2014 Senate Races

[realtonygoodwin]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_elections,_2014

The time is here to start looking at which races we should focus on in 2014 for the Senate. I think we should start with seats without an incumbent running, then start looking at who is vulnerable based on close previous elections (Primary and/or General). Once we order the list that way, then we should look at their ideology, and who would be a good challenger in that state.

Just a quick glance at the above link indicates races in the following states may be good to start looking at.

Alaska
Colorado
Lousiana
Maine
Minnesota
New Hampshire
North Carolina
Oregon
South Carolina

 

[realtonygoodwin]

Here is how each of the above states' incumbent Senator scored on the October 2012 "Freedom Index" It isn't a perfect metric, but it is a good starting point to see where they vote on liberty issues. In parentheses (sp?) is the score of the state's other Senator. This may be a good way to gauge how open the state may be to a more liberty-oriented Senator. The larger the gap between the two numbers, the more likely a strong liberty candidate could win, IMO. If the difference is a negative number, it may be more difficult.

Alaska - 18 (60)
Colorado - 15 (13)
Lousiana - 25 (79)
Maine - 50 (56)
Minnesota - 13 (8)
New Hampshire - 15 (70)
North Carolina - 20 (72)
Oregon - 23 (18)
South Carolina - 73 (85)

Based on this, the best order to prioritize these states would be:

New Hampshire +55
Lousiana +54
North Carolina +52
Alaska +42
South Carolina +12
Colorado -2
Minnesota -5
Oregon -5
Maine -6

Thoughts?

 

[CaptUSA]

Senate takes a good state-wide candidate. We have that in SC!

Remember, if we get one of our candidate to win the primary, they CANNOT lose the general! We have to show that our type of candidate wins. Then the GOP will want more of them.

 

[KMX]

Texas needs to get JC out!

 

[realtonygoodwin]

Good luck with getting Cornyn out. He is popular and powerful and will have the backing of the establishment.

 

[Smart3]

Ron Paul 2014? if not, Robert Paul 2014!

 

[realtonygoodwin]

Ron Paul wouldn't be able to win a statewide election in Texas, unfortunately.

 

[Smart3]

Ron Paul wouldn't be able to win a statewide election in Texas, unfortunately.

Woops, I meant to write Robert Paul if RP was not a possibility.

Robert would be capable of challenging Cornyn, even if he only got 30% of the vote. If Leppert got in the race as well, we could keep Cornyn below 50% and force a run-off.

 

[Eric21ND]

Remember the three M's. These have to be at their pinnacle to win any elected office, but especially a Senate seat.

- Money

- Message

- Messenger

 

[supermario21]

My opinion is to focus first on Lindsey Graham, where we have a proven viable candidate in Tom Davis who we know will have the support of Freedom Works, etc. Secondly, Joe Miller in Alaska is a good candidate to get elected as a liberty candidate. He barely lost to Murkowski and Begich is only a Senator due to the DOJ screwing over Ted Stevens. My third target would be Oregon. Why, you might ask? Because the national establishment will be focusing on "easier races" such as NC, Louisiana, etc. Oregon we can find a libertarian-esque candidate and he/she would likely be competitive in Oregon. It could also be a nice test for Rand, who could lead this movement. If it succeeds, it could show everyone that Rand's message would make the party competitive in areas where we have been terrible.

 

[Confederate]

I hope Miller runs in Alaska.

 

[Uriah]

We should only run a candidate that actually has a chance at winning a senate seat. This means solid or competitive red state.

 

[matt0611]

We should only run a candidate that actually has a chance at winning a senate seat. This means solid or competitive red state.

Remember that 2008 was a democrat "hope and change" election year so many should be vulnerable.

 

[Athan]

Lindsey Grahm. I want him boo hooing in 2014.

 

[Adrock]

Davis against Graham in the SC primary and Miller against the Democrat in the AK general seems pretty good. I hope we also have sone good candidates to field in any upcoming house and senate races where incumbent retires.

 

[realtonygoodwin]

Don't we have influence in the GOP in Louisiana and New Hampshire?

 

[Smart3]

Don't we have influence in the GOP in Louisiana and New Hampshire?

Louisiana's Jungle primary means that the chances of a Liberty candidate winning a statewide race are nil. Remember that even if Jindal doesn't run, we have to keep Landrieu under 50% or she will win simply because the R vote was split. Landrieu's loss, even to Jindal would be a +1 for the country.

Landrieu's odds are pretty good compared to Hagan, Begich, Pryor, etc.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Here is how each of the above states' incumbent Senator scored on the October 2012 "Freedom Index" It isn't a perfect metric, but it is a good starting point to see where they vote on liberty issues. In parentheses (sp?) is the score of the state's other Senator. This may be a good way to gauge how open the state may be to a more liberty-oriented Senator. The larger the gap between the two numbers, the more likely a strong liberty candidate could win, IMO. If the difference is a negative number, it may be more difficult.

Alaska - 18 (60)
Colorado - 15 (13)
Lousiana - 25 (79)
Maine - 50 (56)
Minnesota - 13 (8)
New Hampshire - 15 (70)
North Carolina - 20 (72)
Oregon - 23 (18)
South Carolina - 73 (85)

Based on this, the best order to prioritize these states would be:

New Hampshire +55
Lousiana +54
North Carolina +52
Alaska +42
South Carolina +12
Colorado -2
Minnesota -5
Oregon -5
Maine -6

Thoughts?

sig

 

[John F Kennedy III]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_elections,_2014

The time is here to start looking at which races we should focus on in 2014 for the Senate. I think we should start with seats without an incumbent running, then start looking at who is vulnerable based on close previous elections (Primary and/or General). Once we order the list that way, then we should look at their ideology, and who would be a good challenger in that state.

Just a quick glance at the above link indicates races in the following states may be good to start looking at.

Alaska
Colorado
Lousiana
Maine
Minnesota
New Hampshire
North Carolina
Oregon
South Carolina

I've been here for over a year and I still read your name as Reallygoodbotwin every single time. Weird.

Just thought I'd share that

 

[Rocco]

The top 2 priorities, IMO, must be Davis and Miller. Davis is an outstanding liberty candidate who has a great chance of knocking off perhaps THE worst senator in the nation, and Miller is by far our safest bet at winning another senate seat. Besides that, I am intrigued by the thought of Kent Sorenson in Iowa, Jim Forsythe in New Hampshire, and I think these 4 are probably our best shot IMO.