MyDD :: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches

Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches

by Jonathan Singer, Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 11:39:19 PM EST

It's not often that a party's greatest difficulty in mounting a bid for a Senate Majority is choosing which races not to target. But increasingly, it appears that at least one of the most important steps that the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee will have to take in the coming months is to figure out just which races it will focus its attention on, a task made harder by the fact that the list of potential competitive races appears to be growing.

Of course the Democrats' bid to increase their majority in the Senate has not been met with all positive news. It was just a week and a half ago, for instance, that Alabama Agriculture Commissioner Ron Sparks announced that he would not challenge his state's Republican Senator, Jeff Sessions, this cycle, and Democrats have yet to settle on a single strong challenger in a number of states viewed as their best pickup opportunities in 2008.

Yet at the same time, more and more of the 22 seats that the Republicans have to defend this cycle seem to be moving at least towards having a real race, and potentially even a quite competitive one.

In Nebraska, former Democratic Senator Bob Kerrey is thinking about making another run -- a move that could be helped by either a competitive Republican primary or the retirement of Republican Senator Chuck Hagel.
In Alaska, Republican Senator Ted Stevens' numbers don't look as good as those of a potential Democratic challenger, Mark Begich.
In South Carolina, a new poll shows that freshman Republican Senator Lindsey Graham enjoys an approval rating of just 31 percent, with 40 percent disapproving.
In Kentucky, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell admits that he's gearing up for what he sees as his "most difficult" reelection bid ever.
And now in Tennessee, Democrats may have found the candidate who can knock off Lamar Alexander. Ken Whitehouse reports for the Nashville Post that Michael Ray McWherter, son of the state's popular former Democratic Governor Ned McWherter, is thinking about a Senate run this cycle.

This is just a small sampling of the Democrats' opportunities in states that traditionally been difficult for the party to carry on the federal level. Naturally, the Democrats are going to pour more of their focus on races like New Hampshire and Colorado, states that have shown good trends for Democrats in recent years, states in which they have obvious opportunities for pickups. What's more, the DSCC clearly will not be able to invest heavily (say in the multiple millions of dollars) in all 21 states in which the Republicans are on defense. They probably won't be able to put much money towards all of the five red state races listed above, or even necessarily a majority of them. But the fact that already at this still relatively early point in the cycle the Democrats have so many opporunities on the horizon cannot augur poorly for their chances to grow their majority in the Senate -- perhaps even to the point, either after this cycle or the next, where they have the 60 votes to overcome any filibuster threat from wholly within the GOP caucus.

Tags: Senate 2008, Senate Democrats, TN-Sen, SC-Sen, NE-Sen, AK-Sen, KY-Sen (all tags)

Permalink :: 62 Comments :: Post a Comment

A majority, if they want it (none / 0)

The Democratic Party has a chance to win a Lieberman-proof majority. It is the second such opportunity. Last time they choked. I am not sure whether they are really ready this time, but it is in this respect that the grassroots, netroots and any progressive with a voice can and should push them into doing it.

In 2006, the Democrats won as a result of a disparate set of people and forces, and despite their refusal to attack Bush & the Republicans on Iraq in a straightforward manner. It is my hope that they will not hold back this time.

by James Earl on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 11:49:32 PM EST

Re: A majority, if they want it (none / 0)

if GAINING 6 seats is choking; i hope we CHOKE this cycle again

by jjgtrs on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 10:14:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

The choke (none / 0)

The choke was the failure to get rid of Lieberman. There is no question that the Democratic senate would have more latitude, on every issue, if Lieberman were not there.

by James Earl on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 10:21:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The choke (none / 0)

LIEBERMAN IS DONE; the day after the '08 election, joe should be EXPELLED from the democratic senate caucus AND stripped of his chairmanships and seniority

by jjgtrs on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 10:30:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The choke (none / 0)

That's what should happen. But as we have seen, the Senators are too chummy with one another. They won't have the guts to do it.

by exLogCabin on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 11:01:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The choke (none / 0)

I think that's giving Lieberman a little too much credit. I'd agree with you a bit more were Tim Johnson not incapacitated. right now on several issues we are 2 men down. hopefully we'll cut that back to 1 soon when Johnson is back at work. but our primary goal in 08 is to make Lieberman irrelevant.

by Todd Beeton on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 04:42:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

I wonder what kind of deals Schumer is striking. Kerrey is a has been. A DLC traitor. Hell, he didn't want any unions organizing at the New School. Depending on how things shake out between now and the end of the year, Schumer might have is hands full trying to get a filibuster proof majority.

