2004 Senate Races to Watch

[mndemocrat_29]

The following seats seem to be the most competitive in 2004:

Democratic Seats:

South Dakota-Tom Daschle appears fairly safe. With Rep. Bill Janklow's recent scandal, the only plausible candidate who could give Daschle a challenge is For. Rep. John Thune, who nearly beat Sen. Tim Johnson in 2002. However, Daschle is far more popular in South Dakota than Johnson, and will be the favorite in this race.

North Carolina-With John Edwards out of the race, this seat will become very, very competitive. Rep. Richard Burr has raised millions of dollars, but Erskine Bowles will have the higher name recognition. This race will be very close.

Florida-Though Sen. Bob Graham could still run (thus making the seat a safe Democratic seat), this seems unlikely at this point. However, Democrats seem poised to win this at this point. Rep. Peter Deutsch seems to be gaining steam over Alex Penelas, and Repukes seem in disarray, without leading candidates like Mel Martinez and Mark Foley to fall back on. At this point, the race looks like Bill McCollum vs. Peter Deutsch. Deutsch would likely prevail here.

South Carolina-This seat has been long held by Sen. Fritz Hollings, and will be a very close race. Though a typically Republican state, SC does have a wonderful Democratic candidate in State Supt. Inez Tenenbaum, who recently won statewide by a large margin. Rep. Jim DeMint (the current Repuke frontrunner) isn't a great campaigner. This will be close.

Georgia-The most vulnerable Democratic seat. DINO Sen. Zell Miller is retiring, and at the moment the frontrunners are Repuke Reps. Johnny Isaakson and Mac Collins. Democrats haven't attracted a top challenger for this seat, though For. Rep. Andy Young is considering the run. This race is difficult to call without a Democratic challenger.

Other races (Indiana, California, Louisiana, Connecticut, North Dakota, Wisconsin, Hawaii, Vermont, Arkansas, Maryland, Washington, Nevada, and New York) should all be safe for Democrats.

Republican Held Seats:

Missouri-Sen. Kit Bond will enter this race as the favorite, but his marginal victories make him vulnerable. Democrats have attracted a top tier candidate in Nancy Farmer and coattails from the presidential campaign could carry her to victory.

Kentucky-Sen. Jim Bunning barely won in 1998 to Rep. Scotty Baesler, and looks like he'll be in a close race in 2004. Currently, the gubernatorial race is a draw, proving that Democrats can win in Kentucky. State Treasurer Jonathan Miller seems likely to be the nominee.

Colorado-Polls show Sen. Campbell as being vulnerable, but without a top tier candidate (Rep. Mark Udall, Atty. Gen. Ken Salazar, or For. Sen. Gary Hart), we won't be able to win this.

Illinois-Sen. Peter Fitzgerald is retiring, and this seat seems the most likely of any (on either side) to switch its party stance. The basic question now is who will emerge from the Democratic primary. That person will enter the race as the favorite.

Alaska-Sen. Lisa Murkowski, the appointed product of her father's nepotism, seems very vulnerable in 2004. Though it will be close, thanks to Alaska's right-leaning politics, For. Gov. Tony Knowles has to be considered a slight favorite over Murkowski. Knowles has proven (twice) that he can be elected statewide and comparisons between himself and current Gov. Murkowski (who is loathed by Alaskans) will only help Knowles.

Pennsylvania-A difficult primary is anticipated for Sen. Specter, and this increasingly Democratic state could easily go with a Democrat (though a primary needs to decide whether this is Rep. Joe Hoeffel or Charlie Crystle).

[TakebackAmerica]

1. Hi

Very good.

[otohara]

2. Campbell - Ugh, The Thought of Him Another 4 years

makes me cringe. I'm hoping Udall will run. Gary Hart would be great, but I don't see it happening. Salazar is a good guy, but I fear the GOP will kill him w/ attacks.

