#mo udall

[politicaldilfs]

Vintage athletes-turned-politicians.

[wanderingmind867]

I don't know if this is readable (since i got it by screenshotting the comic) but this was one of the special things at the back of the masterwork: a magazine put together limericks for every candidate in 1976 election, and then endorsed Howard the Duck.

[play-now-my-lord]

if mo udall or jerry brown had won the 1976 democratic presidential primary instead of jimmy carter, the participants in "Disco Demolition Night" would have been rounded up and shot. The development of phonk from the Memphis hip-hop scene would have been immediate and explosive and by the 2020s the DJs of Post-America would have access to cuts and beats that could cause instant ejaculation or death

[deadpresidents]

What do you mean when you said Carter faced a "historically weak group of challengers" in 76?

Quite simply, Jimmy Carter got lucky when it came to his opposition for the Democratic Presidential nomination in 1976 because the biggest potential Democratic candidates chose not to run that year.

It's difficult now to understand how little-known Carter was when he decided to run for President in 1976. He had served a single term as Governor of Georgia and had almost zero national name recognition. So, he was very fortunate that the biggest names in the Democratic Party decided against running for various reasons. Chappaquiddick was still too fresh for Ted Kennedy to make his long-awaited bid for the White House that year. George McGovern had lost one of the biggest landslides in American history to Richard Nixon four years earlier. Senator Edmund Muskie of Maine and New York City Mayor John Lindsay were much bigger names than Carter, but also decided against running. Former Vice President Hubert H. Humphrey considered jumping in the race for months, but ultimately decided against it, probably because he was dying of cancer. If any of those five Democrats had been in the race, they almost certainly would have been favored over Carter.

It's not fair to suggest that luck alone elected Carter. He ran an excellent campaign, and he was the first Democrat to jump in the race, so he gave himself plenty of time to introduce himself to the country -- which was necessary because, again, nobody outside of Georgia knew who he was! And his timing worked out perfectly because as the more-and-more potential heavyweight Democratic contenders decided against running, Carter was seen as an honest and appealing outsider who could bring a fresh approach to Washington.

But the field of candidates who did eventually seek the Democratic nomination in 1976 is so weak that a lot of people today probably don't even know who most of them were. I mean, one of the candidates who went into the 1976 Democratic National Convention was the notorious racist and Alabama Governor George C. Wallace! The best-known of Carter's 1976 Democratic opponents was Jerry Brown, who was in his first term as Governor of California and just 38 years old at the time, and he started to gain some real momentum in the campaign. However, Brown jumped in the race way too late and didn't have enough time to capture enough delegates before the Convention.

Other than Brown and Wallace, though, Carter's main opponents for the Democratic nomination in 1976 were Arizona Congressman Mo Udall, Senator Frank Church of Idaho, Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson of Washington, Senator Birch Bayh of Indiana, anti-abortion advocate Ellen McCormack, former Senator Fred R. Harris of Oklahoma, and Governor Milton Shapp of Pennsylvania. If I told you I made up six of those people, would you be shocked? But I didn't! That was the Democratic field in 1976!

[midwesternartlovertraveler]

There has been either a Lee or Udall in Congress since the 1950s.

Udall and Lee relatives often wave off comparisons to the Kennedys, Bushes, Roosevelts, or Dingells. Former U.S. Sen. Mark Udall, of Colorado, once recalled his aunt summing up such comparisons this way: “The Kennedys are wealthy, Catholic New Englanders; the Udalls are poor, Mormon dirt farmers from the West.”

For better or for worse, those “dirt farmers” have had an outsized economic and environmental impact on the West, and observers say their public service the past seven decades is felt today in the White House, Congress, the Supreme Court and throughout the nation.

[degraziagalleryinthesun]

“Ted DeGrazia, my friend of many years, understands this land and it’s people as no one else in our time. His paintings captured and portrayed the spirit and uniqueness of the Sonoran desert areas.” –Mo Udall (Member of Congress AZ)

[somethingusefulfromflorida]

Alternate Cold War Elections

Democratic Presidential Nominees

1960: John F. Kennedy/Lyndon B. Johnson

1964: John F. Kennedy/Lyndon B. Johnson

1968: Lyndon B. Johnson/Hubert Humphrey

1972: Lyndon B. Johnson/Hubert Humphrey

1976: Hubert Humphrey/Fred Harris

1980: Ted Kennedy/Mo Udall

1984: Gary Hart/Jesse Jackson

1988: Gary Hart/Jesse Jackson

1992: Jesse Jackson/Al Gore

Republican Presidential Nominees

1960: Richard Nixon/Henry Cabot Lodge Jr

1964: Barry Goldwater/William E. Miller

1968: Nelson Rockefeller/Ronald Reagan

1972: Ronald Reagan/George Romney

1976: Ronald Reagan/Bob Dole

1980: Ronald Reagan/Bob Dole

1984: Bob Dole/George Bush

1988: Pat Robertson/Pat Buchanan

1992: Ted Stevens/Pat Saiki

1960 occurs as it did in our timeline, but 1964 sees Kennedy survive his assassination attempt and win re-election against segregationist and father of modern conservatism Barry Goldwater.

1968 sees Vice President Johnson as the front runner following the assassination of the president’s brother and Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy. Johnson still picks Hubert Humphrey as his running mate in this timeline as he did in our 1964, because Humphrey was a civil rights activist and father of modern liberalism (he’d be a progressive today, but in the 60s that was seen as a Republican term because of Teddy Roosevelt). Because Kennedy is still alive, Richard Nixon doesn’t stand a chance at securing renomination; he won in our 1968 because he positioned himself as less extreme than loser Goldwater, but in this timeline it would be a close race between moderate governor Nelson Rockefeller of New York and conservative governor Ronald Reagan of California. Rockefeller would probably pick Reagan as his VP to balance the ticket, east and west, liberal and conservative, while in our timeline the non-extremist but still conservative Nixon chose moderate governor Spiro Agnew of Massachusetts. Rockefeller/Reagan loses because Johnson’s messaging is clear (liberal), while Rockefeller’s is muddled (mixed ticket).

1972 sees Johnson and Humphrey narrowly win re-election because of their handling of the 1969-1970 recession and their promise to end the Vietnam War. Johnson died in 1973 in our timeline, so it’s possible he might bow out and let Humphrey get the nomination in 72, but I think he would be more likely to stay on as president and die in office. Ronald Reagan would be the front runner for the Republicans, and I see him likely winning the popular vote, with moderate governor George Romney of Massachusetts as his running mate. For a long time, Republicans tended to run on split tickets; liberal Eisenhower and conservative Nixon, conservative Nixon and moderate Agnew then moderate Ford, moderate Ford and conservative Dole, conservative Reagan and moderate Bush, years later we saw moderate McCain and conservative Palin, moderate Romney and conservative Ryan. That ship had sailed though, it’ll be noting but conservatives from here on out. But in this version of 72, Reagan plays it safe with moderate Romney (father of Mitt)

1976 sees president Humphrey run for re-election and lose in a landslide to Reagan who was so popular with Republicans that they would nominate him again despite losing. This is what they did to Nixon in our timeline, and it’s what the Democrats did to Adlai Stephenson in the 1950s. At first I thought Humphrey would run with former Georgia governor Jimmy Carter because he needed a moderate southerner to stand a chance, but Carter was not nationally known; he only won our 1976 because he positioned himself as a non-corrupt Washington outsider in the wake of Watergate. No Nixon in this timeline means no Watergate, so no need for Carter to run. Humphrey is super liberal, and he actually considered picking Oklahoma senator Fred Harris as his running mate in our 1968, so I’ll go with him instead. Harris supported Johnson’s Great Society (New Deal 2.0, War on Poverty), but didn’t support his war crimes in Vietnam. He ran himself in 72 and 76, losing both times, so I think he’s the perfect choice for Humphrey’s Vice. Reagan chooses fellow conservative Bob Dole as his VP this time because he figured Romney and the moderates were a liability last time; he goes full conservative (in for a penny in for a pound). I chose Dole because that’s who Gerald Ford picked in our 1976; moderate Ford originally had moderate Rockefeller as his VP, but replaced him with conservative Dole because he didn’t want to alienate conservative voters with a moderate/liberal Republican ticket against the moderate/liberal Democratic ticket of Carter and Mondale.

1980 would be much closer in this timeline than in ours. The economic policies that made Reagan king of the 80s make him royal fool of the 70s. The 1980 recession is seen as his fault instead of Carter’s, he pushes for wars against Iran after the revolution and the Soviets after they invade Afghanistan, which are unpopular so soon after Vietnam. Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts, brother of the still alive former president John F. Kennedy, is the frontrunner for the Democrats, and he picks representative Mo Udall as his VP. Udall was super liberal and the frontrunner in our 1976, only losing because Carter had less baggage; he would have been the first sitting representative to be elected president since James A. Garfield in 1880. When Kennedy challenged Carter in the 1980 primaries, Udall was his main supporter, so it makes sense for her to unite in this version of 1980. I think Reagan would win because he has a slight incumbency advantage, but it’s nowhere near the landslide of his 84 re-election in our timeline. I expect he would be impeached by House Democrats over his dealings with Iran and the Mujahideen in Afghanistan; in this timeline there was no Watergate, so this would become the defining scandal of the 20th century. Reagan wouldn’t resign because he was too proud and figures he had enough support to survive impeachment; he’s probably right, becoming the second president to be impeached and acquired after Andrew Johnson in 1868. But this means he is reviled by both parties after leaving office, going down in history as a middling-to-bad president like Nixon or George W. Bush

Senator Gary Hart of Colorado was a frontrunner in both 84 (losing to the late VP Walter Mondale, liberal protege of Hubert Humphrey), and 88 (dropping out of the race because of reports of an extramarital affair). Without Mondale as a challenger, he would win the 84 nomination hands down. I have him pick Reverend Jesse Jackson as his running mate to mirror our Mondale’s choice of Geraldine Ferraro. Ferraro would have been the first female VP, and Jackson would become the first black VP. After the economic collapse brought on by the scandal plagued Reagan administration, the Democrats were all but guaranteed to win back the White House as they did in our 76. Reagan’s VP Dole would be the front runner, and he would go back to the split ticket strategy, picking moderate CIA director George Bush as his running mate. Bush was the frontrunner in our 80 because he was the most experienced candidate with the highest qualifications, a foreign policy expert who lost to Reagan because he was REALLY boring. Regan picked him as VP to unite the party’s wings, so I can see Dole trying that here.

Side note: President Hart would have a very different relationship with Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher of the UK (if the Conservative Party was still in power in this timeline; they won in part because Democrat Carter was a terrible president, making their UK analog Labour Party look bad). In our timeline, Obama chose Hart as Envoy to Northern Ireland (like an ambassador, but Northern Ireland isn’t an independent country), so this Hart would be integral in opposing Thatcher’s death squads, helping to ease tensions during the Troubles

1988 sees Hart/Jackson re-elected, though his affair might become an analog to Clinton’s Lewinski Scndal, leading to the Republican Revolution in the 80s instead of the 90s. Reagan would be redeemed in the eyes of conservatives, and the Democratic sex scandal would lead them to pick another far-right evangelical as their nominee, televangelist Pat Robertson, who came in third in the Republican primaries in our 88 against VP Bush and senator Dole. No Bush and no Dole means Robertson is the frontrunner, and I figure he’d pick equally conservative columnist Pat Buchanan as his VP; Buchanan challenged Bush from the right in the 92 primaries, winning nearly a quarter of the vote (for the record, most incumbents run unopposed). Robertson and Buchanan are both non-politicians, so think of them as Double Trump.

1992, VP Jesse Jackson would be the frontrunner for the Democrats, though challenged from the right by moderate governor Bill Clinton of Arkansas. I think Jackson would get the nomination, but I don’t know if he would win because of conservative opposition to the super liberal Hart administration; it would be like Al Gore’s race in the 2000, with everybody comparing him to the divisive Clinton. Jackson would stand a better chance than Gore though because he would make history as the first black presidential nominee, a proto-Obama. A Midwesterner, I figure he’d want to distance himself from westerner Hart by picking a southerner like Clinton, though Clinton would reject him because he wants the top spot, not the #2. He might then go for governor Douglas Wilder of Virginia, the first black governor since reconstruction, though having two black candidates on the same ticket would be a pipe dream in the 90s. He would probably end up with senator Al Gore, just like our Clinton; Gore chose not to run for president in 92 because his son had been hit by a car, which wouldn’t happen in this timeline because of the butterfly effect. Republicans in our timeline rallied behind senate majority leader Bob Dole; if he were VP under Reagan and the failed nominee in 84, they would probably gather around Ted Stevens of Alaska instead. Stevens was the Republican whip (#2) and frontrunner for majority leader in 1995 before narrowly losing to Dole, so he would probably be leader in this timeline, making him the presidential frontrunner in 96, though he was more moderate because he was personally pro-abortion and eventually pro-environmentalism (conservative Nixon created the EPA, so maybe Stevens would be similar). He might pick Patricia Saiki, former Republican representative from Hawaii, just to create a totally Pacific ticket as a gimmick, as well as nominating the first woman VP like Ferraro in our 84.

I have no clue who would win in this 92. If Jackson, he would run again in 96, but I have no idea who against. If Stevens, he would run again in 96 against Bill Clinton; Clinton was like Reagan, extremely ambitious, he would not stop until he took the White House.

I’m open to suggestions going forward from here. 1992 largely depends on whether or not Ross Perot runs as an independent and gains as much traction as he did in our timeline. Most third party candidates have either no national appeal or exclusively regional appeal, but Perot was a legitimate contender, qualifying for debates with Bush and Clinton and eventually winning nearly a fifth of the popular vote. It would also depend more on the Cold War; without Reagan in the 80s, US-Soviet relations would be very different, and there’s no guarantee that the USSR would collapse. The Berlin Wall would definitely fall, but I don’t know what 1991 would look like in this alternate Russia.

What do you guys think?

[whatdoesshedotothem]

Wed[nesday] 8 May 1833

5 3/4

12 1/4

Vc

F[ahrenheit] 67° at 5 3/4 and ver[y] fine morn[in]g - ver[y] hot - at my desk at 7 - wr[ote] and finish[e]d

Let[ter] to M- [Mariana] - ver[y] near[l]y 3 p[ages]  somehow did not write readily - kind let[ter] of condol[en]ce

writ[in]g on the melanch[ol]y subj[ec]t ‘I can scarce[l]y wr[ite] of an[y]th[in]g else - b[u]t you will be gl[a]d to

‘hear, I like the looks of Thom[a]s, and hope and th[in]k he is ver[y] like[l]y to be the sort of serv[an]t I want

‘one for wh[o]m I shall forev[e]r rem[em]b[e]r my obligat[io]n to you - I shall be anx[iou]s for you to

‘see Eugénie - She nev[e]r wore a cap in her life - I f[ou]nd it will n[o]t do to ta[ke] h[e]r to Langt[o]n

‘w[i]thout one - I am cert[ainl]y n[o]t disap[pointe]d in her so far - are n[o]t men eas[ie]r to manage th[a]n wom[e]n?

‘at all rates, I am forev[e]r oblig[e]d to you for all the troub[le] you ha[ve] tak[e]n for me - adieu -

‘God bless you, my d[eare]st Mary! Ev[e]r ver[y] espec[iall]y and ent[irel]y y[ou]rs AL- [Anne Lister]’ h[a]d Eugénie at 9 -

and young Parsons to cut and dress my h[ai]r - d[o]wnst[ai]rs at 11 - Mrs. Ch[arle]s Robins[o]n and lit[tle] Hugh h[a]d just call[e]d

for 10 min[ute]s - br[eak]f[a]st - wr[ote] 2 p[ages] and end to my a[un]t and th[e]n Steph. D[octo]r B- [Belcombe] call[e]d for

1/2 h[ou]r - th[in]ks he c[oul]d manage ab[ou]t Miss W- [Walker] - could have her at Thorparch very comforta

bly fortnight and then see how she was   told him all about the business between π- [Mariana] and me

very good friends   but our ever living together at an end  explained   feared there

might be some pique in her feeling at my three several and serious times preventing her

leaving δ- [Charles Lawton] and some fancies about my better circumstances and society?  he seemed sur

prised and sorry but behaved remarkably well   told him it was all her own doing and how much

I had g[r]ived over it but Charlotte Norcliffe had done me much good she and my aunt the only peop

le besides himself who knew of it  said I should not have thought of this experiment

with Miss W- [Walker] had π- [Mariana] and I been as formerly but no pique certainly on my part but I was dull without

having some interest if Miss W- [Walker] married I would take care she did it nicely and her children

would interest  mentioned π-‘s [Mariana] having asked me to live at Speake  he asked if I

might not sell Shibden if factories increased   No said I not for millions I have

much family pride and sense of duty to my uncle said I should [have] provided more than amply for

π- [Mariana] yes left her a life estate in all I had had she been settled with me but two days  but now as I

could not name her in my will as I should have done formerly I should probably not do it at

all I said she had been more worldly than I ever was in my life and less constant too said I would

rather have Miss W- [Walker]  than someone of higher rank and more worldly if I did not take her might

do worse   he laughed and said you are an odd person too and took his leave th[e]n finish[e]d

the 3[r]d p[age] and wr[ote] one long and finish[e]d my let[ter] to my a[un]t - told h[e]r so th[a]t she, b[u]t nobod[y]else

w[oul]d und[er]st[a]nd, wh[a]t I h[a]d communicat[e]d to D[octo]r B- [Belcombe] on the subj[ec]t of M- [Mariana] b[u]t n[o]t a word of wh[a]t

pass[e]d ab[ou]t Miss W- [Walker]   announc[e]d my agreeab[le] journ[e]y und[e]r 6 h[ou]rs - and ask[e]d for Simmens[o]ns

and col[ou]r of draw[in]g r[oo]m curt[ai]ns to s[e]nd to Kendell for the chiffonier - then wrote to Miss W- [Walker] copied

yesterday from my notebook and wr[ote] so far of today - ‘York. Wed[nesday] 8 May 1833. Th[an]k you ver[y]

‘m[u]ch for y[ou]r let[ter] w[hi]ch I can on[l]y regret w[a]s n[o]t writt[en] in bet[ter] sp[iri]ts - I ha[ve] th[ou]ght oft[e]n, and m[u]ch

‘and anx[iousl]y ab[ou]t you - you told me my last let[ter] w[a]s like a sunbeam - may th[i]s let[ter] be like

‘anoth[e]r sunbeam, and a bright[e]r!  I determ[ine]d n[o]t to wr[ite] till I w[a]s off fr[om] Shibd[e]n, and am now writ[in]g

‘in the ver[y] r[oo]m where you and I were so comf[ortabl]y togeth[e]r in Oct[obe]r - If you c[oul]d recall th[a]t ti[me], w[oul]d you?

 swore Doctor B- [Belcombe] to secrecy both about Miss W- [Walker] and π- [Mariana]

102

1833

May

LL

L

Vc

Vc

‘Consid[e]r four-and-twenty h[ou]rs - judge for yours[self], if you can; if n[o]t, ask y[ou]r sist[e]rs’ adv[i]ce,

‘and ta[ke] it - I still th[in]k th[a]t health and happ[ine]ss are w[i]thin y[ou]r reach, and, as I trust, by mo[re] ways

‘th[a]n one - I ha[ve] seen m[u]ch of y[ou]r a[un]t; and we are s[u]ch good fr[ie]nds, I do n[o]t fancy h[e]r opin[ion]s w[oul]d oppose

‘my own - I go to Langt[o]n tomor[row] (direct to me at Mrs. Norcliffes’, Langton hall, n[ea]r Malt[o]n,

‘Yorksh[i]re) and intend stay[in]g a fortnight; aft[e]r th[a]t, I m[u]st ret[ur]n to Shibd[e]n for 2 or 3 days, and shall

‘th[e]n ma[ke] the best of my way to the cont[inen]t - b[u]t, in the meanti[me], you may accomod[ate] y[ou]r plans to

‘mine, or mine to yours, if you please - I told you at part[in]g, th[a]t I w[oul]d meet you

‘on y[ou]r ret[ur]n, if you wish[e]d it - If you ha[ve] energy en[ou]gh to determ[ine], I will ta[ke] you up

‘at y[ou]r sist[e]rs’ own door at Udale ; and, as, dur[in]g the pres[en]t build[in]g operat[io]ns, it is

‘imposs[ible] to accom[oda]te extra peop[le], I c[oul]d, or, rath[er] I mean we c[oul]d, sleep at Inverness - I

‘th[in]k you w[oul]d like Eugénie, and f[ou]nd my man-serv[an]t all we want[e]d - If you dare gi[ve] a

‘fair trail, I am sanguine as ev[e]r ab[ou]t y[ou]r entire recov[er]y - wr[ite] in ans[we]r wh[a]tev[e]r

‘you th[in]k best; b[u]t wr[ite] it soon - Rouse yours[elf] whi[le] there is yet ti[me] - rememb[e]r th[a]t the

‘sun is ris[in]g so[me]whi[le] bef[ore] we see h[i]m, and th[a]t when hum[a]n ills seem w[i]thout remedy,

‘it is n[o]t bec[ause] th[a]t remedy really fails to exist, b[u]t simp[l]y bec[ause] we kno[w] n[o]t how to f[i]nd it -

‘my k[i]nd reg[ar]ds to y[ou]r sist[e]r, and Capt[ai]n Suth[erlan]d; and, be y[ou]r ans[we]r to my let[ter] wh[a]t it may. bel[ieve]

‘me ev[e]r sincere[l]y interest[e]d in y[ou]r welfare, and ev[e]r faith[full]y and affect[ionatel]y y[ou]rs AL- [Anne Lister]

‘am I n[o]t to ha[ve] the kneecaps?’ at 3 55/.. s[e]nt off my let[ter]s to my a[un]t Shibd[e]n, and to M- [Mariana] Lawt[o]n

hall, Lawt[o]n, Cheshire’ and to ‘Miss Walker, at Capt[ai]n Sutherlands’ of Udale Fortrose Ross-shire’

out at 4 5/.. - took Eugénie and b[ou]ght slippers, and silk for dress at Hudsons’, etc and th[e]n took h[e]r to Mrs. Belcombe’s

for Mrs. Milne and Charlotte to see - 1/2 h[ou]r in the minst[e]r court - th[e]n across the wat[e]r to the Duffins’ - 3/4 h[ou]r

and d[i]d n[o]t vent[u]re to go and see her - call[e]d on Mrs. Anne and Miss Gage - at din[ner] so ca[me] away - din[ner] at the hot[e]l

at 6 1/4 in 1/2 h[ou]r - at the Belcombe’s at 7 20/.. to go w[i]th Mrs. Milne to the amateur concert - tremend[ousl]y hot -

Miss Belco[mbe] and Miss Greenup and Miss Bagshaw and Hamlyn and Ch[arle]s Milne of the p[ar]ty - Mrs. Milne and I left th[e]m and walk[e]d

1/2 h[ou]r tow[ar]ds Monk bar - tea and sp[en]t the ev[enin]g at Mrs. Belco[mbe]s’ and ho[me] at 11 10/.. -wr[ote] the last 9 lines  ver[y] fine

day - ver[y] m[u]ch cool[e]r th[i]s ev[enin]g F[ahrenheit] 66 1/2° at 11 1/4 p.m.

[zekedms]

Votes to confirm or deny Amy Comey Barrett’s nomination to the Supreme Court

YEAs ---55

Alexander (R-TN) Barrasso (R-WY) Blunt (R-MO) Boozman (R-AR) Burr (R-NC) Capito (R-WV) Cassidy (R-LA) Cochran (R-MS) Collins (R-ME) Corker (R-TN) Cornyn (R-TX) Cotton (R-AR) Crapo (R-ID) Cruz (R-TX) Daines (R-MT) Donnelly (D-IN) Enzi (R-WY) Ernst (R-IA) Fischer (R-NE) Flake (R-AZ) Gardner (R-CO) Graham (R-SC) Grassley (R-IA) Hatch (R-UT) Heller (R-NV) Hoeven (R-ND) Inhofe (R-OK) Isakson (R-GA) Johnson (R-WI) Kaine (D-VA) Kennedy (R-LA) Lankford (R-OK) Lee (R-UT) Manchin (D-WV) McCain (R-AZ) McConnell (R-KY) Moran (R-KS) Murkowski (R-AK) Paul (R-KY) Perdue (R-GA) Portman (R-OH) Risch (R-ID) Roberts (R-KS) Rounds (R-SD) Rubio (R-FL) Sasse (R-NE) Scott (R-SC) Shelby (R-AL) Strange (R-AL) Sullivan (R-AK) Thune (R-SD) Tillis (R-NC) Toomey (R-PA) Wicker (R-MS) Young (R-IN)

NAYs ---43

Baldwin (D-WI) Bennet (D-CO) Blumenthal (D-CT) Booker (D-NJ) Brown (D-OH) Cantwell (D-WA) Cardin (D-MD) Carper (D-DE) Casey (D-PA) Coons (D-DE) Cortez Masto (D-NV) Duckworth (D-IL) Durbin (D-IL) Feinstein (D-CA) Franken (D-MN) Gillibrand (D-NY) Harris (D-CA) Hassan (D-NH) Heinrich (D-NM) Heitkamp (D-ND) Hirono (D-HI) King (I-ME) Klobuchar (D-MN) Leahy (D-VT) Markey (D-MA) Merkley (D-OR) Murphy (D-CT) Murray (D-WA) Nelson (D-FL) Peters (D-MI) Reed (D-RI) Sanders (I-VT) Schatz (D-HI) Schumer (D-NY) Shaheen (D-NH) Stabenow (D-MI) Tester (D-MT) Udall (D-NM) Van Hollen (D-MD) Warner (D-VA) Warren (D-MA) Whitehouse (D-RI) Wyden (D-OR)

Not Voting - 2

McCaskill (D-MO) Menendez (D-NJ)

55 REPUBLICANS VOTED TO CONFIRM. 0 DEMOCRATS.

THE PARTIES ARE NOT THE SAME.

VOTE.

[guccifloralsuits]

ON THIS PRIDE MONTH PLEASE URGE YOUR SENATOR TO PASS THE EQUALITY ACT

If passed, the Equality Act would ban discrimination on the basis of sexuality. The immediate implication: lgbtq+ people could not be denied service on the basis of who they love. 

You can read the full text of the Equality Act Here. 

Alexander, Lamar - (R - TN): (202) 224-4944 Baldwin, Tammy - (D - WI):  (202) 224-5653 Barrasso, John - (R - WY):  (202) 224-6441 Bennet, Michael F. - (D - CO):  (202) 224-5852 Blackburn, Marsha - (R - TN):  (202) 224-3344 Blumenthal, Richard - (D - CT): (202) 224-2823 Blunt, Roy - (R - MO):  (202) 224-5721 Booker, Cory A. - (D - NJ):  (202) 224-3224 Boozman, John - (R - AR):  (202) 224-4843 Braun, Mike - (R - IN):  (202) 224-4814 Brown, Sherrod - (D - OH):  (202) 224-2315 Burr, Richard - (R - NC):  (202) 224-3154  Cantwell, Maria - (D - WA):  (202) 224-3441 Capito, Shelley Moore - (R - WV):  (202) 224-6472 Cardin, Benjamin L. - (D - MD):  (202) 224-4524 Carper, Thomas R. - (D - DE):  (202) 224-2441 Casey, Robert P., Jr. - (D - PA):  (202) 224-6324 Cassidy, Bill - (R - LA):  (202) 224-5824  Collins, Susan M. - (R - ME):  (202) 224-2523 Coons, Christopher A. - (D - DE): (202) 224-5042 Cornyn, John - (R - TX): (202) 224-2934 Cortez Masto, Catherine - (D - NV):  (202) 224-3542 Cotton, Tom - (R - AR):  (202) 224-2353 Cramer, Kevin - (R - ND):  (202) 224-2043 Crapo, Mike - (R - ID):  (202) 224-6142 Cruz, Ted - (R - TX):  (202) 224-5922 Daines, Steve - (R - MT):  (202) 224-2651 Duckworth, Tammy - (D - IL):  (202) 224-2854 Durbin, Richard J. - (D - IL):  (202) 224-2152 Enzi, Michael B. - (R - WY):  (202) 224-3424 Ernst, Joni - (R - IA):  (202) 224-3254 Feinstein, Dianne - (D - CA):  (202) 224-3841 Fischer, Deb - (R - NE):  (202) 224-6551 Gardner, Cory - (R - CO):  (202) 224-5941 Gillibrand, Kirsten E. - (D - NY):  (202) 224-4451 Graham, Lindsey - (R - SC):  (202) 224-5972 Grassley, Chuck - (R - IA):  (202) 224-3744 Harris, Kamala D. - (D - CA):  (202) 224-3553 Hassan, Margaret Wood - (D - NH): (202) 224-3324 Hawley, Josh - (R - MO):  (202) 224-6154 Heinrich, Martin - (D - NM):  (202) 224-5521  Hirono, Mazie K. - (D - HI):  (202) 224-6361  Hoeven, John - (R - ND):  (202) 224-2551 Hyde-Smith, Cindy - (R - MS):  (202) 224-5054 Inhofe, James M. - (R - OK):  (202) 224-4721  Isakson, Johnny - (R - GA):  (202) 224-3643  Johnson, Ron - (R - WI):   (202) 224-5323 Jones, Doug - (D - AL):  (202) 224-4124  Kaine, Tim - (D - VA):  (202) 224-4024  Kennedy, John - (R - LA):  (202) 224-4623 King, Angus S., Jr. - (I - ME):  (202) 224-5344 Klobuchar, Amy - (D - MN):  (202) 224-3244 Lankford, James - (R - OK):  (202) 224-5754 Leahy, Patrick J. - (D - VT):  (202) 224-4242 Lee, Mike - (R - UT):  (202) 224-5444 Manchin, Joe, III - (D - WV):  (202) 224-3954 Markey, Edward J. - (D - MA):  (202) 224-2742 McConnell, Mitch - (R - KY):  (202) 224-2541 McSally, Martha - (R - AZ):  202-224-2235 Menendez, Robert - (D - NJ):  (202) 224-4744  Merkley, Jeff - (D - OR):  (202) 224-3753 Moran, Jerry - (R - KS):  (202) 224-6521  Murkowski, Lisa - (R - AK):  (202) 224-6665  Murphy, Christopher - (D - CT):  (202) 224-4041  Murray, Patty - (D - WA):  (202) 224-2621  Paul, Rand - (R - KY):  (202) 224-4343 Perdue, David - (R - GA):  (202) 224-3521  Peters, Gary C. - (D - MI):  (202) 224-6221 Portman, Rob - (R - OH):  (202) 224-3353 Reed, Jack - (D - RI):  (202) 224-4642 Risch, James E. - (R - ID):  (202) 224-2752 Roberts, Pat - (R - KS):  (202) 224-4774 Romney, Mitt - (R - UT):  (202) 224-5251 Rosen, Jacky - (D - NV):  (202) 224-6244 Rounds, Mike - (R - SD):  (202) 224-5842 Rubio, Marco - (R - FL):  (202) 224-3041  Sanders, Bernard - (I - VT):  (202) 224-5141  Sasse, Ben - (R - NE):  (202) 224-4224  Schatz, Brian - (D - HI):  (202) 224-3934  Schumer, Charles E. - (D - NY):  (202) 224-6542  Scott, Rick - (R - FL):  (202) 224-5274 Scott, Tim - (R - SC):  (202) 224-6121 Shaheen, Jeanne - (D - NH):  (202) 224-2841 Shelby, Richard C. - (R - AL):  (202) 224-5744 Sinema, Kyrsten - (D - AZ):  (202) 224-4521 Smith, Tina - (D - MN):  (202) 224-5641 Stabenow, Debbie - (D - MI):  (202) 224-4822 Sullivan, Dan - (R - AK):  (202) 224-3004 Tester, Jon - (D - MT):  (202) 224-2644 Thune, John - (R - SD):  (202) 224-2321 Tillis, Thom - (R - NC):  (202) 224-6342 Toomey, Patrick J. - (R - PA):  (202) 224-4254 Udall, Tom - (D - NM):  (202) 224-6621 Van Hollen, Chris - (D - MD):  (202) 224-4654 Warner, Mark R. - (D - VA):  (202) 224-2023 Warren, Elizabeth - (D - MA):  (202) 224-4543 Whitehouse, Sheldon - (D - RI):  (202) 224-2921 Wicker, Roger F. - (R - MS):  (202) 224-6253  Wyden, Ron - (D - OR):  (202) 224-5244  Young, Todd - (R - IN):  (202) 224-5623

What to say: “Hi, my name is ______, my zip code is______. I am calling to urge Senator_____ to vote yes for H.R. 5, the Equality Act. Thank you.”