John McCain: Bush right to veto kids health insurance expansion

by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 12:03:37 AM EST

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

Kerrey is a schmuck.

by Adam T on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 02:10:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

I'll take Kerrey over Hegel any day. Two Democratic Senators from Nebraska? Sign me up!

by admiralnaismith on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 11:42:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Hope we can get some actual progressives in 2008. (none / 0)

IMO, Shaheen in NH is a terrible, terrible milquetoast candidate. Add the fact that she ran a very piss-poor campaign in 2002 with her being a lousy candidate, and you may see Sununu sqeak by again. And Katrina Liebermann Swett is worse.

Sununu + AIPAC = Katrina Swett

I hope people don't write off Al Franken in Minnesota. Coleman is not very impressive and is unpopular. I think Franken could actually be considered a breath of fresh air.

The way I'd go about unseating these incumbent Republican senators in blue states like Maine, Minnesota, NH, and Oregon is to hang the Iraq War/Escalation and Alito and Roberts and the environment around their fucking necks. Constantly repeat (until you're blue in the face, no pun intended). Those four races, in this climate, should not be too difficult. The Rs know this and that's why they are scared shitless this cycle.

McCain is defining Obama, and Obama is neither defining himself, nor McCain. This is awful.

by jgarcia on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 12:21:24 AM EST

Al Franken. (none / 0)

I've been making small donations to Al from the beginning. I appreciated hearing his excellent interviews when he had that midday time slot on Air America. He's proud to report having supporters like myself from all sections of the country, thanks to ActBlue.

by Books Alive on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 10:13:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hope we can get some actual progressives 8. (none / 0)

SUNUNU? ARE YOU KIDDING? STICK A FORK IN HIM, HE'S DONE

by jjgtrs on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 10:17:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hope we can get some actual progressives in 20 (none / 0)

Senator Franken would be the jewel of the Freshman Senators of 2009. No matter how many others come in with him.

by admiralnaismith on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 11:44:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (3.00 / 1)

I always worry when we pick targets this far out. Granted, it's good to start preparing for the next race, but this creates static attitudes in shifting conditions. By my reckoning, candidates endorsed by DCCC in Red to Blue races during summer months did almost twice as well as those endorsed earlier. I think there's something to be said for offering broad assistance early, but not targetting too specifically until about five or six months out, once the dynamics of the races are better understood.

by Jay R on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 12:44:22 AM EST

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

Pick the best possible challengers in all 22 seats. The time to begin to winnow them down is in Summer of 2008, after all the primaries, when we can get a feel for which of them are gaining traction and which are foundering.

Remember, the Republicans will be having to spend money on defense in every state where we put up a fight. The more they're pinned down, the better our own iffier races like Landrieu will do.

by admiralnaismith on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 11:47:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (3.00 / 1)

"Pick the best possible challengers in all 22 seats."

How?

This is one of the great problems Red to Blue had in 2006--they endorsed about eight primary candidates (excluding ones in blue seats like Hirono in HI), and only got two into Congress (Ed Perlmutter and Heath Shuler). But two of the candidates DCCC opposed in the primaries, McNerney in CA-11 and Shea-Porter in NH, won in November despite having been labeled "unelectable" in the primary.

This is the "static thinking" that I was talking about--it took months for DCCC to come around and offer McNerney help, and they NEVER offered anything to Shea-Porter (she and Ciro Rodriguez were the only two pickups to not have been included in Red to Blue, and Ciro certainly got help in his race since his election was, IIRC, late November). "The best possible challengers" before the primaries were thought to be Filson and Craig, and neither of them could close the deal. Meanwhile, Jennings in FL-13 got caught in the undervote fiasco (I was working that race, so I know better than most...), Duckworth got beat by Roskam, Tessa Hafen lost out in NV, and Lois Murphy lost in PA. All of them were the "best possible challengers" according to every analysis done, and all of them fell short after sucking up a ton of party resources.

My point is not that we shouldn't be looking for strong challengers and trying to get them to run, just that we're not all that great at figuring out before the primaries which candidates will perform better come the General. I also recognize that Senate recruiting is fundamentally different than House recruiting in many ways, but I think the basic lesson of Red to Blue should be heeded: there are things we know to look for in races, and things we simply can't control that happen during the campaign. When we paint ourselves into a corner concerning candidates early on and pledge early support for certain races to the exclusion of others, we sacrifice strategic adaptability when the situation changes on us.

I'm still trying to find a happy middle ground, but so far, based on the evidence, it seems as if "hands off until the nominees are chosen" is a better option than heavy intervention by the national committees.

by Jay R on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 05:07:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

Great post. Those who are bemoaning Franken at this stage don't knwo what the hell they are talking about. The surest prescription for having a milquetoast, moderate, do-nothing Congress is to always look for the "most electable" candidate. Let the primaries happen as they may.

Seriously, why the hell does our side even bring up "electability"? That is a red-herring used by the MSM to motherfuck truly liberal candidates.

We, as progressives, should insist on never parroting the silly "electability" canard ever again.

McCain is defining Obama, and Obama is neither defining himself, nor McCain. This is awful.

by jgarcia on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 05:39:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

In South Carolina, incombents tend to keep their job forever. See, e.g., Strom Thurmond ('54 - '03) and Fritz Hollings ('66-'05). Of course, those men were rather popular in the state to say the least. Lindsay Graham obviously isn't. Still, I think it would require a really strong candidate to get rid of him. I really can't believe Alex Sanders didn't beat him in 2002. Sanders is a legend in South Carolina, at least in Charleston and Columbia. He is funny as hell and incredibly smart (he was Chief Justice of the Court of Appeals and taught political science at Harvand, among many other achievements.) 2002 was just a bad year to run as a democrat in this state. The political mood feels different around here these days.

by DPW on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 01:04:10 AM EST

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

Graham's numbers are low because he isn't conservative enough for South Carolina.

by domma on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 12:08:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (3.00 / 1)

Well, it's more complicated than that. Specific positions, like his support of the immigration reform bill, obviously have hurt him. But, in reality, he never was that popular. The SC voters with democratic leaning (about 45% of the vote) never voted for him to begin with--and probably haven't warmed up to him since. And, the conservative base doesn't like him because, yes, he can be a little too independent for their tastes. But, there is more to it than that. Rumors relating to Graham's private life do not please the conservative base (I'm unwilling to repeat the rumors here, since I don't consider the information relevant to public discussion). There's more to say about him as a candidate here, but it's probably not worth analyzing until there are possible democratic opponents to consider. Maybe Inez Tenenbaum will run again.

by DPW on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 09:40:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

Don't overlook Maine with Tom Allen and Texas with Mikal Watts - both are going to make strong runs and could win if we have a strong Presidential nominee.

Bill Richardson: "Get out now. Get all our troops out now. It is the only right and responsible choice."

by Stephen Cassidy on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 01:18:27 AM EST

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

Im hoping Marchand gets a chance to run in NH.

What would LBJ do?

by Socks The Cat on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 01:22:05 AM EST

This Far Out--Taking Them All Down A Notch (3.00 / 2)

I'd echo what others are saying about it being premature to target--as opposed to speculate--this far out. What we ought to be doing now is driving down the GOP brand, hard. And Cheney's batshist crazy "King's X" claim that he's not really part of the Executive Branch is just the kind of thing I have in mind.

Rather than going to court over it, the Democrats should go on a ridicule offensive. Don't forget, this is the GOP's #2 man, and he's acting like a kindergartener at recess. He's damn sure a member of the Executive Branch when it comes to invoking executive privilege. But when it comes to executive responsibilities, suddenly, it's "King's X"???

This is what we need to do--brand Cheney with "King's X" and brand all the Republicans in DC with supporting his kindergarten antics, until they force him to cut the crap. It's time to utterly destroy the "Republicans as grownups" meme. This is the best possible thing we can do right now both for congressional races and for the presidential race.

There will be plenty of time a year from now for the seat-by-seat targetting. But right now, we should be doing everything possible to drive all their numbers down, creating more and better options for us when the time comes where we do have to pick and choose.

by Paul Rosenberg on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 01:52:03 AM EST

Re: This Far Out--Taking Them All Down A Notch (none / 0)

I agree, though it is also important to find strong contenders now in every race. But it is very premature to divvy up money and support. Lots of events (another hurricane, a recession, the Iraq war going even worse, etc.) could drastically change the calculus on many of these races.

Now is a good time to focus on how irresponsible the Republicans have been, how much they lie, how many incompetent cronies they have put in high places, etc. We need to drive Bush's approval ratings down into the teens. Every Republican candidate should be asked "Where were you when the Bush/Cheney administration was running amok?"

by RandomNonviolence on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 09:42:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

Dang!

I thought we had this figured out. Ever hear of a guy named: Howard Dean?

Or another guy named Chris Bowers?

We contend in every race, every single one!

This place is starting to sound like Rahm Emmanuel or 'Chuckie Cheese' Schumer is blogging here.

Get a frikin' grip!

by Pericles on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 01:58:30 AM EST

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (3.00 / 2)

No we don't. We field candidates in every race, but a lot of them sure ain't contenders, and don't expect to be when they get into the race. When genuine opportunities arise, like Foley's seat last cycle, we like to have a credible alternative in place to capitalize, but most of our challengers aren't going to win. We don't spend the party's cash equally among all candidates, and these guys get left out so that we can increase our chances in viable seats.

This isn't to say that we shouldn't keep trying to field candidaates in every seat, but we shouldn't pretend like all campaigns ought to receive the same amount of attention from the national party organizations.

by Jay R on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 02:47:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

An embarrassment of riches yes--its called a landslide. A rising tide lifts all boats. It won't matter who our candidates are--we ain't them and that will be enough for people who are sick of the Republicans in Congress marching in lockstep with the most unpopular president since Richard Nixon. We could have beat the President's veto of Stem Cell Research but once again the Republicans caved and decided to filibuster so there will be no re-vote. In 08 Republicans will say the Dems have presided over a do-nothing Congress blah blah. People will vote for change because they will be sick and tired of being sick and tired and you can take that to the bank.

by changehorses08 on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 11:52:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

can anyone speak to the Democratic bench in Wyoming? There are now going to be 2 senate seats up there in 08 with the special election to replace Thomas. that's clearly the easier seat to take of the 2. this would likely fall in the back burner category, but it sure would be nice to make those Republicans run for their seats.

by Todd Beeton on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 02:52:19 AM EST

Split ticket likely (none / 0)

With two Senate seats up in the same election, Western state voters are very likely to split the ticket. There is kind of a "fairness" attitude about it, or possibly "we don't really trust either Party, so let's have one of each to watch over the other".

There's more of us than there is of them.

by MetaData on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 11:24:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Split ticket likely (none / 0)

Are you serious? Where, other than from the clear blue sky, did that idea come from?

by TheVirginian on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 11:40:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

Freudenthal is term limited. Hopefully he'll run for one of the two seats. That would make that one, at least, a top tier opportunity, and not too expensive to campaign in.

by admiralnaismith on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 11:50:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

Freudenthal has no interest in going to Washington, and he's repeatedly rebuffed attempts to recruit him. Don't count on him running.

by TheVirginian on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 01:38:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment (none / 0)

We still don't have top tier candidates in either Oregon or New Hampshire--two prime pick-up opportunities. That's the embarrassment!

by stuckinsf on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 03:32:51 AM EST

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment (none / 0)

i think shaheen WILL run; oregon is a different matter, GORDO is so beatable it hurts,BUT no viable challenger has stepped forward(steve novick does have some grassroots/netroots support)

by jjgtrs on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 10:23:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Ok, review time (none / 0)

We're done races, no more challengers needed:
Colorado: Rep. Mark Udall
Maine: Rep. Tom Allen
Idaho: Fmr. Rep. Larry LaRocco

Good Challengers in place, higher tier still possible:
Minnesota: Al Franken/Mike Ciseri (Will a national or state wide elected official enter?)
New Hampshire: Steve Marchand (will Shaheen enter?)
Oregon: Steve Novick (Will anyone else enter?)
Texas: Mikal Watts (Will Noriega enter?)

Rumor Mill still churning:
North Carolina: Rep. Brad Miller
South Carolina: Fmr. Lt. Governor Candidate (lost in 06 with 49%)
Virginia: Warner vs. Warner chicken-off
Nebraska: Fmr. Sen. Bob Kerrey
Alaska: Anchoridge Mayor
Oklahoma: State Sen. Andrew Rice
Mississippi: Is Cochran retiring? If so does Mike Moore step up to replace?
Georgia: Word is they are working on someone
Kentucky: Charlie Owens and Greg Stumbo
Tennessee: Son of a fmr. governor news started emerging today

Waiting on anything:
Alabama (stupid Figures . . .)
Wyoming A
Wyoming B
Kansas (face it, Sebelius is playing Veep-stakes and if not will take Brownback's open seat in 2010)
New Mexico (we seriously need someone good here)

by Trowaman on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 05:28:59 AM EST

Re: Ok, review time (none / 0)

We have a perfect New Mexico candidate... unfortunately, he's running for President.

by yitbos96bb on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 10:38:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

I am not impressed anymore by this kind of discussion. I guess I will be more impressed when and if the Democrats do something to impress.

by bruh21 on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 09:51:29 AM EST

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

Not doing something is the same as helping Republicans. And Republicans are devils.

This wasn't ever going to be a 2 year revolution. Patience my friend.

The history of the left is a history of purists betraying the progressive movement so that they can feel good about their righteous selves.

by Populism2008 on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 10:02:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

When did I say that?

by bruh21 on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 03:36:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

Minnesota - Alas, we can write off our chances in Minnesota. We are blowing it and handing a weak Republican practically a "pass" for 6 more years. Comedian Franken will not be taken seriously by a majority of Minnesota voters or the press. He is a weak general election candidate, regardless of how much money he raises or self-funds. I give between $15,000 and $30,000 each two year cycle to Dems for Senate and House, but I would not contribute to a Franken bid. He cannot win in Nov. 2008 and we are blowing that race "big time".

by pasuburbdem1 on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 10:05:41 AM EST

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

RIDICULOUS POST!! if that plastic boy(coleman) wins re-election; I'LL EAT MY SHOE

by jjgtrs on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 10:26:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

This coming from the state that elected Jesse The Body Ventura as Governor.

by yitbos96bb on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 10:35:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

Unnecessary comment; doesn't add anything to the discourse. The difference is that Franken styles himself as a serious candidate, while Ventura never did anything of the sort.

I, too, wish there was a wider variety of candidates in MN.

by PsiFighter37 on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 10:44:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

true, BUT franken can absolutely beat plastic boy(coleman)(the original poster continually goes onto EVERY blog in the sphere and trashes franken; he has a franken fixation that is kind of scary)

by jjgtrs on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 10:55:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

Count me as someone else who would be happy to have more choice of Dem candidates in MN. I listened to Franken's show often and I suspected then he wouldn't be the ideal candidate to run against Coleman.

Al many times doesn't make the argument supporting progressive causes very pursuasively the way a progressive radio talking head - and a Democratic candidate - should be able to. Examples of people who get it: Rachel Maddow, Thom Hartmann, Sam Seder, not to mention Billy, Al's producer on his show, who was quite sharp. (I wonder what he's up to these days). Given that IMO he didn't come off very well in that environment, I didn't think he'd be able to be the best person to challenge Coleman, and the recent interview with Marshall kind of confirmed that.

by PeterB on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 03:21:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

Ventura only had to win with 37% of the vote. Franken will have to do 14 points better.

by TheVirginian on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 10:59:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Oh, absolutely (none / 0)

Minnesotans always go for colorless establishment candidates who can be taken seriously. Why, before they'd consider a man like Franken, they'd be as likely to elect a pro wrestler Governor on a 3rd party ticket! Or maybe send a liberal professor with a bus and a shoestring budget to the Senate over a veteran incumbent! Ridiculous!

by admiralnaismith on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 11:55:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

well I guess I'll have to write him a check to makeup for you shutting him out. that's fine.

He'll make the best senator in the entire chamber (save perhaps Sanders) because he isn't beholden to anybody.

McCain is defining Obama, and Obama is neither defining himself, nor McCain. This is awful.

by jgarcia on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 03:17:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

The GOP is going to be kicking themselves for YEARS going after Daschle. Not only was that the final straw and helped lead to the party stepping up efforts in 2006, but now guys like McConnell are going to be targeted with the full resources of the party, unlike in the past when there was the unwritten rule the leaders of both parties got a bit of a free pass. Payback's a bitch!

by yitbos96bb on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 10:34:32 AM EST

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

It was never an unwritten rule that party leaders got a pass. It was an unwritten rule that the senate leaders wouldn't campaign against each other. Frist broke that unwritten rule when he campaigned for Thune.

So if Harry Reid wants to come to Kentucky and campaign against McConnell, he's more than welcome to.

by TheVirginian on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 11:00:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

B E G I C H ; it is spelled begich

by jjgtrs on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 10:34:33 AM EST

O, Woe is Saxby??? (none / 0)

Gerogia has some interesting potential. The GOP rank-and-file down here was FURIOUS with both Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson for their initial support of the Great Immigration Compromise. So much so that both Senators caved in and helped with the bill's initial defeat.

What's happening today? Agribusiness and manufacturing interests are reading Chambliss the riot act, assuring him that their money WILL go elsewhere if he is not back on board the Compromise.

So what's a rightwing nutjob to do? Will Chambliss take the money and watch his voter base vanish, while Vernon Jones draws a huge African-American turnout? Will Chambliss satisfy the GOP voters, and watch Vernon Jones pull even, then ahead, in the money race? As I said, some interesting potential.

As an aside, while other other Democrats have surfaced, like former WSB-TV reporter Dale Cardwell (a national sales tax supporter, yuck!), the nomination at this stage seems to be Vernon Jones' to lose. Jones is currently the CEO of DeKalb County; prior to that he served two terms in the Georgia House of Representatives.

The bad news is that my Representative and two Senators are in the minority. The good news is that my Representative and two Senators are in the minority.

by CLLGADEM on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 10:49:42 AM EST

Re: O, Woe is Saxby??? (none / 0)

vernon is also a NUT; georgia CAN do better than him

by jjgtrs on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 10:58:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: O, Woe is Saxby??? (none / 0)

As I said, Jones is the front-runner at this stage. Who else will jump in is anyone's guess.

The bad news is that my Representative and two Senators are in the minority. The good news is that my Representative and two Senators are in the minority.

by CLLGADEM on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 11:14:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: O, Woe is Saxby??? (none / 0)

Isn't there a third candidate, Rand Knight? Also, isn't there a draft effort beginning for fmr. State Rep. Wyc Orr? But, Cardwell does sound like a nut....and didn't Jones endorse Bush in 04?

by Leviathan on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 01:54:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: O, Woe is Saxby??? (none / 0)

Yes on Rand Knight, an environmental engineer making his first run for office. Hadn't heard of a Draft Orr movement. Yes on Cardwell's nutty status; if he wants to help us, let him oppose Chambliss in a GOP primary. To my knowledge, Jones did not endorse Bush, but Bishop Eddie Long, the leader of DeKalb County megachurch New Birth Kingdom Cathedral and a Jones ally, did.

The bad news is that my Representative and two Senators are in the minority. The good news is that my Representative and two Senators are in the minority.

by CLLGADEM on Sun Jun 24, 2007 at 09:11:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: O, Woe is Saxby??? (none / 0)

Actually, I think Rand Knight is a PhD in Ecosystem Analysis with previous experience in Forestry. Not an engineer, but excellent background for many current environmental issues.

Draft Wyc has been highlighted on Tondee's Tavern, which is the Georgia link on the MyDD state blogroll.

How is John McCain different than John Edwards?

by The lurking ecologist on Mon Jun 25, 2007 at 04:00:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

South Carolina???? (none / 0)

Graham's unpopularity there is because he is not conservative enough!!!

His "vulnerability" is from the right.

Where is the evidence that he would lose to a Democrat?

Visit DebateScoop

by demondeac on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 10:53:55 AM EST

"Embarassment of Riches"? (none / 0)

Nebraska still has Mike Johanns. Since he'd easily beat any competitor from either party, until we know what he's doing, there's not much room for discussion. (Or until we know what Chuck Hagel is doing, for that matter)

Tony Knowles couldn't beat Lisa Murkowski in 2004, but I'm pretty sure the grandfather of Alaska isn't as vulnerable as overly ambitious Democrats think he is.

I still don't understand how South Carolina is an embarrasment of riches when you don't even have a candidate thinking about the race.

McConnell's words were used in a fundraising letter. It doesn't really bring in the bucks to say, "Things are going great, but I really like money".

by TheVirginian on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 11:38:20 AM EST

Re: "Embarassment of Riches"? (none / 0)

VaBlogger, is that you?

by Leviathan on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 01:56:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (none / 0)

A couple of corrections. Michael McWherter is the son of former Governor NED McWherter.

Also, there are 22 Republican held seats up in 2008. Wyoming now has elections for both Senate seats.

by admiralnaismith on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 11:57:44 AM EST

Re: Senate Dems Face Embarrassment of Riches (3.00 / 1)

As much as Schumer annoys me in many ways, and as much as he is whore for money of any kind, the guy does know how to win Senate seats. I trust the DSCC will distribute its ill-gotten money wisely.

The same cannot be said of the DCCC. I expect them to blow millions on star candidates in impossible districts while ignoring ripe areas like western New York, as they did last election cycle.

But I've got high hopes for the Senate.

by Pogues Fan on Sun Jun 24, 2007 at 12:42:39 AM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.