" In 2010, despite spending $13.6 million, she won reelection with just 53 percent — a relatively weak performance for a Republican incumbent who spent that much money in a great Republican year."
And redistricting made her district lean less Republican (plus excluded her house from her district - ha! ha!)
He…
" In 2010, despite spending $13.6 million, she won reelection with just 53 percent — a relatively weak performance for a Republican incumbent who spent that much money in a great Republican year."
And redistricting made her district lean less Republican (plus excluded her house from her district - ha! ha!)
Her Presidential campaign may have attracted the attention of nationwide wingnuts, which is great for the coffers, but it also highlighted her crazy, which I'm not sure is so helpful for garnering votes from the St Paul 'burbs.
" In 2010, despite spending $13.6 million, she won reelection with just 53 percent — a relatively weak performance for a Republican incumbent who spent that much money in a great Republican year."
And redistricting made her district lean less Republican (plus excluded her house from her district - ha! ha!)
Her Presidential campaign may have attracted the attention of nationwide wingnuts, which is great for the coffers, but it also highlighted her crazy, which I'm not sure is so helpful for garnering votes from the St Paul 'burbs.