Tag: 2018 election

Raul Paul-endorsed Andy Sanborn Loses GOP Primary

By Kenneth Casey | United States

New Hampshire held their primaries for federal elections on September 11th. Much of the focus from mainstream media was on the Democratic Primary for New Hampshire’s 1st Congressional District, where Bernie Sanders’ son received less than 2% of the vote, losing to an establishment-backed member of the party. On the Democratic side, Chris Pappas easily defeated challenger Maura Sullivan in the House primary.

Edwards Trumps Sanborn

Andy Sanborn, a Rand Paul-backed Republican, however, did not see as much attention from the media. On Tuesday, he narrowly lost the GOP primary to an establishment-backed Republican Eddie Edwards.

Edwards finished the race with 48% of the vote, while Sanborn pulled in second with 41.6%. Since the election, Sanborn has conceded defeat and endorsed Edwards for the office. This comes in stark contrast to Edwards’ previous remark that he would not do the same for Sanborn. Claiming the former candidate had a number of “character flaws”, Edwards flatly refused to say he would give Sanborn his support.

Sanborn’s History of Liberty

Sanborn has been well-known in the New Hampshire liberty scene for a while now. He previously was the New Hampshire co-chairman of Ron Paul’s presidential campaign. Also, he introduced Rand Paul at his first appearance in New Hampshire on the campaign trail.

Right after Sanborn announced his candidacy for the open seat in New Hampshire, Rand Paul endorsed his longtime ally. Paul appeared with him recently on the campaign to give him a late push. However, this clearly was not enough to propel him to victory.

A Year of Difficulty

Libertarian Republicans have not fared well in 2018 elections. Many members of Justin Amash’s liberty caucus are losing primaries or not seeking re-election, for example. Sanborn’s defeat to a mainstream establishment Republican is yet another example of the unfortunate fact. It appears, thus, that besides Gary Johnson and a couple of others, the 2018 general election will have very few advocates for libertarian-leaning ideology.


Get awesome merchandise and help 71 Republic end the media duopoly by donating to our Patreon, which you can find here. Thank you for helping us reinvent journalism.

Featured Image Source

Advertisements

The Democratic Party Doesn’t Care about America’s Youth

By John Keller | United States

In the current day, a critical midterm election is rapidly approaching. With this, a segment of the Democratic Party is claiming that only they care about the nation’s youth. This segment of the party is campaigning with their alleged care for the youth. But their promises of free college, free healthcare, and more only prove how little they really care.

Promises of billions, even trillions, in new spending for the youth beg a simple question. Just where will all of this money come from? Currently, the United States Treasury is bankrupt, with a debt of over $21 trillion. “Free” education and healthcare is only remotely possible in a stable economy, and holding a debt greater than our GDP is a guarantee at an economy that is too weak and too unstable for such programs.

Furthermore, the money for “free” programs must come from somewhere, meaning it comes from government revenue. Ultimately, this is a fancy term for the taxpayer’s back pocket. Currently, the United States has some of the highest tax rates in the world when factoring in city, county, state, and federal taxes.

In order for the Democratic Party’s “free” programs to work, the current entitlements, such as Medicare and Medicaid, require major revisions. As they hurtle towards bankruptcy, there is not much more room to tax people to fund them. In order to avoid this, it is necessary for the government to look at its wasted spending. Several members of Congress, such as Senator Rand Paul, have spoken out against it. In order to improve the United States Treasury and make any of the Democratic Party’s policies attainable, ending waste is a must.

However, the Democratic Party has no plan to lower the debt or rework spending in order to make their promises possible. Thus, any tangible Blue Wave will only put America’s treasury deeper in the red. A bigger debt with consistent votes for more spending simply pushes the issues down the road. This, of course, deepens the severity of issues that America’s youth must tackle. As taxes increase and services decay, America’s youth will take on the responsibility of this nation’s debt. But the cycle can end, in fact quite simply, by stopping this fall’s Blue Wave.


To support 71 Republic, please donate to our Patreon, which you can find here.

