakota, and South Carolina.

Say, Yucca Mountain really did cause a Bush backlash, didn't it? I think the GOP swept every statewide position.

Any thoughts on Louisiana this year and in 2004?

Landreau is toast. We're going to win it if we let Terrell show us the way and have G.W. pay her a visit just before the election just like he did for all the others.

Breaux will remain loyal to the Dem's and make deals with the Bush Brigade to assure his re-election in the state as a Dem. The only way I can see that changing is if Daschle and Company push Breaux over the edge from within their caucus.

Tommy boy has probably ticked Breaux off already though. So I'll bet he'll be receiving the special "Kidd Glove" treatment.

Who can beat Campbell now that we've proven Colorado is solid GOP territory? Who can win Alaska? It was supposed to lean Democrat.

Current Alaska governor Tony Knowles has been rumored to have interest in a Senate run. Fran Ulmer is another possibility. Whomever Murkowski appoints as his Senate successor will have lower name ID than either of those two potential candidates. I expect this to be a very competitive race.

There have also been rumors that Ben Nighthorse Campbell may retire and not seek reelection in CO. Governor Bill Owens has been rumored to have possible interest if that happens; otherwise, it becomes a competitive open seat race.

If Campbell decides to run again in Colorado he will be a slam dunk (he won with over 60% of the vote in '98). If Campbell steps down, its hard not to see Owens running for the spot and of course he was just re-elected with 63% of the vote.

I wondered about Arnold running for Senate instead of Gov. I'm not sure if that would interest him or not but I suspect he would stand a good chance of winning and the press would love to have him elected just for the ratings alone.

The best place to look for strong candidates who might run against the GOP incumbent would be states with popular Democratic governors. Of course a lot will change in 2 years, hopefully to the betterment of the GOP.

Santorum isn't running. Specter is, and there is a very good chance that he retires instead of running again. I have it on very good info that fiscal conservative Rep. Pat Toomey from the Allentown area, congressional district-15 will seek this seat if Specter retires.

The addition of Toomey to the Senate would be such an unbelievable great turn of events for Republicans it's difficult to put it into words.

He is one of the very few elected officials who stands up for Social Security reform despite it being the "untouchable" 3rd rail of modern politics.

Here's my ridiculously early prediction: Bunning will have no viable opponent, now that the dem KY gov (his expected opponent) and lieut gov will probably be in jail by 2004. Maybe a rematch with Baesler, but that's doubtful, and Bunning can win that anyway. Campbell will win in a landslide, maybe with more than 60%. Gregg may even go unopposed. You're also right about the Alaska seat, but we'll have to see who Murkowski appoints.

Remember: there's also a big six-year itch for 2004. Fitzgerald was the big anomaly in 1998, knocking off Mosely-Braun with 49%, but even he isn't definitely toast. Who's going to knock him off? But for the rest (Edwards, Lincoln, Feingold, Murray, Boxer--Condy Rice, anyone?; Hollings and Miller will retire; Schumer if and only if Giuliani runs), it could be payback time if the economy is smoking in 2004.

If that happens, and no top-notch dem wants to be the sacrificial lamb, it could be a Mondale-Ferraro (maybe Kerry-someone) scenario all over again, and we could win REALLY, REALLY big.

Governorships will also be up for grabs in NC, IN, WV, KY, MO. We'll already have MS next year. It could turn into a rout. Just to save themselves, the dems may beg Gore to go under the knife. And it may not help, either.

Again, it's all going to depend on how Bush does, particularly with putting conservative economic principles into action--cap gains and dividend tax elimination, soc. sec. reform, opening ANWR, downsizing the govt through retirements, and at least one controversial elimination of a whole department.

I expected us to gain in the Senate as early as May 2001, but just remember: anything can happen. I worry most about a disastrous war scenario in which Saddam nukes our troops.