What freshmen senators do you see being unseated in 2014, after just one term? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 10, 2024, 04:01:17 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Congressional Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  What freshmen senators do you see being unseated in 2014, after just one term? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: What freshmen senators do you see being unseated in 2014, after just one term?  (Read 4461 times)
Lunar
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,404
Ireland, Republic of
« on: December 26, 2008, 08:08:54 PM »
« edited: December 26, 2008, 08:14:44 PM by Lunar »

Funny how all five of your good chances are Democrats.  Well, it's not funny so much as inaccurate and biased.  Having five in the top might be a bit over the top, yaddamean?

Franken is the best chance, followed by Hagan and Begich, perhaps.  I suppose Risch and Johanns are safe, but I expect one of the two not to run for reelection.

edit: on reflection, I dunno about anything I just said
Logged
Lunar
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,404
Ireland, Republic of
« Reply #1 on: December 26, 2008, 08:20:27 PM »

Well, I don't know.  Frankly Risch and Johanns aren't exactly remotely vulnerable.

If one were to shift one or two "could happeners" down to solid, it'd be fine to have all the most vulnerable people be Democrats...
Logged
Lunar
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,404
Ireland, Republic of
« Reply #2 on: December 26, 2008, 10:27:47 PM »

Finally a post I almost agree with.

You assume Franken is not egotistical with your assumption he'd step aside if endangered  I see him as more endangered than Begich simply because Alaska loves their incumbents, but I guess we'll have to see.  It's a close battle between them in my book.
Logged
Lunar
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,404
Ireland, Republic of
« Reply #3 on: December 27, 2008, 07:17:31 PM »

Its worth noting that Hagan won by a greater margin than Dole did in 2002, against a much stronger opponent. Everyone here underestimated her. She is not some fluke win like Begich, or a lucky beneficiary of a wave like Merkley or Franken. She won on her own, and by such a margin(9 points) that she probably would have won even had McCain won the national election, and the state comfortably. She is vulnerable given the state, but she as a Senator is not, and if anyone is capable of surviving an unfavorable climate of the freshman class this year(with the exception of Warner) it is her.

Well, her lead was exaggerated because her existing lead caused Dole to do a last-minute idiotic commercial that caused a bit of a scandal.

And that lead was partially substantial enough to cause Dole to do this because of Youth & Black turnout associated with Obama.

And Dole was not really a good opponent, she's an awful campaigner
Logged
Lunar
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,404
Ireland, Republic of
« Reply #4 on: December 27, 2008, 09:19:06 PM »

Obama won by <1 point. Hagan won by 9. Her victory was not due to increased youth and black turnout. She would have won regardless, maybe by six points instead of eight, but coattails don't produce a nine point win in a state that was evenly divided at the top.

Obama's victory margin is irrelevant. Smiley

You're ignoring what I said.  I said her existing lead was sizable enough to make Dole do something stupid and expand it.  If her lead was smaller, as I said, then Dole wouldn't have made the gambit.   And, like I said, Dole is an awful campaigner.

Without an anti-GOP surge, and in an off-year election, Hagan's victory wouldn't have been nearly as likely.
Logged
Lunar
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,404
Ireland, Republic of
« Reply #5 on: December 27, 2008, 11:48:28 PM »

Hagan would have lost or won by a very very very small margin. The reason why I said Hagan is safe is because of the new population NC is going to have by 2014.

My counter is that the GOP is going to have to change somewhat to appeal to many of those new voters by 2014 if it wants to ever win an election again (which it does)
Logged
Lunar
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,404
Ireland, Republic of
« Reply #6 on: December 28, 2008, 12:26:17 AM »

What states aren't really trending Democratic right now?  The GOP has lost its national appeal for everywhere that's not the Upper South.  Is it ridiculous to guess that this might change?
Logged
Lunar
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,404
Ireland, Republic of
« Reply #7 on: December 28, 2008, 01:59:16 AM »

I understand what you mean, and you're right -- more of the change is likely to come from changes in issue prioritization than from platform shifts. 

I expect the GOP to be more diverse, younger, and fresher in 2014 which should help them with a lot of the types of migrants that are shifting North Carolina's demographics.

Well, I think we agree that it's a bit simplistic to assume every state will continue to trend Democratic over a long period of time.  mmm
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.028 seconds with 12 queries.