Posted on 10/22/2012 3:15:17 AM PDT by GonzoII
RESIZE: AAA
Amid recent reports in the New York Times and other liberal publications that Republican efforts to regain the Senate in November are diminishing, the GOP is still on track to gain the four necessary seats to have control of the upper chamber beginning in January. The GOP could wind up with 52 seats.
The New York Times cited contests in Arizona and Florida as getting out of reach for Republicans. But few in the punditocracy expect that former U.S. Surgeon General Richard Carmona will be the first Democrat to win a Senate seat from Arizona since 1988, and even fewer completely write off the chances of Rep. Connie Mack, namesake-son of a revered former senator in the Sunshine State
Other races once written off as likely Democratic wins are shaping up differently. In Connecticut, despite a so-so performance in their first televised debate, businesswoman and 2010 GOP nominee Linda McMahon is still in a tight contest with liberal Rep. Chris Murphy for the seat of Democrat-turned-independent Joe Lieberman. McMahon is the first defeated Republican Senate nominee from the Nutmeg State to be given a second nomination since Prescott Bush, father and grandfather of two U.S. presidents, who lost a Senate race in 1950 and came back to win in 1952.
Moreover, a true upset could be brewing in Pennsylvania. Out of nowhere, coal operator and Republican candidate Tom Smith is within striking distance of Democratic incumbent Sen. Bob Casey. Smith has poured more than $10 million of his own wealth into the campaign, hitting the administration hard on its “war on coal” and has closed the gap with Casey to only a few points in several statewide polls.
With 33 Senate races to be decided in two weeks, 23 Democratic-held seats and only 10 held by Republicans will be voted on. There are 11 open seats—seven in which Democratic incumbents are leaving and four with departing Republican incumbents. Only one is an involuntary retirement—Indiana’s Richard Lugar, who lost the GOP primary to Richard Mourdock.
Bottom line, Republicans only need four seats, and the majority of these races are within the margin of error. With a little luck and a strong turnout, Republicans in charge come January is possible.
Forget the Brain Dead In Ct. McMahon is an Idiot,Running ads of Her Supporters saying,Im voting for Obama and Linda McMahon,she will work with President Obama.
I really feel Like voting for this Idiot.
Thanks GonzoII.
“Forget the Brain Dead In Ct. McMahon is an Idiot,Running ads of Her Supporters saying,Im voting for Obama and Linda McMahon,she will work with President Obama.
I really feel Like voting for this Idiot.”
Saw those ads, unbelievable.
Better help out Aitkin, too—you bleeping RINOs!!
Scott Brown, sadly, is running similar ads in Mass. He’s trumpeting his “deciding vote” on Dodd/Frank, his support of Planned Parenthood , and his pro abortion stances. Gone are his fiscally conservative ads, railing against Harry Reid, Obamacare, and runaway spending. I get he can’t run as some Tea Party guy, and needs to thread the needle, but he won last time running as a independent conservative. Today he’s running as a moderate Democrat.
In Massachusetts that's almost an irresistible siren call.
It’s amazing any Republican could be so stupid as to run “reach around” ads, but maybe nominating Romney suggested to them that common sense is dead.
Not surprising that a WWE executive would decline to run as a principled conservative. That programming is still some of the trashiest, sleaziest garbage on television.
Some years one party wins all, or almost all, of the close Senate races. And this Senate "class" has been particularly likely to reflect the national vote, with the majority going down in each of the last three elections.
R to D in the Democrat blowout of 2006.
R to Even in 2000, when Gore had a narrow plurality.
D to R in the Republican blowout of 1994.
Plus, no defeated incumbent President, whose party held the Senate, has ever not taken that Senate majority down with him. That holds true from Adams to Carter, before and after the 17th Amendment.
Past performance is no guaranty, and all that. But if Romney wins big, there is very little likely hood of the Democrats keeping the Senate, whatever the individual polls say today.
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.