Manchester mayor considering run for governor (of New Hampshire)

Seacoast Online ^ | January 24, 2008

[Clintonfatigued]

Manchester (New Hampshire) Mayor Frank Guinta says he is considering a run for governor.

The Republican says he is forming a political action committee which will allow him to raise money and explore the possibilities. Guinta says he has been approached by several people about taking his city tax cutting plans to the Statehouse. He says before making a commitment, he'll gauge his support and consider his ability to raise money and how a run would affect his family.

Guinta says he'll file the paperwork to form the PAC on Monday. He's not planning a final decision for several months.

[Gay State Conservative]

It seems to me that NH is now officially a lost cause.There can be no other explanation for the state’s two House seats now being occupied by leftist filthbags that would make Ted Kennedy blush.

[Clintonfatigued]

John Lynch is polling below 50% against Mayor Guinta, who isn’t well-known outside of his home town. That’s a good sign.

[fieldmarshaldj]

All polling data has indicated McCain fares the best in state by state matchups with Hillary or Obama. Still, even if he manages to win, we’re going to continue to shrink in Congress (I’m estimating perhaps a 7 seat loss in the Senate, 8 with McCain’s resignation since the rodent Governor will appoint a successor. And upwards of 25 in the House, all despite the fact that the approval rating for leadership is appallingly low).

My concern about Petraeus is that #1, we have no idea of his ideology or how he would perform as an elected official, and #2, how he would do on the campaign trail. Might be a better bet for him to run for a Governorship (New York ?) in 2010 and prove his stuff there.

[GOPGuide]

I wouldn’t put much stock in early head to head polls vis a vis McCain and Hillary. The media hasn’t sunk their claws into him yet.

I agree that the Senate races for the GOP are going to be a fiasco this year. We will be lucky if we only lose 5 net seats, but I don’t see how we can lose 25 seats in the House. The Rats hold many seats that went for Bush in 2004, we are bound to pick some of those up.

We did after all manage to pick up seats in 1992, which was not the best year for the Republicans.

[fieldmarshaldj]

"I wouldn’t put much stock in early head to head polls vis a vis McCain and Hillary. The media hasn’t sunk their claws into him yet."

I am expecting the onslaught. But the polling data is still a good indicator. I was always amazed how unusually high he polled in a general election state by state, even as he was almost off the radar screen in the primaries.

"I agree that the Senate races for the GOP are going to be a fiasco this year. We will be lucky if we only lose 5 net seats, but I don’t see how we can lose 25 seats in the House. The Rats hold many seats that went for Bush in 2004, we are bound to pick some of those up."

Key word is we should pick up some of those seats, but we may not this year. The party is nearly bankrupt and can't even adequately fund a lot of the contests. As it stands, we may lose AK-At Large; AZ-1; CA-4; CO-4; CT-4; DE-At Large; IL-10; IL-11; KY-2; LA-4; LA-6; MI-9; MN-3; MS-1; MO-6; MO-9; NV-3; NJ-3; NJ-7; NM-1; NM-2; NY-25; NY-29; OH-1; OH-2; OH-14; OH-15; OH-16; PA-5; PA-6; VA-11; WA-8; WV-2. So that's 33 vulnerable seats, and dependent upon the additional retirements, that could rise. Regarding 1992, that was a different situation, because with the requirement for many states to draw Black districts, it gave us added GOP seats at the expense of White Democrats. Even in places like MA, the Dems dropped from 11-0 going into that election to 8-2 afterwards. No doubt a lot of the Perot voters voted GOP downballot.

[Norman Bates]

McCain would be a big help in Arizona which has a couple contested seats. He would get 60% there.

[fieldmarshaldj]

Holding Renzi’s seat is of paramount concern. Knocking out Mitchell is 2nd, and Giffords 3rd.

[Norman Bates]

I think Mac would give us a clean sweep in Arizona, and that would be a definite advantage since AZ is by some standards “trending red” (dem). It’s all about the bell curve - if you can raise the bar there from 55% to 60-62% as McCain can, then you can drag in the inevitable coattail votes.

[fieldmarshaldj]

Problem is, as I outlined above, the party has so little money for the Congressional races, and that’s going to limit us greatly.

[MassachusettsGOP]

Wow I cant believe Guinta is considering going after Lynch. Lynch is pretty untouchable right now.

