http://news.yahoo.com/democratic-sen-mik...36118.html

 

 

This is so great for Maryland.

---

Trouble is we'll elect another one like her. It's the eastern ans southern part of the state they carries the clout

---

Instead of a sign that says "Do Not Disturb" I need one that says "Already Disturbed Proceed With Caution."

Trouble is we'll elect another one like her. It's the eastern ans southern part of the state they carries the clout

I think that there's a good chance of a Republican taking the seat. My family was stunned that Hogan won the Gubernatorial election. That shows that people in Maryland are finally fed up with all of the taxes, and are sick of the de facto one party system run by the Democrats that has dominated the State over the last couple of years. It's time for a change in Maryland.

---

Republicans could learn a lot from Hogan.  Who chose not to focus on issues like abortion and gun control, which he deemed 'already decided'.  He also started his campaign a full two years before the election with Change Maryland.  He focused on an issue that was absolutely devastating to his opponent - high taxation.


Here in Virginia Ed Gillespie ran for Senate against incumbent Mark Warner.  I think Sarvis played spoiler.  In 2008 Jim Gilmore stood no chance of winning the election.  Sarvis managed to draw more votes than the Libertarian and Green party combined in 2008, but nowhere near his numbers for the governor's race in 2013.  Still, the election was far closer than anybody predicted it to be.   What really hurt Gillespie though was that he was virtually an unknown.  To make matters worse Republicans didn't bring him the support that he needed.  Of course Warner was a bit too complacent as well.  He was comfortable sitting in his seat, and didn't do much to keep it.  

 

I think it'll ultimately be difficult for the typically blue state of Maryland to see the same results for Senate as it did for the Governor's race.  Duplicating Hogan's results would require a combination of things that I don't think they'll get.  If they're going to achieve it, they'd need to start now.

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

Republicans could learn a lot from Hogan.  Who chose not to focus on issues like abortion and gun control, which he deemed 'already decided'.  He also started his campaign a full two years before the election with Change Maryland.  He focused on an issue that was absolutely devastating to his opponent - high taxation.


Here in Virginia Ed Gillespie ran for Senate against incumbent Mark Warner.  I think Sarvis played spoiler.  In 2008 Jim Gilmore stood no chance of winning the election.  Sarvis managed to draw more votes than the Libertarian and Green party combined in 2008, but nowhere near his numbers for the governor's race in 2013.  Still, the election was far closer than anybody predicted it to be.   What really hurt Gillespie though was that he was virtually an unknown.  To make matters worse Republicans didn't bring him the support that he needed.  Of course Warner was a bit too complacent as well.  He was comfortable sitting in his seat, and didn't do much to keep it.  

 

I think it'll ultimately be difficult for the typically blue state of Maryland to see the same results for Senate as it did for the Governor's race.  Duplicating Hogan's results would require a combination of things that I don't think they'll get.  If they're going to achieve it, they'd need to start now.

I agree with many of the points stated. Hogan is not exactly an ideal conservative, but he chose to focus on "major" issues such as jobs, the economy, infrastructure, and taxation. He didn't fall for the same trick as most other politicians do, and he centered his campaign on trying to solve issues that affect everyone and not just a small minority. Issues such as abortion and gay marriage are just that. "Social issues". I personally am against abortion, and I believe that gay marriage should be left only for the people and the States to decide; but they should really have no place when it comes to mainstream politics.

 

Let the candidates debate the real issues such as jobs, the economy, infrastructure, and other "big picture" issues, and let's see who comes out on top then. There's a lot that Democrats, Republicans, and other 3rd party/independent candidates can learn from Larry Hogan and his campaign.

---

I agree with many of the points stated. Hogan is not exactly an ideal conservative, but he chose to focus on "major" issues such as jobs, the economy, infrastructure, and taxation. He didn't fall for the same trick as most other politicians do, and he centered his campaign on trying to solve issues that affect everyone and not just a small minority. Issues such as abortion and gay marriage are just that. "Social issues". I personally am against abortion, and I believe that gay marriage should be left only for the people and the States to decide; but they should really have no place when it comes to mainstream politics.

 

Let the candidates debate the real issues such as jobs, the economy, infrastructure, and other "big picture" issues, and let's see who comes out on top then. There's a lot that Democrats, Republicans, and other 3rd party/independent candidates can learn from Larry Hogan and his campaign.

Very well said. I think most people here and that actually care about politics would like nothing more than to see politicians actually focusing on issues rather than rhetoric and buzz words/topics.

---