[Padraig18]

3. IL

After the once-in-a-generation a**kicking the Democrats deleivered to the Repukes here last November, this one should surprise no one. A safe +1 in the "D" column. :thumbsup:

[dolstein]

4. Talk about Irrational Exuberance

South Dakota is at best a toss-up if Thune runs.

North Carolina leans Republican.

South Carolina leans Republican.

Georgia leans Republican.

Lousiana's a toss-up at best if Breaux doesn't run.

Even though a strong Republican challenger hasn't emerged in Nevada, it can't be considered a safe seat. Harry Reid never wins by much.

Sorry, there won't be any Democratic coattails in Missouri -- Bond is favored.

Alaska is at best a toss-up. Knowles is probably the only Democrat who could win a Senate race, but Alaska is still a heavily Republican state.

Specter is beatable, but I'd still give him the edge.

[ButterflyBlood]

5. how is SD a toss up at best?

if Thune couldn't beat a vulnerable freshman, what makes you think he could easily knock off a sitting Senate Minority Leader who's won in the past with above 60%?

[jiacinto]

8. I ran SD as leaning Dem or likely Dem

but now it is at leaning Dem. That may change if Thune runs.

[Frodo]

11. Easy

Your reading of events is incorrect.

1) Thune came close to beating Johnson by tying him (somewhat, but not totally, successfully) to Daschle. Johnson is more conservative than Daschle. Thune will have no problem tying Daschle to Daschle. Johnson was a "vulnerable freshman" beacause of Daschle. Daschle can't point out the issues where he dissagrees with himself.

2) Daschle's role has forced him to portray a more liberal face than he would otherwise be prone to (I'm not knocking his positions, just pointing out that a state that went ~+25% for shrub doesn't find it attractive). And the necessity to hold the line with filibuster after filibuster only makes him seem less "non-partisan". If you thought they demonized him last time... wait till you see this one.

3) There were lots of "ticker spliters" last time who voted for Johnson because keeping the Senate in Democratic hands meant their senior senator would remain majority leader and keep lots of influence in SD (and Johnson would keep the extra seniority). A poll taken right after the election had something like 5-10% of Johnson's voters saying essentially "if I had known the Senate would have gine to the Republicans... I would have voted the other way" -
Minority leaders have less "bring home the bacon" power than a member of the majority might and those voters lean quite a bit more to the right. Daschle was elected much more from the center than his current positions.



If there weren't so many retirements already, I would expect him to retire this year. As it is, I'd assume a tossup leaning in our favor due to the car accident.

[mndemocrat_29]

13. Daschle will beat Thune

1. Johnson wasn't a vulnerable senator because of Daschle. He was a vulnerable senator because he barely won in 1996 against Sen. Pressler, and was facing a universally known candidate in Rep. John Thune.

2. Daschle may be portrayed as a liberal, but Johnson is supporting these filibusters. He was reelected. And additionally, Republicans demonized Daschle nationally. It didn't work in South Dakota (witness Johnson's win, again). South Dakotans like Tom Daschle because they see him as an honest, good man.

3. Those ticket splitters, split tickets for Daschle in 1998 and 1992, they split tickets for Johnson in 1996 and 2002. They'll split tickets for Daschle in 2004.

[Frodo]

18. I disagree

1. Johnson wasn't a vulnerable senator because of Daschle. He was a vulnerable senator because he barely won in 1996 against Sen. Pressler, and was facing a universally known candidate in Rep. John Thune.
His performance six years earlier was not as big an issue as the incredible imbalance in R/D voting in SD. Johnson spent a whole heck of a lot of time running away from Daschle and highlighting all of the ways he agrees with Bush. He ran photos of himself standing with Bush - not Daschle. I think he realized something you don't. (no offense)

2. Daschle may be portrayed as a liberal, but Johnson is supporting these filibusters. He was reelected.
That's not logical. He was reelected despite things he is doing now? It didn't work in South Dakota (witness Johnson's win, again). It did work in SD. A moderate incumbent Senator came very close to losing. Look at all the sothern races that are now in jeapordy. If Z Miller was running again... would the seat be in danger (ignoring the fact that we don't really hold that seat now... so it's really not "in danger")? No... beacuse incumbents have an inherent advantage that is rarely included in these discussions. And Daschle would too... if he was running the way he has in the past... but his leadership position (especially in the minority) forces him to be a figurehead of anti-bushism... popular here, but not there.

