January 28, 2010
— Ace Cambell 41%, Boxer 45%, and remember the old saw about incumbents being under 50%, and most undecideds breaking for a challenger.
She has bigger leads on Fiorina and DeVore, but nothing huge. I mean, no Coakley-sized leads or anything.
And in Wisconsin, Tommy Thompson has a lead of hitherto-believed-to-be-untouchable Russ Feingold.
One more Democratic senator who has long been regarded as a safe prospect for reelection may be facing a challenging year in 2010.A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely voters in Wisconsin finds Republican Tommy Thompson edging incumbent Russ Feingold 47% to 43% in a hypothetical U.S. Senate match-up. Five percent (5%) like some other candidate, and four percent (4%) are undecided.
Any incumbent who attracts less than 50% support at this point in a campaign is considered potentially vulnerable.
Thompson hasn't jumped into the race yet; he's just being urged to do so. Obviously, with good poll numbers, his entry becomes more likely.
A lot of these guys might genuinely not want to serve anymore in politics. I hope they will run anyway, and turn that into a virtue, promising to only run and serve for a single term.
Hell, it would be nice if they promised to serve a fraction of a term. Give us two years or something.
Although most pollsters are being very conservative on the odds of a GOP takeover of the Senate (the House looks almost likely at this point), personally, the way things look now, I'd say the Senate is more likely than not to flip to the GOP, too.
Posted by: Ace at
06:50 AM
| Comments (52)
Post contains 282 words, total size 2 kb.
Posted by: taylork at January 28, 2010 06:59 AM (4jZ56)
If that makes any sense the way I'm wording it.
Posted by: toby928 at January 28, 2010 06:59 AM (PD1tk)
Posted by: Louey at January 28, 2010 06:59 AM (euuyg)
Although most pollsters are being very conservative on the odds of a GOP takeover of the Senate (the House looks almost likely at this point), personally, the way things look now, I'd say the Senate is more likely than not to flip to the GOP, too.
A few months ago I would have said it was not possible but now it is becoming more likely everyday. The question is....are there enough Dem Senate seats up for a vote in 2010?
BTW, there was an article on Fox over the weekend that I linked to that said between 75 and 100 House seats would turn over.
Posted by: Vic at January 28, 2010 07:00 AM (QrA9E)
Posted by: Christal Metthews at January 28, 2010 07:02 AM (A46hP)
Posted by: citizen khan at January 28, 2010 07:03 AM (t/Xp7)
Happy to see Feingold is vulnerable but we do not want Tommy Thompson. He has been pushing Government Health Care for years. We have a good Conservative candidate named Dave Westlake, and at least one other who's name escapes me at the moment, that would be much better than Tommy Thompson.
Posted by: indccc at January 28, 2010 07:09 AM (1kwr2)
Some people in WI are concerned Thompson's age makes him a "one-termer"; I think that's a plus (the Senate should not be a decades-long sinecure) and gives state Republicans six years to groom candidates/younger people six years to build a resume.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 28, 2010 07:13 AM (mR7mk)
Posted by: Purple Avenger at January 28, 2010 07:13 AM (gUO27)
#1: Hold all currently GOP-held seats -- ☑ although Missouri will be close
#2: Win the low-hanging Dem fruit (ND, NV, AR, DE,) -- ☑
#3:Win the hard races ( CO, PA) -- ☐
#4:Win the extremely hard races (CA, WI, IL) -- ☐
#5:Have a not-quite-a-miracle happen in one of the following (IN, NY, WA) -- ☐
Posted by: Robert_Paulson at January 28, 2010 07:18 AM (tdJMo)
6 Ace loves him some poll, don't he?
at least it's not Pole. NTTAWWT.
