Skip to comments.
Senate Outlook, 2004 Elections
Posted on 11/11/2002 12:23:29 PM PST by William McKinley
Edited on 11/11/2002 3:54:34 PM PST by Admin Moderator.
[history]
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-68 next last
Obviously, these are merely my opinions.
To: William McKinley
good overview and much appreciated
2
posted on
11/11/2002 12:30:46 PM PST
by
KC Burke
To: William McKinley
In all probability the generally Republican state of Indiana will go very heavily for Democrat Bayh [unfortuately].
To: curmudgeonII; KC Burke
Thanks KC Burke, I appreciate it.
CurmudgeonII, I tend to think you are right, which is why I put it in the "Leaning" category. I tried to put races in the "Leaning" category if I believe one of two things: 1) the margin of victory is going to be less than 10% AND the person I think will win is not in the same party that the state trends, or 2) I believe that the race has enough uncertainty that I could picture it going to other way, even if I think the margin of victory might be greater than 10 points. I put Bayh into the first category here. I think he will likely win, but I think it will be within 10 points and I think the state favors Republicans.
To: William McKinley
Excellent analysis.
I would add only three points.
1. If Bayh runs in Indiana, move it to strongly leaning RAT. The GOP doesn't have a candidate groomed to make a strong run at him.
2. In Florida, I think there is a reasonable chance that Bob Graham will retire. If he does, this one leans GOP.
3. In North Dakota, there is talk that Ed Shafer will run. If he does, I would move this race to a toss-up.
To: William McKinley
Too pessimistic on Peter Fitzgerald in Illinois. He will be re-elected.
Key races will include NC; SC; FL if Graham retires; and several others.
It's very early.
6
posted on
11/11/2002 12:53:35 PM PST
by
mwl1
To: comebacknewt
Agreed with you on Florida and Graham.
I don't know much about Ed Shafer. Can you fill me in?
I guess I am in the minority when it comes to Bayh. I really think he has damaged himself in the past two years. I could very well be mistaken.
To: William McKinley
When it comes to competitions I subscribe to the "Captain Kirk" philosophy of life. In a nutshell, there is no such thing as a no win situation. Therefore, we will hand Barbara Boxer her ass on a platter in 2K4, particularly after 2 more years of Davis taxes and Pelosi shrewing it up in congress.
ONWARD TO VICTORY FELLOW REPUBLICANS! DRIVE THE 'RATS BEFORE US!!!
8
posted on
11/11/2002 1:02:05 PM PST
by
Axenolith
To: William McKinley
I like Fitzgerald in Illinois, but we'll see who the Democrats put up. The Democrats swept the state this last election, and one big resason for that was the scandals within the GOP officeholders. Some of it was the "bribes for licenses" scandals that occurred under George Ryan's watch in the Secretary of State office, but there's others as well; the State GOP Chairman had to resign his chairmanship when it was found that he was using the taxpayer-paid staff in his State House office (he was also the state's House Majority Leader) for political party work. All in all, there's likely to be a pretty big parade of GOP defendants though the courts and the jails over the next two years. Depending on how big, it could have an impact in 2004.
The one big thing going there for Fitzgerald, though, is that he's appointed the U.S. Attorneys that are chasing all this down. So he can say he's got clean hands and is doing his bit to clean up the mess. He wasn't a member of the regular GOP structure, and in fact they opposed his candidacy for the Senate. It's an example of a wealthy man funding his own campaign, and unlike most, he actually won.
The GOP would have the knives out for him, but they've got other problems now; the Democrats now hold both houses of the state legislature and the Governorship and all but one of the other State Constitutionally mandated offices.
9
posted on
11/11/2002 1:04:59 PM PST
by
RonF
To: RonF
I like Fitzgerald too. Saying who I want to win is very different than saying who I think will win. Incumbency will help. The trend of the state will hurt. The distance he can put between himself and the corruption in the state Republicans will help. Trying to run without the support of the state party will hurt-- but obviously he has done it before.
I hope he can win, but I think if he does win it will be a competitive race, and as such it belongs in a "Leaning" designation and should be considered one of the battlegrounds. IMO.
To: William McKinley
California Strategery: talk up Green Party. Bitch and moan in Birkenstock stores and Bay Area coffee houses about Boxer being a "sellout to the Oil and War Party." (If you can suggest that she's an Israeli sock puppet in a PC manner, so much the better.)
11
posted on
11/11/2002 1:11:55 PM PST
by
Poohbah
To: William McKinley
I agree that at this point Fitzgerald should be favored, and with your "leaning Republican" label. I just wanted to share with the list some of the details about complicating factors in Illinois. Illinois seems to like having one Republican and one Democratic senator. It reflects the split between Chicago and Downstate, with the 'burbs split, but how it keeps working out that way is beyond me.
12
posted on
11/11/2002 1:12:49 PM PST
by
RonF
To: William McKinley
Ed Shafer is a popular Ex-Governor of ND. He would give Dorgan a very strong run IMHO.
Living in Indiana, my impression is that most voters here consider Bayh a moderate. As Governor, his policies were fairly moderate -- in large part because Republicans controlled the legislature in Indiana.
Since he has moved to DC, Bayh has become a reliable liberal vote. Unfortunately, most people here still have a very favorable impression of Bayh, and I don't see a GOP candidate on the horizon that can get the voters excited enough to turn him out.
To: comebacknewt
I agree with combacknewt regarding Bayh's chances in Indiana. The Republican's don't have anyone strong enough to run against Bayh. The Bayh family in Indiana has strong political roots. Actually, Evan Bayh's father was beaten out of office by Dan Quayle.
Evan Bayh is good at portraying himself as a moderate, though he will support the democrat cause when necessary. Indiana is generally a conservative state, so he will act bipartisan when it won't make a difference. As governor, he tried to pass a huge tax and spending hike bill. Fortunately, the Republican congress vetoed it. Bayh whined and complained saying that the state would have huge deficits. Guess what--they had a huge surplus. Not surprisingly, he ran for senate on the platform that Indiana had a big surplus, and that he didn't have to raise taxes to do it.
It will be very interesting to see if he moves more to the left as the Democrats believe it is in their best interests. Anyway, Bayh is in no danger of losing his position. Unfortunately, he has duped a lot of Hoosiers into thinking he's a moderate. However, if he is forced to move far left, things could change. But don't expect it. Hoosiers will turn a blind eye to it unless it gets really bad. Unfortunately, I'd change Indiana to a strongly leaning RAT.
-Trackman
14
posted on
11/11/2002 1:17:11 PM PST
by
trackman
To: William McKinley
Thanks for your analysis.
Bookmarked
To: comebacknewt
Thanks for the information about Shafer. That would be nice.
To: Freebird Forever
You are welcome.
To: William McKinley
Didn't they just pass a law in SD that would prevent Dash-hole from running for both President and Senate at the same time?
To: RetiredArmy
Yes. I believe so.
To: William McKinley
Southernnorthcarolina, from his perch practically on the state line, is already looking forward to the 2004 races in both Carolinas, even while continuing to enjoy the 2002 results. I am optimistic with respect to both venues, even if the Democrat incumbents seek re-election.
Unless our world looks very different 20-24 months from now, having Dubya at the top of the ticket will be a powerful boost to the Republicans all the way down the ticket in both states. Not only the U.S. Senate races in the two states, but the NC Governor's race, and the State House and State Senate races in both states. The GOP already controls the SC Senate and House, and the NC House, and is within striking distance in the NC Senate.
The vicious circle down here in the South has been broken -- the one that allowed Dems to continue to win down-ballot contests even while the GOP mopped up at the Presidential level. Until the last couple of elections, a lot of conservatives persisted in voting Democrat at the State and local levels because the Dems were likely to win, and possess the influence. And of course, the Dems kept winning because people voted for them. That sounds ludicrously obvious, but think about it. Once the GOP is perceived to have a legitimate chance to become the majority party in, say, a State legislature anywhere in the South, there is a strong momentum toward them.
But as far as the U.S. Senate races in NC and SC are concerned: I think Congressman Richard Burr of Winston-Salem will take out Edwards, who is only making Presidential noises to keep his name in front of NC voters. And Congressman Jim DeMint of Greenville will take out Senator Foghorn Leghorn, or scare him into retirement.
Things are lookin' good down here.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-68 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson