Review:2006 - U.S. Senate

2005-10-01 00:00:00

Here’s the progression of Democrat power in the U.S. Senate ever since the high water mark of the FDR-era coalition:

68 seats - 1965.
61 seats - 1975.
47 seats - 1985.
48 seats - 1995.
44 seats - 2005.

That’s despite the Torricelli/Lautenberg switch, despite Bob Packwood’s resignation {cough}, despite Mary Landrieu bringing out the dead against Woody Jenkins, despite the Hollywood and Hamptons money bags, the Democrat cat & dog and felon blocs, and despite the fact the GOP literally gives away U.S. Senate seats – every single election cycle.

Furthermore, here’s a number you will not see if you garner your political analyses from legacy academics or trust-fund liberal media pundits:

14.

A grand total of 14 multi-term U.S. Senators have lost re-election bids since 1986, *inclusive*.

No, seriously, that’s true.

Only 14 multi-term U.S. Senators have lost re-election bids over the past ten election cycles, inclusive. Two of whom, in point of fact, were defeated not in general elections, but instead were ousted in their respective primaries.

Quite unlike races involving freshman Senators, betting against a multi-term U.S. Senator – Democrat or Republican – is not a way to get solvent, much less to get wealthy. The reality is that they rarely lose.

Good times. Bad times. High turnout. Low turnout. Scandals. Recessions. Wars. Peace. Loma Prieta. Hurricane Andrew. Firestorms. Impeachment. Bull markets. Bear markets. Mid-term cycles. Presidential years.

Doesn’t matter.

They very rarely lose. Merely between 0-3 times per cycle. But more often than not closer to zero. Which therefore means their re-election ratios are 90-100%.

Freshmen Senators, on the other hand, lose re-election bids quite often.

And open seats are open seats. They frequently change hands.

The media next year has to defend nine seats in which freshman Senators are up for re-election or for which no incumbent is running: WA, NE, FL, MI, NY, DE, MD, NJ, MN.

The GOP, on the other hand, only is defending five such seats: VA, MO, TN, NV, and RI.

Just keep all that in mind when next Summer rolls around, and the usual suspects rhythmically begin chanting the media is poised to re-take the Senate.

-- Jayson

Review:Baseball Thread

2005-10-01 00:00:00

Read it and weep – Red Sox fans.

-- Jayson

Review:The Religion of Peace Strikes Again

2005-10-01 00:00:00

in Bali.

-- Jayson

Review:Huh?

2005-10-01 00:00:00

I did a double-take when I saw this press release concerning Bill Bennett’s comments about crime rates and abortion.

The Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice?!?!

Huh?

In any case, Bill Bennett has proven quite adept at firing up the chattering classes, hasn’t he?

-- Jayson

Review:Why the Death Penalty Matters

2005-10-01 00:00:00

It matters because these sorts of vermin trash heaps need to be put down.

Having them bleed taxpayers for upwards of 50 years makes no sense. And there is no redemption for them. Only retribution is a viable remedy. Not rehabilitation.

To be very blunt about it, what that piece of garbage needs is a nice episode of old-fashioned “prison justice.”

If you catch my drift . . .

-- Jayson

Review:Self-Parody

2005-10-01 00:00:00

The drones over at the AP and Maria Cantwell literally must have been smoking something funny today.

Check out this headline of a Cantwell screed:

“Dems Decry U.S. Dependence on Fossil Fuels.”

Riiiiiiiiight.

Let’s see, which party’s special interests and elected representatives have spent the better part of the past 25 years blocking such things as, well, you know, nuclear power plants?

And which party’s special interests have spent the past couple of decades filing lawsuits to prevent the construction of new dams and thereby to block new sources of hydro-electric power? And how has that affected the ability of local and regional utilities to invest in renewable sources of energy, e.g., wind power?

I mean, come on.

The AP and Maria Cantwell are walking and talking political farces.

-- Jayson