BREAKING: Carl Levin to Retire

[CaptLouAlbano]

I still think it's a bad idea for Amash to run for the Senate when Michigan is a Democratic state. I think it's better for Amash to stay in his house district, which he shouldn't ever have any trouble winning.

Agreed. The risk/reward factor for this isn't on Amash's side. He's got a nice spot in the House and with time can move up the ladder. We give him a few dozen more allies over the next two election cycles and he could very well be in a leadership position. Winning the MI Senate seat is such a long shot. Levin has been retaining his seat by 20+ points and will likely campaign for the Dem nominee.

The Liberty Movement needs to choose its battles wisely. A third of the Senate will be up for grabs in 2014, there will be plenty of races where we will be competitive and have a realistic shot at winning the seat. Amash should stay put and keep building the coalition in the House.

Now, if you have a libertarian conservative in the MI state senate that can take a run at the seat, I am all for it. But there's little, if any reason, to put Amash up for the seat.

 

[erowe1]

Oh please. MI will never, ever send a small government conservative to the US senate so get over it. You only need to look at who they've elected for the last 50 years to see that and Amash isn't going to magically change the prevailing leftist bent and he has to give up his House seat to give it a shot and which he has worked hard to gain and is SAFE.

It would be the dumbest political move of the century.

1) A lot of those elections were Levin winning reelection. Incumbent senators tend to get reelected, whatever their party is, whatever state they're in, and the longer they're there, the easier it usually is to keep winning.
2) In all statewide elections in recent years, Republicans and Democrats have both won a lot and lost a lot.
3) It seems like you want Amash to stay in the House forever. If he's going to move up, this is an opportunity to go for it that he might not get for a long time.

 

[erowe1]

Agreed. The risk/reward factor for this isn't on Amash's side. He's got a nice spot in the House and with time can move up the ladder. We give him a few dozen more allies over the next two election cycles and he could very well be in a leadership position. Winning the MI Senate seat is such a long shot.

I'd say Amash winning this senate seat is a lot less of a long shot than giving him a few dozen more allies in the House over the next two election cycles is.

 

[TCE]

It's been proven over time. The Liberty Movement can handle one big undertaking, such as a Senate seat, per cycle, tops. If this is what we're going with, it's time to forget about South Carolina, Kentucky, and all of those other open/competitive seats. Pete Hoekstra raised over $5 million just to get destroyed by Debbie Stabenow: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Michigan,_2012 This will take AT LEAST $5 million, probably more, to win. Is the support there? Does Amash actually have a chance if he does get the money? We will find out in the coming months.

 

[TCE]

I'd say Amash winning this senate seat is a lot less of a long shot than giving him a few dozen more allies in the House over the next two election cycles is.

There is a difference between playing the odds and giving up a House seat for the sake of it. It's one thing if he has a strong chance to win the open Senate seat, if he doesn't, then he would be giving up his House seat for no reason. Why go backwards unnecessarily when it took a ton to get him there in the first place?

 

[CaptLouAlbano]

I'd say Amash winning this senate seat is a lot less of a long shot than giving him a few dozen more allies in the House over the next two election cycles is.

How so? You have a 20 point spread to overcome based on Levin's numbers. Conversely, you have a ton of open seats coming up in 2014 for the House. We added a nice group in 2012, and can continue to do so with each subsequent election cycle, as we have CD's across the country that are becoming controlled (at the county level) by libertarian Republicans within county committees.

 

[CaptLouAlbano]

It's been proven over time. The Liberty Movement can handle one big undertaking, such as a Senate seat, per cycle, tops. If this is what we're going with, it's time to forget about South Carolina, Kentucky, and all of those other open/competitive seats. Pete Hoekstra raised over $5 million just to get destroyed by Debbie Stabenow: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Michigan,_2012 This will take AT LEAST $5 million, probably more, to win. Is the support there? Does Amash actually have a chance if he does get the money? We will find out in the coming months.

Right, think of all the push that was done on this site and others for Bills, yet he only raised one million, versus Klobuchar who raised 10 times that amount.

 

[erowe1]

How so? You have a 20 point spread to overcome based on Levin's numbers.

