Posted on 05/07/2006 1:13:32 PM PDT by kellynla
This fall's midterm election won't only decide which party will control Congress and statehouses around the nation. It also could identify which states may emerge as new battlegrounds in the 2008 presidential race that will effectively begin as soon as the votes are counted in November.
In the last two campaigns, the parties divided the electoral map almost exactly in half. In 2000, George W. Bush won the second-narrowest Electoral College victory since 1800. In 2004, Bush won a smaller share of Electoral College votes than any reelected president except Woodrow Wilson in 1916.
But if the Republican advantage under Bush has been slim, it also has been stable. Only three states switched between parties from the 2000 presidential contest to the 2004 vote. And each of them New Mexico, Iowa and New Hampshire was a small state that tilted narrowly one way in 2000 and narrowly the other four years later.
Bush carried 29 states twice. Those states are worth 274 Electoral College votes four more than needed to win the White House. And, at least through his first term, Bush solidified the Republican grip on that terrain. In 2004, Bush held Democratic challenger Sen. John F. Kerry to 43% of the vote or less in 21 of those 29 states. What's more, Republicans since 2000 have widened their lead in House and Senate seats from the "red" states that twice backed Bush.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Maybe that Big Tent approach isn't all its cracked up to be.. to claim it has done any good in California is just a wee bit of a stretch.
when you are faced with twiddledee and twiddledum.. is it any wonder how some react?
Can anyone give me a link or list all of the seats up for reelection? Thanks
Strangely enough, midterm elections are extremely poor predictors of the next presidential election. The correlation is just about zero. I myself was surprised until I looked at the data. 1994 was a good Republican year, but Clinton was reelected. 1982 was a good Democrat year but in 1984 Reagan was reelected.
this is garbage....and lazy journalism...it is a set up to say of the DEMS do well in 2006, theyll sweep 2008.
In 1994, the GOP swept IL, OH, PA, MI, NY, CA and the year before NJ. Did they win any of those states in 1996??? NOPE!!
In 1982, the DEMS swept the midwest and EVERY SINGLE statewide office in TX....How many EVs did the DEMS get in 1984? mmmm..13 i think.
In 1986, the DEMS won 9/10 competitve Senate seats. How many of those states went Dukakis in 1988?
Slime Republicans all you want, you are way off, as is your lib buddy Brownstein: the GOP will pick up one seat (minimum, net) in the Senate, and one to five in the House. Bank on it.
And in 2006, the GOP will gain, net, minimum, one Sen. seat and one to five house seats. (Personally, I think the Senate gain will be two to three, but I'm being cautious).
Arizona has now made it mandatory that you be a U.S. citizen and Arizona resident in order to vote. You will have to prove it before you get a ballot. (Weird, isn't it). From all the whining and crying that we're hearing from the 'RATS in this state, I expect Arizona to swing back to the GOP.
"The Liberals should be careful what they wish for because if they win and start impeachment proceedings on Bush"
a Cheney presidency looks very appealing at this point!
Wow, why don't you just say you expect a GOP landslide in '08, because there is zero chance of an anti-immigrant Dem candidate, while there is a 50% chance of an anti-immigrant GOP candidate.
you underestimate the Democrats need to regain power.
Good move by Arizona. This should be a Federal law as well - before it's too late.
And, also here in Arizona, you have to connect the line with the pencil - NO CHADS! If you make a mistake, they'll tell you to take a new ballot and you have 3 chances or you're through! Now, if we can only muster up our republican women to NOT vote for Nepalitano (I have my Len Munsel sticker on my car)///
I guess if you can accept or better yet sell prochoice/proabortion, pro gun control candidates , members of the gang of 14 as being on the conservative side of the spectrum.. but they are not,, oh well more power to ya , no pun intended. ;-)
The nation is battling a liberal infestation in the GOP from sea to shining sea... and as the invasion of our borders, so to , this invasion is not getting a lot of attention, in fact seems to be sanctioned and encouraged, including more than a few here. (Maybe we should change the mission statement of FR, just take conservative off and use words like diversity and inclusive and waa laaa , you'll have what the New Majority movement is all about.)
We're sure seeing the way it works here in California and the US Senate the last few years,, and it ain't cheap no matter how much it claims to be for lower taxes and less globalmint.
The more I see of the likes of Coleman and Specter specifically, I do question at what cost and to what ends the GOP is willing to go .. and whether the big tent is all its cracked up to be by some here.
We may well reap the whirlwind of a moderate crop of lemons this year and in '08.. here's hoping its not a bumper crop and some real conservatives make it thru the gauntlet.
Chafee, Collins and Graham also seem like examples of something, not sure quite what tho.
Naw, you can show a light bill and the sample ballot with your name on it as two forms of ID here. It's all window dressing. I just got my sample ballot and read the full page of stuff that passes for identification at the polls.
It's much ado about nothing.
So it is you who are peddling the "purity" notion, and perfection is the enemy of the good. I won't hesitate, when strategically feasible to vote against a RINO, and I don't plan to vote for DeWine in the fall. But that could change if the Senate is in jeopardy.
We should all live by the dean of conservatism's advice (that would be William F. Buckley, Jr.): "I plan to vote for the most conservative candididate who is electable."
Interesting you mention pro-abortion .. (I am referring to the larger picture and not just thiose who pass the "test").
imo, The GOP is moving in 2 directions or has 2 warring factions if you will...and can easily be swung around to go the opposite direction at the state level which we do see happening here in california , a prime example.
The gOP is not even effectively fielding a candidate against DiChiFi.
--
What is so evil about purity, btw?
Your comment about DeWine is a bit of a stretch using your same logic, imo. so you won't vote for him in any case, is that my read? That seems to contradict what you say within the bulk of your reply.
--
"I plan to vote for the most conservative candididate who is electable."
Sometimes there is little conservative in any of the candidates, what then? It hasn;t done much for us here in the Gol-darn state.
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.