Surveying the state of GOP state Senate races

It's interesting to see a lot of the analysis used by some political observers stuck in the thick of the backwoods. Dante -- dare to consider that 2008 is a far different race than anything that can be related to with 2004. The economy was different then, Iraq looked like it might have been at a turning point, and gas was -- well, a full tank didn't cost me what it does today.

I found it amazing a year ago that many national "pollsters," usually worth their salt, and television commentators who seem to forget history were saying that it was all wrapped up for Hillary Clinton. I was a Clinton supporter, but I knew better. Last Fall I was writing about how she could lose Iowa and New Hampshire, and at that point she was still "up" in most statewide and national polls by 20 points. But in politics, it's not difficult for those kinds of leads to evaporate.

Why I'm so confident New Hampshire Democrats will do so well in most races is the fact the motivating factors for voters are all with the Democrats this year, much as in 2006 but even more so. Whether it's gas prices, Iraq, the economy, the need for health care, low pay, a greedy corporate America needing to be turned down a notch, or a need for "change," I think voters will be going to the polls this November in droves, and they won't be voting for a third term for Bush, or a political party that focuses just on taxes to the exclusion of people.

For the excellent professor from UNH -- and he is -- I offer that what motivates voters are the issues, not the candidates. I've found that to be true in every election I've been involved in since ... 1960 when I distributed flyers in my old neighborhood for John F. Kennedy. Voters are by and large concerned about how politics affects their own lives. Most don't go to vote as some special favor to the candidate.

Iraq and the lives lost there, the need for a smart war on terrorism instead of what we've done since 9/11, the status of our economy, the need for health care accesibilty, the continuing problem of low wages, the threats of global warming which have been ignored for so long, and the drive for change in all that will get voters to the polls this November in numbers never before seen.

Remember that in 2006 Carol Shea-Porter was quite unknown throughout her district in mid-June. By September she was Democratic Nominee, but still even by late October she was generally unknown, running against a much better known incumbent. She didn't spend much on her campaign. Yet, voters wanted change and were motivated to vote. We know the result. They didn't vote as a favor to Carol Shea-Porter. They voted because the wanted change.

The motivating factors for why people will vote and will vote Democratic this November -- those are the reasons for making my "case." We'll see 19 Senate Democrats, 262 House Democrats, 3 or 4 Governor's Councilors, a Democratic U.S. House and Senate, the reelection of Carol Shea-Porter, Paul Hodes, and John Lynch, the election of Jeanne Sheehan, and President Barack Obama, because voters know we need change.

Of course, the operative words here are what constitutes a "plausible case," and that's where the dialogue will center between now and November as we discuss the possibilities. But I will offer that the tide for Democrats -- and the unity we'll see on the Democratic side this November -- will result in the election of Democrats whose names voters don't know today because they want the change that Republicans won't and can't deliver.

And Dante -- I look forward to our critical thinking about the upcoming elections. And if you're right this November and I'm wrong, I'll visit your class again if you'd like and this time I pay for the coffee and I'll eat crow in front of your students. Let's take the stairs so we don't get stuck in the elevator.

Jim Splaine, have you forgotten that all politics is local? Do you really think people are going to vote for state reps and senators based upon their views about Iraq?

And Jim, don't you think the Democrat-led Legislature has ticked off some folks? I'm surprised you're not critical of the House leadership after they continually tried to water down the laws dealing with lobbyists. You can thank the Republicans for blocking them.