3. Good point.

[mndemocrat_29]

25. To a certain point I agree with you

If it is Thune (if it isn't, then I believe that Daschle will be reelected without any problems), then it will be close, for the reasons you've listed. Daschle will be portrayed as a liberal in SD. However, I don't think this will be a great problem because South Dakotans will go for his power to bring home the bacon over his left-leaning ideology. A freshman like Thune wouldn't have the kind of clout to bring home a lot of pork.

As for the fillibuster thing, I hate to say this, but I think that the majority of Americans don't know and don't care about the filibusters. I talk to many consistent voters, and they don't have a clue about the judicial filibusters. I think people will care more about their pocketbooks than their court rosters.

[helleborient]

32. I was in South Dakota this summer...

And a lot of Republicans do support Daschle simply because they personally like him very much and trust him. Regardless of his liberal politics, they consider him to be "one of them" in a warm, fuzzy way.

That does count for a lot...remember we have our president because people said he was someone they would like to "hang out" with.

[Frodo]

21. A correction and apology

Just reading the message headers I see it's "Daschle will win" (you) and "I disagree" (me).

For the record. I would view the race (now) as a tossup at worst. I am not predicting a Daschle loss. I was disagreeing with some of your points - not so much your conclusion.

Sorry about that.

[helleborient]

31. Very good point...

I think the Republican chances went swiftly downhill after the dreadful car accident.

[jiacinto]

7. What I think

I think NC is ian tossup state right now, SC leans Republican. GA is defintiely leans Republican, but too early to tell because the field hasn't fully developed.

Daschle beats Thune. If Thune couldn't beat Johnson I don't think he can beat Daschle. Also, given how Janklow's seat is likely to be open next year, I think he runs for his old seat. Between a grueling race against Daschle and an easy race for his seat Thune would be an idiot to run for the US Senate.

[mndemocrat_29]

12. Breaux hasn't indicated whether or not he'll run

And I'm assuming that he will. However, even if he doesn't, we just won a Senate race in 2002. We seem likely to win a governor's race in 2003. We should be able to pull off another election in 2004. Rep. Chris John, a moderate Democrat, would probably run if Breaux opted out.

Additionally, if Thune couldn't beat Tim Johnson, a vulnerable freshman senator, there's no way he'll beat Daschle. Daschle is a senate leader. How often will a small state like South Dakota wield that kind of power? They won't throw him away lightly, and Thune seems destined for a House run anyway.

Also, the Carolina races will be close. Erskine Bowles gained 45 percent against one of the most popular figures in American politics. I know that Dole is an archconservative, but she has terrific crossover appeal. I've talked to many different people from my home state who have never voted Republican in their lives who would vote for her. She may be a neocon, but she comes across to the general public as an intelligent and classy lady who devoted her time to the Red Cross. Richard Burr comes across as neither intelligent nor classy, and will more than likely fall to Erskine Bowles, who many NCers would've voted for in 2002, had Dole not run.

As for South Carolina, Inez Tenenbaum has actually improved the schools in South Carolina. She won by the widest margin of any statewide official in 2002 in South Carolina. Sure, a Senate race is different, but she'll have the backing of Sen. Hollings, who is still well thought of in South Carolina. Southern Democratic women have proven to do well in recent years (ie Landrieu and Lincoln).

Georgia, I agree, is rather bleak at this point. If the race were held today, I'd probably predict a Republican pickup. However, the race can't be held today because we don't have a candidate. Until we recruit a candidate, we can't start handicapping this race.

