MO-SEN 2022 megathread: ERIC

[Lognog]

This is way too early to be talking about 20220

yeah you know atlas goes too far when they start talking about elections 18000 years in the future

[Lognog]

And here I thought that they might mostly be retiring because they can see the writing on the wall of not only Democrats being in the final stages of passing a massively popular piece of legislation aimed at providing real relief to struggling Americans during one of the biggest crises of the last century, but of Republicans themselves enabling them to do so on a straight party-line vote. How stupid must some of us be to have thought that might maybe, just maybe result in the Democrats actually doing well with a 1962/1998/2002, even in spite of 2022 being an INFALLIBLE BIDEN MIDTERM !?1?

This is absurd, even by your standards, Biden's popularity is at -21 in MO so it is very unlikely that Blunt is retiring because he is seeing ''the writing on the wall'', and even assuming that democrats will get a decent midterm, which is not backed by the facts outside of some national polls where Biden voters are massively oversampled, it is hard to see how the climate could be good enough for them to win in a red state like Missouri.

As for Blunt, the dude is probably retiring because he wants to make more money as a lobbyist (1) or because he is tired of Trump's influence among the GOP base (2).

...

I- no, no words. Just lol.

Where did I even so much as imply (let alone outright state, as you're acting as if I did) that this had anything to do with Blunt as an individual or a state like MO in particular? Obviously, Blunt (&, not to mention, Senators like Portman, Burr, Toomey, & Shelby, though the latter admittedly might just be retiring on account of his age moreso than anything else) could & would win re-election if he sought it. That's not at all a question here. It goes without saying, which is why I didn't feel the need to say it, because it isn't something that should've even required an explicit statement thereof such as this.

What I was very clearly getting at (& which nobody else evidently had any problems understanding) is that Republican senators on the whole don't seem to be gung-ho with the possibility of what could be a long-haul tenure (i.e. >2 years) in the minority, & aren't inclined to remain in such a situation if they feel that they don't have to. Hence a retirement like Blunt's. Hence retirements like Portman's, & Burr's, & Toomey's, & possibly Shelby's.

Jesus, did I murder your cat or something? Seriously, what made you so blind with an evident hostility for me &/or my #analysis (given your blatantly uncalled-for "aBsUrD, eVeN bY yOuR sTaNdArDs" remark) that you completely f**king missed the underlying point thereof that was otherwise clear-as-day for seemingly everybody else?

I really don't think any of them are retiring because they don't want to be in the minority

Shelby is retiring bc he's about a million years old
Portman just hates being in the Trump era senate
Toomey just hates being in the Trump era GOP
Burr is retiring bc of the massive insider trading scandal he had

as for Blunt he is retiring because of what French republican said

[Lognog]

This primary is a mess.

This is before they even start attacking each other

[Lognog]

Quinton Lucas met with DSCC and is seriously considering, Luetkemeyer is also considering.

I hope he runs. He’d be a formidable candidate.

It doesn't matter, this race is Safe R no matter what happens.

There’s no harm in consistently running strong candidates as scandal/wave insurance.  It’s actually an important part of rebuilding state parties and running an effective 50 state strategy (both of which the party badly needs although obviously it should be coupled with pragmatism about where and how much we invest resources).

There is literally nothing to lose except when they get a bit over ambitious like a Mcgrift type

[Lognog]

Everyone here is dunking on Nixon, but name one candidate that would do better (Besides Kander who doesn't want it anymore)