Nice

Not a bad place for McCaskill to be at this point.

24, male, African-American, CA-24, Democrat. Chair of the SSP Black Caucus.

---

by: DrPhillips @ Thu Jan 27, 2011 at 23:55:55 PM UTC

Very encouraging

Particularly job approval in positive territory.

---

by: conspiracy @ Thu Jan 27, 2011 at 23:57:11 PM UTC

This is a real race

no doubt about it.

But McCaskill can win.

---

by: andgarden @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 00:00:11 AM UTC

Dooooooooom!

I thought Neville Chamberlain already surrendered this seat along with the Sudentenland?

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

---

by: notpjorourke @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 00:09:33 AM UTC

Thanks!

(Those who've read my interchanges with former user leeatwater may understand the reference.)

---

by: tietack @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 00:11:00 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

If Graves polls best among Rs

Steelman must be -- ah -- seen as one of those Tea nuts.

Given the close match with approval numbers, this seems like a Generic Incumbent D v. Generic R poll -- which suggests that other Rs are less then generic.

---

by: tietack @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 00:10:05 AM UTC

If McCaskill can win, Democrats will hold the Senate

Right now I think Democrats lose just Nebraska and North Dakota for a net loss of two.  

All other incumbents except for Tester and Manchin(who won in 2010 of all years) are in states Obama carried and will likely carry again.  

---

by: Bunyan @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 00:12:18 AM UTC

Probably

But with the usual caveat that much can change and probably will. In either direction. Still, I think after ND and NE it likely goes something like MO, MT (depending on Rehberg), OH, VA (with Webb or Kaine), FL, MI, NJ. In that order. Further retirements in WI and NM may change that.

---

by: conspiracy @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 00:30:25 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

If Webb or Kaine dont run in Virginia

We have a HUGE problem.

There is nobody else who could mount a credible challenge against Allen.  

---

by: Bunyan @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 00:38:06 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Perriello

He'd definitely be an underdog, but he would be a hell of a contrast to a slick career politician like Allen.

---

by: Johnny Longtorso @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 02:39:02 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Tom Perriello could

He'd start off behind, but the man works unbelievably hard. There's a reason he lost by less than four percent in an R+5 district during a massive Republican wave. And there's a reason he won the seat in the first place even while then-Sen. Obama couldn't carry the district.

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

---

by: SaoMagnifico @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 02:53:26 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well said

---

by: conspiracy @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 10:44:05 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Periello or Connolly

I think both of these guys could run very effective statewide campaigns, I don't say anything about he-who-shall-not-be-named, but I can certainly see either of them being the best available candidates no matte what Kaine or the incumbent do.

This is especially true if there is indeed a special election, I'm sure Dem state Senators would be besides themselves with joy to have Connolly atop the ballot while they fight to keep their majority this November.

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

---

by: notpjorourke @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 13:24:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I really like McCaskill

I'm to the left of McCaskill but I really like her.  She always does a great job during TV segments I love hearing her talk and her analysis of the issues from the perspective of a U.S. Senator, it's always impressive.

If she wins re-election which I think she has a strong chance at I think she'll be a force to be reckoned with during the 2016 Presidential elections if she chooses to run.

---

by: TXMichael @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 00:34:56 AM UTC

I really like her as well

but she is to the right of the Democratic primary electorate. She might able to coalesce the Edwards coalition. Which wasn't large.

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)

---

by: ndrwmls10 @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 00:42:22 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Missouri

She Is In good shape for reelection.back In 2004 she did better than Kerry did although she lost.Blunt beat her by 4 while Bush beat Kerry by 8.She Is about the best Democrats can get In the seante from Missouri.I am from
Missouri so I know things here.Remember 2012 will not be
2010.Independents are heading towards Obama.And his voters
will be out again.While It will be tough for him In Missouri not Impossable.Both she and Governor Nixon are likely to be relected.Even If Republicans carry Missouri
remember back In 1992 when Democrats won most state wide offices Bond was relected to the senate and In 2000 when Bush carried the state Democrats won most of the statewide
offices.Even In 2008 When Mccain barely won Missouri most
statewide offcies(except LT Governor) went to Democrats.

She also Is no Lieberman or Ben Nelson.Most of the time she
votes with Obama and she did endose him In 2008.

---

by: Robbins @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 01:13:27 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I was referring to a 2016 presidential run.

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)

---

by: ndrwmls10 @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 01:19:09 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Edwards Coalition?

That seems unlikely. To the best of my knowledge, Edwards' coalition was heavy on progressives. So if she is as centrist as she appears, she would probably have trouble securing them.

---

by: childers_moof @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 20:59:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I thought it was more of a populist

lead coalition, but I could very well be wrong. The progressives coalesced around Obama and too a lesser extent Clinton.  

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)

---

by: ndrwmls10 @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 21:57:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Only later

Until Edwards was less than viable, most progressives I know were either with him, education-focused and backing Richardson, or in some degree of love with Kucinich (which I actually understand). I personally pushed most of my Edwards friends to Obama, but only after the Southern primaries (myself being a switch in that direction), though I now wonder if I really made the right choice sometimes.  Back to the substance...I think a lot of progressives saw Edwards' "Two Americas" theme as really important...the first step in getting rid of the problem is admitting you HAVE one.

30, male, Democratic, CO-01

---

by: Tiger in BlueDenver @ Sat Jan 29, 2011 at 01:34:07 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

McCaskill's my favorite senator, but I concede this will be difficult

I happen to be rather pessimistic about Obama's chances here - I suspect he'll probably lose by mid-single digits, so McCaskill can't coast on his performance atop the ticket. Right now, I suspect she's a very slight favorite, but I wouldn't dare even label this a Tilt D (3-5% advantage) race.

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast

---

by: andyroo312 @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 01:36:49 AM UTC

So you think he's actually going to lose

significant ground from 2008 in MO? I find that unlikely.  

---

by: jwaalk @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 02:40:47 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

In Missouri and Indiana, yes. In certain other swing states, no.

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast

---

by: andyroo312 @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 03:50:26 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

What would

you say is "significant ground"? Five points? Ten 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?

---

by: b.j. @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 04:38:10 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well, first, I never said "significant ground"

I'm talking a few points, 5 max.

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast

---

by: andyroo312 @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 16:12:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I thought

you were agreeing with jwalk's use of "significant ground." Nevertheless, do you think he could lose bigger in Missouri than last time but basically stay the same everywhere else except for maybe Indiana? Or would a five-point loss in Missouri translate into a similar loss in, say, North Carolina?  

"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?

---

by: b.j. @ Sat Jan 29, 2011 at 05:47:00 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I dare

But only just.

---

by: conspiracy @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 10:45:04 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

rankings

Everyone has there own system and criteria for rankings, but I think this year you'll see a ton of highlycompetitive races. Not only Missouri, but ND and NE (obviously) but MI, FL, MT, VA & OH are toss-ups and MA, NV on the gop side. ME, WI if the are open seats. I don't see PA being competitive, no matter who the gop recruits (except maybe Ridge, but fat chance Cornyn!).

Some of these might fall off the radar later due to primaries and such, but for a non-wave election the eventual make-up of the 113th Senate is going to be very hard to predict.

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

---

by: notpjorourke @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 12:38:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Other vulnerable GOP seats

I think Indiana and Utah are both seats that Dems have a shot at if they are able to recruit and willing to invest time & money in those recruits. That will be a tough choice for the DSCC since if Lugar & Hatch survive primaries that is likely money down the drain, but if either of them lose and the responsible tea partier goes on to an easy victory it would be criminal (imagine losing the senate 51-47 and having two Mike Lee clones in those seats!)

I'm not sure who's left on the bench in Inidana, but (especially if his CD is destroyed) Matheson would be a strong candidate and though I don't think he could come particularly close to Hatch in the general I do think he could (and should) beat Chaffetz.

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

---

by: notpjorourke @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 13:21:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Utah?

Absolutely no chance whatever.

---

by: conspiracy @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 15:11:10 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Really?

I know tons of UT campaign people from working for Leavitt at HHS and they are very concerned that Matheson would trounce Chaffetz (or many others) if Hatch isn't renominated.

One example given to me was Obama carrying Indiana in '08, there were tons of Dems in IN who were so excited to vote for Obama, not just as good Dems, but because it was the first time in a generation where they felt their vote could really count. - Tons of Dem leaning voters in Utah who would come out in droves if they thought they finally had a chance to elect someone statewide.

Not to say it's likely, but highly possible - given the right circumstances (1. Hatch not renominated, 2. Matheson runs & raises money 3. Obama perform well nationally to depress GOP voters).

Can't hurt to build an infrastructure right? And it won't cost too much to be prepared if #1 happens....

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

---

by: notpjorourke @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 15:21:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

HHS and DOD

You sure get around! Yes, really. No Democrat, not even Matheson is winning a senate seat in Utah. Party building in Texas is one thing when Obama lost the state by 11 it is quite another in Utah where he lost by more than 20.

---

by: conspiracy @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 15:35:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I do get around

HUD, HHS, DoD (twice), Labor & Energy. I'm an IGA Specialist so it's all about navigating the labrynth...

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

---

by: notpjorourke @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 15:43:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

HUD

Yeah, was gonna mention that. Remember you saying something with regard to Martinez.

---

by: conspiracy @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 15:49:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Here's my way unlikely prediction for 2011/the start of 2012:

Jon Huntsman becomes a Democrat and runs for the Senate in Utah.

Matheson would probably do okay if he were he nominee and ran against someone extreme like Chaffetz, but if the Democrats were able to convince Huntsman to switch parties and run, it'd make the race insanely competitive, or so I think, for the reasons you describe.  

"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?

---

by: b.j. @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 15:50:52 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Why would Huntsman become a D?

President Obama wouldn't want it, as it would be a hit to his bipartisan cred.

It would mark Huntsman as a traitor to even more Rs; as an Ambassador, he can say that he's just someone who happens to want to unite with the President on foreign policy.

And given the primary challenge to Matheson this cycle, there's no assurance that Huntsman would win a D primary for Senate.

If Huntsman won as a D, he'd be pilloried pretty quick as the next coming of Ben Nelson.

I think it's more likely that Huntsman gets in the primary against Hatch -- IFF some other tea party type mounts a challenge. But even that seems unlikely -- if Huntsman were to become the next R Senator from Utah, he wouldn't even be allowed to vote as "moderate" as Scott Brown.

I think Huntsman's best move is to stay as Ambassador.

---

by: tietack @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 16:28:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well, I don't think

it's particularly likely. But I think it's a lot more likely that he runs as a Democrat for the Senate in Utah rather than on the national ticket as a Democrat.

I imagine the Utah state party as a whole is pretty damn conservative, at least compared to most other state parties. Maybe not so much in Matheson's district, but around the state? I also imagine that the Democrats are so anxious for a win that they will take someone who would be pretty moderate by state standards and conservative by national standards as long as he could possibly win. After all, who else besides Matheson is going to have a good shot at the nomination in that state? As much as posible, the state party leaders would probably clear the field for Huntsman should he decide to do it, especially because the White House would want this.

He might piss off the hardcore Republicans in the state should he run as a Democrat, but they aren't the people he's doing after. He's trying to win support from everyone else, and the fact that he used to be a Republican (in this hypothetical, I mean) is a huge indication he can't be too far to the left. He can always claim that he hasn't changed, but the party has, and he will always vote the way he thinks is best, no matter what anyone else says. And yes, he would compared to Ben Nelson by national Democrats (at least I think that is what you mean), but that will probably help him at home.

Would Obama want it? I think so. For one thing, it'd give the Democrats a great shot at winning a Senate seat in Utah, of all places. For another, I don't think it'd be a hit to his bipartisan cred. If anything, it could be spun as Obama welcoming conservatives into the party. All of those in Washington who live and die on bipartisanship would go nuts.  

"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?

---

by: b.j. @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 19:38:19 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Why do so many people think Hunstman is becoming a Dem?

I've see the Huntsman-Democrat speculation several times here, but it still doesn't add up for me. Other than take a job in the administration, which several other Republicans have done (John McHugh, Ray LaHood), what has Huntsman done to make him seem like he'd be the next Crist or Specter?

The news about him yesterday was that he's leaning towards a run for President, so he's probably a long shot to run for Senate under any party's banner next year.

20, CD MA-03/NH-01/MA-08

---

by: MassGOP @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 17:32:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well, I don't believe

anybody thinks the odds of this are great in any situation, but it's discussed because he's a fairly conservative guy on most matters. Nobody would confuse him for a John Lindsay/Lowell Wicker-style Republican. But he's also somewhat moderate in some ways, especially compared to a lot of Republicans today. I personally don't see him surviving a national Democratic primary, but I could see him becoming a Democrat in Utah because, like I said above, the party is probably fairly conservative there and is probably very desperate for a win.

I don't think it's likely he runs for president in 2012. I mean, what is he supposed to say? He didn't realize how awful Obama was until just before the primary season was starting? 2016? Sure, but not 2012.  

"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?

---

by: b.j. @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 19:46:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Lowell Weicker

Tom Wicker is another senator from a different state.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  

---

by: Pan @ Sun Jan 30, 2011 at 11:59:26 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I could see Huntsman running as an independent

since Utah's nomination process is so frakked, but he'd be suicidal to attempt to run as a Dem.

---

by: Johnny Longtorso @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 17:35:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That's why we need potentially viable candidates running for all the hopeless seats.

At the very least, they can always just keep their powder dry and ignore the race if it's unwinnable.

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01

---

by: Glenn Magus Harvey @ Sat Jan 29, 2011 at 18:30:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I see top talent has left the Republican side.

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01

---

by: Glenn Magus Harvey @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 04:04:32 AM UTC

This is good news

Though I would like to see her numbers vs. Jo Ann Emerson, who I think would be by far her most formidable opponent.  

20, Democrat, KY-01

---

by: westkydem @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 05:13:00 AM UTC

2 things to look for

In judging McCaskill's chances. First, obviously, is who gets the GOP nomination. I think Wagner or Steelman would be formidable and harris(?)Would not be, I'd have to see Emerson raise some serious money and have a very crowded primary to win, but matches up well ideologically. Graves I don't understand, but we'll see how serious he is.

The 2nd question is will Obama contest the state, he spent tons of money and time there in '08 (my wife and eldest daughter went to the 100k person rally under the arch) but in the end he didn't carry the state. If Obama stays away that might actually help McCaskill since turnout in the urban centers is still going to be huge, but not having to stand next to Obama on a podium 8-10 times will help her create some distance that will allow her to outperform Obama in the rural areas she needs (and did far better than expected in '06).  

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

---

by: notpjorourke @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 12:24:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I can't imagine he wouldn't contest it

Missouri swung about the same as states like Ohio and Florida but Obama didn't win because tne margin in 2004 was larger. McCaskill will get tied to the president in rural areas no matter what so I would argue she could do with tying herself to his turnout in urban areas.

---

by: conspiracy @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 15:09:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Perhaps

I would argue the urban turnout will be spectacular regardless of how much time and energy Obama spends in STL or KC, McCaskill has cut a fairly independent figure since '06, but she is still very closely allied with him so I do agree running away from him is not an option, getting a little distance wouldn't be a bad idea though, there are still lots of Dems outside those two urban areas who are far more likely to give a vote to McCaskill than Obama.

If I were her I would start with the assumption that Obama will not carry the state and she'll need to outperform him significantly (say 2-3%?) to be re-elected. If Obama romps and wins MO by 5 then it doesn't matter, but you can't base a senate campaign on that kind of rose colored outlook, and regardless of what Obama's campaign people are telling her behind the scenes she must be prepared to win with no support from the Obama re-elect.

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

---

by: notpjorourke @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 15:15:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

What do you

mean by your last sentence? Do you imagine McCaskill harbor's the illusion of Obama doing all of the mobilization work for her?

"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?

---

by: b.j. @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 15:52:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Blah on that misplaced apostrophe.

"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?

---

by: b.j. @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 15:53:06 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Be Prepared

Yes.

I'm saying that McCaskill should be prepared to run a complete campaign and NOT rely on promises of outside help, with the Governor's race on the ballot too I think that a good move for the state party.

Worst case for Dems would be the Obama campaign pulling the plug on Missouri in September and Nixon & McCaskill not having the assets in place for GOTV, phone banks, fundraising & local door-to-door efforts

I think regardless fo what Obama's re-elect targeting plan is for Missouri the turnout in STL & KC will be great, but Nixon & McCaskill need to assume they need far more than this to win election themselves.

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

---

by: notpjorourke @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 16:13:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Woops

No, I don't think she or Nixon are expecting Obama to do it for them, but there is a world of differnce on the ground between a target state and untargeted - and a good campaign never gets caught with it's collective pants down.

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

---

by: notpjorourke @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 16:15:30 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Also

There may be a significant differne in voter priorities for a National campaign and a state one.

For instance Martinez almost blew it in Florida in '04 by not spending any resources on GOTV efforts in key areas for him (specifically Little Havana & the Orlando portion of Orange County), the only reason he won (IMO) is that Bush-Cheney did such a great job on turnout in the panhandle that Martinez way exceeded his target numbers for those counties.

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

---

by: notpjorourke @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 16:19:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That seems reasonable enough.

Not that I expect her to announce her reelection strategy for the whole world to see, but I'm curious what she plans to do. From what I've read, she tried to mop up some votes in the rural counties, where Democrats usually don't do particularly well, and then reap the benefit from the urban counties. I seem to recall a special emphasis being placed on women voters in non-urban counties, but I am not sure.

At this point, her biggest asset is actually being a senator. I'd imagine that you get a better reception from people when you actually represent them than when you are simply trolling for support this early in the game, so if she can try to solidify things in the smaller areas while the Republicans are still fighting over a candidate, she can then focus on running up the totals everywhere else.  

"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?

---

by: b.j. @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 16:43:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Cattle Call!

So far GOPers in or experssing interest in the '12 Missouri primary are;

Sarah Steelman
Ann Wagner
Rep Emerson
Rep Graves
Ed Martin

Am I missing anyone?

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

---

by: notpjorourke @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 17:58:42 PM UTC

Nebraska

Compare that with Nebraska where it's looking more and more like AG Brunning is going to get a free pass to the GOP nominatin to take on (or take down depending on your attitude) Ben Nelson.  

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

---

by: notpjorourke @ Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 18:00:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]