Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

2018 Senate Races: Can the GOP Keep and Add to Its Majority?

2018 Senate Races: Can the GOP Keep and Add to Its Majority?

After the Jones victory, the GOP has a one seat majority.

The GOP now only holds a one seat majority in the Senate since Democrat Doug Jones defeated Republican Roy Moore, who faced numerous sexual misconduct allegations, in the Alabama Senate special election.

That loss made the 2018 elections even more crucial for the GOP. Is it possible for the party to keep or even add to their majority? Or will Democrats pounce and take over? Politico listed these races as the ones to watch in the new year.

West Virginia’s Joe Manchin (D) Reelection

Politico listed this race #6 in its list, but I think this is the top one and a race I honestly think the GOP could take. Manchin is a moderate Democrat, well known for working with the GOP, voting with the GOP, etc.

Despite that, the people of West Virginia may choose to replace him with an actual GOP senator. The state overwhelmingly voted for President Donald Trump with 69% of the vote. Plus Governor Jim Justice switched to the Republican party in August.

He also has a stain on him given the fact that his daughter is CEO of Mylan, which came under fire after it hiked up the price of their EpiPen, a life saving allergy shot.

Attorney General Patrick Morrisey and Rep. Evan Jenkins have thrown their hats into the race against him. Polls have shown Manchin with a lead over both so far. That could change.

Missouri’s Claire McCaskill (D) Reelection

Trump also easily won Missouri over failed Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, which could spell trouble for incumbent Claire McCaskill. She also faces a tough opponent: Attorney General Josh Hawley. The man has received support from Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. Lots of super PACs have thrown their support behind him, too. Unfortunately for the Democrats, Hawley’s top opponents in the primary dropped out.

Arizona’s Jeff Flake (R) Retiring

Jeff Flake shocked everyone a few months ago when he decided he wouldn’t run for reelection. Politico says he chose that route since it “became clear he had no path to winning reelection.” Trump won the state, but it has shown blue popping up recently. The GOP could keep the seat with Rep. Martha McSally, “one of the first female fighter pilots in the Air Force.” She even received praise from McConnell last week.

She ran against Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) in 2016, but lost.

But it may not be McSally since she will face Republican Kelli Ward for the seat. In a state that is slowly going blue, McSally may be the choice since she has shown to be a moderate Republican.

Politico reported that Rep. Kyrsten Sinema may “be the DSCC’s best recruit of the cycle” and has also grown a reputation as a moderate Democrat.

Basically it seems you have to be purple to win Arizona.

Another Arizona Race?

Politico didn’t list this one, but I will. No matter your feelings on John McCain, cancer sucks and it’s always sad. McCain is suffering from brain cancer, stage 4 glioblastoma, which is a “rare and highly aggressive form of the cancer.” The survival rate is 14 months and only 5-10 percent of patients live past 5 years.

He missed the Senate vote for the GOP tax bill so he could fly out to Arizona after receiving treatment and celebrate Christmas with his family.

I assumed he did this because it might be the last Christmas with his family. Other hints came after his daughter Meghan McCain moved up her wedding to Ben Domenech.

So there is a chance Arizona may face another Senate election in 2018 if something happens to McCain.

North Dakota’s Heidi Heitkamp (D) Reelection

Like West Virginia, Trump easily won North Dakota over Hillary in 2016. Heitkamp has shown some moderate tendencies like Manchin, especially on energy issues, but that may not be enough to win reelection. Politico wrote that she is “trailing Republicans by small margins.” However, the GOP doesn’t have a candidate yet. The party has eyes former state legislator Tom Campbell and Rep. Kevin Cramer. Campbell has decided to run, but Cramer is still thinking about it.

This shocks me considering it could be an easy race for the GOP to win.

Florida’s Bill Nelson (D) Reelection

This has the GOP on the edge of its seat. If Republican Governor Rick Scott jumps into the race it could spell doom for Nelson. Without Scott, Nelson could easily win reelection. Politico wrote that the GOP has imagined Scott “outspending Nelson and forcing Democratic groups to spend in Florida’s multiple expensive markets, limiting their ability to defend other incumbents or go on offense.”

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

“…The GOP could keep the seat with Rep. Martha McSally,…”
McSally is an UberSquish. She has a conservative rating of 43%, according to Heritage Action, and a TWENTY PERCENT rating according to Conservative Review.

So the question is, “Who here wants another John McCain?”

McConnell got Flake to resign when it became obvious his brand was toxic. He did that so he could substitute in another squish without so much baggage, like McSally.
McConnell is going to try to do to Kelli Ward what he did to Mo Brooks and Roy Moore in AL.

The only candidate who stood up to John McCain was Kelli Ward. Nobody else has proven that they’ll stand up to the GOPe when it isn’t easy.

Don’t be a sucker.

P.S. If you “have to be purple” to win in AZ, then why are both McCain and Flake hated here?
I think the GOPe would like you to believe you have to be a squish to win in AZ, but this state went for Trump by 5%.

Campaign Aides For Jeff Flake’s Primary Challenger Apologize Profusely For Ever Supporting Her
http://dailycaller.com/2017/10/18/campaign-aides-for-jeff-flakes-primary-challenger-apologize-profusely-for-ever-supporting-her/

Yah. Don’t be a sucker.

    Matt_SE in reply to Ragspierre. | December 26, 2017 at 10:52 am

    From the linked article:

    “The two staffers, Dustin Stockton and Jen Lawrence…”

    “Stockton and Lawrence say they were responsible for managing Ward’s current U.S. Senate campaign from May 2017 until September 2017.” — so, they were with her for 4 months.

    “Both are also former Breitbart reporters.” — and yet, Bannon supports Ward.

    “Financier Robert Mercer and his wife Diana donated $300,000 to a super PAC supporting Ward while Stockton and Lawrence were the campaign’s stewards.” — meaning that Ward is probably the best funded of the challengers.

    “The former Ward staffer believes Ward will not ultimately support President Donald Trump’s much-repeated promise to construct a large wall along the border separating the United States and Mexico. (RELATED: SHOCK POLL: Nearly Two-Thirds Of Arizona Voters Think Trump’s Border Wall Is Unnecessary)” — this is an exact replay of the Alabama strategy, where McConnell smeared Brooks as an anti-Trump candidate. All lies.

    “Jeff Flake hasn’t been all that terrible except for his opposition to Trump,” he [Stockton] said.” — yep, this guy sounds like a real patriot.

    “The American Conservative Union gives Flake a lifetime score rating of 97 percent. FreedomWorks gives Flake a scorecard rating of 100 percent.” — here we have the article burnishing Flake’s conservative credentials. Does this sound impartial to you?

    Finally, consider who it is offering you this opposition research: Ragspierre.

    I have to thank you, Rags, for illustrating the exact sort of smear campaign that the GOPe is going to conduct against Ward. If you didn’t exist, I’d have to invent you.

      Matt_SE in reply to Matt_SE. | December 26, 2017 at 11:10 am

      From Stockton’s Twitter feed, it seems he also opposes Tarkanian in NV (the highest visibility challenger to Heller, who’s deeply in trouble there).

      Jennifer Lawrence also comments regularly on his Twitter feed. The two of them seem to be the ones responsible for sending a 12 year old girl to interview Roy Moore. They seem to like Drudge a lot.

      If sending a girl to interview Moore seemed like a good idea to them, then they’re incompetent. Really, I have a hard time distinguishing them from establishment moles.

    Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | December 26, 2017 at 11:04 am

    “Her campaign was such a disaster that we saw an opportunity to prove how much we can help struggling campaigns and we did just that,” Stockton, the former Breitbart writer, said. “Unfortunately, she showed that she isn’t up to the task of standing up to the pressure that causes so many candidates to betray voters when they get to Washington.”

    snip

    Stockton said he and Lawrence worked to position Ward effectively as a grassroots conservative for the primary. They became disillusioned, they said, after concluding that Ward’s ambition to become a U.S. senator is far more important to her than any actual policy issues.

    “What we found is that she is willing to adopt whatever methods she thinks will work at the time,” Stockton said. “She will set anything aside in order to pursue her own ambition.”

    snip

    “People run and say all the things we want them to say. Then, they get to Washington, D.C. and don’t do what they said,” Stockton told TheDC.

    “In the Senate, you have pressure from a lot of people and you have to be willing to stand up for your convictions. She’ll cave to whatever group she thinks will further her ambitions.”

    “We showed her how to run a campaign. At the first opportunity, she sold out the grassroots,” he said.

    “As soon as people saw this was a legitimate campaign, all these people came out of the woodwork. That’s the candidate’s chance to stand up to the swamp.”

    “She started to surround herself with people whose agenda is not the grassroots,” Stockton said.

    “We had donors and volunteers who would stand in 110-degree heat supporting her. They’ve been calling us and asking us why they are ignored.”

    These two people know Ward. They’re both Bannonites. They are NOT some kind of moles. Don’t be a sucker.

      Matt_SE in reply to Ragspierre. | December 26, 2017 at 11:12 am

      In other words, they’re definitely moles.

      Matt_SE in reply to Ragspierre. | December 26, 2017 at 11:45 am

      “According to one conservative website, it’s been rumored the Ward campaign failed to pay Lawrence, who has been characterized as a disgruntled employee.”

      https://arizonadailyindependent.com/2017/10/18/bannon-ingraham-show-for-ward-fundraiser/

      Stockton’s and Lawrence’s “apology” was issued to counteract an endorsement and fundraiser appearance by both Bannon and Laura Ingraham on the same day.

      Let this be a lesson: never trust Ragspierre.

        Ragspierre in reply to Matt_SE. | December 26, 2017 at 1:47 pm

        Ah, so a rumor on a website is now proof that someone is a “disgruntled employee”.

        Therefore, you can smear them, me, and tell everyone that everything said about Ward by two people who know her, are Bannonites, and who (according to your blather) she stiffed is just “establisment” dirty tricks.

        You really are a good lil’ zealot.

          Matt_SE in reply to Ragspierre. | December 26, 2017 at 2:28 pm

          You have a long track record of being a troll, Rags. Nobody needs to rely on my assessment of you.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | December 26, 2017 at 2:35 pm

          No, liar, I have a long track-record of being a consistent conservative.

          Calling me a “troll” reveals several things about you…

          1. you don’t know what the term means,

          2. I’ve been here LONG before you ever posted, so that’s like calling your father names because he has opinions, and

          3. despite the fact this is a blog for conservatives who are interested in legal issues, you want to take it in the direction of T-rumpism, and kinda hate on those of us who really are conservatives and know something about the law.

          I understand. There’s a whole turd-swirl of your type here. And it really is a shame.

          Matt_SE in reply to Ragspierre. | December 26, 2017 at 2:42 pm

          You may have been here longer, but I’m better than you.
          Quality over quantity.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | December 26, 2017 at 3:35 pm

          As you lay your head down tonight, rest with that thought…

          “I’m better than Ragspierre”.

          Why?

          “Because I decree it!”

          I give you permission, and my blessing. A small favor to calm that fevered brain. Rest well, Binky.

          “No, liar, I have a long track-record of being a consistent conservative.”

          LOL, and as you are here, always on the side of the progs.

P.P.S. “She ran against Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) in 2016, but lost.”

This seems to refer to McSally, but it’s not true. McSally didn’t run against McCain in 2016 according to Wikipedia, but Kelli Ward did:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Arizona,_2016#Results

Casey: the part of his prolife father that was left out of his gene pool & Bob & Barrack…. is certainly out with many Penna voters… Go lou Barletta!

You are thinking pre-Trump Presidency.

This is not about Republicans versus Democrats. It is not Conservatives v Liberals. This is the Establishment Uniparty v the voters.

First of all, you have to understand that both parties are controlled by the Establishment. The second thing is that all the sitting members of Congress are members of the Establishment. And, the third is that there is NO WAY that the Establishment political parties are going to replace sitting Congressmen with anyone who is not controlled by the Establishment.

Take Roy Moore for example. The GOP could have continued to back Moore , as none of these allegations had been proven. It didn’t. McConnell rejected Moore and the GOP pulled his funding. Why? If he was guilty and was elected, he would have been cashiered from the Senate for cause and there would have been a do over, probably with Strange as the GOP candidate. But, if he was innocent, then he would have been an anti-Establishment Senator. Rather than take the chance that he was innocent, something the GOPe leadership either knew or strongly suspected, it threw the election to Jones, a member in good standing of the Establishment.

Remember, the Establishment doesn’t really care which party holds a particular seat, as long as it controls the politician in that seat. This is a new era and has to be viewed as such. Those who receive the GOP support and money are going to be favored by the Establishment. And, they will vote as the Establishment tells them to vote.

    Matt_SE in reply to Mac45. | December 26, 2017 at 11:31 am

    And shills like Rags will defend the establishment with every lie at their disposal. The article he linked up above which smears Kelli Ward is a great example.

    Go into the Twitter feeds of the two staffers, Dustin Stockton and Jen Lawrence, and check it out. Go into the Twitter feed of the article’s author, Eric Owens and you’ll find a guy who doesn’t like Bannon and is weirdly pro-immigration.

    This is the whispering campaign the establishment is promoting to fool voters. All of these people are hacks and liars.

      Ragspierre in reply to Matt_SE. | December 26, 2017 at 1:50 pm

      I make it a practice never to lie, but liars lie about me here all the time.

      You’ve made the decision to join them, and all because I posted some information you regard as contrary to your religion.

      You are the “shill”, and the shyster.

      Ragspierre in reply to Matt_SE. | December 26, 2017 at 2:11 pm

      Eric Owens
      ‏Verified account @ericowensdc
      Dec 21

      Trump Commutes Sentence Of Ex-Meatpacking Exec Who Employed Hundreds Of Illegal Immigrants http://dailycaller.com/2017/12/21/trump-commutes-sentence-of-ex-meatpacking-exec-who-employed-hundreds-of-illegal-immigrants/?utm_source=site-share … via @dailycaller

      WHO is oddly soft on immigration…???

        Matt_SE in reply to Ragspierre. | December 26, 2017 at 2:31 pm

        An excellent example of the kinds of posts you find in his timeline. They appear to be innocent statements of fact, but they all tend towards embarrassing Trump or making him look like a hypocrite.

        What kind of “supporter” would do that?

          Ragspierre in reply to Matt_SE. | December 26, 2017 at 2:37 pm

          …an honest one. But you wouldn’t understand that, as is apparent.

          Matt_SE in reply to Matt_SE. | December 26, 2017 at 2:48 pm

          I see now…he’s passive-aggressively attacking Trump OUT OF LOVE. He just likes Trump so much, he wants him to be the best darned president he can be.

          This guy deserves some kind of prize for his selflessness.

          Ragspierre in reply to Matt_SE. | December 26, 2017 at 2:57 pm

          Well, kind of.

          He loves this country and the truth more than he’s dedicated to giving T-rump a tongue-bath 24/7.

          It’s a model you might want to consider adopting.

          Oh, and look up “passive-aggressive”. Like “troll” it doesn’t mean what you think.

        Milhouse in reply to Ragspierre. | December 28, 2017 at 6:38 pm

        Whoa, there, Rags. Sholom Rubashkin is one of the kindest, most generous and selfless people I’ve ever known or even heard of, his conviction and sentence was a scandal, and his commutation long overdue.

        He was never convicted of immigration violations. Of course many of his employees were here illegally; go find a meatpacking plant where that isn’t the case. He knew that as a general proposition it was bound to be true of his own workforce as well. But he had no knowledge of any specific case, and took those measures the law required to prevent it. No, he didn’t go beyond the law’s requirements; why should he?

        His conviction was for a phony “bank fraud” which harmed nobody, including the local bank managers, who were well aware of what he was doing and didn’t mind; it was a matter of filing the right paperwork for the bureaucrats at corporate HQ who had no notion of how a business runs on the ground. He never missed a payment on the loan, until the government maliciously destroyed the business and caused 100% of the bank’s loss.

    Ragspierre in reply to Mac45. | December 26, 2017 at 1:56 pm

    Did the “Establishment uniparty” pass the tax bill that The Great Goad Cheeto sign?

    No. Neither did Der Donald pass the bill. Neither did Der Donald confirm Gorsuch.

    But play your lil’ nutter games, and pretend whatever you will pretend.

    Like the howler that T-rump, whose FATHER was Mr. Establishment, is “the ultimate outsider”.

    Cheeeeeeeeeesus…

      Actually, the Establishment Uniparty DID pass the tax bill, or allowed it to pass. Look, the members of Congress are not going to willingly shoot themselves in the head; even for their Establishment masters. If they did not pass something, then many Republicans stood to lose their cushy jobs in 2019.

      Now, Gorsuch. This was an interesting confirmation of a Trump nomination. You have to remember that the confirmation of Gorsuch really did not change the status quo which had existed for years. Gorsuch merely replaced Scalia. And, if his performance in the Obamacare case was any indication, Roberts is owned by the Establishment. So, the Court reverts back to the status quo that existed when Scalia died, nothing more. The Establishment wants the SCOTUS to be balanced. At the moment, you have three “conservatives”, four liberals and two swing votes, Kennedy and Roberts [though Roberts tends to vote with the “conservatives” he has demonstrated that he is really another swing vote].

      As to Trump being the real “outsider” in the 2016 Republican Primaries, this is true. He and Ben Carson were the only non-politicians. And, once Carson dropped out of contention, Trump was left as the only political outsider in the pack. I know that you would really like to keep considering Ted Cruz as an “outsider”. but he is a career politician and, therefor, NOT an outsider. As i have mentioned previously, he was a master strategist and cleverly positioned himself as a “rebel” to take advantage of the swelling anti-Establishment vote. But, please, get grip on reality.

    Ragspierre in reply to Mac45. | December 26, 2017 at 2:03 pm

    “Rather than take the chance that he was innocent, something the GOPe leadership either knew or strongly suspected, it threw the election to Jones, a member in good standing of the Establishment.”

    I’d call you a liar, but that’s really just your broke-dick opinion.

    Nobody, including the editor of T-rumpBart, believed Moore “innocent”. Well, and several nutters who will now self-identify.
    https://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2017/12/breitbart-editor-now-says-believed-leigh-corfman-thought-roy-moore-terrible/

    Alabama voters didn’t believe Moore.

      Matt_SE in reply to Ragspierre. | December 26, 2017 at 2:33 pm

      Rags, quoting Hot Air, quoting Breitbart (selectively).
      That just REEKS of credibility.

        Ragspierre in reply to Matt_SE. | December 26, 2017 at 2:39 pm

        Oh, dear, so you’re now saying the quotes were “highly edited”?

        Like the Pigford apologists…???

        You’d be wise to just STFU.

      Rags my man, you really have to stop believing everything that you read, in print. And, you should know better than to believe ANYTHING from the Washington Post, especially if it is about Breitbart, Bannon or Roy Moore.

      Now, whether people “believe” that someone is guilty is innocent is irrelevant. The only thing that IS relevant is whether something is PROVEN to be true. And, in Moore’s case, NO PROOF HAS EVER MATERIALIZED.

      Now, being a practicing attorney, I am sure that you are familiar with the concept of the “toad witness”. This is a person who is just incredibly unbelievable. No matter how reliable his information, people just do not find him believable. This is Roy Moore. His personality is such that he just does not come across as believable.

        Ragspierre in reply to Mac45. | December 26, 2017 at 2:54 pm

        “Now, whether people “believe” that someone is guilty is innocent is irrelevant.”‘

        No, that’s the stupid non-sense you’ve been pushing for weeks, and you can’t seem to let go of it.

        What people believe about a person is ALL that’s relevant in any number of situations, including who they will support for office.

        Dollar Bill Clinton was never convicted of raping Juanita Broderick, but I still believe her. Her statements ARE evidence, ya moron.

          Juante Broderick’s claims have weight because of supporting evidence. There was her friend who encountered Broderick in the room, in a disheveled, battered condition just after the attack was alleged to have occurred. There was also other credible witness accounts of Broderick telling them of the attack at later times. However, Broderick impeached her own credibility by making contradictory statements. And, given that Broderick’s veracity was the key to any successful prosecution, no prosecution was pursued. So, a person is free to “believe” whatever they wish. However, it was never proven that Clinton attacked Broderick. The same is true in Roy Moore’s case, except that the case against Moore is even weaker than the Broderick case was. Not only has the main witness impeached herself, but there is no reliable contemporaneous witness to claims of the described incident ever happening. So, even more so than in the Broderick case, there is no way that Moore can be assumed to be guilty. You do know what happens when you ASSUME something, don’t you?

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | December 26, 2017 at 3:17 pm

          “If what people “BELEIVE” [sic] is all that is important then you are doomed, Bud. Because it is pretty clear what people believe you to be. So, perhaps you should embrace that an quit trying to convince others that you are not what they think you are.”

          One of the things that anyone who can read “believes” is that you are a gassy, bloated, condescending prig, who lies.

          I’ve never in my life said that what people “BELIEVE” is “all that is important”.

          So, I am SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooo not “doomed”.

          Also, there are many people in the world who “believe” crazy things…like you.

          I don’t give a good shit about such “beliefs” or the people who harbor them, and pronounce them like they are truisms…like you.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | December 26, 2017 at 3:22 pm

          Gorsh, the people of Alabama disagree.

          They must be EEEEEeeeeeeevil. You’re WAY better than them.

          Because they didn’t believe Moore. And they voted that way.

          Well, we’ve already had bussed in voters interviewed…. and no real investigation done.

          Ragspee is just a prog.

