January Senate Forecast

December Senate Forecast, November forecast, October forecast

Forecast: Democratic gain of one to three seats.
2006 has begun with a flurry of activity on the Senate front. Here is the Senate forecast:

Likely Pickups
Democratic              Republican
Pennsylvania		None
Casey has consistently maintained a double-digit lead over Santorum. Even beter, these same polls put him at or over 50%. Casey also has a ton of money to match Santorum, and a lower name ID that could allow him to rise even further in the polls. This still remains a very likely pickup unless something drastically changes. Because of this, Democrats start with a built-in advantage of +1 in my forecast.

Already Competitive
Democratic Challenges	Republican Challenges
Missouri		New Jersey
Montana 		Maryland
Ohio
This is a category of campaigns where most of the recent polls have shown the sitting party / incumbent to be either tied with a lower name ID challenger, or slightly behind. In other words, these are campaigns where the incumbent party is in trouble, but are not yet facing an uphill battle ala Santorum in Pennsylvania.

Since December, Democrats have gained Montana in this category, as the various scandals surrounding Burns have caused him to sink to new lows. Unfortunately, Republicans have added two races in this category. The original wave of optimism surrounding Menendez after the first Q-poll showed his 2006 chances to be excellent has faded. Now, some polls are showing Menendez to be in real trouble, although it should be noted that polling in New Jersey has been really poor over the past two years, and consistently showed Democrats to be in more trouble than they actually were.

Maryland is a notch below these other four right now. The only reason it is in this category is because of what might very well be a hard outlying Rasmussen poll that shows Steele leading both Cardin and Mfume. Otherwise, no other poll has shown Steele in front. Combine this with Cardin's significant fundraising edge and Maryland's deep blue tint, and Maryland is probably a race with the potential to be competitive, rather than a race that is already competitive.

Theory
In a column I have often quoted over the past few months, Chuck Todd gave an insightful, concise description of this dynamic:

The reality is that if one were to handicap the current Senate battle race-by-race, a 0-2 Democratic pickup would be very realistic. But as Charlie Cook has pointed out, Senate races never break evenly for both parties. The key for the party that's got that little breeze at the end is putting enough races in play to win all those toss-ups. In a neutral climate, the 0-2 Democratic pickup prediction would make sense. But it's hard to foresee a neutral 2006 environment. The makings for a Democratic advantage are brewing. There's no difference between netting three Senate seats and netting six or seven. Once the Democrats are in a position to net a third, it probably means all those slightly-leaning GOP seats are going their way and the gain will be closer to six than to two. If one accepts this basic thesis, and I clearly accept it, the key for a Democratic Senatorial landslide in 2006 is going to be:
  • At least six very strong Democratic challenges to Republican held seats.
  • A numeric Democratic advantage of at least three when it comes to very strong challenges to Senate seats held by the other party.
Right now, Democrats have four "very strong" challenges to Republican held seats, while Republicans have two (though most likely one) "very strong" challenges to Democratic held seats. This means that right now Democrats do not meet either criteria for a Senate landslide.

The Campaign Dynamic
While it is not reasonable to forecast a landslide at this point, there still remains real hope on the horizon for Democrats. Only one of the already listed seats is in a "safe red" state (Montana), and the DSCC actually has a large monetary edge over the NRSC (22.4M to 9.1M cash on hand). Further, among the seats already listed, Democrats are attacking four Republican incumbents (Burns, DeWine, Santorum and Talent), while Republicans are attacking no Democratic incumbents (Menendez really doesn't count). All of this will stretch Republican resources much thinner than they were stretched in 2004.

More hope comes form races that can no longer be realistically seen as competitive. Over the past month, while Mississippi has dropped of the board for Democrats, it has become obvious that Vermont and Florida can no longer be considered campaigns where Republicans have a realistic shot of winning. This further reduces the universe of seats that Republicans can potentially make competitive.

Counting the six seats already listed, overall, Democrats have nine challenges still on the board, while Republicans have only seven. These races are as follows:

Races with Potential, Tier One
Democratic Challenges	Republican Challenges
Rhode Island		Minnesota
Arizona 		Washington
Tennessee		Michigan

Races with Potential, Tier Two
Democratic Challenges	Republican Challenges
Nevada			Nebraska
Virginia		Wisconsin
Democrats can start talking blowout, and dreaming of Senate control, if they can move two more of these races into the "already competitive" category than Republican (note that this is the case even if Maryland drops out of the "already competitive tier). We are not there yet, but there remains real hope that we can get there. The goal from now until at least Labor Day, and possibly until the beginning of October, will not be to rack up as many Casey vs. Santorum-esque "likely pickups." Such races are nice, but they will actually have less impact on the state of the overall Senate picture as the competitive, "toss-up" races. This is not only because at this point it would take a major scandal to create anymore of these races, but also because the outcome of such races seem to be more or less a foregone conclusion at this point. Come October, campaigns such as Casey vs. Santorum will not be the primary focus of resources for either national party in October. Instead, the battle for the Senate will take place in close, competitive, "toss-up" campaigns where both parties will focus their resources. If there is going to be a large national Senate swing in favor of one party or the other, as there was for Democrats in 2000 and as there was for Republicans in 2004, it will be because one party is able to stretch the defensives of their opponent extremely thin. Right now that doesn't look possible for Republicans to achieve, but we aren't there yet either.

Tags: Senate 2006 (all tags)

Comments

48 Comments

January Senate Forecast
Going strictly by polls, I would hazard a guess of 2-3 seat Dem gain as of now.
by Boilermaker 2006-01-23 08:35AM | 0 recs
by marjou1 2006-09-17 05:26AM | 0 recs
Connecticut
You forgot to add Connecticut as a potential pick-up for Democrats.
by Robert P 2006-01-23 08:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Connecticut
Ouch... that's gonna leave a mark!
by teknofyl 2006-01-23 09:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Connecticut
On the contrary, a damaged or defeated Lieberman will give that seat to a Real Republican.
Someone like Senator Chris Shays.

Not the Democrat being demonize by many in the netroots as a republican.

As this thread by Chris shows, we are SHORT as it is from taking over the Senate.

We desperately NEED at least two more seats in play to takeover.

But the irony is, majority here are gearing up to defeat a Democrat in CT as opposed to focusing on trying to find a Republican to unseat.

All emotions, no logic.
 

by fightingLadyinblue 2006-01-23 10:03AM | 0 recs
I don't think a Republican of any stature will run
It's all about primary challenges and indie campaigns.  There probably will be some bench warmer running on the Rep side, but nobody anybody has ever heard of, and by the time anybody can tell if Lieberman is wounded, it will be too late for a first tier Republican to run.
by Geotpf 2006-01-23 01:48PM | 0 recs
Nice analysis
Couple quibbles:

  1. I would be a little stronger on Dem chances in RI (and I've been consistently throwing cold water on some of the more heated it's-in-the-bag rhetoric). The state is just so damn blue. If a Dem survives the primary with some bucks and minor damage, it's going to at least be close, although I agree at this point that Chafee has the advantage.
  2. Florida isn't over yet. There's still time for someone other than Harris to be the R nominee. I totally agree if no one else enters.
  3. I think your analysis of Maryland is a little off, in the sense that (at least from an outsider, but an outsider with MD connections) Cardin is the presumed Dem candidate. MD politicos I've talked to seem to think that actually Mfume has the inside track right now. And I know, he's trailing in the polls. But the MD Dem electorate is 40% black, and there are 3-4 serious, viable, funded white candidates and only one African American. If the white candidates split the white vote a little, it's easy to see how Mfume can win by JUST appealing to and turning out African Americans in Baltimore and Prince George's counties. He might get the odd white liberal vote too (given his background in Baltimore politics). If Mfume does win, it's very hard to imagine Steele beating him, seeing as it neutralizes the only reason Steele was chosen, his race.
by ColoDem 2006-01-23 08:52AM | 0 recs
Re: Nice analysis
Colodem,

No, Rhode island was as sure as PA. All polls showed Langevin winning by double digits. That's until Pro-Choice activists pushed Langevin out for being Pro-Life.

Now Chafee has the advantage & the lead.

That's the stupidity of the Litmus test by some in the Left.

Same with PA. Chris shows PA as our best shot of a pick-up w/ Casey.

Guess what? Up to this day, many Liberals hear are kicking & screaming for a Primary in PA. They don't want a Pro-Life moderate like Casey.

And if this same group of people succeed in ousting or most likely DAMAGING Lieberman enough in the Primary, I will bet you the farm that a popular Moderate Republican like Chris Shays will take that seat away.

With Republican Gov. Rell poised to win big, Lieberman's seat if challenged will turn Red.

These 3 scenarios alone clearly show the stupidity of some activist.

Then they scratch their head wondering what happened? Idiots.

by fightingLadyinblue 2006-01-23 10:19AM | 0 recs
has there been any polling out of RI?
I sure haven't seen any.
by johnny longtorso 2006-01-23 10:50AM | 0 recs
Re: Nice analysis
Langevin dropped out because his opponents refused to clear the field for him, IIRC.
by Adam B 2006-01-23 12:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Nice analysis

First of all, Langevin was not the Only candidate in the race. There were already two other Democrats who were running regardless of Langevin.
In fact Brown was the first to announce his candidacy.

Secondly, it was Idiotic NARAL who literally hounded Langevin 24/7 to quit the race since he was the only Pro-Life candidate.

by fightingLadyinblue 2006-01-23 01:24PM | 0 recs
"literally"
I don't think that word means what you think it does.
by Adam B 2006-01-23 06:22PM | 0 recs
however...
You've got to admit that if Linc winds up voting to confirm Alito, having a pro-choice candidate is a plus (and having a pro-life opponent might have nullified any potential gain).

NARAL acted stupidly and furthered its stupidity by continuing to support Chaffee against pro-choice opponents, but in the end, I'd bet the chances of picking up Rhode Island aren't as much worse as some people reckon.

And if Langevin was indeed hounded out by NARAL, what does that say about his ability in a general election?

by thurst 2006-01-24 05:09AM | 0 recs
I am sick of getting all excited and then...
pop.

But, I will say this:

  • PA - absolutely (idiot Republican, hated by all)
  • MT - absolutely (corruption; Native American vote)
  • OH - absolutely (corruption)
  • MO - shaky (too tight to call, but at least we are very competitive)
  • RI - who knows? (I really mean, who knows?  This seems like a no brainer, RI is blue)
  • AZ - no way.
  • TN - no way.
  • VA - no way
  • NV - ......Nevada has an election this year?  snark
by Robert P 2006-01-23 08:53AM | 0 recs
Re: I am sick of getting all excited and then...
OH is absolutely? MT is absolutely?

says who?

The last poll in OH showed DeWine recovering & is now slightly ahead of both Hackett & Brown. With Hackett performing better than Brown against DeWine.

Read my post above. Oh can turn into RI if Brown does win the primary.

They wanted to even challenge Casey for the Primary. ( And look now, Casey is our best bet for a takeover)

Until Left wing Liberals understand that majority of voters are moderate, this Litmus test that they always try to force upon the party will get us nowhere.

by fightingLadyinblue 2006-01-23 10:25AM | 0 recs
Re: I am sick of getting all excited and then...
Maybe I should explain, these are my opinions.  Mine.  I think the corruption will be so smelly by November that Ohio and Montana will be tearing out the drywall looking for the body.
by Robert P 2006-01-23 10:45AM | 0 recs
Re: I am sick of getting all excited and then...
Ouch.  Yes, NV has an election this year!

:)

Sarah

by Sarah R Carter 2006-01-23 11:46AM | 0 recs
Yeah, I don't see NV as competative...
...unless Goodman runs, and I'm not sure how having a ex-mafia lawyer on our ticket helps our "anti-corruption" theme (although the guy cracks me up).  Carter simply doesn't have the experience or anything else other than the famous name.
by Geotpf 2006-01-23 01:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Yeah, I don't see NV as competative...

You do know that is a relative, right?

by Robert P 2006-02-03 05:15AM | 0 recs
Thinking four
PA, RI, MT, OH.  

If the election were held now, I think we would lose RI but I hope that the Alito votes will scar Chaffee either for his primary or for the general.

The hope with Ohio is obviously the incredibly poor rating for someone who will not be on the ballot: Bob Taft.  He's been 75-80% negative for months now.  With Taft off the ballot, someone should pay.  Mike DeWine, anybody?

Conrad Burns keps getting into more and more trouble.  I think he's dead meat.

Taking the Senate means holding on to MN, a prospect that looks a little brighter, and picking up 2 seats in places like MO, AZ, and or NV.

As for a real longshot, I'd feel better with something completely off the board in a friendly state like Maine than Tennessee.

Even a 52-48 split means the end of the Imperial Senate (cue up the Darth Vader march from Star Wars).

by David Kowalski 2006-01-23 08:54AM | 0 recs
Re: DeWine pulled slight ahead
A poll taken 2 weeks ago showed DeWine bouncing back & now ahead of both Democrats with Hackett doing better than Brown against DeWine.

And 30 days ago, many of you were calling on the funeral of DeWine.

That premise by Brown supporters was " It doesn't matter if its a True blue Liberal like Brown, DeWine is in DEEP trouble.

Now what? We're not even in Sept. when the State GOP & the RNC will be spending millions for DeWine in a Red State.

Same with RI. The Left drove out Langevin because they justified that any Liberal can beat Chafee. they ignored the 15% lead by Langevin.

Today, unless something happens, Chafee is poised to win reelection.

Same in PA, Casey is our most likely pick-up right now. Again, many in the Left want to challenge Casey in a primary.

To add insult to injury, as it is, we are SHORT in taking over the Senate. But people here are all focused & worried about defeating a Democrat in Lieberman & very likely give the seat to Chris Shays. With Republican Gov. Rell expected to win by a landslide, this will be a big day for Republicans in CT.

BE CAREFUL of WHAT you wish for!

P.S. No way will Lamont beat a very popular Moderate Chris Shays or even Nancy Johnson.

Liberals do not understand that CT is NOT as Liberal as they fantasize with. How can they understand when they aren't even from CT!

by fightingLadyinblue 2006-01-23 10:38AM | 0 recs
Re: DeWine pulled slight ahead
however those republican congresspeople wont enter the race. Becuase they dont know that they would face lamont. As of now, its Lieberman who they would be facing, so why would they give up their seat to face a 3 term incumbent senator? There will be little to no opposition for lamont if he wins hte primary
by yomoma2424 2006-01-23 10:44AM | 0 recs
Re: DeWine pulled slight ahead
>>> however those republican congresspeople wont enter the race. Becuase they dont know that they would face lamont. As of now, its Lieberman who they would be facing, so why would they give up their seat to face a 3 term incumbent senator? There will be little to no opposition for lamont if he wins hte primary

Absolutely. Right now, Shays or Johnson WILL NOT challenge Lieberman. Even the State CT GOP chairman stated that.

However, the same chairman gave the possibility of Chris Shays entering the race If the GOP see a serious challenge to Lieberman in the Dem Primary.

Remember, Republican Gov. Jodi Rell is expected to win BIG. If a popular moderate Republican like Shays has the ambition to be a Senator- THERE WON"T BE A BETTER TIME TO CHALLENGE THAN NOW.

A popular running mate in Rell combined with a hurt Lieberman or if her gets lucky, a Unknown Lamont.

That's the type of Risk the many here refuse to even think about.

Its all about can we beat Lieberman. Of course its possible. i could have told them that.

by fightingLadyinblue 2006-01-23 11:38AM | 0 recs
Re: DeWine pulled slight ahead
Both Shays and Johnson (and Simmons) have their own problems in their respective districts, and there's no guarantee that they are even going to win. Shays only got 52% last time in his backyard Fairfield County district, which has, like the rest of the state, been trending hard blue for the past 15 years. Johnson is going to be in deep crap because of her horrid Medicare program and she has potential Abramoff and other corruption ties.

Plus, Rell may not win as big as people think. The state is too Democratic to give her a pass, and DeStefano is very popular in New Haven so even if she wins, she won't win by more than 55%. Her approval ratings are high right now because essentially she is not John Rowland and because she is never seen with George Bush, but in a campaign she'll have to answer why she has done next to nothing in the state so far, other than signing whatever our heavily Democratic legislature brings her way.

A Democrat in CT has so many advantages that it doesn't really matter whether its Lieberman or Lamont, and a victory is likely because the state hates any Republican right now who has connections to Bush. And each of our three republican congresspeople have many connections to the Bush White House.

by ctman1638 2006-01-23 04:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Thinking four
Actually if we could pick up 4 seats it would be a 51-48-1(Bernie Sanders) split.This would be enough to block another right wing Supreme Court nominee if,God forbid,Stevens dies(he will never retire with Bush still President).
by Litvak36 2006-01-23 05:58PM | 0 recs
After November...
If the Democrats only pick up 0-2 seats come November (I think it will be more) and there are meagre pickups in the House, we should watch out.

I can hear the Republican talking points now...

(Imagine some fat, obnoxious, and overpaid Republican "strategist" on CNN or Fox)

"All the pundits said this was going to be a big year, blowout even for Democrats. But they didn't change anything. They had a few gains here and there but nothing serious. The Republican Party is alive and well and will live to fight another day."

So if we win, I sincerely hope it'll be big. I want those Republican pudit morons to eat their words.

Overall, excellent analysis on our current chances.

by gatordemocrat 2006-01-23 09:10AM | 0 recs
Re: BOTTOME LINE! Terrible Loss!
If Democrats only managed to pick-up two or three seats in the Senate & fail to gain more than half a dozen House seats- THIS IS VERY BAD NEWS FOR Democrats.

If we can't even win or takeover with this kind of Problems in the GOP- we're going to be a minority party for a Long Time.

No matter how you spin it, we are Not going to see a combination of WAR & CORRUPTION both linked to the GOP for many years to come.

If we can't win it now or at least have heavy gains, we have a lot of soul searching to do as a party.

by fightingLadyinblue 2006-01-23 11:42AM | 0 recs
Re: BOTTOME LINE! Terrible Loss!
The Democrats will pick up between 20 and 25 seats to take control of the House.We have so many favorable factors going for us that it would be hard to see anything less than 20.
by Litvak36 2006-01-23 06:09PM | 0 recs
2006 US Senate Predictions
There are 33 US Senate Seats up for grabs in 2006. 18 are held by Democrats and 15 are held by Republicans.
The highly competive Democratic Held US Senate Seats up for grabs in 2006 are- open seats in Maryland and Minnesota plus the semi-open seat in New Jersey.
The highly competive Republican Held US Senate Seats up for grabs in 2006 are open seat in Tennesee. Pennsylvania-(Santorum-R),Rhode Island(Chafee-R),Ohio-(DeWine-R),Missouri-(Talent-R),Montana-(Burns-R)

Democrats are favored to hold on to
Maryland(Cardin-D),
Minnesota(Klobuchar),
New Jersey(Menendez)

Democrats are favored to pick up
Pennsylvania(Casey-D)
Ohio(Brown-D)
Montana-(Morrison-D)

Republicans will hold on to
Missouri-Talent-R
Rhode Island-Chafee-R
Tennesee -Hilleary-R

by CMBurns 2006-01-23 09:14AM | 0 recs
My analysis
  • Pennsylvania still seems strong for Casey. Rasmussen shows Casey leading 53-38. Still a likely pickup unless Santorum finds a real weakness in Casey.

  • Two Missouri polls show a narrow McCaskill lead - Rasmussen has it 46-43 and Research 2000 says 47-44.

  • Ohio seems close. DeWine has a narrow lead, but it remains a toss-up. Brown will probably be the nominee.

  • Montana has gotten much more competitive. Rasmussen has it tied now. I doubt it's that close, but it's definitely trending away from Burns.

  • New Jersey is tough, but except for the Farleigh poll Menendez usually has a small lead. He is said to have superior campaigning skills to Kean.

  • Maryland is also tough, but I don't buy the Rasmussen poll showing Steele in the lead. Everybody else favors Cardin.

  • Tennessee and Minnesota are both competitive, but both lean to the incumbent parties, with Corker, Bryant, or Hilleary all favored to narrowly defeat the flawed Ford, and with Klobuchar on track to narrowly defeat Bush lackey Kennedy.
by Ament Stone of California 2006-01-23 09:28AM | 0 recs
Maine Ladies
If we pick up four seats and have 49, do the Maine women, near the end of their careers, vote with us more often?  Do they stand up for what they believe and not tow the President's line?
by Robert P 2006-01-23 10:47AM | 0 recs
Re: Maine Ladies
While their votes are important, organizing and commanding the committees are more important. Convert 'em!
by GeorgiaDem 2006-01-23 04:18PM | 0 recs
Current prediction is net +3-4
I think we will lose at least one race. The GOP lost one in both '02 and '04 (Pryor/Salazar). The question remains can we offset this with enough pick-ups?

Currently I see the following in order of likelihood:

MN  
PA
MD
NJ
MT (Only if Burns stays in)
OH
MO (Will be a virtual tie right down to the wire)
RI (The Alito vote hurts him either way)
TN
AZ
NV
VA (If Webb gets in this moves up)

 

by conspiracy 2006-01-23 10:49AM | 0 recs
RI, TN
Good analysis, but I dont think its fair to put Arizona in the same category as Rhode Island and Tennessee.
First of all, although Chafee has polled in the lead in RI, that doesnt mean much. I mean incumbents are SUPPOSED to have leads at this point, and the last polls I saw had him with a single digit lead and at less than 50%. Now that means RI is far from the slam dunk that PA is, but I would say that is "already comptetive" and going to get more so once we get down the stretch in September and October.
Tennessee is the forgotten child of the 2006 races. Yes, TN is a red state, but much like Arkansas it is very competitive on the state level. Arkansas, remember, has two Democratic senators. I think Ford is a good candidate. He is well-funded, charismatic, and sufficiently moderate for a southern state. This is going to be a tough race to win, but- especially with popular Democratic incumbent Phil Bredesen atop the ticket- its doable.
by AC4508 2006-01-23 11:02AM | 0 recs
TN depends upon the nominee
If it's Ford, we have no chance at all. While he has raised $$ by selling out to every corporate PAC he can find, his family's problems will kill him in the fall. This is why I support Rosalind Kurita, who A) has NO baggage, B) is to the left of Ford on economic issues, and C) has alwasy received the NRA endorsement, which takes another weapon away from the GOP. She is popular in what is becoming a more Republican Middle Tennessee (she represents the area around Fort Campbell in the state Senate) despite being a Democrat. She is competitive all over the state, not just Memphis and Nashville. If she can win the primary, she has a much better chance to win the seat over Corker (perceived as too liberal by the GOP), Bryant (the probable GOP nominee), or Hilleary (damaged goods). However, one of her problems is that Ford has sucked up to all the Washington elites to the point that the DSCC refuses to even recognize her campaign, despite good poll numbers. Kurita is the only Democratic hope this fall for this Senate seat.
by sjs1959 2006-01-23 01:39PM | 0 recs
Given the voter registration crap
Democratic voters go through each election year, shouldn't activists start collecting the paperwork, documenation and education to empower our voters to vote without fear and put GOP voter registration spiderholes and neo-nazi voter intimidation squads on their heels.

REGISTER, DOCUMENT, EDUCATE AND VOTE WITHOUT FEAR

by kmwray 2006-01-23 11:13AM | 0 recs
Short Skirt, Long Jacket
I think the moral of the story here is that even "safe races" need to be included in the national campaign narrative. There's simply too much chance that the GOP crafts a better message and beat us with our own stick.

In other words, money is poured in races like PA while the Republicans use this diversion of resources to pound states where our lead is shaky at best: Washington, North Dakota, Minnesota, Florida, Maryland, New Jersey, and even Hawaii... If any of these states fold or appear out of reach it's likely to cost us dearly in the toss-up and reach states.

In other words, its still possible for the GOP to win by losing. They shed untenable seats in the Northeast for crushing red-state Democrats.

by risenmessiah 2006-01-23 11:56AM | 0 recs
Middle of his pack
How conservative are Senate Republicans?  Well, the median for the 55 Republican senators voting records would be Rick Santorum.  That's right.  He's the 28th most "conservative" Republican in the Senate (and the 28th most "liberal" as well.

Just a whole lot more conservative than liberal in any objective sense.

Pulling out Santorum, and Santorum alone, would make the Senate more liberal but would leave Republicans in the same far right spot they now occupy.  

by David Kowalski 2006-01-23 12:28PM | 0 recs
What's with all the pessimism?
I'm all for objectivity and not getting our hopes up but I think you all may be downplaying the possibilities of A) this election going national and B) what will happen to these poll numbers when the campaigns get going. Our 2006 memes are stronger than theirs, hands down. That doesn't mean we're going to sweep; neither does it mean that all of our candidates would get a "meme boost". Harold Ford could take an enormous hit if corruption is part of a national campaign.

If Bush's and the Republicans' approval numbers stay in the same ballpark as they are now, then I would expect we have a strong chance of holding all or all but one of our seats and taking as many as 5-7 of theirs.  

Retake the Senate? Unlikely under the best circumstances. But enough of this 0-2 nonsense 'cause it ain't gonna happen.
   

by GenkiDem 2006-01-23 01:35PM | 0 recs
Michigan
No discussion here except placing this race in the status of possible Republican pickup. Why?

Earlier in the day there's a front page link to Rasmussen, Rasmussen no less, giving Dem Stabenow a 20+ point lead.

This is a Republican pickup?
by afox 2006-01-23 01:39PM | 0 recs
Draft James Webb (VA)
Please visit http://www.DraftJamesWebb.com to put your message of support in to try to convince Secretary Webb to enter the Senate race against George Allen.  Let him know if you're willing to volunteer and/or donate.

Also, if you're from Virginia, please write a letter to the editor about James Webb.  The DraftJamesWebb people sent out this email today:

We have one more thing to ask (before Mr. Webb announces his decision) of you.  Would you write a Letter To The Editor of your local paper about James Webb and why we need him to run?  We're directing this request particularly to people who live in Virginia.  If you don't live in Virginia, you could write the Washington Post, the New York Times or another national newspaper if you like.  As many of you know, the Times published Mr. Webb's op-ed titled "Purple Heartbreakers" on January 18th.  Some suggestions to keep in mind:

*Find a hook for the publication - a story in the paper about Iraq, George Allen, the Congress's failure to hold Bush accountable, American politics, etc.  Small papers are usually more flexible about wanting a letter relevant to an article they published.

*Keep it short as possible

*Do not mention any Democratic candidate except James Webb.

*For information about Jim Webb, please visit our website - http://www.draftjameswebb.com and Mr. Webb's personal site - http://www.jameswebb.com .

This page of media links was used by Tim Kaine For Governor during his recent successful campaign.  Hopefully, Virginia residents will find your local paper here.

by Fran for Dean 2006-01-23 02:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Draft James Webb (VA)
Oh yea, I forgot to mention how this is relevant.  If James Webb runs, this race will be VERY competitive and certainly a potential pickup opportunity.
by Fran for Dean 2006-01-23 02:23PM | 0 recs
Rhode Island
How is this not a highly competitive/likely pickup for Dems? We ought to line up people to vote for Chafee's primary opponent. It's what Rove would do.

RI ought to be one of the bluest of the blue states.

by GeorgiaDem 2006-01-23 04:13PM | 0 recs
Nebraska
Nebraska is already competitive. Nelson is very well liked in Nebraska and he is likely to get re-elected.

I think his biggest problem now, though, is that the   Democratic grassroots are really angry at him right now. They may just not vote for him. He's going to have serious trouble getting volunteers.

We'll see if the alternative scares them enough into voting for him.

phat

by phatass 2006-01-23 05:45PM | 0 recs
MD
You know we have a primary to get thru in MD and the polls show both dems (mfume and cardin) beating steele.

the netroots blanket acceptance of cardin as the frontrunner is an example of how this progressive stance is slippery--sometimes it about who can win and sometimes its about who is the best guy.

its frustrating to have a real progressive running for Senate and a minority to boot and have no respect from netroots because the md dems who live on the dc beltway have decided who will win.  you know who you are.

by aiko 2006-01-24 03:09AM | 0 recs
Re: January Senate Forecast

I think Laffery will win the primary and we will take the state.  I think we will add MO, Claire is ahead there.  Conrad Burns is virtually tied.  PA is ours.  OH is leaning our way.  NV is competitive.  So with at least 3 leaning our way, we need 3 more and we can come up with MO, MT, and NV that is 6.  I don't think we have a chance in AZ, VA, and TN, the gun states, and Bush won them handily.  It is in those 6 that we have to take the lead in, MO, OH, NV, and PA are battleground states, so we can be more competitive in those states. Right now we are projected to take OH, RI, and PA.

by mleflo2 2006-02-09 11:45AM | 0 recs
by yourta 2006-07-29 07:47AM | 0 recs
by posco 2006-08-01 07:46AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads