2006 Senate Races.

[elperromagico]

Current Status of the Senate:

Republicans - 55
Democrats - 44
Independent - 1

2006 Election

Seats Currently Held By Republicans (15):

Arizona - Jon Kyl
Indiana - Dick Lugar
Maine - Olympia Snowe
Mississippi — Trent Lott
Missouri — Jim Talent
Montana - Conrad Burns
Nevada — John Ensign
Ohio — Mike DeWine
Pennsylvania — Rick Santorum
Rhode Island — Lincoln Chafee
Tennessee — Open Seat
Texas — Kay Bailey Hutchinson (Possible open seat)
Utah — Orrin Hatch
Virginia — George Allen
Wyoming — Craig Thomas

Seats Currently Held By Democrats (17):

California — Dianne Feinstein
Connecticut — Joe Lieberman
Delaware — Thomas Carper
Florida — Bill Nelson
Hawaii — Daniel Akaka
Maryland - Open Seat
Massachusetts — Ted Kennedy
Michigan — Debbie Stabenow
Minnesota — Open Seat
Nebraska—Ben Nelson
New Jersey — Jon Corzine (possible open seat)
New Mexico — Jeff Bingaman
New York — Hillary Clinton
North Dakota — Kent Conrad
Washington — Maria Cantwell
West Virginia — Robert Byrd
Wisconsin — Herb Kohl

Seat Currently Held By Independent (1):
Vermont - Open Seat

The Republicans start off with a slight advantage simply because they have less seats up for grabs. They have a further advantage because they can afford to lose more; even if the GOP lost four seats, they would still have a 51-49 majority. That's not even considering the handful of Democrats who frequently cross the aisle to vote with the GOP.

The Democrats can't afford to lose anything.

To gain even a bare majority, the Democrats have to pick up six seats in addition to protecting their current seats (including those being vacated). That is presuming that the VT Senate seat currently held by Jeffords is won by Bernie Sanders. Sanders is an independent but he would caucus with us and give us the majority.

So where do Dems pick up victories? Is there hope for a majority? Looking at this list, I'm not particularly encouraged.

[Quetzal]

1. I can tell you right now

Akaka is running again - no way in hell will he lose.

[elperromagico]

2. As long as Akaka and Inouye are in those seats,

I don't think they're much at risk.

[SRSU]

40. Unless

There is no paper ballot.

[ArtVandaley]

3. Top 6 to Try For

1. Pennsylvania
2. Rhode Island
3. Montana
4. Ohio
5. Tennessee
6. Missouri

[elperromagico]

4. A good set of six.

But remember that we need to protect the 17 we currently hold as well.

[truebrit71]

7. You forgot Minnesota..

..I have a sneaking hunch that seat is DEFINITELY in play...

[elperromagico]

8. That's one of the 17 we have to keep.

I'm not sure if Dayton's retirement helps us or hurts us. I'm not familar enough with MN politics to tell you.

[gaspee]

5. Our only chance in RI

is for Laffey to challenge Chafee in the primaries.

The people of RI love Chafee. I liked him as my mayor, but not as a congressman adding to the repug numbers.

The funny think is, I like Chafee better than Whitehouse, but I'm working on Whitehouse's campagn. Go figure.

We need Chafee's seat. And if we don't get some help from the DNC and a little republican primary infighting, we aren't going to get it. Period.

Edited to add why I like Chafee.

For a silver spooner, he's actually a good guy. Met him a number of times. Voted against that mother***** marriage ammendment. Voted AGAINST the quagmire. Sends right wingers into apopoleptic fits (LOVE that one,) paygo.

Why I hate chafee. Tool of the banking lobby. Has no balls whatsoever.

Why I like Chafee again. Rational, thoughtful.

Why I'm not voting for Chafee and told him so to his face. The American people can't afford to have the republican crime coalition in power for even one more election cycle. Our country is almost unrecognizable. And we want it back, dammit!

[elperromagico]

9. He wouldn't be nearly as bad if he were a Democrat.

In fact, he sounds like a great many of our "waffling" Dems whose voting records are almost identical to Chafee's.