You can't base it on Levin's numbers. Levin was the incumbent senator. This is an open seat. Compare it with the numbers in the 2010 statewide races, which Republicans won.

We added a nice group in 2012, and can continue to do so with each subsequent election cycle, as we have CD's across the country that are becoming controlled (at the county level) by libertarian Republicans within county committees.

We added how many in 2012? 2? 4? Depending who you count. Let's say it's 4 and we repeat that the next two election cycles, that brings his allies in the House up to about 5% of the Republican caucus. He won't be winning a leadership position with that.

 

[CaptLouAlbano]

You can't base it on Levin's numbers. Levin was the incumbent senator. This is an open seat. Compare it with the numbers in the 2010 statewide races, which Republicans won.

Ok I will give you that, but I still see it as a huge obstacle to overcome. Not worth the risk. I personally, cannot justify dumping 2500 bucks into a Senate race that is a long shot. That's why Bills didn't get a dime from me, despite the endorsements he received.

We added how many in 2012? 2? 4? Depending who you count. Let's say it's 4 and we repeat that the next two election cycles, that brings his allies in the House up to about 5% of the Republican caucus. He won't be winning a leadership position with that.

Snowball effect. We have more people getting elected to local committee seats this year than we did last year. Committees are where it all begins, as the committee men and women have the ability to steer hundreds if not thousands of votes to a a particular candidate. If we did 4 this year, we can do 8 to 12 next, and double that in 2016. In addition, the liberty movement grows two ways: one is obviously by electing more of our guys to office, but the second way is by influencing elected officials that are already in office. Many politicians, as you well know, will vote whichever way the wind is blowing. We make sure that the wind is blowing in our direction, and our influence steers the votes of others. Take McConnell in KY for example. Do you honestly think he would have come out in favor of industrial hemp were it not for Rand?

 

[EBounding]

It's been proven over time. The Liberty Movement can handle one big undertaking, such as a Senate seat, per cycle, tops. If this is what we're going with, it's time to forget about South Carolina, Kentucky, and all of those other open/competitive seats. Pete Hoekstra raised over $5 million just to get destroyed by Debbie Stabenow: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Michigan,_2012 This will take AT LEAST $5 million, probably more, to win. Is the support there? Does Amash actually have a chance if he does get the money? We will find out in the coming months.

Pete Hoekstra was awful. Plus he had to fight a somewhat competitive primary and was up against a Dem incumbent. And it's pretty bad when the Dem can run to the right of you since she opposed TARP. And this was all during a Presidential year when Obamanous Prime rolled through again. If the seat wasn't open I would say no way.

If people are comfortable with Justin being the only liberty vote in the House with maybe 5 other people, then he should hold the seat. But I think it's worth the chance. Justin won't only have the support of "Ron Paul people" but also Club for Growth, Tea Party groups and other grassroots activists who are tired of the old guard.

 

[kathy88]

So interesting who the naysayers are on this.

 

[CaptLouAlbano]

So interesting who the naysayers are on this.

It's the issue of picking our battles. For Amash to win MI, he would need to win the primary (which could be costly) and the general (which will be costly). Failing to do either costs him his House seat.

Politics is like business, you have to assess the risk vs. the reward, and the likelihood of achieving the desired outcome. While it would be nice to have Amash win the MI Senate seat, as I assess the situation at hand, I see the likelihood of that being very small. So small, in fact that I would have a very hard time supporting it financially.

Amash is too valuable to lose him to a failed Senate bid. Find me a State Senator in MI that can win statewide, and we very well might have something to support financially. I donate a lot of money every year to campaigns, but even with the 10's of thousands I send out, there still is a limit to what I spend - just like every other financial decision, I have to assess whether or not my money is well spent. As I mentioned I didn't give a dime to Bills, even though I thought he was a great candidate. He just had ZERO chance of winning, so why spend the money on him, when I could instead give it to another candidate that could actually use that money to produce results.

And of course, we have no idea if Amash is even considering running for the seat. His people, are likely doing the very same thing - assessing the risk vs the reward, and basing their decision on that information and data.

