U.S. Senate battle already breaking Nebraska records

[Omaha Steve]

Full story (reg req): http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_pg=1673&u_sid=2206678

Published Saturday
July 15, 2006

U.S. Senate battle already breaking Nebraska records

BY ROBYNN TYSVER


WORLD-HERALD STAFF WRITER

The onslaught of political advertising on your TVs is costing U.S. Senate candidates Ben Nelson and Pete Ricketts a chunk of change.

The two have raised a combined $12.3 million - far more than any other campaign in Nebraska's history.

The candidates had spent a total of $9.1 million, according to federal reports filed Friday.

Ricketts, who had a competitive Republican primary, has raised $6.5 million. Nelson, a Democrat seeking a second term, had raised about $5.8 million.

The previous campaign spending high was in 1988, when Republican David Karnes and Democrat Bob Kerrey spent a combined $7 million in their U.S. Senate contest.

Nelson and Ricketts still have about 31/2 months to the Nov. 7 election.

Nelson raised more than Ricketts in the second quarter, according to the reports that covered April 1 through June 30.

[Vinca]

1. Nelson's a Democrat?

When did that happen?:sarcasm:

[OKNancy]

2. Yes, he is

When given the choice between a radical right-winger or a conservative Dem who will help the Dems regain the Senate and allow Dems powerful chairmanships...then I hope the good people of Nebraska will elect the Democrat.

[Vinca]

4. But if he never votes with the Democrats, what's the point

of being all misty-eyed over a Nelson win? Numbers are numbers.

[OKNancy]

6. That's right - numbers

Voting for Nelson is being pragmatic and practical as many Democrats have to do in red states.
Nelson votes about 50/50 Dem, and even if he voted against us every time, it helps our numbers in the Senate. I don't vote in Nebraska, but if he ran in Oklahoma, he would be better than either two the the crazy jackasses that represent me now.

[Vinca]

11. All I know is every time there is a close vote that matters and

Democrats lose, there is a list posted on this forum of senators who voted with the Republicans. It always includes Nelson. I think he gets a pass because of the state he represents, otherwise there would be a Ned Lamont in Nebraska.

[expatriot]

14. Would you rather have Dem Senator that votes with us 50% of the time

or a GOP Senator that votes against us 100% of the time?

[Catch22Dem]

17. Let me tell you why a conservative dem win is so fucking important

Picture this scenario; a Nelson loss being the ONE loss that costs us the majority and thus all the chairmanships. Now, picture a win, and perhaps the majority. That one conservative dem win COULD bring us all the chairmanships. Imagine committee chairman Kerry, Kennedy, etc... See why it matters? Yes, he's a conservative, and yes, he votes w/ repukes WAY too often, but we don't have another candidate in NE, so his win could aide in getting us the majority, and that has FAR reaching effects.

[Omaha Steve]

18. oh crap IF....

If Lieberman looses as a Dem in the primary and wins as an independent, could it end up R-50, Dem-49, Ind-1?

[TheVirginian]

25. Two things...

Bernie Sanders in Vermont will win this fall, which would mean two Independent Senators. Second, both Lieberman and Sanders have said they'd caucus with the Democrats.

[Vinca]

20. Good point. I was overlooking chairmanships. nt

[OKthatsIT]

26. I almost hope the Republicans win this one. Nelson sux.

- from a Progressive Dem

[w4rma]

3. Nelson represents Nebraska very well. I hope he wins big. (nt)

[acmavm]

5. Nelson represents Nebraska very well? It's the God's truth that he

out-republicans Hagel.

Yeah, we need him to win. But what a horrible choice. And Ricketts, what can I say? He's just a total phony. We'd be so screwed if he was elected.

[OKNancy]

7. Not really

http://www.adaction.org/ADATodayVR2005.pdf

Nelson has a voting record ( for 2005 ) of 55%

[acmavm]

8. Nonsense. Maybe you should look at the issues that he screws us on.

And 55% is bullshit.

[OKNancy]

9. I'm just reporting what Americans for Democratic Action

published ( link )
I have no dog in this hunt.

[expatriot]

15. Would you prefer 0%? That's what you'll get with a red state republican.

[acmavm]

19. Did you frigging read my post? I didn't say that Nelson should go down

in flames. Ricketts is worse.

What is wrong with some of you people?

FROM MY FIRST POST:

Yeah, we need him to win. But what a horrible choice. And Ricketts, what can I say? He's just a total phony. We'd be so screwed if he was elected.

[skipos]

10. Quiz: what is Nelson's approval rating from Democrats in NE?

I'd like to hear your guess, without cheating.

[Hawkeye-X]

21. 70% from memory.

Yeah I saw that hte other day.

[Omaha Steve]

12. Vote Smart on Ben Nelson

A lot to read through!

http://www.vote-smart.org/bio.php?can_id=CNIP0639

[Toots]

13. Nebraska is a sad place to be a Democrat that's for sure

:shrug: Democrats have no real representation there at all.