[gaspee]

11. If he would

Switch to independent, I'd work on his campaign. He's no Jack Reed, who votes the way I want him to about 90% of the time, but who is?

The only reason Chafee is a Republican is loyalty to his father.

I can live with Chafee. But not as a republican.

He's also a very genuine person. Which is pretty rare from the politicians I've met. RI is a pretty small palce, so meeting them all isn't very hard to do.

I'm rational to realize no politician is going to match my views exactly, but there is a big picture out there. And Chaffee needs to be a casualty of that big picture. Sorry guy.

And for full disclosure. My uncle became mayor when chafee was appointed to his father's Senate seat and my brother in law is an advisor to Whitehouse.

[Lexingtonian]

13. I'd watch for Langevin getting back in

That's the rumblings in the undergrowth, anyway.

[LittleClarkie]

6. Herb Kohl is safe as milk

He's just Conservative enough to keep this purple state happy. I don't even know who's running against him yet.

I'm more concerned about our liberal Mayor of Milwaukee and our moderate Governor. God forbid the Milwaukee County Executive should get the Governorship. He was responsible for trying to shortchange ballots in our minority areas in 2004. But for some reason he's popular in Milwaukee. I'm told he's not so popular in the rest of the state. I hope not.

But anyway, I don't think we have to worry about Herbie.

[BillZBubb]

10. I like our chances to pick up a few seats.

But a net six is just too high a hurdle. In a just world without sheeple, we'd pick up an additional 10 seats in a rout.

[Lexingtonian]

12. Why not be encouraged?

If you look at things in more detail, things look pretty darn good for Democrats.

The Vermont seat is basically conceded.

Talent, Santorum, Chaffee, and Burns are polling in the mid-30s in their home states. Kyl is in low 40s in Arizona and I'd guess from other Nevada polling, having no direct polling, that Ensign is too. No exact idea about Mike DeWine, but both Democrats and Republicans don't like him much and he's been by far the weaker Senator in Ohio all along when compared to Voinovich. They're all dead in the water as long as present Republican policy continues to fail, i.e. inevitably. Republicans are only supporting these folks defensively, along the "well, better than a Democrat" line, at this point.

Arlen Specter is sick enough that it's hard seeing him not resigning within a couple of months or year or two- and Ed Rendell would appoint a replacement. Olympia Snowe is also weighing retirement for very real health reasons; if she does, there are no Republicans in Maine of any stature or evident ability- Snowe really is all that is respectable about the Maine Republican Party-, and it's a Democratic seat without much difficulty.

The Democratic picture is more murky but has a year to clear up. Basically, Democrats are united in favor of the candidates and incumbents there are just about everywhere; there's going to be some internal Democratic shakeout of conservatives in New Jersey, Minnesota, and Maryland, but the Kerry numbers and quality of candidates says they're going to be fine even if it all looks close or even Republican for a while. Btw, Feinstein is probably going to retire as well, and California is evidently in shakeout in both parties as well from looking at Schwarzenegger's polling and Boxer's November result.

We're seeing some shakeout- soft patches- in dealing with "centrist" Democratic incumbents, which (as I see it) ends up improving things by forcing them away from their "moderacy"/conservatism/compromising. Their margins will fall, at least for a time if not on Election Day, but I don't seem them getting defeated. It seems to be happening in Connecticut with Lieberman, Carper in Delaware, Cantwell in Washington, Kohl in Wisconsin. Stabenow seems to have gone through it already, judging from Michigan pollings.

The national story is (as DU also illustrates, interestingly enough) that, as Kerry sadly found out, there are contingents of Democrats who are presently more conservative than are Independents. Independents don't vote in midterm elections much, either. So a state or a House district can presently be polling as very clearly unwilling to elect or reelect a Republican, but either the Democrat running appears too compromised or conservative to Indies and liberal Democrats and defecting moderate Republicans or s/he seems too liberal to the local moderate Democrats.

