Google Ads


Site Stats

ND-Sen: Conrad Will Retire

by: James L.

Tue Jan 18, 2011 at 10:38 AM EST


Ugh, really?

North Dakota Democratic Sen. Kent Conrad announced today that he will not seek reelection, creating a potentially prime pickup opportunity for Republicans in a GOP-leaning state.

"After months of consideration, I have decided not to seek reelection in 2012," Conrad said in a statement. "There are serious challenges facing our State and nation, like a $14 trillion debt and America's dependence on foreign oil. It is more important I spend my time and energy trying to solve these problems than to be distracted by a campaign for reelection."

Not the way I'd like to see this cycle start!

UPDATE: Roll Call has some more insights into Conrad's motivations, and possible Democratic successors:

Sources close to the Democrat told Roll Call Conrad made a final decision over the holidays and that it was for personal reasons, not political. After 26 years in the Senate by the end of his current term, the Budget Committee chairman will be ready for new challenges, the sources said....

But the early decision gives the party plenty of time to find a top-tier candidate to run in his place. Former Rep. Earl Pomeroy's name has already been floated as a potential candidate, though Pomeroy and former Chief of Staff Bob Siggins recently joined Alston & Bird to work on the firm's health care team.

UPDATE 2: No, actually, Pomeroy's not sounding like a candidate, according to his just-posted comments at Politico Arena (though optimists might point out it's not quite a Sherman-esque statement):

I'm about two weeks into a new job. I've changed course and I'm not looking back.

The Hill has more extensive lists of potential other candidates for the Dems:

The strategist listed former Rep. Earl Pomeroy (D-N.D.), former state Attorney General Heidi Heitkamp (D) and her brother, broadcaster Joel Heitkamp, as possible candidates....

On the Democratic side, state Senate Minority Leader Ryan Taylor is considered a contender for statewide office, and state Rep. Corey Mock, who ran for secretary of state last year, is also being mentioned as a possible candidate....
James L. :: ND-Sen: Conrad Will Retire
Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

ND-Sen: Conrad Will Retire | 143 comments
the worst part is
he was a better senator and democrat than bayh.  with bayh it was ughh, we lose a seat, but he's gone, with him it's why, kent, kent?

Top ten signs you're an SSPer #1: your favorite song is "Panic At Tedisco" and no one understands what you mean.
Well
this is a pain in the ass. I'm thinking Kent Conrad is feeling lonely up there in Washington since Pomeroy and Dorgan are gone. The three were close.

19, Male, Independent, CA-12
but...
If he was just lonely he wouldn't want to spend another 2 years in solitude.  Better to make new friends anyway if you're going to be stuck there till 2013.  And who knows, you might like them more than your old ones.  I think the personal aspects of the Pomeroy loss and the Dorgan retirement have a lot less to do with him calling it quits as the political aspects of them.  
[ Parent ]
plus...
If Pomeroy is a lobbyist now, he can see him more than ever!
[ Parent ]
Bleh.
I guess the chances of him being talked into the race are even smaller now.

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
If i remember correctly
he retired once in the past and then returned. This time it's much less likely...
Yeah
He announced he was retiring in 1992 after one term, but then Sen. Burdick (who would normally be up for reelection in 1994) died and Conrad, evidently feeling "seller's remorse" and not wanting to duke it out with Byron Dorgan, switched to the other Senate race.

20 years old, male, GA-12 (home), GA-10 (school); previously lived in CA-29, CA-28, CA-23, IL-06, IL-14, GA-01.
[ Parent ]
Not quite
He had promised not to seek a second term if the federal budget deficit hadn't decreased by the end of his term. When it hadn't, he kept his promise, but then returned to the Senate after the late Sen. Burdick's widow, Jocelyn Burdick (the only female Senator in ND history) decided not to stick around and seek a full term).  

24, SSP Gay Caucus Policy Committee Chair, Western Democrat; CO-05 (home), CA-14 (law school)
[ Parent ]
I see it as this.
The Dems start at 51-49.  They need to work their asses off for McCaskill, Webb, and Tester.  Luckily, it'll be a presidential year and we have MA, NV, and maybe ME on the table.

When I heard this news, though, I wanted to punch the wall.  I need cheering up.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!

So, Obvious Next Question
Who's in/ Who's out? Just my cursory and uneducated guesses.

Pomeroy - probably OUT. Didn't he just take some sort of law or lobbying job a few weeks ago?

Heitkamp - ? Don't know. Passed up the chance to run this year, though that could be the very understandable desire not to run against Hoeven. I'd guess she jumps IN, but far from certain.

Berg - ? This may be his only chance for a promotion (as ND seems to re-elect its Senators for very long periods) and he could have a lot more influence as a Sen than a Rep. If he's IN (and I think that he might) he'll have to announce early in order to get some second-tier foes out of the race and into filling his vacant house seat.

Dalrymple - OUT. He did run for Senate a while ago, but I imagine he could get used to being Governor.

Stenjehm - probably IN. This would be a golden opportunity for him to move up. Though to some extent it depends on the other moving pieces (perhaps a run for Gov or House is also possible.)

Wrigley- depends on Stenjehm. If Stenjehm's in, I think he runs for AG instead. If not, I'd say he's in. Based on Stenjehm above, I'd say OUT.

Kalk - OUT. There's definitely going to be some sort of open statewide seat in 2012, and I think he switches his campaign there rather than try and take out some much bigger names.

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)

Tell me more
about Heitkamp.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
[ Parent ]
Wish I could
... but never having even been to North Dakota, I can only tell you what you probably already know: she was the AG in the 90s and lost a close race to Hoeven in 2000. I believe she hasn't been all that politically active since then but has been repeatedly speculated as a potential candidate because she's more-or-less the only "A" list Dem left in the state who hasn't ruled out future runs (except maybe Schools Supt. Wayne Sanstead, but I think he's getting old.)

Someone with more info about ND care to fill in the gaps?

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)

[ Parent ]
She sounds strong.
I hope the DSCC has a long talk with her.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
[ Parent ]
10 points...
I'm not sure if that would be described as "close" for an open seat.  It's not like Hoeven was super-popular then (he'd never run for anything).  But yeah, she's probably the best we've got.

