Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Jump to content
WikipediaThe Free Encyclopedia
Search

2006 United States Senate election in Missouri

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2006 United States Senate election in Missouri

← 2002 (special)November 7, 20062012 →
 
NomineeClaire McCaskillJim Talent
PartyDemocraticRepublican
Popular vote1,055,2551,006,941
Percentage49.58%47.31%

County results
McCaskill:     40–50%     50–60%     60–70%     70–80%
Talent:     40–50%     50–60%     60–70%     70–80%

U.S. senator before election

Jim Talent
Republican

Elected U.S. Senator

Claire McCaskill
Democratic

Elections in Missouri
Presidential elections
Presidential primaries
Democratic
2000
2004
2008
2012
2016
2020
2024
Republican
2000
2004
2008
2012
2016
2020
2024
U.S. Senate
U.S. House of Representatives
State elections
Gubernatorial elections
Lieutenant gubernatorial elections
Secretary of State elections
State Auditor elections
State Treasurer elections
Attorney General elections
Senate elections
House of Representatives elections
Other localities

The2006 United States Senate election in Missouri was held November 7, 2006, to decide who would serve as senator forMissouri between January 3, 2007, and January 3, 2013. This election was the fifth consecutive even-number year in which a senate election was held in Missouri after elections in1998,2000,2002, and2004.

IncumbentRepublican SenatorJim Talent was elected in a 2002 special election over incumbentDemocratJean Carnahan, who was appointed to the Senate seat after the posthumous election of her husbandMel Carnahan, who died in a plane crash shortly before the2000 election. Talent ran for re-election for his first full term; his Democratic opponent was Missouri State AuditorClaire McCaskill.

Both Talent and McCaskill faced unknowns in their respective primaries on August 8 and defeated them soundly. Early on the morning of November 8, Talent conceded defeat to McCaskill,having faced considerable political headwinds. Talent lost the election with 47% of the vote, to 50% of the vote for McCaskill. This was the last election an incumbent Republican senator lost in Missouri.

Background

[edit]

The election was expected to be very close, given the seat had changed hands twice, both by very narrow margins, in the prior six years. In 2000, formerMissouri GovernorMel Carnahan, a Democrat, narrowly defeated incumbent Republican SenatorJohn Ashcroft 50% to 48%. Mel Carnahan died in a plane crash three weeks before election day, so his widow Jean Carnahan was appointed to the seat after the election. Two years later, in a special election held for the seat, incumbent SenatorJean Carnahan lost an even closer election to former CongressmanJim Talent, 50% to 49%.

State politics

[edit]
See also:Missouri bellwether

The state of Missouri was abellwether state throughout the 20th century. It had voted for the winner of every presidential election starting in 1904, except for in1956, when the state narrowly favoredAdlai Stevenson overDwight D. Eisenhower.

The state itself is bordered by both the South andMidwestern United States. In statewide elections for much of the prior century, Missouri had favored theDemocratic Party. Beginning in 2000, however, Missouri began a gradual drift toward theRepublican Party. In the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections,George W. Bush carried Missouri with a margin slightly greater than he received nationally.

Bush's 2004 victory also saw Missouri Republicans triumph in several down-ballot elections. SenatorKit Bond was re-elected by a decisive margin, andMatt Blunt won the election for Governor, narrowly defeating state auditorClaire McCaskill. The Republican Party also captured control of the state legislature for the first time in eighty years.

National significance

[edit]

The Missouri contest was seen as vitally important to control of theUnited States Senate. Democrats needed to win six seats to take control of the chamber with 51 seats. To do this, they would need to retain their 19 incumbent seats, win two Republican-held seats in states won byJohn Kerry in 2004 (Rhode Island andPennsylvania), and win four races in five states Bush had won (Missouri,Montana,Ohio,Tennessee andVirginia). Thus, if Talent were re-elected, Republicans would need to win only one other seat to retain control of the Senate.

General election

[edit]

Candidates

[edit]
  • Frank Gilmour, small business owner (Libertarian)
  • Lydia Lewis, retired functional systems analyst (Progressive)
  • Claire McCaskill, State Auditor of Missouri, former State Representative and nominee for Governor in2004 (Democratic)
  • Jim Talent, incumbent U.S. Senator since 2002 (Republican)

Campaign

[edit]

Talent, anticipating a tough re-election battle and attempting to dissuade challengers, had accumulated a large campaign fund.[1] For most of 2005, he had no opposition. State SenatorChuck Graham had briefly entered the race early in the year, but dropped out soon after. However, on August 30, 2005, Democrat Claire McCaskill announced her intention to run for Talent's Senate seat.

McCaskill started with a large financial disadvantage, but she was also an experienced candidate with high name recognition. McCaskill had run two successful campaigns for state auditor. She was also acandidate for governor in 2004, when she defeated the incumbent Democratic GovernorBob Holden in theprimary election but lost with 48% of the vote in the general election.

Talent started statewide advertising on August 1, 2006, forcing some observers to suggest that Talent was on the ropes and therefore needed to reassert his image (damaged recently by his "flip-flopping" on stem cell research, his opposition to raising the minimum wage and a general feeling of antipathy from the body politic regarding his lack of notable achievements while in the Senate)[2] and pull ahead in a statistical dead heat.

Embryonic stem cell research

[edit]

Since joining the Senate in 2002, Talent had supported federal legislation that would banstem cell research. This included co-sponsoring a bill (S.658)[3] sponsored by SenatorSam Brownback which would ban all forms ofhuman cloning, including the cloning and destruction of human embryos.

On February 10, 2006, Talent withdrew his support for the bill,[4] citing the need to balance research and protection against human cloning. This move followed criticism by Talent's Democratic opponent in the 2006 election,Claire McCaskill, as well as pressure from Missouri business interests that oppose restrictions on stem cell research. Though this reversal was widely criticized as being due to politics,[5] Talent told the Associated Press, "The technology is changing all the time and so I'm always considering whether there is a better way to strike the balance.".[6] Talent suggests that moral concerns might be put to rest through a possible future scientific breakthrough - replicating embryonic stem cells without the use of cloned embryos.

ProposedConstitutional Amendment 2 would amend the state constitution and allow, in line with federal law, stem cell research and treatment.[7] On May 1, 2006, Talent announced his opposition to the proposed ballot-initiative.[8] Stem cell research and treatment is working up to be a divisive issue for many Republicans and is taking a particular prominence in Missouri.[9] In the senate, he subsequently voted against expanding federal funds for embryonic stem cell research in July 2006.

Michael J. Fox commercial

[edit]

ActorMichael J. Fox, who hasParkinson's disease, appeared in atelevision campaign commercial forClaire McCaskill in late October, stated that Talent wanted to criminalize embryonic stem cell research. The commercial, which was one of many Fox had appeared in for politicians of both major political parties supportive of such research,[10] made national headlines.[11]

Rush Limbaugh, conservative radio talk show host, commented on the TV commercial, saying that Fox was "really shameless" and that he was "either off his medication or acting."[12] Limbaugh speculated that Fox may have intentionally not taken his medication to exaggerate the effects of his illness, saying "He's moving all around and shaking, and it's purely an act."[13][14] Limbaugh followed up on October 25, 2006, saying, "When you wade into political life you have every right to say what you want, but you cannot in turn argue that no one has the right to take you on."

Elaine Richman, a neuroscientist, stated, "Anyone who knows the disease well would regard his movement as classic severeParkinson's disease. Any other interpretation is misinformed."[15] On October 26, Fox responded to Limbaugh's claims, saying in an interview withKatie Couric, "The irony of it is that I was too medicated." He added that his condition during their interview reflected "a dearth of medication — not by design. I just take it, and it kicks in when it kicks in."[16] He further laughed, "That's funny — the notion that you could calculate it for effect."

