What are these races like? I’ll try to analyze them here, but I don’t know all of the factors. Can y’all help me by telling me what’s missing?
(pluses and minuses are for the appropriate party in question (i.e. a minus for the Republicans is a good thing for us)
Idaho
D nom: Larry LaRocco
background: former ID-01 reprentative (+), unsuccessful nominee for Senator against Larry Craig, unsuccessful nominee for Lt. Gov. against Jim Risch (-)
campaign: Working for the Senate (++)
state PVI: R+19
R nom: Jim Risch
background: Lt. Gov. (+), former Gov. (+), former Lt. Gov. (+)
campaign: dodging debates (-)
D party: very underdog (-), but very energized (+), Obama rally in Boise (+), significant ID-01 House race (+?)
R party: national mood against R (-), Larry Craig (-), Rex Rammell and Kent Marmon and Pro-Life (-,–?)
Oklahoma
D nom: Andrew Rice
background: State Sen. (+), divinity school (+), Oklahoma City background (?), 9/11 personal connection (?)
campaign: (no special information?)
R nom: Jim Inhofe
background: current Senator (+), global warming is a hoax (-), anything else, such as
campaign: history as a highly competent/hard-hitting campaigner (+)?
state PVI: R+12
D party: Obama effect (+)?, but Clinton won this state and Obama isn’t having a great chance at winning it (-), no significant House races (-?), locally dominant party (+)
R party: nationally dominant party (+), what else?
Kansas
D nom: Jim Slattery
background: former KS-02(?) Representative (+), lobbyist (-)
campaign: (no special information?)
R nom: Pat Roberts
background: current Senator (+), no negatives?
campaign: (no special information?)
state PVI: R+11
D party: KS-02 House race (+?), Sebelius’s political establishments? (+)
R party: nationally dominant party (+), internal conflict between conservatives and moderates…which wing is Roberts part of? (-)
Georgia
D nom: Jim Martin
background: (I don’t know him)
campaign: competitive primary raised name ID (+), anything else
R nom: Saxby Chambliss
background: (I don’t know him other than that he defeated Max Cleland)
campaign: famously nasty campaign(er) (+/-?)
state PVI: R+6
D party: competitive possibly divisive primary (-?) but party has kinda coalesced after that (+), anger toward Chambliss for defeating Cleland (+)
R party: nationally dominant party (+)
Where does Chambliss’s campaign against Cleland count? Was it something that only angered Democrats, or did it anger most people?
Conclusions: I think we’re more likely to win GA and ID than OK and KS right now. KS is probably the least likely, OK above that, and GA above that, and ID on top. What do you think?
I think he’s in the moderate camp, isn’t he?
Well I consider Roberts a conservative but I don’t see how that really helps as i’m sure I’d call a moderate Republican conservative too.
When it concerns Larocco, I’d consider his senate race against Larry Craig a positive, it would have raised his name identification in the 2nd district. I’d also consider Rex Rammell to be a potentially big negative. He has the potential, and the money, to take a big portion of the conservative vote.
in Georgia, Jim Martin was a State Rep so that would be a positive in my book. He was also the Liuetenant governor nominee in 2006 which has helped raise his name identification state wide so that would also be a positive in my book. Also, Obama is taking Georgia seriously so that would be a positive if not a big positive. The African American population in the state is rather large and the boost should help Martin.
Other than that, I got nothing on these races.
I think Pat Roberts (who really seems to be one of the most bland, unremarkable Senators of the bunch) political strength is that he can effectively bridge the more moderate and conservative wings of the Kansas Republican Party. The Kansas GOP is still more divided than perhaps any state party in the country (evidenced by the primary Tuesday for KS-02) — and Roberts, and even Sam Brownback to an extent, seems to be able to keep both wings happy. He’s certainly not as conservative as someone like Jim Ryun or Phill Kline, nor is he as moderate as someone like Nancy Kassabaum was. Jim Slattery is a good, credible candidate, but I think he’d have to be running against someone percieved as much less acceptable to moderate Republicans to win in Kansas.
Vietnam Vet (+) vs. Chambliss’s “bum knee” (-)
is that he was chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee for all of the Bush presidency up to the 2006 election, since when he has been the ranking minority member; and has never had the slightest inclination to provide any oversight or do any investigating of the faked and cherry-picked intelligence that allowed Bush and Cheney to take us into the so-called war in Iraq, which has cost hundreds of thousands of lives and basically destroyed our economy. Under Roberts’ stewardship, the Bush administration got a free pass to use anything they wanted for intelligence and do anything they wanted with it.