After a few days of suddenly ramped-up chatter about Sarah Steelman getting in the Senate race, all of a sudden, she’s officially in:
Before filing as a candidate with the Secretary of the Senate this afternoon, Steelman will launch a campaign website this morning that outlines her decision to become the first Republican in the race against Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill.
“I want to do my part in fighting for America’s future. That’s why I have decided to run for the United States Senate,” Steelman writes on the homepage of her revamped website, www.SarahSteelman.com.
Steelman’s entry complicates matters greatly for Jim Talent, who’d been expected to seek a rematch against Claire McCaskill (who beat him in 2006) but now must go into a GOP primary flying the establishment flag against a challenger with a cadre of tea-party supporters. Steelman, of course, played the same role in the 2008 gubernatorial primary, badly damaging then-Rep. Kenny Hulshof en route to his wide loss in the general; she had also briefly considered running in 2010 against Roy Blunt in the GOP primary. Yesterday she got some assurances from the NRSC that they wouldn’t take sides in a Talent/Steelman primary, and (unlike 2010, where Blunt’s early entry seemed to drive her off) that was apparently enough for her to jump in quickly before Talent (who says he’ll have a decision in coming months) could get entrenched.
that would be some delicious cat fud.
anything about Steelman, except one Republican operative called her “Sarah Palin” with an economics degree and she was on a list of women each of whom was supposed to be amongst the most likely females to be the first female president.
I have no doubt that this race will be competitive, but I wouldn’t be so quick to right it off. Obama will almost certainly contest the state in 2012, which should help McCaskill. There are still quite a few unregistered black voters in the state, which would break heavily towards McCaskill, and while turnout is very high amongst blacks in the state, it could be higher still. My guess is, Obama will focus on that, which should help McCaskill tremendously, unless her support amongst whites absolutely collapses.
Obama didn’t carry Missouri in ’08 and will certainly have a hard time doing better in ’12. McCaskill also has never been popular within the Democratic party so if she looks weak the cash will dissapear fast. Claire has done a lot to shore up her position away from the cities so it’s not impossible for her to outperform Obama enough to win, but it’s a tough tough climb.
As for Steelman she is no Sharron Angle or “what’s her name the witch girl” from Deleware. I think she’s a bit awkward in public and comes across as a bit weird, but she is no Palin lightweight. She has a strong network across Mizzou and has run and won statewide before.
IMO opinion the NRSC’s decision to stay neutral is paramount to an open endorsement of Steelman over Talent.
I was gonna say something about it last night when I saw her website was under construction, but I didn’t think it was news worthy enough to post on SSP. When I saw that, I expected an announcement within a few weeks, not today.
She’s nothing special. She lost to Kenny what’s his name who was a horrible candidate. She can beat her, but I think pretty much anyone can. She’s probably the weakest candidate for the R’s. I worry about McCaskill, she’s going to be in for a fight.
She was friendly with Ron Paul’s Campaign For Liberty too back in her 2008 run before his supporters became influential in some primaries. While it probably will not get her the big bucks like it did for Ron in the presidential race and Rand in the early stages of the Republican primary, it does get a potential roadblock out of her way. Ask Sue Lowden, who had to deal with the anger of the Ron Paul supporters forever after the mishandled 2008 Nevada GOP Convention.