After a couple of relatively quiet months, the Senate race rankings have undergone a fairly major shakeup, with 15 distinct contests receiving an upgrade or a downgrade based on a combination of local and national circumstances. Most of these changes favor Republicans -- 7 of the 10 upgrades (meaning that a party switch is now more likely) were made to Democratic-held seats; 4 of the 5 downgrades were made to Republican-held seats. While there are still plenty of opportunities for the Democrats in the Senate, I believe that the Republicans are now slightly more likely to gain seats than to lose them, potentially threatening the Democrats' supposed filibuster-proof majority.
Races are ranked in order of their likelihood of changing parties (by November 2010, accounting for all factors such as potential retirements, primary challenges, and so forth).
Likelihood of party switch has increased since last month's rankings.
Likelihood of party switch has decreased since last month.
1.
Missouri (R-Open)
We're waiting to see whether Robin Carnahan's numbers have been weakened any by the national tide having turned somewhat against the Democrats. Meanwhile, Roy Blunt had vastly improved fundraising numbers in the second quarter. Still, this is the sort of cycle that -- even if it tends to work against Democrats, may also tend to favor outsider candidates, and Blunt -- a seven-term Congressmen and former Majority Whip -- is not exactly the freshest of faces. I'm hedging a bit by giving Missouri a down arrow but nevertheless allowing it to retain the top slot on our list for the time being. Really, you could argue for almost any ordering of the top five or so races.
2. New Hampshire (R-Open)
Kelly Ayotte, on the other hand, the Republican Attorney General of New Hampshire, is a relatively fresher face, although some New Hampshire observers I've spoken with wonder whether she might ultimately be too green to run a top-notch campaign. Still, another poll has come out showing Ayotte in a dead head with Democratic nominee Paul Hodes. She certainly gives the Republicans far better chances to retain Judd Gregg's seat than a retread like Charlie Bass or John Sununu might have.
3. Connecticut (D-Dodd)
New Quinnipiac polling doesn't show Chris Dodd's situation improving any, but there remain a lot of contingencies in this contest: is Rob Simmons a safe bet to win the Republican primary when he's likely to face a couple very well-financed challengers? Is Dodd himself in the clear from a primary challenge? How will Dodd's diagnosis of prostate cancer affect the dynamics of the race? For the time being, it would be foolish to characterize this race is anything other than a toss-up.
4.
Nevada (Sr.) (D-Reid)
Harry Reid's approval numbers have been in the dumps for some time now, but the argument against ranking this race more highly was that the Republicans lacked credible challengers. But now it appears that it might not matter: (relative) no-name Republicans are beating him. Reid currently has more than $7 million in cash-on-hand and Nevada is something of a machine state, so this is an easier pickup on paper than it will be in practice. Still, this is a very, very vulnerable slot for the Democrats.
5. Ohio (R-Open)
Rob Portman, as we anticipated, has now accelerated past his Democratic rivals in terms of fundraising. Still, although an anti-Bush message is likely to be a tired and losing one for Democrats in most instances in 2010, it may carry more weight when employed against Bush's former budget director, and Portman has not yet pulled ahead of the Democrats in the polls.
6.
Kentucky (R-Open)
Jim Bunning, after much deliberation, will in fact retire. Unless he pulls a Favre, this is a big favor for Republicans. They are, however, hardly out of the woods in Kentucky, as the two leading Democratic candidates continue to poll competitively against the two leading Republicans. One dynamic to watch for in Kentucky is that Rand Paul, son of Ron Paul, will probably put the Republicans at a disadvantage if he defeats Trey Grayson for the party's nomination. Kentucky is arguably among the worst environments for a libertarian candidate in the country: socially conservative but somewhat more liberal economically, the exact opposite of the libertarian sweet spot.
7.
Colorado (D-Bennet)
An underwhelming field all around in Colorado; nominal incumbent Michael Bennet has a net-negative approval rating, but his most likely Republican opponents aren't liked any better. A race like this is likely to be determined by national factors, rather than local ones, and right now those factors are looking much improved for Republicans, especially in a state where Obama's approval ratings have been poor relative to his election-day performance.
8.
Illinois (D-Burris)
A Rasmussen poll shows Mark Kirk with a three-point lead over Democrat Alexi Giannoulias; on the other hand, that poll was based on a likely-voter sample in which Barack Obama had just 56 percent approval in his home state. At the end of the day, both parties are fielding fairly strong candidates here and I expect the race to gravitate back toward the partisan ID split in Illinois, which ordinarily favors Democrats. But Kirk is entirely capable of prevailing if Giannoulias runs a poor campaign or Republicans are having a good night nationwide.
9. Delaware (D-Open)
We're continuing to wait on U.S. Rep. Mike Castle to make a decision about whether to enter on Republicans' behalves. If he doesn't make that decision fairly soon, this race might warrant a slight demotion. Then again, since Castle has been in public office since 1981 and reprsents the entire state, he won't necessarily need a lot of time and money to introduce himself to Delaware's voters, making a late start more viable.
10.
Pennsylvania (D-Specter)
While Democrats are busy fighting a primary battle, likely Republican nominee Pat Toomey, who was one once of the three or four most conservative members of the House, is cleverly and somewhat disingenuously trying to position himself as a moderate, having advocated, among other things, for Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court. I'd expect Democrats to win over some votes by pushing back on Toomey's track record once they've picked a nominee, although as I suggested before, Arlen Specter's own inconsistencies might make him less capable of doing so than Joe Sestak. Specter, indeed, has become a lighting rod for criticism from virtually all corners of the political spectrum, although I continue to have trouble believing that either he or Sestak would ultimately be an underdog against Toomey.
11. North Carolina (R-Burr)
Republican Richard Burr has unusually low name recognition for an incumbent, and a lot of the voters that know him don't particularly like him. The question, as Public Policy Polling's Tom Jensen suggests, may be whether 2010 is more of an anti-incumbent year -- in which case Burr is in some trouble -- or merely an anti-Democratic year.
12.
Arkansas (D-Lincoln)
A recent poll has Blanche Lincoln's approval down to 49 percent. The poll was conducted by a Republican strategy firm and warrants caution for that reason, but I don't have trouble believing that voters have begun to grow wary of Lincoln, who has had a difficult time articulating her positions on issues like health care and EFCA. The saving grace for Lincoln is that Republican opposition in this race is poorly organized. If I were the NRSC, I might put something of a bounty on Lincoln's head and see if I couldn't come up with a more capable challenger.
13.
Texas (R-Open?)
While in Pittsburgh for Netroots Nation, I had a chance to speak briefly with Houston Mayor Bill White at a luncheon, who will run for Senate if, as anticipated, Kay Bailey Hutchison eventually vacates her Senate seat to concentrate on her gubernatorial bid. White is a sharp guy in an unmistkably Texan, slow-moving sort of way. The basic mathematical argument he presents is reasonably compelling: although Republicans have a very slight partisan identification advantage in Texas, White is rather popular in the Houston area, where he was re-elected in his last two terms with 90 and 86 percent of the vote, and the Houston media market represents about one-quarter of Texas' electorate. Although Texas would hold a "jungle primary" in the event of a speical election, White anticipates that the race would quickly boil down to a two-candidate affair: himself and whomever Rick Perry nominates to be Hutchison's replacement -- likely a very conservative Republican. White would therefore run as a moderate -- perhaps almost as a quasi-independent -- which might impede fundraising and enthusiasm among national Democrats but is something he could live with since he's raised plenty of money on his own. It's a pretty good story; the question is whether White might be running into too much of a national headwind, especially in a special election environment in which turnout is liable to be low.
14.
Louisiana (R-Vitter)
Democrat Charlie Melancon is in a little bit of a pickle. Having voted against the Democrats' health care package in committee, he may not receive much financial support from national Democrats -- a bit of a problem against an incumbent like David Vitter who has $3.2 million in cash-on-hand. Louisiana has become a tough state for Democrats and 2010 is likely to be a reasonably tough year; although he should be competitive enough to keep the race interesting, ultimately I'd have to rate Vitter as the fairly heavy favorite.
15.
North Dakota (D-Dorgan)
Governor John Hoeven is in no apparent hurry to decide whether to challenge Byron Dorgan for his Senate seat. As I suggested last month, this feels like a bluff on Hoeven's behalf, designed to push the influential Dorgan toward more conservative stances on issues like health care and energy. With that said, the reason I've thought this is probably a bluff is Hoeven had looked like he'd been an underdog to Dorgan, and most sitting governors won't give up their seats to run a race that they'd probably lose. But if the national environment becomes favorable enough for Republicans, Hoeven might begin to take his Seante prospects more seriously.
16.
Iowa (R-Grassley)
Chuck Grassley's position at the eye of the health care hurricane could leave him vulnerable on both flanks. A primary challenge, if successful, could turn this into an open seat contest. Meanwhile, IA-1 Congressman Bruce Braley is now contemplating taking on Grassley in the general election. Grassley remains well-liked by Iowa voters and has a lot of goodwill to burn through, but this one is starting to get interesting.
17. Florida (R-Open)
There's the possibility that Charlie Crist will get himself into a little bit of trouble in picking a replacement for Mel Martinez, but as we've suggested repeatedly, the Democratic opponents in this race are not especially strong statewide candidates and appear to be significant underdogs against both Crist and the other GOP hopeful, Marco Rubio.
18.
New York (Jr.) (D-Gillibrand)
With Carolyn Maloney unlikely to challenge her, Kirsten Gillibrand should now have plenty of time to raise money to hedge against a late entry by George Pataki or Rudy Giuliani.
19.
California (D-Boxer)
A Rasmussen poll has Carly Fiorina within four points of Barbara Boxer, but other surveys do not have the race being nearly as competitive. Considering Fiorina’s underwhelming performance as a spokesman for the McCain campaign, I expect her to be mostly an annoyance to both Democrats and Republicans, who have a better opportunity with Meg Whitman in the governor race.
20. Georgia (R-Isakson)
21. Arizona (R-McCain)
22. Hawaii (D-Inoyue)
23. Wisconsin (D-Feingold)
24.
Nevada (Jr.) (R-Ensign?)
We had inserted this race on our list last month on speculation that John Ensign’s adultery scandal might force him into early retirement. Although Ensign is in a great deal of trouble for 2012, he seems to have limped through his scandal in strong enough position to at least keep his seat for the time being. Unless there are further revelations, we will consider de-listing this race next month.
25.
South Carolina (R-DeMint)
Jim DeMint may face a Democratic challenger after all in the form of State Sen. Brad Hutto. Although there are some vague parallels here to Kay Hagan’s successful insurgent bid last year against Elizabeth Dole in North Carolina, 2010 is likely to be a far less favorable cycle for the Democrats and their infrastructure in South Carolina is notoriously poor. DeMint’s approval rating has not been tested for a long time -- the most recent poll is from November, 2006 when he came in at a 51/36 approve -- so it’s worth waiting to see if someone polls this race. But for the time being, it looks like no better than a long shot.
26. Oklahoma (R-Coburn)
27. Alaska (R-Murkowski)
28. Kansas (R-Open)
29. Maryland (D-Mikulski)
30. Washington (D-Murray)
31. Alabama (R-Shelby)
32. South Dakota (R-Thune)
33. Indiana (D-Bayh)
34. Vermont (D-Leahy)
35. Oregon (D-Wyden)
36. Utah (R-Bennett)
37. New York (Sr.) (D-Schumer)
38. Idaho (R-Crapo)
8.24.2009
Senate Rankings, August 2009 Edition: Republicans Movin' On Up
by Nate Silver @ 6:30 AM...see also 2010, senate, senate rankings
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

58 comments
I'll take a phrase from #3 Dodd and run w/it: but there remain a lot of contingencies like the health care bill, Obama's approval rating, Obama not on the ballot, voter turnout, Iraq, Afghanistan, finding bin Laden, remember him, money, money, money etc. Again, actual candidates have to run against each other by organizing a campaign.
And Giuliani ain't running in NY after the embarrassment of raising 50 million in the Rep primary and getting (1) delegate he's having more fun the humans should be allowed earning beaucoup money in the private sector. Yea, that's the ticket ...
I think the most likely keys to the 2010 election are whether guaranteed national health insurance passes and how the economy is, very much including jobs.
Thanks for posting the update, Nate. One editing recommendation: You seem to be persistently misspelling Senator Inouye of Hawaii's name. Please edit it.
I, for one, would not be sad to see Reid go. And as much as I'd hate to lose a seat, if it would mean we get a majority leader with a little more, eh, je ne sais quoi...
I'd love to see some analysis of possible dynamics post-midterm with Reid being thrown out on his butt. W
About healthcare. What if the "public" option was administered by provisional "chartered" licenses to private companies, like charter schools? Couldn't that be a basis for compromise?
The Democrats in the senate have made the filibuster-proof majority irrelevant. Remember how we breathlessly waited for Norm Coleman to go away so that Dems could have 60 seats? How naive we were to give the Democrats so much credit, thinking they could actually govern and get things done. I am changing my party affiliation to Independent.
Its fascinating stuff in a way at the moment these Senate rankings. I wonder how much chance any of these seats have of changing really. I can see the Dems maybe picking up Mo and NH, the GOP maybe picking up a few, possibly Ct, Ar, Co and Pa.
Incidentally, Nate is still listing Illinois as (D-Burris) as opposed to (D-open). Any reasons for this? Hasn't Burris pretty much said he won't run?
