Any states the GOP could pickup in 2010?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 04:58:47 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2010 Elections
  Any states the GOP could pickup in 2010?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3
Author Topic: Any states the GOP could pickup in 2010?  (Read 15047 times)
sg0508
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,053
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: May 01, 2009, 04:24:37 PM »

I haven't followed much.  Kulongoski has been weak though for years in OR and with the disaster with Rod in IL, any chance there?  How about reclaiming AZ?  Any states we have a shot at, particularly blue states?
Logged
Lunar
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,404
Ireland, Republic of
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: May 01, 2009, 04:29:12 PM »

You mean governor's races?

Certainly Oklahoma, Tennessee, Michigan, and Kansas they have a solid shot at [and VA and NJ in 2009].  They have some competitive holds in California, Hawaii, Arizona, and Nevada.

I believe those are the states that have attracted the most attention
Logged
sg0508
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,053
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: May 01, 2009, 04:31:32 PM »

I don't see us hanging onto CA.  We won't run a moderate.  OK, KS?  Sure, but those are red states.  I was kind of thinking towards the bluish/purple states.

Those are the key ones...It would be nice to get CO back after a horrid few yrs there, but Ritter seems moderate and popular.  But, maybe AZ/OR/IL/IA/MI/WI, etc.
Logged
Lunar
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,404
Ireland, Republic of
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: May 01, 2009, 04:35:09 PM »
« Edited: May 01, 2009, 04:36:52 PM by Lunar »

Ritter has some problems due to Colorado's super-aggressive fundraising restrictions, so there's a shot there.

Michigan I think is the most blue state that the GOP has the greatest shot at, balancing & maximizing those two variables

Madigan looks to be hard to beat as long as Kirk is leaning towards the Senate race, and even then, it's an uphill battle
Logged
Dan the Roman
liberalrepublican
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,458
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: May 02, 2009, 10:51:31 PM »

I would put Maine and Massachusetts as potential targets given candidate recruitment. Chafee will probably win in Rhode Island. New York maybe if Patterson runs.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: May 03, 2009, 12:53:02 PM »

I don't see us hanging onto CA.  We won't run a moderate.  OK, KS?  Sure, but those are red states.  I was kind of thinking towards the bluish/purple states.

Those are the key ones...It would be nice to get CO back after a horrid few yrs there, but Ritter seems moderate and popular.  But, maybe AZ/OR/IL/IA/MI/WI, etc.

We already have AZ. Republicans have pretty good shot at PA if Wagner(D) doesn't run. Also it wouldn't hurt to keep an eye on OH. Granted Strickland is pretty strong but you never can tell and if you are going after IA and WI you might as well gor for OH as well.
Logged
Chancellor Tanterterg
Mr. X
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,201
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: May 04, 2009, 03:47:08 PM »

I don't see us hanging onto CA.  We won't run a moderate.  OK, KS?  Sure, but those are red states.  I was kind of thinking towards the bluish/purple states.

Those are the key ones...It would be nice to get CO back after a horrid few yrs there, but Ritter seems moderate and popular.  But, maybe AZ/OR/IL/IA/MI/WI, etc.

We already have AZ. Republicans have pretty good shot at PA if Wagner(D) doesn't run. Also it wouldn't hurt to keep an eye on OH. Granted Strickland is pretty strong but you never can tell and if you are going after IA and WI you might as well gor for OH as well.

Trust me on this, barring some enormous scandal, Strickland isn't in any danger, especially not against Kasich.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: May 04, 2009, 04:25:45 PM »

I don't see us hanging onto CA.  We won't run a moderate.  OK, KS?  Sure, but those are red states.  I was kind of thinking towards the bluish/purple states.

Those are the key ones...It would be nice to get CO back after a horrid few yrs there, but Ritter seems moderate and popular.  But, maybe AZ/OR/IL/IA/MI/WI, etc.

We already have AZ. Republicans have pretty good shot at PA if Wagner(D) doesn't run. Also it wouldn't hurt to keep an eye on OH. Granted Strickland is pretty strong but you never can tell and if you are going after IA and WI you might as well gor for OH as well.

