Senate and House of Representatives

[jdobbin]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20477656/

For the Republicans the 2008 numbers look daunting: there are 22 Republican-held seats to be defended, and six of them appear in jeopardy — not including, at this point, that of Sen. Larry Craig of Idaho.

The news Monday that Craig pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct charges stemming from a restroom incident at the Minneapolis airport is significant in the context of what is shaping up as an abysmal year for GOP Senate hopes.

If Craig’s arrest makes the Idaho race competitive, Republicans will need to spend some money in Idaho that they’d counted on spending in what had until now been more pressing races for the GOP, such as those of Sen. Susan Collins in Maine and Sen. Norm Coleman in Minnesota.

It looks like some of the Senators running will be in states that have gone Democrat in recent years.

Could the Senate go filibuster free for the first time since Carter?

[richardson]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20477656/

It looks like some of the Senators running will be in states that have gone Democrat in recent years.

Could the Senate go filibuster free for the first time since Carter?

I doubt it. There is much that can happen before the elections and some people may not get what they wish for. The Democrats are making too many mistakes, the economy is going well and many people will end up being suprised when the war in Iraq starts turning around.

Mike Richardson

forums.resourcesforattorneys.com

Edited September 3, 2007 by richardson

[jdobbin]

I doubt it. There is much that can happen before the elections and some people may not get what they wish for. The Democrats are making too many mistakes, the economy is going well and many people will end up being suprised when the war in Iraq starts turning around.

You must be reading some other news about Iraq that I'm not.

This week the Republicans had two senior Senators announce they are stepping down. One of the seats is probably difficult to win under the best of circumstances, the other is not.

[Guest American Woman]

You must be reading some other news about Iraq that I'm not.

You said exactly what I was thinking. The war in Iraq turning around? That would be much more than a surprise.

Also, from what I've been reading, health care is a major concern for the 2008 election. As for all those mistakes Democrats are making-- a couple of examples would be nice.

Edited September 3, 2007 by American Woman

[bush_cheney2004]

Also, from what I've been reading, health care is a major concern for the 2008 election. As for all those mistakes Democrats are making-- a couple of examples would be nice.

Too funny....the first big mistake the Democrats made was continued funding for the war in Iraq! Beating the Republicans in 2008 is still uncertain because the Dems always find a way to screw it up with internecine squabbling.

[jdobbin]

You said exactly what I was thinking. The war in Iraq turning around? That would be much more than a surprise.

Also, from what I've been reading, health care is a major concern for the 2008 election. As for all those mistakes Democrats are making-- a couple of examples would be nice.

I think the latest snag in Iraq is the British leaving Basra. One U.S. general had harsh criticism of the British over that. A former British general blasted right back.

This week the Democrats stood back and let the Republicans pile up on one of their own.

[Guest American Woman]

I think the latest snag in Iraq is the British leaving Basra. One U.S. general had harsh criticism of the British over that. A former British general blasted right back.

This week the Democrats stood back and let the Republicans pile up on one of their own.

Only time will tell what's going to happen in Basra. Sounds as if the British felt it was ok to leave, but I'm afraid more violence will erupt.

As for the Republicans-- they sure did pile up on one of their own! I was surprised, actually.

As for the Democrats, John Edwards is looking pretty good these days. He's quietly going about his business, getting the support of some of the big unions in key states. He's not afraid of being liberal, either, so he doesn't seem to be walking that centrist line as much as Obama and Clinton are. He may be the candidate I end up backing.

[richardson]

Only time will tell what's going to happen in Basra. Sounds as if the British felt it was ok to leave, but I'm afraid more violence will erupt.

As for the Republicans-- they sure did pile up on one of their own! I was surprised, actually.

As for the Democrats, John Edwards is looking pretty good these days. He's quietly going about his business, getting the support of some of the big unions in key states. He's not afraid of being liberal, either, so he doesn't seem to be walking that centrist line as much as Obama and Clinton are. He may be the candidate I end up backing.

1. The British left the city of Basra not the area. They have not called back their troups and can be back in Basra, if needed, withing hours if not minutes.

2. A Senator, who if innocent, that is dumb enough to plead guilty to a lessor charge hoping everything will go away is too dumb to be one of anyone's own. If he was guilty then he does not deserve to call himself a Republican. Either way he proved that he is not worthy of representing the Republican Party. Republican voters have higher standards than Democrats and we expect our representatives to maintain those standards. If they don't we don't try to cover for them.

3. John Edwards is one of the mistakes I was writing about earlier. He has moved so far to the left that he is alienating the entire center and right of the United States. He may make the Democratic party far left base happy, but what about everyone else. I don't believe that you can win an election appealing to only one section of the population. The odds of Edwards winning a national election are about the same as the odds of Duncan Hunter or Tom Tancredo winning. Edwards is too far to the left and Duncan and Tancredo are both too far to the right.

