Democratic Senators Mark Kelly, Raphael Warnock just got their jobs…..
They will have to run to keep those jobs again this November….
One is a low-key former astronaut who preaches moderation and collaboration. The other is a progressive pastor willing to kill the filibuster to pass a landmark voting rights bill.
Mark Kelly and Raphael Warnock don’t have much in common and approach their first jobs in politics from dramatically different perspectives. But together the two Democratic senators are the bellwethers for the durability of Chuck Schumer’s majority — and much of President Joe Biden’s agenda.
That’s because while most Republicans are buoyed by the thought of a national anti-Biden wave next fall, Democrats are pouring money into the economy and betting that vaccinations allow American life to recover a sense of normalcy this year. Kelly (D-Ariz.) and Warnock (D-Ga.) may be the most immediate beneficiaries, having already built strong political brands in their states. And if they win reelection next year, it’s hard to imagine Democratic incumbents falling in Nevada, Colorado or New Hampshire….
…
Both senators raised more than $4.4 million in the first quarter of this year; Kelly has nearly that amount in the bank, and Warnock has more than $5.6 million — both huge numbers this far out from the 2022 election. They became two of the most prolific small-dollar fundraisers in their party last cycle, and those donors are already getting courted by their campaigns….
…
Kelly and Warnock downplayed their focus on their reelection races in interviews. But Democratic leaders see that their campaigns never really stopped after Kelly won in November and Warnock triumphed two months later. Now they face another fight for full six-year terms.
Warnock will be a definite underdog in 2022.
Excuse me
But who is lined up to run against Warnock?
I have no idea.However, rest assured there will be several serious candidates emerge in a state where the Republican Party remains ascendant.
Sure Warnock will be the underdog.
Not saying he can’t win but yes it will be an uphill climb.
Agreed….
Warnock will have Stacey Abrams and Biden/Harris working fir him….
That effort won’t be so shabby….
And Trump could e en help by taking hits from the 2 in state DA’s
Maybe Trump will keep telling people NOT to vote down there?
We’ll see how strong the GOPer’s are post Trump presidency…
So far he ain’t batting too good…
Scott Kelly clearly has an easy path to victory than Warnock…But…
Warnock just beat an incumbent, the economy is roaring back and he can place himself as a critical vote in making that so…he has an already built up political machine that just finished an election in 2020…
If he is in any shape or form an underdog…it would be marginal at best…I do think the Republicans will be out for blood after there defeats in 2020, but they could be too fractured and by November if the economy is still up and if the virus is on the way out…that is a strong narrative that he will use that can gain enough support from Indp and the few never trumpets…I still think the majority of people overall can vote for their interests over their King, you just need to sway a percent or two and that is a win for him…
We’ll be watching the Georgia US Senate race and it’s gonna be a interesting one….
BOTH sides should be out for Blood….
I’m hoping Trump can show up and fuck things up AGAIN for Republicans
My labelling Warnock an underdog is based on the following:
1.) The party in the White House usually, but not always , loses seats in Congess.
2.) Georgia remains a Republican State .
3.) There is polling evidence that Trumps antics in the lead up to the runoff costs Republicans substantially wherein Warnock triumphed.
4.) New election laws will likely hurt the Democratic vote ,particularly in Democratic voting counties(if this be not true?Then
why are Georgia Democrats so upset by them?)
My calling Warnock an underdog doesn’t necessarily mean he will lose,but I fully expect him to be listed as one of ,if not ,the most vulnerable incumbent Democratic Senators.
I agree that Warnock IS the underdog…..
I think he also will have a strong Democratic effort to have him keep his job….
Hmmmmm?
GA-Sen: Ex-Sen. David Perdue (R) was spotted visiting with Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R) this week, leading to speculation that he may go back on his previous decision not to run against Sen. Raphael Warnock (D) next year. Although Perdue hasn’t given any indication yet that he plans to change his mind, it underscored again the lack of confidence Republicans have in the current field, which includes Ag. Commissioner Gary Black (R) and veterans Kelvin King (R) and Latham Saddler (R), and the uncertainty over whether ex-football star Herschel Walker (R) will run, and if he can stand up to the rigors of a campaign…
RRH….
I’d tend to agree with Jack, at least insofar as the likely change in differential turnout from 2020 to 2022 and the new restraints on voting.
While only FDR and GWB gained U.S. Representatives in their first mid-terms (1934 & 2002), a sitting presidents’ records for U.S. Senate are not really consistent enough to form a pattern or rule.
The Democrats added senators in the first mid-terms of Wilson, FDR and JFK, but lost them in those of Truman, LBJ, Carter, Clinton and Obama.
Republicans’ successes (since the direct election of Senators became universal in 1914) are balanced in the opposite direction.
Harding, Coolidge, Hoover, Ike, Ford and Geo. H.W. Bush lost Senators for the GOP, while Nixon, Reagan, Geo. W. Bush and Trump gained them.
[Table pasted at the end of this post.]
I attribute this to a couple of reasons, including these:
(1) only one third of the states which elect a Senator in the presidential years also elect their other Senator in the subsequent mid-term. (However, roughly the same set of states will elect Senators in both the first presidential election and second mid-term of a two-term President.)
(2) since the Senate is deliberately (from the New Jersey Compromise of 1787) not proportional to population, the partisan proportions of Senators elected will not necessarily mirror those of the previous Electoral College.
And the states represented by Senators increased before the elections of Woodrow Wilson (Arizona & New Mexico. 1912) and JFK (Alaska & Hawaii. 1959).
Democratic Presidents and changes to the left; Republican ones to the right.
1914 Wilson + 5 – 5
1922 + 6 – 8 Harding
1926 + 7 – 6 Coolidge
1930 + 8 – 8 Hoover
1934 FDR + 10 – 11
1946 Truman – 12 + 13
1954 + 2 – 1 Ike
1962 JFK + 3 – 3
1966 LBJ – 4 + 4
1970 – 4 + 2 Nixon
1974 + 5 – 5 Ford
1978 Carter – 3 + 3
1982 0 + 1 Reagan
1990 + 1 – 1 GHWBush
1994 Clinton – 10 + 10
2002 – 2 + 1 GWBush
2010 Obama – 6 + 6
2018 – 2 + 2 Trump