|
|
"A comprehensive, collaborative elections resource."
|
The run of Democratic House retirements that wasn't -- and what it means
|
|---|
| Parent(s) |
Container
|
| Contributor | RP |
| Last Edited | RP Jun 17, 2010 01:59pm |
| Logged |
0
|
| Category | Analysis |
| Author | Chris Cillizza |
| News Date | Thursday, June 17, 2010 07:00:00 PM UTC0:0 |
| Description | When Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown (R) beat state Attorney General Martha Coakley (D) in the special election to replace the late Sen. Ted Kennedy (D) in January, Democratic strategists openly fretted that the aftershocks caused by that election would lead to a run of retirements in their already-nervous ranks.
But since that day -- Jan. 19 -- the same number of Democratic and Republican incumbents (nine each) have announced they will not seek re-election the 112th Congress.
And, with filing deadlines closed in all but eight states -- Vermont's deadline to run for federal office is today -- Democrats appear to have dodged the doomsday scenario of retirements that looked like it might come to pass as late as this spring.
Taken in total, there are 39 open seats this fall -- 21 held by Republicans, 18 by Democrats. |
| Share |
|
|
2¢
|
|
| Article | Read Full Article |
|
| Date |
Category |
Headline |
Article |
Contributor |
|
|