Featured Image Source

The Case for Liberty – Phil Anderson for WI

By John Keller | United States

Dodge County, a rural bastion in Wisconsin, is in a desperate position following increasing control from Madison. Whereas the inner cities have been struggling under the Walker Administration, rural Wisconsin has begun to suffer in ways they haven’t since the market crash of 2008.

In the last fiscal year, Dodge County had a proposed budget of $111,693,552, an 11.39% increase from 2013. A property tax rate of 5.6% is the average in Dodge County. But the main source of income for the Dodge County government, the property tax, brings in only $33,281,315. So, other taxes and revenue sources had to cover $78,412,237 of appropriations in the county. The reason for such an imbalance is unfunded mandates.

As of mid-July, there are 99 unfunded mandates and restrictions on how local counties can govern from the Walker Administration. Essentially, this means there are 99 instances in which Scott Walker is telling the county how to run itself and how to spend your money, without paying for it with the state’s taxpayer funds. This leads to budget imbalance and growing debt at the local level.

Phil Anderson: A Solution

Phil Anderson offers a different option. Running for governor in 2018, he is campaigning to increase local control. He stated in his platform, “Local municipalities, counties, and school boards ought to be as free as possible to pursue the priorities of their communities without interference from the State. State regulation ought to be limited to those things that only the State should do. All unfunded mandates should be eliminated.”

There is only one candidate that wants change the way Wisconsin runs so that local governments can run their own affairs. He is running to find local, common sense solutions for local problems, not statewide, bureaucratic decisions. In order to keep your money in your pocket and allow Dodge County, and all of Wisconsin. to spend less, vote Phil Anderson for Governor.


To support 71 Republic, please donate to our Patreon, which you can find here.

Featured Image Source

Justin Tucker: All Politics is Local

Justin Tucker, Chair of the Chicago Libertarian Party, is running for Illinois State Representatives in District Four.

71R: With thousands of career options, what inspired you to seek a career in politics?

Tucker: I have been interested in politics since I was a teenager. I have been a libertarian since I learned about Harry Browne, the Libertarian Party nominee in 2000. It was only in 2015 that I jumped into activism and joined my local LP chapter. What inspired me to join was the gross misconduct of the Chicago Police Department and the Chicago amusement tax imposed applying to Netflix. I felt enough was enough. I could no longer be willfully apathetic or believe I couldn’t make a difference.

I am currently the Chair of the Libertarian Party of Chicago, serving since 2016. I also worked on the Gary Johnson’s 2016 campaign as Volunteer Coordinator in Illinois. This year, I collected over 1600 signatures for our statewide candidates to be on the ballot this November.

I choose to run for Illinois House of Representatives in District 4 with the purpose of telling my neighbors about our candidates and maybe getting a few signatures for myself. My energy, however, was better spent circulating petitions for the statewide slate than circulating my own.  Also, as a Libertarian, I didn’t want to deal with all the government paperwork to get on the ballot. I will instead be running a write-in campaign to have a platform to talk about why our candidates are the best choices for Illinois and to share our ideas with the electorate.

71R: Many people when they think of government they think of Congress or the presidency. Why is politics at the state level, and in the state House of Representatives, so important and motivated you to get involved?

Tucker: It is often said that all politics is local. Politics at the state and local level are so important because they are closest to the people, and thus easier to make an impact on policy. That’s why I chose to involve myself in a run for a State House seat and also why I support statehood for Cook County.

I’m a fan of local control. It’s easier to hold the crooks accountable when they’re in your neighborhood as opposed to far away legislature.

71R: For over 150 years the United States has been locked in the two-party duopoly. What attracted you to the Libertarian Party?

Tucker: I was attracted to the Libertarian Party because it’s the only party that is for small government and means actually means it. One of the biggest issues for me is getting the government out of the way of my LGBT friends. Republicans claimed to be for smaller government but fought against the right of gender and sexual minorities to marry. When I discovered the Libertarian Party, I saw they were consistently for small government across all areas of life. I’ve been a fan ever since. My only regret is that I didn’t get involved with activism sooner.

