Senate 2008 Guru's Week in the Senate Races

There were two big buzz words in the Senate and 2008 Senate races this week: obstructionism and immigration.

A long, long time ago, when the Republicans were in the majority in the Senate, they decried Democrats daring to get in the way of their agenda.  Now that they find themselves in the minority, Republicans are all too happy to hypocritically engage in any and all obstructionist maneuvering they can conjure up on a whole host of issues from lower prescription drug prices to workers' rights and much, much more.

Well, Democratic leadership has taken notice and began an offensive with this powerful video taking aim at those hypocritical, obstructionist McConnell Republicans:

The 2008 election will be a referendum on George W. Bush and a referendum on Iraq, but it can also be a referendum on a progressive, American agenda that Democrats are trying to advance and Republicans are trying to, well, obstruct.  Any Democrat running for Senate can point to this agenda and say, "A vote for me is a vote for progress, a vote for affordable health care, a safer America, a fairer, stronger economy.  A vote for my opponent is a vote against progress, a vote to obstruct this agenda." Pretty simple.

Much more below the fold.

The most widely covered vote the Senate took this week was, of course, on the immigration reform legislation.  This vote held significant subtext among conservatives, including a threat to run primary opponents against any Republican Senator who supported the legislation.  It seemed to be enough to get (take your pick of nickname: "Shameless" or "Spineless") Saxby Chambliss to wither behind fellow Republican Senator Johnny Isakson.  Only three Republicans up for re-election in 2008 voted in favor of cloture on the immigration bill: Nebraska's Chuck Hagel (who might retire from the Senate and already faces at least one primary opponent running to his right if he doesn't retire in state Attorney General Jon Bruning); Idaho's Larry Craig (about whom retirement rumors abound); and South Carolina's Lindsey Graham, the biggest loser in the Senate over the immigration bill from a practical, political standpoint.

According to a recent InsiderAdvantage poll, Graham's approve-disapprove has sunk to an abominable 31-40, and South Carolina conservatives have begun an anti-Graham effort with sites like and blogs like Dump Lindsey Graham.  He has even earned the nickname "Grahamnesty" among conservatives over his support for the immigration legislation.  He will have a primary opponent; it's just a matter of how strong an opponent.  The Graham camp may have thought they dodged a bullet with the indictment of Republican state Treasurer and possible primary opponent Thomas Ravenel, but rumors have arisen suggesting that the South Carolina state Republican Chairman, Katon Dawson, might be Graham's primary opponent, which would spell serious trouble for Graham, especially if InsiderAdvantage is right and Graham's disapproval among Republicans has grown to 46%.  Should a Republican primary showdown occur, it could open the door to a viable Democrat, such as 2006 Democratic Lt. Gov. nominee Robert Barber, Jr., South Carolina's top vote-getting Democrat last year.

After Graham, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell was the big political loser over the course of the immigration debate, with many noting his doing everything possible to cut and run from a leadership role.  And the conservative netroots are none-too-happy about it.

Outside of obstructionism and immigration, it was an exciting week in the many Senate horse races around the country.  Here are the top stories in the Senate races this week:

New Hampshire: This was a terrible week in the polls for John Sununu.  First, a Suffolk University poll came out saying that only 31% of New Hampshire voters felt Sununu deserved re-election, compared with 47% feeling that someone else should serve as Senator.  Then, an American Research Group poll came out pitting Sununu against former Governor Jeanne Shaheen.  Shaheen demolished Sununu 57-29.  Meanwhile, the Shaheen family continues to keep us wondering as to when a decision will finally be made regarding the former Governor's possible entry.

Maine: Susan Collins also had a tough week.  Not only was she the only member of Maine's Congressional delegation (Olympia Snowe included) not to call getting the troops home from Iraq Mainers' top priority, but her notorious fundraiser with BFF Joe Lieberman wound up raising a big pile of money... for Democratic Congressman Tom Allen looking to unseat Susan Collins (who wouldn't be running for a third term anyway, if she kept her repeated promises to the voters of Maine).

Oregon: Several new potential candidates came out of the woodwork to make rumblings about a challenge to the vulnerable Gordon Smith this week, including: former Monmouth Mayor Paul Evans, who is also an Oregon Air National Guard Major who has been deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan; Oregon state House Speaker Jeff Merkley; public radio personality Jeff Golden; and, Oregon state Senate Majority Leader Kate Brown.  Democratic activist Steve Novick and businessman Ty Pettit have already announced their candidacies; and, State Senator Alan Bates and businesswoman Eileen Brady are currently also considering bids.

