Democrats target seven states in 2006 Senate races

WASHINGTON --Despite being New York's less-famous senator, Charles Schumer stayed busy in 2005, keeping a hand -- or quote -- in almost every major congressional battle.

Now he is out to prove he has the strategy to elect Senate Democrats and maybe wrest control from the Republicans.

Schumer, the head of Senate Democrats' campaign efforts, said Tuesday he is focusing on seven states where he believes they can take GOP-held Senate seats in 2006: Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Missouri, Montana, Tennessee, and Arizona.

"If the stars align right we could actually take back the Senate," Schumer said.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/rhode_island/articles/2005/12/27/democrats_target_seven_states_in_2006_senate_races/?rss_id=Boston.com+%2F+News

And the House is where Investigation and Impeachment begin.

Our chances are looking good.

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

When do I get to create threads?

oh, that's for drinking.

never mind.

:toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :spray:

Having a Grolsch right now quite legally.

just go to the lounge and introduce yourself. It want take long. Oh, and don't take anything they say seriously.:evilgrin:

:toast: :hi:

corruption of the election system!

... all other points are moot.

elections. This is the problem. Blackwell and the pug legislators have no intention for fairness(Just read OH HB 3). If this is not brought to light you, all the GOTV work will be for naught.

They're morans. Plain and simple. I hate to sound discouraging, but Ohio no longer has democracy. My poor native state of Ohio is going to have to wait for some federal fair-election legislation to break out of their Republican dictatorship, sad to say. The Dems better focus on places that have fair elections.

Here's who they are running:

http://www.claireonline.com/

Baby Blunt has left a pretty bad impression of the GOP in MO for the most part.

Make sure they're pro-war DLC candidates, Chuck.

Anyone else is "unelectable."

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

You gotta like Schumer. For a politician, the guy is intellectually honest.

For me, what those ass*oles did to Clinton, is about to come back in spades.

"If the stars align right"... Great understatement. If reality plays out is more like it.

The point is, it doesn't really matter what the DLC targets. Seven states - pretty conservative.

The country knows power must be balanced.

We WILL control congress in 11 months. It will be at that time that impeachment for sexual indsicretions will become droll.

And it is at that time you would do well to not count yourself as Republican.

I am certain California is already counting itself Democrat.

Great post,

Joe

given a margin of error...i.e., mass insanity and intense propaganda mixed with Rove-induced "circumstance". Throw in a pinch of Diebold and you have George W. Bush being elected to every seat in Congress. Impossible? *waiving arms mystically* "The secret wiretaps were constitutional, the secret wiretaps were constituuuuuutionalllll..."

I doubt that even Delay will have a job by the end of 2006. I mean, beyond pulling wings off of flies or whatever the hell he did before politics.

I'm with you man, history has shown that change will happen. It happened in 1982 in the repub dominated senate, it happened in 1994 in the dem dominated congress, & it'll happen now. I'm surprised the republicans have dominated both houses for this long. If Fox News hadn't been around I doubt even Bush would have gone beyond one term.

I think you are dead on about "Fox News" - and I use the term news in association with Fox very lightly.

I know CNN was bad about Iraq - Fox was "Off the charts" bad.

We DO have a history in our country. And I guess it will have to happen again, now. People that mislead us do get "Ridden out of town on a rail". Just a fact.

Americans may be slow sometimes, not stupid.

And what goes around does come around. And it is coming around.

Joe

Assuming that this time November looks more or less like it does now, here's how I see it. Pennsylvania is all but in the bag for one; Missouri and Ohio are probabilities for 2 and 3; Rhode Island is a strong possibility as Chafee looks like he's going to get a conservative challenger in the primaries--that's four. Burns in Montana is leading both potential challengers but he's dropping fast and they've got nowhere to go but up--that's a very plausible fifth. Harold Ford is a plausible 6th pickup--polls show him slightly ahead of or slightly behind the various potential Republican opponents. Then it gets tough--Kyl in Arizona faces a strong opponent but has a comfortable lead; if Lott retires, then Mississippi is a plausible takeover; if Virginia can field a strong challenger there's an outside shot there; Carter in Nevada is way behind but must have something of an outside shot. We can conceivably hold all Dem seats--Florida is still safe as Cruella is still running; Maryland looks safer than it did a few months ago; New Jersey is a question mark but it's a blue-purple state; and the latest polls in Minnesota look much better for the Dems than a few months ago.

Bottom line--I could see us holding all Dem seats and grabbing 8 Republican seats given a continued favorable climate. But six is more than enough and very, very doable. I think a Senate takeover is at this stage slightly more likely than a House takeover.

In which seven states the Swift Boat Liars and their fellow travelers will set up offices?

trent may retire and if he does his seat is a tossup, I gar-un-tee!!!!

weeks. I'm hoping like hell that he does, because I think that would give us a great opportunity to pick up a seat in "red" Mississippi! Further, I hope that it's his seat that gives the Dems the majority. What an incredibly ironic and sweet final F-U to the Senate leadership that would be, considering how they fed him to the wolves after his Thurmond "faux pas." :-)

Mmmmm... Sen. Gene Taylor (D-MS)... yum!

Of course if Lott does retire he could always get his rug to run for his seat, the way George Wallace got his wife to... :-)

Talk here in Mississippi is that Attorney General Mike Moore(D) would be almost a sure bet if Lott retires. Funny thing about Lott: he says one day he's running for Majority Leader when Frist leaves and the next day he says Katrina wiped him out and he can't afford to run again. Is he hoping the GOP will front him for another run?

would be a strong candidate in a statewide race. I don't know if Taylor could win a statewide contest and I'd rather not lose his seniority in the house. And who knows what south MS redneck republican would win his seat if he gave it up. Hopefully Moore and Taylor will both be in Washington in 2007.

if he can catch it! I agree that Lott retiring would be a major breakthrough. The katrina backlash is bound to pay some dividends down south.

Barak

When is he up for re-election.

I can't stand that DINO Repuke mole.

JB

the fact that we are not automotrons.

We think, we debate, we reason. EVERY person of reason should be encouraged here.

God knows, the Republicans won't. That is exactly why they lose.

The day we lose the desire to reason, we all lose.

Joe

Just how stupid are these people running the party? Don't these people understand bush is not running??? This is not the way to win Senate seats.

ALL POLITICS IS LOCAL. Someone famous said that once, he used to damn near run the country.

Maybe it is true, when issues are not national. They are now. In fact the only times I have ever paid close attention to elections was when they were serious national issues.

This logic must be flawed, or voter turn-out would reflect it.

B*sh may indeed be able to shave a point or two, but the ability to do so has a limit.

There is absolutely no way they can do this in the face of overwhelming opposition. We don't control the workings, and probably won't until a shift in power happens. But we do have it in our country to shift the power right now.

And we better.

Jow

or maybe they are throwing out red meat for the party radicals

National issues need to be the talking points during the 2008 NATIONAL ELECTION, not the 2006 MID TERMS when fewer people are tuned in and those that do VOTE care a lot more about local issues then what asshole has two years left in oval office. The difference in voter turn out is like 20% less during mid terms.

Public dissatisfaction with President Bush does not translate into voter turn out DURING MID TERMS. Voter turnout wins elections. Hot Local issues will push voter turn out.

borrowed time now.

I believe the country knows it, too.

I am willing to bet on our country, in any event.

Joe

...in 82 and in 92, the mid-term election results were attributable to national issues.

Plus, this quote sounds like a formulated opinion to me, more than the party platform.

Cheers!

"Thoroughly corrupt (repuke - can't ever use the term these criminal prefer) congress" is VERY valid and VERY pertinent to this election.

The control of our entire government by the incompetant and thoroughly corrupt repukes has been vividly illustrated now thanks to Katrina, Rita, and the PROVEN Iraq war lies.

Public dissatisfaction with President Bush does not translate into voter turn out DURING MID TERMS. Voter turnout wins elections. Hot Local issues will push voter turn out.

Public dissatisfaction with Clinton lead to a nationalised election strategy and Republican takeover in the 1994 midterms. I can't believe you're ignoring this....

ON EDIT: I would like to point out the obvious again for you: the 1998 midterms with big wins for Democrats turned out that way because of public dissatisfaction with Gingrich and the impeachment witch-hunt. In 2002, Republicans won "big" largely because they nationalised their election strategy and had a (at the time) very popular President Bush stumping for their candidates. We lost in 2002 because we believed that local issues would dictate who would win....