The opinions stated on this post are mine alone, and do not represent the office I work for. 

[votenet-blog]

Amid today’s polarized politics, McCain tried to remind Americans: 'More unites us than divides us’

Amid today’s polarized politics, McCain tried to remind Americans: ‘More unites us than divides us’

Author: Cokie Roberts / Source: ABC News

John McCain arrived in Washington ready to take on the town. With his hero’s story and honored family, he was one of those few congressional freshmen who automatically attract attention.

He also bucked the political trend, having been elected as a conservative Republican in 1982, a year when 26 of his fellow party members lost their House seats. But…

[theliberaltony]

via Politics – FiveThirtyEight

How much can we learn from early primary polls? Back in 2011, FiveThirtyEight Editor-in-chief Nate Silver set out to answer this question and found that early national polling is at least somewhat predictive of who will win the nomination, especially when the results are adjusted for each candidate’s name recognition.

Now, eight years later, FiveThirtyEight has collected more polling data, plus there are two more presidential election cycles — 2012 and 2016 — to look at, so we felt it was time to update the series. In the first two installments, we’re just going to look at what the polls say for competitive presidential primaries for both parties, starting with early primary polls from 1972, which is widely thought of as the start of the modern primary era. This first installment runs through 1996 — analyzing primary polls for seven presidential elections is enough ground to cover in one article — and the next installment will start with the 2000 presidential primaries and run up through the 2016 presidential primaries.

As for how this series we will work, we took all surveys from the calendar year before each election — so for the 2016 presidential primaries, that means all polls from 2015 — and then split them by whether they occurred in the first half of the year (January through June) or the second half (July through December). In the 2011 version of this series, Nate only looked at polls from the first half of the year before the election, but we decided to include the second half of the year as well because this helped us capture how a candidate’s standing changed during the course of the year and let us include candidates who jumped into the race on the later side. We also included anyone we had polling data for, no matter how likely or unlikely they were to run or win.

Our tables in this series include two key metrics that help us better understand the primary field and how things changed throughout the year we’re examining. The first is an average of each candidate’s (or potential candidate’s) numbers in all the polls for that half of the year — candidates were counted as having zero percent support in any poll they did not appear in.1

The second is an average of each candidate’s standing in the polls that is adjusted for how well-known the person was at the time. To do this, we divided a candidate’s polling average by their level of name recognition, which helped us identify folks who might have had a small national profile but were doing relatively well among voters who knew about them.2 But because pollsters aren’t consistent, our methods of estimating name recognition had to be treated as rough estimates. To reflect that inherent imprecision, we sorted candidates onto a somewhat subjective five-tier scale to sum up their level of fame.3 We combined polling averages with a few educated guesses to produce the name-recognition scores. For example, a candidate like Hubert Humphrey in 1972, who had been the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee in 1968 while serving as vice president, would almost certainly be extremely well-known, while someone who had lost the nomination to Humphrey in ’68 might not be as well-known but would still be more widely recognized than someone bursting onto the national scene for the first time. These name-recognition scores are represented as five square boxes in the table below (more black boxes means higher levels of name recognition).

And it just so happens that in the first primary we’re looking at, the 1972 Democratic primary, we have an example of how our adjusted polling average can reveal a potential winner. Take Sen. George McGovern, who was polling at around 4 percent in the first half of 1971. He wasn’t very well-known, but he was polling relatively well among those who had heard of him, so his adjusted polling average for that same six-month period was 6 points higher, at 10 percent.

The 1972 Democratic primary field

Candidates’ polling averages in the first half and second half of the year before the presidential primaries, plus an adjustment for name recognition

Name recognition Poll Avg. Adj. poll avg. Candidate 1st half 2nd half 1st 2nd 1st 2nd Ed Muskie 32.3% 24.5% 40.4% 30.6% Ted Kennedy 23.5 18.2 29.4 22.7 Hubert Humphrey 23.5 18.8 23.5 18.8 George McGovern 4.0 5.7 10.0 9.4 John Lindsay 4.4 6.7 7.3 8.3 Scoop Jackson 0.4 2.8 2.0 7.1 Eugene McCarthy 2.4 5.5 3.0 6.9 Birch Bayh 0.2 0.3 1.0 1.7 Harold Hughes 0.2 0.2 1.0 0.8 Samuel Yorty — — 0.3 — 0.6 Bill Proxmire 0.4 0.2 1.0 0.4 Wilbur Mills 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.4 J. William Fulbright 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3

We included everyone we had polling data for, no matter how likely or unlikely they were to run.

Source: Polls

However, he trailed Sens. Humphrey, Ed Muskie and Ted Kennedy — the former two had made up the 1968 Democratic ticket, and the latter was … well, a Kennedy. But McGovern still managed to win the nomination — that’s why he’s bolded in the table above — in part because he had a good understanding of how the reformed nominating process worked. After all, he led the committee that wrote the new primary rules after the calamitous 1968 Democratic convention, where party bosses helped Humphrey get the nomination even though he had not contested any of the primaries. And even though McGovern was crushed by President Richard Nixon in the 1972 general election, Democrats kept their new primary rules. McGovern would not be the last Democrat to become the nominee despite low early polling numbers.

We’re skipping the 1972 GOP primaries because Nixon was running for re-election and faced no serious challenger from within his party — remember, we’re only interested in competitive nomination processes. So moving on to 1976, the Democratic field was comparable to 2020 in that it was crowded and support was fragmented. In the first and second halves of 1975, four or five potential Democratic candidates averaged 10 percent or more in our adjusted polling average. But three of them — Humphrey, Kennedy and Muskie — didn’t wind up running. Segregationist Alabama Gov. George Wallace was the nominal frontrunner in those early polls, but he was a divisive choice for obvious reasons, which left things wide open for a dark horse candidate. And in the end, one of the least-known candidates — former Georgia Gov. Jimmy Carter — claimed the nomination. The early primary polls don’t really capture Carter’s success, but he did set up shop in Iowa, which voted first, and his strong showing there gave his campaign a boost that helped him gain enough momentum to win the nomination. It also cemented Iowa as a premiere early state alongside New Hampshire.

The 1976 Democratic primary field

Candidates’ polling averages in the first half and second half of the year before the presidential primaries, plus an adjustment for name recognition

Name recognition Poll Avg. Adj. poll avg. Candidate 1st half 2nd half 1st 2nd 1st 2nd George Wallace 19.2% 20.0% 19.2% 20.0% Scoop Jackson 10.7 11.0 17.8 18.3 Hubert Humphrey 15.3 16.0 15.3 16.0 Ed Muskie 8.3 10.0 10.4 12.5 George McGovern 7.8 9.5 7.8 9.5 Birch Bayh 1.0 2.0 2.5 5.0 Lloyd Bentsen 2.0 0.8 10.0 3.8 Fred Harris 1.0 0.8 5.0 3.8 Jerry Brown 0.7 1.5 1.7 3.8 Jimmy Carter 0.8 0.5 4.2 2.5 Mo Udall 1.7 1.0 4.2 2.5 Frank Church 0.5 1.0 1.3 2.5 Sargent Shriver — — 1.5 — 1.9 Ted Kennedy — 10.3 — 12.9 — Julian Bond — 2.3 — 5.8 — John Glenn — 1.7 — 2.8 — John Lindsay — 1.7 — 2.8 — Adlai Stevenson III — 1.0 — 1.7 —

We included everyone we had polling data for, no matter how likely or unlikely they were to run.

Source: Polls

The 2020 Democratic race could be primed for a similar upset. The polls are currently split between two early frontrunners — still undeclared former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders — and it’s not yet clear if they will continue to sit atop the leaderboard, effectively blocking lesser-known candidates, or if their lead over the rest of the field will shrink as other candidates garner support, which could make the Democratic field look as wide-open as it did in 1976.

As for the GOP in 1976, the party had two clear frontrunners from the start. President Gerald Ford and challenger Ronald Reagan battled all the way to the national GOP convention, where Ford narrowly edged out the former California governor. The 1976 Republican primary marked the start of a streak of early polling frontrunners winning the nomination.

The 1976 Republican primary field

Candidates’ polling averages in the first half and second half of the year before the presidential primaries, plus an adjustment for name recognition

Name recognition Poll Avg. Adj. poll avg. Candidate 1st half 2nd half 1st 2nd 1st 2nd Gerald Ford 36.5% 46.5% 36.5% 46.5% Ronald Reagan 21.9 34.7 27.3 43.3 Barry Goldwater 8.0 4.7 10.0 5.8 Nelson Rockefeller 8.3 3.0 8.3 3.0 Charles Percy 6.0 1.5 10.0 2.5 Mark Hatfield 1.4 0.8 3.4 2.1 Howard Baker 5.8 1.2 9.6 1.9 Elliot Richardson 3.5 1.0 5.8 1.7 James Buckley 0.5 0.7 1.3 1.7 John Connally 0.5 0.8 0.6 1.0 Edward Brooke — 1.0 — 2.5 — William Milliken — 0.5 — 2.5 — Bill Brock — 0.3 — 1.3 — Dan Evans — 0.3 — 1.3 —

We included everyone we had polling data for, no matter how likely or unlikely they were to run.

Source: Polls

Four years later in 1980, the early national surveys had the incumbent president, Democrat Jimmy Carter, trailing badly against Sen. Kennedy, who had finally decided to run. Based on our data, Kennedy holds the dubious distinction of being the candidate with the highest adjusted polling average to not win a presidential nomination, at least for the 1972 to 1996 period. In the end, Carter was renominated, but he lost the general to Reagan.

The 1980 Democratic primary field

Candidates’ polling averages in the first half and second half of the year before the presidential primaries, plus an adjustment for name recognition

Name recognition Poll Avg. Adj. poll avg. Candidate 1st half 2nd half 1st 2nd 1st 2nd Ted Kennedy 46.8% 49.2% 46.8% 49.2% Jimmy Carter 31.7 36.2 31.7 36.2 Jerry Brown 14.1 7.9 23.6 13.2 George McGovern 0.6 0.3 0.7 0.4 Walter Mondale 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.4 Scoop Jackson 0.4 0.2 0.7 0.3 Frank Church 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.3 Daniel P. Moynihan 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 Mo Udall 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.1

We included everyone we had polling data for, no matter how likely or unlikely they were to run.

Source: Polls

Reagan’s nomination in 1980 marked another GOP contest won by the early frontrunner, but it also started a trend of the Republican runner-up winning the GOP nomination in the party’s next competitive primary cycle. His principal foe was former CIA Director George H.W. Bush, who was relatively unknown in the year prior to the primaries. Bush advanced from about 4 percent to 11 percent in our adjusted polling average from the first half to the second half of 1979, and even though he beat out Reagan to win the Iowa caucuses, Reagan went on to win the nomination (although it wasn’t entirely a bust for Bush, as Reagan did make him vice president).

The 1980 Republican primary field

Candidates’ polling averages in the first half and second half of the year before the presidential primaries, plus an adjustment for name recognition

Name recognition Poll Avg. Adj. poll avg. Candidate 1st half 2nd half 1st 2nd 1st 2nd Ronald Reagan 34.3% 37.3% 34.3% 37.3% Howard Baker 13.1 15.0 21.8 25.1 John Connally 10.2 12.8 12.7 16.0 Gerald Ford 19.3 12.3 19.3 12.3 George H.W. Bush 1.5 4.5 3.8 11.4 John Anderson 1.2 1.3 6.0 6.3 Phil Crane 1.0 1.0 5.0 5.2 Bob Dole 2.3 2.4 3.9 4.0 Charles Percy 1.2 0.9 3.0 2.3 James Thompson 0.3 0.4 1.4 2.1 Alexander Haig 0.4 0.8 1.1 2.1 Elliot Richardson 0.3 0.7 0.7 1.8 William Simon — — 0.3 — 1.7 Jesse Helms — — 0.3 — 1.3 Jack Kemp 0.7 0.2 3.6 0.8 Larry Pressler — — 0.2 — 0.8 Lowell Weicker — 0.9 — 4.3 — Robert Ray — 0.2 — 1.1 —

We included everyone we had polling data for, no matter how likely or unlikely they were to run.

Source: Polls

Reagan sought re-election in 1984, and to face him Democrats nominated their early polls leader — former Vice President Walter Mondale. This marked the only time between 1972 and 1996 that the Democrats nominated someone who led in the raw polling average a year before the primary, although he still had to sort things out at the convention against his main opponents, Sen. Gary Hart and civil rights leader Jesse Jackson.

The 1984 Democratic primary field

Candidates’ polling averages in the first half and second half of the year before the presidential primaries, plus an adjustment for name recognition

Name recognition Poll Avg. Adj. poll avg. Candidate 1st half 2nd half 1st 2nd 1st 2nd Walter Mondale 33.8% 40.1% 33.8% 40.1% John Glenn 24.3 24.7 30.4 30.9 Alan Cranston 4.7 5.3 11.7 13.1 Reubin Askew 1.4 1.9 6.9 9.6 Jesse Jackson 4.0 7.6 5.0 9.5 Gary Hart 3.0 2.6 7.4 6.5 George McGovern — — 4.5 — 5.6 Ernest Hollings 0.9 1.0 4.6 5.1 Ted Kennedy 2.1 1.8 2.1 1.8 Bill Bradley — 0.7 — 1.7 — Daniel P. Moynihan — 0.3 — 0.8 — Mo Udall — 0.3 — 0.8 —

We included everyone we had polling data for, no matter how likely or unlikely they were to run.

Source: Polls

In 1988, Democrats returned to form by not nominating the early frontrunner, and instead picked Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis. Yet our adjusted polling average indicated Dukakis was a lot stronger than early surveys suggested, as he enjoyed a fair bit of support while being relatively unknown. It didn’t hurt him that Hart, who was campaigning again and one of the early frontrunners, was undone by an extramarital affair. While Dukakis went on to clinch the Democratic nomination, he lost in the general election.

The 1988 Democratic primary field

Candidates’ polling averages in the first half and second half of the year before the presidential primaries, plus an adjustment for name recognition

Name recognition Poll Avg. Adj. poll avg. Candidate 1st half 2nd half 1st 2nd 1st 2nd Michael Dukakis 7.5% 11.3% 37.6% 28.2% Jesse Jackson 14.5 18.0 18.1 22.5 Paul Simon 4.2 7.5 20.8 18.7 Al Gore 3.5 6.5 17.5 16.2 Gary Hart 14.3 12.7 17.8 12.7 Dick Gephardt 4.5 4.4 22.5 11.0 Bruce Babbitt 2.2 2.0 11.0 10.1 Mario Cuomo 6.1 3.5 15.3 8.8 Pat Schroeder 0.1 1.3 0.3 3.2 Joe Biden 2.4 1.3 11.8 3.1 Ted Kennedy — — 1.3 — 1.6 Sam Nunn 1.3 0.2 6.4 0.8 Bill Bradley 0.9 0.3 2.2 0.8 Bill Clinton — 0.4 — 2.0 — Chuck Robb — 0.4 — 2.0 — Dale Bumpers — 0.2 — 1.1 — Lee Iacocca — 0.8 — 0.9 —

We included everyone we had polling data for, no matter how likely or unlikely they were to run.

Source: Polls

Opposing Dukakis in 1988 was George H.W. Bush, who had served eight years as Reagan’s vice president — yet another GOP runner-up who went on to win the next open primary. Bush also led most early polling, with Sen. Bob Dole in second. And while Dole did win the Iowa caucuses, Bush recovered in New Hampshire and won most contests after that. But this wouldn’t be the last Republicans saw of Dole; he would get his shot at the presidency later on.

The 1988 Republican primary field

Candidates’ polling averages in the first half and second half of the year before the presidential primaries, plus an adjustment for name recognition

Name recognition Poll Avg. Adj. poll avg. Candidate 1st half 2nd half 1st 2nd 1st 2nd George H.W. Bush 37.0% 42.9% 37.0% 42.9% Bob Dole 22.0 23.3 27.5 29.1 Jack Kemp 8.5 7.1 21.3 17.9 Pete du Pont 1.7 2.2 8.4 11.1 Pat Robertson 4.1 6.0 10.2 10.0 Alexander Haig 4.3 4.7 7.1 5.9 Paul Laxalt 1.6 0.1 7.8 0.7 Jeane Kirkpatrick 0.6 0.2 1.6 0.5 Howard Baker — 2.3 — 3.8 — Thomas Kean — 0.8 — 3.8 — Pat Buchanan — 0.1 — 0.2 —

We included everyone we had polling data for, no matter how likely or unlikely they were to run.

Source: Polls

In 1992, Bush became the third president to fend off a notable primary challenger since 1972. Initially, Bush’s approval rating had been high — close to 90 percent after the Gulf War. But a faltering economy and broken promise not to raise taxes weakened Bush and helped spur a challenge from the right in the form of pundit Pat Buchanan. We only have data for the second half of 1991 — at first it looked unlikely that Bush would face a serious challenge, so pollsters weren’t asking about the Republican primaries much — but we can see that despite Bush’s massive lead in the polls, Buchanan’s position was more robust than it looked. Even though his name recognition was low, those who did have an opinion of him seemed to support him. Bush won the nomination, but Buchanan embarrassed him by grabbing 37 percent of the vote in New Hampshire, and ultimately, Bush lost re-election.

The 1992 Republican primary field

Candidates’ polling averages in the first half and second half of the year before the presidential primaries, plus an adjustment for name recognition

Name recognition Poll Avg. Adj. poll avg. Candidate 1st half 2nd half 1st 2nd 1st 2nd George H.W. Bush — — 59.4% — 59.4% Pat Buchanan — — 9.8 — 24.5 Howard Baker — — 3.6 — 6.0 Jack Kemp — — 3.2 — 5.3 David Duke — — 2.8 — 3.5 Dick Cheney — — 2.6 — 3.3 Dan Quayle — — 2.0 — 2.0 Phil Gramm — — 0.4 — 1.0 Pete Wilson — — 0.2 — 0.5

We included everyone we had polling data for, no matter how likely or unlikely they were to run.

Source: Polls

Facing Bush in the general election was Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton, who was still not that well-known when he announced his run for president in October 1991. Nonetheless, Clinton’s adjusted polling average improved substantially in the year leading up to the primaries. He started at around 3 percent in the first six months of 1991 and jumped to about 19 percent in the second half of the year. New York Governor Mario Cuomo led the polls, but at the last minute decided against running, and Clinton went on to defeat former Sen. Paul Tsongas and former Gov. Jerry Brown for the nomination.

The 1992 Democratic primary field

Candidates’ polling averages in the first half and second half of the year before the presidential primaries, plus an adjustment for name recognition

Name recognition Poll Avg. Adj. poll avg. Candidate 1st half 2nd half 1st 2nd 1st 2nd Mario Cuomo 20.0% 22.7% 33.3% 37.8% Jerry Brown — — 13.0 — 21.7 Doug Wilder 2.5 7.8 6.3 19.5 Bill Clinton 1.3 7.4 3.1 18.6 Bob Kerrey 1.3 5.6 3.1 14.1 Tom Harkin 1.8 5.3 4.4 13.2 Paul Tsongas 0.8 3.5 3.8 8.8 Jesse Jackson 10.5 4.1 10.5 4.1 Al Gore 8.8 0.9 14.6 1.5 Dave McCurdy 0.0 0.3 0.0 1.3 Jay Rockefeller 1.3 0.6 2.1 1.0 Lloyd Bentsen 10.0 0.8 16.7 0.9 Eugene McCarthy — — 0.4 — 0.6 Larry Agran — — 0.0 — 0.2 Dick Gephardt — 6.5 — 10.8 — Sam Nunn — 5.3 — 8.8 — Bill Bradley — 3.3 — 5.4 — Chuck Robb — 1.0 — 2.5 — George McGovern — 2.0 — 2.5 — George Mitchell — 1.0 — 2.5 — Stephen Solarz — 0.3 — 1.3 —

We included everyone we had polling data for, no matter how likely or unlikely they were to run.

Source: Polls

In 1996, the GOP chose Dole to face off against Clinton during his re-election bid, making Dole the third runner-up since 1976 to win the GOP nomination at the next opportunity. Dole seemed to have an insurmountable edge in the Republican primary polls, but he still had a rough start — he barely defeated Buchanan in Iowa and then lost to him in New Hampshire before recovering to win most other contests. Dole went on to lose in the general against Clinton.

The 1996 Republican primary field

Candidates’ polling averages in the first half and second half of the year before the presidential primaries, plus an adjustment for name recognition

Name recognition Poll Avg. Adj. poll avg. Candidate 1st half 2nd half 1st 2nd 1st 2nd Bob Dole 46.2% 44.0% 57.8% 55.0% Phil Gramm 11.1 8.6 18.5 14.3 Colin Powell 5.2 8.6 6.5 10.7 Pat Buchanan 5.6 6.6 7.0 8.2 Lamar Alexander 3.1 2.9 7.7 7.4 Steve Forbes — — 2.7 — 6.6 Richard Lugar 1.8 2.1 4.6 5.3 Alan Keyes 0.6 1.0 3.1 5.2 Arlen Specter 1.8 2.0 4.4 5.1 Pete Wilson 4.5 2.7 7.5 4.5 Bob Dornan 0.8 0.8 3.8 4.2 Newt Gingrich 3.1 1.6 3.8 2.0 Jack Kemp 0.8 0.6 1.4 1.0 Dan Quayle 1.9 0.7 1.9 0.7 Dick Cheney 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.6 Ross Perot 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.6 Pat Robertson 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 Bill Weld — 0.1 — 0.3 — Bill Bennett — 0.1 — 0.2 — Howard Baker — 0.1 — 0.2 — George H.W. Bush — 0.0 — 0.0 —

We included everyone we had polling data for, no matter how likely or unlikely they were to run.

Source: Polls

And that’s a wrap for now. In Part II, we’ll look at early primary polls in contests from 2000 to 2016. And as we’ll see, Republicans broke with their habit of nominating the early polling leader, while Democrats nominated an early frontrunner twice, after doing so only once between 1972 and 1996.

Additional contributions by Laura Bronner.

[wanderingmind867]

My Voting Record (US Democratic Primaries: 1844-2024):

1844 Democratic Primaries: Martin Van Buren

1848 Democratic Primaries: George Dallas

1852 Democratic Primaries: William O. Butler

1856 Democratic Primaries: N/A (No candidate sounds very good)

1860 Democratic Primaries: N/A (No candidate sounds good)

1864 Democratic Primaries: N/A (No candidate sounds very good).

1868 Democratic Primaries: James E. English

1872 Democratic Primaries: N/A (Democrats supported the Liberal Republicans that year. Their primary is in my Third party primaries notes).

1876 Democratic Primaries: Samuel Tilden

1880 Democratic Primaries: N/A (None of the candidates sound very good, honestly).

1884 Democratic Primaries: Grover Cleveland

1888 Democratic Primaries: Grover Cleveland

1892 Democratic Primaries: Horace Boies

1896 democratic Primaries (Top Four):

1. William Jennings Bryan

2. Richard P. Bland

3. Horace Boies

4. Henry Teller

1900 Democratic Primaries: William Jennings Bryan

1904 Democratic Primaries (Top Two):

1. Alton B. Parker

2. Nelson A. Miles

1908 Democratic Primaries: William Jennings Bryan

1912 Democratic Primaries: Judson Harmon

1916 Democratic Primaries: N/A (although I like Woodrow Wilson's fashion sense, he's also a rascist eugenicist. I can't support him).

1920 Democratic Primaries (Top Two):

1. Thomas R. Marshall

2. Al Smith

1924 Democratic Primaries (Top Three):

1. Al Smith

2. Robert L. Owen

3. Oscar Underwood (mostly just because he hated the KKK)

1928 Democratic Primaries: Al Smith

1932 Democratic Primaries: Al Smith

1936 Democratic Primaries: Upton Sinclair (my protest vote against Roosevelt from the left. How I wish Huey Long could have ran that year…)

1940 Democratic Primaries: Franklin D. Roosevelt

1944 Democratic Primaries: Franklin D. Roosevelt

1948 Democratic Primaries: Harry Truman (although I wish Henry Wallace was one of the candidates).

1952 Democratic Primaries (Top Two Candidates):

1. G. Mennen Williams

2. Estes Kefauver

1956 Democratic Primaries: Estes Kefauver

1960 Democratic Primaries: Wayne Morse

1964 Democratic Primaries: Lyndon B. Johnson

1968 Democratic Primaries: Eugene McCarthy

1972 Democratic Primaries (Top Five Candidates):

1. George McGovern

2. Shirley Chisholm

3. Hubert Humphrey

4. Patsy Mink

5. Terry Sanford

1976 Democratic Primaries (Top Three Candidates):

1: Frank Church

2: Mo Udall

3: Fred Harris

1980 Democratic Primaries: Jimmy Carter (my beliefs might be closer to Ted Kennedy, but I hate the Kennedy Clan. Except Eunice. Eunice is fine).

1984 Democratic Primaries (My Top Three Candidates):

1. Jesse Jackson

2. George McGovern

3. Walter Mondale

1988 Democratic Primaries (my top two candidates):

1. Jesse Jackson

2. Paul Simon

1992 Democratic Primaries: Tom Harkin

1996 Democratic Primaries: Nobody (I hate Bill Clinton)

2000 Democratic Primaries: Bill Bradley

2004 Democratic Primaries (Top Three Candidates):

1. Dennis Kucinich

2. Carol Moseley Braun

3. A tie between Al Sharpton and Howard Dean

2008 Democratic Primaries: John Edwards

2012 Democratic Primaries: Barack Obama

2016 Democratic Primaries: Bernie Sanders (I'd have taken Martin O'Malley too though)

2020 Democratic Primaries (Top Four Candidates):

1. Bernie Sanders

2. Elizabeth Warren

3. Tom Steyer

4. Marianne Williamson (She is definitely weird and new agey, but Wikipedia's summary of her policies don't sound too bad)

2024 Democratic Primaries: Marianne Williamson (I don't expect her to win at all, but I appreciate the challenge to Biden from the left. Remind him the progressive wing is still alive. Also, screw RFK Jr. I hate all the Kennedys. Except Eunice. She made the special Olympics; she can stay.)

PS: I made one of these for the Republican Primaries too. I might post that later.

[mikeo56]

Fifty US senators affirmed that they indeed do believe that the activities of human beings contribute to climate change. OK. But 49 senators—fully half the upper house that represents our grand republic—do not. So, hey, you go out there and burn whatever carbon you want to? Not sure what to make of that. But we thought you might want to know just which representatives have absolved you of your responsibility to the planet. So here’s a list—of the senators who think climate change is some other species’ problem, and then the senators who wish we’d maybe do something about it.

Voted against the amendment (nay—human activities don’t contribute to climate change)

Barrasso, John (R - WY) Blunt, Roy (R - MO) Boozman, John (R - AR) Burr, Richard (R - NC) Capito, Shelley Moore (R - WV) Cassidy, Bill (R - LA) Coats, Daniel (R - IN) Cochran, Thad (R - MS) Corker, Bob (R - TN) Cornyn, John (R - TX) Cotton, Tom (R - AR) Crapo, Mike (R - ID) Cruz, Ted (R - TX) Daines, Steve (R - MT) Enzi, Michael B. (R - WY) Ernst, Joni (R - IA) Fischer, Deb (R - NE) Flake, Jeff (R - AZ) Gardner, Cory (R - CO) Grassley, Chuck (R - IA) Hatch, Orrin G. (R - UT) Heller, Dean (R - NV) Hoeven, John (R - ND) Inhofe, James M. (R - OK) Isakson, Johnny (R - GA) Johnson, Ron (R - WI) Lankford, James (R - OK) Lee, Mike (R - UT) McCain, John (R - AZ) McConnell, Mitch (R - KY) Moran, Jerry (R - KS) Murkowski, Lisa (R - AK) Paul, Rand (R - KY) Perdue, David (R - GA) Portman, Rob (R - OH) Risch, James E. (R - ID) Roberts, Pat (R - KS) Rounds, Mike (R - SD) Rubio, Marco (R - FL) Sasse, Ben (R - NE) Scott, Tim (R - SC) Sessions, Jeff (R - AL) Shelby, Richard C. (R - AL) Sullivan, Daniel (R - AK) Thune, John (R - SD) Tillis, Thom (R - NC) Toomey, Patrick J. (R - PA) Vitter, David (R - LA) Wicker, Roger F. (R - MS)

Voted for the amendment (yea— human activities contribute to climate change)

Alexander, Lamar (R - TN) Ayotte, Kelly (R - NH) Baldwin, Tammy (D - WI) Bennet, Michael F. (D - CO) Blumenthal, Richard (D - CT) Booker, Cory A. (D - NJ) Boxer, Barbara (D - CA) Brown, Sherrod (D - OH) Cantwell, Maria (D - WA) Cardin, Benjamin L. (D - MD) Carper, Thomas R. (D - DE) Casey, Robert P., Jr. (D - PA) Collins, Susan M. (R - ME) Coons, Christopher A. (D - DE) Donnelly, Joe (D - IN) Durbin, Richard J. (D - IL) Feinstein, Dianne (D - CA) Franken, Al (D - MN) Gillibrand, Kirsten E. (D - NY) Graham, Lindsey (R - SC) Heinrich, Martin (D - NM) Heitkamp, Heidi (D - ND) Hirono, Mazie K. (D - HI) Kaine, Tim (D - VA) King, Angus S., Jr. (I - ME) Kirk, Mark (R - IL) Klobuchar, Amy (D - MN) Leahy, Patrick J. (D - VT) Manchin, Joe, III (D - WV) Markey, Edward J. (D - MA) McCaskill, Claire (D - MO) Menendez, Robert (D - NJ) Merkley, Jeff (D - OR) Mikulski, Barbara A. (D - MD) Murphy, Christopher (D - CT) Murray, Patty (D - WA) Nelson, Bill (D - FL) Peters, Gary (D - MI) Reed, Jack (D - RI) Sanders, Bernard (I - VT) Schatz, Brian (D - HI) Schumer, Charles E. (D - NY) Shaheen, Jeanne (D - NH) Stabenow, Debbie (D - MI) Tester, Jon (D - MT) Udall, Tom (D - NM) Warner, Mark R. (D - VA) Warren, Elizabeth (D - MA) Whitehouse, Sheldon (D - RI) Wyden, Ron (D - OR)

Republican Legislators are a threat to National Security and life on planet Earth

[askthealaskan]

In the summer of 1988 I was a young driver/guide working for a cruiseline in Ketchikan, Alaska. It was just the beginning of the tourism boom that would see the total cruise ship visitor number increase from about 100,000 in that year to today’s annual visitation of over 1,000,000. The company liked to pickup extra work when it could and I reported to work on a July morning with news that I would be driving around a charter group for the next three days. I was hoping to get the days off as it was the Fourth of July and that was always the most celebrated holiday of the year in Alaska on the account that it happened in the middle of summer. That was reason enough for people to take a break and hike, steer, paddle, and fly to town to have a little fun. The events actually started the day before and ended the day after the fourth making it a small festival rather than a holiday. Ketchikan was still a lumber town back then too, with fishing a close second. The town was a bit scruffier then too but Senator Ted Stevens never missed a Fourth of July celebration in Ketchikan. My displeasure at having to work the holiday was quickly ended when I was told that Senator Stevens had brought several senate colleagues and their wives to town with them to celebrate the 4th with him and do a little fact finding on Alaska issues. They would be staying at the newly opened Salmon Falls Resort and would be needing a ride from the airport, then rides into town the following day, then a ride back to the airport in a couple of a days. My dispatcher told me that I would be driving the bus for all these trips. I was a bit of a political junky at the time and knew the players pretty well. If they had had political cards like baseball cards I would say I did well with the pack that came with Senator Stevens. There was Fritz Hollings the Democrat from South Carolina, John Warner from Virginia, Tom Hawkins from Iowa, and a couple more that I frankly don’t remember now, and a freshman newly elected from Arizona named John McCain. Now to get to the airport I needed to take a 7 minute ride on a small ferry to the island directly across the channel from town. [see video] There was nothing else on that island, so the road from the ferry terminal on that side led to the airport and no where else. A bridge had been proposed, but at the time no one call it a “the bridge to nowhere” yet. I remember driving out to the tarmac to pick up the Senators and their families. I had been giving tours all summer and had my script down. I knew my facts and had the benefit of growing up in Ketchikan, and so the ride across the channel between the island the airport was a great opportunity to point out fishing boats, ferry boats, and floatplanes. I wonder now if Senator McCain had any premonitions of the future that day as he rode the ferry between the islands. On the drive out to Salmon Falls, we went past Ward Cove Cannery and saw eagles perched on trees. My standard tour spiel was to look for the white “golf balls” against the green backgrounds as the first clue to see them. And then to call out those who were “experts at finding golf balls in trees” to help those who were not to find one. The pulp mill was still active in 1988 so I gave them my standard spiel about its economic impact and the environmental issues. I remember is taking them into town one day so that they could shop. I parked my bus on the dock and they all got off to shop. I had set a return time and since I had no place to go I just stayed with my bus and broke open a book to read. After awhile I heard someone knocking on the door and I opened it to see Senator McCain. He explained he was early but he had grown tired of shopping. I invited him onboard. I fully expected him to go back to his seat and start reading important papers from out of briefcase or something but instead he sat in the front seat across from me and started a conversation. I don’t recall what we actually talked about but what I remember is total lack of pretense, the sincerity in his eye contact, and the manner that he conversed that made you feel that you were talking to an old friend. This side of John McCain doesn’t translate in stump speeches, but I have heard other people who have had similar encounters with him that will tell you same thing. It’s why he is respected by so many from both sides of the political isle. I didn’t know his story back then. That he had once been a fighter pilot. That he was the son of an Admiral. That he had been shot down and was repeatedly tortured in that time, that he was a close friend of Senator Mo Udal, a Democrat. That he would lose the 2000 Republican nomination because he would refuse to indulge in dirty campaign politics. That he would nominate the governor of Alaska, and former classmate of a cousin of mine, to be his historical nomination for Vice President. But even though I often disagreed with his politics, I have never met a politician I have respected more than John McCain. I think if everyone in America had the chance I did to talk with him like I did, he would be president.

[patriotsnet]

How Many Seats Do The Republicans Control In The Senate

New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/how-many-seats-do-the-republicans-control-in-the-senate/

How Many Seats Do The Republicans Control In The Senate

Focus On Competitive Races

Democrats targeted Republican-held Senate seats in and . Seats in , and were also competitive for the Democrats. Republicans targeted Democratic-held seats in , , , North Dakota and West Virginia, all of which had voted Republican in both the 2012 presidential election and the 2016 presidential election. Seats in , , , and , all of which voted for Trump in 2016, were also targeted by Republicans. The Democratic-held seat in New Jersey was also considered unexpectedly competitive due to corruption allegations surrounding the Democratic incumbent.

How Is Senate Majority Chosen

The Senate Republican and Democratic floor leaders are elected by the members of their party in the Senate at the beginning of each Congress. Depending on which party is in power, one serves as majority leader and the other as minority leader. The leaders serve as spokespersons for their partys positions on issues.

Cbs News Projects Hickenlooper Wins Colorado Senate Seat Democrats First Pickup

Democrats picked up their first Senate seat of the night, with CBS News projecting former Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper has defeated incumbent GOP Senator Cory Gardner. Hickenlooper decided to run for Senate after running briefly in the Democratic presidential primary.

Gardner was considered one of the most vulnerable Republican senators up for reelection this year, especially since hes the only major statewide elected GOP official. Gardner has also been trailing Hickenlooper in polls leading up to Election Day.

While this is a victory for Democrats, they will have to pick up several other seats to gain a majority in the Senate.

Opinion:the House Looks Like A Gop Lock In 2022 But The Senate Will Be Much Harder

Redistricting will take place in almost every congressional district in the next 18 months. The party of first-term presidents usually loses seats in midterms following their inauguration President Barack Obamas Democrats lost 63 seats in 2010 and President Donald Trumps Republicans lost 40 in 2018 but the redistricting process throws a wrench into the gears of prediction models.

President George W. Bush saw his party add nine seats in the House in 2002. Many think this was a consequence of the 9/11 terrorist attacks on America nearly 14 months earlier, but the GOP, through Republican-led state legislatures, controlled most of the redistricting in the two years before the vote, and thus gerrymandering provided a political benefit. Republicans will also have a firm grip on redistricting ahead of the 2022 midterms.

The Brennan Center has that the GOP will enjoy complete control of drawing new boundaries for 181 congressional districts, compared with a maximum of 74 for Democrats, though the final numbers could fluctuate once the pandemic-delayed census is completed. Gerrymandering for political advantage has its critics, but both parties engage in it whenever they get the opportunity. In 2022, Republicans just have much better prospects. Democrats will draw districts in Illinois and Massachusetts to protect Democrats, while in Republican-controlled states such as Florida, Ohio and Texas, the GOP will bring the redistricting hammer down on Democrats.

Vindman: Tucker Carlson Is ‘hating The Us’ With Rhetoric

The midterm elections are still 18 months away, but the fight for control of the Senate is already shaping what gets done in the nation’s capital this year.

President Joe Bidennow his infrastructure and jobs proposalsis not running for reelectionInside Elections with Nathan L. Gonzalesunwillingness to establish a commissionCheri BeasleyRep. Val Demings

Collins Says Gideon Called To Concede

Senator Susan Collins of Maine told supporters on Wednesday that her Democratic opponent, Sara Gideon, had called her to concede the race. Without taking Collins’ seat, Democrats have little change of claiming the Senate majority.

“I have news for everyone. I just received a very gracious call from Sara Gideon conceding the race,” Collins told supporters on Wednesday afternoon.

Collins, one of the more moderate members of Senate, was considered particularly vulnerable this year. If she had received under 50% of the vote, the race would have proceeded to a runoff, under Maine’s system of ranked-choice voting.

Gideon significantly outraised Collins, and hit the senator repeatedly for voting to confirm Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

United States Senate Elections 2016

New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota West Virginia

Elections to the U.S. Senate were held on November 8, 2016. A total of 34 of the 100 seats were up for regular election. Those elected to the U.S. Senate in the 34 regular elections on November 8, 2016, began their six-year terms on January 3, 2017.

Control of the Senate was up for grabs again in 2016. In order to take the chamber back, Democrats needed to gain five seats in 2016, but they fell short, picking up only two seats. Ultimately, Republican senators proved to be far less vulnerable than predicted. Some reasons for the predicted vulnerability are as follows. The majority of seats up for election were held by Republican incumbents, many of whom were freshmen who were swept into office in the Tea Party wave of 2010. Additionally, the Senate election coincided with a presidential election, which has been a boon to Democratic candidates in the past decade. Democrats had made gains in the Senate in the last two presidential elections, while they had suffered losses in the years between.

HIGHLIGHTS

The Democratic Party gained two seats in 2016, resulting in a 52-48 majority for Republicans. The two independent members of the Senate are included in the Democratic totals, as they caucus with Democrats.

100 100

Arkansas: Mark Pryor Vs Tom Cotton

In a stunning blow to Democrats, Rep. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., beat two-term Democratic Sen. Mark Pryor, the first Senate Democrat to lose his seat this election cycle.

Pryors loss is a major upset to Democrats who were hoping to hold onto the seat and keep Republicans from taking control of the Senate. Pryor comes from a popular political family in the state. His father, David Pryor, represented Arkansas in the U.S. Senate and served as the states governor. The family maintains close ties with the Clintons, a connection that prompted former President Bill Clinton to campaign on Pryors behalf on multiple occasions.

But Cotton, a one term congressman and former Army Ranger who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, was able to break through Pryors deep political connections in the state. Throughout the campaign, Cotton, 37, repeatedly tied Pryor to President Obama, whose favorability has reached an all-time low, and stressed issues related to national security, including how the administrations is dealing with ISIS, on the campaign trail.

Th United States Congress

January 3, 2015 January 3, 2017 Members 1st: January 6, 2015 December 18, 20152nd: January 4, 2016 January 3, 2017

The 114th United States Congress was a meeting of the legislative branch of the United States of America federal government, composed of the United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives. It met in Washington, D.C. from January 3, 2015, to January 3, 2017, during the final two years of Barack Obama’s presidency. The seats in the House were based on the 2010 United States Census.

The 2014 elections gave the Republicans control of the Senate and the House for the first time since the 109th Congress. With 248 seats in the House of Representatives and 54 seats in the , this Congress began with the largest majority since the 71st Congress of 19291931. As of 2021, this is the most recent session of Congress in which Republicans and Democrats held any seats in New Hampshire and , respectively, and the last in which Republicans held a Senate seat in .

Colorado: Mark Udall Vs Cory Gardner

Rep. Cory Gardner, a rising Republican star, defeated Democratic Sen. Mark Udall in Colorado, where universal mail-in ballots and a large bloc of Hispanic voters added uncertainty to one of the tightest Senate races in the country. Udall was one of the three Democratic incumbents to lose their Senate seat.

Udall, the son of the late Arizona congressman Mo Udall, lost control of the race this fall amidst criticism that his campaign focused too closely on Gardners past positions on womens health. In March, Gardner said he no longer supported personhood amendments, which doctors say would limit access to birth control and make abortions illegal. He later voiced support for over-the-counter birth control.

Nearly half of all ads in the race mentioned abortion, according to CMAG/Kantar Media, which tracks television ad spending.

Though more Republicans returned ballots than Democrats in the final days of the race, Democratswhose get-out-the-vote operation in 2010 powered Sen. Michael Bennet to a narrow victory and served as the blueprint for their national operation this yearwere optimistic they could make up the difference.

Senate Elections 2014: Republicans Seize Control Of The Senate

The result was a loss for President Obama and Democrats.

2014 Midterm Election Results Are Mostly In

— Republicans handed a major defeat to President Obama and Senate Democrats on Tuesday night when they seized control of the Senate by flipping at least seven seats from the Democratic to the GOP column.

Republicans secured victory in seven states where Democrats currently hold seats – Arkansas, Colorado, Iowa, Montana, North Carolina, South Dakota and West Virginia. Three incumbent Democratic senators lost their seats Sens. Kay Hagan, D-N.C., Mark Pryor, D-Ark., and Mark Udall, D-Colo.

Iowa and West Virginia elected their first female senators — Joni Ernst and Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, respectively.

PHOTOS: The Unusual Places Where Americans Vote

Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell won re-election in Kentucky, putting him one step closer to becoming Senate Majority Leader next year. Current Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid congratulated McConnell on the Republican win.

“I’d like to congratulate Senator McConnell, who will be the new Senate Majority Leader, Reid said. The message from voters is clear: they want us to work together. I look forward to working with Senator McConnell to get things done for the middle class.”

Results are still out in Alaska, Virginia and Louisiana, a state heading into a Dec. 6 runoff between Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu and Republican Rep. Bill Cassidy.

Georgia: David Perdue Vs Michelle Nunn

Republican David Perdue, a former CEO of Reebok and Dollar General, won the Georgia Senate race, clearing the 50 percent threshold needed to avoid a January run-off. He bested Democrat Michelle Nunn, daughter of well-revered former Sen. Sam Nunn, and Amanda Swafford, the Libertarian candidate, who polled in the single digits but could have acted as a spoiler in the race.

Throughout the campaign, Perdue touted his business experience on the trail, but faced criticism after a leaked deposition showed he said he spent most of his career outsourcing jobs abroad. Perdue will replace outgoing Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss.

Mcconnell Not Troubled At All By Trumps Suggestion Of Supreme Court Challenge

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell defended Mr. Trump for falsely claiming that he won reelection, although he acknowledged that the presidential race had not yet been decided.

Its not unusual for people to claim they have won the election. I can think of that happening on numerous occasions, McConnell told reporters in Kentucky. But, claiming to win the election is different from finishing the counting.

Claiming to win the election is different from finishing the counting, Mitch McConnell says, adding that Americans should not be shocked that Democrats and Republicans are both lawyering up for the close races

CBS News November 4, 2020

He also said he was not troubled at all by the president suggesting that the outcome of the election might be determined by the Supreme Court. The president cannot unilaterally bring a case to the Supreme Court, what its unclear what case the Trump campaign would have if it challenged the counting of legally cast absentee ballots.

McConnell, who won his own closely watched reelection race on Tuesday evening, expressed measured confidence about Republicans maintaining their majority in the Senate. He said he believed there is a chance we will know by the end of the day if Republicans won races in states like Georgia and North Carolina.

What Advantages Do Senate Democrats Have In This Bare Majority

Perhaps the most significant advantage for Democrats is the ability to confirm Bidens Cabinet and Supreme Court nominations with a simple majority, or 51 votes. Each of these processes once required a 60 percent majority vote until senators moved in 2013 to lower the threshold to 51 votes to advance confirmations for most executive-level and federal judicial nominations. In 2017 senators established the same lower threshold to approve Supreme Court nominations.

Four Cabinet or Cabinet-level members have been confirmed by large margins for Bidens administration so far, including Lloyd Austin as the first Black secretary of defense and Janet Yellen as the first woman to serve as treasury secretary. Austin and Yellen were confirmed by 93-2 and 84-15 votes, respectively. Nineteen of Bidens nominees are still awaiting confirmation votes.

As the majority party, Democrats are expected to control the agenda for Senate operations, including policy and oversight committees.

READ MORE: How does the filibuster work?

Such committees include the Senate Judiciary, charged with confirmation hearings for federal judges and Supreme Court justices, as well as oversight of the Justice Department. The incoming Senate Judiciary chair Dick Durbin, D-Ill., has already expressed plans to probe former President Donald Trumps efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.

Why Is There An Election In Georgia

The election is being rerun because of Georgia’s rule that a candidate must take 50% of the vote in order to win.

None of the candidates in November’s general election met that threshold.

With 98% of votes counted, US TV networks and the Associated Press news agency called the first of the two races for Mr Warnock.

Control of the Senate in the first two years of Mr Biden’s term will be determined by the outcome of the second run-off.

Mr Warnock is set to become the first black senator for the state of Georgia – a slavery state in the US Civil War – and only the 11th black senator in US history.

He serves as the reverend of the Atlanta church where assassinated civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr grew up and preached.

Claiming victory, he paid tribute to his mother, Verlene, who as a teenager worked as a farm labourer.

“The other day – because this is America – the 82-year-old hands that used to pick somebody else’s cotton went to the polls and picked her youngest son to be a United States senator,” he said.

If both Democrats win, the Senate will be evenly split 50-50, allowing incoming Democratic Vice-President Kamala Harris the tie-breaking vote. The Democrats narrowly control the House of Representatives.

Mr Ossoff has also claimed victory in his race against Republican Senator David Perdue, but that race is even tighter. At 33, he would be the Senate’s youngest member for 40 years.

Mr Biden won at least seven million more votes than the president.

Democrats May Have Control At The Federal Level But Republicans Are Pushing Back Through States

30 state legislatures are now controlled by Republicans, while only 18 are controlled by Democrats.

Though the hotly anticipated Blue Wave did not sweep over the country as thoroughly as some analysts had predicted in the weeks and months leading up to the American election on November 3, 2020, theres no denying that Democrats notched major victories in both the Senate and the White House, despite losing several seats in the House of Representatives.

But that victory is beginning to be undercut by the majority of state legislatures, which are Republican-controlled, as they begin to enact stricter voting laws, pass state sovereignty bills and push through highly conservative legislation to push back against Democratic ideologies in Washington.

How Many Senators Are Chosen

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.

READ: How did town meetings affect the government of New England colonies?

Republicans Can Win The Next Elections Through Gerrymandering Alone

Even if voting patterns remain the same, Republicans could still win more seats in Congress through redistricting

In Washington, the real insiders know that the true outrages are whats perfectly legal and that its simply a gaffe when someone accidentally blurts out something honest.

And so it barely made a ripple last week when a Texas congressman said aloud whats supposed to be kept to a backroom whisper: Republicans intend to retake the US House of Representatives in 2022 through gerrymandering.

We have redistricting coming up and the Republicans control most of that process in most of the states around the country, Representative Ronny Jackson told a conference of religious conservatives. That alone should get us the majority back.

Hes right. Republicans wont have to win more votes next year to claim the US House.

In fact, everyone could vote the exact same way for Congress next year as they did in 2020 when Democratic candidates nationwide won more than 4.7m votes than Republicans and narrowly held the chamber but under the new maps that will be in place, the Republican party would take control.

If Republicans aggressively maximize every advantage and crash through any of the usual guardrails and they have given every indication that they will theres little Democrats can do. And after a 2019 US supreme court decision declared partisan gerrymandering a non-justiciable political issue, the federal courts will be powerless as well.

A Different America: How Republicans Hold Near Total Control In 23 Us States

In those states, Republicans hold the governorship and the legislature, giving them the power to take aim at abortion access, trans rights, voting and gun safety

Democrats across the US cheered last month, as Texas legislators staged a walkout from the statehouse to block the passage of a Republican bill that would enact a number of restrictions on voting access.

Read more

But the victory seemed short-lived, as the states Republican governor, Greg Abbott, quickly announced he planned to call a special session to get the legislation passed.

The walkout and the probably only temporary relief it provides for Democrats demonstrated the immense legislative power that have in dozens of states across the country and the ability that gives them to pass a hard-right agenda on a vast range of issues from abortion to the ability to vote.

In 23 US states, Republicans hold the governorship and the legislature, giving the party near total control to advance its policies. This year, Republicans have used that power to aggressively push their conservative social agenda taking aim at abortion access, transgender rights and gun safety, as well as voting laws.

During the legislative session, which concluded late last month, Republicans approved bills to allow permitless carry of firearms, ban abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy and increase criminal penalties for protesters who block intersections.

The Gop Has Yet To Land A Single Top Recruit To Run For The Senate Anywhere In The Country

The surest way that Republicans can stop whatever legislative agenda President Biden has in mind after the 2022 midterm elections is to win a majority in the US Senate.

Even more than the House, a simple majority in the Senate could let Republicans gum up everything from gun control legislation to Supreme Court nominations.

On paper, it seems easy enough. Republicans need to win just a single seat in order to flip the 50-50 Senate and possibilities for doing so are all over the map. Given that midterm elections often benefit the party out of power, and Democrats control two out of three levers of the federal government, Republicans wouldnt be overly optimistic in assuming Mitch McConnell might soon rule the Senate again.

But here is the thing about the GOPs chances: At this early stage, they are having problems getting good candidates to sign up. And while the historical trends look good for Republicans you cant win something with nothing.

Republicans have yet to land a single top recruit to run for the Senate anywhere in the country even in places where they have an opportunity to flip a seat and a good candidate could make all the difference.

In Nevada, Republicans are pinning their hopes on getting former state attorney general Adam Laxalt in the race to challenge Masto, who won in 2016 by just 3 percentage points. So far, Laxalt has not announced plans to run and he comes with baggage: he lost a bid for governor in 2018.

Pelosi Says It Doesn’t Matter Right Now If She’ll Seek Another Term As Speaker Beyond 2022

In a press call, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi shot down a question about whether this upcoming term would be her last as speaker, calling it the “least important question you could ask today.” She added that “the fate of our nation, the soul of the nation” is at stake in the election.

“Elections are about the future,” Pelosi said. “One of these days I’ll let you know what my plans are, when it is appropriate and when it matters. It doesn’t matter right now.”

After the 2018 election, Pelosi to term limits on Democratic leaders that would prevent her from serving as speaker beyond 2022.

Iowa: Joni Ernst Vs Bruce Braley

Republican Joni Ernst defeated Rep. Bruce Braley in the Iowa Senate race to fill the open seat vacated by the retirement of Sen. Tom Harkin, a Democratic stalwart in the state. Ernst, 44, will be the first female senator to ever represent Iowa, a state that catapulted Barack Obamas career just six years ago.

Ernst, an Iraq war veteran, shocked the political establishment when she won a crowded GOP primary in June. Ernst, a little known state senator, burst onto the national scene after releasing an attention grabbing ad called Squeal, which featured her talking about castrating hogs.

Braley stumbled throughout his campaign from making remarks that insulted some Iowa farmers to threatening a lawsuit against his neighbor over roaming chickens. Republican and Democratic surrogates with potential 2016 ambitions flooded Iowa in the final weeks of the campaign to help their candidates.

Democrats Control House And Senate For First Time Since 2011 As Schumer Ousts Mcconnell

Mitch McConnellChuck SchumerKamala Harris

On Wednesday, Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer of New York took on the role of Majority Leader, taking the title away from Republican Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky as regained control of both congressional chambers for the first time since 2011.

Control of the Senate shifted over to a 50-50 party split on Wednesday as Democratic Georgia Senators Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock were both sworn in as the 49th and 50th Democratic senators, leaving Vice President Kamala Harris as the deciding vote should the chambers votes ever end in a tie.

Also sworn in on Wednesday was Democratic Senator Alex Padilla of California. Padilla was appointed by California Governor Gavin Newsom to fill the vacated seat of Vice President Kamala Harris, who had previously served as a Californian senator. On Wednesday, Harris swore in Padilla, Ossoff and Warnock.

At the virtual 2020 Democratic National Convention, Schumer said that Democrats would work with Biden to help him achieve his ambitious agenda.

We will make health care affordable for all, well undo the vicious inequality of income and wealth that has plagued America for far too long, and well take strong, decisive action to combat climate change and save the planet, Schumer said.

Newsweek contacted Schumers office for comment.