2006 Senate Races

[Lasher]

One of my favorite resources for tracking the 2006 campaigns is The Wall Street Journal Battleground States Poll. But they don't update it as frequently as I would like, and I have been wondering if they list all Senate races that are competitive. Finding no better poll, I set out on my own.

I listed all the 33 Senate races on a spreadsheet and recorded recent polling information. I used Rasmussen Reports in nearly every case because of their relatively frequent updates. I found no polling information anywhere for 13 of the races, most likely because the incumbents are sure to win.

I considered a Senate race close if the incumbent was not ahead by 10 points or more. There are currently only 9 close races. Incumbents are listed first.

Minnesota: Amy Klobuchar (D) 45% Mark Kennedy (R) 43%

Missouri: Jim Talent (R) 43% Claire McCaskill 40%

Montana: Conrad Burns (R) 45% John Morrison (D) 49% Democrat pickup

New Jersey: Robert Menendez (D) 36% Tom Kean Jr (R) 43% Republican pickup

Ohio: R. Michael DeWine (R) 41% Sherrod Brown (D) 44% Democrat pickup

Pennsylvania: Richard J. Santorum (R) 38% Bob Casey Jr (D) 51% Democrat pickup

Rhode Island: Lincoln Chafee (R) 44% Sheldon Whitehouse (D) 41%

Tennessee: Van Hilleary (R) 47% Harold Ford (D) 38%

Washington: Maria Cantwell (D) 46% Mike McGavick (R) 41%

All of these close races were included in the WSJ Battleground States Poll except Montana and Rhode Island. All were listed as competitive races in the DU Research Forum. We currently stand to gain 3 seats and lose 1, a net gain of 2.

That's not good enough. With 55 Republicans, 44 Democrats, and 1 Independent who can usually be expected to side with Democrats, we need at least 51 seats (a net gain of 6) to take control of the Senate. If we end up with 50 seats we still lose because Elmer Cheney gets to cast a tie-breaking vote.

Edit: Include Tennessee - thanks to TheFarseer & Clark2008

[killerbush]

1. I noticed that a certain Ct. Senate race is not listed

Maybe it's because Lieberman has a 46% lead

[Lasher]

3. That's right, Lieberman would win even if he ran as an Independent

Connecticut: Joseph I. Lieberman (D) 59% Paul Streitz (R) 23%

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2006/State%20Polls/April%202006/Connecticut%20Senate%20April.htm

[MH1]

2. Amy Klobuchar is the incumbent in MN? nt

[Lasher]

4. No, Mark Dayton is actually the incumbent

Since the Democratic incumbent is stepping down, I listed the Democratic candidate as the incumbent. I used this same convention throughout, thinking it would help keep things simple.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2006/State%20Polls/April%202006/Minnesota%20Senate%20April.htm

[MH1]

12. Okay, got it. Something wasn't clicking there.

I was going by your statement about listing the incumbent first. It makes sense now!

[abluelady]

5. Look into VA

George Allen has a good chance of being beaten if Jim Webb wins the Dem primary. Webb has a lot of charisma, experience and money! If the VA Dems work for him as they should, we could say bye bye George.

[Lasher]

7. That's the spirit!

Right now it looks like Harris Miller is the front runner in the Democratic primary. A matchup between him and Allen is currently projected as a 34% to 51% loss. People with positive attitudes like yours can help to turn things around in this and other Senate races between now and November.

[TheFarseer]

19. Are there any polls on the primary?

I can't see where electing Miller would be any different from having George Allen in the Senate as far as their positions on the issues.

[TheVirginian]

22. No polling thus far...

But the Fairfax County Democratic Party did a straw poll where Webb won like 55-45. Very unofficial results, but NoVa is Miller's territory.

As far as their positions on the issues go, Harris Miller is a lot more solidly Democratic than James Webb is. I'm not sure where Webb stands on any issue, except for Iraq. Miller was the chairman of the Fairfax Democratic Party, and has been a Democrat for the last thirty years. Webb has a lot of external support because of his percieved ability to compete well against Allen, but Miller has a lot more in-state support because he's actually a Democrat.

