Prediction for 2006 senate race. Rep. +4 to +10 ACCURATE

To: DixieOklahoma

I'd give us at least an even chance in Florida. North Dakota I do not see swinging Republican even in the offyear election. For whatever reason we have never been able to field a strong candidate there. I also don't see us having much success in Nebraska now that Governor Johanns has opted for a Cabinet position. Nelson seems just conservative enough for the people of Nebraska and they won't be able to use judges against him because he usually support the President's nominees.

I'd say our best pick up opportunities are Minnesota, Florida and West Virginia only if KKK Byrd decides to retire.

21 posted on 12/27/2004 1:19:38 AM PST by mull

To: DixieOklahoma

With every senate race, it all comes down to the candidate the Parties choose to run. Just because it is a red state, that doesn't mean the Republican can win. And just because it is a blue state, that doesn't mean the Democrat can win. That being said, we need to do a good job recruiting candidates. With the right candidates, we should easily get pick ups in North Dakota and Nebraska. The other races that are potential pickups (in my mind) for the Republicans are Florida, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Washington, and West Virginia (is Byrd retiring). The seats we must make sure to defend are Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Missouri. So here's my state by state breakdown.

Pick up opportunities:

North Dakota: Kent Conrad is up for reelection in a very Republican state. Conrad will be reelected unless the Republicans can get a big name to run against Conrad, and even then, it would still be difficult, but the Republican would be favored. I would look for Governor Hoeven to run, or other statewide Republican office holders (LG, AG, Sec. of State, etc.) to run. It looks like we have a lot of possibilities. We just need to convince them to run. Any news on potential ND picks.

Nebraska: Once again, we need to get a good candidate to run against Ben Nelson. I was really disappointed when Tom Osborne decided not to run for the seat. Will President Bush and Karl Rove convince Governor Johanns to give up the Department of Agriculture to become the next senator from Nebraska. Let's hope they ask him, and that he says yes.

Possible Pickups:

Florida: It will be hard to knock off Bill Nelson, but doable with the right candidate. Jeb Bush won't run (I don't think), and Katherine Harris couldn't win a general election (in my opinion), but I fear she would be a heavy favorite to win the nomination if she runs. What about getting one of the Diaz-Balart's to run? Or possibly Illeana Ros-Lehtinen (congresswoman)? I really feel that a Hispanic candidate would have the best shot of defeating Bill Nelson.

Minnesota: Mark Dayton is very beatable in my mind, but only if we have a good candidate. I don't think Governor Pawlenty will run, because I think he wants to be President, but it would be quite helpful if he did run. Congressman Kennedy could also beat Dayton, but it would be tougher. I'm a Texan, so I'm not an expert in this matter. What is the feeling in Minnesota?

New Jersey: Corzine will retire to run for Governor, which is an office he will probably win. This is a state where we need to nominate a RINO. I hate saying it, but that is something we need to do. If I had to choose between having 59 seats in the senate without any RINO's or 60 with one RINO, give me the super majority. I just don't think a conservative, or at least my idea of a conservative could win in New Jersey. And I say that with a sad heart as I will be going to college there starting next year. That being said, who could we get to run that could win. Forrester could run again, but I'm pretty sure that would end in a defeat. Although I hate to ask it, what is Christie Todd Whitman doing these days? Would she be up for being a senator? Is there any other Republican in the state that could run and win?

New York: The only candidate that could run and knock off Hillary is Rudy Guiliani. It is as simple as that. Will he run? If he were smart, he'd run, because I don't think there is anyway he could win the Republican nomination, unless he becomes the hero that defeats the Republican's worst nightmare, Hillary Clinton. But would he really run for the Senate, serve for one year, and then run for President? Probably not. But he could get tapped as a VP. Let's get Rudy to run for the senate. And no, I don't think this Kerik thing will hurt him in New York, whereas I do think it would hurt him nationally. We need Rudy to run.