Of incumbent Democrats, the ones in what has to be seen as serious trouble for these reasons are Byrd (sadly enough) and Bob Nelson. Bob Nelson is actually doing better than expected because Republicans are nosediving in Florida, but it's not a sure thing yet. Byrd simply has a problem electorate to deal with at this point, an electorate in which every internal problem has come to a head following on years of propaganda and socioeconomic decline. Ben Nelson, Mark Pryor, Jeff Bingaman, and Kent Conrad look pretty safe because of a mix of Republican inability to put up strong candidates and real Republican nosediving everywhere west of Mississippi.

We do have a year for things to become as bad for Republicans in the South east of the Mississippi, though. I'd be surprised if Mark Warner doesn't get very close to winning, if not actually winning, in Virginia. I doubt Harold Ford Jr will do very well in Tennessee if in fact Frist retires (which is more up in the air than people think, I believe), not because he's black but because he's too compromised as a Democrat.

At this point I'm becoming more interested in the picture developing in the House than in the Senate, actually. If Republicans do survive as a Senate majority in '06, it's going to be too fragile and politically endangered to be effective- Democrats will be the aggressors and punishing them at every turn if that happens. That moves the Bush peoples' hopes to the House in any case. And if you're following that story at all, Republicans are concealing their worries about losing the House pretty well but their actions say they are running scared. But I've gone on long enough.

[elperromagico]

14. A good post.

I'm not especially encouraged - although your post encourages me a bit - because it seems the Dems will need a perfect storm in order to win back the Senate.

As for House: I'm not too familiar with the House because the races are often so much less high-profile. I'm sure though, that when one narrows the House down to only those races that are truly competitive (perhaps 50 out of 435), the contest becomes much clearer.

[Awsi Dooger]

17. First time I remember disagreeing with you, Lexingtonian

My look at the big picture in regard to senate/house is completely different:

* Secondary issues and momentum and Bush's performance are virtually irrelevant in federal races right now. National security fear remains more intense than we dare to concede and the GOP will probably capitalize on that in 2006 just like 2002 and 2004. Whenever I quiz apolitical types, and that's many times a week, national security easily trumps everything else

* Incumbents don't lose other than very rare circumstances. Those low approval ratings mean squat if we lack superior alternative candidates. I don't see them in most cases. Ensign, for example, is a lock of all eternity. Nevada is in a down period for statewide Democratic candidates and the only two bigleague options -- Oscar Goodman and Shelly Berkley -- won't be masochistic enough to challenge Ensign

* We're in worse shape longterm in the House than Senate. I've looked at isolated House districts carefully and there are very few in which a liberal leaning district is represented by a Republican, but there remain quite a few in which Democrats hold office in districts that typically default GOP. Those type of districts have slowly drifted toward their presidential voting trends beginning in '94 and I fear it will continue

As usual, some of your stuff like the centrist Democratic incumbent paragraph is well over my head. I certainly hope you're right with the optimism but I just don't see it. Last year I took plenty of flak here by estimating the GOP had caught and surpassed us in terms of registration and GOTV strategy. I stand by that. Plus I worry we put all our energy and fanaticism into ousting Bush and the incredible letdown of that failure will carry over into a less than enthused Democratic effort in 2006. That just goes along with one of my prized sports betting theories, that the outcome of a hotly contested monumental game springs the winner to greater heights and devastates the loser. I applied that in midterm 2002 and I'm worried it fits in 2006 as well. I just hope we can identify our best candidates especially in gov races, which I seem to emphasize much more than most DUers.

One tiny correction: Florida's senator is Bill Nelson, not Bob Nelson.

[Lexingtonian]

20. all of that is right, and true

I'm sorry I don't have the time to respond adequately to the issues you raise tonight. I'll try to do so tomorrow. And I wouldn't mind being able to hop off that pedestal you have me on. :-)

In very brief, an awful lot of nonpartisan folks are down to supporting Bush due to his terrorism policy supposedly working out. We're overdue for a scandal involving the Guantanamo Bay prison business and how few, if any, actual terrorists and how many mere regime opponents are locked up and dying there. Nonpartisan people look for the practical outcomes.

Incumbents do lose when their political stances hold no water; it takes some (often very minor) inethical behavior to tip them over the edge. I think we have reason to expect both to be evident and applicable by next November to enough of them. It's a long argument, but the polling says that core Republican "principles" are being doubted by the Believers and, at the present rate at which they are losing voter demographics, moderate Republicans will be wedged from the hardline policies the Bush people and Frist/Hastert can't back off from now by next fall.

The House is a worse place than the Senate; we have 'merely' 170 or so real Democrats at this point but we're improving that number at a rate of 10 or so each House election. An ideologically solid majority looks like 2012 in any case. The issue to take with your reasoning is what kind of Republican Party exists after even a stalemate or small defeat in November '06- it's so completely overleveraged on hardline conservative policies increasingly bankrupt in their own electorate, never mind the general electorate, that it can't survive anything other than victory.

More tomorrow, if I can find the time.

[RUMPLEMINTZ]

25. I love your optimism

But how can we be gaining 10 or so real Democrats in each House election when we've gone from 267 seats 12 years ago to 202 today?

Let's hope that happens starting next year. :)

[Lexingtonian]

56. the answer is simply that

in 1994 we perhaps only had 110 solid ones...sad as that may be. It was a different time, the present measures don't apply well. But if you remember what 1993 and 1994 were like in the House- Democrats had the Presidency, House, and Senate, yet accomplished practically nothing other than the balanced budget (even that just barely)- this is not an inaccurate way of characterizing the situation. Overall numbers are nice, but there's a decent set of reasons a lot of Democrat voters stayed home on Election Day of November 1994.

We're replacing a lot of elderly House Democrats, generally in safe districts, with (on the whole) stronger and less 'conservative' ones. Districts are also, quite uniformly, getting more strongly Democratic. The exception is mostly in Southern backwater areas, where Democrat still meant what it did in 1950 a very few years ago.

[DemFromMem]

18. Have to disagree about Harold Ford, Jr.

He's probably one of the best Democratic politicians to come up in the last several years here. He's incredibly shrewd and knows exactly what plays in this right of center state. You say he's compromised as a Democrat, but it's not Democrats he's trying to reach. They're going to vote for him - and vote big. It's the independents and GOP voters who have a list of also rans getting ready for a bloody GOP primary and a Democratic Party united behind Ford.

I went to a Ford Senate fundraiser a few weeks back and was surprised how many Republicans I saw there. A good sign.

The one weak point right now is the residual effect of Ford's crooked uncle John Ford getting indicted recently on serious corruption charges as a state senator.

But don't write Ford off. He knows how to win.

[Radical Activist]

19. You saw Republicans at the Ford fundraiser.

Exactly. He's also getting grumbles and dissatisfied reactions from audiences of actual Democrats. People don't see Ford as a person who has any kind of real convictions and that counts for a lot with the voters.

[Lexingtonian]

55. I'll be glad if he wins

and hopeful. But '06 is going be rough on Democrats anywhere around the middle of the Bible Belt even when they have a lot of Republican friends.

[Hippo_Tron]

38. What makes you think that Byrd is vulnerable?

Byrd owns half the state of West Virginia. The GOP could run Ronald Reagan against Byrd and Byrd would still win. Anybody that the GOP recruits to run against Byrd is a sacrificial lamb.

Also, I think that NJ is pretty safe. The fact that the GOP can't find a decent candidate to run against Corzine for Governor says something about the shape of their party. The way in which McGreevey resigned was the perfect opportunity for the GOP to win, but the best candidate they could field against Corzine was Forrester.

[MojoXN]

43. Byrd's not out until he decides to go...

Trust me. This damn state is getting more Right of center daily though, and I'm not 100% sure that a Dem will be elected to replace him. It's a shame too. This state once was the bastion of the Democratic Party, and it's gone to * in the past two elections.