[Stinky The Clown]

31. What Virginia does is Virginia's business, but as a neighbor ......

I'd sure like to have seen Warner run against Allen. Since he seems to .... uh .... have bigger fish to fry, then I'd like to see Webb run (I know, I know, ex Republican). I honestly think he has what it takes ***in Virginia*** to beat Allen.

And there's another little factoid. Virginia was the first Southern state to switch from reliably Dem to Repub back in the 64 cycle. It'd be nice to see them lead the path that would reverse that same trend.

[Progressive420]

64. Miller stands on labor should be enough

to keep you away from him but then he also believes in no paper trail for e-voting and as far as the "external support" goes im a dem and i support Webb not just for his "percieved ability to compete" but because he is a real populist and thats hard to come by these days and a populist candidate can and will play well in VA.

[MH1]

24. Miller will be a big improvement over Allen.

Miller is pro-environment, pro-alternative energy, anti-nuke and has supported Dems a long time - including the Dem presidential nominee in 2004. He also didn't endorse George Allen in 2000.

Meanwhile, Webb supports nukes and trashing anti-war protestors. (He trashed Kerry and VVAW as recently as 2004). Webb supported Allen over Robb, so mustn't have thought Allen was all that bad at one time. What I have seen him say about Iraq is that it was a "strategic blunder." O-K. (too be fair, I haven't researched that deeply - if he has also been talking about it as immoral, pls post a link and I'll rescind that objection).

I'm not sure why people feel they need to equate Miller to Allen, when there is no equivalence. People have concerns about Miller, but there are also valid reasons to be concerned about Webb.

This is why we have primaries. I just wonder where is the hue and cry on DU about national Dems picking a favorite instead of leaving it up to the locals. Or does that only matter in other states or when it isn't the DUer's candidate being supported?

[TheFarseer]

29. You should read some of the threads in the VA forum

Miller refuses to say that he would have voted against Iraq. Webb strongly states that he would have voted against. Miller has been called the "Anti-Christ of Outsourcing" by the IT industry, while Webb says he will vigorously fight against outsourcing. Webb has some warts as far as supporting repugs, but Miller has donated money to repugs including $1000 to Dennis Hastert. But don't let me sway you. I'm just quoting from the VA forum.

[TheVirginian]

33. The VA forum is quoting James Webb press releases

All of those are almost verbatim press releases that Webb has issued in the last month. Throw up some of Miller's, and maybe it'll be a fair fight.

[Catchawave]

43. Miller supporters are certainly welcomed to

join in !

There's more debate on the Raising Kaine website, which is also leaning heavily to Webb:

http://www.raisingkaine.com/frontPage.do;jsessionid=E8152EF558BC99EA5F852681FF45E32E

Here are Webb and Miller's websites:

http://www.webbforsenate.com/

http://www.miller2006.org/

[TheVirginian]

45. I'm not saying that Webb's supporters should stop

I'm just saying that "I'm just quoting the VA forum" doesn't mean anything or make the information less impartial.

[AlecBGreen]

69. Catch is right

JOIN IN! The VA forum is always looking for more insight and opinions. If you got something to add, please do.

:hi:
-Alec

[Catchawave]

83. Thanks Alec....Virginia is darn important this midterm...

No, make that DAMN important....and would love Miller supporters as well to join in...so far...:shrug:

[abluelady]

23. I Don't Think Miller Can Beat Allen

I do think Webb could but Webb has to beat Miller first.

[MH1]

10. Harris Miller seems fine too, if the national dems would back him.

My understanding is that the local dems already do.

Both Webb and Harris have baggage, but then, who doesn't.

[TheFarseer]

6. You're missing Tennessee

This is a competative race from what I've heard.

[Lasher]

11. You're right, I should have listed Tennessee

Here is the scoop

Tennessee: Van Hilleary (R) 47% Harold Ford (D) 38%

Going by my 10% margin rule of thumb I should have included this in one of the close races, as the Democratic challenger is behind only 9%. I have noted this on my spreadsheet.

Thank you.