[depakid]

23. Up until Hagel stole his election via HIS company, ES&S

Nebraska had 2 Democratic Senators for over 25 years- neither of which was anywhere near being the type of right POS that Nelson is. For instance, in 2002- Nebraska was still represented by Bob Kerry.

So, when people tell me that Nebraska "can't do any better" than the likes of Ben Nelson, what I glean from that is they haven't read their history.

Personally, I'm ambivalent about this race.

If he wins- the Dems maybe get a majority in the Senate (don't count on it) but Nelson himself will keep on legitimizing and voting for Republican policies. However, since he isn't high profile- he doesn't do quite as much damage to the party's reputation- and candidates all around the country (include state and local candidates). The same isn't true of someone like Lieberman- or as often as not- Biden.

On the other hand- on issue after issue, Nelson's a far right enabler who betrays traditional Democratic values- and the party would be better off without him. No tears from me is he loses- good riddance I'll say.

[expatriot]

16. Is this our greatest vulnerability? What others are we playing defense?nt

[agincourt]

22. Whole thing makes me sick,

DINOBen has high approval ratings but will probable lose. All the GOPig trolls will come out for Ricketts to keep Harmless Harry from being the Senate majority leader.

[Omaha Steve]

24. Just a month ago Hagel said Ben Nelson was another Ted Kennedy

Scorecard info after the article.

Published Sunday
June 25, 2006

Hagel rallies GOP over Ricketts' bid

BY ROBYNN TYSVER


WORLD-HERALD
STAFF WRITER

GRAND ISLAND, Neb. - Republican Chuck Hagel threw several sharp jabs Saturday at his U.S. Senate colleague Ben Nelson, saying the Nebraska Democrat showed his partisan stripes when he voted with Ted Kennedy to raise the minimum wage.

Hagel, who refers to Nelson as a "pretend Republican," left no doubt in a speech before a GOP gathering that he plans to be one of Pete Ricketts' strongest, and most vocal, supporters in his battle to unseat Nelson.

Ricketts' race against Nelson, who is seeking a second term, topped the talking points at the Nebraska Republican Party State Convention in Grand Island.

About 325 attended the convention, including Gov. Dave Heineman and U.S. Rep. Jeff Fortenberry.

The gathering was used by Hagel and others to try to convince rank-and-file Republicans that Nelson can be beaten by Ricketts, a political newcomer.

Hagel noted that he was once in a similar position, when he ran against then-Gov. Nelson in 1996 and was 24 points behind on Labor Day. Hagel went on to win by 14 percentage points.

He told his partisan brethren that the Nelson-Ricketts race had national implications, because seven GOP Senate seats are in jeopardy. A Nelson victory, he said, could propel Democrats back into power in Congress, where Nelson would be compelled to vote for a Democratic leader. That leader would then preside over two years of turmoil.

"If the Democrats win either house, you will see two years of nonstop investigations of the Bush administration," Hagel said.

He also criticized Nelson for voting for the minimum wage bill proposed by Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass. Hagel said the vote proved that Nelson was not a true conservative.

Marcia Cady, Nelson's spokeswoman, said Hagel's attempt to paint Nelson as a liberal will not wash with Nebraskans, who know that he is an "independent and populist" voice.

Cady said Nelson's support for a higher minimum wage proved that he supports workers.

"Ben voted for the minimum wage because it helps employees. It hasn't been adjusted for 10 years. He also voted to do away with the estate tax to help employers," Cady said.

"I think this points out that Pete wants to represent one point of view, while Ben represents all of Nebraska," she added.

Ricketts, who took the stage after Hagel, said there are about 200,000 more registered Republicans in Nebraska than Democrats. He said the numbers alone show that his campaign is within striking distance.

Although Nelson sometimes votes with President Bush, Ricketts said, Nebraska would be served better with a Republican "who believes what he votes on and is not intellectually dishonest with his votes."

In his speech, Hagel took an opportunity to stump for Bush's controversial immigration and guest worker plan. Hagel said one reason people have lost faith in government is that Congress has failed to tackle tough issues such as immigration.

He said Republicans should give the president more credit for understanding the issue because, as governor of Texas, Bush presided over the longest stretch of the nation's border with Mexico.

Hagel called on the national GOP to return to its roots. The party has been in power for more than a decade and has to take responsibility for the nation's rising debt.

"It doesn't do any good to blame Ted Kennedy, blame the media," Hagel said. "I think we've wandered. We've strayed from our Republican moorings."

He added that the Democratic Party does not have the answers. "It's a very thin gruel, what the Democrats offer."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=367&topic_id=276



Here is the voting scorecard on issues from different interest groups.

http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=CNIP0639



Ben has an average of about 70% on labor by the AFL-CIO over the years 2001-2005.

AFL-CIO 64 percent in 2005.

AFL-CIO 82 percent in 2004.

AFL-CIO 62 percent in 2003.

AFL-CIO 62 percent in 2002.

AFL-CIO 81 percent in 2001.


A few times his vote has kept oil company's from drilling in ANWR. He ain't all bad.