Mike Richardson

forums.resourcesforattorneys.com

Edited September 3, 2007 by richardson

[jdobbin]

1. The British left the city of Basra not the area. They have not called back their troups and can be back in Basra, if needed, withing hours if not minutes.

2. A Senator, who if innocent, that is dumb enough to plead guilty to a lessor charge hoping everything will go away is too dumb to be one of anyone's own. If he was guilty then he does not deserve to call himself a Republican. Either way he proved that he is not worthy of representing the Republican Party. Republican voters have higher standards than Democrats and we expect our representatives to maintain those standards. If they don't we don't try to cover for them.

So if the troops do have to go back to Basra, that would be considered another setback in Iraq?

It seems some Republicans had known that Foley was inappropriate but did nothing about it until it exploded on them. Some Republicans are saying that Craig should fight and stay on. Guess some Republicans don't think he is dumb enough.

Edited September 3, 2007 by jdobbin

[Guest American Woman]

Republican voters have higher standards than Democrats....

Yeah, right.

[jdobbin]

Yeah, right.

Here is a list of Republican scandals in this year alone.

http://senate2008guru.blogspot.com/2007/08...ption-2007.html

Does it seem like there's a new Republican scandal in the news every single week? Well, that may be because there is:

January 23, 2007: Republican radio personality Scott Eller Cortelyou of Denver arrested on suspicion of using the Internet to lure a child into a sexual relationship

January 29, 2007: Republican former Jefferson County, Colorado, Treasurer Mark Paschall indicted on two felony charges "in connection with an allegation that Paschall solicited a kickback from a bonus he awarded one of his employees"

January 31, 2007: Republican Congressman Gary Miller is named by Republicans as ranking member of oversight subcommittee of House Financial Services Committee despite the FBI's investigation into his land deals

February 14, 2007: Major Republican fundraiser Brent Wilkes and former CIA executive director Kyle "Dusty" Foggo are indicted by a grandy jury for corrupting CIA contracts

February 16, 2007: Major Republican donor Abdul Tawala Ibn Ali Alishtari, aka Michael Mixon, is indicted in federal court on charges of providing material support to terrorists

March 5, 2007: Ethics complaint filed against Republican Senator Pete Domenici for his role in the Attorney Purge scandal

March 6, 2007: I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney found guilty of obstruction of justice and perjury

March 8, 2007: Republican former U.S. Congressman and Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich admits to extramarital affair

March 23, 2007: Former Deputy Interior Secretary J. Steven Griles, an oil and gas lobbyist who became an architect of George W. Bush's energy policies, pleads guilty to obstructing justice by lying to a Senate committee...

Etc. It goes every week until last week.

[jdobbin]

Hagel to retire and not run again next election.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20654184/

Sen. Chuck Hagel is set to announce Monday that he is retiring from the Senate and that he won’t join the race for the White House in 2008, the Omaha World-Herald newspaper reported on its Web site Friday night, citing “people close” to the Republican from Nebraska.

The newspaper reported that Hagel told Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of his decision on Friday morning. The Nebraskan’s staff learned of the decision Friday afternoon, the World-Herald reported.

Hagel, 60, was first elected to the U.S. Senate in 1996 and would be up for reelection in 2008.

It looks like another seat that the Republicans will be struggling to hold.

[bush_cheney2004]

It looks like another seat that the Republicans will be struggling to hold.

As opposed to the Democrats "struggling" to win?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unite...s_from_Nebraska

[jdobbin]

Charlie Cook looks at Republican Senate prospects.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20727165/

First there are the open seats. The first retirement was that of GOP Sen. Wayne Allard in Colorado, a state that once tilted Republican but has been edging closer and closer toward Democrats. While former Rep. Bob Schaffer might be able to hold the seat for Republicans in fending off Democratic Rep. Mark Udall, the odds look worse than 50-50.

Right before Labor Day, Republican Sen. John Warner of Virginia announced he was retiring, and the conventional wisdom is that popular former Democratic Gov. Mark Warner will announce his candidacy this week.

Mark Warner would be considered an almost prohibitive favorite over another former governor, Republican Jim Gilmore, who left the job somewhat inauspiciously. A much more competitive race could be waged by GOP Rep. Tom Davis, who could cut into growing Democratic margins in Northern Virginia and the Tidewater region.

A possible GOP fight over whether to have a convention or a primary (a decision the state party makes) and then another fight between Davis and Gilmore would waste time and resources in a state that has become more mid-Atlantic than Southern.

The state GOP will have to choose between their hearts (Gilmore) or their heads (Davis), and the answer is far from clear.

Now comes the most recent GOP retirement -- Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel. Jon Bruning, the state's Republican attorney general, entered the race long before Hagel's Monday announcement, and the GOP field is likely to grow.