Harry Reid has a legendary turn out the vote machine, and without Rep. Jim Gibbons (who would've been a very tough competitor) running, he'll have a much better shot at being reelected.

If Bush is falling in the polls (which he is), or Dick Gephardt is on the ticket, Missouri WILL have coattails.

[SaveElmer]

15. Alaska won't be close

Knowles will win fairly easily. Also Illinois will go Democratic. South Carolina and Georgia are lost. North Carolina was looking bad until Bowles said he would run. Makes that race competitive. I think everything else will be a wash. Democrats won't take control, but will remain close. No change or 1 Republican pick up at the worst.

[mndemocrat_29]

16. I don't believe that we can call SC lost

when the Democratic candidate is a proven statewide winner.

[Frodo]

20. I think the issue in SD is...

Who heads the ticket for President? Is it someone conservatives are anxious to go vote against?

[jiacinto]

17. I disagree

I think Knowles has a 50-50 chance.

[goobergunch]

29. I'm hoping for a primary challenge to Murkowski

This would weaken her substantially.

[mndemocrat_29]

35. Exactly

if Sen. Murkowski is beaten in a primary, it will be complete unknown vs. popular former governor. With Murkowski, it will be sitting senator vs. popular former governor. Knowles against someone else would be a much easier race.

[NewJerseyDem]

37. There probably won't be a primary

Most of the potential candidates have decided against it. The only remaining potential primary challenger is Sarah Palin who lost the Lt. governor primary last year by a few percentage points. I believe she is quite conservative but I doubt that she will run. Also, Murkowski would probably beat her in a primary so I would be very surprised if Lisa Murkowski isn't the nominee in 2004.

[NewJerseyDem]

23. Knowles could lose

Knowles is a very strong candidate but this is Alaska. It is one of our best chances in the senate for a pickup but it is far from certain.

[NewJerseyDem]

24. Knowles could lose

Knowles is a very strong candidate but this is Alaska. It is one of our best chances in the senate for a pickup but it is far from certain.

[javadu]

6. I Hope that You Are Right About MO

I am a former Missourian. I think that Holden is doing the best that he can under difficult circumstances, but it is my understanding that the state is in a fiscal meltdown. Like it or not, Holden seems to be taking the blame for it. I believe the blame is misplaced, but nevertheless, he seems to be taking it. It is important to understand that I am basing my opinions on things "overheard at the cafe" and other dubious sources, but they are pretty consistent in their dislike for Holden. I am afraid that Missourian's dislike for Holden might hurt democrats in general.

I HOPE that someone can disabuse me of my pessimism.

[jiacinto]

9. My thoughts

SD--Likely Democratic right now. If Thune enters the race it falls to "Leans Democrat". But I see Daschle prevailing there. Janklow's accident may help the Democrats in SD in one key rate. Most likely there is going to be a special election or open seat for SD's only House Seat.

Thune could easily win his old seat back. Why would he choose a grueling, hard campaign against Daschle when he could easily win re-election back to the House? Thune will probably run for his old seat again.

NC--tossup. But this is the "cursed Senate Seat". Since 1974 it's switched parties every six years. So keep that in mind.

SC--leans Republican. That could change as Tenenbaum is probably the best shot we have to win it. However, DeMint starts with an edge there.

GA--leans Republican. That could change though.

The other Dem seats look safe right now, although that could change. There is always a race that comes out and suprises people.

MO--Bond is the favorite. But he has had less than impressive victories in his three runs. Farmer could give him a run for his money. But we need to see how this race develops.

CO--Mike Miles is the only Dem candidate here, but he is from Colorado Springs and does have a military background that could help bring in crucial votes in the rural part of the state. However, given that he has little money, he is a complete underdog. But this is a potential sleeper race next year. But its status right now is "Likely Republican" , although it may change in the coming year.

IL--The Democrats start off with an edge here. However, there are tons of candidates running on both sides. And we won't know how this race is going until after the March primary. But the Dems start off with an edge here, although that could change. Without Jim Edgar or Topinka in the race the GOP lacks its heavy hitters. But still this race is too up in the air to say truly how it will go.

