MyDD :: The Path To 51

The Path To 51

by Chris Bowers, Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 11:55:24 AM EST

Following up on their ratings of all 50 Governors last month, Survey USA has released approval ratings for all 100 Senators, complete with trends lines from last month:

Barack Obama (D-IL) has the highest approval rating of any United States Senator and John Cornyn (R-TX) has the lowest, according to 50 separate but concurrent statewide public opinion polls conducted by SurveyUSA for its media clients across the country.

SurveyUSA interviewed 600 adults in each of the 50 states 6/10-6/13. Approval rating questions were asked identically in all 50 states.

The approval rating for Maria Cantwell (D-WA) increased 10 points from May to June, the largest increase for any Senator. The approval rating for Bill Frist (R-TN) decreased 7 points from May to June, the largest decrease for any Senator.

Complete Approval Ratings, sorted alphabetically by state, sorted alphabetically by Senator, and sorted from highest approval rating to lowest, along with links to the full crosstabs for each of the 50 separately conducted opinion polls, are available here:

http://surveyusa.com/100USSenatorApprovalRatings061305.htm

While the overall rankings are interesting, I am much more interested in the ratings for the Class I Senators who are up for re-election in 2006. Again, here we find an advantage for the 18 Democratic Senators, who have an average rating of 58.4 / 30.1, while the fifteen Republicans come in at an average of 54.9 / 33.9. Getting down to the nitty gritty, there appear to be exactly nine vulnerable Republican Senators:

1. Rick Santorum, with a paltry 45 / 44. His extreme vulnerability has already been discussed.
2. Mike DeWine is highly vulnerable with a weak 44 / 43 approval rating. Ohio is clearly becoming increasingly disgusted with the Republicans who control the state. We can really do some damage here on every level in 2006.
3. Conrad Burns is in a lot of trouble with a 50 / 42 rating. This is a top tier pickup opportunity, and you have to like Tester's chances.
4. Lincoln Chafee. With a 53 / 39 approval rating, defeating Chafee will not be the slam dunk it once seemed with Langevin, but Whitehouse still has a good chance in one of the three most Democratic states in the nation.
5. Jim Talent is also in danger, with a 48 / 38 approval rating. We need to turn things around in Missouri ASAP, and defeating Talent would be a great start.
6. Frist's open seat. Frist was really socked following the nuclear option debacle, dropping his approval to just 51 / 39. Hopefully this has left enough of an opening for Ford to finally decide to jump into this race full force, since this is in fact a winnable seat.
7. John Ensign. We also have a pickup opportunity in Nevada, considering Ensign's anemic 49 / 34 approval rating. Oscar Goodman, the mayor of Las Vegas, should jump on this one. He could take Ensign down.
8. Jon Kyl. Kyl can also be beat, as his approval rating sits at only 49 / 31. Jim Pederson can pull this one off.
9. George Allen. Allen can be beat by Mark Warner. Allen's 53 /32 approval rating makes him somewhat vulnerable, but it would probably take a star like Warner (who comes in at 55 / 31) to do it. Warner versus Allen would be a Titanic matchup. We will have to see what Warner decides to do.
The seemingly invulnerable: Orin Hatch (UT), Kay Hutchinson (TX), Trent Lott (MS), Richard Lugar (IN), Olympia Snowe (ME), and Craig Thomas (WY).

Having nine vulnerable Republicans is not bad at all. This is still basically the leftovers of the weak class of 1994 that swept into office on a huge Republican tidal wave, and was promptly gutted by Democrats in 2000 to the tune of five pickups. We need good candidates to make this happen, but in most places that is already coming together. Looking at this list perks me up a bit, as I realize that there is at least an outside chance Democrats could retake the Senate in 2006. At the very least, we seem to have good chances to make gains. I'll discuss this later today when I look at Democratic seats for 2006.

Tags: Senate 2006 (all tags)

Permalink :: 30 Comments :: Post a Comment

Drag on Rupub's (none / 0)

You can tell by scanning the numbers that the nation is not that happy with the Republican's. If I counted right, there are 13 Repub's with lower than 50% approval and only 4 Dem's, which includes Dayton and Lautenberg, one of which is not running, the other is probably not going to run again. All in all, I think 2006 presents a golden opportunity to make substantial gains, if not take outright control. We must start now.

by sandzen on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 12:09:32 PM EST

Ohio Senate Race (none / 0)

With the Ohio Worker's Comp. Fund Scandal ("Coingate"), this may rub off onto DeWine's GOP affiliation, especially since 2006 will also be the Ohio Gubernatorial Election. The problem is the weak performance of the Ohio Democratic Party. They need to get their act together.

by T Dubya Ault on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 12:37:47 PM EST

Hutchison's probably running for governor (none / 0)

so that seat may not be invulnerable, even though it is in Texas. An open seat's an open seat.

by dbeard115 on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 12:49:28 PM EST

Re: Hutchison's probably running for governor (none / 0)

Hutchison would be invulnerable, but it looks like the seat may open up.

by wayward on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 09:19:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hutchison's probably running for governor (none / 0)

Kay has announced already that she's running for re-election to the Senate. We Texans are refusing to coronate her over a year in advance.

That 50 State Strategy does include Texas, right?

by gregwythe on Wed Aug 10, 2005 at 11:43:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

NV (none / 0)

Goodman is highly unlikely to run and its a good thing. His schtick would not play very well outside of Vegas -- and he'd be a lousy Senator.

Ensign is indeed vulnerable and a good candidate to run against him would be Democratic Assembly Speaker Richard Perkins, a moderate-conservative Democrat, a deputy police chief, and an experienced legislator. He's been preparing to run for Governor but he's trailing in early polls for the Dem nom.

by desmoulins on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 12:55:23 PM EST

Re: NV (none / 0)

Goodman is way too Vegas to win the Senate race. For a Democrat to win, he must be able to carry more than Clark County (Southern Nevada, including Las Vegas), and I don't see Goodman doing that.

Frankly, no Democrat seems to be interested in running against Ensign, and the party here is making the state executive offices their priority. Currently, the Republicans control every constitutional statewide office, from Governor on down. Ensign will probably get a weak challenger and get re-elected.

by Satori on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 07:05:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

We need to recruit a challenger for Dewine (none / 0)

Must be a top priority. A good breakthrough Dem statewide candidate in OH can save the party in that state. We need to save it from the evangelizing maniacs.

by freedc on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 01:13:12 PM EST

Lugar safe? (none / 0)

probably, but what to make of this rumor?

"Informed and reliable Democratic sources" tell the Howey Political Report that former Rep. Tim Roemer (D-IN) "is seriously considering a 2006 challenge to U.S. Sen. Richard Lugar... Roemer confidants tell HPR that a statewide head-to-head poll taken by Garin-Yang last week had Lugar leading Roemer by 41-39 percent. It also revealed that 36 percent felt the country was on the right track and 53 percent felt the country was on the wrong track. Previous published polls in Indiana have had Senator Lugar with approval ratings in the 70th percentile."

I posted this on the Indiana Democratic Club but foudn it via Political Wire & Kos

Is Lugar really vulnerable, was that just a super partisan poll, or was it just a response to the filibuster stuff going on at the time? A sort of temporary "throw the bums out" feeling?

by descolada99 on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 01:16:53 PM EST

Re: Lugar safe? (none / 0)

There might not be a contradiction since the numbers we see in this post are just approve/disapprove, not re-elect. It's likely will always Lugar get very high personal approval ratings -- I mean, you can't really disapprove of the guy, it'd be like disapproving of your kindly, slightly senile grandfather -- but a challenger also with high name recognition and favorability (like Roemer, probably) would make the race competitive. However, maybe there's something of a we-love-the-old-guy-but-he-needs-to-be-replaced-anyway vibe out there like the one that took out Bill Roth in 2000 (and maybe there's a whiff of that around Robert Byrd too, unfortunately).

by Crazy Vaclav on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 01:44:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Lugar safe? (none / 0)

Hope you're right about that. As much as I'm not a fan of Roemer's politics (far to moderate formy tastes, like Bayh) it'd be another D in the senate to fight off extremist judges.

Roemer was certainly wrong for DNC chair but could be right for Senate from Indiana.

by descolada99 on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 02:10:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Oscar Goodman? (3.00 / 1)

He's from Philly, right? He's a bit wild, but in NV that might be okay, what with the brothels and such.

Could we invite him to speak to us when he's in Philly? Can you imagine he & Dean together? The republicans in the vicinity might burst into flame... :)

Yes, in fact:

http://www.lasvegasnevada.gov/mayor_oscar_b_goodman.htm

The self-proclaimed “happiest mayor in the world,” Goodman was born and raised in Philadelphia, graduating from Haverford College and receiving his law degree from the University of Pennsylvania Law School. He has become one of the city’s premier criminal defense attorneys, having been named one of the “15 Best Trial Lawyers in America” by the National Law Journal. He has also been featured in numerous publications such as Of Rats and Men and even portrayed himself in the movie Casino. Mayor Goodman also serves on the Advisory Board of the U.S. Conference of Mayors.

by lutton on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 01:39:40 PM EST

He's an ex-mob lawyer (none / 0)

Not a problem in Sin City, but...

by Geotpf on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 03:41:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Making Ohio Blue (none / 0)

2. Mike DeWine is highly vulnerable with a weak 44 / 43 approval rating. Ohio is clearly becoming increasingly disgusted with the Republicans who control the state. We can really do some damage here on every level in 2006.

Thank you for confirming that! Maybe we can get some national assistance here now instead of being written out in the off-year. But on the other hand...

The problem is the weak performance of the Ohio Democratic Party. They need to get their act together.

This is true. We need some Dean-ism in this state and some serious message discipline to make sure we at least capture the governorship if nothing else. Dems here (online at least) are starting to get organised in preparation for 2006 - translating that to the ground is another matter.

The special election in the Ohio 2nd District will be telling.

by David Berger on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 02:16:40 PM EST

Interesting (none / 0)

Is below 50% trouble for Senators like it is for National Races?

Anyhow figures I found interesting:

Brownback at 50% in Kansas
Durbin at only 50%
Frist's 14 point swing in a month
Bill Nelson at 47-29%, better than I expected
Ben Nelson at 64-26%, sounds really good for him.
Kerry only at 53-42%

Tennesseans for Feingold

by ben114 on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 03:06:50 PM EST

Re: Interesting (none / 0)

Ben,that 50% "incumbent" rule is for a head-to-head horse-race poll -- and usually applies only to a poll conducted late in the cycle (although thats not the case here where we regularly apply it 22 months ahead of an electin!); the numbers in this survey are the "re-elect/someone new" and its not uncommon for an incumbent to run in the low 40s, even to run behind a generic "Someone new" and still win re-election easily.

by desmoulins on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 04:27:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

New England (none / 0)

All 6 New England states went for Kerry over Bush in 04. The region has 17 House Dems and only 5 House Republicans with 2 extremely shaky (Shays and Simmons in CT and the southern NH seat a possible long term pick-up. On the Senate side it is split almost evenly (6-5-1 with Independent Jeffords having been elected as a Republican).

What's happened is that liberal Republicans of the old stripe have been more or less read out of the party except for New England Senate seats. If, and this is a big if, we can make this a national election rather than a series of state-wide races, "enablers" like Chaffee and Snowe are in trouble no matter what their personal popularity.

If you want a good omen, Ed Muskie was swept in in the Democratic wave of 1958, the sixth year of Ike's reign. Maybe Maine and RI will do the same in 2006, the sixth year of Bush.

by David Kowalski on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 03:13:18 PM EST

Chambliss vulnerable in '08? (none / 0)

he's a bit lower than I would have guessed in Georgia.... We need to get Roy Barnes to mobilize for the '08 election...

hank

by HKingsley on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 03:50:52 PM EST

Re: Chambliss vulnerable in '08? (none / 0)

A good candidate could have beaten Isaakson in '04, but the DSCC left Majette high and dry.

If the Georgia Democratic Party can stop imploding, maybe they can make a race of it.

by wayward on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 09:23:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Tenn/ Frist analysis is correct (none / 0)

This analysis of Frist being beatable
is probably correct. Tenn. is red-state
but its imperative to note that the
last election a good stretch saw an unbeatable
just drop like a rock in one week;
red states are actually quite independent
minded and unfortunately probably respond
more to the news-entertainment-media companies
that sell news-entertainment.

It will be a packaging problem down there,
you'll have to find a way to connect.

by turnerbroadcasting on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 04:05:40 PM EST

Re: Tenn/ Frist analysis is correct (none / 0)

Frist being theoretically beatable has nothing to do with any reality. He's retiring. To concentrate on his Presidental run.

by InigoMontoya on Wed Jun 15, 2005 at 03:12:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Kyl, Ensign seats could help Dems win White House (3.00 / 1)

Two of the seats in this list that Democrats should pay significant attention to are Nevada and Arizona. Both of these states have become much more politically moderate than they were in the 80s and early 90s. Nevada will soon be a blue state the way it's demographics are so quickly changing. Jon Kyl and John Ensign should be strongly challenged in 2006 by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

The future of the Democratic Party on the Presidential level rests with the how Democrats do in the Southwest -- in Arizona, Nevada, and Colorado. These three states are the three fastest growing states in the country. They will have increased electoral clout in the near future, especially after 2010. If the Democratic Presidential nominee in 2008 can win Arizona, Nevada, and Colorado, then Democrats wouldn't even have to worry about winning Florida or Ohio in that race. If Kyl and Ensign survive 2006, they may both be on the ballot in 2012. With more straight-ticket voting occuring now, having Republican Senators on the ballot during Presidential elections is not something Democrats want, especially in these key swing states -- states that will significantly grow in electoral clout after the next census. Strong challenges to Ensign and Kyl in 2006 at the very least could end up weakening them in future races.