Washington: I feel like Cantwell is very vulnerable. Could Dino Rossi beat her? Probably, unless this going to court blows up in his face. He can make himself look like the victim of fraud (which he is) and use it to his advantage in a senate run. Other viable Republican options include Jennifer Dunn (although I'm quite sure she is very content in retirement), or Sam Reed, the only Republican to win reelection to a statewide office this year. However, Sam Reed poses a problem. He oversees elections as Secretary of State and with this recent Gubernatorial election in Washington...well, you get the picture. The good news for Reed is that he probably angered more Republicans than Democrats, so he wouldn't be hated by moderate Democrats come 2006. Plus, he has a real opportunity to gain attention and more prominence if he proposes election reform that is meaningful and passes. Are there any other potential candidates that I'm missing? Dave Reichert after one term in the house?

West Virginia: How old will Senator and former Klansman Robert Byrd get before he retires? Has he already announce his plans for the election? If he runs, he will be almost impossible to beat. If he retires, it is a good, but tough, pick up opportunity for Republicans. The only problem in West Virgina is that there aren't a great deal of potential candidates, as far as I can see. The only one I can picture running is Congresswoman Shelly Moore Capito. Is there anyone I'm missing? Plus, who will the Democrat nominee be if Byrd retires? Governor Wise?

States to Defend:

Virgina: The only possible danger to Senator Allen is Mark Warner. Will Warner run? I haven't decided yet. If he is going to run for President in 2008, he won't. But if Hillary is expected to run for President (and she would win the nomination), then he may run and hope for a Hillary loss to propel him in 2012. It's too early to tell. I still think Allen would win the Warner/Allen match up. But I'd like to avoid it altogether and have Warner sit the race out.

Pennsylvania: Rick Santorum is one of my favorite senators. But I'm a Texan. Is he too conservative for Pennsylvania. I've never been there, but judging by the results of the last few Presidential elections, I'd say yes. Still, I have a gut feeling (whatever that's worth) that Santorum would win. I've heard that he is well-liked and he hasn't made any missteps. He is what he says he is. Any thoughts from Pennsylvanians?

Missouri: Maybe I'm just being paranoid, but Missouri, and St. Louis in particular always scares me. I know Bush won by a healthy margin in '04 and Talent is an intelligent man who isn't hated by the Democrats. The state Democratic Party also seems to have a lot of infighting. That points to a probable Talent reelection. That being said, I'd still keep this one on the radar.

Other states to watch:
Wisconsin (possible Kohl retirement?)
Rhode Island (what will the ultimate RINO do- switch parties or stay loyal and how will the overwhelmingly Democratic state react?)
Montana (are the Democrats making real ground in that state?)
Any other surprise retirements???

After looking at all these races, and knowing only what I know right now, here is my final prediction:
GOP +3 ...That would make the Senate 58-32 (only 2 seats shy of super-majority)

22 posted on 12/27/2004 1:23:41 AM PST by dmc8576 (High School Students for Bush - 325 members ....Students for Kerry - 20 members. ENOUGH SAID!!!)

With every senate race, it all comes down to the candidate the Parties choose to run.

In theory yes, but as a practical matter the Parties' "choice" is apt to be quite limited. Most states have at least two or three certifiable Republican heavyweights who would start with a strong organizational and fundraising base and decent statewide ID. Same for the 'rats. The issues are (1) whether the heavyweights are actually interested in the Senate (usually yes, but not always) and (2) whether they see '06 as a good year to gamble their political careers for the big step up. In most states, especially those of any size, that decision needs to be made mid to late '05.

If Bush and the pubbies are polling well this summer and fall, recruitment will be easy. The RNC and the White House will probably have to crack heads to avoid fratricide -- i.e., they will do their best to clear the field for a consensus choice. However, if the polling tanks, we'll be out in the nominal swing states scratching for the least bad forlorn hope and crossing our fingers that the Senate race doesn't cripple the rest of the ticket.

These are standard calculations at this point every cycle. The thing that makes them interesting this time around is that Bush has an ambitious second term agenda. Does Social Security or tax reform help or hurt candidate recruitment in swing states? Don't misunderstand: I hope Bush pushes strongly for rightward reform. All I'm saying is that the recruitment could be tougher than usual if by August we're neck deep in third rail politics and our top contenders in tough states start deciding it's not the time to risk their careers.

At some point, high strategery comes into play. The Republican leadership in the White House and on the Hill need to make some cold-blooded decisions fairly early on about what we can realistically hope to pass in '05 and '06. If we just flat out, simply and unmistakably don't have the votes in this Congress on Issue X, how hard do we fight for it as a symbolic gesture to the base if it's killing our '06 chances? It's not an easy question if you really think, as I do, that we really, really, really need 60 solid votes in the Senate to get a whole buncha things done.

23 posted on 12/27/2004 3:18:15 AM PST by sphinx

> Ben Nelson's going to have a heck of a fight on his hands, and he knows it.
> Governor Mike Johanns' term expires in 2006. He's popular, he's in the
> majority party, he's got the grassroots organization in place, and he'll be
> well funded by the RNC. If Johanns runs, he wins.

You are out of date here. Johanns will be in Washington soon and not running in 2006. The other person who could beat Nelson has decided against running (the ex-Coach). There is nobody else in the Republican party that is widely known and would be an easy win. Ben Nelson may lose, but it will not be a sure thing. It all depends on who runs against him and how well funded he is.

24 posted on 12/27/2004 5:33:33 AM PST by jim_trent

To: Criminal Number 18F

I, too, think that Dayton is the elderly male equivalent of a Valley Girl. You can hear the wind whipping through his ears as he speaks. He's been an embarrassment for so long that maybe, finally, he will be dumped.

I agree with you, however, that the whole list is a tad too optimistic. Yes. I'd like to see the Republicans gain at least +5. But I'm not about to base my long-term political outlook on that outcome.

Congressman Billybob

Click for latest, "Jon Stewart, You Magnificent B*stard! I Read Your Book!"

25 posted on 12/27/2004 6:13:57 AM PST by Congressman Billybob (Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.)

I'm not so sure Teddy Kennedy will run.

Q: Why does Ted Kennedy run?

A: Because he is too drunk to walk and we know he can't drive.

Thank you... Thank you very much.

26 posted on 12/27/2004 6:23:33 AM PST by TN4Liberty (American... conservative... southern.... It doesn't get any better than this.)

To: DixieOklahoma

The GOP should make Dayton, Stabenow, and Cantwell sweat in their re-election bids. But Dayton is the only realistic chance of a GOP pickup, especially if Rep. Mark Kennedy runs against him.

Depending on who runs against Santorum, he should survive re-election. He is a 2 term incumbent and high up on the Senate leadership. Thus, he will have access to lots of money. The only RATS who has a good shot at unseating Santorum is Gov. Ed Rendell. But Rendell is running for reelection as PA Governor.

A potential wildcard in 2006 is retirements from Lott, Burns, and Lugar. While these men represent deep red states, it's going to cost a lot of money to defend open Senate seats. This potential scenario could drain funds needed to oust incumbent RAT Senators.

27 posted on 12/27/2004 6:28:30 AM PST by Kuksool (RATS are pro-life when their political power is aborted)

The GOP should be smart and push conservative values for two years since the base is what carries interim elections. Immigration reform, cutting wasteful spending, and social security reform would be huge!

28 posted on 12/27/2004 6:33:30 AM PST by chris1 ("Make the other guy die for his country" - George S. Patton Jr.)

I think both Santorum and Dayton are basically 50/50. I also think both NE and RI are about 50/50. Beyond that, a lot could happen depending on who might retire.

29 posted on 12/27/2004 6:49:01 AM PST by crasher

Actually, Kennedy is way ahead on this one. He announced back in 2000 that he had every intention of running again in 2006. Unfortunately he's not going anywhere anytime soon.

30 posted on 12/27/2004 6:51:57 AM PST by mull

To: DixieOklahoma

One possible wild card is if George Pataki decides to challenge Hillary in New York rather than run for a fourth term as Governor. I haven't heard any rumors about this but it is an interesting possibility. He is a proven vote-getter and has never lost an election. He also has a history of coming from behind and knocking off powerful incumbents, first to win his State Senate seat and then to beat Mario Cuomo. He has certainly been a disappointment as Governor but is infinitely preferable to Hillary and would give her a run for her money.

31 posted on 12/27/2004 7:02:27 AM PST by jalisco555 ("The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity." W. B. Yeats)

Also how do you see Washington as a possible pickup?

If Rossi is cheated out of the governorship by the recount-until-we-win crowd, he'll be a very strong contender for Senate in 2006.

32 posted on 12/27/2004 7:05:54 AM PST by kevkrom (If people are free to do as they wish, they are almost certain not to do as Utopian planners wish)

New York: The only candidate that could run and knock off Hillary is Rudy Guiliani.

I keep hearing this, but I think it short-sells a possible Pataki run. I think he could at least make it a race.

34 posted on 12/27/2004 7:13:59 AM PST by kevkrom (If people are free to do as they wish, they are almost certain not to do as Utopian planners wish)

To: discostu; DixieOklahoma

The GOP could loose the AZ seat. McCain has lost most of the base, he could lose in the primaries.

It's not McCain's seat that's up. McCain was just reelected in November with 76% of the vote.

35 posted on 12/27/2004 7:48:58 AM PST by Paleo Conservative (Hey! Hey! Ho! Ho! Dan Rather's got to go!)

To: Common Tator

Florida is one of the last southern states to tranistion to the safe Republican column.
__________________________________________________________

This statement alone shows almost no understanding of Florida politics or demographics.

1. FL by 1970 was where many southern states are today. The Governor was Republican Claude Kirk. The Senators were GOP Ed Gurney and Dim Lawton Childs. The geographic tag on the Senator, ie nobody from Dade County, mattered more than the party tag in those days.

2. Since 1970, it has been the exception when the FL Senators have not been split between the parties. The Governorship has bounced back and forth.

3. If anything after trending GOP before the rest of the South, Florida has trended Dim since the Reagan years. I consider Florida a somewhat like NJ. Both have trended Dim somewhat maybe because of a growth in nonCuban Hispanic population. Clearly Florida is not lost forever to the GOP and I don't believe NJ is either although NJ has more of a Dim machine to contend with than FL.

4. In 1970 Florida looked set to trend GOP for decades, then came Watergate and some poor candidates. Everyone should keep such things in mind.

36 posted on 12/27/2004 7:50:29 AM PST by JLS

To: DixieOklahoma

I'd love to see the R's get a 60+ seat lead in the senate... however I am not sure if it will happen.

If however the Dems continue their america bashing ways, it is going to happen sooner or later.

37 posted on 12/27/2004 7:55:21 AM PST by HamiltonJay

To: Paleo Conservative

Agreed,

McCain is going nowhere... some dillusional thinking by some folks here who think he's in trouble holding his seat.

38 posted on 12/27/2004 7:56:39 AM PST by HamiltonJay

Santorum's a lock, there is nobody in PA with enough clout or pull to take him out. He's popular, and the only thing really negative on him has been the kids schooling scandal which was basically a blip.

Santorum will win re-election easily.

39 posted on 12/27/2004 7:58:20 AM PST by HamiltonJay

To: DixieOklahoma

I thought Jeffords was retiring???

Either way, the GOP won't control the seat.

40 posted on 12/27/2004 7:59:16 AM PST by KidGlock (W-1)

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794