71R: Illinois is often brought to the political forefront and were put into the national spotlight during the gun control debates, a debate that still exists today, due to Chicago’s crime. Where do you stand on this critical issue?

Tucker: As a Libertarian, I believe in the right to protect yourself. Chicago residents like Otis McDonald stood up to the city’s infringement on the right to self-defense and ended up changing the course of history. The fight, however, is not over. In Illinois, we need to abolish the Firearm Owner’s Identification card, conceal carry licensing and waiting periods. The Second Amendment is the only permit anyone needs.

Drastically reducing gang violence in Chicago is more of a complicated task. We can start by ending drug prohibition, cutting taxes and regulations to attract economic development, and reforming education.

71R: Our Founding Fathers even disagreed on how to interpret the Constitution, shown in the Federalist vs. Anti-Federalist debates. What is your interpretation of the Constitution, and how does that influence your view on government?

Tucker: The Constitution has, without a doubt, contributed to the development of liberal thought. It was a document designed to limit the power of the federal government and protect the rights of the people. I have a tremendous amount of respect for it. The problem, however, is that it hasn’t prevented the federal government from overstepping its authority.

If our federal government followed the Constitution literally as it is currently written, the size and scope of government would be drastically reduced. I certainly wish that’s how it operates today.

Ideally, the feds are allowed to do only a handful of things. They get out of the way for the rest of the stuff and let the communities in the several states do their things. That’s how I interpret the Constitution. Local control is key and the Constitution influenced me in that regard.

71R: Libertarians tend to believe less government is better government. What is one area of government, however, you would like to see operating?

Tucker: I believe that the purpose of government is to protect the rights of the people. That would include courts, peace officers, and a defensive military.

On a municipal level, I think there’s a little more flexibility in what the government can do if its available to all people. Chicago has gorgeous parks, stocked libraries, and an extensive mass transit system, all of which I use.

Ideally, all these things should be paid for by the most voluntarily or least coercively means possible. In the case of the parks, the libraries and the transit system, these could be fully or partially privatized.

71R: Branching off of the last question, what is one area you think there should be cutbacks or even elimination in the state of Illinois?

Tucker: It’s hard to pick just one, but in Illinois, it would be taxes. We should cut or eliminate as many taxes as we can. Property taxes, incomes taxes, sales taxes, taxes on vices, taxes on bags. Let’s take a chainsaw to as many taxes as we can.

71R: What can the people of District Four expect should you be elected?

Tucker: If enough of the people of District Four write me in, they can expect me to work many things that would help to reduce the size and scope of government. My major initiatives include establishing 401(k) plans for all new state government employees, slashing spending, cutting taxes and or abolishing as many taxes and regulations as possible, legalizing cannabis and psychedelic mushrooms and reforming the criminal justice system. I would also make the case for Cook County statehood any chance I could.

71R: If someone was interested in getting involved or donating, how can they reach out to your campaign?

Tucker: Folks can reach out to me through my Facebook page (www.facebook.com/JustinTuckerforIL) if they want to get involved. Since I don’t want to deal with government authorities, I am not accepting donations; however, I highly recommend donating to Kash Jackson’s campaign for Illinois governor (www.kash2018.com/donate) or to the Libertarian Party of Illinois (www.lpillinois.org/donate).

71R: Do you have any final remarks for the readers?

Tucker: The Libertarian Party is not possible without our candidates, our volunteers and our donors. Please consider volunteering a few hours a week to a Libertarian candidate. Be an activist in your local chapter, or if there aren’t any available, get a few friends together and form a LP chapter yourselves. If you want to share the LP with your neighbors, consider running for office or becoming a precinct committeeman. If you can’t donate your time, please donate your money. Every volunteer hour and every dollar helps us fuel the fires of liberty. Thank you!

I would like to thank Justin Tucker for his time. Be sure to visit his website for more information.


To support 71 Republic, please donate to our Patreon, which you can find here.

Featured Image Source.

These Five Senate Races Will Make or Break the Blue Wave

By Drew Zirkle | United States

With midterms fast approaching, Democrats are beginning to target specific races in the hopes that they will win back the seat advantage in the Senate. Currently, the GOP holds a slim majority of 51 to 49, but that majority is far from secure. The Democratic Party, which hasn’t held a majority of Senate seats in over 3 years, is making a valiant effort to retake enough seats to put them back in control. Coalitions of establishment voters, progressive voters, and young people all over the country are looking to catapult fresh faces past GOP incumbents as well as secure weak incumbents against GOP advances.

As we get closer to November 6th, key races that will be necessary victories if the Democrats are to win back the Senate majority are beginning to emerge. Along with the exorbitant amount of data and factors to consider when determining the performance of Democrats, these five Senate races will stand out as indicators of whether the balance of power will shift in Washington after the midterm elections.

#1. Rep. Jacky Rosen (D) V. Sen. Dean Heller (R), Nevada:

The Race:

Jacky Rosen is relatively new face both Nevada and National politics, however, her candidacy is proving to be a powerful force that her opponent, incumbent Dean Heller, is struggling to contain. Jacky began her career in politics in 2016 after then-Senate majority leader Harry Reid asked her to run for Nevada’s 3rd congressional district, a congressional district that encompasses the area South of Las Vegas. Despite being a newcomer to politics, she beat career politician and familiar GOP candidate Danny Tarkanian in a very close race.

Although the race was close, it was still a great victory for the Democrats, as the NV-3 district had only been in control of the Democrats for 2 years since the year 2000. Rosen then decided to throw her hat into the ring for the 2018 Senate race, and to her benefit, no other major Democrat’s opposed her. After mopping up a field of weak primary candidates in June, Rosen has put all her energy into building a robust campaign to unseat the incumbent, Dean Heller. Behind Rosen’s robust campaign is a strong foundation of political capital in the form of endorsements, which she got from key figures like Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren. Despite having only two years of political experience, Rosen has the appearance of a seasoned politician despite being a fresh face in Nevada politics.

Geographical Analysis:

Nevada Senate races are especially unique, as only 2 counties reliably get over 150k voters while the rest get less than 30k. Those two counties, Clark and Washoe counties, are the keys to the Senate seat. Although Clark county almost always has a Democratic majority because of the presence of Las Vegas, Rosen must secure a large margin in that county to ensure victory. Luckily, Rosen already has a wealth of political connections in the county because her current house district, NV-3, is located within Clark County. In order to be successful, Rosen must get at least a 10% margin of victory in Clark County.

In 2012, the unsuccessful challenger against Heller only had a 9% margin of victory in Clark County, compared to the successful Democratic candidate in 2016, who had an 11% margin of victory the county. Although a 2% difference in one county doesn’t sound like a lot, that 2% figure will represent nearly 15,000 voters, a number which could mean the difference between victory and defeat. Rosen will also have to outperform her 2012 counterpart in Washoe county to achieve a victory. In 2012, Heller had a near 10% margin of victory in Washoe County. Rosen will have to limit her margin of loss to at least 3-5% in order to win the race.

Summary:

The power behind the Rosen campaign has the Nevada GOP and the Heller camp sweating bullets. Recent scientific polling is looking favorable for Jacky Rosen and although she currently has the advantage, further polling could even bring her outside of the margin of error. As long as Rosen doesn’t underperform in key areas, she becomes the kingpin Democrats need in their crusade for dominance in the Senate.

Rep. Jacky Rosen (D) Chance of Victory – 70%

#2. Sen. Claire McCaskill V. At. Gen. Josh Hawley, Missouri*

*(Missouri Primary elections are on August 7th)

The Race:

Senator Claire McCaskill is an outlier. She is a two-term Democratic Senator in a state that is reliably Republican in Presidential elections as well as most state offices. McCaskill has had a long career in politics, with her involvement in state and local politics beginning in 1982 in the Missouri statehouse. She began to rise through the ranks in state politics until 2004, where she made a competitive but ultimately unsuccessful run for Governor. She tested her luck again statewide in 2006, but this time, for a Senate seat. She successfully unseated incumbent Jim Talent (R) with just under 50% of the vote and then in 2012, won a second term with a 55% share. McCaskill has been able to walk a very thin line of moderate policies to keep the support of mostly-red Missouri, however, it appears as though her luck may be running out.

Her opponent, Missouri state AG Josh Hawley, is a young face in the Republican party and has received a lot of support from national figures, such as President Donald Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. Although Hawley is a strong candidate, he has flaws too. Hawley has been criticized for being a “ladder candidate” and is still embroiled in a primary battle with GOP underdog Austin Petersen. McCaskill is going to need every ounce of her experience and grit if she is going to keep this state blue, however, if the past is any indicator, McCaskill is sure to put up a good fight.

Geographical Analysis:

If McCaskill is to win in November, she is going to have to push hard in key counties that she lost in her failed 2004 gubernatorial campaign and that Jason Kander (D) lost in his doomed 2016 senate bid. She will also have to secure key high population areas that traditionally vote Democrat in Missouri. In St. Louis City, St Louis County, and Jackson County she will need to earn 80%, 55%, and 60% respectively in order to stay afloat. However important this urban base is, it is not enough to win outright.

In 2006 she won a number of more rural counties south of St. Louis such as St. Francois, Washington and Iron counties. She also managed to keep above 35% in many of the rural counties she lost. This is in stark contrast to 2004 when she struggled to win any rural counties and dipped into the 20-30% range in the rural counties she lost. Trump’s invigorated base is what doomed Jason Kander’s race in 2016, however, if Josh Hawley is unable to harness Trump’s energy again in 2018 McCaskill may be able to gain just enough support from the smaller counties of Missouri to cobble together a victory.

Summary:

McCaskill is in a very dangerous spot. She is running in a state where Hillary Clinton only got 38% and is up against a young candidate who has the backing of a President who performed very well in the state. Despite all this, McCaskill is polling marginally better than Josh Hawley, although her lead is so small it’s almost superficial. If McCaskill is able to buckle down in key rural counties and secure her base in urban and Suburban centers, McCaskill will have a good chance of securing her third term and helping the Democratic Party maintain a majority.

Sen. Claire McCaskill (D) Chance of Victory – 55%

#3. Fmr. Gov. Phil Bredesen (D) V. Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R), Tennessee*

*(Tennessee primary elections are August 2nd)

The Race:

Tennessee is a state without an incumbent this election cycle. Last September, when current Senator Bob Corker (R) announced his retirement, the Democratic Party saw a window to potentially flip this state from red to blue. The challenger looking to take the state back into Democratic hands is experienced politician and well-loved Tennessee figure, Phil Bredesen. Bredesen was the Mayor of Nashville from 1991 to 1999, a position that gave him enough political clout to claim victory in the 2002 and subsequent 2006 elections for Tennessee Governor. Bredesen was able to accomplish all of this by maintaining a moderate stance, as any position too far left would be detrimental in a state as conservative as Tennessee. Despite his moderate stance on most issues, Bredesen has earned endorsements from Joe Biden as well as Sen. Doug Jones, Sen. Ron Wyden, and Sen. Tammy Duckworth.

Bredesen is expected to easily win his primary field on August 2nd, as is his presumptive opponent, Rep. Marsha Blackburn. Blackburn is a familiar face in Tennessee politics as well. She has been the representative from Tennessee’s 7th district since 2003 and has won all of her elections with over 2/3 of the vote. Despite her success in congressional races, Blackburn has never run for a statewide position before and lacks the high number of statewide political connections that Bredesen has. Despite this, Blackburn’s campaign is being helped along with endorsements from a slew of GOP figures, including outgoing Senator Bob Corker and President Trump. Although Bredesen is a dying breed of blue-dog Democrat, he is the perfect candidate to concoct a winning formula in this deeply red state. He has done it twice before for the Governorship, and, with any luck, he should be able to pull it off again for Senate

Geographical Analysis:

Predicting what a statewide Democratic victory looks like in Tennessee is not easy due to its rarity. The only modern examples to go by are Bredesen’s previous statewide victories in 2002 and 2006. Most Democratic candidates running in statewide elections in Tennessee only achieve victory in Davidson County (Nashville) and a smattering of other rural counties, a result which adds up only about 1/3 of the votes statewide. To do better, Bredesen is going to have to replicate the magic that got him elected in 2002.

Bredesen was able to reach a majority of 50.5% by coalescing victories in a number of rural counties in the Northwest and central parts of Tennessee as well as Nashville and its surrounding suburban counties. These victories combined with strong showings of above 40% in most of the counties he lost ensured a win for Bredesen. In order to win again, Bredesen must succeed where other Democrats failed. He must garner widespread support in a coalition of rural counties to stand a chance. The urban and suburban populations are not large enough to secure a victory alone.

Summary:

Senator Bob Corker’s resignation is dream come true for Tennessee Democrats. The hole left open by Corker has turned this GOP stronghold into an incredibly volatile race. Phil Bredesen has repeatedly polled ahead of Marsha Blackburn and occasionally has been outside the margin of error in said polls. A repeat of Bredesen’s statewide results in 2002 and 2006 may be on the books if he is able to win the hearts of Tennessee’s rural population.

Fmr. Gov. Phil Bredesen (D) Chance of Victory – 65%

#4. Rep. Kyrsten Sinema (D) V. Rep. Martha McSally (R), Arizona*

*(Arizona primary elections held August 28th)

The Race:

Sen. Jeff Flake (R) made waves he announced his retirement from the Senate after speaking out against President Donald Trump, however, his departure from the Senate may be even more important than his time within it. A tightly contested battle to fill the shoes of Flake’s shoes is playing out in Arizona, with Democratic challenger Rep. Kyrsten Sinema gaining considerable support for her campaign. Sinema has held the AZ-9 district since its creation in 2012 and is not only the first openly bi-sexual member elected to Congress, but is also currently the only openly atheist member of Congress. Sinema is a member of the Blue Dog Coalition and frequently compromises between progressive and moderate views when making policy decisions.

Sinema is expected to win her primary by a large margin, however, the same can not be said for her potential opponent Rep. Martha McSally. Although McSally is the favorite in a field of 3 major contestants, conservative firebrand Kelli Ward and contentious former sheriff Joe Arpaio are only polling about 10% behind McSally. McSally also suffers from a lack of inter-party support, failing to yet win an official endorsement from President Trump. On the contrary, Sinema has an endorsement from Joe Biden as well as 15 Democratic Senators. In the face of a very divided Arizonian GOP base, McSally will struggle to hold together a base of energetic voters should she win the GOP primary. Because of the GOP division, Sinema and the Democratic party may have the political upper hand in this key Arizona race.

Geographical Analysis:

Arizona county maps for statewide political races often look identical. There is often few races where a particular county will flip from cycle to cycle, meaning that the GOP continues to hold a small advantage in most statewide races. To secure victory, Sinema will have to shore up democratic strongholds as well as perform well enough in GOP territory to flip Republican-leaning counties. Sinema could work to flip either Yuma county or Navajo county, both of which will have around 30k voters and were carried by
Jeff Flake in 2012 with only 50% of the vote in each county.

Sinema could also target Maricopa County (900k voters) or Pinal County (100k voters). Both of these counties were also carried by Flake with less than 52% of the vote in 2012, however, their size and entrenched GOP base may make progress in these counties difficult. Finally, Sinema needs to retain at least 55% in Pima County, by far the largest Democratic stronghold (350K voters). Should she fail to secure this base of Democratic voters, any campaigning in GOP held areas will not be enough to achieve victory.

Summary:

As GOP infighting continues to damage their front-runner, Kyrsten Sinema is taking charge and looks as though she may just have enough support to flip the seat in favor of the Democratic Party. However, the race is far from over and scientific polling is highlighting the closeness of the race. Sinema is currently is only polling with a 5-8% advantage over McSally, meaning although Sinema holds the advantage, it is by no means comfortable. So long as Sinema can stick to a smart campaign and the GOP remains divided, she has the opportunity to change the status quo of Arizona statewide politics.

Rep. Kyrsten Sinema (D) Chance of Victory – 75%

#5. Sen. Joe Donnelly (D) V. St. Rep. Mike Braun (R), Indiana 

The Race:

This seat has repeatedly been rated among the most volatile for current Democratic Senators, and in a state that only voted 37% in favor of Hillary Clinton, its no wonder Sen. Joe Donnelly has been put in a precarious position. Donnelly, who has only been serving in the Senate since a 2012 victory, is expected to have a hard time holding onto his seat despite his challenger being a 2 term member of the Indiana state house. Although Joe Donnelly has a much greater wealth of experience than his opponent, he is running in a state that has really bought into the Trump narrative against establishment politicians, putting Donnelly in a position where his experience is actually preventing him from making inroads with certain blocs of voters. Donnelly has gained and maintained popularity in the conservative state of Indiana by being flexible and exemplifying the bipartisanship that red state Democrats must engage in to retain their seats.

Despite his efforts to maintain a base of moderate and left-center supporters, Mike Braun, Donnelly’s opponent, has managed to harness the populist energy that allowed Trump to win Hoosier moderates in 2016. Braun is also receiving national support from former Governor of Indiana and current Vice President, Mike Pence. Donnelly is also currently caught in a dilemma between his past support of protectionist trade policy and the current reality that Trump’s protectionist policies may hurt his constituency. It’s safe to say that there is an uneasiness among Democrats regarding Joe Donnelly’s chances at keeping the seat.

Geographical Analysis:

In order to win in November, Joe Donnelly will have to fight to earn widespread support beyond the Democratic sanctuaries of Northwest Indiana and Marion County. One key bellwether county could be Vanderberg county. This Southern county with about 75,000 voters was won by Obama in his 2008 presidential victory in Indiana as well as by Donnelly in his 2012 Senate victory. Other races where Democrats lose statewide have seen key losses in Vandeberg county as well as significantly lower percentages in other Southern counties.

In order to win in November, Donnelly will have to win Vandeberg county and retain between 42-45% of the vote in many of the southern rural counties that he has little chance of winning. Donnelly will also have to perform strongly in Delaware and Madison counties, two counties with over 40,000 voters that saw a heavy GOP swing in 2018. Furthermore, Donnelly will have to get at least 60% in the Marion County, the Democratic stronghold of over 300,000 voters. All of these circumstances and more will have to be met if Donnelly is to avoid a loss like Evan Bayh (D), who suffered a crushing defeat in the 2016 Indiana Senate Race.

Summary:

Joe Donnelly’s seat is in an incredibly precarious position this November, and the DNC knows it. Money and resources from the coffers of the party have been flowing to Indiana in an attempt to crush the momentum that Mike Braun currently has. Donnelly’s victory in 2012 was an anomaly and many don’t expect his luck to hold up again. Luckily for Donnelly, much of the outlook of this race has been shaped by speculation, as solid polling has yet to be conducted in this key race. Donnelly will have to reverse the momentum that Hoosier Republicans had statewide in 2016 in order to avoid a devastating loss for Senate Democrats.

Sen. Joe Donnelly (D) Chance of Victory – 35%

Conclusion:

This year’s midterms promise to be a very exciting time in politics, and an especially crucial time for Senate Democrats, who are hoping to break the GOP majority. Although these 5 Senate races are the bellwethers for Democratic performance, they are by no means the only races that are close or important. In both traditionally-red North Dakota and politically divided Florida, Democratic incumbents are trying to hold off strong campaigns by popular GOP figures. In Texas, dark horse Rep. Beto O’Rorke (D) has the opportunity to overthrow Republican heavyweight Sen. Ted Cruz (R).

All over the country, Democratic Senators from Montana to West Virginia to New Jersey are attempting to keep the upper hand in volatile races with formidable challengers. No one can doubt the power of the blue wave, however, the geography of this midterm heavily favors the GOP and will make it difficult for the Democrats to take back the Senate majority. The road may be long, but, there may just be enough power in the progressive movement to overcome the difficult situation the Democratic party faces this November.

Chances that Democratic Party Becomes the Majority Party Following the Midterms – 20%


To support 71 Republic, please donate to our Patreon, which you can find here.

Featured Image Source.