The key to Democratic prospects in the Southwest in 2008 and 2012 is going to be how well they win the Hispanic vote. The Hispanic population is rapidly increasing in the Southwest. Have Pedersen and Goodman already been blessed by the Dem. state parties in AZ and NV as the eventual nominees? If not, then Southwestern Democrats should seriously consider backing Hispanic candidates against Kyl and Ensign in 2006. Why did Democrats do significantly better in Colorado in 2004 than they had in the past? They ran two Hispanic candidates -- Ken Salazar and John Salazar. The same success that Democrats realized with Hispanic candidates in Colorado in 2004 can be replicated in 2006 in Nevada and Arizona. An even larger percentage of the populations of Nevada and Arizona are Hispanic than is the population of Colorado.

Democrats can help themselves enormously in 2008 and 2012 by running Hispanic candidates for the Senate against Kyl and Ensign next year. If Democrats can gain one or two Democratic Hispanic Senators in the Southwest, it could have huge implications for the Presidential races of 2008 and 2012.

by JT on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 05:40:26 PM EST

McAuliffe Rules (none / 0)

I think the Republicans are going to reprise their 2002 strategy for the Senate. They want to draw the DNC and the big fundraising machines to expensive states where they think they have the advantage. They did it quite well with sucker punching Dems to spend lots of money on Janet Reno's candidacy to unseat Jebbius Maximus and don't forget the Ron Kirk Project imploding like nothing we have done ever seen.

In terms of resources, I think we have to put everything on the line in open seats...be them in Texas, Tenneesee, Minnesota, or Hawaii. They have to be our biggest priority.

And then, despite what you might think, we have to focus on the smaller, less populous states against incumbents. At first everyone thinks the same thing...wait those states are so cheap to campaign in...big money will bury us. But TV advertising is used because of population, because you can't reach enough people in time to be competitive. If the state is smaller...you do really have a chance to press the flesh...and that's key.

So much as I know everyone wants to re-elect Bill Nelson and defeat Slick Rick Santorum...each Senate seat is worth the same in votes, no matter how much you spend on the race. I'd rather beat Ensign, Chafee, and Burns for the same cost of knocking off Santorum and losing the other races.

by risenmessiah on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 06:47:30 PM EST

Re: McAuliffe Rules (none / 0)

Chafee told the world that he was
not voting for George W. in the last
election. So he has a lot in common
with us Democrats.

As it turned out, Chafee's vote
last November didn't matter at all.
Kerry swept his home state and
the Republicans swept the Senate.

But dream for a monment.

If, yes IF, the Democrats had won
a handful of those Senate races
we thought we could take --

If, yes IF, the Senate had been tied
50 Democrats and 50 Repulicans
when it met in January, 2005 --

How would Chafee have voted that day?
For George W.'s team or against it?

Rick Santorum is a young man
from a big state who has lead
a campaign of hate. Taking him out
would move the meter away from
far right and toward the center.

I'm lusting to see Santorum go down.
But Chafee? I won't spend a nickel
on that race.

by Woody on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 09:27:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: McAuliffe Rules (none / 0)

So many of those Senate races were heartbreakingly close. KY, FL, LA, NC, SD were all very winnable.

by wayward on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 09:38:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: McAuliffe Rules (none / 0)

We need to hold our seats in every state.

Santorum is in an expensive state, but he's low-hanging fruit. He's one of the reddest men in the Senate representing a violet-blue state that he doesn't even really live in.

Burns should be high on the list. He's a easy and relatively cheap target.

DeWine is DeFeatable, but the Republicans completely control what should be a purple state. Bill Nelson has the same problem with re-election.

Chafee is probably going to be liberal enough to hold Rhode Island again.

by wayward on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 09:32:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: McAuliffe Rules (none / 0)

See, I think the "low-hanging fruit" temptation is exactly what the Republicans are hoping for. If Ricky had a solid lead, we'd focus our money elsewhere. By getting us to committ to a race against an incumbent in an expensive state...we've bit off more than we can chew. Same reason why Warner does not give a crap against Allen and would rather run for President.

But I am not suggesting that we abandon our current seats, just favor open seats after that, cheaper incumbents, THEN the high profile races.

by risenmessiah on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 09:48:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Who is challenging Talent? (none / 0)

Please not Jay Nixon.
Please not Jay Nixon.

"You say the world has lost it's love I say embrace what it's made of" -Dar Williams

by Valatan on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 09:36:37 PM EST

Re: Who is challenging Talent? (none / 0)

The DSCC is trying to get Claire McCaskill to run, but she has not announced anything.

by stgermh on Wed Jun 15, 2005 at 09:23:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]