Great that she announced early

Hopefully an early announcement will do two things: 1) keep Steve Pearce out, and 2) keep Tom Udall out.

There is little indication that the so-called "baggage" from the U.S. Attorney story will dampen her standing in the state, and after defeating a statewide office holder in a Democratic district in a Democratic year, I feel confident about her ability to play statewide.

Udall, meanwhile, hasn't indicated in the slightest that he'd be interested in the seat, though things chance when there's an open seat. However, with Wilson's entry and obvious strength, he might think twice about leaving his cushy seat in the House for a questionable statewide bid.

Pearce, meanwhile, has to realize that he's too conservative for the state in a Democratic year, and a damaging primary against Wilson will hurt the GOP's chances overall.

---

by: Unabridged @ Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 13:41:58 PM CDT

Offered without further comment.

http://www.swingstateproject.com/showComment.do?commentId=6682

---

by: James L. @ Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 14:40:19 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Okay?

I said he had no reason to retire. I don't think he decided to quit for any political reason. He's detailing in his speech this afternoon medical conditions that I previously didn't know about. It was implied in my statement that Domenici has "no reason to retire" that I know about.

---

by: Unabridged @ Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 14:43:19 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

It's okay.

You just made the mistake of believing the hype, and chose to ignore the glaringly obvious reasons for Domenici to jump ship.  These things happen.

---

by: James L. @ Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 15:02:15 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Tom Udall is thinking about running:

So sayeth Congressional Quarterly:

New Mexico's two other House members, Democrat Tom Udall and Republican Steve Pearce, both were said to be mulling bids for the Senate race.

Here.

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.

---

by: TheUnknown285 @ Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 14:51:28 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I don't know why he would think twice...

I'd make the first point that Heather Wilson doesn't exactly have a particularly strong base in NM-1 (even if you don't count 2006, she generally wins by a 55-45 margin against relatively weak candidates).

Udall starts off with a base much greater than that of Heather Wilson in a run (which I've already mentioned here: http://www.swingstat...). In addition, Udall being unwilling to challenge Domenici, who has got to be considered a legend in NM (and if you don't believe me, the headline of today's Albuquerque Journal read "The End of an Era" in reference to Domenici). Wilson would not have survived her congressional race in 2006 had it not been for Patricia Madrid's ridiculously weak debate showing (and yes, with an 800 vote margin of victory, I think I stand on pretty solid ground for that assertion).

A match between Wilson and Udall, while competitive, would still favor Udall, because of his support (unlike Tom Davis, Heather Wilson does not carry particularly strong support in the district).

Your go-to source for great sarcasm

---

by: DGM @ Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 14:54:58 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

One conversation in two threads

I won't repeat what I've said in a different thread, but I disagree with you. We'll see what Udall does, however.

---

by: Unabridged @ Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 15:09:59 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Here's my take

2006 Congressional voting/funding
District 1:
Heather Wilson: Spent 4.9 million dollars; won 50% of the vote, barely edging opponent Patricia Madrid, who spent 3.3 million. With the massive divide in fundraising (1.6 million) it is clear that this district is left leaning. I would guess 50-55D to 45-50R.

District 2:
Steve Pearce spent 1.2 million; winning 60% of the vote, outspending his opponent Albert Kissling, who spent .18 million (Outspent 6-1) I would guess if you take the money advantage away, this district would split 50-55R to 45-50D.

District 3:
Tom Udall spent 400k; winning 75% of the vote against opponent Ronald Dolin who spent 23k. Take away the money advantage, I'm guessing the district would split 55-60D to 40-45R

2004 Congressional Voting/Funding
District 1:
Heather Wilson spent 3.3 Million dollars winning 54% of the vote, against Richard Romero, who spent 2.1 million dollars.  I am sticking with my numbers from before, take the fundraising gap away, and this is probably 50-55D to 45-50R

District 2:
Steve Pearce spent 1.7 million dollars winning 60% of the vote, against Gary King who spent, 1 million.  This makes me question my numbers from earlier, possibly favoring the Republicans more than I thought, however, with the political atmosphere, maybe I am closer to it for 2008 prediction.  I would say 51-56R to 44-49D.

District 3:
Tom Udall spent 452k winning 66% of the vote, against Greg Tucker, who spent 46k.  I would stick with my 55-60D to 40-45R. 

---

by: JeremiahTheMessiah @ Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 18:18:02 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Whole new delegation?

Wow, imagine if Udall, Pearce and Wilson all ran for the seat!  We could have an all new delegation with Udall in the Senate, Heinrich in NM-1 and two new Dems to take over NM-2 and NM-3.

---

by: writestuff @ Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 14:01:07 PM CDT

A Dem in NM-2?

You sure?

---

by: Unabridged @ Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 14:07:18 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

The PVI is only R+6

Pearce's '06 opponent who no one paid attention to got 40%.  If the seat opens up, a Dem pickup may not be likely, but it's a realistic possibility.

---

by: omarka @ Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 14:13:41 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

According to my sources

Pearce outspent his opponent 6-1 and won 60% of the vote.  Other than the political atmosphere, I don't see anything weighing him down.  I imagine that this district would be very competitive is Pearce were to take on a senate bid.  I don't think Republicans have the money to cover all these wholes being made by retirements, etc. 

---

by: JeremiahTheMessiah @ Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 18:10:40 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

"other than political atmosphere"

That's quite a statement. Even Republicans who have long enjoyed large margins of victory throughout their entire career saw that margin shrink considerably in 2006, for no reason other than political atmosphere.

---

by: Unabridged @ Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 18:17:13 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

madrid lost the election by 900 POINTS?

What are these points?  last time i checked, VOTES determined elections.  seems like cq needs a new proffreader.

being normal is for the mediocre.

---

by: doug_tuttle @ Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 18:28:46 PM CDT

proof-reader and it seems i need one too :)

being normal is for the mediocre.

---

by: doug_tuttle @ Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 18:29:40 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

haha

Irony is fun

---

by: Venslor @ Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 19:25:25 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Wilson will be tough competition

I consider Wilson to be one of the brightest stars under the GOP tent and she is a formidable opponent. The fact that she once again won in a dem leaning district proves this point.

I do think it will make her district more than competitive. But if the DEMS want to win, then they need to field someone other than Madrid, I watched her debate with Wilson, she was terrible.

In the senate, if Richardson is tapped as HRC's VP, then Udall has good chances on Richardson's coattails, but either way, the race will be extremely competitive and yet another state where the GOP will have to spend money it was not planning to have to spend. I suspect that the DEMS will pick this seat up.

The GOP empire is crumbling.

---

by: bonncaruso @ Fri Oct 05, 2007 at 02:24:45 AM CDT

Possible Republican Primary

From the Santa Fe New Mexican:

One possible Republican Senate candidate, state Land Commissioner Pat Lyons, said Thursday that he's leaning toward running for the Senate. But he said he might back out if Richardson jumps in the Democratic primary. "He'd be tough with all that federal money," he said referring to Richardson's presidential campaign funds - which would be legal to use in a U.S. Senate race.

---

by: TXObserver @ Fri Oct 05, 2007 at 14:44:13 PM CDT

If Madrid were

Able to repeat her 06 performance in CD-01, losing by less than 1k votes, Wilson would probably have to get around 65% of CD-02 voters to win.

---

by: safi @ Sat Oct 06, 2007 at 13:10:14 PM CDT

Well Said.

Since 2008 is a Presidential Year.
In NM-2 which is held by Steve Pearce and formerly held by Joe Skeen.

2004- Pearce won 60-40
2000- Skeen won 58-42
1996- Skeen won 56-44
1992- Skeen won 57-43.

Wilson will not get more then 60% of the popular vote in NM-2 against Madrid.

In NM-3 which is held by Tom Udall and formerly held by Bill Richardson
2004- Udall won 70-30
2000- Udall won 67-33
1996- Richardson won 67-31
1992- Richardson won 67-30
1988- Richardson won 73-27
1984- Richardson won 61-38

Madrid will get at least 60% of the popular vote in NM-3CD.

Another thing we must mention is Richardson and Udall previously ran for the US House in NM-1 and narrowly lost those races.
Richardson in 1980 lost to Manuel Lujan 49-51
Udall in 1988 lost to Steven Schiff 47-51

In order for Wilson to win. She needs to win NM-1(55-45),NM-2(60-40) and lose NM-3(45-55). Wilson defeats Madrid 52-47 percent.

In order for Madrid to win. She needs to tie NM-1(50-50). lose NM-2 (55-45) and win NM-3(60-40). Madrid defeats Wilson 52-47 percent.

Assuming NM-1 is a 50-50 race between Wilson/Madrid. Wilson is unlikely to get more than 60% of CD-02 voters. Madrid can break more than 60% of CD-03 voters to win.

Winning big in NM-3 with more than 60% is key for Madrid and tie Race in NM-1. NM-2 is going to be at most a 60-40 race favoring Wilson.

Madrid's margin of victory in NM-3 will be greater than Wilson's margin of vicotry in NM-2. This offsets a narrowly loss in NM-1.

A weak Madrid has an excellent chance of unseating a Strong Wilson.

---

by: NeKiPa @ Sat Oct 06, 2007 at 15:37:13 PM CDT

[ Parent ]