MojoXN

[Lexingtonian]

53. I wish it felt that way

This sort of thing is showing up-
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/6/5/2163/10044

[Hippo_Tron]

58. I read it, I'm still not convinced

If the Democrats in WV rely on the religious wrong, then Byrd will still win. He voted for that stupid federal marriage ammendment and I believe he is pretty pro-life. Don't get me wrong, his anti-war stance makes up for it in my book, but my point is that the social conservatives will still vote for him. The only thing that this tells me is that Byrd may actually have to campaign for his seat if he gets a strong well funded challenger. But having to campaign and being in danger are two different things. Russ Feingold got a well funded challenger who he beat by 10 points because he is such a great campaigner.

Personally I'm more worried about who will fill Byrd's seat after he retires.

[Divine Ms Q]

15. Montana - Burns

Don't worry....Montana is bleeding blue now....we'll have Conrad's ass on a platter.... ::evilgrin:

[safi0]

16. The recent Montana numbers

showed Burns getting 49-50 percent. Thats not great but his head isn't on a platter like some have said. I think the list of 6 about what where we can pick up is pretty accurate.

From our side, I don't think Byrd is beatable, he's a damn near legend in WV, Rockefeller was re-elected in 02 with like 62% of the vote if Byrd runs again I see him getting similar numbers. States I'm worried about are Minnesota, I don't know how strong this Mark Kennedy guy is and I don't know who our candidate will be and I have a little uncertainty. Same thing but less in Maryland, I think if our primary gets too bloody Steele could steal that race but we should win. The Nelsons are two others, I'm not familiar at all with how Nebraskans view Ben Nelson same with Florida and Bill. Washington is another state I'm worried about, Cantwell is a Freshman Senator with a very undistinguished record and early polls showed Dino Rossi beating her. Wisconsin was brought up, if Tommy Thompson runs Kohl will be in for a dogfight, otherise he wins with 58-60% or more.

I just saw some poll numbers on Byrd and its not great. They have him and some person named Caputo at 46-43. I thought a 7 term Senator would do better than that, but he does have a 62% approval rating.

[Hippo_Tron]

23. Others suggest that Rossi would have a tough time running for Senate

Washington is a blue state and blue states are more likely to elect GOP Governors than Senators. Plus, Rossi would have to abandon the recount effort which would make him look stupid.

Bill Nelson is actually starting to look like more of a sure bet for re-election. The best that the GOP can seem to come up with is Katherine Harris, who has a lot of baggage from selection 2000. However, if Jebbie makes a run for the seat, then Nelson is in serious trouble.

Ben Nelson is also looking good because the potential challengers against him don't seem to be running.

Kohl would have a tough time beating Tommy Thompson, but it looks like Thompson is more interested in the private sector than he is in politics at the moment.

Montana will be a good race, one that will be a huge victory for dems if they win.

Tennesee will be a tossup since Frist is out and Ford will be running.

I've heard mixed reviews about Missouri. Hopefully Howard Dean can work some of his 50 state magic here and make this one competative.

Mississippi is actually a good shot for a pickup if Lott leaves and Moore runs for Senate instead of Governor. If Lott retires and Moore doesn't run, Gene Taylor could make the race competative.

Texas - It looks like Jabba the Hutch is running for Governor meaning that this one is an open seat. Again, I think this largely depends on what candidate we can get to run and how well Howard Dean's plans to re-invigorate the party are working.

Minnesota is looking like a serious problem. If the dems had a strong candidate, I would say that this state leans Dem, but it is looking like the GOP has a stronger candidate in Kennedy than anyone that the dems can field. On the other hand, Paul Wellstone came out of nowhere, so I'm hoping that, that could happen again.

Rhode Island - I think that the best strategy at this point is to unseat Chafee in the primaries. Rest assured, Chafee's opponent (can't remember his name) will be getting tons of money from the club for growth and from the religious wrong.

As far as Byrd goes, I don't care what some polls say, I'd bet everything I own on his re-election.

[safi0]

26. I agree that Minnesota

Is a problem but I think we can still retain this seat. Unlike Coleman, Kennedy can't pretend he's some moderate. When I hear from MInnesota DU'ers there very optimistic. One of there candidate Patty Wtterling ran against Mark Kennedy in 2004 and lost 54-46, but they say Kennedy's district is the most conservative in Minnesota and in a statewide race she'd smoke him.

I don't think we'll win in Mississippi. Lott seems like one of those guys who'll stay in the Senate forever.

Texas is Texas and any Democrat would have an extremely difficult time in this state. One of the guys who's gonna run from our side is Ken Bentsen son of Lloyd. If the Republican primary gets real bloody I think there's a chance Bentsen with his family lineage could steal the seat, but I'm not optimistic.

I think we can beat Chaffee. Recent poll numbers only show him getting 41% and if we can successfully associate him with Bush, Cheney, Delay and the rest of the unsavory charachters of the GOP we can win. Has a Republican announced there intent to run against Chaffee?

[TheFarseer]

31. I've heard so many scenarios about Chaffee

He could easily lose in the primaries and might run as an independent if that happens, or if a primary loss looks certain he could switch parties. I think if he wins the primaries he's going to win the general election - just a hunch.

The only chance we have in Mississippi is if Lott retires and I just don't see him doing that.

There are at least half a dozen really good candidates in TX but I'm not sure if that state will elect a democrat to Senate. Might depend on what the GOP can dig up and if Tom Delay damages him/her.

[CatholicEdHead]

33. Or Amy Klobochar

is also a creditable canidiate. Amy has more experience, but Patty has more overall appeal, espically to outstate Minnesota farm country in the west and south.

[Hippo_Tron]

34. Yes, Mayor Laffey is challenging Chaffee

I just read some excerpts from a piece that Rothenberg wrote on Laffey, saying that he's actually pretty charismatic with lots of grassroots support, kind of like a GOP equivalent of Howard Dean. Also, Chafee's party really dislikes him, because he even admitted publicly that he is not voting for Bush. Granted he didn't make a spectacle of it like Zell Miller did. Laffey will get tons of soft money ads from the club for growth and other third party groups that don't like Chaffee. The only problem is that Independents can vote in primaries in Rhode Island. Rode Island is 16% GOP and 45% independent which I think broke somewhere around 55 Kerry 42 Bush. Laffey should have a good chance, unless Independent Kerry voters decide to save Chaffee and at the same time, Bush voters decide that they like Chaffee because of his family legacy.
Also, remember that when Arlen Specter was in trouble Bush, Cheney, and Santorum all campaigned for him and he had full NRSC support against his opponent. RI's other senator is a Dem who probably won't stump for Chaffee, Bush and Cheney probably won't come help a guy who openly admits he didn't vote for them and even if they do and they manage to save Chaffee, their visit will make a great smear ad against him in the general election. Plus Chaffee has Bolton on his record as well as Prascilla Owens, etc.

[MojoXN]

45. Shelly Moore Caputo...

Arch Moore's daughter. He was the governor of WV for a number of years, until he got removed from office for corruption. Robert Byrd is a GOD in this state. There's a Robert C. Byrd expressway, a Robert C. Byrd high school, etc. I'm pretty sure there's a statue of him somewhere. Point being, he's not going anywhere unless he damn well decides to. I wouldn't worry about his seat.

MojoXN

[carpetbagger]

21. We don't need 6 seats yet. We need a net gain of three.

That would set the field up for 2008, which is when we'd have the best chance to retake the Senate.

On our side, we've got maybe 2-3 vulnerable seats (Landrieu, Pryor, Johnson). They've got Allard, Chambliss, Collins, Coleman, Dole, Sununu, and Smith running. I could see, without huge shifts in the electorate, a gain of 3-4 seats.

[RUMPLEMINTZ]

27. What do you think

about Bill Nelson in Florida? I'm worried if the rethugs run Tommy Franks. Is Ben Nelson safe in Nebraska? It's a pretty red state. What are your thoughts on Maryland? With Kwasi Mfumi (sp?) embroidered in scandel and the rethugs running the African American Lt. Governor I think that might be tough. Let's make sure we put as much effort into holding these seats as we do trying to pick up seats.

[carpetbagger]

30. Like I said, net gain.

I think Nelson beats Franks at this point. Franks is no Stormin' Norman.

Ben Nelson is somewhat safe. The plains have an electorate that is not won over by GOP stands on bread-and-butter issues, and Bush's SS reform push should be enough to put him over the top against anyone but Coach Osbourne (sp?).

Mfume will probably lose the general election. The NAACP isn't particurly popular, especially in white Baltimore, . Association with the NAACP will paint Mfume as a radical. His scandals will keep him from being able to project a progressive but reassuringly progressive message.

Maryland is a "blue state", but it's blueness is shallower than most reliable blue states. There is a large and growing fundamentalist community. The democratic party is divided, with regional interests (Baltimore vs. DC, "new" vs. "old" MD, north vs. south) leading to personality conflicts that effectively sunk Townsend's run (with Townsend's help), and nearly led to Glendenning losing in 94 and 98. Rarely does this impact on national elections, save for the 1990 redistricting of the House, but it does have the effect of dragging down candidates who can't keep the elections focused on national issues. If it ceases to become a referendum of Reid vs. Frist, Bush vs. Kerry/Gore, red vs. blue, it's an open seat.

[TheFarseer]

32. Coach Osborne is running for governor

He's going to win easily too. If our current governor Heineman would wise up and run for Senate instead of re-election it could be a race. Lee Terry from our 2nd district could make it a race and if Johans would come back from being Ag secretary to run, he could make it a race. It looks unlikely that any of them will run however. Honestly, I think Nelson would beat any of them anyway. He's going to punish anyone else that would run agaisnt him.

[RUMPLEMINTZ]

35. Thanks for the analysis,

I'm still not so sure about Florida if Tommy Franks runs. Don't they have a lot of military families down there?

[carpetbagger]

50. On Tommy Franks and military families...

Franks will come in with all of the Operation Iraqi FUBAR baggage and none of that 9/11-magic that Bush has had over the years. In the campaign, Franks would have to either face questions on Social Security (there's a winner in Florida), or face questions on tactics in Iraq.

By 2006, the military families will be starting to feel the strain to the extent of significant frustration. I don't see them going out and voting for Tommy Franks.

[Hippo_Tron]

37. I'm assuming by "bread-and-butter" you mean social issues

If this is the case, then how come those states vote for Shrub 60%+. Although with Nebraska, I've read that they have a tradition of voting GOP for President but sending Dems to the US Senate. This seems to be the case with the Dakotas as well. Very interesting.

[carpetbagger]

49. I mean economic issues of personal importance.

What keeps us in play in those states is that it's hard to villanize your opponent when he or she has met a significant number of potential voters. And it's possible to do that in the small plains states.

So why does it work in the Dakotas, and not in Wyoming? The upper plains are one of the few areas where large numbers of people still connect their vote with their economic well-being. The "bread and butter" issues in these states are agriculture and seniors policies. We do well there becuase of the same reasons we do well in the areas of West Virginia where mining is still a dominant industry. People don't get distracted like they do when they work for a large, diversified corporation. Obviously, Wyoming's economic base makes it a dream GOP state, gushing black gold and red votes from the ground.

[safi0]

52. That's why I think

Maryland Primary voters should pick the candidate who is the most electable and since Steny Hoyer isn't running that person is Ben Cardin. I like Mfume and I think he'd have a better than even chance of beating Steele but I think Cardin's a sure bet. I'd be very surprised to see Steele beat Cardin

[usregimechange]

22. Missouri is looking good. We can do it. Mccaskill likely to run

[JHBowden]

24. Tennessee, Pennsylvania, Vermont

eom

[Darkamber]

28. Watch Washington! Cantwell could be at risk.

Cantwell is still a freshman Senator who won by a small margin last time. Now we have the big election lawsuits going on for the Govern race and finger pointing at King County, the Democratic stronghold in Washington State.