          He brings up Juanita Broderick as “proof” the allegations against Moore must be believed.

          He doesn’t bring up Anita Hill and her allegations.

          Wonder why?

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | December 27, 2017 at 9:25 am

          Well, that was a pretty good round-up of the nutters and liars.

          Nice job of self-identifying…!!!

          Roundup of nutters:

          Ragspee believed Anita Hill.

          Super nutter.

        Mac45 in reply to Mac45. | December 26, 2017 at 3:07 pm

        Think about this for a moment, Rags. If what people “BELEIVE” is all that is important then you are doomed, Bud. Because it is pretty clear what people believe you to be. So, perhaps you should embrace that an quit trying to convince others that you are not what they think you are.

        Want to rethink your assertion? Or are you just going to post “OH, Yeah?” as you usually do?

    There is no “Uniparty” just as the “voters” are anything but a bunch of people who disagree if not hate each other.

    Some politicians, such as Kelli Ward, Roy Moore, and Danny Tarkanian, are mere hucksters and snake-oil salesmen who paint a picture of not only a Stonecutters-level conspiracy but that “the voters” (or, if you prefer, “volonté générale”) is somehow a unified mass that just so happens to think that Ward, Moore, Tarkanian, et al. are the bees knees, with defeat attributable *only* to the “establishment” conspiracy.

Rick the Curmudgeon | December 26, 2017 at 12:18 pm

I’m sure the GOPe will do an admirable job in the ’18 midterms, returning Mitch to the job he much prefers, that of the Senate Minority Leader.

While Republicans Luke Messer and Todd Rokita destroy each other for the IN seat, Joe Donnelly is doing what Hoosier Dems always do. Run to the right of Republicans and than grab their ankles for the Dem Leadership once elected.

There’s a third one though, Pro Trump, businessman Mike Braun.

Mitch will no doubt be putting out a hit job on him by Valentines Day.

    Matt_SE in reply to murkyv. | December 26, 2017 at 2:36 pm

    You watch: this will be the M.O. of McConnell for every race that threatens his power base, then he’ll try to blame it on the crazy base like he did in AL.

    Poor Mitch only has one play in his playbook.

Until we boot that rat mcconnell from the head of OUR (again: OUR party – we are the base) party in the Senate, don’t look for anything but sabotage from him.

That rat Mcconnell is jeff flake, but without the big mouth.

Concerning McCain’s seat – the rules in AZ appear to be that the governor gets to appoint someone until the next general election. So, if he was diagnosed in July 2017, he has already used up 5 of the average of 14 months.

While he could live a lot longer, I hope the Rs are looking for good options and don’t do the usual circular firing squad and severely injure good candidates in the first race and end up with no one for the second race.

No mention of the Democrats likely pick-up in Nevada? Incumbent Dean Heller is likely to be defeated by Danny Tarkanian. Tarkanian has an uncanny knack to lose. He lost Nevada’s 3rd Congressional District (which Trump won, btw) to Jacky Rosen, who he would be facing in November in a state that went against Trump.

But hey, handing over Senate seats (likely for life) to Democrats is a small price to pay to flip the bird to “the estabishment”/Stonecutters.

    I think you may be forgetting the fact that Heller is in a lot of trouble, and his re-election isn’t at all assured.
    But hey, don’t mind the facts while you’ve got a cool and self-serving narrative to spin.

      Oh, I know that Heller is in trouble. He’s squished out plenty of times and I’d welcome him being replaced as the GOP nominee by someone who isn’t a born loser. He’s also in trouble because there are hard-core Trump supporters who are more than happy to make Chuck Schumer the Senate Majority Leader in order to vent þe olde sound n’ fury at the mythical establishment.

      Tarkanian is what happens when feelz override political reality.

        “…at the mythical establishment.”
        Well, somebody spent $3.5 million smearing Brooks in round 1 in Alabama, and it wasn’t Moore.

        Really, by this point I think the fact that the GOP establishment exists is beyond dispute. Which means if you’re denying it, you’re either a liar or a fool.

        Although I suppose you might just be a sock-puppet for Ragspierre, making you both.

        “He’s also in trouble because there are hard-core Trump supporters who are more than happy to make Chuck Schumer the Senate Majority Leader in order to vent þe olde sound n’ fury at the mythical establishment.”

        Care to back that up with anything beyond your fevered imagination?

        No, didn’t think so.

        All you trump haters are deranged.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend