Replies

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.

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.

“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?