Montana: Disgraced former state House Republican Leader Mike Lange announced on Friday that he would be a candidate for Senate in 2008 against popular Senator Max Baucus, which meant that Lange got to enjoy some sexy Saturday press that no one would see.  It's like Lange said, "Bob Schaffer in Colorado had a stumbling, embarrassing entry into his Senate race.  Let's copy that!" Why is Lange "disgraced," you might ask.  He gained an awful lot of notoriety just a couple months ago for going on an obscenity-laced tirade against popular Governor Brian Schweitzer, which, of course, got caught on video (warning: strong language):

Not wasting any time, the DSCC has a terrific piece outlining why Lange is entirely unfit for the U.S. Senate.

North Carolina: Disappointingly, Congressman Brad Miller announced that he would not be challenging the vulnerable Elizabeth Dole in 2008.  One of the reasons Dole is vulnerable: even she seems to agree that she has accomplished nothing during her Senate term:


(The reference to Dole's lacking accomplishments was promptly removed from Dole's official Senate biography within a day of posting on it.  I guess she didn't consider losing six Senate seats as NRSC Chair to be an "accomplishment." I think it's pretty impressive, though.)

Arkansas: Former Governor Mike Huckabee is considered the only Republican who could give Senator Mark Pryor a run for his money.  Huckabee has ruled out a Senate bid.  Just for funsies, the Arkansas state chapter of AFSCME ran a Pryor-Huckabee poll and found Pryor beating Huckabee 49-42.  Shouldn't give sub-Huckabee Republican alternatives much reason for enthusiasm.

Virginia: Retirement speculation got a boost with this Washington Times commentary on John Warner.  After his infamous $500 Q1, many expected that a Warner retirement was inevitable.  His upcoming Q2 numbers, which should be released in July, will be revealing.

Republican Senate primaries: Wyoming's Senate appointee John Barrasso probably should expect a primary, with appointee-wannabes former state Treasurer Cynthia Lummis and former U.S. Attorney Matt Mead both hinting at the possibility.  Further, seemingly due to his broadening investigations, Ted Stevens might find himself facing a primary challenger if he runs for re-election as planned.  On top of that, John Cornyn is getting a primary opponent from well beyond the Enchanted Land of Wingnut; however, this mega-wingnut did get 8% in last year's TX-Gov GOP primary, so he might at least generate a few headaches for ole' Box Turtle.  Meanwhile, military veteran and MN-GOP Chair runner-up Joe Repya continues to ponder a primary challenge to Norm Coleman in Minnesota, and the effort to draft 1995 GOP Gubernatorial nominee Larry Forgy into a primary against Mitch McConnell in Kentucky proceeds.

For daily news and updates on the U.S. Senate races around the country in 2008, check out Senate 2008 Guru: Following the Races.

Tags: 2008 election, AK-Sen, AR-Sen, immigration, KY-Sen, ME-Sen, MN-Sen, MT-Sen, NC-SEN, NH-Sen, Obstructionism, OR-Sen, Republican Primaries, SC-Sen, TX-Sen, VA-Sen, Week in the Senate Races, WY-Sen (all tags)



Re: Senate 2008 Guru's Week in the Senate Races
It is crucial to have additional weapons other than the war to present to the American people. The Repugs are being extremely effective in making the Dems congress look incompetent.
by g1967 2007-07-01 03:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate 2008 Guru's Week in the Senate Races

Coleman and Smith are the most likely to go. Their obstruction on labor issues and the Iraq supplemental have stood in the way of progress.

by olawakandi 2007-07-01 03:19PM | 0 recs
Thanks Guru!

Love you're work. You're my favorite blogger online. Or one of them.

by Populista 2007-07-01 03:30PM | 0 recs
my favorite blogger too

Milf milf hunter Milf Hunter milf hunter felicia Milf Lesson deauxma lesson milf Milf Seeker milf seeker Milf Next Door hot milf next door Milf Diary deauxma diary milf Hot Milf hot ass milf Milf Sex milf sex video Milf Cruiser cruiser michelle milf Milf Rider milf rider melissa Sexy Milf sexy hot milf Milf Porn free milf porn Milf Lesbian milf lesbian sex Asian Milf milf hunter asian Milf Anal milf anal sex Black Milf black cock milf Busty Milf blonde busty milf Mature Milf mature milf porn Free Milf free milf video Milf Video free milf video Milf Movie free milf movie Free Milf Video free milf sex video Blonde Milf blonde busty milf Milf Fuck fuck hot milf Milf Blow Job hot milf blow job Milf Tit big tit milf Milf Avenue avenue milf yahoo Milf Ass big ass milf Big Tit Milf big blonde milf tit Milf Nude free nude milf pic Milf Gang Bang real milf gang bang Latina Milf hot latina milf Milf Pussy hairy pussy milf Horny Milf hot horny milf Milf Gallery free milf gallery Milf Cum milf cum shot Milf Site free milf site Milf Fucking fucking hot milf Free Milf Movie free milf porn movie Milf Hardcore hardcore milf sex Ebony ebony sex Ebony Sex free ebony sex Ebony Porn free ebony porn Ebony Pussy ebony hairy pussy Ebony Ass big ebony ass Ebony Girl hot ebony girl Ebony Lesbian ebony lesbian porn Ebony Teen black ebony teen Ebony Booty big ebony booty Ebony Anal ebony anal sex Ebony Blow Job ebony teen blow job Ebony Foot ebony foot job Ebony Bbw ebony bbw porn Ebony Shemale ebony shemale movie Ebony Hoe ebony black hoe Ebony Tit ebony big tit Ebony Mature mature ebony woman Gay Ebony gay ebony movie Ebony Hardcore hardcore ebony sex Ebony Babes hot ebony babes Masturbation female masturbation Female Masturbation female masturbation video Male Masturbation male masturbation technique Masturbation Technique male masturbation technique Masturbation Story female masturbation story Masturbation Video female masturbation video Girl Masturbation girl masturbation teen Public Masturbation masturbation in public Teen Masturbation teen girl masturbation Gay Masturbation gay masturbation story Mutual Masturbation male mutual masturbation Female Masturbation Video female free masturbation video Masturbation Tip male masturbation tip Woman Masturbation woman masturbation technique Anal Masturbation anal male masturbation Voyeur Masturbation teen voyeur masturbation Female Masturbation Story free female masturbation story Male Masturbation Technique best male masturbation technique Free Masturbation Video free female masturbation video Boy Masturbation teen boy masturbation

by Glen 2007-07-01 09:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate 2008 Guru's Week in the Senate Races

I've been thinking Shaheen should wait and run in 2010, but I've changed my mind.  The Liebercrat is outfundraising blog candidate steve marchand by a significant ammount.  

I hope she runs.  

I expect the front line of seats Democrats attack to be completely obliterated.  (NH, MN, Oreg., ME, VA (If M.Warner runs)

by JeremiahTheMessiah 2007-07-01 03:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate 2008 Guru's Week in the Senate Races

I guess I should start with the usual disclaimers that a) I'm going to support heavily the eventual nominee, even if it's Swett, and b) Shaheen would be a significantly formidable (if perhaps not progressive) candidate if she decides on a run.

Having said that, I remain absolutely convinced that if Shaheen doesn't run, Marchand would beat Swett in the primary.  I know that may sound like pure spin because I like Marchand, and I'm not blind to the importance of money, but it's how I feel based on a couple factors.

First, at least in 1Q, something like 90% of Swett's contributions were from out-of-state, and a good deal of it was money for the general after having maxed out the primary limits.  Conversely, I'm getting the serious impression that Marchand's financial support is being dampened by the possibility of a Shaheen run, which in turn tells me that if she decides not to, that the bulk of the players in-state and dollars, and perhaps even the DSCC (which currently wants Shaheen) will rally around him.

Of course none of this matters if Shaheen runs, as Marchand has said he would step aside if that happens.

Oh, and Guru: it's great to see you over here.  This site is the better for it.

by Dean Barker 2007-07-01 04:16PM | 0 recs
Blog Candidate?

Why is Marchand the blog candidate?  The possible candidate all the blogs are talking about is Jeanne Shaheen?  Also, Buckey is getting some blog buzz.    

by nascardem 2007-07-01 04:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Blog Candidate?

Lucas got it right.  Of announced candidates, Steve Marchand has the most buzz behind his name.  I would agree that Buckey has some, and Jeanne will have the nod if she gets in the race.  If she doesn't get in the race, the designated "blogosphere" candidate would be Marchand.  

by JeremiahTheMessiah 2007-07-01 06:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate 2008 Guru's Week in the Senate Races

Great post Guru. Look forward to your future postings.

My suggestion is that progressives focus their money & efforts on our best bet 2-3 senate races, with the proviso that if other races look real competitive next fall, we go in.

by carter1 2007-07-01 04:13PM | 0 recs
My suggestion

My suggestion is that we spend the next ten to twelve months recruiting the strongest possible challengers in all Republican seats that are up in 2008. Including the ones everyone knows are impossible (the way everyone on July 1, 2005 knew Macaca guy was unbeatable, it would be dumb to waste resources there).

If, after the filing deadline, it turns out the best we could get against some popular red-state incumbent was a town clerk nobody ever heard of, well, ok, we can winnow that one out then and focus on the more promising targets. But for the time being, there are no byes for Republicans. Worst case scenario, we make them work for their wins and keep them focused on defending seats while our twelve incumbents have an easy time.  Better case than that, we end up with a few surprise dark horse wins.

Suppose Stevens gets forced to resign at the eleventh hour due to scandal? Suppose Graham gets primaried out because of his immigration vote?  There's a lot of our worst shots at seats where a sudden opening would be the best shot at winning we'd see in decades. Heck, Wyoming's B seat is probably that right now.  don't we want to be prepared everywhere in case lightning strikes?

by admiralnaismith 2007-07-01 08:07PM | 0 recs
Re: My suggestion

For Senate Seats- that are winnible
1)Colorado- Mark Udall
2)Maine- Tom Allen
3)Minnesota- Mike Ciresi
4)New Hampshire- Jeanne Shaheen
5)North Carolina- Roy Cooper
6)Oregon- Alan Bates

Winnable if Open
1)New Mexico- Tom Udall
2)Virginia- Mark Warner
3)Mississippi- Michael Moore
2)Alaska- Mark Begich
3)Georgia- Thurbert Baker
4)Idaho- Larry LaRocco
6)Kentucky- Greg Stumbo
7)Nebraska- Mike Fahey
8)South Carolina-
9)Tennessee- Mike McWherther
10)Texas- John Sharp
11)Wyoming-B Paul Hickey

by nkpolitics 2007-07-02 04:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Senate 2008

Democrats need to fight back against Republican hypocrisy.  Republicans are the ones blocking the Democratic agenda and the public needs to know that.

by Toddwell 2007-07-01 04:39PM | 0 recs
In reference to a few items

Conventional wisdom is born when enough people early on agree on a basic outlook of an event. It seems as if you're trying to build conventional wisdom, by making a post and repeating it, over and over again linking to yourself, in an effort to build a concensus around your way of thinking. Not a bad strategy at all, but there are a few questions I have about the narratives you're trying to build:

1) Do you believe that the voters should not elect anybody who makes a term limit pledge at the end of their promised amount of terms? If so, how do you feel about Paul Wellstone making a similar pledge, and breaking it when he ran for a third term?

2) Since when does saying the word "ass" twice count as either "strong language" deserving of a warning or "obscenity-laced"?

3) You constantly champion Ron Barber as a potential candidate in South Carolina. Have you heard any indication that he is considering, or has been considered, as a candidate?

4) Now that its been established that the "effort" to draft Larry Forgy has absolutely no connection to Forgy himself, can you find any indication of any significant Republican organization in Kentucky looking to Forgy as an alternative to McConnell? Since the rumors are saying that the Draft Forgy site is likely the result of Democrats looking to stir things up for the Minority Leader in the absence of a candidate, is there any reason to believe that there is a serious effort to challenge McConnell's seat from Republicans?

by TheVirginian 2007-07-01 04:40PM | 0 recs
Term limits pledges

As for your first question, when a Republican breaks a term limits pledge, it is a broken promise such that you can't trust a thing he says or any promise he makes about anything else.  If a Democrat does it, no big deal--we could use her added experience to continue to get things done in Washington.  Consistency be the hobgoblin of little minds.

by admiralnaismith 2007-07-01 08:10PM | 0 recs
Re: In reference to a few items

(I believe "TheVirginian" is our own concern troll "va blogger" - welcome.)