Maybe the Republicans can run Hoeven for this seat too!  he can have both.  

Jeez, that was supposed to be a joke and then I thought about how it could actually play out and I got a bad feeling in my stomach.

[ Parent ]
Well,
she was supposedly leading in the polls until she announced she had to undergo surgery for breast cancer. And Bush did defeat Gore in the state by 27 points.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Thanks for that info.


Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
[ Parent ]
yes.
Conrad was winning by 23 as well, so there was a lot of ticket zig zagging going on...
[ Parent ]
Local Office
Do anyone know about the mayors in North Dakota. There is

Dennis Walaker-Mayor of Fargo.Party affiliation(?).         Endorse Pomeroy and Hoeven

or

Michael Brown- Mayor of Grand Forks  

[ Parent ]
Walaker
He's a Republican. He was the Fargo public works director before he moved up to mayor. The biggest issue there is always, always, always flood control, which is his area of expertise. He's in his 60s and I don't think that Congress would be a good fit for him now.

41, Ind, CA-05
[ Parent ]
Heitkamp
Wasn't she eyeing a Gov run in 2012?  
[ Parent ]
Fun fact:
The Dakotas were split in two to give the GOP more power.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
Really?
That's thoroughly believable, whether true or not. I will always be amused that Alaska and Hawaii were admitted together in 1959 to offset each other politically, Alaska being a stronghold of labor Democrats and Hawaii of GOP business interests.

20 years old, male, GA-12 (home), GA-10 (school); previously lived in CA-29, CA-28, CA-23, IL-06, IL-14, GA-01.
[ Parent ]
My, how times change!


My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)
[ Parent ]
Odd thing is though in 1960
Hawaii barely voted for Kennedy and Alaska barely voted for Nixon.  

CO-02 (college)/FL-15 (home).  
[ Parent ]
Sure
And there was barely anyone in either one of them.

I wish there was a really good book on the story of the politics of how all the post-Kansas states joined the Union. There are some really interesting stories - and loads of fun politics - in that.

[ Parent ]
And also
How the States Got Their Shapes is a fun read.

My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)
[ Parent ]
Nevada's really interesting
The state never had enough people to qualify and was only pushed through in order to give Lincoln an additional three electoral votes. There was a silver rush at the time, so the population WAS at least growing pretty quickly. Within a decade though, the silver rush was over and the state's population crashed. Congress expanded Nevada's boundaries, but it still did nothing, and then throughout the late 1800s, there were proposals to merge it with Utah or even Idaho. In fact, a bill to send the Idaho panhandle to Washington -- with the intention of attaching the remainder of the territory to Nevada -- actually passed Congress but was vetoed by Grover Cleveland. Ultimately, of course, it stayed a state, but it remained by far the smallest state in the Union until the middle of the 20th Century. As late as the '30s, it's population was less than a third of Wyoming's.

It's actually really funny if you look up "Nevada" in the NYT archives pre-1900. They rail against it, and use it to editorialize against a rapid admission of Western states (which of course hurt New York's relative Senate representation). They repeatedly refer to it as "the dying state of Nevada," or the "rotten borough of Nevada," and note that it had a voting population of just 12,000, which even in the late 1800s was absurd. They'd point out that it's overall population of just 40,000 was less than 1% of New York's population (5 million) yet they both got two senators.

Without the Civil War - or had Lincoln's reelection seemed more assured - Nevada almost certainly wouldn't have existed. It probably would have been attached to California or divided between California and Utah. In fact, as it was, it was only left out of California because at the time railroads and communications were still in their infancy and the few settlements in the area were thought far too distant to the rest of California.  

[ Parent ]
Very interesting comment :)

[ Parent ]
I've thought of Nevada
as an eastern outlier of California for a while.  Thanks for the story!
[ Parent ]
It's actually even more complicated
After California statehood, Nevada's territory was split between New Mexico Territory (what's now NM and AZ), with the northern boundary of those states extending all the way to California. North of that, everything was part of Utah Territory.

The Comstock Load Silver Rush, however, brought into the territory lots of non-Mormons prone to all sorts of debauchery. So they split off the far western part of that to become Nevada Territory, and then upgraded it to a state. Had Mormon/Non-Mormon animosity not been so bad, it wouldn't have been created, or later Utah would have been added to Nevada back when it's population was crashing.

Funny NYT quote about these various-goings-on:

They Could Take Nevada
NYT Editorial
April 10, 1887

In the course of some remarks about the proposed annexation of Southern Idaho to the dying State of Nevada, the Salt Lake Herald, an organ of the Mormon Church, makes an important admission.

...

The Salt Lake Herald now declares that Mormons are opposed to the annexation project and that they do not desire to get possession of Nevada. But at the same time it says:

"There has been no time within the past fifteen years when the Mormons could not have gained political control of Nevada six months after they had set out to do it; they have had the voters and the ability to colonize them in the 'sagebrush State.' If the Mormons had hankered for statehood enough to induce them to make the sacrifice required, they would long since have controlled Nevada, made their own laws, and sent to the United States Congress two Senators and one Representative of their own choosing. The Mormons want nothing to do with Nevada. They recognize it as politically and socially the rottenest of American commonwealths, and as worthless materially; and they have no ambition to make the sacrifice necessary to its moral, political; and material redemption."

> http://query.nytimes.com/gst/a...

[ Parent ]
LOL :D

Thanks very much!
[ Parent ]
Great....
The North Dakota Senate Delegation was 2 Democrats in 2008, now it will be 2 Republicans after 2012... lovely....
Now
you know how Virginia Republicans felt after John Warner retired in 2008.

19, Male, Independent, CA-12
[ Parent ]
Other states?
What other states a shift from two of one party to two of the other in a short time frame recently besides Virginia and now possibly North Dakota?

In 1994 Tennessee went from two Dems to two GOP.  That's the most recent example I can think of.

[ Parent ]
West Virginia
back in the 50's. Both seats flipped to the Democrats overnight. And one of those Democrats elected was no one other than Senator Byrd (RIP).