Posted by: RealPoliticky at January 28, 2010 07:18 AM (nGR17)
Posted by: Purple Avenger at January 28, 2010 11:13 AM (gUO27)
I agree, but for some reason, this theme that "Feingold is such a good guy, even if he's nuts" seems to be making its way around the intertubes this morning. It's a bit perplexing.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at January 28, 2010 07:19 AM (A46hP)
Posted by: Dave on the sea at January 28, 2010 07:21 AM (OBDWE)
Posted by: Seriously at January 28, 2010 07:21 AM (hUFAW)
then CA...when is the GOP primary in Cali? I am holding off until I know who will be running against Boxer...
Posted by: ginaswo/MiM at January 28, 2010 07:21 AM (iX2MM)
Follow the Wm. F. Buckley axiom - Vote for the most conservative candidate who can get elected.
At this point, who cares if he's squishy on health care? HEALTH CARE IS DEAD! Morte.
It's how he will vote on taxes and spending.
Posted by: Biff Baxter at January 28, 2010 07:22 AM (zmX+X)
Posted by: torabora at January 28, 2010 07:24 AM (R+LUw)
Posted by: torabora at January 28, 2010 07:26 AM (R+LUw)
http://tinyurl.com/ykzpmml
Posted by: Hatchet Five at January 28, 2010 07:28 AM (wPZU5)
Follow the Wm. F. Buckley axiom - Vote for the most conservative candidate who can get elected.
Uh, Bill, thanks for giving us McCain as a choice. Drop the "who can get elected" part and we're good, otherwise you can kiss my axiom.
Posted by: barbelle at January 28, 2010 07:30 AM (qF8q3)
The current candidates running against Feingold (Terrence Wall, David Westlake) are nice guys, but have no chance of winning. Neither has experience, name recognition or the ability to raise big money.
The sleeper candidate is Milwaukee conservative radio talk show host and author Charles Sykes, who has the intellect and knowledge to debate Feingold on the issues, the smarts to run a good campaign, and good media savvy. Sykes is not yet in the race, although he is getting a lot of push and encouragement to jump in. More info here: http://www.620wtmj.com/shows/sykes
Posted by: Michael_Haz at January 28, 2010 07:31 AM (n0UV4)
Posted by: runningrn at January 28, 2010 07:38 AM (CfmlF)
Posted by: docj at January 28, 2010 07:40 AM (dt6br)
Paging Mr. Scott Brown, paging Mr. Scott Brown.
Posted by: DelD at January 28, 2010 07:41 AM (eWtdM)
As it happens, I went to high school with Tom Campbell, in Chicago. Good guy, very bright, but very liberal. If the choice is between him and Boxer, he's the obvious choice; a fiscally responsible social liberal probably is the best we can hope for in California. A trivia note: Campbell's father was a federal judge and oversaw the grand jury that indicted the Chicago 8.
Posted by: Brown Line at January 28, 2010 07:42 AM (VrNoa)
Posted by: Massachusetts at January 28, 2010 07:48 AM (4Kl5M)
It's how he will vote on taxes and spending.
Does not compute.
Posted by: MlR at January 28, 2010 08:00 AM (0G5pp)
Ace- You need to dial back expectations on the Senate, or you are just setting things up for a disappointment. Since Biden breaks a tie, a takeover would require the GOP to win 10 of the 18 Dem seats up for election, while holding all their own seats. Right now a pickup of as many as 7 or 8 seats looks plausible, but the last 2-3 seats will be a very steep climb.
Consider that Inouye, Leahy, Murray, Mikulsky, Schumer, and Wyden all appear safe. Open seat in CT looks pretty safe now too.
That means the GOP needs to win 10 of the following 11 seats: Bahy, Bennet, Boxer, Feingold, Gillibrand, Lincoln, Reid, Specter, DE open seat , IL open seat, ND open seat.
Posted by: Jon at January 28, 2010 08:00 AM (Xt7UU)
November is going to RAWWWK, lol.
Posted by: lauraw at January 28, 2010 08:07 AM (++QbI)
Posted by: Agnostica at January 28, 2010 08:11 AM (gbCNS)
Posted by: Jean at January 28, 2010 08:13 AM (vb5IK)
Posted by: Jean at January 28, 2010 08:16 AM (tpEh1)
Posted by: citizen khan"
How about we at least stop the democrats first. Indeed, the TEA folks need to take over the GOP from the ground up. I hope you and every other fiscal conservative is doing what they can at the local level to see this happen, instead of bitching about RINOs. Regardless, we have a choice between the GOP as it will be next year, or the democrats. Take your pick.
If you want to improve the GOP, join us and make it happ'n cap'n.
Posted by: Wigglesworth at January 28, 2010 08:22 AM (dUOK+)
I would love to hear Senator Boxer addressed as "Ma'am."
Did I say "Ma'am?" I meant "jobless bitch."
Posted by: kev at January 28, 2010 08:23 AM (Zz0oZ)
Feingold cannot be taken out by a nobody but could easily be taken out by Thompson. The thing about these numbers is that both Feingold and Thompson are known by the electorate. So their numbers won't change too much by gaffes or negative ads.
Even if Thompson doesn't run, these kinds of poll results often lead to people like Feingold deciding it's time to leave.
Posted by: AmishDude at January 28, 2010 08:28 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: redc1c4 at January 28, 2010 08:44 AM (d1FhN)
I would love to hear Senator Boxer addressed as "Ma'am."
Did I say "Ma'am?" I meant "jobless bitch."
Haven't you heard? These are now life-long titles. Even when these schmucks get thrown out of their office, it is considered proper 'etiquette' to refer to them with their past titles.
Of course, it is horseshit, but that's where following today's publicly accepted rules of etiquette gets you.
Posted by: MlR at January 28, 2010 08:54 AM (0G5pp)
Ted Kaufman - Delaware, not a chance
Roland Burris - Illinois, not a chance and the favored R is a RINO who voted for crap and tax.
Byron Dorgan - North Dakota; good chance here. So one of 4.
Kit Bond - Missouri– probably stay R
Judd Gregg - New Hampshire- most likely turnover to Dem
George Voinovich - Ohiotossup but under todayÂ’s environment stays R unless another RINO is selected.
First of all, Delaware is now "Solid Republican Takeover" in every listing: Beau Biden isn't running and Representative Mike Castle (former Governor as well) is favored to win by something like 30 points. So there's two guaranteed Senate victories. Then, Kelly Ayotte is favored to win in New Hampshire by 10+ points right now (assuming she wins the primary, which she will easily). As long as she's not Coakleyesque bad as a campaigner (and she's on notice) there's another hold for the GOP.
The GOP Senate nomination for OH is going to Rob Portman. You'll like him a lot, I think.
The biggest tossup here is still in MO. Carnahan now trails Blunt, but Carnahan is generally the better-liked candidate statewide and they're BOTH from political "dynasties" in Misssouri so the anti-establishment vibe could cancel itself out. That's the one current GOP seat that I think is most likely to go to the Dems.
That's putting you some effin' knowledge, son.
Posted by: Jeff B. at January 28, 2010 08:56 AM (GhUHn)
Heh! From Michelle Malkin (proof that there is no such thing as a Blue Dog Democrat):
Every Senate Democrat voted to raise the debt limit to $14.3 trillion. The vote was 60-40 on straight partisan lines.
Posted by: runningrn at January 28, 2010 09:11 AM (CfmlF)
That's putting you some effin' knowledge, son.
I saved your post and mine. After November we will find out who had "the effin' knowledge", hoss.
Posted by: Vic at January 28, 2010 09:17 AM (QrA9E)
Posted by: Mr. Chumpo at January 28, 2010 09:44 AM (dDysH)
Posted by: ol_dirty_/b+/tard at January 28, 2010 09:57 AM (IoUF1)
Posted by: ravens jersey at July 13, 2011 08:55 PM (2a2qa)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2316 seconds, 180 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: GuyfromNH at January 28, 2010 06:53 AM (GWXuo)