Mid-Terms 2006

[mmarsh]

We are 3 months from Kick-Off, This thread should include any thoughts, ideas and opinions concerning the Mid-Term elections. Will the Democrats retake 1 or both Houses? Or will the GOP manage to hang on or even gain seats in Congress.

Also if possible try to mention the race in YOUR home state if possible.

Guess I'll go first. I'm from NY so that means either Hillary, or ugh, Hillary. The only GOP candidate dropped out after running a disasterous campaign. It was so bad that the State Ranking Republican, Joe Bruno told her to drop out. At least Mrs Pirro got the message to quit, (unlike Kathleen Harris who still hasnt figured out that her own party doesnt want her). So Hillary is basically unopposed. Sorry, NY is boring this year.

http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=ny&id=3678781

Overall, I think the GOP will have a bad go of it. They will lose at least 3 seats in the Senate (Santorum, Burns), and it looks like Dewine is in major trouble, being 8 points back. While not impossible, He will have trouble catching up. There are another 5 or so seats that look like could change blue.

http://sixers.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ODdmNWRkMTEwNjMxOTdjZDBiNDE2YjFkOWY3ZmVjM2E=

I dont think the Dems will have enough wins to retake the Senate and thats the worst of both worlds for the GOP. Here's why. First off all they will have a very weak minority, which means they will have to deal with the Dems. And second, because they are still the majority they will get all the blame for every mess as yet to occur. It would almost be better for the GOP to suffer a major defeat now in order to increase their odds in 2008.

For the House, very tricky. Could go either way. Normally I'd say the Dems look rosy, but they have so much ground to catchup they will need to count on a good election turnout. I guess it will depend on how many go to the polls. I expect a significant number of seats to change blue, I'll wager about at least 8 (they need 15 to retake the House).


Ok thats it for me, Anybody else?

 

[Rabs]

West Virgina is gona be pretty boring to. Byrd is absloutely slaughtering the GOP. Hell, I cant blame them hes brought a lot of good things to the state and is a pretty moderate Dem.

 

[mmarsh]

West Virgina is gona be pretty boring to. Byrd is absolutely slaughtering the GOP. Hell, I cant blame them hes brought a lot of good things to the state and is a pretty moderate Dem.

I'll agree with that, you West Virginians are lucky to have him he's a good senator, one of the best Democratic senators IMHO...

 

[Padre]

Overall, I think the GOP will have a bad go of it. They will lose at least 3 seats in the Senate (Santorum, Burns), and it looks like Dewine is in major trouble, being 8 points back. While not impossible, He will have trouble catching up. There are another 5 or so seats that look like could change blue.

Mmarsh - how come Santorum is a gonner?

 

[mmarsh]

Padre

Santorum is extremely far rightwing. Pennslyvania is moderate that leans very slightly to the left. Very simply, his conservative firebrand ideology is simply too extremist for most people. Also Santorum had in the past allied himself closely with Bush, and Bush is very unpopular now, that previous relationship hurt him politically as well.

The polls very, but most polls show an average of a 10 point gap between Casey and Santorum. This is from Stategic Vision a GOP pollster thats shows Casey ahead by a 7 point gap. I think that number is slightly low, but thats IMHO...

http://www.hillnews.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/051606/casey.html

Casey shouldnt get careless, but as long as he plays his cards right he will win.

 

[DTop]

My opinion is this. The political pendulum will swing as it always has. To my way of thinking, it's more a matter of the voting public wanting change just for the sake of change than it is for any real deviation from the norm (politically speaking). That is to say, that no matter whether the Dems or the Reps are in power, many or perhaps most Americans seem to prefer to a change the dominant party for no other reason than it's just time to do so, especially at the national level. It may be an unspoken contribution to our system of checks and balances. Why else would we limit presidents to just 2 terms? This may have been instituted initially to stem the run of FDR and the Dems stranglehold on the White house, but I haven't heard of any strong attempts to remove that restriction lately. It sits well with our desire to change things periodically.
The political clime here in FL is very different from that in the Northeast. I still can see some of the political ads from up north when I watch the Red Sox games. I've seen CT Dems cutting up Lieberman for being pro Bush. I've heard comments like "no one should be worried about their mother or father having to be sent off to war". Ned Lamont's ad says this:
"For too long Senator Lieberman has parroted Republican talking points, giving “Democratic” cover to the president’s failed policies. If it talks like George W. Bush and acts like George W. Bush, it’s certainly not a Connecticut Democrat. "
Joe Lieberman's ad by contrast is saturated with sarcasm when it says "No More Joe” followed by a male narrator asking, “What else does Ned Lamont have to say?”
The narrator praises Lieberman’s career as a civil-rights activist, attorney general and environment-friendly senator and concludes with a bumper-sticker slogan of his own: “Experience. Principles. Results. Not a bad bumper sticker.”
Here in FL for example, there's a candidate for governor (Tom Gallagher) who's TV ad says this:
"It seems every candidate has a group they’re fighting for. I do too. It’s called the family. As Governor I won’t allow liberal judges from Massachusetts to re-define marriage in our state. We need a constitutional ban on gay marriage, a 24 hour waiting period on abortion, and we must increase the number of children adopted in Florida. As a father, I don’t think anyone should have to explain what an adult billboard is to a seven year old. – so I’m taking ‘em down. I’m Tom Gallagher. Our families are worth fighting for and that’s one fight I’m ready to have."
Ah American politics, you've got to have a sense of humor about it or it'll drive you nuts.

 

[Padre]

Thanks MMarsh - just that last time I heard anything about him he was a rising star pegged as a future President, like Barak Obama.

Also, I understand Sen. McCain is now 70 yet he is still favoured as the Republican Presidential candidate - I'm surprised his age is not seen as a concern albeit Reagan used it as an asset. News articles just don't mention McCain's age and I'm a bit surprised (but don't have a problem with 70's plus running for office). Does he have a senate race before 2008?