Trust me on this, barring some enormous scandal, Strickland isn't in any danger, especially not against Kasich.

At the very least it gives the Republicans the opportunity to take the seat should such a scandal be revealed. It would be very unwise to abandon the state considering how important it is. If your already planning on trying for IA as his post suggested it would be foolish not to be in force in Ohio cause I think Ohio would elect a Republican before IA would.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,611


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: May 04, 2009, 04:51:40 PM »

You mean governor's races?

Certainly Oklahoma, Tennessee, Michigan, and Kansas they have a solid shot at [and VA and NJ in 2009].  They have some competitive holds in California, Hawaii, Arizona, and Nevada.

I believe those are the states that have attracted the most attention

How did PA not get mentioned?
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: May 04, 2009, 06:46:58 PM »

You mean governor's races?

Certainly Oklahoma, Tennessee, Michigan, and Kansas they have a solid shot at [and VA and NJ in 2009].  They have some competitive holds in California, Hawaii, Arizona, and Nevada.

I believe those are the states that have attracted the most attention

How did PA not get mentioned?

I wondered the same thing. Why mention Michigan and not PA? Thats why I brought it up on my first post on this thread but have yet to get a reply.
Logged
bullmoose88
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,515


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: May 05, 2009, 04:04:51 PM »

You mean governor's races?

Certainly Oklahoma, Tennessee, Michigan, and Kansas they have a solid shot at [and VA and NJ in 2009].  They have some competitive holds in California, Hawaii, Arizona, and Nevada.

I believe those are the states that have attracted the most attention

How did PA not get mentioned?

Good Lord, enough with Pennsylvania.  I cannot stand that state and the disproportionate amount of attention it gets on this forum.  What a gay place, seriously.



Up Yours.
Logged
The Mikado
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,677


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: May 05, 2009, 08:02:16 PM »

PA does get a ridiculous amount of attention, but that's because it is ridiculously important.
Logged
Lunar
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,404
Ireland, Republic of
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: May 05, 2009, 08:57:00 PM »

You mean governor's races?

Certainly Oklahoma, Tennessee, Michigan, and Kansas they have a solid shot at [and VA and NJ in 2009].  They have some competitive holds in California, Hawaii, Arizona, and Nevada.

I believe those are the states that have attracted the most attention

How did PA not get mentioned?

I wondered the same thing. Why mention Michigan and not PA? Thats why I brought it up on my first post on this thread but have yet to get a reply.

I forgot about it?
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,611


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: May 05, 2009, 09:10:17 PM »

You mean governor's races?

Certainly Oklahoma, Tennessee, Michigan, and Kansas they have a solid shot at [and VA and NJ in 2009].  They have some competitive holds in California, Hawaii, Arizona, and Nevada.

I believe those are the states that have attracted the most attention

How did PA not get mentioned?

I wondered the same thing. Why mention Michigan and not PA? Thats why I brought it up on my first post on this thread but have yet to get a reply.

I forgot about it?

WHAT?
Logged
Badger
badger
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,237
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: May 06, 2009, 07:25:19 AM »

You mean governor's races?

Certainly Oklahoma, Tennessee, Michigan, and Kansas they have a solid shot at [and VA and NJ in 2009].  They have some competitive holds in California, Hawaii, Arizona, and Nevada.

I believe those are the states that have attracted the most attention

How did PA not get mentioned?

Good Lord, enough with Pennsylvania.  I cannot stand that state and the disproportionate amount of attention it gets on this forum.  What a gay place, seriously.



Up Yours.

You know, Van Der Blubb, I don't often agree with Phil on much, but......
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: May 06, 2009, 03:45:54 PM »

You mean governor's races?

Certainly Oklahoma, Tennessee, Michigan, and Kansas they have a solid shot at [and VA and NJ in 2009].  They have some competitive holds in California, Hawaii, Arizona, and Nevada.

I believe those are the states that have attracted the most attention

How did PA not get mentioned?

Good Lord, enough with Pennsylvania.  I cannot stand that state and the disproportionate amount of attention it gets on this forum.  What a gay place, seriously.