So... the last three cycles of midterms have been won with a NON-LOCAL STRATEGY.

not just against the opposition.

but the Freepers hate Schemer as much as her. He is hardly a shrinking violet in the Senate and has DONE a LOT there. Even the "great" Peter King, who the Reps anointed to run against him, bowed out early in the race. Didn't stand a prayer of winning, only embarrassment for the national party. No Rep wanted to challenge Chuckie. The man got something like 72% of the vote here.

EAT YOUR HEART OUT REPUBLICANS (AND GW Bush). THAT is what a MANDATE really looks like.

list.

Olympia Snowe's support comes from her allegedly moderate positions, but the base in her own party does not support her. The GOP sees her vote padding and public statements as evidence that she is a RINO. If we could recruit a real candidate and see that they were well-funded we could take back the Senate seat held by Ed Muskie and George Mitchell. Snowe has higher numbers among Democrats and Independents than Republicans. If we gave those sizable blocks of voters a reason to vote for someone else there is no reason we can't defeat Snowe and then Collins. Sadly, the state party seems to have other battles on its mind and both the state and national party see opposing Snowe as a losing fight. I wonder if we'll bother putting up a real fight in 2008 against Susie Q...

Who will run against her that can garner that much support? Seriously. Maybe if we get George Mitchell to run again.

Jean Hay Bight? Eric Menhert? Mike Brennan? I hear there's a guy from Camden with serious dollars who's interested in giving it a try. Can any of them win? Even with strong support from the DSCC, the DNC, the MDP, and any other group?

I wish beyond belief that the answer is yes but I'm not so sure.

Who is thinking of running? I will vote for anyone against Olympia. Her votes tell the story of an ass kisser not a moderate. She sends us these perfectly worded replies (Collins sends nothing), then votes the party line. What do you think of Jean Haybright? Since we just got a Diebold scanner after 200 years of hand counting, I am sure it is all being worked out.

I just returned from Memphis, where I was for the holidays. Our travels from Memphis to North Carolina took use across that state and I was amazed at the sheer number of "W" stickers of one sort or another in Tennessee. Strangely, these stickers were more prevalent in West Tennessee than East Tennessee, which doesn't make sense given the traditionally conservative nature of the East Tennessee area.

When in Memphis, it was clear from conversations with some of the "W" sticker folks that their support was based upon Shrub's supposed Xtian beliefs and latent racism, which was voiced as concern about how bad "crime" was getting in Memphis and how it used to be more peaceful before blacks moved to the "white-flight suburbs" of Germantown and Cordova.

When I see those "W" stickers, I can't help but think about the Nazi swastika. The swastika was used by Hitler to denote a movement, as well as a person. I view these "W" stickers as serving the same purpose for Shrub and his christofascist racist ilk.

JB

Some of those folks downright regret their support; some have lost their fever either because Bush and Repubs are seen as traitors to the cause or because of how downhill things have gone. Harold Ford will have a hard time but not nearly as hard as he would have had this time 2 or 3 years ago.

Here's a cute baby Panda, instead.

the only Republican who voted against IWR? Chaffee often votes with them on key issues.

If he is still there in January '07 and the GOP have a majority, he will vote for whichever knuckle-dragging rednecked neanderthal the GOP chooses to succeed Cat killer. He will vote to advance a radical right-wing agenda, even if he casts individual votes against it. If he wants to switch parties and have a "D" next to his name and caucus with the Democrats, fine. If he wants to keep the "R" next to his name and caucus with the Repugs, he has to go. Simple as that.

if his vote doesn't matter.

It was discussed here earlier in great detail.

The repukes leave NOTHING to chance.

Chaffee is only their for "window dressing" to make the fact of repuke/nazis more acceptable to the amerikkkan sheeple.

1) As the poster above me explains, he votes Republican on enough occasions to cause serious damage.
2)NE liberals are a dime a dozen--his democratic challenger will be at least as liberal as him.
3) If he's the deciding vote that makes the Senate Democratic-run, the Senate becomes significantly more liberal regardless of Chafee's views.

a dozen. I grew up in Rhode Island. I'm one of those dime a dozen liberals who lives in a red state now.
I'm still having trouble reconciling in my mind voting someone like Chafee out but keeping someone such as say a Lieberman in.