1) I think the voters decide what's important to them.  I think a broken promise is a bad thing.  If some voters wanted to hold Wellstone accountable for breaking his term limit pledge, they're absolutely justified.  If some voters don't care about Collins' broken promise, that's their prerogative.  No double standard, as much as you'd like to evidence one in order to have an argumentative leg to stand on.

However, my deeper contentions here are twofold:

A) Wellstone was a college professor.  He didn't know the day-to-day life in the Senate.  He ostensibly had good intentions.  That doesn't change the fact that he was going to break a promise, but it's there for whatever it's worth.  Collins, however, served - how long? - yes, twelve years as a Senate aide to Senator Cohen of Maine and then made her pledge and then reiterated her pledge as her first term concluded and she ran for a second.  There is every reason to believe that Collins never had any intention of keeping her promise.  She wasn't a stranger to day-to-day life in the Senate or what serving 12 years in the Senate meant.

B) For Collins, it's part of a deeper narrative on her duplicity.  She lied about term limits.  She's all over the place on Iraq.  She says she's pro-choice and then supports far-righty Alito for the Supreme Court.  A pattern of duplicity for Collins.

2) I think the newscaster for the local NBC affiliate is probably a better arbiter of decency in Montana than either you or I, and he too suggested that the tirade contained strong language and that kids should leave the room.  While the language might not be as obscene as some of the language in some of your comments on my blog, it's still obscene and laced throughout his tirade.  If all there is left to quibble is the fine point of how obscene the guy's tirade was (against a popular Governor, no less), maybe he's not a great candidate for Senate.

3) I do consistantly champion Robert (not Ron) Barber as a possible Democratic challenger to Lindsey Graham (or whoever wins the SC-GOP Senate primary next year).  I have not yet heard anything substantial about him considering a Senate bid.  Doesn't mean I don't think he'd be a strong candidate for a number of reasons.  So I continue to float his name.

4) Draft efforts don't always have to be connected to or need the blessing of the potential draftee.  And we don't know anything for sure about who runs the Draft Forgy blog.  However, the content on the Draft Forgy blog is what is important.  And many conservatives are disappointed in McConnell, and Forgy is making the rounds in the Kentucky media.  Draw your own conclusions.

Any other questions?

by Senate Guru 2007-07-02 06:33AM | 0 recs
Re: In reference to a few items

Its so odd that my account keeps getting banned. As far as I know, I haven't violated any rules, except maybe the cardinal sin here (and at SSP): "Don't be a Republican".

Fair enough. I don't consider it to be trolling when I am upfront about what I believe, and when I raise topical concerns about a post. I also exhibit tremendous restraint, not commenting in most threads and not hi-jacking the threads I do comment in. But I'm not the owner of a progressive blog, so the decision to censor opposing viewpoints isn't mine to make.

1) For the record, Wellstone also re-iterated his pledge when he ran for his second term.

And the "narrative" that you claim for Collins is entirely a partisan smear, based in subjective analysis, and not fact. If you asked Collins for her opinion on Iraq, you would find her views to be very consistent. And the only "anti-choice" act that Justice Alito has supported is ending partial birth abortions, which over two-thirds of the country supports, despite the fact that about half identifies themselves as "pro-choice". Does that make two-thirds of the country "far-righty" on abortion?

2) I never argued that Lange is a great candidate, or that his remarks weren't inappropriate. I was just stunned to see that the YouTube clip that you posted a warning for only featured two mild cuss words, and they were both bleeped out. Its a quibble, yes, but you treat it as if he was quoting a Tarintino movie.

3) I was only asking if there's been anything else on the guy, nothing more, nothing less. Thanks for the update.

4) First of all, despite whatever disappointment there has been for McConnell, there is no attempt outside of the Draft Forgy blog to replace him with someone else in 2008. And Forgy isn't "making the rounds" in Kentucky media at all. The only mention of him, besides a newspaper article where Forgy and McConnell speculate that the draft site is run by Democrats, are liberal blogs. Draw your own conclusions.

This account is likely to be banned as well, so I'll direct any further questions to your blog.

by Unabridged 2007-07-02 07:33AM | 0 recs
Going Nuclear: Not Just for Wingnuts

It's time to kill the filibuster. There was a time when it was a useful tool for the minority when it wasn't abused, but historically it has done far more harm then good.

The wingnuts have made it clear tht the next time they're in power and we have the audacity to use it, they will eliminate it. Why wait til then?

Even if we don't do this, we ought to at least return to the days when the filibusterer had to actually, you know, filibuster. At the very least, if you're going to stifle the majority of the American public, you ought to have to physically get your butt up there and read off names in the phone book like a real senator.

by alteran 2007-07-01 05:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Going Nuclear: Not Just for Wingnuts

Democrats would lose a lot of support doing this. The Republicans were going to lose support for doing it--even though their version only applied to judicial nominees--and that brought about the Gang of 14. Trying to extend it to all filibusters would be a lot more consequential, and would bring about a much bigger backlash.

by TheVirginian 2007-07-01 06:19PM | 0 recs
calm down

I'm with the estimates of a 5-6ish seat Democratic Senate gain in '08.  Maybe 7 if Specter has to resign.  61 will come into sight for Democrats in '10.

Getting rid of the cloture/filibuster minority protection is dumb.  Maybe you're right, the stupidest ones should have some geezers reading newspaper columns into the Congressional record until they keel over.  If you can't get 60 or 61 Senators to agree that something has to be done, then maybe it's not important enough to the voters on the proponent side or resisting it is too important to the opponent side's voters.  In either case, one side is not convinced of the real urgency of the matter (as represented) and is willing to prevent action.  

I don't think any significant number of voters is ignorant that Democrats do the proposing of bills and Republicans do the denying of cloture in the Senate.  For all the upset, average Americans don't necessarily disagree with the outcomes or the lack of decisions.

In my opinion Washington is in fact reflecting where the middle of public opinion is in the country right now.  The middle of public opinion wants a wind-down of war in Iraq, but not ending it before all Al Qaeda there is fatally damaged and "victory" has been given all reasonable (which is to say, even some obviously unreasonable) chance to be accomplished.  The middle of public opinion is willing to let illegals get citizenship eventually, forcing them to jump a lot of hoops, but there isn't a sense of enough urgency to the problem to slap down the nativist morons just yet.  (In fact, the political/material stalemate turns out to serve a psychological purpose- all the idiots get to vent all their bigotry, denial, paranoia, et cetera until it wears out.)  So 'obstruction' and venting is, despite everyone's frustration with it, where The People is.

Public opinion splits 50%-1 for Democrats, 40% plus White House powers for Republicans, and that's how the country and its political system are behaving.  We've turned the ship around but the willingness to turn on the engine and go somewhere particular isn't there yet, and so we drift slowly in some random direction- but with the ship pointing the right way, while the crew has two factions which are fighting for the engine key.

Right now the fundamental game is really all about Republican support slowly bleeding away, with just about everything Democrats do and their various minor debacles and such relatively secondary.  The 2008 election will be simple: choose between making progress (Democrats running Congress and the Presidency), or continued stalemate (Democrats running Congress and Republicans the Presidency) that'll keep the country feeling like it does now-a group therapy session gone out of control.  

by killjoy 2007-07-01 10:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Going Nuclear: Not Just for Wingnuts

What do you mean?

The fact that moderates like Landrieu, Salazar, Pyror, et al. got behind the Gang of 14 shows that they feared political retribution in any extreme action. And that was just for a nuclear option on filibusters for judicial nominees, not all filibusters. Sure, its an option that the Democratic caucus could choose to pursue, but I can't see the more moderate Senators, or any Democrat from a red state, getting behind it, and I can't see the American public approving.

by TheVirginian 2007-07-01 07:08PM | 0 recs
Re: In reference to a few items

The attitude that you display towards me isn't neccesary.

The Republican Party forced him out of the position most likely in order to repair a working relationship with the Governor. I don't think they would force someone out of that position in any event where a relatively mild cuss word escaped their lips. I never claimed to be the arbiter of decency in Montana, but when I hear the words "obscenity-laced tirade", I expect, you know, that.

I wasn't "ripping apart" Barber's candidacy. I just happen to note that every time the Guru makes a post about Lindey Graham catching heat for his positions, he brings up Ron Barber, and provides a link to his earlier post. Anytime I read on kos or SSP about Barber, its always a link going back to that one post. I was curious if there was any development, in the slightest, over this potential candidate. That's not ripping apart anything, its a genuine inquiry.