If I hjad to chose btw living here in NC or moving back home to PA, I would move back to PA. There are just too many stupid people here. NC is much more gay then PA. 
Logged
Badger
badger
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,237
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: May 06, 2009, 07:30:01 PM »

But PA apparently has a fewer people who still think it's appropriate to use 'gay' as a negative pejorative. Most 10th graders today know better.

Nothing wrong with being a conservative; just don't be an a**hole. It may be too late for Vanderblubb, NC Yankee, but you still have a good chance.
Logged
HAnnA MArin County
semocrat08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,037
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: May 06, 2009, 10:03:09 PM »

Gay is not a synonym for stupid.
Logged
SamInTheSouth
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 389


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: May 10, 2009, 08:23:42 PM »

You mean governor's races?

Certainly Oklahoma, Tennessee, Michigan, and Kansas they have a solid shot at [and VA and NJ in 2009].  They have some competitive holds in California, Hawaii, Arizona, and Nevada.

I believe those are the states that have attracted the most attention

How did PA not get mentioned?

Good Lord, enough with Pennsylvania.  I cannot stand that state and the disproportionate amount of attention it gets on this forum.  What a gay place, seriously.

If I hjad to chose btw living here in NC or moving back home to PA, I would move back to PA. There are just too many stupid people here. NC is much more gay then PA. 

I lived in PA for seven years and I would never move back there.  People up north are nasty and rude and just miserable individuals overall. 
Logged
Landslide Lyndon
px75
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,611
Greece


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: May 11, 2009, 04:38:58 PM »


Not necessarily.  However, stupid is always a synonym for gay.

Geez Van!
I didn't know you were one of them!
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: May 11, 2009, 05:10:22 PM »

But PA apparently has a fewer people who still think it's appropriate to use 'gay' as a negative pejorative. Most 10th graders today know better.

Nothing wrong with being a conservative; just don't be an a**hole. It may be too late for Vanderblubb, NC Yankee, but you still have a good chance.

I only used it cause Van used it against PA, and yes I know thats a horrible excuse. You give most tenth graders far too much credit. There are twelth graders in my school who use the word gay to describe everything they dislike. I do fear though that it won't be long before that good chance is long gone, badger.
Logged
HAnnA MArin County
semocrat08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,037
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: May 11, 2009, 11:24:31 PM »

Homophobia is never necessary regardless of how old you are. Some people just need to grow up. At the same time, it's really offensive when people say that someone or something is "retarded" if they don't like them. It's really sad how cruel people are nowadays. Sad
Logged
justfollowingtheelections
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,766


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: May 12, 2009, 12:32:21 AM »

PA does get a ridiculous amount of attention, but that's because it is ridiculously important.

No it's because they have the greatest senator of all time and the greatest former senator of all time.   
Logged
Landslide Lyndon
px75
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,611
Greece


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: May 12, 2009, 12:08:07 PM »

And for all you self-righteous pricks who are offended by my usage of the word 'gay', consider that this was our word first before the queers came and took it.  So if anything I should be offended when they call themselves gay, because gay means happy while most gay people are sad, sick individuals with AIDS.

If you substitute AIDS with schizophrenia, then that description fits you perfectly.
Logged
Badger
badger
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,237
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: May 12, 2009, 12:18:45 PM »

But PA apparently has a fewer people who still think it's appropriate to use 'gay' as a negative pejorative. Most 10th graders today know better.

Nothing wrong with being a conservative; just don't be an a**hole. It may be too late for Vanderblubb, NC Yankee, but you still have a good chance.

I only used it cause Van used it against PA, and yes I know thats a horrible excuse. You give most tenth graders far too much credit. There are twelth graders in my school who use the word gay to describe everything they dislike. I do fear though that it won't be long before that good chance is long gone, badger.

<laugh> No worries, NCY. A sense of selp-depriciating humor is the first line of defense against a**holery. I fear I probably need to work on it more than you do.

Oh, and on second thought you're totally right about 'gay' as a pejorative for everything, from movies to video games to actual homosexuals, is used well into high school even today. Still, when a teen star like Hannah Montana does PSA's against such language, presumably because the producers think there's a reachable audience of tweeners for that message, it gives me hope.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3  
« previous next »
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 0.051 seconds with 14 queries.