2010 Senate Elections

[scandinaviany3]

free alive and nate pm me

pm me now. You must be down there working on Delavar's campaign. I'm working on Cloud's.

Guys pm me on want to help on planning against murray

 

[Aratus]

fran dresser + caroline may negate each other out grandly, and if governor paterson now goes to no. 3 or 4 or 5 on his list...

picture how vulnerable the newbie may be in 2010 concerning the november election... http://www.ny.gov/governor/

 

[Knightskye]

fran dresser + caroline may negate each other out grandly

Watch, neither one gets appointed and then they start a TV show.

 

[Eric21ND]

This is the most important work we could be doing right now, looking ahead and planning, get people and infastructure in place and ready to come out the gate.

 

[tangent4ronpaul]

Those that vote in midterm election years are certain to vote on Congress and Senate races. Most people that do vote in any year, do vote for at least President, Senate, and Governor if they are on the ballot. The other races, most people who vote will vote for them, but much of those people are people who will vote for someone just because they have a D or an R next to their name. The only exceptions to that rule is President, Senate, and Governor, since they are high-profile races.

Winnable or not, how about running ANYBODY in the same party against the incumbant. That should be good enough to get into debates and on radio shows for educational purposes. If we did that for every House and Senate seat - we might even win a few. Spend no money, except perhaps on yard signs in front of the polling places the day of the primary election. Maybe choose people on the basis of their name being earlier in the alphabet or what the name looks like. ie: "Goodman" is a better choice than "Blackstone" and hope voters click those D's and R's for the one with the more pleasent sounding name or the first name they find.

Then focus major financial and other support on a handful of races that seem most likely to be won. Especially when a seat is opening up due to retirement.

-t

 

[nate895]

Winnable or not, how about running ANYBODY in the same party against the incumbant. That should be good enough to get into debates and on radio shows for educational purposes. If we did that for every House and Senate seat - we might even win a few. Spend no money, except perhaps on yard signs in front of the polling places the day of the primary election. Maybe choose people on the basis of their name being earlier in the alphabet or what the name looks like. ie: "Goodman" is a better choice than "Blackstone" and hope voters click those D's and R's for the one with the more pleasent sounding name or the first name they find.

Then focus major financial and other support on a handful of races that seem most likely to be won. Especially when a seat is opening up due to retirement.

-t

We should focus on open GOP seats, and weak Democrat incumbents.

My list:

Kansas, open GOP
Missouri, open GOP
Illinois, Burris (D)
Colorado, Bennet (D)
Washington, Murray (D)

Washington isn't considered weak, but it does have a strong Ron Paul movement that might just be able to elect somebody.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

Unless the incumbent has Blago or Stevens level problems, they aren't 'weak,' and can still kick the can out of any insurgent 10,000 times a week. Stick with the open seats created by retirements and raise at least $2 million for each Senate run, that's the cleanest opportunity. Add FL, as Jeb Bush said he won't run. We could otherwise run paper candidates in all Senate and House races, but unless one is careful that will actively diffuse focus on the higher percentage races.

 

[nate895]

Unless the incumbent has Blago or Stevens level problems, they aren't 'weak,' and can still kick the can out of any insurgent 10,000 times a week. Stick with the open seats created by retirements and raise at least $2 million for each Senate run, that's the cleanest opportunity. Add FL, as Jeb Bush said he won't run. We could otherwise run paper candidates in all Senate and House races, but unless one is careful that will actively diffuse focus on the higher percentage races.

I don't think we have the resources to go after Florida and much else.

All incumbents can be weakened in swing electorates. Challenger money is many times more effective than incumbent money, and Congress is almost sure to be unpopular as a whole next election.