19, Male, Independent, CA-12
[ Parent ]
Georgia
went from 2 Ds to 2 Rs in two cycles (02/04), not that Zell Miller was much of a Democrat.
[ Parent ]
Pennsylvania, briefly.
Santorum to Casey in 2006 then Specter switched in 2009.
[ Parent ]
Tennessee, 1994
Frist and Thompson won seats on the same day that were previously held by the Democrats (Thompson took Gore's old seat).

40, male, Democrat, NC-04
[ Parent ]
At the risk
of sounding like a life coach, stop being so goddamn negative. It's not going to be easy to keep this seat, but it won't be impossible. The fact that the state voted for its congressional delegation to be all Democrats for a long time shows it's not averse to voting for our party. It'll be a presidential year, so the top of the ticket can, if nothing else, devote resources to the state if need be to back up our efforts. More than anything else, we have time on our side. It's not even February, and if we didn't find a candidate until June of this year, we'd still have a lot of time. Rather than complain about how hard it will be to keep it, let's work on getting a candidate and having this person travel the state to talk about the issues.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
ok
I won't point out the difficulty of electing a Democratic senator in a conservative state to an open seat.

I was railed on for saying it's possible for the Dems to win in Texas.  I guess I'm not following protocol as to which seats I should feel negative about and which seats I should feel positive about....

[ Parent ]
If there
is one path to victory for Democrats here, is that remember that Obama only lost North & South Dakota by 8 points or something like that. Hell he even aggressively contested North Dakota up until McCain unleashed the horror that was Sarah Palin upon the nation. If the economy improves and Obama's poll numbers go up, he could try to contest North Dakota again. Which would definitely help Democrats down there.

19, Male, Independent, CA-12
[ Parent ]
It seems to be
far more conservative at the state level than at the national level.

And no, there is no protocol. I just meant to say that saying we can't win is effectively handing the seat to the Republicans. It might end up in their hands regardless, but that isn't clear now. (If nothing else, the candidate that really would destroy everyone, Hoeven, is already in the Senate.) Say what you want about the Republicans, but they don't adopt such a defeatist attitude. They aim to win, and to win big. I wish we were more like that.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
Aye.
Heitkamp already sounds like a good idea.  And with Hoeven gone, the GOP has no 100% chance of win 'magic bullet.'

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
[ Parent ]
According to the links
at the bottom of her Wikipedia page, she was considering getting in this past cycle, but ultimately decided not to. My guess is, she will receiving a phone call from Patty Murray in five, four, three, two....


"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
It's fine to keep targets open
but remember politics is a Zero-sum game in more ways than one. There's only so much $ to spread around. ND for the Democrats is in the same place as PA or NJ for the Republicans - they're not likely to win it, but it would be nice to keep open the possibility in case things go very well elsewhere. This past cycle, I'd put it as analogous to states like WA and WI for the Republicans, or NC for the Dems.

That said, I repeat: there is only so much $ to spread around. And there are 4 toss-up senate races that are likely to be huge money pits for both parties: FL, OH, MI, and VA. I wouldn't be surprised to see half of both parties' expenditures go to those 4 states. So there's probably not going to be the money for tilting at windmills, for the most part. I think those 4 states, along with NV, MT, MO, and MA, get basically all the attention this cycle.

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)

[ Parent ]
Fortunately
ND is cheap.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
[ Parent ]
More Open Seats to come
I'm betting we'll see Virginia (Webb), Hawaii (Akaka) & Wisconsin (Kohl) open on the Blue side and Nevada, Utah & maybe Arizona open on Red side.

I'd put the over/under on '12 open Senate seats at 7 right now.

"Earnestness is stupidity sent to college"
P. J. O'Rourke

[ Parent ]
If Webb doesn't run
I think there will be some major, major pressure on Kaine. VA is probably the only very vulnerable D seat (I put MT, MO, NE, and ND in that category as well) where it will be a disaster for Democrats not to put up a top-tier challenger. Like I said above, I forsee VA being a major money pit. And if Allen doesn't face a first-rate challenger, that money is liable to flood into other races and put seats in play in unpredictable ways (PA and NJ are two places I could see having their dynamics changed as a result.)

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)
[ Parent ]
Well,
the Democrats have won in the state before, just like Republicans won back a Senate seat in Pennsylvania this cycle. And as others have said, North Dakota is cheap, and can be made cheaper still by the top of the ticket on our side.

The biggest issue isn't the lean of the state or the money. It's the potential lack of a candidate.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
That ties into Money
Regardless of the cheapness of a state, it does take money to introduce (or re-introduce after 12 years on the sidelines) a candidate. And I think that money is not going to be there for second-tier targets unless things really change in those "Big 4".

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)
[ Parent ]
That ties into Money
Regardless of the cheapness of a state, it does take money to introduce (or re-introduce after 12 years on the sidelines) a candidate. And I think that money is not going to be there for second-tier targets unless things really change in those "Big 4".

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)
[ Parent ]
But at the same time,
I'd imagine that in a very small, very spread out state like North Dakota, a bigger part of the equation is face time with the candidate. For one thing, maybe the voters just don't consume that much media, making the effects of such spending far more limited. But even if they do, the state is cheap enough and still small enough so that a candidate could still advertise fairly heavily but do enough small scale contact to be effective.


"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
exactly...
Running a Senate race in ND is like running a House race in a moderately priced market (Because you do have to hit a couple of different markets, however small.)  Hopefully the white flag against Hoeven won't rub off as a white flag in the next race as well.
[ Parent ]
I've found it's always possible to defend an unpopular position here
if I have facts and data behind me -- even if the facts and data are somewhat uncertain.

Sometimes, however, it takes some intestinal fortitude. It's manageable here. At a place like DK, the opposition to something unpopular in that crowd can be overwhelming.

With the recent example of the discussion re: a successor to Hutchinson, I don't think anyone disagreed strongly with what I said, w/r/t D chances being better than most would expect. But perhaps that was because I was "below the radar" relative to what you and user b.j. said.

