Posted on 01/28/2006 1:45:37 PM PST by Clintonfatigued
Good news.
Democrats are oversampled in most Minnesota Polls.
Kennedy should be a shoo-in. He is the second district U.S. Representative right now.
Wouldn't it be nice to be able to refer to "the good Senator Kennedy", and the "______________ Senator Kennedy"? (Fill in your own: 'drunk' 'reprehensible', etc.)
This is mildly good news, as Mark Kennedy has narrowed Amy Klobuchar's slim lead to nothing.
But the fact that Bush posts an anemic approval rating of 35% in Minnesota is ominous.
We've got the problem of Democratic voter fraud in Dane & Milwaukee counties; the two counties with the most looney leftists per square mile. The rest of the state is mostly red. We look very red when you look at us by counties.
I wish you luck! Do what you can, with what you have, where you are. And we'll do the same! :)
The lessons learned in rural Minn have served me well throughout my life. I'm proud to be from there... but wouldn't want to return.
See more at:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1567031/posts
Pass it along, I don't have the others in a mail group.
Thanks
I certainly hope that he will win his election to the U.S. Senate. I also hope we can elect one of the 4 great Republicans who is running for the endorsement in the sixth district into Kennedy's seat in the House.
Kennedy has gained grown since the last poll. Long time to Nov however.
Then again, when your a pessimist like me, you're always glad to be proven wrong.
Gotta wonder though, neck and neck in liberal Minn. is a real shocker. Dems better get the dead indian vote out in mass.
Good catch. Sorry world.
35% ? Sounds like the 'Rat oversampling shuffle again.
Wouldn't many liberals reflexively vote for the Kennedy?
You talking about Minnesota or Wisconsin? This is about the Minnesota senate race.
It wasn't perceived, it was an unapologetic endorsement. It was incredibly courageous for the Mayor of liberal and statist St. Paul to put his neck on the line, and he paid for it. It's St. Paul's loss they preferred a Saddam-apologist Kerry Socialist hack to the moderate non-Kool-aid drinking Democrat Kelly.
Yep, and Bush has already been out once for Kennedy. Don't think that the Dems won't be quick to point that out.
It may simply be better for Kennedy (and those candidates in more 'Rat-leaning states) to run their own races without bringing in the President (and in more GOP-leaning states, do the opposite). It's like the old LBJ tactic, he used to ask his Senators (in order for them to win reelection), "Do you need me to be for you or against you ?" Whichever position worked to get them elected was what would be used. You can technically run against the administration as a Republican without being a liberal, just trot out the old "I'll vote with 'em when they're right, and against 'em when they're wrong."
Those are exactly the people who elected Pawlenty. The Range is hemorrhaging population though the Twin Cities proper are hopeless.
I have high hopes for Kennedy, the President's numbers nothwithstanding.
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.