They're separate races with different dynamics so I suppose a good candidate hasn't popped up or recruited, which of course begs the question, Why not?

I thought Santorum was in trouble. Did that change?

I'm ready for Santorum to be gone! :spank:

Go Casey!

I swear I looked, honest. :evilgrin:

Go Santorum. Really. Go somewhere else. Far away. And forget how to get back.

Don't want to whine, I just want to know.
I don't find the "we just might take back the Senate" idea convincing.
I think we can kick their ass six ways from Sunday.
And it's time we did.
And some of the people that need to have their ass kicked
are incumbent Democrats that need to be expelled in the
primaries.
After all, that's what primaries are for.

They have not gotten it right yet, lately.

Sometimes reality hits the road, so to speak.

I think we really are at that point. They work for us though,

Don't they??

Yep- that is exactly what primaries are for.

Joe

Errr- that's loser language.

How about- if we earn it by standing up to the bullies of the far right and show the American people that we are worthy of majority leadership.

Memo to Shumer: You all ain't going nowhere until the party shuts down its simpering Republican enablers and starts standing up for traditional Democratic values again. You can start by blocking the corrupt and unethical Alito. Frame it like that- and even if you "lose" the filibuster, you can show you are serious by backing up Harry Reid's earlier threat to shut down the Senate. Punt on that- and you've all but given up another winning issue.

A majority of citizens in all of those states have had quite enough of the far right's extremism. I think they just don't trust that the Dems have what it takes to lead.

Do you?

is going to have an interesting contest for Sarbanes' seat. I don't think it's going to be an easy fight.

with a good Dem. Worried about this race....

Not only do they have to drop increasing gun control rhetoric, but they should probably say things like the AWB was a worthless piece of legilisation that will never happen again.

Staffers, if you're lurking, go visit the gungeon.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I'm sorry to yell, but I am T I R E D of hearing democratic politicians with diarrhea of the mouth. To quote Nike..JUST DO IT..don;t run to the press blabbing about every plan you might have.. Why give them the opportunity to belittle and question you to death..

Have your "meetings" with each other, and get busy behind the scenes setting up the plans to take back the house and or senate.. Be generous with details to each other and to the committees, but STFU to the press ..

Senator Lincoln Chafee , Rhode Island
Running for US Senate in Rhode Island
Republican

Whenever the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community has needed a strong Republican voice in the Senate to speak up for our rights and stand in the way of discrimination, Senator Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island has answered the call. Time and time again, Senator Chafee has proven his commitment to equality for GLBT Americans by voting his conscience and lending his voice to fight discrimination, not just in Rhode Island, but wherever it affects our community.

Now Senator Chafee needs our community’s support more than ever, and it’s our turn to stand by a man who has stood by us since being elected to the Senate. Already locked in a tough race for reelection, Senator Chafee is now facing a primary challenge from the right in the form of Cranston, RI Mayor Steve Laffey, who recently announced his bid to unseat the moderate Republican Chafee. A staunch conservative, Laffey was quoted in the Providence Journal saying he agreed with President Bush’s opposition to marriage for same-sex couples. We need to do our part to ensure that Senator Chafee has the support he needs to withstand a right-wing challenge and retain his seat in the Senate where he can continue to serve our community.

Chafee is an original cosponsor of several key pieces of legislation supported by the Human Rights Campaign. He was one of the first Senators to support the Domestic Partner Health Benefits Equity Act, a bill that would rescind the unfair tax on domestic partner health benefits offered to employees by many fair-minded American companies. He is currently the only Republican cosponsor of the Uniting American Families Act, which would guarantee the right of permanent partners of U.S. citizens to stay with their partners without threat of deportation. Last year, when the Senate tried to enshrine discrimination into the U.S. Constitution by adding an amendment prohibiting marriage for same-sex couples, Senator Chafee was one of only a handful of Republicans to cast his vote on the right side of history. Fighting on behalf of equality for all GLBT Americans, Chafee is also a current supporter of the Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act, and he has cosponsored the Employment Non-Discrimination Act to protect our community from job discrimination.

https://www.hrc.org/candidateFundraising/index.cfm?fuseaction=candidateProfile&electionCycleID=55&fullList=0&cfid=9419413&cftoken=31197010




Christopher Shays , Connecticut
Running for US House in Connecticut
Republican

A strong ally: Republican Chris Shays is serving his ninth term in Congress and during that time he has distinguished himself as one of the strongest bi-partisan leaders in the fight for equality. Shays stands on the front lines, advocating for our community where few others can, in the Republican Caucus. Shays is a key ally in HRC’s work to advance fair-minded legislation.

