SUSA 50 State Approval. (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 29, 2024, 05:35:02 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Gubernatorial/State Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  SUSA 50 State Approval. (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: SUSA 50 State Approval.  (Read 2727 times)
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


« on: November 30, 2005, 03:21:24 PM »

Wow, Murkowski's making a run for Taft.  It looks like, come 2006, Idaho may be the only state without a Democrat in any significant office, if the Dems can play on this.

What exactly has Matt Blunt done to deserve a 60%+ disapproval?

And what has happened to Bill Owens?  He used to be very popular.

You should add Texas.  You should see some of the candidates the Democrats are putting up for statewide office in 2006.  Geez.
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


« Reply #1 on: November 30, 2005, 03:26:49 PM »

Wow, Murkowski's making a run for Taft.  It looks like, come 2006, Idaho may be the only state without a Democrat in any significant office, if the Dems can play on this.

What exactly has Matt Blunt done to deserve a 60%+ disapproval?

And what has happened to Bill Owens?  He used to be very popular.

You should add Texas.  You should see some of the candidates the Democrats are putting up for statewide office in 2006.  Geez.

I was including congressional representation - otherwise Utah would also fall into that category.

Ok, no problem.  Didn't understand your definition of "significant".  Smiley
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


« Reply #2 on: November 30, 2005, 03:48:04 PM »

Wow, Murkowski's making a run for Taft.  It looks like, come 2006, Idaho may be the only state without a Democrat in any significant office, if the Dems can play on this.

What exactly has Matt Blunt done to deserve a 60%+ disapproval?

And what has happened to Bill Owens?  He used to be very popular.

You should add Texas.  You should see some of the candidates the Democrats are putting up for statewide office in 2006.  Geez.

I was including congressional representation - otherwise Utah would also fall into that category.

Ok, no problem.  Didn't understand your definition of "significant".  Smiley

Well, I suppose that varies.  I'm sure we can all name the congressional representatives of one-district states like South Dakota and Montana, but I suppose few people offhand know who represents TX-19 or CA-33 outside of Texas and California.

I had to look up who represented TX-19, so some Texans don't exactly know who a state CD Rep is.. 

Still, I know Shiela Jackson Lee (with her mouth, who couldn't?), Chet Edwards, Henry Cuellar, Solomon Ortiz, Gene Green and can place their faces well, so your point is well taken.
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


« Reply #3 on: November 30, 2005, 04:03:48 PM »

Sam, what do you think of Strayhorn in a primary challenge? I still have to look at the issues more, (and I know youre Dem), but I'm thinking I'm gonna vote for her.

The primary challenge will be the race in Texas next year, unless a real Democrat candidate comes along (Chris Bell=no).

Both Rick Perry and Strayhorn are former Democrats-turned-Republicans, but Strayhorn is the more "liberal" of the two, esp. on social issues and will be perceived as the more liberal candidate.

All being said, Strayhorn would prefer not to have a real Democrat in the race, as Perry is strong with the core constituent of Republican primary voters (if not Republican voters in general) in the state: social conservatives.

Strayhorn's way to winning is through reaching those Republicans who are disaffected with Perry, but more importantly getting Independents and Democrats to vote in the Republican primary.  Texas has no party registration and at the beginning of each year you can change which party you vote in their primary (this is how John McCain came so close to defeating George Bush in the Republican primary of 2000).  If there are no real Democrats for any statewide office to speak of, (as there presently aren't) it would be best-case scenario for Strayhorn.

A Perry approval rating in this poll of 47%-47% should translate to roughly 50% approve or so among RV in an adult poll in a state like Texas where there are so many unregistered or illegal citizens.

Nonetheless in a general election, Strayhorn could easily top 60% among present opponents, though Perry would be only around 55%-60% (can't see him topping that).  The wild card here is Kinky, but I think he won't make a big enough difference to change things and might hurt the Democratic candidate more.

Both candidates of course, have their weaknesses.  Strayhorn's is foot-in-mouth syndrome (a la Tom Coburn).  Perry's is being the unlikeable good-looking guy who just seems uninteresting.

That's about all I can think of right now.
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 0.031 seconds with 12 queries.