AK--This race is a tossup, but leans toward Murkowski. The last Democrat to win a seat in AK was Mike Gravel in 1974. Knowles had the best chance of any Democrat in years. But, given how Republican the state is, and how vocally the national party is opposed to ANWR, Murkowski starts off as the early favorite.

PA--This race is going to go to the wire. Specter has traditionally had difficult re-elections during presidential cycles. In 1980 and in 1992 he barely eked out wins. His primary against Toomey will be key. Should Toomey do very well--ie come within striking distance of Specter--it will show that the base is not happy with him.

Conversely the primary between Crystle and Hoeffel could get nasty. And if whomeever wins enters the general election bruised and broke then Specter wins. Either man would make a good candidate. But a difficult primary helps Specter.

[Awsi Dooger]

26. Good analysis, and I agree about Murkowski as the favorite

Too many DUers expect a Knowles pickup in Alaska, perhaps even a cinch. I would definitely make Murkowski the favorite now.

She will be the incumbent, regardless of circumstance, and receive the financial backing as such. Knowles won big as an incumbent gov in '98 during great financial times. I seriously doubt his numbers would have been anywhere near as good last year. Plus you are correct about ANWR, and Knowles will be two full years removed as gov.

Remember how close the late Alaska gov polls were last year, some even showing Fran Ulmer in the lead? Then the elder Murkowski blew her away. Alaska figures to go for Bush by massive double digits.

We should have learned from 2002 not to expect too much in senate races in unfriendly states. Too many of these states -- SD, NC, GA, SC, AK, CO -- are considerable Republican states, especially in a presidential year. Only in SD do we have a sizeable edge ourselves, in senate incumbency.

Still, I expect Thune to challenge Daschle. Rove and Co. will court him, and make it worth his while, with presidential visits and cash. Thune lost by 500 odd votes due to an Indian landslide in the final counted precincts. He is young and aggressive, and with the Senate being much more prestigious than the House I would be shocked if he simply settled for his old seat.

[mndemocrat_29]

28. Knowles may have been out of office for two years

But I'm betting that if they held a race between Frank Murkowski and Tony Knowles for governor, today, that Knowles would win. Alaskans are upset at Murkowski, and the fact that Lisa was appointed by an unpopular governor (not to mention the nepotism thing) isn't going to help her. I'm definitely not saying that Knowles will win in a walk (this is Alaska, after all), but I'm saying that it probably is slightly leaning to Knowles.

[Frodo]

34. I think the deciding factor will be national results

The Alaska polls close a good five or six hours after the East coast. If the Presidential race is close enough (or if we have already won), the right voters will turn out. But there aren't enough hard-core Democrats in Alaska to turn out if shrub wins FL or PA early on.

Murkowski's fortunes ride big on Bush's fortunes. If he's going down in flames weeks before the election, she has no chance. If he's cruising to an easy re-election (and let's not forget the advantages of incumbancy - we're still facing an unanswered advertising period after we select our candidate for instance), then she will easily overcome any issues relating to how she got there.

[jiacinto]

44. Bush backstabbed Thune in the last campaign

Bush went to SD last year in the summer during the drought and refused to do anything for the people there. That hurt Thune.

[Awsi Dooger]

46. I agree, but Bush also visited SD plenty in the fall

Next year will be very interesting, because Bush obviously won't have to campaign in SD, not for himself anyway. Thune will have to weigh that lack of side-to-side benefit heavily while considering his options.

Still, it's just my gut feeling that Thune will take one more crack at senate in '04. The next opportunity would be Johnson's seat in '08, and politicians aren't normally that patient.

[Padraig18]

27. I dissent, in part.

"IL--The Democrats start off with an edge here. However, there are tons of candidates running on both sides. And we won't know how this race is going until after the March primary. But the Dems start off with an edge here, although that could change. Without Jim Edgar or Topinka in the race the GOP lacks its heavy hitters. But still this race is too up in the air to say truly how it will go."