With respect to ND, I think a viable approach (and argument) is to start with President Obama's '08 performance as a baseline, and add some prominent D, perhaps one of the state house leaders, or the CEO of some ND energy company, as a Senate candidate. In addition, there's some support for "heroes" that defend the status of the Dakotas as small states; both Conrad and Dorgan made their names in part by going after out of state energy companies. (Another possibility -- I wonder if Roger Johnson is willing to come back to ND for a Senate bid.)

In politics, its important to be able to hold one's own in a place where one might have unpopular positions.

[ Parent ]
Very will said.
On a somewhat related note, I posted at Daily Kos, although not that much, when I was still in college. As the 2004 election was heating up and I visited more frequently, I began to post a little more. And since it's always nice to be the first to find something new or interesting, I created a diary about a book I read called Neoconomy, a book by an economist and reporter named Daniel Altman. The book simply described the "radical" economic assumptions that the Bush administration was using in making its economic claims. It was informative and highly accessible, and since you need to understand your opponent before you defeat them, I thought others should know about it. But when I posted a link to the book and talked about it, I was derided as a Republican. A lot of people suggested that I be banned, although I don't think I was.

Daily Kos is a good site to browse, and it serves a purpose even if I don't always like it, but I would never post there regularly. For one thing, it's too big, so having a conversation like we do here is very hard. But more than anything else, it's quite a mind fuck, and not in a good way.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
But on the other hand...
At the risk of sounding negative, this is primarily a horse-race site. It's fine to want to constantly cheerleader for Democrats - hell, I'm a Democrat, and I will always the first to cheer if there is legitimate path to victory. But many of us also want to take the bad with the good, and analyze these races from an intellectual perspective and not a partisan perspective. Frankly, if all you want to do is tell everyone how Democrats can win every race, that's fine, but you're going to get pushback on this site from at least some of us who think we also have to look at resource allocation and what races we can actually win.

So, that said - this is bad news, and there's no sugarcoating it. Obama still lost North Dakota, they ousted their longtime Dem house representative last year, and the Dem bench here isn't that deep. Can Dems win? Sure. Heck, Republicans managed to win in Illinois last year. Do I think it's likely right now? No. I'd probably agree with the commentator abovethat we should be focusing on some of the other Dem races that could be close (Virginia, Nebraska, Missouri) and maybe playing offense on some Republican seats (Nevada and Massachusetts), obviously.

Sorry if that's negative.  

[ Parent ]
I love the
push back I've gotten from users here. My point wasn't to act as a cheerleader for Democrats. It's to simply say that the the idea that we've lost the Senate two years out is ridiculous, even if you are looking at the lay of the land right now. I guess you could say that I'm trying to restore the equilibrium.

There are a lot of variables to consider. Since everyone seems to be mentioning money, I'll simply say that lots of Democrats who were destroyed this year--Elaine Marshall, Robin Carnahan, and Lee Fisher--each raised millions of dollars. An obscure candidate would probably need help raising money, but that's hardly the worst thing about a candidate. There could be help from the top of the ticket if it's needed. Besides, assuming he still has some money left over--Open Secrets is telling me he has about $1.8 million cash on hand--can't Conrad transfer some if not all of it to help out whomever is running on the Democratic line?

As far as tossing out Pomeroy, I'd guess that's more a function of the wave than anything wrong with him. I can't seem to find any exit polling for North Dakota, but let's slightly change the 2008 numbers. (I don't think I am suggesting anything crazy here, but if I am, please tell me.)  Instead of the breakdown being 16/48/36 for liberals, moderates, and conservatives, let's change that to 16/36/48. I'll keep the percentage of liberals and conservatives each candidate from 2008 received but give Pomeroy 40 and the Republican 60 percent of moderates. That gives him 44.8 percent of the vote, or basically what he received this year.


"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
Heck
the Dakotas' collective Congressional delegation were 5-1 Dem in 2008, now they'll be 5-1 Rep.
[ Parent ]
and..
We have a near-certain lock for least Senate Senority for Jan 2013 (well, a tie at least).
[ Parent ]
Crap
Damn that is a massive dagger. Part of Conrad probably didn't want to go through a long and vicious campaign like what he would have likely gone through with tons of 3rd party money that would have poured in. Already he was being attacked. He probably said f that I am not dealing with that. That is such a shame as he was a pretty good Senator and it will be hard to hold that seat without him. In an open seat condition it has to at least lean GOP thought I have no idea who can be recruited on both sides.

Conrad was probably about the worst retirement this cycle that we could have had. Best of luck to him in his future endeavors and I am glad that we had him while we did.  

28, Male, Democrat VA-08  

Agree.
I did not always agree with him but he's a Democrat in ND, that's an endangered species and I hate to see them go. That figure about the two Dakota's going from Democratic dominance  to Republican so fast is shocking. There's nothing wrong with seeing the glass half full and no one likes a pessimist but being as honest as I can be I can't see any way we keep this seat. Honestly I think it would have even been at least somewhat competitive with Conrad, without him it starts as a lean R race in my book. If Dorgan or Pommeroy wants a comeback we stand a fighting chance but I seriously doubt Dorgan is interested and the latter already declined. Heidi would be better off to run for Governor I would think, though she'd be the best we could hope for and she's been out of politics for twelve years and lost her last race by double digits.  

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  
[ Parent ]
I don't really care how negative it sounds
I think we just lost the Senate.  

NY-01/NY-19
We start at 51-49 arguably.
We need 50 to hold the Senate assuming Obama wins.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
[ Parent ]
I agree
I know we're two years out, but if I had to bet my life on it I'd say NE and ND are gone now. We can only lose one of the endangered freshmen (Tester, Brown, Webb, McCaskill). We also have to pray races don't tighten or incumbents don't retire in NJ, FL, MI, WI, or NM. I guess offense will just be the name of the game, in MA and NV in particular.

My top ten to flip goes:

North Dakota
Nebraska
Montana
Virginia
Missouri
Massachusetts
Nevada
Ohio
Michigan
Florida


NY-01/NY-19

[ Parent ]
I have to say, I don't think it's cheerleading to say...
It's too soon to say Dems have lost the Senate. It's not even the end of January.

