US Senate - the anti-incumbency state

[cos]

There's a state in the US where, since the 1960s, only one US Senator has been re-elected. He got re-elected several times, and was quite notorious in his day, so you might've heard of him, but he's been gone for a while now*. Do you know which state (and which Senator they did re-elect)?

Or, do you have a guess? If so, leave a comment before you Google or read other comments, I'm curious.

* edit: "a while" means more than just a couple of years :) Long enough that we already know his successor served only one term.

Edit2: To clarify, that one Senator they re-elected a few times was the exception - this state's pattern has been to not re-elect Senators. From 1970 - present, no Senator in this state except that one exception, has been elected more than once (or elected even once, if they were already serving due to being first elected before 1970).

Comments

[rmd.livejournal.com]

my completely wild-assed guess is alaska.

[lizkayl.livejournal.com]

Well, Strom Thurmand by S. Carolina?? forever. And Ted Stevens? Since about 3 years after Alaska became a state.

[cos]

I guess you'd be thinking of Ted Stevens as the notorious one exception, but he hasn't really been gone for a while, he's only been gone since last year.

While Ted Stevens occupied one of Alaska's seat, two other Senators (Mike Gravel, then Frank Murkowski) served multiple terms each since the 60s. Murkowski was re-elected in 1986, 1992, and 1998, before resigning his seat after being elected Governor in 2002. Before him, Mike Gravel got re-elected in the 70s.

[cos]

South Carolina is about as far as you can get from an anti-incumbency state :)

For almost the entire period I'm talking about, both of SC's Senate seats were occupied by the same two Senators, Strom Thurmond and Fritz Hollings, who kept getting re-elected over and over. It's been less than a decade since either of their replacements got in, and both of them are still in (the one who's running for re-election this year, Jim DeMint, is polling ahead of his rival by more than 2-to-1, so he's certain to be re-elected).

Alaska's not it either, see above.

[yehoshua.livejournal.com]

The one that leaps to my mind is Minnesota, but both Mondale and Wellstone served multiple terms after 1960, so I'm stumped.

[wotw]

North Carolina/Jesse Helms ?

[cos]

Yup!

They've had 12 Senators since the 1970, and Helms was the only one of those who got re-elected in that time.

Senator Richard Burr might break the curse this year, but he's considered the most endangered Republican incumbent and polls are close.

[cos]

Yup. Hubert Humphrey and David Durenberger also got re-elected in Minnesota more recently than the 60s (Humphrey in 1976, Durenberger in 1982 and 1988)

[lizkayl.livejournal.com]

Whoops, misunderstood the trivia question, read too fast.

[sykotropic.livejournal.com]

You amuse me.

[cos]

Are you implying that me amusing you has never been re-elected?

Well, I guess it hasn't been around long enough to have needed to run for re-election yet.

[sykotropic.livejournal.com]

Hmmm....the idea that you might be around long enough to need to be re-elected is hmmm...

Actually what I was referring to was the political mind twistering question. That you pose such questions amuses me and therefore you amuse me. In a good way.

[roamin-umpire.livejournal.com]

I can narrow down a whole bunch of states that it's NOT, but I'm having a hard time coming up with one that it could be. Maybe... Minnesota?

[cos]

That's the one yehoshua almost guessed, before realizing that couldn't be it.

[hermitgeecko.livejournal.com]

Strom Thurmond is also where I would have gone. Not because I misunderstood the question, but because I knew nothing about South Carolina's other senator.

[kirin]

Huh. Guess maybe I should've got this one. I obviously knew Helms was around a long time, but I don't think I'd noticed that we hadn't had any other re-elections. Of course, I've only been here a decade, which isn't that long in Senate cycles.

Here's hoping Burr *doesn't* break it. Aside from the fact that I'd obviously never vote for him anyway, his ads have been incredibly annoying.

[cos]

I think it's still a subtle misunderstanding of the question: It's mainly a question about "which state has this long pattern of *not* having Senators re-elected, for many decades?" rather than a search for a really long-serving notorious Senator. I didn't even say he was notoriously long-serving :) (he was in office for a fairly long time, though nothing close to Thurmond)

[cos]

A decade has been long enough to have had Senators Jesse Helms, John Edwards, Elizabeth Dole, Kay Hagan, and Richard Burr. I don't know if there are any other states where you'd have had five different Senators in just ten years! :)

[barking-iguana.livejournal.com]

I presume Helms. I know the other seat (held by Morgan when I first was aware of it) aways changed hands and I don't think Dole's been re-elected since. That other seat is so cursed it actually had a vacancy by suicide.

[barking-iguana.livejournal.com]

Ah, I see I was right (about NC and Helms). I'm nearly certain there've been no other states with 5 US Senators in the last 10 years, but I'm quite certain that it haas happened in the past.