The Republican party is in a state of near chaos after last November's implosion and humiliating statewide rejection of its candidates; there is a very real civil war just beneath the surface that daily threatens to burst out into the open. In contrast, the Democratic party has seldom been as unified as it is now. Don't let the number of Democratic candidates mislead you into believing that the party lacks unity.

Again, my call: +1 in the "D" column in November 2004.

[helleborient]

33. I agree...

There are multiple solid Democratic candidates running that can win statewide...remember we did elect Carol Moseley Braun...the last black Senate member...and we might do it again.

The Republicans have no credible candidate and are unlikely to find one. Most of them are looking toward rebuilding in the next go-round of statewide races in 2006, and counting 2004 as another bad year for them.

[Padraig18]

38. Exactly!

Ms. Barr-Topinka and Governor Edgar both saw this one had 'flaming death for the Republican candidate' written all over it, and declined to run.

[mndemocrat_29]

39. I bet Edgar never runs again for anything

He'll stay in retirement. I wouldn't be surprised if Topinka retires next election, too. There's no way any Republicans are going to be able to hold statewide office in Illinois for long.

[paulk]

45. who is Mike Miles?

I live here, and I've never even heard of him...

Are the Dems going to run another dog (like they did in the gov's race)?

I heard a rumor (from an elected Democrat) that Ken Salazar might run. That was about six months ago, though.

[srpantalonas]

50. it may get nasty, but it won't come from us.

my pledge: comparisons and differentiation, but no attacks on character. we want a positive campaign that showcases ideas and leadership, not meanspiritedness. So far, what I've gotten from them is that I'm "a dot-com washout just looking for a job" and that my support of Human Rights "is naive and shows he just doesn't get it."

I'm hoping the level of discourse improves. But you won't see nastiness from me.

[AnnabelLee]

10. I'm worried about Feingold's seat

I think he is a fantastic Senator, but the latest poll I could find was not encouraging:

<snip>
The poll, sponsored by The Capital Times and the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, found that 45 percent believe Feingold is doing a good or excellent job. Forty percent rated Feingold's performance as fair or poor.

Those ratings are down slightly from February, when 48 percent gave Feingold the highest marks, but they fall within the poll's margin of error of 4 percentage points.

On the question of whether Feingold should be re-elected - or whether voters prefer an unspecified "someone else" - 41 percent picked Feingold, compared to 34 percent who chose someone else.
<snip>
http://www.madison.com/captimes/news/stories/49413.php

I've always heard that 50% is the number below which a politician is in trouble, & the pukes are lining up to throw money into defeating Feingold:

<snip>
Welch also has announced he is running for the Republican nomination for the U.S. Senate to oppose incumbent Democrat Russ Feingold next year. Republicans would like to expand the freeze issue to that race. Earlier this month the GOP demanded Feingold talk about the issue.
<snip>
But the party's emphasis on the freeze might get sticky because Welch is not the only candidate for the GOP nomination to oppose Feingold. Dodge County businessman Tim Michels, who reportedly has significant wealth, is in the race, and car dealer Russ Darrow is mentioned as a possible third candidate. Darrow is being encouraged by former U.S. Sen. Bob Kasten, R-Wis.
<snip>
http://www.madison.com/captimes/news/stories/55442.php

[mndemocrat_29]

14. Feingold will win

Republicans big problem in 2004 in Wisconsin will be Bush. He's already polling poorly here, and they have yet to attract a real candidate. Rumor has it that For. Rep. Marc Neumann wants to run, but Feingold has newfound fame and respect for his campaign finance laws.

[jiacinto]

19. Well

The only Republican with a chance is Tommy Thompson. But he isn't running.

[mndemocrat_29]

22. Agreed

Tommy Thompson would be a very tough competitor, and with him out of the race, this should be safe for Democrats.

