Republicans seen retaining control of Senate

Washington Times ^ | Wednesday, April 28, 2004 | By Donald Lambro

[JohnHuang2]

Democrats have some new opportunities to pick up Senate seats this year, but the Republicans still are favored to make net gains in the South, where President Bush and his party draw their strongest support.

Entering 2004, Republicans appeared to have a slam-dunk shot at strengthening their tenuous 51-seat hold on the Senate with a bonanza of five open Democratic seats in Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, North Carolina and South Carolina. But their lopsided Southern advantage has been offset to some degree by unexpected Republican retirements in Colorado and Oklahoma that have enlarged the Democrats' targeted-for-takeover list.

[TheBigB]

Hope this is right, John. Bush will need to have some coattails to help Murkowski in AK (assuming she wins the primary) and Coors in CO (ditto).

[wingster]

I certainly hope so. I was hoping for a significant gain.

[Jerr]

I am very sorry, but what has been accomplished with the majority control that we have had?

If they are not going to fight the Democrats for what they believe, does it matter if they are in the majority or not?

I really do care, but I want the Republican majority to start acting like a Republican MAJORITY. Time to get off of the stick and back in the game.

[Sareln]

You also have to remember that most polls are useless for reality, I mean, depending on the integrity of the pollster, the numbers can be manipulated to show just about anything, or depending upon the people you ask, you may not get a truly equal slice of the demographic of likely voters either.

[JohnHuang2]

Hope this is right, John.

If I were to guess, I say we pick up seats. Stay tuned :-)

[MNJohnnie]

I am very sorry, but what has been accomplished with the majority control that we have had?


A 1 seat majority for 18 months. Keep that in mind. Keep also in mind the fact that the Democrats have pulled out ALL the stops on obstructionism. Yes, I would like to see the Republican Senate be more combative but we need a majority Bush victory in Nov. before that will happen. Right now the Democrats have the fig leaf of claiming "Bush's 2000 victory was given to him by the Supreme Court" If Bush wins convincingly in Nov, he will probably tip a few close races to the Republicans. The problem we have right now in the Senate is their antiquated rules make it really tough to beat down a hell bent on doing nothing minority party!

[A Jovial Cad]

*But their lopsided Southern advantage has been offset to some degree by unexpected Republican retirements in Colorado and Oklahoma that have enlarged the Democrats' targeted-for-takeover list*

Can't speak for Colorado, but the Dims are dreaming if they think Oklahoma is a "toss-up." True, the current Dim Attorney General in OK is apparently trying to clear the way for the party-annointed Dim Brad Carson by having a Grand Jury indict one of his strongest Dim primary challengers on what can only be described as dubious charges, but that's going to make little difference.
The biggest factor will be the fact that there is going to be a ballot measure in November that, if passed, will outlaw gay marriage in the Sooner state. This is widely, and correctly, viewed as being a measure that will swell the number of GOP and traditional evangelical voters visiting the polls, and while they're there most of them will take the time to vote for the Republican candidate on the ballot. The OK Dim leadership was so worried about that, in fact, that they had disgraced former Gov. David Walters (Dim) make automated phone calls to registered Dims across the state urging them to call the state Capitol to ask that the legislators keep the gay-marriage initiative (banning it, not allowing it) off the fall ballot, with the explicit warning that it would cause a surge of Republicans and other decent-minded folks to the polls--to the advantage of the statewide GOP ticket.
That failed, and the initiative will be on the ballot this fall. Never say never in politics, but it is highly unlikely that the next Senator from the great state of Oklahoma will be anything other than a conservative Republican.

[TheBigB]

I do think Coburn will have a better chance in November than Humphreys would have. (I think Coburn takes the primary)

[TheBigB]

Staying tuned. :^) Had Nickles and Campbell stayed put I would be more confident. I'm not 100% convinced that Ryan will lose in IL, but he's fighting uphill.

[Common Tator]

I really do care, but I want the Republican majority to start acting like a Republican MAJORITY. Time to get off of the stick and back in the game.

With the senate having the fillibuster rule it takes 60 votes to do anything the opposite party does not want to happen.

There are two possible routes for forcing filibusters. One they think the Democrats can't get 40 of their 48 senators to hang tough, or the media will support so the the voters get outraged.

