GOP Senate Gains in 2006 May Overshadow gains in 2004 (analysis)

November 4th, 2004 | Remember_Salamis

[CommerceComet]

>>NetherCutt came on very strong towards the end of the campaign....

He did? The most current vote totals on the Washington Secretary of State website show Nethercutt's percentage at less than 43%. Nethercutt got about 70,000 less votes than Bush (who is generally dispised in Western Washington) and about 112,000 less than Rossi. Sad to say but Nethercutt never threatened Osama Patty. Nethercutt did little better than a back-bencher state senator would have done.

In 2006, if Rossi runs against Cantwell, he wins. If Nethercutt runs against Cantwell, she wins.

[TexasNative2000]

I'd rather Senator Henry Bonilla.

Good call. I was thinking of current statewide officeholders. Bonilla is an excellent choice.

[mull]

That's a good point. I honestly think that it would take a Kennedy retirement to make the race competitive for Card, Romney or Cellucci. This is the only state in the country where the Kennedys are still thought of as royalty, but I'm not sure that it extends to his nephew Joe.

Even for an open seat, it will be an uphill struggle for any Republican. All of the Rats in the congressional delegation (Frank, Markey, Meehan, Delahunt) have been able to raise money hand over fist each election cycle while facing token opposition.

[KoRn]

Current VA Gov. Mark Warner could give Senator Allen a run for his money in 06. A "solid win" would be nice, but I think it would be a close race.

[Linda Sandoval]

Win - Ben Nelson of Nebraska – Nebraskans love having two moderates hugging the center from both sides.

If Ron Brown, x-Ne Football asst coach-who's very active in social issues, ran he would beat Nelson by a mile. The people of Ne love our coaches. x-head coach Tom Osborne was just reelected by 80%. The first time he ran was the same & he never had any political experience. Huskers are mad and have a lot of anger than Ron Brown was let go with head coach Solich. I know he would beat Nelson big.

[Southack]

We are going to pick up a couple of additional Senate seats in 2006, but the interesting thing about that is *not* how much more power that will give us, but rather, what it will do to the Dems.

After their consecutive drubbings in 2002 and 2004, the Dems have two options: repeat more of the same...or change themselves.

But no matter what they do, they are still going to lose seats in the Senate and remain likewise out of power in the White House.

Thus, *either* choice that the Dems make (i.e. change or don't change) will be viewed as a disaster in the post 2006 election analysis (because they will have lost Senate seats).

Moreover, their Dark Horse option (which they won't choose) to preemptively accept overall Senate defeats in 2006 and concentrate all of their resources on winning the House back, will likewise hurt them no matter what.

This is because *failing* to retake the House under such a strategy would be viewed as a disaster, and worse (for them), re-taking the House while wild-eyed leftist Nancy Pelosi is their House leader would alienate most of America against their Party for 2008.

In short, their options for 2006 and 2008 are gloomy due to their all-or-nothing gambles in 2002 and 2004.

Note also that major political campaign contributors are going to recognize that the Dems have no realistic chance of regaining power in the next 5 years, too.

That's going to shift large amounts of money away from Dem campaigns into Republican coffers...further exacerbating the current trend.

In the meantime, we'll be packing the Supreme Court with conservatives, filling the federal benches with strict constructionists, and smashing whatever leftwing laws still survive on the federal books.

Because of their enormous strategic blunders from 2000 through this year, the Dems will be out of power *AT LEAST* through 2008, and probably much longer.

Being out of power for that long will even influence news media coverage, as reporters with more fair stories are going to get better access to the centers of power than will the old guard leftist hacks.

So in the courts, our laws on the books, in the bank accounts, and in news coverage, Republicans stand to gain much at the Dems' expense.

[69ConvertibleFirebird]

That will put the Senate at 60-40 GOP.

Would you please make it 62-38. We need to be sure that Jumpin Jim Jeffords clones don't knock us below 60. Filibuster proof would be SO great! Let the judges be confirmed! Let the oil flow! Let the trial lawyers stand in unemployment lines!

[ExSoldier]

SHE said that she was promised a shot at Bill Nelson with full GOP support and she announced for that position in the next election, right as she announced she would not be running for the open seat this term.

[RinaseaofDs]

Amazing analysis.

Should be put in a time capsule and broken out in 2006.

Do you think that Rove will have an active hand in any of these elections, or do you think he's pretty much done now that Bush has a second term?

[JerseyHighlander]

1 day for this write up? A good start, here's a few thoughts to ponder.

Loss - John Corzine of New Jersey – Backlash Alert! The backlash against McGAYvey will break the democratic political machine in Jersey. Corzine will be the first victim.

Corzine has all but proclaimed by skywriting that he intends to run for Governor in 2005. As such, there are a good dozen Democrats who will move to take his seat, if Corzine wins the off year special election for NJ governor, he gets to pick his replacement for the vacant Senate seat. BUT, Corzine has made no moves to make himself a longterm "kingmaker" in NJ, he has too much money and didn't rise up through the NJ Democrat machinery. Can't be bought, doesn't owe favors.
The Republicans have a short bench here, it's too early to call anyone as a possible 2006 Senate primary candidate.

Loss - Mark Dayton of Minnesota – The already-vulnerable Dayton is now a laughingstock after fleeing D.C. last month due to concern over terrorism. The Minneapolis Star-Tribune, no bastion of conservative thought, called Dayton "Cassandra," a "flake" and a "little chicken." Up-and-coming Conservative Rep. Mark Kennedy has been foaming at the mouth to take out Dayton since his friend Norm Coleman won a senate seat two years ago.

The Minnesota Republican party just got slapped down in their marginal districts this election. Check the state House and Sentate results. They need to regroup. Until the next election, it's not possible to say if Minnesota took a pause in the movement to Republican voting patterns, or that 2002 was the high point of Minnesota Republicans vote totals.

[Remember_Salamis]

I think Stabenow IS one of the weakest candidates too, as do many others. But again, look at potential opponents.

And you're kidding on those two young pups in the House right? Miller is a freshman congresswoman and Rogers is a Sophomore. Will one of them go after Levin croaks or retires some time in the future? Sure. But right now those two are very green.

Nick Smith is Michigan's best hope against Stabenow. He's got a lot of name recognition and is the most prominent House Member from Mighigan from either side of the aisle. Maybe he retired to prepare for the '06 run against Stabenow.

[Remember_Salamis]

I've read countless times that the House is locked up until 2012, after the next redistricting. The only way we lose the House between now and then is if there is some sort of watergate-type scandal thatdiscredits republicans nationwide.

[jackbill]

I don't want to rain on your parade, but in many instances, you are all wet.

Ford?????

In 2000, Bush beat Gore in Tennessee by 51.1% to 47.3%.

In 2004, Bush beat Kerry by 57% to 42%.

And Ford is going to win statewide? Not on your life.

Go back to the drawing board.

[Remember_Salamis]

1. It's a mid-term election, so there will be no Bush coattails for the GOP candidate to ride.

2. Tennessee has one of the higher black populations in the ocuntry at 17%. There's a good chance that they will have a high turnout to elect one of their own to the Senate.

[ChuckK]

I’ve pinged Dan from Michigan because he probably has better insight into this than the two of us combined, but here’s my take:

Miller: She might only be starting her second term, but she twice won statewide election as Secretary of State before that (originally beating an incumbent who served in the position for a couple of decades). I’d be willing to bet that she actually has higher name recognition than Stabenow. She also eliminates any gender advantage Stabenow might have.

Rogers: His name id is admittedly lower than either Miller or Stabenow, but he has an impressive resume. He served in the Army and FBI, was the Michigan Senate Majority Leader and is now part of the House leadership team. All that aside, he is a perfectly complete politician (think John Edwards’ charisma with W’s substance). He’d definitely start out behind, but he’d catch up once people learned who he was—very similar to the North Carolina race this year. He’d also probably get big time help from the Club for Growth.

[Dan from Michigan]

Neither Rogers or Miller are really green, and Stab ran for Senate after only two terms in the house. She was a state senator before that and got most of her name recognition though from her 94 run for governor - AND Lt Governor(under Wolpe). She won the congressional seat in 96(with $3million from unions) and in 98.

Stabenow is not a good public speaker, and can probably get eaten up by a straight forward facts based speaker in a debate. Both Rogers and Miller can do that. If Stabenow plays the experience card, she'd get countered heavily.

Miller: She might only be starting her second term, but she twice won statewide election as Secretary of State before that (originally beating an incumbent who served in the position for a couple of decades). I’d be willing to bet that she actually has higher name recognition than Stabenow. She also eliminates any gender advantage Stabenow might have.

Miller can win(I'm hoping she takes a shot at Granholm in 06). She had more votes than anyone in Michigan history in her 96 re-election(exceeded Engler's vote which was against Geoff Fieger). She's from Macomb County which is a key area, and she was given a lot of credit for lowering lines in the secretary of state's office. She's been a conservative as well as a congresswoman and shouldn't have base problems. Being from the Detroit area also helps.

Rogers: His name id is admittedly lower than either Miller or Stabenow, but he has an impressive resume. He served in the Army and FBI, was the Michigan Senate Majority Leader and is now part of the House leadership team. All that aside, he is a perfectly complete politician (think John Edwards’ charisma with W’s substance). He’d definitely start out behind, but he’d catch up once people learned who he was—very similar to the North Carolina race this year. He’d also probably get big time help from the Club for Growth.

I don't ever bet against Mike. Rogers won't run unless he thinks he has a good shot to win. If he jumps in, he'll probably win. He has a safe district(for him - marginal overall) and won his last two races with 62% and 68% of the vote. Bob Alexander, his opponent ran a good race last time too. Rogers got about 48% or so in Ingham County which is the 4th most democrat county in the state. He then ran big margins in Shiawasse(Swing), Clinton(GOP), his part of Oakland, and took 71% in Livingston County which is his home. He won first in 2000(pre-redistricted district that went for Gore) by about 88 votes over a very strong candidate in Dianne Byrum for Stabenow's old district. Livingston turned out big and he won. Rogers has part of Oakland in his district as well, so he's becoming more well known in the (Western) Detroit area. West and North MI are his weaker areas, and once he's known out there, he'll do well. Rogers is a good speaker and can fit in any environment.

[HoustonCurmudgeon]

Solid Win- Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas – Safe.

Your not that good if you think Kay Bailey will run again. The seat is however safe for Republicans.

And before anyone asks, she will take on our RINO Governor in 2006.

[HitmanLV]

I'm inclined to think that Ford is overrated, too. If he was worth his mustard he would challenge the stymied Ma Pelosi for House Minority Leadership.

He is slick and a media darling, but largely untested, much like Obama. Frankly, until either are tested (and best as I can see, neither has ever really been tested), I'll consider them formidable.

Giving them too much credit buys into the hype. For me, the jury is still out.

[Remember_Salamis]

If I say win, that means the GOP is keeping it even if she retires.

[Salvation]

Bumping!