[AuH2ORepublican]

“I’m estimating perhaps a 7 seat loss in the Senate, 8 with McCain’s resignation since the rodent Governor will appoint a successor”

---

I don’t see how we can lose 7 in the Senate. We will almost certainly pick up Landrieu’s seat in LA, and if the NRSC indeed has a big recruitment for SD to announce (which sounds like Mike Rounds) then we’ll pick up Johnson’s seat in SD as well. If Steve King runs in Iowa, which I think is likely, then Harkin could well go down. So for the Democrats to pick up 7 net seats they would need to pick up 8-10 gross seats, which I think is out of the question in 2008. Even if they pick up the open seats in VA and NM (in which they are currently leading, but will tighten before it’s over), they would also need to win very competitive races in CO and NH, races where they are behind in MN, OR and ME, and they’d still be 1-3 seats short of that goal. Where else do you think the RATs will win Senate elections? Alaska? Stevens will either retire or get knocked out in the primary, and we’ll hold that seat in a presidential year (if Lisa Murkowski could beat Tony Knowles by 4% in 2004, I don’t see how we can lose an open-seat race there in 2008). Mississippi? As much as I distrust Roger Wicker, I don’t think he’ll lose a run-off against Musgrave, who will come in second (I think the more conservative Shows could beat Wicker, but he won’t get into the run-off). SC? Graham or whoever beats him in the primary will win with at least 53% in November. NC? Dole will win with at least 54%, and probably around 60%. OK? Inhofe will win comfortably. TN? Alexander may be a skunk, but he’ll easily win. Frankly, I don’t think we can lose more than 6 net seats, and likely will lose not more than 2 net seats. And given that there are several races with out-of-touch Democrat incumbents in states in which McCain will probably carry (such as NJ, MI, WV and DE), there’s a chance that we may be able to pick up net seats (even if we only pick up LA, SD and IA, we can pick up a net seat if we only lose in VA and NM). All is not lost.

Regarding McCain’s seat, it is true that if he wins the presidency that Gov. Napolitano will name a Democrat to replace him. I was thinking about that yesterday morning, and came to the conclusion that if McCain wins the nomination (which I assume will be the case) he should resign from the Senate with enough time prior to November so that the remainder of his term (which ends in 2011) would be filled on Election Day. While Napolitano would be able to name a Democrat to serve for a month or two prior to the election, the GOP would be in excellent shape to win the seat in November (especially since Hillary won’t contest AZ if McCain is the GOP nominee) with several possible candidates (Congressmen Shadegg, Franks and Flake come to mind). What do you think?

[fieldmarshaldj]

If McCain ends up the nominee and if the media is successful in tearing him down and sinking the ticket, that 7 seat loss is quite possible. What do we lose in worst-case scenario ? Alaska (Stevens may refuse to leave, same with Young in the House), Colorado, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Oregon and Virginia (perhaps even an 8th with Maine). This also presumes we fail against Johnson in SD (who could get the sympathy vote), Landrieu in LA (whose brother still managed to score a victory a few months back, and that has to be taken into account), and Harkin continues his winning streak against high-profile IA Congressmen. The only potential sleeper I see is in NJ where that self-financing RINO lady may have a shot against the ‘Corpse, but even that is unlikely, and I see nothing else we remotely have a shot at.

Regarding AZ, McCain may not particularly care if the seat goes to Grant Woods (which last I heard, Woods was still on friendly terms with him, even after he switched parties), and Woods is considered formidable (think of him as the Mike Moore of AZ), although he hasn’t last run a race since 1994. If Napolitano opts to appoint the current AG, Terry Goddard (although I think Goddard covets the Governorship when she steps down in 2011, since his father was Governor from 1965-67), he would also be tough to beat. Why I think she’d go with Woods is because without Goddard, the Dems don’t have an heir apparent for Governor (unless one of the House members runs). Of course, she could also appoint Goddard to the Senate, and appoint Grant Woods back to his old job as AG and still achieve her goals. McCain also may not wish to resign from the Senate and hedge his bets (a la Lieberman).

I’m hoping I’m wrong with all those seats and that it turns out we only shed 2 or 3 (about best case scenario), but there may be enough anger amongst base Conservatives that hate McCain as much as I detest Romney (who ought to be receiving even more scorn), that they don’t turn out to vote. Our party being badly short on funds makes it that much worse.

[Kuksool]

McCain or Precious Willard. Conservatives have no decent choices. Willard may eventually get all the conservatives vote for him, but not much else.

I think McCain could possibly win against Hillary. McCain’s history of snubbing conservatives could win indies who don’t like Hillary. Right now with the current political climate, unaffiliated voters want to “poke” Republicans in the eyes. We are in a lose / lose situation. Since IL's primary is on Super Tuesday, I'll probably vote McCain. He's the least worst of the Rudy McRomney trinity.

[Norman Bates]

That’s the advantage of coattails though. The top of the ticket provides that extra boost.

[Clintonfatigued]

McCain should do well among anti-Hillary liberals and moderate independents. He’s unpopular among conservatives, but could win them over if he chooses a conservative running mate.