Remember that, traditionally, open seats are easier to flip than those were someone is up for re-election. On that level I would say that there aren't that many seats that I would describe as easy to flip. I would say at this stage its as likely the Dems make a seat or two's worth of gains than it is that the Republicans make gains.
I think if I were the GOP I might look at the Senate and think its going to be hard to amke meaningful gains, so why not just aim at a few embarrassing places for Dems to lose? Obama's old seat, Biden's old seat, maybe a press on Dodd and maybe Clinton's old New York seat (if the right candidate can be found). Take 2 or 3 of those and claim some sort of symbolic victory, and hope for a more real victory in the House??
Yeah, I'd be interested in a piece on the effects of Reid losing his seat; I also wonder if it's worth losing his vote to get rid of his so-called "leadership".
Glad to see this. I'd really been jonsing for the Senate rankings and had started to defect over to CQ. :-)
I certainly don't feel in an optimistic spirit today but still I think predicting a nationwide Republican headwind one year out in a political world is somewhat dicier than your average 7 day forecast.
While it would be a horrible symbolic loss to have Harry Reid loose I for one would not shed any tears. I think his leadership style is horrible. He always has struck me as having a spine of jello.
At what point does Obama decide that the Democrats will have much better chances in CT and NV without Dodd and Reid and send Rahm to strongarm Dodd and Reid into retirement, Bunning style?
In the end I believe Dodd will win unless the economy is horrible. I think the best thing that could happen for the democrats is for Reid to be defeated, he is a horrible leader.
The reality is he has so much money he will win unless it's 1994 all over again.
I doubt that will happen, people forget Clinton only got 42% of the vote so the Majority of the electorate voted gainst him. You also had a republican party that stood for something.
The bottom line people aren't thrilled with the democrats but still despise republicans. I would expect the usual loss of the majority party but nothing earth shatterring and possibly even pichingup a seat or two in the house.
I don't anticipate on Ensign(NV) resigning.- I would include-a Special Election in MA(Kennedy).
The safe Democratic seats are in
HI(Inouye)
IN(Bayh)
MD(Mikulski)
NY(Schumer)
OR(Wyden)
VT(Leahy)
DE(OPEN-Kaufman)is on a watch list depending on what Mike Castle does.
ND(Dorgan) is on a watch list depending what John Hoeven does.
The Likely Democratic seats are in
AR(Lincoln)
CA(Boxer)
NY(Gillibrand)
WA(Murray)
WI(Feingold)
The Lean Democratic seats are in
IL(OPEN-Burris)- IL will be the only vulnerable Democratic seat- Democrats can hold on even in a bad year.
The Tossup Democratic seats are in
CT(Dodd)
CO(Bennett)
NV(Reid)
PA(Specter).
Dodd(CT) and Reid(NV) are unpopular due to their role in Washington DC. Bennett(CO)is an appointed US Senator with low name recognition. Specter(PA)is facing a contested primary.
Lean Democratic Takeover Seats
MO(OPEN-Bond)- Carnahan is a strongest Democratic candidate for an open GOP seat. Blunt has limited appeal. MO will be a Democratic pickup even in a bad year.
NH(OPEN-Gregg)- Hodes is a safe candidate- Ayotte-is untested. If 2010 is a bad year for Democrats and Ayotte convinces NH's that she is a moderate- Republicans will hold onto NH. If Ayotte is defined as a rightwing Conservative- Hodes wins.
OH(OPEN-Voinovich)- Likely Democratic nominee- Lee Fisher is a safe candidate. Portman is unpopular due to his ties with Bush43. Democrats need to make the race about Portman's support and role in Bush43 failed policies.
Tossup Republican seats.
KY(OPEN-Bunning)- Both sides have top tier candidates. National environment will determine the outcome in KY.
Lean Republican seats.
NC(Burr)- Burr seat is a curse seat. Burr is a backbench member in a state that is becoming less Republican. The big question is which Democrat is willing to unseat Burr.
Likely Republican seats.
LA(Vitter)- Incumbent involved in scandal, Top Tier Democratic challenger- but state has been trending Republican.
Safe Republican seats.
AL(Shelby)
AK(Murkowski)
AZ(McCain)
FL(OPEN-Martinez)-Crist is a popular statewide elected official.
GA(Isakson)
ID(Crapo)
KS(OPEN-Brownback)- Democrats lack a candidate.
OK(Coburn)
SC(DeMint)
SD(Thune)
UT(Bennett)
Democrats have a greater chance of picking up MO,NH,and OH and possibly KY and NC than Republicans have a greater chance of winning CT,CO,DE,IL,NV,and PA.
I mean a pickup of a seat or two in the seante not house.
Essentially any analysis of Senate rankings at this point should be based on the strength of individual candidates and not national trends. This is because a year from now is a long time a way. An improved economy is likely as soon as the late winter this year (which will provide a boost to Dems), who knows what health care plan will be passed (depending what it is will impact the national climate), will cap-and-trade be in the midst of debate around election time or will it be over/postponed? Will the wars overseas be silent or will Afghanistan continue to be a mess? Those issues are going to be incredibly important to the 2010 midterms and they can't be forecasted in advance so what I'd like to see is an analysis of races based on individual candidate strength, not on "trends or tides" or polls which at this point are too based on those tides.
The Republican gains in 1994 were open seats.
AZ(Deconcini- who was involved in the Keating 5 scandal retired). Democrats nominated a one term Democratic congressman from a Republican District- Republican's nominated John Kyl- a 4 term US House member from Phoenix Suburbs. Kyl was favored to win AZ- regardless of what kind of year 1994 was.
ME(Mitchell- then Senate majority leader retired). Mitchell would have won re-election had he ran again. Democrats nominated a liberal Congressman from Portland. Republicans nominated Olympia Snowe- a moderate Republican.
MI(Reigle-who was involved in the Keating 5 scandal retired). Democrats nominated Bob Carr- a Congressman from Lansing who was a safe candidate. Republican nominee- Spencer Abraham- was an unknown- Abraham benifit from the 1994 GOP wave.
OH(Metzenbaum retired.)Had Metzenbaum ran again- He would have won re-election. Republicans nominated Lt Governor Mike DeWine. Democrats nominated Joel Hyatt- a liberal trial lawyer.
OK(due to the resignation of David Boren). OK is a red state so it was expected that James Inhofe was going to win.
PA(Wofford- was a first term Democratic Senator- who lost because of the national wave- and 94 health care debacle).
TN seats(Sasser/Gore seat) had to do with 94 GOP wave and TN becoming a Red State.
Republicans kept open seats in MN,MO,and WY.
Obama is still popular in states like CT,DE,and IL. He can help save Dodd's rear. He and VP Joe Biden can help Beau Biden face a tough challenge from Mike Castle. and help Giannoulias in IL. In PA- Specter has support from Independents and Moderate Republicans who voted for him in 1980,1986,1992,1998,and 2004.
Bennett(CO) and Reid(NV) are likely to be in trouble- Bennett is an appointed US Senator from a purple state. Reid(NV) is unpopular in a state that is a swing state.
Does anyone think that Dick Durbin, or any other Democrat, is necessarily going to be a better leader than Harry Reid? (Obviously he would be more charismatic, it being virtually impossible to be less charismatic). Is there any likelihood that another candidate might emerge to be Democratic Leader in the Senate?
It is true that its still a very unclear picture as far as 2010 is concerned. My guess is that 2010 might well be a holding pattern election, with only a relatively few seats changing hands in any elections, especially if the economy is ok, and healthcare reform passed.
The strength of candidates will help us in
AR(Lincoln)
CA(Boxer)
CO(Bennett)- Republicans don't have any top tier challengers.
DE(Biden)-assuming Castle does not run.
HI(Inouye)
IN(Bayh)
MD(Mikulski)
MO(Carnahan)
NV(Reid)- Republicans don't have any top tier challengers.
NH(Hodes)- Demographic benifit the Democrats
NY(Schumer)
NY(Gillibrand)
ND(Dorgan)assuming Hoeven does not run.
OH(Fisher)- Demographics benifit the Democrats- Portman is out of touch.
OR(Wyden)
PA(Specter or Sestak)- Toomey can be easily tied as a right winger.
VT(Leahy)
WA(Murray)
WI(Feingold).
IL(Both Giannoulias(D) and Kirk(R) are strong candidates but Demographics benifit Giannoulias.
same goes with CT,DE if Castle runs.
Just a quick not on Harris Wofford, in that he was serving out the term of Senator Heinz, who had died in office. I wonder how much the idea of Senator Wofford replacing someone from the opposing party might have played into the feelings of the 1994 Pa Senate Election?
Its amazing how many open seats are going to be Republican next year. My guess is that most of the red open seats are defendable. I think Bennet and Reid maybe the most vulnerable in office. I think that the Illinois and Delaware seats maybe among the vulnerable ones, and if it does turn into a change election, they would be targeted as strong symbolic seats.
The problem the GOP may end up having is how well a Republican message will play in places like Delaware and Illinois. Can the GOP adapt a more conservative message to fit into their target seats, as the Democrats did very successfully in 2006 and 2008, or are they just going to play the same national message and hope it gains traction?
2010 will be like the 1998/2002 midterm elections.
In 1998- Democrats picked up the open seat in IN(Coats retired)- Democratic nominee was Evan Bayh- popular former Governor. Unseated NY(D'Amato)-weak GOP incumbent in Blue state and NC(Faircloth)-weak GOP incumbent facing a charismatic Democratic opponent. Democrats lost IL(Scandal plagued Democratic incumbent),KY(OPEN seat-Ford retired).-Race was a tossup between Bunning and Baesler.- Mitch McConnell played a role in helping Bunning win. and OH(OPEN-Seat- Glenn retired)-Republican nominee was George Voinovich- a popular outgoing Governor. Democrats nominated a 2nd tier candidate.
In 2002- Democrats picked up AR(weak GOP incumbent- top tier Democratic challenger- Hutchinson/Pryor race is like Santorum/Casey or Blunt/Carnahan.
Democrats lost
GA(national environment- Republican fear campaign- helped unseat Cleland.
MN(Wellstone memorial backlash)
MO(Carnahan was appointed not elected. Talent was a recent 2000 GOP nominee for Governor- he narrowly lost in 2000.
In 2010- Democrats will pick up MO,NH,and OH. They will lose in CT- due to the Dodd's unpopularity and CO- Bennett being an appointed Democrat.
Nate, doesn't that New Hampshire poll look a little "Unrelaistic" to you? No undecideds, republican pollster, generic numbers in the Hodes vs. generic Republican column? And that after Ayotte has introduced herself as a social conservative in New Hampshire? And why doesn't that poll poll Paul Hodes against Ayotte's primary challenger? This all looks very suspicious to me.
"unrealistic" :-P
I think Nate is overestimating the national nature of the upcoming elections. The fact of the matter is that the regional relignment that made the South Republican has succeeded in making the North Democratic. As a result, it will take a very heavy anti-Dem wind to push CT, NH, DE, or PA in the Republican category. OH, MO, NV, and CO are true swing states, but therefore in each case the election will turn on the individual candidates, and in each case the Republicans are in trouble. (I include OH, since Portman, despite a clear primary field and terrible Democratic news, still polls behind either Fisher or Brunner.) In the end, the Dems are more likely to pick up seats, particularly if two likely events come to pass: 1. A health care reform bill gets signed, thus depriving the media of an incentive to cover the antics of the deathers; 2. The economy grows in the 4th Q of 2009 and the 1st and 2nd Qs of 2010, which will put Obama in a favorable light, since voters still blame Bush for the recession.
The reason you think there has been a major swing to the Republicans is because you are looking at a badly biased way of tracking polls. Pollster.com counts every Rassmusen poll separately. Since Rasmussen reports multiple times a month, and they are wildly out of line with all other polls, you get a wildly low estimate of Obama approval.
Currently Pollster.com has Obama approval at +5.5%. Other than Rasmussen (which has Obama -1), last four polls (see Real Clear Politics) have Obama +14.5% (polls are Gallup, NBC, ABC, Pew).
Wofford won the 1991 Special Election against Richard Thornburgh- who was a popular former Governor and Bush 41 AG. Wofford was able to defeat Thornburgh because of the Health Care/- The people who helped elected Wofford elected Bill Clinton in 1992. In 1994- Santorum was a Congressman from a Democratic leaning Congressional District from Pittsburgh- Santorum benifited from Gingrich contract with America.
Democratic candidates strengths-Republican candidate weakness help Democrats pick up
PA in 2006,VA in 2008,NM in 2008,CO in 2008 and NH in 2008.
OH-2006 and RI-2006 had to do with the national wave the unpopularity of the Republican party in those states.
NC-2008- had to do with Dole's weaknesses than Hagan's strengths.
AK-2008- Stevens scandals.
MT-2006- Burns scandals.
VA-2006- Macaca gaffe.
MO-2006- National environment and McCaskill was a top tier candidate.
OR-2008 and MN-2006 had to do with Obama coattails.
MO-2010 can be like PA-2006.(Strong Democrat/Weak Republican. OH-2010 can be like OH/MO-2006.(National Environment/Demographics favoring Democrats) NH-2010 can be like RI-2006.(State favoring Democrats)
KY-2010 can be like MO/TN-2006.(National Environment/State leaning Republican).
NC-2010- will be like VA-2006(Gaffe made by GOP incumbent.)
In 2006- Democratic Seats that were considered vulnerable but Democrats won.
FL/NE(Nelson)- Republicans picked the worst candidate- Katherine Harris. I see CO-2010 and NV-2010 being similar to FL and NE-2006- Democratic incumbents are vulnerable to defeat but Republicans will nominate an unelectable candidate.
MD(OPEN-Sarbanes)- Republicans picked a top tier candidate-Micheal Steele but Steele lost badly to Ben Cardin. DE-2010 and IL-2010 will be similar to the MD-2006 race.
MN(OPEN-Dayton)- Republicans picked a top tier candidate- Mark Kennedy who lost badly to Amy Klobuchar.
NJ(Menendez)- Strong GOP candidate- Tom Kean- lost to Bob Menendez.
2010 US Senate Races in CT,DE,and IL and possibly PA will be favorable to Democratic nominee based on the partisan Demographics of those states.
If Democrats were to lose seats in the US Senate- it will be in CO and NV.
One of the interesting things about 1994 was that the wave against the Democrats was often targeted at the most experienced Democrats. Romney ran strongly against Ted Kennedy and came relatively close to unseating a scion of Massachusets royalty. Pulling down Speaker Tom Foley, Gov Mario Cuomo, among others falling under a wave lead by young conservative Republicans. Personally I think the GOP is still suffering at the partisan nature of many of these, even though some of them have subsequently fallen from grace. I think the GOP blueprint has remained find a rightwinger and run them. I think Toomey in Pa is still evidence of that idea continuing still.
If you look at the STATES rather than just at the candidates you see there are only TWO states where Democrats SHOULD pick up seats because they are relatively blue states where Obama did well:
1. New Hampshire
2. Ohio.
Outside this there's North Carolina where Obama barely won, but which would probably go Republican if there were an election held today.
The reason Democrats are in trouble is that they have basically taken almost all the seats they SHOULD hold in the Blue States and now have to defend.
You can see the completely anti-democratic (small d) nature of our government from this. Republicans represent rural small state America, and yet they have disproportionate influence because a state like Wyoming or Idaho gets equal Senate representation with California.
I have difficulty believing that Dodd is going to lose but if his numbers don't improve he might not get out of a primary.
Specter has always been in trouble. Probably Sestak is the best chance to hold onto that seat, but Specter is just slippery enough to slide through to the general election -- only to lose there.
Republicans now hate him with an "H", liberals don't trust him and his switch of party has alienated Independents who for some stupid reason tend to think "wrong but strong" is better than "weak but right."
Well, Hitler was "wrong but strong" and how well did THAT work out?
But, it's tough for Specter to portray himself as a "man of conviction."
If you look at the STATES rather than just at the candidates you see there are only TWO states where Democrats SHOULD pick up seats because they are relatively blue states where Obama did well:
1. New Hampshire
2. Ohio.
Outside this there's North Carolina where Obama barely won, but which would probably go Republican if there were an election held today.
The reason Democrats are in trouble is that they have basically taken almost all the seats they SHOULD hold in the Blue States and now have to defend.
You can see the completely anti-democratic (small d) nature of our government from this. Republicans represent rural small state America, and yet they have disproportionate influence because a state like Wyoming or Idaho gets equal Senate representation with California.
I have difficulty believing that Dodd is going to lose but if his numbers don't improve he might not get out of a primary.
Specter has always been in trouble. Probably Sestak is the best chance to hold onto that seat, but Specter is just slippery enough to slide through to the general election -- only to lose there.
Republicans now hate him with an "H", liberals don't trust him and his switch of party has alienated Independents who for some stupid reason tend to think "wrong but strong" is better than "weak but right."
Well, Hitler was "wrong but strong" and how well did THAT work out?
But, it's tough for Specter to portray himself as a "man of conviction."
It's not the economy as such that will hurt Dems. It's unemployment. If that hasn't improved significantly, history shows that they will pay a price. But there is another, even more difficult issue for the Dems: debt. Surveys show that deficit spending is now a top concern for voters - and that concern isn't going away anytime soon. August, Friday afternoon announcements of 2 trillion dollar additions to the national debt (over ten years) don't help. I think this could be a powerful issue against the Democrats. And please spare me the "blame Bush" defense. True or not, that won't work politically two years into the Age of Obama.
Please, a moment to pause, and appreciate that we live in a country where a man who likes to poop his diaper in front of a hooker is likely going to be reelected to the US senate.
I don't accept the premise that there will be a national headwind against the democrats in 2010. Just a few months ago we were talking about the democrats taking 5 seats, "permanent majority" etc. 14 months is a long time. why don't we wait and see what happens with the economy, healthcare, etc. if a "moderate" product comes out of the healthcare debate (ie no public option) and the political center perceives that some positive reform occurred, this would change the landscape dramatically. don't count obama out!!
Disagree on AK being so low.
Murkowski won her only state-wide election in 2004 by only 9400 votes in the same year Bush was re-elected, carrying AK by 70K+ votes. She ran significantly behind him and on his coattails, in short. If Knowles runs against her again, and Parnell has to raise taxes to pay off Palin's budget problems and Berkowitz runs against Young again, then it may be possible for local Dems to run ahead of national trends be they anti-Dem or with the trend be it anti-incumbent. Taking 2 more state house seats is also easily done - missed one pickup by 1 vote out of 10K 9 months ago. AK having bicameral Dem majorities, a Dem gov, 2 Dem senators and a Dem rep for its CD? It's all possible - they start out the election at 45% in all categories, just need to position the 3rd parties against the GOP and make gains among the 4% dissatisfied Indepentents and AK can be a totally blue state, just like MA.
NV is also much more blue now than you all are giving it credit for, due to hispanic and SanFran exurban sprawl. 200K Dem registrant advantage just since 2004? I call that a blue state.
-Jeff
Again, as uncomfortable as it is to point out, what is the point of having a filibuster-proof senate if you don't use it? That scenario is likely only going to have been from the day Al Franken was sworn in to the day that Senator Byrd or Kennedy dies. Effectively, a few months long. Come September put the health insurance bill on the senate floor and VOTE, goddammit!
"if it would mean we get a majority leader with a little more, eh, je ne sais quoi..."
If you speak French here, you'll be skewered as a socialist. Go ahead, you can say 'balls'.
I actually think we won't see much change in 2010. I think the pendulum will have reached it's apex. Unless, of course, the health insurance reform becomes an albatross. 2012 is the year to watch. I do think the filibuster-proof senate will be history. Net gain for Repubs: three or four seats.
Nate - this is a truly masturbatory and silly exercise on your part.
Remember August 2007? Hillary Clinton the presumptive nominee for the Dems, John McCain dead in the water and Rudy Giuliani a near cinch for the GOP? How'd that one work out?
I know you are not killing any trees with this, but to make ANY conclusions prior to the resolution of the health care reform issue and seeing how the stimulus affects things, well this is just silly.
You do a lot of sharp and excellent topical analyses, but this is worthless, and I have yet to understand why you constantly cite outlier GOP Rasmussen as if he/she were a credible source. On California alone, Carly Fiorina? The woman who has missed voting in 18 of 21 national elections? That is hurting her just a bit.
Come on, Nate, lose the breathless urgency about sketchy polls 16 months prior to the election. Ultimately, most of the other posters are right. The shift will be likely 1-3 either way. Would love to see Grassley lose, for sure.
camipco said...
Please, a moment to pause, and appreciate that we live in a country where a man who likes to poop his diaper in front of a hooker is likely going to be reelected to the US senate.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Post of the day lol
Diaper Dave ~ America, what a country! and looking forward to Stormy Daniels running against him in the Rep primary.
Comparing known candidates is ok, but Charlie Cook still leaves out states like DE where it is not yet known if Castle is even in it. Until he announces, it's a lock for whomever the Dem is, right? So, I recommend doing it that way. Likewise is AR and CO safe, since there's no GOP candidate as of now. You can always re-rate those races as higher later, if there does magically appear some credible Repub in those states. But as the GOP didn't challenge any of the 3 Dem reps in AR last yr, they only have some anti-semitic State Sen with no money to run against Lincoln? Pffft. Big deal. Wake me when he can poll above 30% state-wide.
In LA, Repub challengers are a bigger prob for Diaper Dave. If you wanna sling mud at him, fund a Repub challenger (who's not a porn star) and then Melancon still looks above-it-all when you get to the general. Charlie doesn't have to win 51%, either, just as long as he's the only Dem in the race, he can still outlast a wounded Vitter if you can fund other Repubs to cut Vitter's vote and force a December runoff.
-Jeff
Braley won't challenge Grassley in IA. Went to his town hall last wk, going again on Thurs. Grassley got a pass from Obama same as McCain did. They'll both retire in 2016 anyway. No need to force them out right now. Vilsack can be done in the cabinet and run for Grassley's seat in 2016, then. Braley needs to keep this district safe for the Dems for at least another 2 yrs against strong competition.
I'm looking at Dems gaining 4-5 seats next yr. Maybe you could work on Snowe/Collins to et some more crossovers to get to 67? Could always impeach Vitter/Ensign, too if you get to 66 and a Dem gov in the state to appoint a Dem replacement to get to 67 and end filibusters for several decades at that point. If it's not about doing that, then you can at least shore up the 3/5ths majority with 4-5 more.
-Jeff
If the Democrats can pass meaningful healthcare reform, if the economy is rebounding, if the Iraq war is winding down, if the Afghanistan war is stable, the republicans are toast. The Party of Can Do vs the Party of No, even I would have a fair chance of winning in such as election.
Ickey,
Have you lost your mind? Dems +4-5 seats in 2010?? That would require them to sweep Nate's top ten (a top ten which is a bit generous to the Dems, in my view). What have the divided Dems done, or what will they do, to deserve such untrammeled control. You can forget it.
There is no way that Guiliani, if he decides to run, can win in the upstate counties considering his reprehensable conduct during the 2000 senate election (the Farmersville Garbage Scandal leaving a very bad taste in the mouths of people who would otherwise have supported him) and if a Republican can't win in upstate, they're absolutely dead in the water in a statewide election in New York. If Giuliani is the Republican opponent, Gillibrand could quite possibly break 67% despite her own problems.
Re Nevada--how good is the Mason Dixon poll? I notice that 47% were undecided. Reid's supposed adversary has never held public office and seems to be mostly the son of a famous person, ala Ensign. I think Reid is a very adroit Senate leader, hopefully we will see that in the next weeks. Obama agrees and said this spring in Las Vegas "As long as I am President I was Harry Reid as my Senate majority leader."
An interesting situationis developing in Arkansas. Your point about the republicans being disorganized is correct. We fully expect a Green Party to enter the race, which would dilute some of Lincoln's support on the left even more. However, these is a rapidly growing and expanding grass roots populist candidate that is running as an independent. His name is Trevor Drown, the former Green Beret and Afgan War Vet.
Before you discount the possibility and start the split the party nonsense, I suggest you look at the numbers and do further research. More than 95 percent of registered voters in Arkansas are Independents. In the last two elections, they voted all over the individual not the party. Their disgust for party politics have gotton even deeper. Drown's message of listening to the people at this early stage and taking it slow, is starting to make headway. Recent attempts to discunt him, has already brought the local GOP out and this can only be to his benefit. We shall see an interesting race shaping up as he defines his leadership.
The following Democratic or Republican US Senators running for re-election rarely get challenged.
Democrats
1)HI(Inouye-D)-
2)IN(Bayh-D)-
3)MD(Mikulski)-
4)NY(Schumer)-
5)ND(Dorgan)-
6)OR(Wyden)-
7)VT(Leahy)-
Republicans.
1)AL(Shelby)
2)ID(Crapo-R)-
3)UT(Bennett-R)
The following first term GOP Senators that are safe.
1)AK(Murkowski-R)-
2)GA(Isakson-R)
3)SD(Thune-R)
The following first term GOP Senators that are vulnerable due to gaffes but are favored to win due to Partisan demographics of their states.
1)LA(Vitter-R)
2)OK(Coburn-R)
3)SC(DeMint-R)
The following open seat GOP Seats that are safe.
1)FL(OPEN Martinez-R)- Charlie Crist.
2)KS(OPEN Brownback-R)- Jerry Moran/Todd Tiahrt.
The following Republican US Senators that are normally safe but can face a tough race this cycle.
1)AZ(McCain-R)- primary challenge from the Conservative Right. A primary defeat can give Democrats a decent chance of winning that seat.
2)IA(Grassley-R)- His strong opposition to Health Care and IA being a state that went for Obama by a 10 point margin can give a top tier Democrat a chance of unseating Grassley.- ie Jim Sasser-TN in 1994.
The following Democratic US Senators that have been safe in previous election cycles but are vulnerable this cycle due to special circumstances
1)CT-Dodd-D due to the Mortgage Scandal- and his foolish decision to move to Iowa- during his 2008 failed Presidential bid. A 94 style GOP wave in 2010 will likely bring Dodd down.
2)NV-Reid-D- won close races in 1986,1992,and 1998- avoided a top tier challenge in 2004. Republicans will need a top tier candidate to unseat Reid in 2010. (Dean Heller).
The following Democratic US Senators that were vulnerable in previous election cycles are safe-this cycle due to lack of top tier challengers.
1)AR(Lincoln-D)
2)CA(Boxer-D)
3)WA(Murray-D)
4)WI(Feingold-D)
The only Republican US Senate incumbent facing re-election that is likely to lose re-election is
1)NC(Burr-R)- NC Seat has a curse and Burr is a first term incumbent who won a close race.
The following open GOP Seats that are going to switch parties.
1)MO(OPEN-Bond-R)- Robin Carnahan-D is a strongest recruit. Roy Blunt-R is the weakest.
2)NH(OPEN-Gregg-R)- Blue State- Hodes is a safe choice. Ayotte is an unknown quantity.
3)OH(OPEN-Voinovich-R)- GOP nominee Rob Portman-R is a liability. Democratic nominee- Lee Fisher is a safe choice.
The following Democratic seats that are on the watch list.
1)CO(Bennet-D)- is suppose to be vulnerable- being appointed and having low name recognition but GOP don't have any top tier candidates. Bennett will get a free pass.
2)DE(OPEN-Kaufman-D)- Democrats are going to unite behind Beau Biden. The only Republican that can give Biden a tough race is Mike Castle who is more likely to retire than run for the US Senate.
3)IL(OPEN-Burris-D)- Both sides have top tier candidates- DEM- Giannoulias, GOP- Kirk. Due to the partisan demographics of IL and Obama's influence- Giannoulias is favored to win in IL.
4)NY(Gillibrand-D)- Pataki is the only Republican that can give Gillibrand a tough race but Gillibrand will end up winning in the end.
5)PA(Specter-D)- Whoever wins in the DEM Primary is likely to defeat Toomey in the general election unless in 2010 is a GOPWave election year like 1994.
You forgot to list KY after OH on your list of open GOP seats that will flip due to the dem (Mongiardo) being stronger than the Repub (Greyson).
Also, Murkowski is far from safe without Bush coattails to ride on.
-Jeff
KY-2010 will be a repeat of KY-1998- the last time KY had an open seat.
The race between Dan Mongiardo vs Trey Greyson will be a tossup. It will take couple of days from being decided.
Nate,
Generally agree with your snapshot except for ND. I've spent a lot of time in ND in the past and know both Dorgan and Hoeven. Dorgan is a master at running as a populist at home where people there take a shine to populists, and then is a rock-solid Liberal in DC. North Dakotans LOVE Byron in spite of his voting record. If ND is in play, then Demos will have HUGE problems across the country.
A quibble with Mike Castle's blurb. He has been in public office since 1891 not 1981.
Safe Incumbent Party
AL(Shelby-R)-Red State,popular incumbent,weak challenger.
AK(Murkowski-R)-Red state, weak challenger.
AZ(McCain-R)-Red State,weak challenger.
CA(Boxer-D)-Blue State,weak challenger.
FL(OPEN-R)- Popular GOP candidate. Democratic candidate is not well known.
GA(Isakson-R)-Red State,weak challenger.
HI(Inouye-D)-Blue State,popular incumbent-weak challenger.
ID(Crapo-R)-Red State,popular incumbent-weak challenger.
IN(Bayh-D)- popular incumbent,weak challenger.
IA(Grassley-R)- weak challenger.
KS(OPEN-R)- Democrats don't have any top tier candidates. Republicans have a primary between two strong candidates.
MD(Mikulski-D)-Blue State,popular incumbent- weak challenger.
NY(Schumer-D)-Blue State,popular incumbent-weak challenger.
NY(Gillibrand-D)- Blue State,weak challenger.
ND(Dorgan-D)- popular incumbent,weak challenger.
OK(Coburn-R)-Red State,Weak challenger.
OR(Wyden-D)-Blue State,Popular incumbent,Weak Challenger.
SC(DeMint-R)-Red State,Weak Challenger.
SD(Thune-R)- Red State,Weak Challenger.
UT(Bennett-R)-Red State,Popular incumbent-weak challenger.
VT(Leahy-D)-Blue State,popular incumbent-weak challenger.
WA(Murray-D)-Blue State,popular incumbent-weak challenger.
WI(Feingold-D)-Blue State,popular incumbent-weak challenger.
Vulnerable Incumbent Party.
AR(Lincoln-D)- mediocre incumbent in Red State, weak challenger. Leans DEM retention- depending on national environment.
CO(Bennett-D)-appointed Senator with low name id. Too soon to rate. National environment will determine the outcome.
CT(Dodd-D)-Usually Safe Incumbent vulnerable first time because of bad publicity. Credible challenger. Due to the demographics on CT- Dodd will win in the end.
DE(OPEN-D)- It all depends on what Castle does.That said. Beau Biden(D)is favored to win regardless.
IL(OPEN-D)- Both sides have strong candidates but State leans Blue at the national and State level. Lean DEM.
KY(OPEN-R)- Pure Tossup. Both sides have popular Statewide elected officials as their candidates.
LA(Vitter-R)- Red State,Weak incumbent,Strong Challenger.
MO(OPEN-R)- Strong Democrat,Weak Republican. DEM Pickup.
NV(Reid-D)- Weak Incumbent.
NH(OPEN-R)- Blue State,Safe Democrat,Untested Republican. DEM Pickup.
NC(Burr-R)-Weak Incumbent.
OH(OPEN-R)- Weak Republican,Safe Democratic candidates. DEM Pickup.
PA(Specter-R)- Weak Incumbent.
In a 1994 style wave- DEMS will pick up MO,NH,and OH, and lose AR and CO. Dems will hold on to CT(Dodd has seniority),DE(VP Biden's influence),IL(President Obama's influence),NV(Reid's seniority),and PA(Specter has seniority).
In a 1998 style wave- DEMS will pick up MO,NH,OH,and possibly KY,LA,and NC.
Love the analysis Nate.
For anybody who says it's stupid to predict Senate races now: think of how the midterm election impacts the voting/policy/demands for concessions of (perceived) vulnerable senators TODAY. Remember, all these Senators want to win and are working now to position themselves to achieve that end. It would seem Bennett, Lincoln, and Dorgan might move further right than normal in order to fend off challengers in the looming general. I have a harder time deciphering how this would effect Burr or Vitter. This has a huge, real effect on cap&trade, health care, etc TODAY.
Nate, how does Daschle's 04 loss factor into Reid's chances? My (admittedly rudimentary) take is that the perfect storm has not emerged for Reid to fall like it did for Daschle six years earlier.
Tom Daschle- who always got re-elected to the US Senate in 1992 and 1998 against third tier challengers- faced a toughest challenger since the first time he got elected to the US Senate. John Thune- was a former popular AT Large US House Member of South Dakota. He narrowly lost a US Senate Race in 2002 against Tim Johnson. The Daschle/Thune race was going to be close. 2004 was a Presidential Year. Bush was going to carry SD by a 60-40 margin over Kerry. Thune relied on Bush 43 coattails to defeat Daschle.
Regarding Reid- Reid does not have any top tier challengers. Reid's close call in 1998 against Ensign had to do with the fact that Ensign was from Reid's base in Las Vegas. Democrats are favored to win the NV Governorship in 2010 due to the unpopularity of the Republican Governor- and Ensign scandals.
Looking at the other races in 2010.
The following US Senate Seats are safe Incumbent Party due to weak opposition.
AL(Shelby-R)
AK(Murkowski-R)
AZ(McCain-R)
CA(Boxer-D)
FL(OPEN-LeMeiux-R)-Crist-R
GA(Isakson-R)
HI(Inouye-D)
ID(Crapo-R)
IN(Bayh-D)
IA(Grassley-R)
KS(OPEN-Brownback-R)-Moran/Tiahrt-R-
Democratic bench in KS is weak.
MD(Mikulski-D)
NY(Schumer-D)
OK(Coburn-R)
OR(Wyden-D)
SC(DeMint-R)
SD(Thune-R)
UT(Bennett-R)
VT(Leahy-D)
WA(Murray-D)
WI(Feingold-D)
Vulnerable depending on the opponent.
DE(OPEN-Kaufman-D- If Castle-R runs- it will be a tossup. Otherwise Safe Democratic.
ND(Dorgan-D)if Hoeven runs- otherwise Dorgan-D is safe.
Vulnerable but incumbent favored.
AR(Lincon-D)- Democratic US Senator from the most Red State. Republican bench is weak- Lincoln has a moderate ideology.
CO(Bennet-D)-appoint US Senator with low name recognition in purple state- Weak opposition.
CT(Dodd-D)-vulnerable because of bad publicity- safe due to partisan demographics of state and clout.
IL(OPEN-Burris-D)- Republicans have a strong candidate- Mark Kirk-but IL is a blue state at the national level and President Obama will make sure IL elects a DEM to his old US Senate Seat.
NV(Reid-D)-
NY(Gillibrand-D)- appointed US Senator however- NY is a blue state- Gillibrand is favored to win .
PA(Specter-D)
Vulnerable- Incumbent Favored but possible takeover due to behavior of Incumbent.
LA(Vitter-R)-
NC(Burr-R)
In open GOP seats in KY,MO,NH,and OH. Democrats fielded top tier candidates.
KY(Mongiardo,Conway)
MO(Carnahan)
NH(Hodes)
OH(Fisher,Brunner)
Republicans have a top tier candidate in KY(Greyson).an unelectable candidate in MO(Blunt),and OH(Portman)and a untested candidate in NH(Ayotte).
2008 Democrats picked up 8 seats.
3 out of 8 were open seats.
VA,NM,and CO- Republican candidates were unpopular,too conservative,and too controversial. Democratic candidates were household names in their state.
MN,NH,and NC- Republican incumbents were weak first termers. In MN- Franken was a weak opponent- but benifited from Obama's coattails.
NH- Shaheen was a top tier challenger.
NC- Hagan was a generic opponent. Dole was the weakest incumbent-out of the 3.
AK- Scandal plagued incumbent.
OR- Obama coattails helped Merkley unseat Smith.
In 2006 we picked up 6 seats.
PA- Strong Moderate Challenger-Weak Controversial Incumbent.
OH,RI,and MO- had to do with national environment- Republican party was unpopular in OH,and RI. MO-GOP incumbent was a weak freshman.
MT- GOP incumbent was involved in scandal
VA- GOP incumbent involved in gaffe.
I think that 2010 will be a bad year for Senate Republicans -- the party is defending several seats of their big win in 2004.
2012 and 2014 senate races will be good for Republicans as they regain many senate seats that were lost in the 2006 and 2008 elections.
So my prediction for 2010 is that GOP loses a senate seat, but will regain 20 House seats (many of which were lost in the 2008 blowout).
The 2004 Republican Freshmans US Senators are Southern Republican US Senators who were elected due to Bush-43 popularity in deep red states.
AK-Murkowski- narrowly elected against a two term former Governor. Murkowski is safe due to a weak Democratic bench. Tony Knowles and Ethan Berkowitz are the only two top tier candidates but they are underdogs in the general election.
FL- Martinez is resigning. Republican nominated Charlie Crist and popular sitting Governor. Safe Republican.
GA- Johnny Isakson is a great fit for the voters in GA. Democrats will give him a free pass.
LA- Democrats fielded a top tier candidate to challenge David Vitter- US Rep Charlie Melancon. LA is trending Republican so Vitter is favored to win re-election.
OK- Coburn is vulnerable but favored against a tough challenge from Brad Henry or Dan Boren.
SC- Democratic bench in SC is weak against DeMint.
SD- Stephanie Herseth Sandlin is the only Democrat that can give Thune a race and she is not running.
The only freshman Republican US Senator that is vulnerable for defeat is Burr-NC. The other Republican seats Democrats will pick up are open seats in MO,NH,and OH and maybe KY. MO and OH- the GOP candidates are liabilities. NH is a blue state.
The 2006 Democratic freshmans were
Ben Cardin-MD- who is safe in 2012.
Amy Klobuchar-MN who is safe in 2012.
Claire McCaskill-MO is vulnerable to a top tier challenge.
Jon Tester-MT is vulnerable to a top tier challenge.
Menendez-NJ is safe.
Brown-OH is vulnerable.
Casey-PA is safe
Whitehouse-RI is safe
Webb-VA is vulnerable.
In 2008- The 8 Freshman Democratic US Senators are
AK- Begich- who is vulnerable.
CO- Udall- who is vulnerable.
MN- Franken who is vulnerable.
NH- Shaheen who is safe.
NM- Udall who is safe.
NC- Hagan who is vulnerable.
OR- Merkley who is safe.
VA- Warner who is safe.
Nate - Why did you not handicap Feingold in WI?
Please look at the University of Minnesota poll as well as the Des Moines Register poll when rating Senator Grassley of Iowa. His popularity is spiraling downward! And, check out http://www.krauseforiowa.com
Turnout won't be low in Texas.
We are absolutely pissed at Perry. Last time he won only because we don't allow run-off elections. 60% of the population voted for the three other candidates. This time that won't happen.
Texas is turning blue. We are tired of the Republicans behavior. Have you seen what they are doing to our public education?! And Independents are planning on voting Democrat.
There is also a movement for people to vote in the Republican Primary to get Perry out of the running because we know that Hutchinson is less crazy than him on some things but will also be more vulnerable against a Democrat.
Some of us are split ong voting in the Republican Primary to get Hutchinson in or the Democrat Primary to get Kinky in.
Perry is already planning on taking the Chancelor position at A&M there was a scandal several months ago about the Chancelor and President (there was several others if I recall besides just the Chancelor) being forced out of their positions/fire because of political presure from Perry on getting the job.
Mark my words. 2010 is going to be UGLY. Hutchinson is already preparing to go all out against Perry (did you hear about the gay search word scandal?) and Perry has his big bad of dirty tricks in his pocket, not to mention how the Bushes will sway things.
Perry is already associating himself with Palin... That may work for the neo-cons and the tea baggers...but the rest of us? We have him in our sights and we want his ass and all the other Republicans out. Now.
In Ohio, I'm afraid Portman is not the most savory Democratic choice. Why does it not surprise me that he's pulled ahead in fundraising?
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,
Post a Comment