Democrats look for gains in governors' races

[ProSense]

Democrats look for gains in governors' races

By John Whitesides, Political Correspondent
Fri Feb 10, 2:35 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrats are positioned for gains in governors' races in November and could capture governorships in many big battleground states, giving the party an early edge in the 2008 fight for the White House.

Republicans must defend 22 of the 36 governors' offices on the ballot in November, including eight states where the incumbent retired or is barred from running again. Democrats defend 14 governorships but only one in which the incumbent is not running.

The lopsided political map, along with a tough national election climate for Republicans, put Democrats in a strong position to pick up at least the four governorships needed for a national majority. Republicans hold 28 governorships to 22 for Democrats.

"The math is not in our favor this year," said Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, chairman of the Republican Governors' Association, who is stepping down this year ahead of a potential 2008 presidential bid.


nore...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060210/pl_nm/usa_politics_governors_dc_1

[madrchsod]

1. don`t look good in illinois

we just may lose the governorship. alot depends if the moderate republicans can get judy barr topinka nominated to face blago.if they can`t blago should win...if he doesn`t get in anymore legal problems

[Awsi Dooger]

2. The goverorships are by far my highest priority

No one else agrees with me, obvious by the mere one reply to this thread so far.

I overwhelmingly believe in the ground up approach, getting Dem governors in office and filling lesser positions, plus just allowing the state to get comfortable with Democratic leadership.

We're not going to gain control of the House or Senate this year. It's not pessimism, simply overwhelming mathematical probability. Look at the states and districts we have to flop and it's virtually inconceivable enough of them can turn in what is still a 50/50 nation. Our positives are not high enough in regard to party perception and 9/11 still impacts how white women vote in federal races. Those are undeniable regulators in terms of winning congressional majorities. The conventional wisdom post-2004 was Democrats were playing defense in regard to 2006, based on the senatorial playing field and House redistricting. Big hint: everything tends to drift back to the beginning. The GOP implosions have not been enough to completely negate the foundations behind the earlier conventional wisdom. I'm hoping for short to medium gains.

But on a state to state level we have a chance for significant pickups and I hope the party handicaps properly and applies proper emphasis, instead of wild stabs at the federal level.

[Hippo_Tron]

3. Ohio and Florida governorships will be very important nationally...

Ohio Secretary of State will also be very important.

[Zinfandel]

4. Sound thoughts...Will we have a chance even there, Arnold will continue

as Republican Gov...the Republican Secretary of State will count the votes...via electronic voting machines...

[sandnsea]

5. Oregon is in trouble

Our Governor is kind of weak, up against a really nasty House speaker who has made a mess of everything. It's all being blamed on the "dino", so he's going to have an ugly primary which will leave the Democratic candidate beat up and wide open for a Republican defeat. We don't have nice moderate Republicans running for state office anymore either, it would mean a real wingnut most likely. Still, people are used to their local Democrats, it's really the national party that they vote against. Lots of supposedly red areas voted Dem and then went Bush in the GE, they vote against "latte liberals". The local Dems need to help dispel the myth of the "latte liberal" instead of running against it themselves.

[snowbear]

7. You've got to be kidding... Oregon going for a wingnut??

Wow.. that's unexpected.

Alaska will be booting out R-Frank Murkowski.. and I sure hope it's back to a Democrat again!!

From what the polls here are showing, it will likely be one of these two:

D-Ethan Berkowitz >> R-Sarah Palin >>

Ethan is doing great in the polls.. but Sarah is popular because she nailed the head of her own party on an ethics violation. It will be a close one.

If D- Tony Knowles decides to run again, he'll WIN AGAIN.. He hasn't made his mind up yet.
(He's already been a 2-term Governor, so he'd only be able to serve one 4-year term)

[sandnsea]

8. By default

Yes, the Republicans have been putting up quite a few of the loopiest wing nuts you can imagine. The R base is as nutty here as anywhere else. I don't think that kind of nut could win unless we have a really damaged Dem candidate though, that's what I'm worried about. We'll probably have an even stronger Green challenge, if Kulongoski wins the primary. So we could end up with a real disaster on our hands. We don't have the margin that California has. I haven't decided whether to support Kulongoski or Sorenson. We need to do a better job in the state, no question about it, otherwise we're setting ourselves up for more losses in the future. But maybe Kulongoski could do a better job if we made our case to the people better, I don't know.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

6. Spitzer will definitely win New York.

And hopefully Phil Angelides can beat Arnold in CA.

[ProSense]

9. I'm counting on that too. n/t

[Starbucks Anarchist]

10. I'll be moving there in a few months.

Would you have any idea how late I have to register to vote there?

[ProSense]

11. Try this site:

http://www.elections.state.ny.us/portal/page?_pageid=153,42096,153_53293&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL

[Starbucks Anarchist]

12. Thanks.