Fundraising

[edit]

Talent had a huge cash-on-hand advantage over McCaskill. Because of the way FEC filing works, Talent's numbers include the money he raised during his 2002 special election campaign. Totals are through July 19.

CandidateFunds Raised[17]Cash On-Hand[17]
Jim Talent (R)$19,602,725$6,921,577
Claire McCaskill (D)$4,572,707$2,684,766

Debates

[edit]

Endorsements

[edit]
Claire McCaskill (D)
Individuals

Organizations

Predictions

[edit]
SourceRankingAs of
The Cook Political Report[21]TossupNovember 6, 2006
Sabato's Crystal Ball[22]Tilt D(flip)November 6, 2006
Rothenberg Political Report[23]Lean D(flip)November 6, 2006
Real Clear Politics[24]TossupNovember 6, 2006

Polling

[edit]

A June 19–22, 2006Research 2000 poll showed Talent's favorability rating was 47%-46%, with 7% having no opinion. Soon after, a St. Louis Post-Dispatch poll was released showing McCaskill with 49% favorability to Talent's 43%.[25]

SourceDateClaire
McCaskill (D)
Jim
Talent (R)
Frank
Gilmour (L)
Rasmussen[26]September 1, 200546%46%
Rasmussen[27]November 9, 200547%45%
Rasmussen[28]January 2, 200646%43%
Research 2000[29]January 21, 200647%44%
Rasmussen[30]February 8, 200641%46%
Rasmussen[31]March 6, 200643%40%
Zogby/WSJ[32]March 31, 200645%48%
Rasmussen[33]April 4, 200642%41%
Rasmussen[34]May 8, 200640%43%
Zogby/WSJ[35]June 21, 200644%49%
Research 2000[36]June 24, 200649%43%
Rasmussen[37]June 27, 200642%42%
Rasmussen[38]July 20, 200645%42%
Zogby/WSJ[35]July 24, 200645%49%
Rasmussen[38]July 31, 200645%42%
SurveyUSA[39]August 15, 200647%46%2%
Rasmussen[40]August 15, 200644%46%
Zogby/WSJ[41]August 28, 200645%50%
Research 2000[42]September 1, 200647%46%2%
USA Today/Gallup[43]September 5, 200644%50%
Zogby/WSJ[41]September 11, 200645%49%
SurveyUSA[44]September 14, 200648%47%1%
Rasmussen[45]September 15, 200645%42%
Zogby/WSJ[41]September 28, 200645%47%
Mason-Dixon/MSNBC[46]October 2, 200643%43%
Reuters/Zogby[47]October 5, 200639%43%
USA Today/Gallup[48]October 5, 200648%45%
Rasmussen[49]October 7, 200644%43%
SurveyUSA[50]October 12, 200651%42%3%
Rasmussen[51]October 13, 200644%45%
Bennett, Petts & Blumenthal (D)[52]October 13, 200648%43%
Mason-Dixon/McClatchy-MSNBC[53]October 24, 200646%43%
SurveyUSA[54]October 24, 200645%48%2%
Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg[55]October 24, 200645%48%
Rasmussen[56]October 27, 200646%48%
Research 2000[57]October 28, 200647%47%2%
Rasmussen[58]October 30, 200648%47%
CNN/Opinion Research Corporation[59]October 31, 200649%49%
SurveyUSA[60]October 31, 200649%46%2%
Reuters/Zogby[61]November 2, 200646%43%6%
Rasmussen[62]November 2, 200649%48%
Mason-Dixon/MSNBC-McClatchy[63]November 3, 200646%45%
Rasmussen[64]November 5, 200648%49%
USA Today/Gallup[65]November 5, 200649%45%
SurveyUSA[66]November 5, 200651%42%4%
SurveyUSA[67]November 6, 200650%44%3%
Polimetrix[68]November 6, 200650%50%
OnPoint Polling and Research[69]November 6, 200649%46%

Polling and candidate positions

[edit]

In single-issue polling, Talent's positions contradicted the majority of voters in the election on most issues: 66% of Missouri voters favored raising theminimum wage to $6.50 an hour;[7][70][71] 62% of Missouri voters favored raising taxes to replaceMedicaid funding cut by the current Republican Governor,Matt Blunt; 54% opposed a law that would require all Missourians to show a photo ID before they vote; 58% favored campaign donation limitations; and 66% favored restoring Medicaid coverage to about 90,000 Missourians who lost coverage when Blunt and the Republican legislature tightened eligibility requirements.

Results

[edit]

When the polls closed inMissouri on election night the race was, as expected, too close to call. With 85% of the vote in and with still no call, McCaskill claimed victory. At the time McCaskill declared victory, she was ahead by a vote margin of 867,683 to Talent's 842,251 votes; in percentage terms, with 85% of the vote in, McCaskill led Talent, 49% to 48%. Finally, at 11:38 P.M. Central Time theAssociated Press called McCaskill as the winner.St. Louis County, adjacent toSt. Louis, andJackson County, home ofKansas City, are probably what pushed McCaskill over the finish line.

General election results
PartyCandidateVotes%±%
DemocraticClaire McCaskill1,055,25549.58%+0.91%
RepublicanJim Talent (incumbent)1,006,94147.31%−2.49%
LibertarianFrank Gilmour47,7922.25%+1.27%
Progressive PartyLydia Lewis18,3830.86%n/a
Write-in880.00%n/a
Total votes2,128,459100.0n/a
Democraticgain fromRepublican

Counties that flipped from Republican to Democratic

[edit]

Counties that flipped from Democratic to Republican

[edit]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^"Missouri Congressional Races in 2006".OpenSecrets. Archived fromthe original on January 10, 2007. RetrievedFebruary 27, 2017.
  2. ^Phillips, Lauren."Talent's Bid for Second Term Just Like His First — a Tossup - New York Times".archive.nytimes.com. RetrievedJune 1, 2024.
  3. ^[1]Archived January 12, 2016, at theWayback Machine s. 658,"A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to prohibit human cloning", introduced March 17, 2005
  4. ^Stearns, Matt; Kraske, Steve (February 11, 2006)."Talent changes stem-cell stance".Kansas City Star. Archived from the original on March 13, 2006. RetrievedSeptember 29, 2025.{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)
  5. ^"Stem-Cell Dilemmas: Senator Talent believes there is an 'ethically untroubling' option on embryonic research. Will it cost him re-election?"Archived November 29, 2006, at theWayback Machine, Eleanor Clift,Newsweek, February 17, 2006
  6. ^"Stem cell battle emerging as key issue in Missouri Senate race"Archived October 29, 2006, at theWayback Machine, Sam Hananel,AP, January 25, 2006
  7. ^ab2006 Ballot Measures, Missouri, Secretary of State
  8. ^Kristen Hinman (July 17, 2006). "A wedge issue that helps Democrats: Stem cell research is dividing Missouri's GOP".Salon.com.
  9. ^"Democrats see stem cell research as political tool"[permanent dead link], Sheryl Gay Stolberg,The New York Times, April 25, 2006
  10. ^Campaign 2004: Pennsylvania's U.S. Senate race provides clear choicesArchived February 21, 2006, at theWayback Machine Post-Gazette. October 18, 2004
  11. ^Actor Fox sparks debate, support for stem cellsArchived October 25, 2006, at theWayback Machine October 26, 2006
  12. ^"Topic Galleries".Chicago Tribune.[permanent dead link]
  13. ^Montgomery, David (October 25, 2006)."Rush Limbaugh On the Offensive Against Ad With Michael J. Fox".The Washington Post. RetrievedMay 27, 2010.
  14. ^"Olbermann Gives Us the Visual to Limbaugh's Attack on Michael J. Fox".CrooksAndLiars.com. Archived fromthe original on September 30, 2007. RetrievedOctober 26, 2006.
  15. ^"WP: Limbaugh mocks Michael J. Fox ad - Politics - Washington Post - msnbc.com". Archived from the original on July 16, 2012. RetrievedApril 8, 2023.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)
  16. ^Fox: I wasn't off meds in political ads. Associated Press, October 26, 2006
  17. ^ab"Congressional Elections: Missouri Senate Race: 2006 Cycle".OpenSecrets.org. Archived fromthe original on August 25, 2006. RetrievedAugust 30, 2006.
  18. ^http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascitystar/news/politics/15221409.htm[dead link]
  19. ^"Claire McCaskill (Senate MO) | WesPAC". September 12, 2006. Archived from the original on September 12, 2006. RetrievedApril 8, 2023.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)
  20. ^"Endorsements". October 6, 2006. Archived fromthe original on October 6, 2006.
  21. ^"2006 Senate Race Ratings for November 6, 2006"(PDF).The Cook Political Report. Archived fromthe original(PDF) on June 5, 2008. RetrievedSeptember 30, 2021.
  22. ^"Election Eve 2006: THE FINAL PREDICTIONS".Sabato's Crystal Ball. November 6, 2006. RetrievedJune 25, 2021.
  23. ^"2006 Senate Ratings".Senate Ratings. The Rothenberg Political Report. RetrievedJune 25, 2021.
  24. ^"Election 2006". Real Clear Politics. RetrievedJune 25, 2021.
  25. ^Mannies, Jo (June 24, 2006)."Senate race tied to state issues".St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Archived fromthe original on August 8, 2006.
  26. ^Rasmussen
  27. ^Rasmussen
  28. ^Rasmussen
  29. ^Research 2000
  30. ^Rasmussen
  31. ^Rasmussen
  32. ^Zogby/WSJ
  33. ^Rasmussen
  34. ^Rasmussen
  35. ^abZogby/WSJ
  36. ^Research 2000
  37. ^Rasmussen
  38. ^abRasmussen
  39. ^SurveyUSA
  40. ^Rasmussen
  41. ^abcZogby/WSJ
  42. ^Research 2000[permanent dead link]
  43. ^USA Today/Gallup
  44. ^SurveyUSA
  45. ^Rasmussen
  46. ^Mason-Dixon/MSNBC
  47. ^Reuters/Zogby
  48. ^USA Today/Gallup
  49. ^Rasmussen
  50. ^SurveyUSA
  51. ^Rasmussen
  52. ^Bennett, Petts & Blumenthal (D)
  53. ^Mason-Dixon/McClatchy-MSNBC
  54. ^SurveyUSA
  55. ^Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg
  56. ^Rasmussen
  57. ^Research 2000
  58. ^Rasmussen
  59. ^CNN/Opinion Research Corporation
  60. ^SurveyUSA
  61. ^Reuters/Zogby
  62. ^Rasmussen
  63. ^Mason-Dixon/MSNBC-McClatchy
  64. ^Rasmussen
  65. ^USA Today/Gallup
  66. ^SurveyUSA
  67. ^SurveyUSA
  68. ^Polimetrix
  69. ^OnPoint Polling and Research
  70. ^"June 2006 poll of Missouri voters, statewide issues".St. Louis Post-Dispatch. June 24, 2006. Archived fromthe original on August 22, 2006. RetrievedOctober 10, 2006.
  71. ^Lauren Phillips (September 29, 2006)."Talent's Bid for Second Term Just Like His First — a Tossup". CQPolitics.com. Archived fromthe original on October 27, 2006.

External links

[edit]

Official campaign websites (Archived)

U.S.
Senate
U.S.
House

(election
ratings
)
Governors
Attorneys
General
State officials
State
legislatures
Mayors
Local
States
Governor
Lieutenant Governor
Attorney General
State Auditor
State Treasurer
Secretary of State
MO Senate
MO House of Representatives
U.S. President
U.S. Senate
U.S. House of Representatives
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2006_United_States_Senate_election_in_Missouri&oldid=1314142169"
Categories:
Hidden categories:

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp