Senate races to watch

[Peter1469]

Senate races to watch

Will the GOP snatch defeat from the jaws of victory (again), or not?

The fight for the Senate majority is increasingly focused on five races: four controlled by Democrats and one held by Republicans. These contests -- Alaska, Colorado, Iowa, North Carolina and Kansas -- are acknowledged by both sides to be very competitive, and because of that are likely to see the heaviest spending by both the party committees and the outside groups over the last five-plus weeks of the midterm election.

Below are the 13 seats most likely to change hands on Nov. 4. The No. 1 race is considered the most likely to switch parties.

See the link.

[KC]

The article somewhat misleading portrays some races-- and I'm thinking Alaska in particular-- as looking too favorable to Republicans. While it's true Sullivan has pulled ahead, neither candidate is polling very close to 50%. It's gonna be close.

[texan]

That is your comment and saying the the entire article is "misleading?" You're party must be behind.

It wasn't misleading at all............it wasn't like they were doing back flips for republicans, each race was supported with some facts that were solid. I am also going to give the writer the nod that he has access and the time to research a little more than us.j

One thing not mentioned is that the negative money is just now starting to be spent in the Kansas race. Orman hasn't had any negative money spent against him until recently. It will be interesting to see what happens

[KC]

That is your comment and saying the the entire article is "misleading?" You're party must be behind.

It wasn't misleading at all............it wasn't like they were doing back flips for republicans, each race was supported with some facts that were solid. I am also going to give the writer the nod that he has access and the time to research a little more than us.j

One thing not mentioned is that the negative money is just now starting to be spent in the Kansas race. Orman hasn't had any negative money spent against him until recently. It will be interesting to see what happens

What's my party again?

You are clueless.

[texan]

Of course I am clueless.........I wouldn't have it any other way. I don;t know which party are you..............Easy test: In the current race and referring to the current candidates, who would you vote for in Kansas if you were voting there.

You inferred it was misleading in races (plural), then commented on one single point about Alaska. Is it multiple races or one.

[Captain Obvious]

What's my party again?

The one that's behind, silly!

[bajisima]

It is pulling close here in NH too. Local polls have Scott Brown and Jeanne Shaheen neck and neck. Its going to be a closer one here than people realize I think.

[Green Arrow]

I think ultimately it will come down to Kansas and Louisiana. Louisiana especially, because Orman could represent either party, or none. I think the smart choice for him would be to stay unaffiliated. It would also be the first time in modern American history that a candidate not affiliated with either party served in the U.S. Senate.

But Louisiana is the big one. I think it will ultimately go to a December runoff.

[del]

I think ultimately it will come down to Kansas and Louisiana. Louisiana especially, because Orman could represent either party, or none. I think the smart choice for him would be to stay unaffiliated. It would also be the first time in modern American history that a candidate not affiliated with either party served in the U.S. Senate.

But Louisiana is the big one. I think it will ultimately go to a December runoff.

bernie sanders would like a word with you when you have a minute

[Green Arrow]

bernie sanders would like a word with you when you have a minute

Sen. Sanders caucuses with Democrats and is planning on running for President in 2016 on the Democratic ticket. That's the textbook definition of party affiliation.