If, as I predict, Republicans hold all the seats of retiring Republican Senators (NH, FL, KY, OH and MO), then there will be at least 44 GOP Senators in the 112th Congress.
With the announcement today of the retirement of Byron Dorgan, the junior Senator from the Peace Garden State, Republicans can add North Dakota to the list of states (AR, CT and NV) where we are all but certain to pick up a seat currently held by a Democrat.
Some say Earl Pomeroy, the state’s sole Congressman, has a shot at the seat. But, with a recent poll showing the 11-term Democrat “losing to an unnamed candidate 50 – 42“, he just doesn’t look as strong as he might otherwise look.
If Republicans can recruit strong candidates to run in Washington State, New York State, Maryland, Oregon and Wisconsin, we may see a GOP Senate a year hence. To help make that possible, donate to Massachusetts Senate candidate Scott Brown.
RBD, great news for Senate pickups huh.
Here in PA Toomey has a great shot at beating (R) (D) Spector.
Arlen tends to have 40% fairly strong support, so he’s got a real uphill battle after switching parties. His heath will be an issue as side by side against a much younger Toomey he loses.
This was great news, although it gives Dorgan the ability to vote for anything Obama wants without facing the voters. So, that is one “moderate” who does not have to be concerned about getting re-elected.
In addition, Reid and Lincoln have basically lost. The writing seems to be on the wall that Beau Biden wont get into the race in Delaware, so that should be a pick-up. Unless Dodd retires, that should be 5. And Pennsylvania will be tricky, but I think the anti-Obama sentiment will lead to 6 pick-up’s.
That leaves Gillenbrand in New York, and the IL seat. Gillenbrand is vulnerable, but without Rudy, the only candidate the Republicans have is really Peter King, who I dont forsee giving up his guaranteed seat for a possible loss to Gillenbrand. In IL, while Kirk has a chance, I just dont see a Republican winning in IL. That is also the case in MA.
So, it looks like there will be 6 pick-up’s. However, that is also conditioned on keeping the Ohio seat, which is way too close at this point, keeping the Missouri seat, Blunt and Carnahan are in a dead heat, having Ayotte win in NH, and keeping the NC seat.
So, it is still going to be very tough for Republicans since this is the 2004 cycle in which the Republicans were last succesful.
Finally, forget Washington, Maryland, Oregon and Wisconsin. That is just not happening. The only other possible pick-up’s might be in Colorado, Indiana and maybe in California, however, I just dont see viable candidates in Colorado and Indiana, and I just dont see Barbara Boxer losing.
Yeah Chris I agree with most of your analysis. Anyone but a socialist winnning in NY or CA or ILL is impossible.
Breaking news….
(D) Governor of CO cancels fundraiser and dismisses campaign staff…end reelection bid.
Races for Republican pick ups in governors mansions looks very juicy.
Now add CO to PA, MI.
It seems a lot of Dems don’t have the courage to get into competivtive races.
Although independent pollster Rasmussen 3 weeks ago had CO (D) Ritter 8 points behind a possible (R) opponent.
Looks like a def Republican governors mansion pick up.
Hmm, Gene, now that you mention PA, maybe I should up the minimum to 5.
I would classify PA, DE, CO and IL as tossups with slight GOP edge (brings us to 48).
And with good candidates, IN, CA, MD, WA, WI & NY (Gillibrand) become lean Dem, with possibility of becoming tossups depending on dynamics of the year.
Chris, Washington and Oregon had lots of Perot voters in 1990s. In 1994, 7 of WA’s 9 seats went GOP. Patty Murray is a weak candidate and has never run against a strong opponent in a year when dynamics favored GOP in Evergreen State. If she draws opponent who can fire up the GOP base, she’s toast.
But, that’s a big “if.”
Gene, there really are not that many quality Democrats left. Aside from Beau Biden they do not have many promising candidates. If they did, they would fight tooth and nail to keep 60 seats.
And, yes, the Republicans are going to make huge gains in regards to governors. However, the real importance of the 2010 election is to take back the House, and make sure the Republicans get a 43rd vote in the Senate (the need for 43 is obvious with Collins and Snowe). In an era when the federal government constantly ignores the tenets of federalism, the key is to prevent Democrats from passing legislation that bankrupt the whole country.
If the Dems aren’t motivated to come out in November, Spector in PA is toast. At 80 he doesn’t fire up even his base which as you know he abandoned this year. If Dem turnout is a problem, Spector is history.
I haven’t followed WI …we had a popular governor there for 8 or more years in Thompson, why don’t we have strong candidates lined up?
Daniel, Patty Murray is vulnerable, however, I just dont see a Republican who can challenge her. Off the top of my head I can’t even think of a legitate candidate. The Governor is a Democrat. They have 3 Republicans I believe. Doc Hastings is in a safe seat, and doubt has the clout to challenge Murray. Cathy Rodgers might have a shot, however, she is getting up there in terms of a leadership position in the House. Would she give that up to be a Junior Senator knowing the Republicans have a great chance to take back the House? She would be the perfect candidate, but I just dont see it. And if I recall, Reichert barely won re-election last year. That does not bode well for a challenge to an incumbant Senator. Aside from that, I just dont see a viable candidate, especially in a state where the state legislature is controlled by Democrats.
As for Oregon, it’s the same thing. I just dont see someone who can challenge Wyden. Again, the Governor is a Democrat. And I cant even think of a Republican Congressman from Oregon. So, I dont see where a legitamate candidate is coming from.
And that underscores the problem in large parts of the country. There are just no legitimate candidates. That is why it’s easy for people from the Midwest and the South to say that RINO’s are awful, but in places like Oregon and Washington, the only chance to elect Republicans is often to nominate RINO’s.
Chris, Patty Murray came from the state legislature. Is there a charismatic Republican in either House who has been solid on spending? Get him to announce at a tea party and secure some interviews on the right-leaning radio shows in Seattle area (of which I hear there are a number) and we’re off.
Oregon is tougher in large part ’cause Wyden is a responsible legislator and intelligent guy.
Mitch Daniels has run Indiana fantastically during one of the worst recessions ever. He is a rock when it comes to fiscal conservatism. I have no idea if he has his eye on Bayh’s seat, but if he does, there’s no reason why he can’t win it.
I’m not even from Indiana, but I’m a big Mitch Daniels fan.
Shoot, Chris all three potential Republican candidates in Colorado, Weins, Norton and Buck, are polling better than either the incumbent Bennet or Romanoff. Colorado is going back Red, I’m pretty sure. Governor decided to quit his re-run today, isn’t that interesting? He is trailing McInnis.
I hope there is a republican in the Washington state senate who can challenge Murray. However, I know nothing about local Washington politics.
As for Daniels, I think the problem is that he is 60 years old and still has 2 years to be the Governor. If he challenges Bayh and losses, he is basically done unless Lugar retires in 2012 (I am not sure he will in what will probably be a good year to be a Republican). And Bayh is going to be very tough to beat because on the money he has already raised, and because Obama can campaign for him and hold sway in the more urban parts of Indianopolis.
One other thing to remember. While 10/11 pick-up’s would be great, republicans have to remember that this is the 2004 cycle (something many seem to be forgetting). It’s more important to keep all of the seats that are currently Republican, and only pick-up 3/4 seats, than spread already limited resources thin by going after seats that are really unrealistic to obtain, then only pick-up 2/3 of those seats, and lose a few seats like Missouri and Kentucky.
Steven, the polling looks promise, but Colorado has been a really tricky state lately. If I were getting paid to make predictions, I would mark the state as a toss-up. Although I have to say that I like Jane Norton a lot. I think she has a chance if she can survive the primary. And even then, I think this race is going to be really close, and might be a dead heat come election day.
Chris, I would have prefered Ryan Fraizer, more libertarian, but instead Ryan’s going to take out Perlmutter in Congressional District 7. 😉
Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) read the tea leaves or more precisely the internal polling and announced Tuesday night that he would retire rather than run for re-election this year. Dorgan was polling badly after tying himself to President Obama and Harry Reid over the past year.
In Nebraska meanwhile, our fine Democrat Senator Ben Nelson got a good look at what will probably also be his fate at about this time next year. Nelson has transformed himself into a cartoon character of late with his bizarre statements since selling his vote on Obamacare.
I hope you’re right about Reid, but I think that the scene on the ground here in Nevada is a little more complex than it looks from afar. He is still trailing in the polls, but Rasmussen shows the distance between him and his likely challengers narrowing, which makes me nervous. He is very unpopular here, but SEIU is a big player in Las Vegas–and so it might depend most of all on who gets out the vote. To complicate matters, his most likely challenger, Sue Lowden, appears as though she would make an excellent candidate except for one thing–the Ron Paul folks hate her because she was part of the Republican leadership in the state who tried to prevent them from taking over the 2008 state convention. (Romney won the most delegates, but at the state convention, the Ron Paul folks tried to stage a coup.) If they vote against her or sit out or whatever, there could be difficulties in defeating Reid.
As far as Gillibrand, I’m on her e-mail list (my name got added from another mailing list I’m on), and I get the impression that she is a little nervous about re-election–though she was much more nervous when she thought she might be facing Rudy. Nevertheless, she has tacked so far to the left, that she might lose whatever support she might have had in the past from so-called moderates. Peter King might just have a chance.
GOP picks up ND, maybe CO and Ark
Dems pick up MO, maybe OH
There are a few other possibilities either way, but they are kinda longshots.
Bottom line, net GOP pick up of 1 or 2.
Underlying factors – Biden will run in DE, Lincoln is ahead in all non-Rasmussen polling, Reid has huge money and organizational advantages and no compelling GOP candidate, Specter is really very much better positioned than Toomey, and if he can hold off Sestak, I think he wins. Dodd might belong on the maybe GOP list, but I just have a gut call that he survives.
Caveat. Thats based on the political environment today. I GUARANTEE it will be different 11 months from now (just think, its barely more than 11 months since the inauguration – seems like a long time, no?)
Any real prediction would have to take into account how the environment will change over the next 11 months. I know perfectly well what you guys would say about that. Me, I think the recovery will solidifying, unemployment will be coming down, health care reform will be passed and ultimately a slight positive for Dems – so things will look a bit better for them. That said, my overall bottom line prediction is that the Senate will be a wash.
Ooops,
Dodd is not running. Hmmm. Put CT back in the Dem column – AG Blumenthal has got to be considered the front runner now.
If Dodd is dropping out as reported, it is probably that Democrats have access to numbers which make my forecast for ’10 look pessimistic.
For the GOP.
Tano, too bad that we have to wait 11 months to see you proven wrong. Rasmussen does a good job of factoring in voter intensity and it increases on the GOP side with each passing day.
Since penning this piece and even with the news of Dodd, I’m holding to the prediction I made in the title as I think PA will easily go GOP. You can blather on all you want about Specter, but you neglect one thing. There are lot of pro-lifers in the Keystone State and they’ve never been able to get excited about any of the opponents of the pro-choice one-time Republican. This year, they’ll be pumped to beat him and in a year with the now-Democrat’s approval cratering and the GOP base fired up, their support and volunteer efforts will make the difference.
The Dodd decision moves the CT seat from lean GOP to lean Dem and means that while the Republicans might be able to get to 48 or 49, the Democrats will likely keep the Senate, but then they’re so few GOPers up in the ’12 cycle that it all but means, Senate reverts to Republican control that year.
Who’s retiring in FL? Do you mean LeMieux the seat warmer?
“If Dodd is dropping out as reported, it is probably that Democrats have access to numbers which make my forecast for ‘10 look pessimistic.”
Huh? I know you are into extreme fantasies when it comes to predictions Dan, but this here sentence of your just doesnt make any sense.
I mean you already assumed the Dems would lose CT. So why does Dodd dropping out add any new information that would indicate some even bigger tsunami?
And, as you wisely point out on your front page post, the Dems now have the inside track to hold the seat (in fact it is almost guaranteed) – so the bottom line here is that Dodd dropping out makes any GOP overall gain less likely.
Tano, please try for one moment to understand my arguments. I think the Dems forced Dodd out because they sensed they were weaker in other races (I would imagine CO, IL, DE & PA, maybe even MA) and wanted to make this seat as safe as possible.
And the more I look at PA, the more I see it as going GOP. Energy there is all on our side, so perhaps I made an error in not including it in the all-but-certain GOP pickups.
And please, Tano, if anyone is the fantasist here, it’s you. Unless the economy rebounds significantly, the GOP will make gains next year.
Since you make no effort to understand my posts and offer ridicule instead of argument, you keep me wondering why you spend so much time on this blog. I used to be flattered by your obsession with us, now I’m just amused, but ti’s getting kind of stale.
I think Tano’s wrong about Ohio too. Strickland’s toast, and we already have Brown, if Brunner runs expect every hint of election fraud (and JtP) to come up.
Also expect crickets about any conflict of interest Brunner might have, you know, all the howling about Blackwell when he ran for Governour?
The appointed Demoncrat Senator in Colorado is also not very popular, and Republican Mike Castle is heavily favored to win Plugs Biden’s seat in Delaware.
I’m not as bullish on Republican prospects as some others, but when even a one-note Democrat shill like Tardo admits the Republicans will gain seats, that’s got to be a good sign.
Kurt, that is an interesting take. I actually agree with you that Reid might not be dead yet, and that with the cash he has and the SEIU/ACORN influence in Nevada, he might make this close. However, I just cant see the good people of Nevada voting for him again. His numbers remind me a lot of what happened with Jon Corzine. People assumed Corzine would win because he had purchased 2 elections before this year, the Republican was mediocre, and ACORN would steal the election if it were close. However, something interesting happened – usual Democrats did not turn out, Republicans voted Christie, and the distaste among “independents” towards Christie led to what can be classified as a republican route in NJ. I think the same will happen in Nevada, and every other state, without Obama on the ballot.
As for NY, she is nervous because she knows that any serious challenger to emerge will challenge her, since she is the most vulnerable. However, like I said earlier, there is just no one there to challenge her. Peter King might have a shot, but I dont see him giving up his guaranteed seat and a chance for a leadership position. So, there simply is no one with enough name recognition, and the ability to rasie money, who can challenge her unless Pataki decides to jump into the race.
Dodd dropping out is a huge blow for Republicans. He would have gotten destroyed in November, and Democrats can now acutally mount a challenge for that seat. Blumenthal might actually cruise and win by double digits. So, you have to mark that down as a hold for democrats.
Lastly, I cant see how one can possibly say that democrats will pick up 2 seats in red states like Ohio and Missouri, which are being hammered by Obama’s disasterous policies. And if anyone thinks that Blanche Lincoln’s staff isn’t beginning to pack her stuff up in anticipation of losing in November, they are going to be blind-sided by the results come November 2nd.
“I cant see how one can possibly say that democrats will pick up 2 seats in red states like Ohio and Missouri, ”
Carnahan is ahead in all the polls I’ve seen, even Rasmussen. Not by much, but it has been stable for a long time.
Ohio polling goes both ways, so it is pretty much a tossup. Fisher is a popular Lt.Gov. and the Dems can, and will, pound away at how the GOP would have been willing to see the auto industry totally destroyed, whereas the Dems saved it. I think a Dem pickup is likely.
In regards to MO, I am glad you are citing the polls, considering there have been any new polls conducted within the last several months. There have really been 2 major polls that have been conducted, and they both showed either a 1 or 2 point lead for Carnahan, and when you factor in the margin of error, it is quiet likely that Blunt was in the lead. Furhtermore, you have to remember that Obama barely won MO last year, and his voters are not as likely to come out because he is not on the ballot. Next, most of the polls were conducted before the democrats began to tank in the polls, and unless you think the polling numbers for democrats in general will improve this year, there is no reason to believe that will help Carnahan. So, it is quite likely that come the summer, Blunt will open up a single digit lead, and will probably win by 4-8 points on election day.
As for Ohio, you are correct that it will be a much tougher race for Republicans. However, the auto industry is almost irrelevant to Ohio voters. This will come down to jobs. If the unemployment rate in Ohio continues to hover over the national 10% number, the democrat has no chance. For, a winning strategy in a state where jobs are the number 1 issue is not to be associated with a party who is all about raising taxes (which hurts job growth), increasing insurance premiums, and increasing government spending. So, while this is a statistical deadheat right now, unless jobs start coming back, there is no way the people of Ohio are voting for a Democrat. So, that should begin to open up for Portman come the summer as well.
Chris,
“considering there have been any new polls conducted within the last several months”
Rasmussen (Carnahan up by 2) is from Dec. 15.
“when you factor in the margin of error, it is quiet likely that Blunt was in the lead. ”
Well Chris, if you would understand how polls, and margins of error worked, then you would realize that although a close result like these do indicate a certain probability that Blunt is in the lead, they also, at the same time, indicate a higher probability that he is behind.
“[Dem] voters are not as likely to come out because he is not on the ballot.”
Rasmussen uses a likely voter screen, and it is notoriously friendly to Republican assumptions.
” Next, most of the polls were conducted before the democrats began to tank in the polls”
See above.
“unless you think the polling numbers for democrats in general will improve this year,”
I do actually, but I dont think they need to for Carnahan to win. She is a more attractive and popular candidate to begin with. Of all the things to be in politics, a GOP house member is actually the least popular. Far worse than being an Obama supporter, even in the heartland.
“However, the auto industry is almost irrelevant to Ohio voters. This will come down to jobs. ”
I find those two sentences to be in contradiction to each other. The auto industry is an issue precisely because it is about jobs – not just in the plants themselves but in the related parts industries, of which there are many in Ohio, and which may all have gone bankrupt if GM and Chrysler had been sacrificed to the gods of the market, as the GOP proposed.
“For, a winning strategy in a state where jobs are the number 1 issue is not to be associated with a party who is all about raising taxes (which hurts job growth)”
That is the type of argument that might be attractive to Republicans. But you need independents to win elections, and they may well reward the party that actually does things to save real jobs and real industries, over the party that just gives the same old theoretical arguments for how jobs might someday be created.
Oh, but Tano you’ve already decried Rasmussen,
So I guess it’s hard keeping the week’s talking points straight, eh?
Livewire,
Ah, yeah. I have decried them as being biased in favor of Republicans. So when they show a Democrat ahead by two, that means the Democrat is probably ahead by an even greater margin.
Now c’mon, that wasn’t so complicated, was it?
And BTW, when are you going to actually make a substantive comment in one of these threads? I realize that following me around and throwing insults at me seems to really rock your boat, and believe me, I take great satisfaction in knowing I bring happiness to people, but surely you might actually have something to say about the actual topics, no?
You do realize that we still have a long way to go to the election, and things can easily turn back for the Democrats by then. I wouldn’t call OH a sure thing for the basic fact that the Ohio Republican Party has yet to return to the same strength it had in 04. OH Dems could be hurt by their primary, since Portman seems to be running away with the Republican one, so thats something to keep an eye one.
FL seems to be the reverse of OH, Republicans probably would hold it but it depends on how that Republican primary goes. Christ and Rubio could have a drag out fight that leaves the party fractured, and let the Democrat win.
MO is also not a sure thing for Republicans, considering how unpopular the Dem national party is and the Democratic in the race is running ahead…yea I don’t see that being a hold on.
Republican make gains, which they should after being smacked around the last 6 years.
Well Tano, I understand you might think I’m ‘following you around’ considering how you never stick around after your arguements are crushed by myself and others.
again and again.
“Why does President Obama hate free people?”