I know that everyone's talking about that other retirement. But this one could potentially be big news too: Kentucky Senator Jim Bunning giving up on his bid for-election in 2010.
It's widely assumed that if the retirement goes through (and so far, the reporting has been a bit speculative), that this will be a boon to the GOP's chances of retaining their seat in Kentucky, with Bunning replaced most likely by Kentucky Secretary of State Tray Grayson. I don't really debate this, particularly after Bunning raised barely more than $250,000 in the first quarter, and had been even with or slightly or behind most Democratic opponents in recent polls.
Grayson, however, hasn't been polling much better. A PPP poll (.pdf) earlier this month but Grayson 6 points behind U.S. Rep. Ben Chandler, and 4 points behind Attorney General Jack Conway, although he was 4 points ahead of another declared entrant, Lieutenant Governor Daniel Mongiardo (who narrowly lost to Bunning in 2004). A Research 2000 poll, meanwhile, had Grayson essentially tied against the three likely Democratic opponents.
These polls may slightly underestimate Grayson's standing because his name recognition is a bit weaker than that of some of his Democratic rivals. What people might not realize, however, is that Kentucky, while being a somewhat conservative state, is also still a rather Democratic state, at least in terms of is voters' declared party preferences. Gallup gives Democrats a 13-point party identification advantage in Kentucky (counting "leaners"), which places it roughly in the middle of the pack nationally. No, Kentucky is not going to vote for certain types of Democrats -- particularly liberal, northern Democrats named "Barack Obama" who gave the state the cold shoulder. But it elects plenty of moderate-to-conservative Democrats to statewide and national offices, like its Governor Steve Beshear, as well as Mongiardo, Conway and Chandler. Democrats also have a 65-35 advantage in the Kentucky State House, although Republicans control the State Senate.
This race, in other words, looks to be a toss-up whether or not Bunning retires, perhaps tilting slightly for or against Grayson based on which Democrat wins that party's nomination.
5.01.2009
Bunning Retirement Might Not Save GOP in Kentucky
@ 11:02 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
53 comments
First?
I know the other retirement is unlikely to change the ideological composition of the supreme court, but it does bring up a topic that has gone uncovered for a while. It would be nice to hear fivethirtyeight's take on who might retire in the next 4 or 8 years under Obama, what kind of obstructionism he can expect to face for his nominees, etc.
Bunning retirement still gives the GOP a boost in chances of holding the seat, rising from dismal to decent.
Re Kentucky, perhaps the Republican meltdown will help to convince socially conservative southern whites that their economic interests are not served by the GOP.
Does it really matter? Won't Kentucky just produce another Blue Dog to water down Obama's agenda?
liberal_defender_of_freedom wrote:
"Does it really matter? Won't Kentucky just produce another Blue Dog to water down Obama's agenda?"
This is silly. Would you rather have another Ben Nelson or 6 more years of a Jim Bunning-type conservative? ANY dem makes the Senate more liberal.
I think the likely nominee is Dr. Rand Paul for the Republican ticket. He has said he would run if Bunning retired and he has his dad's fundraising team behind him.
" PPP poll (.pdf) earlier this month but Grayson 6 points"
Maybe "put" instead of "but?"
I have to think this seat drops well into the double digits as far as senate rankings. Sure, the Democrats *could* win now, but it's unlikely. In the era of Obama, KY is a deep red state.
I'm also interested to see how far you drop PA on your next Senate rankings update, Nate.
Just run Colonel Sanders and everyone will vote for him.
Woo! Ideological purity! Yay!
Anyway. Re: John M - I think Nate covered that caveat. Apparently, Kentucky's like West Virginia - while it's solidly red at a presidential level, it's bluer even at legislative levels.
And even given that Bunning was throwing wild pitches even in the run-up to his 2004 campaign, I don't think that in most deep-red states he would have held on to his seat by only 1 point.
It may move into a situation like Texas. But I'd be surprised if it dropped further than that.
So the "strategic retirements" continue...
Hmm, well, the GOP had almost no chance to keep the seat WITH Bunning, now it's much easier. A Democrat with the ability to channel Hillary Clinton's campaign populism should do well.
A pair of very interesting retirements there. Kentucky is just the sort of state that GOPers have to be hoping doesn't become a little more purple. I'd have thought a guy like Ben Chandler would have a decent shot at the seat.
The SCOTUS seat is very interesting in as much as the GOP won't be able to do a whole lot to stop President Obama from finding a decent, youngish liberal to fill the seat.
Bunning is still denying any retirement. Its clear to me that McConnell is just trying to force him out.
That said, if he does retire, I still think this is a decent pick up opportunity for Team Blue. I'd see it as slightly less likely that MO, OH, or FL w/o Crist.
So do we assume that when Bunning fails to retire, Grayson will bring a primary challenge?
liberal_defender_of_freedom said...
Does it really matter? Won't Kentucky just produce another Blue Dog to water down Obama's agenda?
Even a guy like Mimick in ID-1 who may only vote dem 40 percent of the time is way better than sali who would almost never vote dem. Same can be said about a blue dog in Kentucky... also, I think Kentucky is more like OH but a not as many big cities. What I mean is, is that we can elect a moderate democrat. Much more liberal than Nelson, Specter, etc.
Also, even if we lose and Grayson does win, that would give Beshear a chance to name an SoS successor right?
It looks indeed as though Bunning is finally caving to GOP pressure.
Still, KY still looks like a decent target.
NH and MO look like the Dems' to lose. OH and FL are at least tossups, wouldn't you say (provided Crist doesn't run)?
As for Dem seats, I have a hard time seeing any being lost.
So my money's on four Dem pickups, putting em at 64. What's your prediction?
@liberal_defender_of_freedom
"Does it really matter? Won't Kentucky just produce another Blue Dog to water down Obama's agenda?"
You're sounding a little Republicanesque with your concerns for ideological purity in the Democrat party. More Democratic senators lessons the impact of any single senators influence so the blue dogs as a group can control less of the debate. So for example during the stimulus bill, say there were 5 possible centrist senators the Obama administration had the possibility to negotiate with instead of 3. He would have been able to probably get their demands down because if one of the original 3 decided to vote no he could still try and charm one of the remaining 2.
PLEASE,can we have another senate rankings, i feel like we really need them...you no with the possible bunning retirement, the whole specter thing, the charle crist attack ads, and you no everything,else, so please!
Thanks
Mark
PS Could you maybe also cover the virginian governor race, I from virginia and my dad is still undecided, he likes Mcauliffe the best but he isn't sure if Mcauliffe can beat Mcdonnel, because Mcauliffe is like super liberal!
I've said this before. I think Bunning could WIN the Republican primary in KY if he can raise enough money to be at all competitive!
I honestly don't see how a total crackpot with hard-right views could fail to appeal to KY Republicans! What more do they want?
Bunning ran possibly the WORST senatorial campaign in recent memory, a campaign so bad that it had people in the state openly speculating on whether he'd become mentally unstable, and he STILL won!
This is the part of the country where thirty percent admit openly on polls that race "matters a lot" in their votes.
So, Bunning is cantankerous old dingbat, who's dumber than a bag of rocks and given to unhinged loon rantings? That simply means he's MORE in tune with the electorate!If he actually goes ahead and resigns it will be because he can't raise enough money, NOT because he can't win!
I'll believe a Democrat winning the Senate race in KY when I see it. That is a state where there are still a lot of angry white "Reagan Democrats." The vote Republican but for historical reasons call themselves "Democrats."
Looking at the 2002 NH US Senate Race. Bob Smith- a Conservative Republican was facing re-election and was going to lose in the general election to then popular Governor Jeanne Shaheen. The Republicans defeated Bob Smith in the GOP primary with John Sununu Jr. who narrowly defeated Shaheen in 2002. Shaheen defeated Sununu in 2008 in a rematch.
Off topic, but I just read the Time 100 most influential people, and Nate is on there. Good Job you do amazing work
"You're sounding a little Republicanesque with your concerns for ideological purity in the Democrat party."
I wouldn't say that. What I would say though is I voted in Obama based on liking his agenda. Anyone who waters it down goes against what I feel is right.
On another note. Does having the election on an off year while Obama is not running, help Dems in the ex-slave/Appalachia states to win? Reason I say this is I would think Obama running brings a lot of people to the polls to just vote against Obama and in tern possibly some of those same people might vote straight party line.
Some of the comments about Bunning as nutbar ignore one truth about him - the man was a state legend long before he ever ran for office. While basketball is more beloved than baseball in the state, lots of people still think of him in the baseball context first and probably gave him a pass for longer than they would have with another candidate. Its like when Tom Osborn first ran in Nebraska - no one gave a darn what his platform was, he was freaking Cornhusker royalty. So you probably can't assume the electorate as a whole is as nutty as Bunning became.
With the dems reaching 60 once Senator Franken in seated, the battle cry of 2010 for the right will be, "Stop Obama from having absolute control!"
In a state that went easily for Senator McCain in a horrible year for the gop, that argument will work well imo.
The Kentucky senate seat is fool's gold for the dems.
John M. said:Sure, the Democrats *could* win now, but it's unlikely. In the era of Obama, KY is a deep red state. I'm not so sure about that. After all, Kentucky was once the state that kept sending Richard Mentor Johnson to the senate while being a slave state at the same time. Kentucky has always been a tough state to get a grip on.
A few interest group ratings of Bunning's record according to VoteSmart.org (http://www.votesmart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=26874&type=category&category=30):
Environment:
- Environment America - 0 percent in 2008
- League of Conservation Voters - 12 percent in the First and Second Sessions of Congress in 2007-2008
- Republicans for Environmental Protection - 29 percent in 2007-2008
- American Land Rights Association - a rating of 60 in 2007
Abortion issues:
- Planned Parenthood - 0 percent in 2008
- NARAL Pro-Choice America - 0 in every year since 1996
- Planned Parenthood - The only time period that Bunning received other than a 0 rating was in 1993 to 1996, when he received a 2 rating
- National Right to Life Committee - has not given Bunning less that a 100 rating in any year since 1996
- Civil Liberties and Civil Rights - American Civil Liberties Union, Arab American Institute, Human Rights Campaign, Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, American Civil Liberties Union, Irregular Times/Progressive Patriots, National Council of La Raza, Iranian American Political Action Committee, National Council of La Raza, Arab American Institute, League of United Latin American Citizens ALL have given Bunning a rating of 0 to no more than 35 in the years since 1995. Bunning's best ratings on Civil Liberties and Civil Rights issues came from The Libertarian Party - Personal Freedom (although the Libertarian Party gives him three ratings in 1995 on those issues: one of 70, one of 45, and one of 20 - typical libertarian - so out of step, they don't even know how to coordinate!).
Now can anyone tell me that even a Blue Dog Democrat would NOT be better? I don't think (the correctly castigated) Zell Miller ever got such low ratings. Even most GOOPers who could win in Kentucky would get better ratings.
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
Charles said:
So my money's on four Dem pickups, putting em at 64. What's your prediction? I would put NH down as a democratic gain. That state is moving to the left faster than the nation as a whole. At this rate by 2010 it will be as liberal as its brother Vermont (ok maybe im exaggerating a little here but you get the point.
Missouri is not quite a democratic lock. I would say dems have a 55-60 percent chance here. Robin Carnahan way be polling well now, but hes got a long way to go in the bible belt stated that almost banned stem cell research.
Ohio: I think Rob Portman is the favorite here, but the race will still be competitive. Dems have a 35-40 percent chance picking up a seat here.
Florida: GOP hold. Crist enters the race and he's got it in the bag. If not, a generic GOP candidate is the favorite. Meek looks like the favorite in the democratic primary but hes got a long LOOOOONG way to go.
Conn: Chris Dodd has me really worried. I think he should retire. While the republican bench in Conn. is a joke a generic republican with very little name rec. could beat dodd just because of votes AGAINST dodd.
PA: We REALLY need to see some Specter(D) vs. Toomey(R) polling. But with Obama backing him i think hes the favorite.
North Carolina: Dems have about a 30 percent of taking Burr's seat.
Colorado: Colorado is moving to the left, Bennet is building name rec. still. Hes pretty safe
Illinois: I would feel very confident in a dem hold if Burris declined to run for re-election. The only way the GOP could take this seat is if Burris wins a chaotic primary with 25 percent of the vote or something and gets creamed by kirk. But given Burris raised less money in Q1 than a high school student working at McDonalds part time could make in the same period of time....even winning the primary is a long shot for burris.
Reid: Nevada is moving to the left, weak GOP bench, Reid is pretty safe.
Kentucky: 35 percent chance of Dem gain. Kentucky hates obama and the GOP run attack ads saying that "(insert name of dem nominee here) will just be a rubber stamp for obama" and "with another dem senator, obama will have even more power". And i think that will scare kentucky voters into making a NObama vote.
When all is said and done i think the dems will have 62 seats in the senate. But this will be all Obama will need really. For the republicans to filibuster they would need to get EVERY republican senator to filibuster (including the moderate ones from maine) as well as 3 democrats to join them. Voting against your party's bill is one thing but to filibuster your own party's bill is a whole different ball game.
There is no need for President Obama to campaign in Kentucky for the Dem nominee for Senate. He has two, and maybe three, surrogates who could be much, much more effective doing that:
William Jefferson Clinton, who would appeal to the African-American voters and to the 'centrist' Dems; and
Hillary Clinton (although the Sec of State usually doesn't do this type of campaigning, it's not totally unheard of) who would appeal to the AA voters and to the 'centrist Dems.
And the 'maybe' third:
Chelsea Clinton, who would appeal to women and the 'youth' vote of most ethnic heritages.
Evan Bayh would also be a good surrogate campaigner, especially in Northern Kentucky, since Bayh is from southern Indiana. One thing Bayh would have to make sure of is that he didn't do anything to show favoritism for any university (especially Indiana University) over the University of Kentucky or the University of Louisville.
The downside for Bayh campaigning in Kentucky is that he will also be campaigning in Indiana for another term. He is not expected to have strong opposition, though, and thus would have the luxury of being able to campaign outside the state to some extent. Also, campaigning he did in northern Kentucky would bleed over into southern Indiana, so it could be a win/win for Bayh and the Democratic Party.
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
Looking at all of the competitive US Senate Races.
Democrats will hold on to
Arkansas(Lincoln-D)
California(Boxer-D)
Colorado(Bennett-D)
Delaware(Biden-D defeats Castle-R)
Illinios(Giannoulias defeats Kirk-R)
Nevada(Reid-D)
New York(Gillibrand-D)
Pennsylvania(Specter or Sestak)
Washington(Murray-D)
Wisconsin (Feingold-D)
Connecticut is the only seat DEMS may lose.
Democrats will pick up.
Missouri-(OPEN-Bond)- This is the 2008 VA US Senate Race. Democratic Nominee is a popular statewide elected office. Republicans have a primary between two unpopular candidates. Carnahan-D defeats either Blunt or Steelman.
New Hampshire(OPEN-Gregg)- Strong Dem Pickup US Senate Elect Paul Hodes.
Ohio- (OPEN- Voinovich)- Slight edge to Lee Fisher-D
North Carolina- Tossup with a slight DEM lean if Roy Cooper runs.
Kentucky- Dem pick up if Conway is the Democratic nominee.
nkpolitics1279,
Are those your predictions, the predictions of someone else, or
your "statements of fact" that you just pull out of someone's (maybe even yours?) nether regions?
It's one thing to prognosticate. It's entirely different to compose a post in such a manner that your prognostications are presented as fact.
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
Well, I had to come out of lurkerville to point out that U.S. Rep Ben Chandler is the grandson of A.B. "Happy" Chandler, one of the most - if not the most beloved in Kentucky. Happy Chandler was commissioner of baseball when Jackie Robinson became the first black player. from wiki; Albert Benjamin "Happy" Chandler, Sr. (July 14, 1898 – June 15, 1991) was twice governor of Kentucky, a U.S. Senator, the 2nd Commissioner of Major League Baseball, and a member of the Baseball Hall of Fame. His jovial attitude earned him the nickname "Happy," which stuck for the remainder of his life. All Ben Chandler has to do to win the Senate seat is play this clip every now and then. Shoe in. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqGuVQsl-7U
Mike in Maryland is a troll.
Do you disagree with my predictions or are you being a douche bag.
Tell me that you don't think
Carnahan is going to win MO by a double digit margin. or Hodes is going to win in NH or Fisher will win in OH or Conway will win in KY or Cooper has a chance of unseating Burr in NC if he decides to run.
Tell me that you don't think Beau Biden is going to win in DE, Giannoulias is going to win in IL, or Gillibrand is going to win in NY or Bennett is going to win in CO.
Do me a favor Mike in Maryland- Stop responding to me predictions unless you have a constructive disagreement?
nkpolitics1279?
Ever hear of 'Truth in labeling'?
The law applies to products people buy, but the concept is much more extensive than just consumer products.
As to what I think of your predictions:
Will Fisher be the Democratic nominee in Ohio? And if Fisher is the Democratic nominee, is that a guaranteed win? Portman was not closely connected to the GOP scandals in Ohio, so he is not the 'normal' Ohio GOOPer that Taft and/or Blackwell would have supported. Portman has a very large campaign war chest already - how much bigger will it grow? How effective of a campaign will Fisher and Portman run?
Giannoulias? Hard to tell this far out who is going to win the Illinois Democratic primary. If it's a REAL crowded field, someone might be able to win with 15-20% of the vote. If it's that crowded of a field, the support for Giannoulias might be splintered among 4, 5 or more candidates.
If it's a small field, it'll be a lot easier to figure out the winner of the Democratic primary winner.
Kentucky? If Bunning does not retire (as his office is still putting out word that he will NOT retire), then will he win the GOOPer primary? If he does, will the Dems have such a primary fight that it tears the party apart? Will the GOOPers have a primary fight that it tears the party apart?
If Bunning does retire, then who will win the GOOPer primary? Will the Dems and/or the GOOPers have such a primary fight that it tears the parties apart?
North Carolina? Is Cooper guaranteed to win? No.
If you remember, in November, 2007, almost EVERYONE making predictions about the 2008 Presidential primaries were saying it would be Hillary vs. ? in the general election. November, 2007 was just 18 months ago. Many, as late as early April, 2008, were not convinced it would be Obama vs. McCain. Many thought a large portion of the super-delegates to the Democratic Convention would hold out and it could easily turn into a deadlocked convention, without either candidate being able to get a majority.
Many people in Maryland didn't take Booby Ehrlich's candidacy for Governor in 2002 serious. In fact, the conventional wisdom was that he would lose by 10 or more points. After all, Maryland has a heavy Democratic registration edge, and the Democratic nominee was a Kennedy. Problem was that Kennedy-Townsend ran a horrible campaign, and Ehrlich did a good job of hiding his conservatism from the 'casual' voter, and won the Governorship.
All other things being equal, you have most likely set out a probable scenario. But that is all you've done - a likely scenario. One thing I've learned in decades of watching politics - just when you think you can expect a zig in most politicians, at least one will zag and throw everything off kilter, making predictions questionable at best, and sometimes blowing all prognostications out of the water.
Besides, do we know which candidate for either party has a hidden 'scandal' that will come out in the next year and a few months? Do we know which candidate will be diagnosed with some disease that will cause them to drop out of the race? Etc., etc. No we do not know, but it could happen once, twice, three times, or more. And what would happen to that candidate's probability of winning? What if one of the candidates is involved in some tragedy, and the candidate barely survives the immediate scenario, but more or less fully recovers (think of the Ray-Gun assassination attempt). No matter which party, what does that do to the candidate's probability in the next election?
What will the economic picture be in late 2010? Fuel prices high or low? Unemployment rate holding steady at a very high rate, or moderate rate; or maybe falling? What will interest rates be? What about the housing market - on it's way to recovery?
Will there be an event that causes the electorate to reconsider either or both parties? Something like a scandal in either party? In the Obama administration? Will there be another terrorist attack? And if so, who will be responsible?
So for you to write your messages as "so and so WILL win" and 'so and so WILL lose" as if it is written in stone is nothing but asinine posturing, making you appear to know everything about every race. You don't because NO one does.
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
Mike in Maryland let me go backwards on your rebuttals.
In Maryland 2002- KKT ran a lousy campaign. The previous Democratic Governor Parris Glendening was pretty unpopular. KKT picked a White Republican military man as her Lt Governor Runningmate instead of a Black Democrat. Ehrlich picked a Black man named Michael Steele as his runningmate. Ehrlich-Steele ticket defeated the KKT-Larson ticket. Ehrlich lost re-election in 2006 to Martin O'Malley.
Regarding NC- Cooper. Cooper is a popular 3 term Attorney General. Burr is a first term Conservative Republican Backbencher in a state that is trending Democratic. This seat flips every 6 years. NC other GOP Senator lost badly to an unknown State Senator. In a neutral year- AR 2002 US Senate Race. a first term Republican US Senator Tim Hutchison- Conservative republican lost to popular Democratic State AG Mark Pryor.
Regarding Kentucky- The leading Democratic candidate is Attorney General Jack Conway or Lt Governor Dan Mongiardo. Either them will face either Bunning or Greyson. Conway or Mongiardo defeat Bunning. Only Conway stands a chance of defeating Grayson.
Regarding Giannoulias of Illinios.
The Democratic Candidates are going to be Giannoulias,Schakowsky,Burris and Chris Kennedy. Burris will not get more than 20%. Kennedy who has not won any elected office will get 10% Giannoulias will come out in top with a strong support in downstate IL.
Regarding Ohio.
Portman is a non controversial GOP unlike Blackwell,Taft or Mean Jean Schmidt or John Boehner. However Portman is closely tied with Bush 43. He is a free trader. The likely Dem nominee Lee Fisher is not the perfect candidate but he will benifit from popular Governor Ted Strickland's coattails.
When I analyze individual House,Senate or Governors race- I look at who the candidates are in each race
The national issues such as unemployment and Obama's unpopularity is revelent in US Senate races like CO(Bennett-D),FL(if Crist-R is not running,)KY-(if Bunning does not run),
What if Lisa Madigan got into the IL-Senate race- then she would cream Giannoulias, Schakowsky and of course Burris in the primary. Also, I don't think that Kirk is such a long shot to win the seat even if a 'generic Dem who isn't Burris' gets nominated- that is, Giannoulias or Schakowsky. A PPP poll has him leading the latter by 4 and tied with the former.
'
When I analyze individual House,Senate or Governors race- I look at who the candidates are in each race '
As Mike said- you can't do that. The race aren't in a vacuum where nothing will happen until 2010- and you can't predict what exactly will happen.
Maybe Carnahan has a scandal that blows her out of the water, like the GOPer who ran against Obama in 2004? Ryan or something like that.
As a 538 reader you should know that- because that's what this site is about.
nkpolitics1279,
If you are sooooooooooo good at predicting the races, explain how Roscoe Bartlett (the idiot some village is missing) won election in MD-6 in 1992.
Hint - his expected general election opponent, Beverly Byron, lost in the Democratic primary. The reason she lost? Some Dem party voters didn't think Byron was a 'pure' enough Democratic Party member, and voted for a more 'pure' Democratic candidate. Problem was, Thomas Hattery was too much of a 'pure' Democrat for the people of the district, so they voted for Bartlett in the general election, and have been voting for him since.
If you are sooooooooooo good at predicting the races, explain why Frank Kratovil now represents the Maryland First District instead of Wayne Gilchrest.
Hint - Many of the GOOPers on Maryland's Eastern Shore thought that Gilchrest was not a 'pure' enough GOOPer, so they voted for the Club for Growth-backed Andy Harris in the 2008 GOOPer primary. Harris was too much of a 'pure' GOOPer for the district to digest, so Kratovil squeaked out a win.
If you are sooooooooooo good at predicting the races, explain why Robert Bauman lost the 1980 election for the Maryland First District to Roy Dyson.
Hint - On October 3, 1980, while running for re-election, Bauman was charged for attempting to solicit sex from a 16-year-old male prostitute. The scandal broke 32 days before the general election, thus not enough time for Bauman to ride out the storm.
If you are sooooooooooo good at predicting the races, explain how Norman Coleman won election as the junior Senator of Minnesota in 2002.
Hint - an accident on October 25, 2002, took the life of the incumbent Democratic Senator. That accident happened just 12 days prior to the general election, and the Democratic Party had to scramble to find a candidate to run. Even so, Walter Mondale, with about a week of campaigning, came within 50,000 votes of keeping Coleman out of the Senate seat. If not for that accident, we almost assuredly wouldn't be having the stand-off in Minnesota today.
If you are sooooooooooo good at predicting the races, explain why the 1964 Presidential election was between Lyndon Johnson and Barry Goldwater, not the expected contest between John F. Kennedy and Barry Goldwater.
Hint - a very sad day in November, 1963, in Dallas, Texas, caused a different line-up of candidates in the 1964 election.
In other words, you may THINK you know who will run, and you MIGHT be correct if circumstances don't interfere, but there are no guarantees in life, and things can happen to disrupt the best well-laid plans.
Therefore, for you to present any prognostication (defined as a forecast or prediction) as FACT is just slightly short of nothing but pure arrogance on your part. Guess what? Most people detest arrogance when exhibited by others.
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
酒店 , 酒店經紀 ,酒店公關 ,酒店兼職,酒店小姐, 酒店上班,酒店喝酒, 酒店工作, 酒店兼差
Aw, c'mon, MikeMD, don't you think you're taking this all just a bit too seriously and getting into NK's face a bit more than necessary?
I interpreted NK's predictions presented as fact as a self-conscious display of pretend arrogance--sort of the way that John McLaughlin of the McLaughlin Group always presents his predictions as fact before shouting "Bye-BYE!" at the viewers who inexplicably haven't tuned him out yet. True, McLaughlin's a bit of a dick (like Pope Benny's a bit of a Catholic), butt you know the expression: two dicks don't make a right.
"If you are sooooooooooo good at predicting the races, explain how Norman Coleman won election as the junior Senator of Minnesota in 2002.
Hint - an accident on October 25, 2002, took the life of the incumbent Democratic Senator. That accident happened just 12 days prior to the general election, and the Democratic Party had to scramble to find a candidate to run. Even so, Walter Mondale, with about a week of campaigning, came within 50,000 votes of keeping Coleman out of the Senate seat. If not for that accident, we almost assuredly wouldn't be having the stand-off in Minnesota today."As I remember this race the polling showed Wellstone trailing shortly before his death. He had been dogged throughout the campaign by attacks on his forthright vote AGAINST the build-up to war in Iraq, at a time shortly after 9-11 when pro-war hysteria was in full flower. The media was ranting WILDLY in favor of war and he was one of the few legislators to take a hard stand against it.
He was being attacked from all quarters about this (remember that even former anti-war activist John Kerry supported Bush on Iraq at this point) and Wellstone's defense was "I had to vote my conscience." This looks a LOT better in retrospect than it did to fearful moderates at the time.
If he had lived he MIGHT have pulled that race out, but it was by no means a certainty.
Whatever sympathy vote Wellstone's death might have aroused was canceled by a well orchestrated media lynching when speakers at his memorial urged supporters to turn out to ensure that his legacy lived on -- a perfectly reasonable thing to say -- but it was portrayed as some sort of unseemly opportunists attempting to parlay Wellstone's death for political advantage. The media obsession with this hyped up incident locked in Coleman's election.
But, the truth is he might well have won against Wellstone because of the relative unpopularity of Wellstone's position against the build-up to war which the legions of the confused thought had something to do with 9-11, thus making Wellstone an easy target for right-wing super-patriot slander.
To Dasmus and Mike in Maryland.
Dasmus-
Lisa Madigan is more likely to run for Governor than US Senate. She is the Democratic Party favorite in either of those races. She also will beat Kirk like a drum. Regarding matchups between Giannoulias and Schakowsky which show Kirk in a statistical tie race with either of those candidates. This poll is based on name recognition. That poll shows 50% of the voters have no opinion or don't know who Schakowsky is or 40% of the voters have no opinion or don't know who Giannoulias is. 43% of the voters have no opinion or don't know who Kirk is. Second of all In a matchup between Kirk and Schakowsky- 33% of the Democrats are undecided. while 19% of the Republicans are undecided. In a matchup between Kirk and Giannoulias- 31% of the Democrats are undecided. while 19% of the Republicans are undecided. The Undecided Dems will support the Democratic Nominee. Giannoulias or Schakowsky will defeat Kirk by a 55-45 percent margin. I don't see any scandal issues occuring in the Missouri Race- Blunt and Steelman are social conservatives-unless they are hypocrites.
Mike in Maryland-
You are a f-cking troll douchebag who needs to drop dead.
Let me tell you why each individual US Senator or House Member lost his seat in the primary or general election.
Starting with the 2008 US House Races.
CO-4(Musgrave-R)- Her nutcase ideology- Hatred towards gays like yourself.
CT-4(Shays-R)- Represented a solid blue disrict- New England GOP is becoming extinct.
FL-8(Keller-R)- District trending Democratic- Obama coattails.
FL-16(Mahoney-D)- Sex Scandals.
FL-24(Feeney-R)- Involved in the Jack Abrammoff lobby scandal.
ID-1(Sali-R)- Wingnut incumbent.
KS-2(Boyda-D)- Freshman Incumbent in the GOP district. Once the moderate GOP Lynn Jenkins won the GOP nomination Boyda was going to lose.
LA-2(Jefferson-D)- Indicted on Bribery Scandal.
LA-6(Cazayoux-D)- A Black Democrat named Michael Jackson ran as an Independent spliting the Democratic party vote.
MD-1(Gilchrist-R) lost in primary due to Club for Growth. District went Democratic.
MD-4(Wynn-D) lost in primary due to his support for Iraq War and Bush Energy policy. A real Democrat like Donna Edwards now occupies this seat.
MI-7(Walberg-R)- District trending Democratic.
MI-9(Knollenberg-R)- District trending Democratic.
NV-3(Porter-R)- District trending Democratic.
NY-29(Kuhl-R)-Wingnut GOP incumbent.
NC-8(Hayes-R)-Wingnut GOP incumbent in a District trending Democrat.
OH-1(Chabot-R)-Wingnut GOP in a District trending Democrat.
PA-3(English-R)- District trending Democratic.
TX-22(Lampson-D) Represented a ruby red Congressional District.
UT-3(Cannon-R)-Lost in the GOP primary for being Pro Amnesty.
VA-2(Drake-R)- Lost in a District trending Democratic.
VA-5(Goode-R)-Wingnut GOP Congressman in a swing District.
Regarding the 2008 US Senate Races.
AK(Stevens-R)- Convicted Felon.
MN(Coleman-R)- Obama's Coattails.
NH(Sununu-R)- Strong Democratic challenger and Obama's Coattails.
NC(Dole-R)- Weak Campaigning and poor constituency service.
OR(Smith-R)- Obama's Coattails.
Regarding the 2006 US Senate Races.
MO-(Talent-R)-loss had to do with the national environment.
MT-(Burns-R)- Scandals- and nutjob ideology.
OH-(Dewine-R)- The unpopularity of GOP in OH and bad economy.
PA(Santorum-R)- nutjob ideology in Democratic state.
RI(Chaffee-R)-voters wanted to elect a real Democrat over a liberal Republican.
VA(Allen-R)- Macaca Moment.
Looking at the 2010 US Senate races.
MO- is like VA 2008. OPEN Senate Race in a swing state. Democrats have a very popular statewide elected official. Republicans nominated the most unpopular candidate.
NH is like NM 2008- OPEN seat in a Democratic leaning State. Democrats nominated a popular US Congressman. Republicans picked an unknown ideologue.
OH is like CO-2008- Open seat in a purple state trending Democratic. Democrats nominated a generic Center left candidate. While Republicans nominated a generic Center right candidate. Republican is pro free trade and tied with Bush 43.
FL with Crist- (TN-2002)- Republicans nominee a popular former Governor and Presidential candidate won over a Generic Democratic US Congressman.
FL without Crist(TN-2006) Meek is in a similar situation as Harold Ford Jr.
KS-(NE-2008). In a Red State Democrats did not field any top tier candidates.
Hopefully this "good ol' boy" will step aside and give way to Rand Paul to run for the seat in 2010. Although Paul has been polite in stating that he won't consider a run if Jim Bunning decides to stay, the Sec. of State of Kentucky has already formed an exploratory committee. Rand's thoughts on that:
"Friends,
I find it a bit troubling that Trey Grayson is pushing Senator Bunning to leave the race. It is perhaps disingenuous, at best, for him to proclaim that Sen. Bunning is his mentor and then announce he is forming an exploratory committee to run, even BEFORE Senator Bunning makes any announcement."
"I think Senator Bunning should be commended not only for his great service, but incredible courage in voting against the Bank Bailout. I think it is disrespectful to form any campaign organization while he is still running."
-Rand Paul
nkpolitics1279 said - NY-29(Kuhl-R)-Wingnut GOP incumbent.
Living in this area and knowing the politics of the man Kuhl replaced (limited-government conservative legend Amo Houghton), it was very obvious why Kuhl lost: he thought that in order to be a Republican he had to vote like a firebreathing, totalitarian, Southern Baptist preacher. That is simply not the sort of conservatism that works in upstate New York. Upstate is one of the remaining bastions of the limited-government crowd and Houghton carried that banner well for a very long time, often deliberately antagonizing the national GOP because of it. Kuhl didn't understand this and catered to the theocrats and that is why he lost a district that was expressly gerrymandered to be a safe Republican seat.
Lord Carver- The reason for calling Kuhl a Wingnut is his Right Wing Conservative Ideology on Social Issues such as Opposition to Gay Rights and Abortion Rights and his Strong Support for the Iraq War. Kuhl's loss is similar to Marilyn Musgrave's loss in Colorado and Bill Sali's loss in Idaho. as well as Thelma Drake's loss in Virginia. I am looking forward to seeing other wingut GOP congresspersons in Safe GOP Congressional Districts lose like Michelle Bachmann of Minnesota and Jeanne Schmidt of Ohio.
Mongiardo vs. Grayson would be an interesting showdown. Both are young, well-known to Kentucky voters, have good command of the issues and know how to raise money. The similarities end there, however. Mongiardo (Lt. Gov.) is a M.D. from rural Appalachia and, in fact, still practices medicine there. Grayson (SOS) is a Harvard-educated attorney from just outside Cincinnati. Mongiardo's homespun demeanor has benefited his various successful candidacies, while Grayson's reserved nature is well-suited for the job of chief elections official. As of now, I would give the advantage to Mongiardo primarily due to his strong showing in 2004 and subsequent impact on the winning gubernatorial slate in 2007.
I think Jack Conway has the intelligence and work ethic to potentially be a strong candidate, but I'm not yet sold. His landslide victory in the 2007 race for Attorney General owed much to the coattails of Beshear-Mongiardo and extreme bent of his Republican opponent. The contest's low profile did nothing to help familiarize the eastern third of the state with the young Louisvillian. Conway's only prior run for office came in 2002 when he narrowly lost to then-incumbent Anne Northup in the 3rd CD race.
与本统计机构统计调查取得的统计数据不一致的， 再次同声传译提请全国人惠州翻译公司。大常委会商务口译审议的统计法修订草案明确规定：深圳翻译公司，国家广州翻译公司统计数据以同声传译设备租赁国家统计局公布的数据为准俄语翻译，
政府有关部门统计调查取得的统计数据，与本级人民政府统计机构统计调查取得的统计数据不一致的，县级深圳翻译以上地方
深圳同声传译人民政府设立广州翻译公司独立的统计机构
翻译公司，，
法语翻译
上海翻译公司镇人民政府设置统计工作岗位上海翻译公司
英语翻译 ，配备专职或者兼职同传设备
同声传译统计人员，深圳日语
翻译
同声传译设备租赁。。新疆租车，依法管理统计工作
同声传译设备租赁，
法语翻译
同声传译同声传译，同声传译设备
珠海翻译公司，实施统计调查。深圳手机号码，
同声传译设备
表决器。会议设备租赁
广州翻译公司
汕头翻译公司，
无线导览
会议设备租赁统计人员应当具备与其从事的统计工作相适应的专业知识和业务能力。
Seems like Rand Paul was left out of this poll. Convenient.
At any rate, I still think Rand Paul will win this primary, and the general election.
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,
Post a Comment