Dems ‘o6 Senate Problem

• June 1, 2005

Washington – Since 2000, both parties have gained Senate seats in the states they typically carry in presidential campaigns. But this political partitioning provides a clear advantage for Republicans because so many more states backed Bush in his bids for the presidency.
If Democrats only gain in their part of the map, “it’s like saying, ‘We’re going to win more home games but never worry about road games,’ “ said Matthew Dowd, a political advisor to the Republican National Committee and senior strategist for Bush’s reelection campaign. “They could have a great home record but never win a majority.”
…
Twenty-nine states voted for Bush in 2000 and in 2004. Republicans now hold 44 of the 58 Senate seats in those so-called red states.
…
This distribution makes it virtually impossible for Democrats to regain a majority simply by defeating GOP senators from blue states, such as their two top targets for 2006 –
Tags: General

http://Array MikeAdamson

It’s probably the hat.
http://sayanythingblog.com/ Aaron

Like if the Democrats had nominated a Presidential candidate this time around who I could take seriously on national security and would have spent less than Bush.

You’re an oddity I think. I think most who split their ballot go the other way around, which can be evidenced at least by the fact that one Democrat (Eisenhower) has won 51%+ of the popular vote in a presidential election in the last 60 years while the GOP has done it 7 times. Yet in the same time frame, the GOP has been the minority in the Senate nearly the entire time….

I understand individual races that happening (splitting the ballot), but it seems like a regular thing for some “moderate” voters across America.
http://sayanythingblog.com/ Aaron

Actually, you did. I screwed up and typed a response to your comment in the wrong thread:

Many of the questions begin from the sole premise of whether those survey support giving someone the right to choose some aspect of personal accounts.

Asking whether people wish to have the choice is a fairer way of asking the question. If you ask people about “Bush’s plan” there is a lot of bias that jumps into the question, skewing the answer people will give both directions depending on their political persuasions…
http://ThatColoredfellasweblog.bloghorn.com/ that colored fella

Says nothing about “”rights”, just giving the choiceÃ¢â‚¬Â¦

You’re correct Aaron,

It says nothing about ‘rights’ – and neither does my comments. Stop distorting my words!

Asking whether one supports ‘giving someone the choice’, is not the same as ‘Do you support Bush’s Private Accounts Plan’? – which is the way you’re spinning it.
http://ThatColoredfellasweblog.bloghorn.com/ that colored fella

Aaron,

Current speculation among Democrats gave chances of recapturing the Senate in 2006, long odds. But, what has energized the party, is the widely held belief that, with each passing day, we have an even better chance at taking back the House next year!

The Dems know that it’s easier to conduct a more substantive campaign in local Congressional races, and incumbent Republicans will have to answer for the conduct of their party, and the failures and indifference of this administration.

But, we can still make gains in the Senate, betting that Pennsylvania, for instance, is fed up with Santorum. And, as brave a moderate Chafee has been, I suspect the Republicans will run an arch-Conservative in the Primary, making it easier to win in the General.
http://sayanythingblog.com/ Aaron

Here is the text of the question, TCF:

Do you favor or oppose proposals to give younger workers the choice of privately investing a portion of their Social Security taxes through personal accounts?

Says nothing about “rights”, just giving the choice…

This question gets 52.7% yes and 40.3% no.

Browsing through the polling report that you so often point me to, you’ll see similar responses when people are asked if we should have a choice or control over investing our SS accounts.

That is, unless you taint the poll by adding scary-sounding things like “which will increase the risk”
http://www.takingbacknd.blogspot.com/ Brenarlo

PORK PORK PORK… people vote for Senators because they know their names and because Senators, especially Dems like Conrad and Dorgan, bring home PORK PORK PORK!!
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

I think some people split their ballots because they want gridlock. Others are truly partisan blind.

I’ve split the ballot before in local elections, voting Democrat for my state legislator and Republican for governor. Never done it as far as federal balloting goes though. I would, though, if I thought it would be the best way to go. Like if the Democrats had nominated a Presidential candidate this time around who I could take seriously on national security and would have spent less than Bush.
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

You’re an oddity I think.

You have no idea how often I get that.
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

Right on, Brenarlo. Too many people rate their legislators based on how many tax dollars that politician brings home to the state.

SayAnythingBlog.com

Dems ‘o6 Senate Problem

Create a SAB Readerblog

Recent Comments