Posted on 11/15/2014 11:00:16 AM PST by Clintonfatigued
Congratulations, Republicans! You won the Senate majority! Now, can you hold on to it for more than two years?
Looking at the 2016 Senate map, there’s reason for doubt. Republicans will have to defend 24 seats, compared with 10 for Democrats. And the raw numbers don’t even tell the whole story. Seven seats held by Republicans — Florida, Illinois, Iowa, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — were carried by President Obama in 2008 and 2012. And there is chatter about potential Republican retirements in Arizona and Iowa. If either John McCain or Chuck Grassley decided to call it a career, each of those races would be major Democratic targets.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Does WP have a crystal ball? They’re starting this crap already and the new Congress hasn’t even been sworn in yet, won’t for another couple of months.
Very tiring.
I don’t have a crystal ball either, but I think the Republicans will likely do what they always do. Which is sad.
“Flipping 5 seats is highly unlikely, plus we have a couple we can potentially pick up. They probably will pick up 1 or 2 for sure from Blue States in a presidential election year. If our margin was more like 52-48, it would be a real concern”
If the Herr Gruber videos had hit three weeks ago, we would have picked up NH and Virgina as well IMO. Thus making it 56-44 in the Senate, a real shame.
Each of the ten races they mention, their prognostications are a series of "ifs" and "maybes" and little more.
The GOP RINOs they cite will likely be replaced, at worst, by other RINOs. Any of this pie in the sky speculation two years ahead of an election is little more than whistling past the graveyard.
It is equally likely that the GOP might actually increase their majority in both chambers, and if Hillery is their nominee (which I doubt)with the kind of baggage she has, would be lucky to carry three states, and would also likely drag down the Dim party to new depths.
If FR had a “LIKE” box to hit I would give your comment a dozen...
Masturbatory fantasies for the recently whacked libs.
If the Herr Gruber videos had hit three weeks ago, we would have picked up NH and Virgina as well IMO. Thus making it 56-44 in the Senate, a real shame.
I can’t even construct a political analogy for our side, a shoe-on-the-other-foot.
What did the Post predict two years ago about this year’s elections? We should take these new predictions seriously if they were accurate in their predictions two years ago.
Re: Mark Kirk
Being a RINO in Illinois is an advantage. Better Kirk than another Dick Durbin.
Before I left the state, he was my congressman. Nice guy who will vote with conservatives and libertarians over half the time. Probably better than McCain, Graham and Ayotte.
Coates and Blount are both Republicans.
Add Portman and Johnson.
The Post article practically assumes a Democrat presidential vicory. Two years is and eternity in politics, and it is tough to win three presidential elections in a row. The only time that has happened since Truman in 1948 was Bush41 winning “Reagan’s third term.”The Post article practically assumes a Democrat presidential victory, and asks if the Republicans can hold the Senate in that case. My answer is, “I doubt it, but I also doubt if we’ll find out."
Best case, it appears to me, is a Scot Walker/Ted Cruz Republican ticket, threatening the Democrats’ chances in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ohio - and having the intellectual firepower of Cruz to oppose the Democratic ticket. With that dynamic facing a woman who is overage in grade (Hillary will be 69, and will have been on the national stage for 24 years by ’16) and has bupkis for a record of accomplishment as Secretary of State or Senator, and who has Obamacare (anyone remember Hillarycare?) and the rest of the Obama distortions of constitutional order to defend, I do not consider a 2016 Democrat victory likely, let alone inevitable.Obama hasn’t been trying to make Americans better off, and he seems even less inclined towards that now. Seemingly, then, the Democratic nomination, for president or anything else, will be as degraded a brand two years hence as it was last week. So in the best case the Republicans win the presidency and hold the Senate with about the same majority that they have now. Without Senator McCain, so that would be a plus.
But we can hardly assume that Boehner and McConnell won’t damage the Republican brand regarding the Senate in particular - which argues against heading the national ticket with a senator. In addition, remarkable as it may sound, there seems to be only on example since 1920 (and perhaps none before then) of a senator running against a governor - but governors are who parties run against incumbent presidents. And governors have won about as much as they have lost in those matches.When you care enough to send the very best, you send a governor - but otherwise, parties seem to want to run Senators or vice presidents. We really, really need to wrest the White House from the Democrats in ’16.
Portman is safe
I submit that would depend on who the Republicans run. If they nominate a squishy moderate that depresses the turnout of the base then none of the Republicans running in Blue states are safe.
You must be thinking of 2018. And there are more targets in 2018 than those 2, North Dakota should be at the top of the list. Montana.
Article lost credibility after it mentioned a possible McCain retirement. They will have to remove this RINO slug in a pine box before he retires.
These f.ing cockroaches, this actually started a few weeks ago when it was clear we were gonna win the Senate. Haven’t even taken office yet and already they start the propaganda war (and at least one “freeper” was going around repeating it) to buoy to rat donors. I guess it would be smart to start pre-planning for 2018! right now.
My take on ‘16, 2 democraps (Reid and Bennett, Heller may have just lost the NRSC chairman’s race because of Reid being up in his home state) are very vulnerable, and NO Republican is assured of losing.
Not even my RINO Senator, Marky Mark Kirk. I see that race as being like MA 2012, except Hillary or whoever the rat is won’t be doing as well as Obama did in MA in 2012. I hate Kirk but I’m telling you right now I’d crawl though fire to vote for him over “Max Cleland in a skirt” Tammy Suckworth, (Will she make Kirk’s health an issue? Will they have a literal “race”? LOL, that’s right I’m making fun of the sacred cow) Princess Royale Lisa Madigan, arrogant egghead son of a *itch Congressman Bill Foster, or any disgusting pig like that. I loathe them so much, I’d even vote for that queerbo Richard Tisei against any one of them and I wouldn’t think twice about it. I know some FRiends strongly disagree but that’s how I feel.
I read some Politico article that said Ron Johnson and Pat Toomey “start as underdogs” because Osama (who shant by on the ballot but will hopefully be around the neck of every rat like Bush was around GOP necks in in 2008) carried those States, balderdash. The candidates they tout, the pigs who lost last time, Feingold and Sestak. In PA I’d be more worried about that witch Kathleen Kane, people LOVE female rat AGs for some unfathomable reason.
Iowa is vulnerable if Grassley retires (he says he’s not FWIW) or if he’s “Robertsed” and weakened by some SO CALLED “tea partier”, my advice if anyone wants to primary him, be electable or please don’t bother, don’t be a Milton Wolf, be someone worth supporting. I’m not too worried about AZ and the democrats “Brown tide” plan to win there. Sucky NH is in play if the Shaheen clone or especially the “popular” ex Governor Lynch runs.
The same article pimped Hagan to run against Burr, (lol she just lost to Tillis who ran a subpar campaign,). Begich to run for Murkowski’s seat (he could maybe win with RINO backing if she loses the primary again, or the witch could just run as a democrat herself). And in a real puzzler, Mary L (who’s casket is still being viewed for this election!!!!!) to run for Vitter’s seat (he’s running for Governor and will win according to everyone), I guess just because they literally can’t think of another name.
t be a Milton Wolf, be someone worth supporting. I
“Logjammin’”
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.