I admit this isn't good news, but we don't know how things will shake out. I see good pickup opportunities in Nevada, Massachuetts and possibly even Maine (depending on whether Markos predicted tea party challenge happens)

[ Parent ]
If Teabaggers
win primaries in Maine and Indiana, and also in Arizona (or if Kyl retires), things will look a whole lot better, and people will suddenly be a lot happier. Thankfully, those things aren't as unlikely as the Republicans hope they are.

Anyway, since there's so much undue negativity here, let me go towards the opposite end:

-2 in North Dakota and Nebraska
+2 in Nevada and Massachusetts
+3 in Arizona, Maine, and Indiana
+1 in Texas.

So the Democrats end up losing two but gaining six.


"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
Well, it's early, so no one can say you're completely wrong at this point
Of course, you could be as accurate claiming Republicans will gain six (North Dakota, Nebraska, Missouri, Michigan, Montana and Virginia) and lose none.

Do I think this is likely? No. But probably as likely as your scenario at this point.

I'm personally sticking by my prediction from last week - Republicans win between 0-2 seats in the Senate - Dems retain control.  

[ Parent ]
It wasn't a serious
prediction by any stretch.

I will say that as nice in theory as it is to try to expand the map, it's even more important in practice, and even more important still in 2012. Why? Because as unfriendly as 2012 looks, 2014 looks worse, at least from the point of gaining seats. Aside from the seats held by Collins in Maine, McConnell in Kentucky, Graham in South Carolina, Chambliss in Georgia, and maybe Cornyn in Texas, what looks like a good opportunity? And none of them look particularly great.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
Yeah, we do agree on that
Also, I should add - I more hope you're right than I'm right.  
[ Parent ]
Massachusetts will be a lot tougher than people think
Sure it's a blue state, but Scott Brown has very strong approvals, an enormous war chest, a natural talent for campaigning, and a pass from the Tea Party to move to the center.
[ Parent ]
Strong, but not very strong.
And he's very defeatable with the right candidate and presidential turnout.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
[ Parent ]
I don't
think it will be easy, but I think it's definitely doable, given the enormously rich template the Democratic candidate will have.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
If E Schafer continue out

If E Schafer continue out the race I think the race for North Dakota senate would be not as unbalanced.

The republicans have not other J Hoeven. I think they are democratic candidates of the level of the republican candidates what sound.

Still, I think this new of K Conrad retiring is a bad new for the democratic side.

Before the new I was thinking K Conrad was not as safe, and now I think the republican candidate is not as safe.

[ Parent ]
We haven't lost the Senate
The Dems have pick-up opportunities in MA, NV and ME (if Snowe gets tea-partied)
[ Parent ]
I hope we can get
Heitkamp or a Tester-esque candidate to run.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
Cheer up, PPP says the enthusiasm gap is gone
http://publicpolicypolling.blo...

We may lose ND and NE, but if these enthusiasm numbers hold up then we'll be in good shape in VA, and in fighting shape in MO, MA, and NV.  Also in position for a decent reversal of fortunes in the house.

Thanks for the perk.
I just hope that ND Dems run someone strong anyway like Heitkamp.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
[ Parent ]
Heitkamp could be a Chris Coons
I know ND isn't a real Tea Party stronghold (despite its conservatism), but neither was Delaware.

If Heitkamp runs, and a FAR-right candidate takes out a more conventional ND Republican, team blue could have a fighting chance (though I'd still agree we'd be underdogs).  

24, SSP Gay Caucus Policy Committee Chair, Western Democrat; CO-05 (home), CA-14 (law school)

[ Parent ]
The "Angry" vote isn't there though
ND has the lowest unemployment in the nation, and people tend to really like their elected officials. That's probably not fertile ground for a Tea Party Challenge.

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)
[ Parent ]
It certainly wasn't in 2010

[ Parent ]
pomeroy did lose
and dorgan would have been vulnerable.  it might have been republican success more than tea party, but dems did quite poorly there.  plus the dakotas have a hidden, but strong vein of libertarianism.  for SD, it's west river, especially rapid city, not sure about ND.

Top ten signs you're an SSPer #1: your favorite song is "Panic At Tedisco" and no one understands what you mean.
[ Parent ]
I mostly agree
Despite its economic parallels with Wyoming (low unemployment, moderately high income, resource-extraction heavy industries), ND does seem to be a less vitriolic place.

My main point is that Delaware Dems convinced a strong candidate to run despite it being against a tough opponent, and that opponent went away in the primary. Something similar (whether form the Tea Party or otherwise) cannot be completely ruled out in ND.  

24, SSP Gay Caucus Policy Committee Chair, Western Democrat; CO-05 (home), CA-14 (law school)

[ Parent ]
ND
I lived in ND for 3 years and met some statewide elected officials. You are correct that poltics there generally don't get nasty. Everyone involved more or less knows everyone else, and the entire culture there - political and otherwise - is nonconfrontational. The state has a conservative lean but voters are mostly interested in bread and butter issues and are perfectly willing to vote for Dems as long as they aren't too liberal.

41, Ind, CA-05
[ Parent ]
No, it's there
it's just not about unemployment. The "angry" voters are among demographics with the lowest unemployment.

The "angry" voter isn't about jobs, no matter how much people want to rationalize it. It's an irrational reaction to change, or an attempt at change, in a country that hates change.

It would've been there, high unemployment or not. It's a reality of a Democratic presidency.  

[ Parent ]
Someone
above mentioned Roger Johnson. He seems like an even better choice, if only because he was more recently elected. Plus, his background is in agriculture.

Besides that, he looks like Kent Conrad. A lot like him. What are the chances that we can have him either (a) not mention his name for the entire campaign or (b) change his name to Kent Conrad in the hopes of confusing the electorate?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...
http://nfu.org/about/leadershi...

Also, here's another name, although she's been out of office for a while: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...



"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
Indeed.
Thankfully there are good possibilities to look into.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
[ Parent ]
What about Byron Dorgan?
Dorgan reluctantly retired after learning Hoeven was going to run.  He would be 70 in 2012 and could serve two more terms.  