I'm afraid if Rossi looses the Lawsuit for the Governor Race that the will turn his attention to the Senate and Canwell's seat. In Washington there are lots of moderate Dems and independents who want Rossi for Governor.

We can not loose Cantwell's seat! Expect a big battle in WA if it ends up being Rossi against Cantwell. Hopefully, even those Dem's who favor Rossi for Governor will be terrified at the thought of putting another GOP clone in the Senate...the last place where the Dem's have any power at all.

[Hippo_Tron]

36. Rossi running for the Senate is different than Rossi running for Governor

Rossi ran for Governor largely on the platform that the Democrats had a monopoly on the state and that it was time for a change. This strategy works wonders for Republicans running for Governor in blue states, Mitt Romney for example, and for Democrats running for Governor in red states, Dave Freudenthal for example. However, Rossi can't run for US Senate and say that he is going to bring change when he is running as a Republican. The Republicans are the ones with the establishment in DC and Rossi can't make an anti-establishment argument.

[election_2004]

42. Rossi

Wouldn't Rossi be more likely to want a rematch against Gregoire in 2008?

If he runs against Cantwell for the Senate in 2006 and wins, he can't really credibly run for Governor of WA two years later. If he runs against Cantwell for the Senate in 2006 and loses, he's lost all credibility as a winning candidate if he wants to challenge Gregoire to a rematch.

[Gregory1230]

29. 3-4 seats is process

I think 3-4 seats from repubs is process to 2008 election take back America. 6 seats would be sweet but may have hard time takeover from repubs.

But it still too early yet tho. Dems have lot of time to campaign. :)

I live in Florida and I have not hear about Bill Nelson doing in Senate so far. I hope he can reelected in 2006.

Oh hey go :kick:!

[mvd]

39. PA

I think Casey will win unless Diebold gets involved.. you can never put anything in the bank, but I'm 90% confident of a Casey win. The Montgomery County Democratic Committee has already endorsed Casey - and it's important he gains early momentum in that county.

[globalvillage]

46. I agree. Santorum is done.

Last I heard, Bob Casey had a 14 pt lead. Don't get me wrong, I am not comfortable with any lead in any poll, but the Casey name is big in this state. I think we have a winner.

http://www.bobcaseyforpa.com/

[Hippo_Tron]

54. PA has a Dem Governor, Diebold won't be a problem

Now if we could just do something about Ohio, we'd be in better shape.

[OzarkDem]

41. Repub appeasement by Vichy Dems

has certainly put our tail in a crack, so to speak. Lets hope they listen to Dean.

[Pepperbelly]

44. Here are the odds as they stand right now ...

http://www.campaignline.com/oddsmaker/index.cfm?navid=12

Plug in your favorite and see what the odds are. This site ended up predicting a Kerry win in 04. Decide for yourself how accdurate they are. They claim an accuracy rate of 98.2%.

[globalvillage]

47. Their average is going down after '06. Just like Santorum.

Casey widens lead in Pennsylvania senate race, Quinnipiac University Poll finds; Schiavo, Social Security take toll on Santorum

Wednesday, April 20, 2005

State Treasurer Robert Casey, Jr., has a 49 – 35 percent lead over incumbent Republican U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum in the 2006 Senate race, according to a Quinnipiac poll released today.

This compares to a 46 – 41 percent Casey lead in a February 16 poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN uh-pe-ack) University.

Pennsylvania voters give Sen. Santorum a 48 – 35 percent approval rating, down from 52 – 31 percent Feb. 16 and comparable to his all-time low of 47 – 30 percent.


http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x15431.xml

[Pepperbelly]

48. the elections are a loooong way off ...

much can change.

And will.

Thee are no polls I'd get excited about right now.

[globalvillage]

51. Agree. See prev post.

"I am not comfortable with any lead in any poll,"

Don't trust them now, won't trust them in '06.

I have already signed up to work for Casey campaign. I will leave nothing to chance.

But I don't think '06 is a long way off. We need to pay attention to this now.

[Internut]

57. See my post for

analysis using the odds from that web site

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1829472