If you had control of Senate race funding...

[ian]

How would you spend the money?

If I were in charge, this is the order in which the DPA/DSCC (or its Republican equivalents) would fund candidates, with the most dough going to #1 and least going to #14:

1. NJ
2. MO
3. MN
4. MT
5. RI
6. OH
7. PA
8. MD
<gap>
9. TN
10. VA
11. WA
12. MI
<gap>
13. NV
14. AZ

And honestly, I wouldn't even encourage funding to #s 9 through 14.
And as a sidenote, a Democrat wins in CT no matter what.  Funding there is unneccesary.

[TheresNoMoney]

1. Missouri
2. Montana
3. Ohio
4. Minnesota
5. Pennsylvania
6. Virginia
7. Rhode Island
8. New Jersey
9. Tennessee
10.Washington

[Mr. Morden]

What about the fact that there are some huge discrepancies in the populations of these states, and so the amount of $ required per state will be quite different?  I would assume that blanketing the Montana media markets would be fairly cheap, because the population of the state is so small.  But doing the same for PA or NJ would be far more expensive.

[Mr. Morden]

Also, I'm not sure it makes much sense for either party to put much $ into RI until we see what happens in the primary.  Depending on who wins the primary, the general election could be very competitive, or it could be very noncompetitive.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Menendez's approval rating continues to fall, as does Lautenbergs and Corzines.  This race is slowly slipping away from him.

[MarkWarner08]

Races ranked in order of my spending priorities:

1. MO: McCaskill needs the money in what will likely be the closest Senate race in the country
2. OH: The road to the Senate Majority runs through Ohio
3. MT: Like Missouri, an underfunded Democratic challenger takes on a vulnerable GOP incumbent in a red state.
4. RI: Whitehouse will need some DSCC fudning when Chafee wins the primary. If Laffey wins, this money goes to Tennessee or Virginia.
5. TN: Bob Corker is a tax-raising, flip-flopping, wishy-washy elistist who's faux moderate positions are alienating conservative and moderate voters. If Ford were white and named Smith, he'd be up by 10%. In reality, Ford has run a perfect campaign and deserves the DSCC's help.

Defense:

6. WA:  This seat will need funding from the Nat Dems because of McGavick's vast fortune.

7. MN: Kloubacher will need all the help she can get from DSCC.
8. NJ: Downwithdaleft, Roll Call hasd reported that the NRSC and GOP insiders are fretting Kean's huge Cash on Hand disadvantage. Kean's in worse financial shape than McCaskill, and unlike her, he has to run in 2006 as a Republican in a deep blue state.
9. Maryland:  Cardin's campaign is picking up momentum, Rales is a non-factor in the primary and Steele's calling Bush his "home boy."  This seat goes way down my list.

One long shot:

10: I'd put some money into Virginia to help Webb pull off an upset.


Where's Michigan, Nebraska, Nevada and Arizona? Stabenow and Nelson will not lose this year and Carter and Pederson can't win.

I've omitted Pennsylvania because I believe that Bob Casey will pull this race off by 5%. Spending money here would be akin to Bush's decision to spend dough in Califronia in 2000.

[Mike in Maryland]

Democratic spending priorities (in order):

Offense:
OH; Brown has to compete in several media markets, and don't underestimate the state GOP machine (sputtering and corrupt though it may be.)
MO: McCaskill is even in polls, but not in funds
PA: Casey is still ahead, though by a narrower margin, but we can't take this for granted (though Santorum has pretty much had the airwaves to himself lately and is still behind)
RI: If Chafee wins this will need the cash; if not this drops down the list
MT: Competitive, but state is cheap to run in
TN: If Ford keeps in contention with Corker, then this is worthy of attention
VA: We'll see if Allen's recent slump is just a blip or a sign of something more substantial.  If the latter, then I'd put this above TN.
NV: A longer shot but not out of sight
AZ: Pederson has a lot of money of his own.  If he can't put himself into contention with that, then I wouldn't waste money on this.

Defense:
WA: Cantwell is only modestly ahead, and has a self-funded opponent
The next three I'd rank equally:
NJ: Race is competitive, Menendez is slightly ahead but not overwhelmingly popular, and advertising there is expensive
MD: Cardin is ahead but doesn't have either the primary or general locked up, so we can't take it for granted.  If Mfume wins the primary I'd raise it to the top of money needs on the defense list.
MN: Klobuchar seems to be consolidating her support but can't risk running out of cash in the homestretch.
MI: If Bouchard shows further momentum in polls this will need more money, but I don't think he's running as strongly as the GOP says.
NE: Nelson is ahead but not safe in GOP state, and has a wealthy opponent.
FL: If Katherine Harris is not the GOP nominee then I'd pay more attention to this, though I expect Bill Nelson will defeat any of those running.

[Moooooo]

Mike, who do you like for AG in MD?

What about comptroller?

Im pretty much set on Gansler and Owens.

[Mike in Maryland]

Undecided on both; for AG I could vote for any of the Dems, but I'm somewhat partial to Gansler (my county's prosecutor).  I also like Simms but after a good start he seems to be sputtering.

For Comptroller I am trying to decide between Schaefer (despite his too many gaffes, I still appreciate his long public service and knowledge of state government) and Owens.  Franchot strikes me as too much the preachy nanny-state liberal for my taste.

[Adlai Stevenson]

Races ranked in order of my spending priorities:

1. MO: McCaskill needs the money in what will likely be the closest Senate race in the country
2. OH: The road to the Senate Majority runs through Ohio
3. MT: Like Missouri, an underfunded Democratic challenger takes on a vulnerable GOP incumbent in a red state.
4. RI: Whitehouse will need some DSCC fudning when Chafee wins the primary. If Laffey wins, this money goes to Tennessee or Virginia.
5. TN: Bob Corker is a tax-raising, flip-flopping, wishy-washy elistist who's faux moderate positions are alienating conservative and moderate voters. If Ford were white and named Smith, he'd be up by 10%. In reality, Ford has run a perfect campaign and deserves the DSCC's help.

Defense:

6. WA:  This seat will need funding from the Nat Dems because of McGavick's vast fortune.

7. MN: Kloubacher will need all the help she can get from DSCC.
8. NJ: Downwithdaleft, Roll Call hasd reported that the NRSC and GOP insiders are fretting Kean's huge Cash on Hand disadvantage. Kean's in worse financial shape than McCaskill, and unlike her, he has to run in 2006 as a Republican in a deep blue state.
9. Maryland:  Cardin's campaign is picking up momentum, Rales is a non-factor in the primary and Steele's calling Bush his "home boy."  This seat goes way down my list.

One long shot:

10: I'd put some money into Virginia to help Webb pull off an upset.


Where's Michigan, Nebraska, Nevada and Arizona? Stabenow and Nelson will not lose this year and Carter and Pederson can't win.

I've omitted Pennsylvania because I believe that Bob Casey will pull this race off by 5%. Spending money here would be akin to Bush's decision to spend dough in Califronia in 2000.

I agree with MarkWarner08's choices.  McCaskill needs help dearly and I think Virginia and Tennessee should be the main 6th seat priorities for the DSCC; if we assume that we can win Missouri, Montana, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island.