 

[supermario21]

To be honest, the pulpit of a Senate seat is worth at least 20 house seats. Look at what Rand Paul (and Mike Lee and yes, Ted Cruz) was able to achieve. Also, since Michigan will be on paper a longer shot than say an Iowa, we might as well go for it there. It will be easier to get our guy in Michigan than probably going through a bloody primary in Iowa for example. Let the establishment focus on flipping seats in AR, IA, WV, SD, and MT, and AL (sorry but Joe Miller is a damaged good) and we can focus on Amash, Brannon, and whoever primaries Lindsey.

 

[roho76]

Karl Frisch ‏@KarlFrisch
Sen. Levin (D-MI) is retiring. Let's Draft @JenGranholm! #DraftGranholm2014


After reading this, I want Amash. He could beat Granholm, she was the worst governor.

OMG!!! NO!!!!!!

This must be prevented at all costs!!!​

 

[roho76]

Senator Granholm sounds good enough to me.

much better than Levin and all the Repubs likely to run.

 

[roho76]

1) A lot of those elections were Levin winning reelection. Incumbent senators tend to get reelected, whatever their party is, whatever state they're in, and the longer they're there, the easier it usually is to keep winning.
2) In all statewide elections in recent years, Republicans and Democrats have both won a lot and lost a lot.
3) It seems like you want Amash to stay in the House forever. If he's going to move up, this is an opportunity to go for it that he might not get for a long time.

Exactly. Levin also was first elected in a time that MI went through a very tough time. He assumed office in the height of the oil crisis of the late 70's and early 80's. Big time for Dems in MI. I think that's changed and a R can easily win.

 

[KingNothing]

Oh please. MI will never, ever send a small government conservative to the US senate so get over it.

Anything could happen. Especially when an honest, intelligent, man has the financial support of a motivated Libertarian/Conservative base that spreads all across the nation.

Most people in America are not Progressives, or Neocons, or Tea Partiers, or voting Democrats or voting Republicans. Most people either don't vote, or only show up to cast a ballot when they have a chance to do so for person they like and trust most. With money, honesty, charm, money, money, intelligence, more money, and money, why couldn't Amash win Levin's seat?

 

[CaptLouAlbano]

At the risk of veering slightly off topic, I think the liberty movement as a whole needs to work on building the farm team at the state level, as opposed to using the House as a means to "promote" someone to the Senate.

I am, and have always been, a big supporter of the repeal of the 17th Amendment. And while that issue is far from being one that is on the table at this time, as a movement, we can at least put that somewhat into practice by having our candidates for US Senate come from the state legislature. It's one of the reasons, I am very pleased to see Bright possibly going after Graham in SC instead of someone like Mick Mulvaney.

 

[Uriah]

Agreed. The risk/reward factor for this isn't on Amash's side. He's got a nice spot in the House and with time can move up the ladder. We give him a few dozen more allies over the next two election cycles and he could very well be in a leadership position. Winning the MI Senate seat is such a long shot. Levin has been retaining his seat by 20+ points and will likely campaign for the Dem nominee.

The Liberty Movement needs to choose its battles wisely. A third of the Senate will be up for grabs in 2014, there will be plenty of races where we will be competitive and have a realistic shot at winning the seat. Amash should stay put and keep building the coalition in the House.

Now, if you have a libertarian conservative in the MI state senate that can take a run at the seat, I am all for it. But there's little, if any reason, to put Amash up for the seat.

When exactly is a good time to move up the ladder?

If a Democrat takes the seat in 2014 it will be much harder to win later. Are you banking on Sen. Stabenow retiring soon? Are you certain we can give him a few more dozen allies in the house?

A few dozen, so something like 36-60 within two elections cycles. Sounds great but what districts are you talking about and who will run for those seats? How many incumbents will be challenged? It is true that Levin has been winning by large margins. But he is an incumbent with a large political machine behind him. This Senate seat will be open.

As to winning Senate seats elsewhere, can you be specific? Iowa for instance, has a great grassroots base, but as an Iowan I know we do not have a high caliber liberty candidate to win the US Senate, especially if Steve King runs. If Steve King announces then mark Iowa off of you list.

Your advice is supported more by speculation than fact.

 

[KingNothing]

Opportunities multiply as they are seized. Will we ever have a better opportunity than this?