[plurality]

30. I would add Gregg in NH to that list

He's vulnerable.

[mndemocrat_29]

36. Who do you recommend to run against him?

I'm not saying it can't be done, but it will be difficult. The two top candidates: For. Rep. Dick Swett and For. Gov. Jeanne Shaheen, have both run statewide before (against For. Sen. Smith and Sen. Sununu, respectively), and lost. Additionally, Gregg is far more popular than Smith or Sununu. So, unless we can start a Democratic sweep, this will be very difficult to pull off.

[plurality]

41. hey, even the old man in the mountain couldn't last forever

From what I've seen on the ground here, Gregg's support is just as solid. All it takes is the right candidate and message, and they're on the way.

[jiacinto]

40. Well

I think he is going to win comfortably. The only Democrat with a chance of beating him is Jeanne Shaheen, but she isn't running.

[burr]

42. Andy Young having second thoughts on U.S. Senate race.

From the AJC...
"Young spent the day fielding questions from state Democratic Party officials after a breakfast meeting with about 100 supporters at which he voiced serious concerns about the gritty reality of a yearlong run for national office.

Some top Democrats said afterward that they construed his comments to mean he is 'leaning against' a campaign to replace Sen. Zell Miller (D-Ga.), who is retiring. But one of Young's key advisers said it is too early to count out the former U.N. ambassador, who has not sought elected office since an unsuccessful bid for governor in 1990.

'He's still evaluating his options,' said Atlanta businessman Paul Rosser, who is heading Young's Senate exploratory committee. Rosser attended Wednesday's informal breakfast forum in downtown Atlanta along with Young relatives, close friends and supporters.

Michelle Nunn, the daughter of former Sen. Sam Nunn (D-Ga.), has said she would consider a Senate bid if Young did not run."
<http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/1003/02young.html>

[mndemocrat_29]

43. This is very interesting

I honestly think that Michelle Nunn would have a better shot at winning that Andy Young. Time recently wrote an article about how Southern Democratic women have a better shot at winning statewide than men. I think that Nunn's universal name recognition, coupled with what could be a divisive Repuke primary, could benefit us greatly in 2004. Additionally, she's very young, and could serve many terms in office.

(I hold out that For. Sen. Max Cleland would be the best candidate here).

[TheReligiousLeft]

47. Per my ex-Room mate Alaska is ours!

He's from Alaska, and from the public opinion he was able to gauge people aren't too happy with ol' Lisa, she wasn't elected, she got in power by her father's power (like shrub*, our president will even win Alaska).

[Awsi Dooger]

48. Why did Jim Gibbons decline to run against Harry Reid?

I live in Las Vegas and should know the answer. But I was on an extended trip when Gibbons made his decision. Nobody locally has been able to provide a good explanation.

Earlier in the year Gibbons' wife was said to prefer he take a shot at succeeding Kenny Guinn as gov in '06. If so, that shapes up as a crowded and interesting field, possibly including colorful+ Las Vegas mayor Oscar Goodman.

Harry Reid was supposedly having a great fundraising year by Nevada standards, perhaps contributing to Gibbons' decision.

[mndemocrat_29]

49. I think it was a combination of job stability

(Gibbons isn't a wealthy man) and a future gubernatorial run. Also, I think he'd rather take on an empty governor's seat over an incumbent-filled Senate seat.

[mndemocrat_29]

51. On Alaska

Also, Murkowski's appointment doesn't bode well, not just because she was appointed by her father, but because she was appointed in general. Of the 100 Senators now in office, I believe only 5 (I'm fairly certain) were appointed and still managed to keep their seats. Considering that there have been many appointed senators over the years, and yet we have only five currently serving that doesn't bode well.

P. S. I'm fairly certain that it's five. I know that if it isn't, it's a very small number. Here's the five, if anyone knows of any others, please feel free to correct me:

Sen. Akaka
Sen. Chafee
Sen. Miller
Sen. Murkowski
Sen. Stevens