Posted on 11/10/2012 5:22:01 AM PST by Evil Slayer
My post of this morning was published with a couple of Senate races not finally decided. But the Republican candidates (Rep. Denny Rehberg in Montana and Rep. Rick Berg of North Dakota) have now conceded to the victorious Dems. (incumbent Sen. Jon Tester in Montana and Sen.-elect Heidi Heitkamp in North Dakota).
This nets out at a two-seat pickup for the Dems and a 55-45 majority heading into 2013 (assuming that, as expected, the Senate's two independents, Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Sen.-elect Angus King of Maine will caucus with the Dems). The net gain is especially impressive since the Dems had to defend 23 of the 33 seats that were up in 2012.
If you can stand to look ahead to 2014, it turns out that once again, the Dems will have to defend a much larger portion of the seats that will be on the ballot. Assuming that no deaths, resignations, special elections or party switches occur, 20 of the 33 Senate seats that will be up in 2014 are now held by Dems. And, if you look at the map of where those seats are located, it appears that there are more Dems in generally red states than vice versa. Minnesota will also have a Senate race and freshman incumbent Al Franken is likely to face a tougher challenger than Kurt Bills. It will be some consolition to the Dem planners that they will head into that cycle with a five seat margin in the Senate and, since the vice presidency (with its potential as a tie-breaking vote in case of 50-50 ties in the Senate) will remain in Dem hands through 2016, the Dems would have to make a net gain of six seats to gain control that year.
If you are wondering how it can
(Excerpt) Read more at minnpost.com ...
Because we nominated Romney - we pissed away our chance of hamstringing Obama.
This is so terrible - had we simply defended the ground, we would only have to make up 3! Count ‘em, 3! Seats.
Totally mindboggling that with obozo at the top of the ticket we lost senate seats in deep red states like Montana, North Dakota, Missouri and Indiana.
It’d be like with Bush at top of ticket and Dems losing in places like new York, California, Mass, Illinois, etc.
Inept.
Get a dose of reality. Murdoch and Brown lost. Was it Romney’s fault that Murdoch made a stupid comment about Abortion? Connie Mack and George Allen ran horrible campaigns.
there will never be enough cash to beat dem machines
I’m not buying this. The entire election reeks of voter fraud.
Not inept - FRAUD!!
voter fraud....ya really think? ........
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQxsx3IGS1E&feature=youtu.be
It’d be like with Bush at top of ticket and Dems losing in places like new York, California, Mass, Illinois, etc.
Inept.
You're right. Totally inept and it really brings home the fact that this election was a disaster for 'Pubs/conservatives. We lost, and lost badly. Before the election we were touting ND and MO as "sure pickups". We lost them both. MT was a bit closer but we were confident. Gone. IN was looking strong and we pissed it away. IN is a real killer because we traded an 80% conservative voter (old Lugie) for a 99.1% Obama voter.
I know Mourdock was a Tea Party darling, but facts are facts and he made stupid statements in the middle of a campaign and that blew the contest away. Same with Akin in MO. I'm not saying they were wrong in their positions, they were just stupid to say the things they said in the way that they said them. We need candidates who understand that the 'Rats and the media will jump on any kind of misstatement and kill us with it. We need to field candidates who are not only correct in their positions on the issues, but politically astute and understand the importance of the elections they compete in.
Same deal in 2010 when we pissed away two possible pickups (DE and NV) with lousy candidates. Those two, plus the four we lost this year, would have put us over the top, even writing off MA and ME. Instead, we get at least two (probably more) years of Harry Reid running the Senate. *vomit*
I forget who said running “retreads” like George Allen and Tommy Thompson might not have been the best idea. I wonder if other Republicans might have done better but the turnout and trends were just against us. With the GOP being down to 45 though I am not too optimistic about them gaining 6 next time, unless there are several Demo retirements.
I remember taking some heat for pointing out that many pro-lifers can be one issue blinded, ideological retards, penny wise, pound foolish,anyone? How the freekin hell do you garantee rights to potential humans when proven ones, like use, are getting them stripped? Save the effing Constitution and it`s Lockean principles first, shmucks! "Oh, parish the thought, sir.",because "its for the CHILDREN!"
Funny how it’s always everyone else’s fault but Romney’s. No, it can’t be because Romney delivered fewer republican voters than John McCain.
Hey - face the facts. This would have been a massive blowout, if Obama had performed up to par. Obama did terrible, but fortunately Romney failed to take advantage of a 9 million drop in voters.
Look at North Dakota, folks. If the Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate was able to win a race in a state where Obama got only 39% of the vote, there's clearly a lot more at work than just Republican turnout and a piss-poor presidential candidate at the top of the ticket.
“IN is a real killer because we traded an 80% conservative voter (old Lugie) for a 99.1% Obama voter.”
Good riddance to bad rubbish. Lugar refused to campaign for Mourdock. Why are we shedding tears for traitors?
In 2014, 20 democrat senators (including Senators Durbin, Franken, Baucus, Hagan, Harkin, Kerry, and Lautenberg) can run for re-election, and only 13 Republicans (including Senators Alexander, Johanns, Cochran, and Roberts) can run for re-election.
It’s “perish the thought” not “parish”.
You assume it was a fair fight. That's the trouble with Republicans. We play by The Marquess of Queensberry rules. They don't.
Berg of ND ran a very poor campaign. His dem opponent, Heidi Heitkamp painted herself independent and as much of a conservative as Berg, even though she was funded by out of state anti oil and anti military interests and is a die hard socialist.
Berg had real stupid advertising. Many of his TV adds had the following statement: “I like Heidi, but - - - “ He basically endorsed her by saying she was likeable. I put this in the same category as that “let’s reach across the isle” bullshit mentality the typical RINO has where every time you reach across the isle to a commie you lose something!
Heitkamp ran fierce attack adds, one of which painted Berg as a rich mean landlord, and he did nothing to defend himself.
Simply put, Berg brought flowers to a gunfight.
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.