The $64,000 question is whether former Democratic Sen. Bob Kerrey runs. Kerrey, president of the New School in New York City, conducted a poll several months ago and is said to be undecided but seriously looking at the race. Kerrey would be the best shot for Democrats, but there are other reputable potential contenders, including Omaha Mayor Mike Fahey, waiting in the wings should Kerrey decline to enter the fray.

Imagine Bob Kerry coming back to the Senate. Looks like Nebraska will be a real fight this election.

[jdobbin]

Another Republican Senator announces he won't be seeking re-election.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/07/us/07dem...amp;oref=slogin

The announcement by Senator Pete V. Domenici of New Mexico that he has a progressive brain disease and will not seek re-election has left unanswered questions about how the illness is affecting him and whether it could interfere with his plans to remain in the Senate until his current term expires in January 2009.

Mr. Domenici, who is 75 and in his sixth term, revealed on Thursday that he had frontotemporal lobar degeneration, a term that describes a family of diseases that damage parts of the brain that control language, behavior, planning, organizing, decision-making and movement. Patients can have either speech problems or behavioral ones, or both, and the symptoms can vary from subtle to flagrant. There is no treatment or cure. The cause is not known, though in about 40 percent of cases, there is a family history of it.

Pete Domenici's condition sounds quite serious.

[bush_cheney2004]

Another Republican Senator announces he won't be seeking re-election.

Pete Domenici's condition sounds quite serious.

Ya think? I guess the old republic will have to muddle through somehow!

[jdobbin]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21973397/

Pascagoula, Mississippi - Mississippi Sen. Trent Lott, the Senate's No. 2 Republican, announced Monday he will retire from the Senate by end of year.

"It's time for us to do something else," Lott said, speaking for himself and his wife Tricia at a news conference.

Lott, 66, said he had notified President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour on Sunday about his plans. Barbour, a Republican, will name someone to temporarily replace Lott.

"There are no problems. I feel fine," Lott said.

Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl, who helped broker a bipartisan immigration bill that went down to defeat this year despite President Bush's support for it, will run to replace Lott as the Republicans' vote-counting whip, said spokesman Ryan Patmintra.

The seat is not likely to go Democrat. It just becomes another seat where they have to place resources in to win.

[jdobbin]

Another election of a Democrat in a key Republican riding helps the Democrats pad their majority for a few months.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24605489/

Mississippi Democrat Travis Childers won a special election to Congress on Tuesday, helping his party to a third victory in recent months for seats long in Republican hands.

The victory puts Childers into the seat vacated by Roger Wicker, a Republican appointed to the U.S. Senate when Trent Lott resigned. The win also pushes the Democrats to a 236-199 majority in Congress — if only for a few months until November's general elections.

Even some Democrats expressed surprise tonight about the win.

Edited May 14, 2008 by jdobbin

[jdobbin]

MSNBC Muses about whether there are any safe seats left for Republicans.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24613179/

Stunning? Only if you haven’t been paying attention in recent weeks.

Sickening? Yes, if you are a Republican.

That about sums up Tuesday night in Mississippi’s First Congressional district.

I wonder what other Republican seats are likely to fall.

[BubberMiley]

Given their troubles getting people out to vote, getting money, and the overall lack of enthusiasm for their candidate, this is shaping up to be a dark year for the GOP.

[jdobbin]

Given their troubles getting people out to vote, getting money, and the overall lack of enthusiasm for their candidate, this is shaping up to be a dark year for the GOP.

One of the articles said it might not get as bad as 1983 for them in Congress but it is hard to see where the bottom is.

I have heard some Republican commentators dismiss the recent victories as something likely to be overturned in the next election. We'll see. That could be just brave talk.

I've heard some posters in the past here stating that it doesn't matter if the Democrats win big this election. Okay. Let's hope they win big.

Edited May 15, 2008 by jdobbin

[bush_cheney2004]

...I've heard some posters in the past here stating that it doesn't matter if the Democrats win big this election. Okay. Let's hope they win big.

We're still waiting for those "big changes" after the "big" 2006 mid-term wins.

[BubberMiley]

We're still waiting for those "big changes" after the "big" 2006 mid-term wins.

Wait till next year, when Obama is president and there is a larger majority in the House and Senate.

[bush_cheney2004]

Wait till next year, when Obama is president and there is a larger majority in the House and Senate.

OK...we'll wait for the big changes that are not coming (again). Obama is a junior senator...not Abe Lincoln.

[jdobbin]

Wait till next year, when Obama is president and there is a larger majority in the House and Senate.

It seems the argument being made here is that at least one Republican has no real fears about more Democrats in Congress. Perhaps that feeling will extend to the Presidency too.

Afterall, there doesn't seem to be any fear of big changes.

Edited May 15, 2008 by jdobbin