Posted on 11/02/2005 6:24:16 PM PST by Roscoe Karns
In a bizarre tactic that has left many Democrat strategists and centrist Democratic groups puzzled and disturbed, the Democratic leadership has jumped even further to the left since their last election defeats. The results have been staggering and numerous, and well-documented in the press, and have caused an acute case of political heartburn among many Democrat members and liberal pundits.
Shortly after the 2004 election, left-wing radical group Move-On.org proudly pronounced that “Now it’s our party: we bought it, we own it and we’re going to take it back.” And it was of course correct on all accounts.
Enter Howard Dean as the chairman of the Democratic National Committee. He was too liberal to win the Democratic primary for president because he ran to the left of the more “conservative” senator from Massachusetts, John Kerry. Now he’s reaching out to red-state voters with his pessimism and negativity.
The congressional leadership for the Democrats has formed an alliance with the extreme left as well. MoveOn.org and the Daily Kos are featured guests on conference calls and in meetings to develop strategy with Sen. Harry Reid (Nev.) and Rep. Nancy Pelosi (Calif.). By contrast, Republicans offer clear principles and solutions to the problems confronting the American people. The outlook for protecting the majority in the United States Senate looks good as a result.
Let’s look at the facts about the upcoming elections.
The Democrats must defend 18 seats, compared to 15 seats on the Republican side. The GOP also has 14 out of 15 incumbent senators running for reelection, while the Democrats have lost at least three senators to retirement in Maryland, Minnesota, Vermont and potentially a fourth in New Jersey.
One important statistic tells us that, since 1914, almost 80 percent of congressional incumbents have been reelected. And of the nine winners of Senate elections in 2004, only one member did so by defeating an incumbent. Yet the Democrats have hung their hopes for a Senate majority on defeating incumbent Republican senators across the board in such places as Arizona, Missouri and Montana — all of which broke strongly Republican last year.
As for open seats, thanks to the welcome news that Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison will continue serving Texas in the Senate, Republicans are defending only Tennessee. If there is any question on how a Senate race in the South will go for the party of Howard Dean and MoveOn.org, a quick look at the races in North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia and Louisiana from the last cycle should answer that question.
In terms of open seats on the Democratic side, Republicans are on the offensive with top-tier candidates in the blue states of Maryland (Lt. Gov. Michael Steele), Minnesota (Rep. Mark Kennedy) and New Jersey (Tom Kean Jr.). Unlike the Democrats, however, these Republicans do not have primary contests and can focus on raising funds and getting their messages out.
Even in the open seat in Vermont, Republicans have an outstanding candidate, former IDX Systems CEO Richard Tarrant. But in an embarrassing situation for Howard Dean, the Democrats have been unable to find one of their own and are instead relying on third-party candidate Bernie Sanders to carry the liberal water.
The GOP is working hard in states with vulnerable Democrat incumbents. Former Ameritrade COO Pete Ricketts has joined the field of candidates in Nebraska, a state President Bush won by 33 points. In Washington, Safeco CEO Mike McGavick brings an impressive array of political and business skills to the race. Races in Florida, Michigan and West Virginia will also be very competitive.
Historically, the midterm election after the reelection of a president is not kind to the incumbent party. We fully understand this dynamic and are working hard to build good, aggressive campaigns that can win the tough races.
Republicans are being proactive in both defending our incumbent senators and ensuring that we are challenging vulnerable Democrats. We have already run ads in two states, and we are raising the money we need to impact our races next year.
My Republican colleagues are committed to maintaining a strong majority in the Senate and are taking an active role in fundraising for our candidates. Several candidates are breaking fundraising records in their home states, and National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) fundraising is running 34 percent ahead of this time last cycle. More important, the Republican National Committee will lend great assistance to the NRSC by committing resources into the key states next year and their combined cash on hand leads the Democratic National Committee and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee by a whopping $18 million.
Unlike the Democratic Party, Republicans can point to a positive agenda and a genuine record of tackling issues of great importance to mainstream Americans. The Democratic leaders do not have an agenda, a plan or a message. All they can offer is pessimism and negativity. As we saw last year, that’s a losing argument.
I just KNEW someone would pick up on that one.... :-)
The recruitment has been a bust. The Dems will not be losing any seats, except maybe in Minnesota if the GOP gets lucky.
Not to mention Nebraska, North Dakota and especially Florida (among others).
Basically, I think the only Republican shot is in Minnesota.
I might add New Jersey as slight possibility with Kean (certainly better than Steele), if Corzine does something cronyistic like appointing Menendez to the Senate seat.
Otherwise, the Republican recruitment efforts have been pretty awful.
Democrats have done excellent recruiting in Missouri, Pennsylvania (obviously).
They have been so-so in Rhode Island (Langevin and Kennedy would have been top-tier), Montana (Tester and Morrison are good, but I don't think it's as close as 2000), and Ohio (Ryan was easily top-tier, Brown is too liberal and Hackett I don't believe can do well in a full campaign).
Suffice it to say, I think the Democrats could win 3-4 seats under the best of circumstances, but if their recruiting had been better, they could win 3-4 seats even without the best of circumstances and take back the Senate in the best of circumstances.
It's even worse than that, because Kennedy basically recruited himself. He's been aiming for the Senate since before Liddy Dole took up the NRSC.
>>>Dems’ lurch to the left.<<<
Speaking of Lurch, what has he been up to lately?
Yea.. we should have gone with norm coleman for this round of nrsc chair. Even better though if George Allen went at it again for this round , but i doubt they'd let that fly.
I don't recall hearing any dim let us in on his plan to lower the cost of gas. Perhaps you can steer me in the right direction.
It is identical to the plan Clinton offered in 1992 to fix the economy.
If it took concrete and viable plans to elect Democrats then Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton would never have been elected president.
Like many people you believe that what is necessary to get your vote is what is necessary to get a majority of votes. History proves that is not true.
Did I mention the clear and concrete plan that JFK offered in 1960 to defeat the Soviet Union?
Democrats don't need to offer concrete plans to win elections. Concervatives get beat because they think it takes real and effective plans to win.
It doesn't.
She is doing a good job as NRSC chair.
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.