Shays’ solid support for our community is clear-cut. As the Republican lead co-sponsor of ENDA in the House, he is a leader in our fight for employment protections. He is also a cosponsor of the Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act, which is a strong hate crimes measure.

As a co-sponsor for the Tax Equity for Health Care Plan Beneficiaries Act, Shays is also working with HRC to strengthen our families. Currently, domestic partners pay federal income taxes on health insurance provided by a partner's employer. Responsible employers who offer domestic partnership benefits are also forced to pay higher taxes. Thus, the employer, as well as the employee, is penalized for making a sound business decision that contributes to stability in the workforce. This smart piece of legislation would remedy this inequity for GLBT families and fair-minded employers.

Shays also opposes the Federal Marriage Amendment and any similar effort to write discrimination into the U.S. Constitution. As a Republican, Shays is uniquely positioned to outreach to moderate Republican members in the House, and we will need their support in order to defeat this discriminatory amendment if it comes up for a vote.

https://www.hrc.org/candidateFundraising/index.cfm?fuseaction=candidateProfile&electionCycleID=54&fullList=0&cfid=9419413&cftoken=31197010


They're also backing the following Democrats:

Bob Casey , Pennsylvania
Running for US Senate in Pennsylvania

Senator Debbie Stabenow , Michigan
Running for US Senate in Michigan

Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin , Wisconsin
Running for US House in Wisconsin

Senator Ted Kennedy , Massachusetts
Running for US Senate in Massachusetts

More:
https://www.hrc.org/candidateFundraising/

More corporatism? Fewer Republicans in charge is a good thing, but what sort of Democrats will replace them?

*opinion void when considering LIEbeman, Zellout and Bidden, among others.

It seems to me that the democrats really don't want to lead in the direction they know we need to go. They are still controlled by corporations.

Taking the senate and the house next year are SIMPLE. #1.) Do a poll asking what three issues are most important to the average American. (I would not run on two issues strongly though they can support these issues, Abortion and Gay Rights. Both are hot button issues they lead to no compromise.) Include in this poll "in what three areas have the republican leadership gone wrong?"

In a sence what you do at this point in change the rules of standard American political campaigning. NO MORE ATTACK POLITICS. Americans are sick of it. Run on the above issues because the demo reps believe them.

My guess the issues are,

Getting out of Iraq and re-establishing foreign relations
Providing Ethical Clear Governance
Sustainable energy practices and local economony

That's pretty lame. Sorry, Chuck, but you need to fight seriously on every front. I'm not saying there aren't some states where running is a lost cause, but hoping to go 6 for 6 is pretty unrealistic. In the long run you do better running in even those "miracle shot" states because even if you do lose you keep the public debate open and force voters to rethink the assumptions that are keeping red states red.

His goal is six but they're contesting significantly more than that; it's a reasonable way to approach it, I think. Pennsylvania, Missouri, Ohio, Montana, Rhode Island, Arizona, Tennessee, Nevada, Mississippi, and I bet he's doing everything he can to get a decent candidate in VA. Chuck's done a pretty good job at lining up candidates and I suspect that just about every Republican Senator up will face a decent opponent.

It will be a MIRACLE if Santorum gets re-elected! He's running so far behind in the polls that he'll never catch up; and that's behind a person (Casey) who hasn't even formally declared he's running. Most people here find Santorum an absolute embarrassment, especially
in light of the contents of his stupid "It Takes a Family" book. He is universally disliked, viewed as ignorant and thought of as a disgrace to the very state where freedom was born. What's worst is that HE DOESN'T EVEN LIVE IN PA ANYMORE, and is viewed as being out of touch with the lives of everyday Pennsylvanians.

The only way that Santorum will win is if the election is completely rigged. Thank God it looks like that charlatan will be run out of
Washington on a rail. I, for one say, GOOD RIDDANCE!