The chances of the media helping teh Republicans are slim and none. And the chances of Democrats not getting 40 of their 48 Democrats to hang tough are zero.

The key is to not let the media paint Republicans in any more negative light if you can avoid it.

The senate at anyone time has bout 35 consservatives and 35 liberals. The remainder are Rinos and Dinos. In battle ground states only Rinos and Dinos can get elected.

So if the Republicans have the majority of the Rinos and Dinos as Rinos, they control. Yes Rinos go off the reservation. But if you have enough Rinos, it does not matter.

If a the Republican party can get with in striking distance of 60 Senaters .. that is 55 or so, they can often buy the votes of 5 or 6 DINOs to win out. But when they only have 51 they can't buy 9 DINOs and the DINOs know it... so you can't get any of them.

The media makes it very tough for Republicans. When Newt Gingrich refused to pass the budget clintono wanted the Republicans were accused of shuting down the goverment. When Clinton refused to sign what the Republicasn had passed they Republicans were blamed for shuting down the Government for not passing abudget Clinton would sign

The media always plays the Republicans congress as wimps. It works wonderfully to turn the voters on the right off. It is very effective way to defeat Republicans.

Another good media trick is that the two parties often make a deal. The Democrats get something they want in return for giving the Republicans what they want.

The media always covers the trade as Republicans go belly up to democrats. They do it even if the Republicans got the best of the deal That insure people like you get ticked off at the Republicans.

The media thinks there is one born every minute. But I think it occurs more frequently than that.

[aft_lizard]

We need to make sure our majority covers the base, instead we have Senators like Chaffee and Snow we tend to cater to so we dont lose there support.

[A Jovial Cad]

*I do think Coburn will have a better chance in November than Humphreys would have. (I think Coburn takes the primary)*

I agree with you, sort-of. The thing Humphrey's would bring to the November contest is a solid Republican turnout in Oklahoma County (the OKC Mayor bit-he was very popular in the Metro area), and Tulsa, plus at least a fair chunk of the Indian vote, thanks to his heritage. He's also a very good speaker, quick on his feet with the press, and his conservative credentials cannot seriously be questioned.
*BUT*, and here's the thing, Tom Coburn would bring nearly all that (OKC and Tulsa voters), *plus* a good number of Eastern Oklahoma Democrats from his old congressional district out there. Either one of them would make a great candidate; I haven't made up my mind yet between them in the primary. The only thing I *do* know is that whoever the GOP candidate is in the fall will have my support--and my vote.

[GeronL]

This is wrong actually, RINO's will retain control over the Senate. Bush will still see Spectre, his pal, block his judges and energy policy.

[GeronL]

Significant gain?? Dream on. The RINO's will stay in control and continue to block judges and policies.

[GeronL]

With the senate having the fillibuster rule it takes 60 votes to do anything the opposite party does not want to happen

Unless the Opposition Party is Republican, then they lay down and play down.

[JohnHuang2]

G'evening, amigo

[GeronL]

Our Texas GOP-controlled legislature and GOP Governor are raising our taxes. What a shock huh??

By the time we have a Presidential primary in 2008 there will be no conservative left in the party.

good morning.

[Robert_Paulson2]

the majority is no longer 51.

The rules of the poison pill, executed at the end of the last democratic senate surrender, have made the new target 60 or 66 seats needed to move legislation past the "infinite debate" aka "cloture," stage.

Despite debates on terminating the rules of operation for the Senate... the necessary votes there were NOT present to change back to 51 percent... so we are stuck... for now.

I am not sure that gaining 1 or 2 seats in the Senate would do any good. Perhaps.

What used to be considered a working majority in the Senate, has been flushed for the new "demos go nuclear" option on every bill and confirmation hearing.

If we had 60 senators, and ONE of them voted with the dems... it would block cloture... and a vote on any bill targetted for defeat.

sometimes blocking movement, and gridlock.. is a good thing.

[Hank Rearden]

So what would they do with it?

More "free" pill vote-buying scams? More Big Stupid Government? Even more gigantic deficits?

How 'bout some pork, hey?

When do we get that limited government we were promised years ago, before they already grabbed the majority?

Do we need more of Orrin Hatch and Snarlin Sphincter in charge?

I can't wait.