Fourth, I'll give you that its not often a draft movement is associated with the candidate in question. However, how often does the candidate supposedly being "drafted" speculate that the effort is from members of the other party? And how often does a draft effort not get an ounce of measurable support from members of his own party? The only people I see talking about Larry Forgy are Democrats, who have something to gain from a primary challenge to McConnell. I was curious if there was anything to refute the believable claim that the "draft Forgy" effort is, in fact, simply a front for an anti-McConnell talking points distrubtor.

I'm not trying to dispute anyone, and its not "desperate" in the least. I'm raising reasonable points, and so far it seems that more people are interested in asking why I'm willing to present an alternative way of looking at things than actually addressing the points I raise. Its obvious the Democrats are better positioned for 2008 than Republicans. The national political atmosphere notwithstanding, there are simply more Democratic opportunities than Republican ones. I'll be the first person to say that the only states the GOP will be competitive in 2008 is Louisiana and maybe South Dakota, depending on circumstances. Yet, any reasonable objective observer would raise questions about the viability of Democrats in South Carolina or Idaho, or the liklihood of a primary challenge to McConnell or Stevens. In the pursuit of a reasonable discussion of the upcoming Senate races, I bring up points that call into question speculation that I feel goes too far. And in 2009, when the Democrats will likely have one or two more seats to their name in the Senate, I'll do the same thing about the 2010 cycle.

by TheVirginian 2007-07-01 07:19PM | 0 recs
Re: In reference to a few items

I am somewhat shocked, that you, as a conservative Republican, do not find the phrase "shove it up your ass" to be obscene.

by HellofaSandwich 2007-07-01 08:31PM | 0 recs
Re: In reference to a few items

First, you don't know what kind of a Republican I am. Second, while I consider any cuss word to be "obscene", I don't consider Lange's inappropriate comments to be either "obscenity-laced" or a "tirade".

by TheVirginian 2007-07-01 08:44PM | 0 recs
Re: In reference to a few items

If you're working to further the interests of the Republican Senate Minority, then there's only one kind of Republican you really can be.

by HellofaSandwich 2007-07-01 11:39PM | 0 recs
Re: In reference to a few items

While "around here", people may view Collins as little more than a lock-step rubber-stamp, voters in Maine are significantly less partisan than activists posting on a liberal blog. And I think her +70% approval rating would contribute to the notion that people think she's being productive, despite whatever notions you or others "around here" may believe.

I agree that people get to make up their own minds. I was asking an honest question about the original poster if, in his own mind, he believes that Collins' break of her term-limit pledge is any worse or better than Wellstone's?

by TheVirginian 2007-07-01 07:23PM | 0 recs
Re: In reference to a few items

Guru is a partisan.  Breaking a promise is something he is going to use.  Who cares if Wellstone did it too?  The point isn't to be fair, the point is to trash Collins.  

by BooMan 2007-07-01 08:11PM | 0 recs
Re: In reference to a few items

Thank you for your honesty. Its refreshing to see that some on your side admit to employing double-standards and latching onto any mud to sling, regardless of merit, in an effort to make partisan gains.

by TheVirginian 2007-07-01 08:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate 2008 Guru's Week in the Senate Races

Can someone please explain to me why the Democrats walked through 5 years of this catastrophic administration without such tactics -- when our rights, safety, lives and sanity were on the line?

by Bartimaeus 2007-07-02 05:27AM | 0 recs
Re: Senate 2008 Guru's Week in the Senate Races

If I'm not mistaken, Democrats have run early ads against targeted Republican opponents in 100% of the elections held in the past five years. But if you're talking about playing the "obstructionist" card specifically, that really only works very well when you're in the majority (too easy to dismiss as whining when it comes from the minority party) and it definitely adds some extra punch when you've got a stack of bills that were already passed by one house to wave around and say, "SEE!" Both of those things are relatively new developments and advantages the Democrats have not enjoyed previously.

by CalD 2007-07-02 06:33AM | 0 recs
Re: Senate 2008 Guru's Week in the Senate Races

My list of vulnerable senate races are: vulnerable MN and CO and lean to tossup are NH and CO. As for the Dems lean to tossup LA and likely SD.

by olawakandi 2007-07-04 09:15AM | 0 recs
Re: Senate 2008 Guru's Week in the Senate Races

Lean to tossup  republican are NH and OR.

by olawakandi 2007-07-04 09:15AM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads