Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846.
-Dan
Posted on 08/02/2005 6:53:19 AM PDT by watsonfellow
Yes, and he would have been defeated if he had run for reelection, due to his opposition to the Mexican-American War. But he regained the respect of the community.
I am from Oklahoma and I second the nomination of Inhofe and Coburn -- those guys are great!
atlanta67, I think you mean well, but don't forget this: We LOST (I repeat **LOST**) two GOP house seats to Democrats in special elections prior to the 2004 general election. One of them was in South Dakota, one of the most Republican states in the union in presidential elections. And yet just a few months later President Bush won re-election and swept the GOP to gains in both the House & the Senate.
Don't read too much into this. This was a special election where A) the Republicans had a bruising primary, B) the Democrat was an Iraqi war veteran who hid his party affiliation and tried to sound conservative, C) the locals were mad at the GOP governor, and D) the Democrats poured a TON of money into the race in hopes of winning and thus "embarrassing" President Bush.
Explain how for the Democrats? I hate to say I predicted this but I did. We got lazy, overconfident it's that simple. The democrats are hungry, remember the 90's? Did we get where we are because we sat around and assured ourselves we would win because we were right. Geezz.
I'm sorry to rant but win or lose on this one, we still are getting beaten.
Hackett did not run as a republican (it's a sad excuse). If running as a republican is calling the POTUS a chicken hawk then I don't want to be a republican. Hackett got this far pretending to be a straight shooter and GOTV.
Sorry I'm kind of upset.
""Nafta was signed by GHWB, not Clinton""
Signed by GWH Bush ratified when Clinton was Pres
Anyone have the latest numbers??
Darn sure wasn't me. I figured Schmidt by 7%. W T H do I know? LOL!
The Dems are way beyond desperate to win and they're going to use kicks to the groin, they'll throw wild roundhouse rights, rabbit punches, and head butts; they'll bite, they'll urinate and bleed on their opponents. The filthier and dirtier the tactic, the more likely they'll do it.
They want a fight? We're far stronger and more capable. We have to give them a fight, and we can't hold ANYTHING back. There is an opportunity to break them utterly and send them the way of the Whigs, but only if we unite and act decisively.
Right. Took effect in 1994.
Normal trends get thrown out the window.
That's Voinovitch, I tell ya!
In 1858 he lost a race for the Senate.
Shortly later, he won the presidency."
Was 1858 still the time when Senators were elected by State Legislatures, and not directly by the public? I thought it was early 20th Century when the ammendment to the Constitution changed the selection process.
So, Lincoln may have lost an election by Illinois Pols, not the public.
Florida is just busting with good numbers, thanks to the Bushes(pres and Gov)
http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050802/NEWS01/308020014/1056/CINCI
Schmidt: 49,644 votes (50%)
Hackett: 48,751 votes (50%)
Clermont County only one outstanding (52% reporting)
"Can you name any candidate who lost a House election and then went on to win a Senate seat?"
John Kerry
President Bush also lost his first race, which was also for Congress.
Losing a Congressional race isn't necessarily a political death knell. It can make things more difficult though.
has been static for 30 minutes, that worries me
And what is the turnout? I read it might be only 20-25%.
-Dan
If Jeb were my guv, my spirits would be high too.
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.