Typically, a younger candidate would be preferable since they could hold the seat for a longer time.  But, North Dakota may no longer be such a hospitable place for Democrats.  A Dorgan candidacy would immediately change the dynamics of this race and make it a Tossup at the very least.

Patty Murray should at least give Dorgan a call and see if he can be convinced to run.  If Dan Coats can come back, Byron Dorgan certainly can too.

I'd want Dorgan
for the same reason I'd want Nelson: it gives the party another six years to develop more of a bench in the state. Except that Dorgan seems like someone we'd actually want, whereas Nelson...

You have to think Murray is going to be promising him whatever he wants, whenever he wants it, short of offering herself.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
Me too.


Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
[ Parent ]
I would like

For North Dakota the line is clear:

1 K Conrad
2 B Dorgan
3 E Pomeroy
* W Sanstead (but born the year 1935)
4 H Heitkamp

[ Parent ]
Depends how he feels...
Frank Lautenberg was itching to get back in back in '02, but I think that's the exception.  When you're 70, do you want to be jumping on planes going back and forth, raising money and giving speeches every night?  (And that's just the campaign year and a half.)  It's much more common for someone in their 60s-70s to want to retire from the Senate (or House) and enjoy their lives.  For every Lautenberg, there's a ton of pols who just want to retire and be a grandfather or grandmother and not neglect their families...those are the ones we never hear from again, but I'd bet we could name 100 in the last decade alone.  I'd like to see 538 do an analysis of the age of a Senator/Governor/House member at retirement or loss, and the likelihood they run for something again...
[ Parent ]
NJ isn't that far away from DC, either.
If Lautenberg were representing a state west of the Mississippi, would he still be so gung ho? Same goes for Ted Kennedy, Robert Byrd, Strom Thurmond, John Warner, and all of the other recent Senators who lived into their late eighties/early nineties - their home states were all geographically convenient to DC. Inouye and Stevens are the obvious exceptions.  
[ Parent ]
Proximity is another good point...
Plus I'm pretty sure in the mid 00s, both NJ Senators spent more nights in Manhattan than NJ anyway.

Hawaii is almost the exception that proves the rule.  When you are THAT far away, the state's population doesn't expect you to be able to return every weekend or even every few weekends, so you don't have to make the slog as often.

[ Parent ]
Curious - what is the flight time from Hawaii to D.C.?
Gotta be at least 10 hours, right?  
[ Parent ]
As someone who knows this quite well...
Your guess is about right Mark. 5.5 hours to LA and about 5 hours to HI. It is a long freaking trip.

I wish that I knew this from experience but my friend went a few weeks ago and she told me about it.

28, Male, Democrat VA-08  

[ Parent ]
It couldn't hurt.
Dorgan's probably out for good - I understand it wasn't just because of Hoeven but also because the Obama administration screwed him on financial reform. But if I were Patty Murray, I'd still give him a call to make sure. Talk is cheap.

Chances are if Pomeroy wants to go the distance with his new lobbying job then Heitkamp is the best we can do. Still, I'm not totally giving up on this seat yet. I'm waiting at least until I know who the GOP nominee for Pres is. If it's some slick East Coast rich guy like Romney, I think Obama would do well to contest the upper plains, and whoever runs for Conrad's seat (and possibly even Nelson) gets the boost.

Remember, this time in 2009 a lot of Dem bloggers were still expecting to make gains in 2010. A lot can change in a campaign cycle.  

[ Parent ]
He denied
retiring for political reasons.  Also, that would be very spiteful and stupid of him to leave because of one issue.  He was not screwed on financial reform.  What are you talking about?

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
[ Parent ]
Brainstorming -- other possible D candidates
Roger Johnson, head of the National Farmers' Union
Merle Boucher - ND House minority leader
David O'Connell - ND Senate minority leader
Wayne Sanstead - Superintendent of Public Instruction
Luckily
The GOP no longer has a sure thing candidate like Hoeven.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
[ Parent ]
Roger Johnson was talked up.
He was in office very recently and was not defeated either; he retired to run the NFU.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
[ Parent ]
thus the question for him
is he happy at the NFU, or would he rather drop that for a chance to become a Senator.
[ Parent ]
hmm
I could see Johnson. He isn't that old and was a fairly popular elected state ag commissioner, which is a big deal there. I don't know that O'Connell and Boucher are that well known statewide, and Boucher represents a rez district that doesn't much resemble the rest of the state. Sanstead is popular, but he's 75 years old.

41, Ind, CA-05
[ Parent ]
I'll wait to see how things shape up before I worry too much
Of course it's going to be difficult to hold this seat, but not impossible.

24, male, African-American, CA-24, Democrat. Chair of the SSP Black Caucus.
I'm a bit surprised, really...
I thought that the prospect of gutting social Security would get him all excited for another term.  But, I guess I shouldn't be surprised.  they start running ads against him, he runs away scared just like a typical conservadem.  Someday someone will elect a conservadem that isn't a total coward, but that day is not today.

It would have been nice, just this once, for one of our guys to retire during a GOOD cycle instead of running away scared.

It seems that Patty Murray leads off with a strikeout this cycle.  Perhaps the good news in all of this is that social Security might not end up being gutted after all--there's no way Conrad would have quit if that were on the table.

Am I the only one here
that things that this is way to early to postulate. Remember in early 2009, when Bunning, Bond, Voinavich and, Gregg all announced their retirements? People here, and a lot of places were talking about a veto-proof majority for the Democrats. The point is, we really have no idea what the environment will be like in 2012, other than turnout will likely be better, as it is a presidential year.

26 White Male. Born and raised in MN-8, currently living in MN-5.

"A man who stands for nothing will fall for anything."

I guess...
But if that's the case, SSP could just shut down comments until next February.  I personally like to postulate the same way I like to think about how the Phillies lineup will shape up against NL East pitching in September of 2011.  

Plus we learn from postulations a year or more out, and can examine them to read history and/or predict the future.

[ Parent ]
Fair enough, but I think Goldy's point is correct that...
...it's too soon for hand-wringing.  And there's a lot of hand-wringing right now.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10
[ Parent ]
No you're not, I'm in the same club as you.
I've been thinking the exact same as you reading through these comments.

This time 2 years ago we were giddy about expanding our majority.  This time a year ago, we knew we were going to lose seats, not gain them.

And this being a Presidential cycle, even a year from now we likely won't know how our odds will look.  A lot depends on the identity of the GOP Presidential nominee, and the first-in-nation states are pushed back to February this time.  A sufficiently bad nominee can give us coattails.

Not to mention we don't know how job growth and the unemployment rate will go the next year.  Those things are even more important.

There are too many unknowns.  By summer 2012, Heidi Heitkamp could be our nominee and comfortably ahead, and we'll have forgotten early hand-wringing.

Or, yes, we could lose the Senate......but I stand by it that if Obama wins, we hold the Senate.  I still feel pretty good that those 2 things are tied together.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

[ Parent ]
Absolutely agree with the last prediction
I'm also saying both - projecting an Obama win and Dems keep the Senate (maybe losing 1 or two seats).

I think Repubs keep control of the House.  

[ Parent ]
To DC and OG's point
Here's a link to an article from Kos ranking the Senate races in April of 2009. Note that this article suggests that eight of the 10 to pickup opportunities at this point were Republican held seats

http://www.dailykos.com/storyo...

This is how things change dramatically. We're not even at April, 2009 yet. And notice, this articles doesn't have Bayh as even a race to watch, because no one had a clue he would retire.  

[ Parent ]
That's why
I think it helps to plan for different circumstances and be as expansive and aggressive as possible.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Damn on Update 2
Pomeroy was our only real hope barring a Delaware-style tea party miracle.
Just after several posters suggested that we remain calm
with excellent reason, there's one more person who says it's the end of the world....
[ Parent ]
Pomeroy
I don't see why everyone thinks he'd be such a great candidate. He lost every county in the state in his re-election bid. Someone like (Heidi) Heitkamp would be much better.  
[ Parent ]
Huh?
Pomeroy won quite a few counties, most notably Grand Forks. He was never a particularly strong incumbent, but he'd still be one of the top three Democratic candidates for the seat (along with Dorgan and Heitkamp).
[ Parent ]
I
don't think anyone thinks he'd be a great candidate, just the best we could hope for. It's North Dakota. Heidi hasn't been elected to anything in sixteen years and lost her last race by double digits (albeit she was courageously fighting cancer at the time). Pommeroy is the absolute best we could hope for behind Dorgan. Also I'm not sure your right about losing every county.  

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  
[ Parent ]
I wonder
if the electorate is a little more open to voting for newcomers than we think. In 2006, a woman named Kristin Hedger lost to Al Jaeger, the long-serving Secretary of State. She wasn't a career politician, and she was only 26 at the time. Yes, it was a wave year, and eight points really isn't that close, but I wouldn't be hung up on the candidate.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
I agree
There's too much of a love affair here between most users and retreads....

Just goes to show how name recognition affects even the best and brightest.

[ Parent ]
Well, if Pomeroy
or even Dorgan would be interested in returning, we should probably welcome that. They do offer advantages that a novice does not. But at the same time, we shouldn't run for the hills if we have to run someone new and/or obscure.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
ND remains winnable, depends on the 2012 climate
Fact: Berg only got 10k more votes than Pomeroy's 2008 opponent... Pomeroy lost because he got 90k (!) less votes than 2008.  With higher turnout and higher dem enthusiasm in 2012, there's no particular reason to say ND is not in play, both in the House and Senate.  If the Republicans manage to turn independents back toward favoring electing democrats, a decent dem can win this seat.
Turnout comparisons between presidential and midterm years don't really mean anything.
You could argue that "fact" for pretty much every House member that lost last year.
[ Parent ]
The votes are out there
is all I'm saying.
[ Parent ]
Indeed.
At this point, I'd like the Democrats to work on finding a candidate and updating their turnout structure. Then, let the candidate travel the state and talk to voters. We might not be able to win this race, but we don't have to get blown out of the water.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Rick Berg
Just wanted to throw this out there again on its own - what do you guys think the chances of Rick Berg trying to make a quick move up are? If he passes on this, odds are he will never be a Senator (as ND senators tend more often than not to be lifers). But running for Senate is likely to be significantly harder than holding on to his House Seat. Running for Sen after 1 term in the House is not unheard of (Brownback being the most prominent example) but it might not be all that easy either. Thoughts?

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)
Hmmm
Might not be that tough, first of all he's already running and running statewide, regardless of which office he chooses. He might get some grief for trying to get a promotion before he's even started his job, but that can be dealt with.

The biggest reason I don't think he'll run is he won't be able to clear the primary field, if he runs for re-election he'll get a walk, but it very possible he could lose a primary and then where is he?

"Earnestness is stupidity sent to college"
P. J. O'Rourke

[ Parent ]
i think it's likely...
If he announces early and gets the support of Hoeven and the Gov, maybe he can force the other would-bes to the House race.
[ Parent ]
It won't be a clear primary
but it's not liable to be crowded either. Berg has a big advantage over everyone else, in that his running would open up a obvious place for second-tier contenders to go - his house seat. Kalk, Cory Fong, and Drew Wrigley would probably switch to the House race in a heartbeat, where they'd have a better chance of winning.

So aside from a Tea Party insurgent Some Dude type challenge (and assuming Dalrymple doesn't run - if he does that scrambles everything), I think Berg's only big competition would be Stenjehm. He seems to me like the only one with a big enough profile to not want to settle for a House seat and try to beat Berg in a primary.

It would be a risky strategy, but not impossible - and it could also have big rewards if he were willing to try it (1/3 as many elections, 4X the influence, etc). I imagine Rep. Berg is probably doing some real soul-searching this afternoon.

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)

[ Parent ]
The primary wouldn't be cleared
For the same reason you said Berg would want to run: Most of those other guys want a chance to move up, and that might not come until 2020, when the gov race is likely to be open (If Dalrymaple serves 2 full terms)  
[ Parent ]
Not even then
ND has no term limits, so there's no guarantee Dalrymple doesn't pull a Hoeven and hang on until something else arises.

An interesting thing about ND, though, is that it has way too many statewide officials. I haven't crunched the numbers, but it probably has the highest statewide officials: population ratio in the country by far. That means that all of them are pretty low profile, and that a seat in the House is probably a promotion for any of them (except maybe for the AG, which is at worst a lateral move). So they might actually want Berg to run - it would open up a spot that's almost as lucrative, and might even be a little easier to win.

Berg would probably start out as the front-runner, with maybe one or two serious primary opponents of moderately lower profile. Not invincible, but probably the favorite. I'm thinking a good analogy would be Dewhurst's position in TX.

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)

[ Parent ]
Probably so
After a high profile 2010 campaign, he probably has higher name rec than all, except for maybe Stenehejem, and he is a strong fundraiser.  
[ Parent ]
I'm not so sure about that
Commissioner Kalk beat Atty. Gen. Stenehjem's brother, the majority leader in the North Dakota Senate, en route to holding his first public office; he's very "Tea Party before there was a Tea Party", apparently, although local Tea Party cheerleader and possible candidate Gary Emineth sounds like he'd prefer Rep. Berg. A couple different tea-flavored factions backing different candidates could split the diehard conservative vote, as it did in Indiana; Kalk is certainly hard-right enough to court Tea Party support.

IMO, the preponderance of established state elected officials ultimately might be enough to scare Berg off; even if Berg and Kalk work out some sort of deal wherein Kalk runs for the at-large House seat while Berg runs for Senate, the elder Stenehjem would likely command the support of the North Dakota Republican Party establishment, from what I've gleaned of the political scene in Bismarck, and I think he'll be happy to take a good long look at this big-ticket race now that Sen. Conrad is retiring.

Ultimately, I'm expecting a slogfest between Kalk and Stenehjem for the Republican nomination while Berg stays put. If Berg and Kalk cut a deal and Berg runs for Senate while Kalk runs for House, I think Stenehjem would still run for Senate. If Berg, Kalk, and Stenehjem all run for Senate, it's a clusterfuck. Either way would pit the Tea Party against the Republican establishment. Now, why does that sound familiar...

20, center-left independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native

[ Parent ]
For those of you who think ND's recent 3-0 Democratic delegation is indicative of its willingness to split tickets...
... look at this chart of party strength in North Dakota. ND has been consistently strongly Republican at all levels right back to statehood ... except for a brief period in the 1980s (farm crisis?) Take a look at the statewide officeholders. You'll see all three of Conrad, Dorgan and Pomeroy. In essence, all of ND's recent Democratic Congressional strength has stemmed from the vestiges of that era.
I think your stats are misleading
1) The R party when ND became a state was the progressive party.
2) ND has a tradition of socialist innovation, a tradition that lives today in its "Bank of North Dakota"
3) The Rs that they elected up to the time of Burdick/Conrad/Dorgan/Pomeroy were relatively progressive, almost in a Rockefeller tradition.

I suggest that ND is closer to the case of NY-23 -- an ancestrally R northern tier state which is open to government intervention. What happens in ND is in fact close to what happens in MT.

[ Parent ]
The R party in ND was both Socialist and Conservative
The Dem party was all but nonexistent in the state before the 1930s, so the Republicans had 2 factions in the early 20th century: the NPL (socialist/liberal) and the IVA (free-market/conservative). The recall of Lynn Frazier was the replacement of a left-wing Republican with a right-wing Republican. I think it was around the late 1950s-1960s when the NPL side jumped over to the Democrats and the Republicans became more conservative. I also think the change happened fairly quickly: for example, Quentin Burdick was elected as a Dem just a couple years after his R-NPL father left the House.

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)
[ Parent ]
While you make reaonable points
I think Milton Young and Mark Andrews were moderate-liberal in the R spectrum of their day, and that was after Quentin Burdick was first elected.

But a quick Google doesn't reveal much, so that assessment is just from my possibly faulty memory.

[ Parent ]
Good riddance
Cat Food Commission Kent has his sights set on social security.  At least he won't be able to do damage beyond next year.  And Conrad was one of the prime reasons there was no public option in the health insurance reform bill.  

Dorgan was a real Democrat who's sorely missed.  Can't say the same about Kent.

Nice to see your back.
Now if the Democrats lose 4 seats next year and Mitch McConnell has control of what legislation comes up in the Senate, are you really going to be wishing Kent Conrad retired?

28, Liberal Democrat, CA-26
[ Parent ]
Not as long as the filibuster's still around
It's worth getting rid of Conrad as chair of the finance committee.
[ Parent ]
That is true.
nt

28, Liberal Democrat, CA-26
[ Parent ]
Like to see Ed Schultz give it a shot

I saw
a list of famous North Dakota residents yesterday and remember seeing his name there. If he doesn't run, how about Josh Duhamel (pretty boy television/movie star and husband to Fergie) or Kellan Lutz (another pretty boy male model and actor of the "Twilight" series)? /sarcasm.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Meh...
He'd be giving up a nice paycheck for a chance to get creamed. I would love to see him in the Senate but no way he could make it. He can get more done from his show anyway. He is better off to stay put.  

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  
[ Parent ]
Right. If you would like the Democrats to have no chance.
nt

28, Liberal Democrat, CA-26
[ Parent ]
ND-Sen: Conrad Will Retire | 143 comments

Copyright 2003-2010 Swing State Project LLC

Primary Sponsor

You're not running for second place. Is your website? See why Campaign Engine is ranked #1 in software and support among Progressive-only Internet firms. http://www.mediamezcla.com/

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

About the Site

Publisher: DavidNYC

Senior Editor: James L.

Senior Editor: Crisitunity

Contributing Editor: Jeffmd

Search the SSP archives:

Sign up to receive a daily e-mail whenever the SSP is updated:

SSP Resources

Presidential Vote by CD

SSP Document Collection

Race Tracker Wiki

Dave's Redistricting App

Blogroll

Daily Kos Elections
DemConWatch
Five Thirty Eight
Governing
Hotline On Call
Political Wire
Pollster.com
Prop*50
Public Policy Polling
The Thicket
Powered by: SoapBlox