Lasher

[blm]

8. Bets are off in Penn. Santorum's RW cronies are buying the big newspapers

there. They're setting up the miracle comeback - bet on it.

[mcscajun]

9. New Jersey: Robert Menendez (D) 36% Tom Kean Jr (R) 43% Republican pickup

Please, Noooooooooooooooooo.............

:hurts: :cry: :banghead:

[Lasher]

14. I'm sorry, it hurt me to have to list that one.

This race bears watching. I used an April 11 poll of 500 likely voters in this projection. Menendez was ahead 39% to 36% on February 14, and 38% to 34% on December 7.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2006/State%20Polls/April%202006/New%20Jersey%20Senate%20April.htm

Ohio is another race that's been giving me chest pains.

[AndyTiedye]

17. We Have a Really, Really, Big Problem in Ohio

Last Fall, he turned a landslide for US into a landslide for THEM.

This Fall, he intends to install himself in the governor's office.

They were able to flip over 30% of the entire statewide vote last Fall.
No Democratic officeholder in Ohio is safe.

If he engineers a Rethug sweep in Ohio that keeps the Rethugs in control of Congress,
the Party is going to owe him big time.

[Jersey Devil]

48. Strategic Vision poll has it tied 35-35 May 12-14

with a whopping 30% "undecided". In all of these polls (Rasmussen has 21% undecided) no one takes into account that in NJ the "undecided" almost always breaks Democratic.
http://www.strategicvision.biz/political/newjersey_poll_051806.htm

[Jersey Devil]

51. PS - Wait for a Quinnipiac poll (+6 Menendez on 4/27) before any panic

They have been the most accurate for NJ over the past several years. Their last poll was in April 27 and showed Menendez with a 6 point lead.

April 27, 2006 - Menendez Leads Kean By 6 Points In NJ Senate Race, Quinnipiac University Poll Finds; With Senate Candidates Unknown, Bush Approval Is Factor
Democratic incumbent U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez has opened a 40 - 34 percent lead over State Sen. Tom Kean, Jr., his likely Republican challenger, with 20 percent undecided, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

This compares to a 40 - 36 percent lead for Sen. Menendez, with 19 percent undecided, in a March 20 poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x11375.xml

[mcscajun]

58. Sounds promising. When's their next poll due? n/t

?

[Jersey Devil]

59. They usually poll at the end of each month in an election cycle

I have been following their polls for several years and they have been on the money almost every time. The other NJ poll to watch is the Eagleton Poll by Rutgers Univ which is not as regular, their last poll on April 4 with Menendez holding a lead of 5 points, 40-35.

http://eagletonpoll.rutgers.edu/polls/release_04-04-06.pdf

[mcscajun]

60. Thanks! And you're quite right about the undecideds/independents

They generally do break Democratic. :)

[Clark2008]

13. Where's Tennessee

Bryant's only leading Ford by 7.5 percent - that is if Bryant becomes the nominee.

Hubby and I are voting for Corker in the primary to give him an edge and then voting for Ford in the general. Corker does the worst against Ford.

[Lasher]

15. Thanks, see reply 11 above.

I have updated the OP to include Tennessee.

The primary won't occur there until August 3. I think it's safe to assume that Ford will be the Democratic nominee, but I took a guess at his Republican opponent. Of the 3 Republican front runners I picked Van Hilleary as the most likely to win in the primary because he is polling better against Ford than the other 2.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2006/State%20Polls/May%202006/Tennessee%20Senate%20May.htm

It sure would be sweet to pick up Catkiller's seat this year.

[politicasista]

41. Thanks. They don't report polls in the news too much down here

I hope Harold's republican opponent is really weak.

[TheVirginian]

16. I've been tracking the '06 election since last September...

Unfortunately, I don't have access to as much polling as I would like, but I have a pretty comprehensive list of information for each race. Are there some particular races you were looking for?

[Lasher]

18. Here are the 2006 Senate races for which I found no polling data

Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin, & Wyoming.

If you PM me with your email address I will send you my spreadsheet.

[TheVirginian]

21. Some polling data:

I haven't seen anything out of Maine, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New Mexico, or Utah.

Here's what I have:

Hawaii: (5/9/06)

Akaka: 40%
Case: 38%
Undecided: 22%

Rep. Ed Case is a Democrat, so this is a primary challenge. There is only nominal Republican opposition in this race, so whoever wins the Democratic primary will be the Senator come next January. This poll was sponsored by QMark Research & Polling (MoE: 3.7%), and was paid for by Ed Case, so there is the potential that the questions or the sample was slanted in favor of Case. However, Akaka's campaign has refused to release any polling of their own, an unusual move unless their polling reflects what this poll shows. Either way, this race is safely Democratic, but it would be very interesting if Ed Case pulled this off. Also, its worth noting that Case is significantly more moderate than Akaka is.

Nevada: (4/5/06)

Ensign: 60%
Carter: 27%

Rasmussen just released that they did a poll on this race, so that should be availible to the public later this week (Thursday, most likely), but those numbers will likely reflect this polling. Jack Carter simply isn't a strong candidate. I also have a previous poll from last October that shows roughly the same results. Now that Las Vegas mayor Oscar Goodman has announced that he's not running, Carter's the only candidate, and I can't imagine any scenario where his campaign succeeds. Barring any disaster on Ensign's part, which doesn't seem likely, he'll win big in November.

New York: (5/14/06)

Clinton: 64%
McFarland: 27%

Clinton: 63%
Spencer: 27%

I also have two other polls from this month that show roughly the same results. Put simply: Clinton wins in a landslide. The two viable candidates are former Yonkers mayor John Spencer, who also has the support of the NY Conservative Party, and former DoD spokesperson K.T. McFarland, who got into the race last month. This poll, as well as a May 9th poll conducted by Marist, were the first two polls this cycle that show Clinton above the 60% threshold, and I imagine she'll finish with somewhere around 65% of the vote.

North Dakota: (1/25/06)

Conrad: 53%
Stenehjem: 40%

Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem announced in February that he wouldn't run (after Governor John Hoeven announced that he wouldn't run), which means that Conrad will have only nominal opposition. Stenehjem was the strongest candidate in the field, and was polling 13 points down. Conrad also enjoys favorability ratings up in the low '70s. His seat is locked up.

Texas: (1/5/06)

Hutchison: 64%
Radnofsky: 25%

This poll was done in January and before Radnofsky won the Democratic Primary in April, so Radnofsky's numbers have likely climbed to probably the high 30s, and perhaps even the low 40s. Unfortunately, that's where her numbers will stay until November.

Vermont: (1/5/06)

Sanders: 70%
Tarrant: 25%

Sanders: 70%
Parke: 24%

Again, an older poll, but likely the margin of victory for Sanders precludes that not much attention will be paid to this race. After the GOP primary, I imagine the GOP nominee will be able to get around 30-35% of the vote, but almost all the Democrats and almost all the Independents will break for Sanders.

Wisconsin: (4/30/05)

Kohl: 60%
Lorge: 25%

Kohl: 40%
Thompson: 45%

Strategic Vision has been paying a lot of attention to this race, but only for the possibility of former (and one of the state's most popular politicians) Tommy Thompson joining in, where polls suggest he'll win easily. Kohl, meanwhile, has been doing well against actual declared candidates, including attorney Robert Lorge. Thompson has until mid-July to make up his mind on whether he's running, so this remains a question mark. If its Thompson, Kohl will have an uphill battle. If its not Thompson, Kohl will win.

Wyoming: (4/27/06)

Thomas: 64%
Groutage: 25%

This race isn't going to make any news. What is more intersting is that Wyoming's at-large Representative is only ahead of her Democratic challenger by about nine points. Dale Groutage is a college professor and a retired Navy systems analyst.


You're not likely to get much out of Maine, where Olympia Snowe is up against activist Jean Hay Bright. Most of the state, including much of the Democratic Party, is content with moderate centrist Snowe as their Senator. Bright doesn't have much money, name recognition, or even in-state support.

In Massachusetts, I believe there are two no-name GOPers competing for the right to be a sacrificial lamb. They'll be lucky to crack 25%. Kennedy's seat is his until he decides to give it up.

In Mississippi, state Senator Mike Moore has a lot of Democratic support, but decided not to run against Lott (there was a possibility of Lott not running again). So Moore is either giving up on the idea, or waiting until Cochran's seat comes up ('08, I think). So the candidate is state representative Erik Fleming, who doesn't stand a chance against Lott.

New Mexico could be a little interesting, but not right now. John Bingaman is popular in the state, but with the immigration issue flaring up, one of his GOP opposers could gain some traction on the issue. Right now there are five filed GOP candidates, none with any real viability. The strongest of them is Santa Fe Councilman David Pfeffer. After the June 6th primary, the winner of the primary will get some recognition, but probably won't crack 40% against Bingaman, unless he really screws up on immigration.

In Utah, xMission founder Pete Ashcroft is willing to put millions of his own dollars into this race, but its not likely to have any effect in unseating Hatch, who remains one of the most popular politicians in one of the only states that still has a positive net approval of George Bush. The only poll I saw was not an official poll, but it gave Hatch an insurmountable margin of victory.


Let me know if there's anything else I can help you with.

[Lasher]

26. We should both probably do some updates in the Research Forum

Thanks for the scoop.

[Jai4WKC08]

20. Don't forget Arizona

This ran in the WaPO today:

The biggest Democratic target could be Republican Sen. Jon Kyl, who is facing Jim Pederson, a wealthy property developer. Until recently, Kyl had been seen by most independent experts as fairly safe for re-election, but a recent poll put his advantage at only 7 percentage points, and some analysts now think he could be vulnerable.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/23/AR2006052300569.html

I've been watching this race for a while. AZ is a Repub-leaning state, but Kyl himself isn't that popular imo. Pederson had a major name-recognition problem -- probably still does -- but he's been closing the margin for several months and seems to be gaining even more steam.

I wouldn't call this race for the Democrats yet, but it could definitely get there.

[Lasher]

25. Arizona is another one that's going back and forth

The March 30 WSJ Battleground States Poll gave Kyl an advantage of only 5 points, but An April 25 Rasmussen poll gave Kyl 51% and Pederson 35%.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2006/State%20Polls/April%202006/Arizona%20April.htm

That's quite a difference, but I just went by the most recent poll I could find. IMO, Rasmussen's polls favor Republicans over Democrats, so things in Arizona might be better than they seem. Another thing to consider is the possibility that disenchanted Republicans might stay home in droves this November. If that happens, there would be a Democratic advantage that the polls might not reflect.

[OzarkDem]

27. Cook Political Report is a tad more optimistic

As of May 12, they show only one Dem seat that's a tossup, but five GOP seats at risk.

In Missouri I think McCaskill can beat Talent.


http://www.cookpolitical.com/races/report_pdfs/2006_sen_ratings_may12.pdf

[Grebrook]

28. We'll pick up at least five seats, here's the breakdown

First off, we won't lose NJ. The latest polls are going back and fourth and in a heavily Democratic state you can expect higher voter turnout over anger at Bush to keep Menendez in the senate

1.) Lincoln Chaffee is going to lose his primary, and Steve Laffey is widely seen as a fanatic in Rhode Island, he'll lose by double-digits in the general election. Chaffee himself is losing his lead over the Democrats. It'll be gone by November even if he survives his primary.
2.) Ohio has IMPLODED for Republicans like nothing I've ever seen, the atmosphere is TOXIC because of Bob Taft, (R) and Bush, they're going to get massacred and Dewine is losing in the polls
3.) Santorum - LOL - Owned
4.) James Talent - Republican governor of Missouri is widely hated, suffering bad approval, and several poll show Mcadskill ahead - She'll win
5.) Conrad Burns - Done

I'm guaranteeing five pick ups. We need a sixth but I don't see one so far. There's a possibility we might lose Herb Kohl in Wisconsin , also, if Tommy Thompson jumps into that race as a Republican. Mark Warner should have ran in Virginia. He would have won for sure, the polls showed. But that means that George Allen can be beaten, and I think Webb might be able to pull it off if he builds momentum.

[AX10]

30. Webb in Virginia and Pederson in Arizona.

Kohl will safely cruise to a fourth term unless Thompson jumps in, in which case the race becomes competitive with the edge going to Kohl.

Kohl: 60%
Generic Repub: 40%

Kohl: 53%
Thomson: 47%

I don't agree that New Jersey is going to elect a Republican Senator.

[TheVirginian]

34. What WI polling is that?

Who conducted it and when?

[Lasher]

86. The latest WI poll that I found was at Strategic Vision

And it looks real bad.

http://www.strategicvision.biz/political/results.htm

[TheVirginian]

32. I disagree

Although I like the fact that you "guarantee" your results, and I don't mean this as a knock, but I trust sources that at least know how to spell the candidate's names.

Every RI poll I've seen has Chafee winning the GOP primary. The last poll I saw was 44%-33%, and that's only including GOP voters. Independents and Democrats can vote in RI's open primary, but most of those votes will go for Chafee. Especially now that Matt Brown has dropped out of the race, there will be more people voting in the GOP primary, and that can only help Chafee. After that, I haven't seen a poll yet that has Whitehouse ahead of Chafee.

Ohio has been trending favorably for Brown since March, but once the campaigning starts on both sides, those numbers will even out, and I'm predicting it will be a toss-up until November. While the tag "Ohio Republican" is a bad label to have this election season, Mike DeWine isn't corrupt. That might not matter, but then again, it might.

Santorum's cooked. Game over.

Literally every poll I've seen out of Missouri is within the margin of error. That's about a dozen polls in the last six months that has had either Talent or McCaskill up by no more than three points. More than any other race, this might be a bellweather election, which favors McCaskill, but Missouri has been trending Republican in the last eight years, so its by no means a lock. This is another toss-up until November.

I'm worried in Montana that Conrad Burns may have gotten the damage out of the way early. Polling as indicated that his drop in approval has stopped (it slid from the high 50s to the low 40s in the last three months). If it stopped, that means it also has a chance of picking back up, especially if the Democratic primary is especially bloody and if Jim Morrison's ethical scandal becomes an issue. Also, if Burns' connections to Abramoff are downplayed by lack of media coverage on the Abramoff scandal (that is, if the trial is held this summer or next year), then Burns might be in the clear. Another X-factor to keep an eye on is State Sen. Bob Keenan, who is challenging Burns in the primary and is currently polling better than both Morrison and Tester.

NJ could get bad, especially if Corzine's numbers continue to slide. Menendez has never scored well in approval ratings or favorability ratings, and Kean has a lot of name recognition. Menendez has done well with the Senate thus far, but it may be out of his control.

I don't think Thompson is going to run for Senate, but I could be wrong. And George Allen won't be beaten.

[AX10]

35. If Democrats lose a Senate seat in New Jersey in this anti-republican...

environment, then something is severely wrong in this country, and that problem may not be repairable.

[TheVirginian]

36. The problem is that Senate races are statewide, and not national

While New Jersey may not like Bush, they also have a problem with Jim Corzine and both Senators. Tom Kean's father is well-liked and well-respected in New Jersey, and few people have a problem with his son. If the GOP does pick up a seat in NJ, it'll be because of the political environment in the state and the respective strengths and weaknesses of the candidates, and not because of the nation.

[AX10]

37. Sad. People are not that intelligent.

[Jersey Devil]

49. The problem in NJ may resolve itself as we get closer to November

One of the problems is that a lot of people think Tom Kean the former Governor is running and have no clue it is his son.

[MH1]

39. Had Warner run,

Allen could have been beaten, I believe.

However Warner has other goals.

[nickinSTL]

50. clarification on Missouri

for anyone not clear...Talent is the sitting Senator, Matt Blunt is the VERY unpopular governor. I think that disenchantment with the cuts in social programs by Blunt compounded by both Bush's unpopularity and Talent's opposition to stem cell research will likely sink him.

[OzarkDem]

53. Great, I was hoping someone would say that

Blunt is so unpopular, he can't help but be a drag on Talent's race.

[TheVirginian]

38. Pick-ups, Toss-ups, and Losses

We have a better-than-good chance of picking up PA.

The following races are toss-ups: MO, OH, MT, MN, and RI. Fortunately, 4 of 5 of those seats are currently Republican, so that's good news for us.

We have a decent chance of losing NJ.

The following races are leaning GOP, but could be pickups under the right circumstances: AZ, TN, and VA.

The following races are leaning Dem, but could be losses under the right circumstnces: MD, WI, and WA.

The following races will have contentious Democratic primaries, and the seat may change hands, even if the party in control does not: CT and HI.

CA, DE, FL, MA, MI, NE, NM, NY, ND, VT, and WV are solidly Democratic (except for VT, which will remain Independent, but will caucus with the Democrats).

IN, ME, MS, NV, TX, UT, and WY are solidly Republican.

[Lasher]

40. Thanks for the input

When I started this thread I hoped there would be thoughtful input and my expectations were exceeded. I was expecting to see at least one Joe Btfsplk who would scold us for daring to hope that we might regain control of the Senate this year but I did'nt see that (so far).

Here's something I want to offer about your predictions in this message: Lieberman is going to win CT, even if he does not win the Democratic primary. He would then run as an Independent and he would win. Something that worries me about that is, Lieberman might later switch to Republican, whether he is elected as a Democrat or as an Independent. This one switch would throw a clod in our collective churn.

Lasher

[TheVirginian]

46. Nah, I don't see Lieberman switching parties

Lieberman would definately win as an Independent... my only question is, will he still be able to file as an Independent if he loses the primary? Or would he have to launch a write-in campaign?

I post on another message board that's all general topic, but it has some political discussion. Its also bi-partisan, so there's a lot of input from all sides. Anyways, on that board I've started an ongoing 2006 Senate election thread that basically works like a blog... my first page is continually updated with the latest polls and analysis, as well as my predictions, and other posts are added with news items and updates. I've been working on it since September, so I consider myself very up-to-date about the 2006 Senate elections.

[Stinky The Clown]

42. You forgot Polan ... er ... Maryland

We have an open seat with Sarbanes' retirement. There will be a Dem primary and the Repubs are already united behind Rove's pick - Lt Gov Michael Steele.

I'm still thinking we're solid Dem, but we also have 100% no-paper-Diebold here, thanks to the Dems, of all people.

[Grebrook]

44. Steele is a nut, he torpedoed himself

I was actually worried about Maryland for a while, but then Michael Steele went and illustrated how much of a lunatic he was by comparing Stem Cell Research to the HOLOCAUST in front of an audience of JEWS, while running against a JEWISH Democrat for the Senate. Either Mfume or Cardin will beat him. Doesn't matter which to me, since I can't tell which is more blue.

[TheVirginian]

47. I listed MD...

as leaning Dem but could be a loss under the right circumstances. I happen to think that Michael Steele is a phenomenal candidate, and one of the best GOP recruits this cycle. I wouldn't vote for him, but I wouldn't be surprised if he won. That said, Maryland is a very blue state.

Sometime near the end of March, the DSCC hired a Democratic strategist to analyze the race factor in the election, and he came back with startling results. He went around the state and found that up to half of the African-American voting population could, under the right circumstances, be persuaded to vote for Steele. Those circumstances include, mostly, putting Cardin on the ballot and taking the black vote for granted. Now, that sort of vote for Steele isn't likely, but he's polling right now at around 20%... if he can raise that to 30% and convince enough Democrats to stay home in November, Michael Steele could be the next Senator from Maryland.

But, as I said, Maryland is a very blue state. A lot of things would have to happen for Steele to win, and I don't see all of those things happening.

[Stinky The Clown]

55. For Grebrook and Virginian:

Couple of things ..... Maryland's black population is far from a monolithic voting block. Neither side can afford to take them for granted. The increasingly upward economic power of Price Georges County, as but one example, could easily be the place where a serious Republican voting block could form. This very important population has long been ignored or taken for granted and they want a voice. The upward mobility adds to the mix, as it also presages a tilt to the right.

Howard County also has a substantial black middle class. A wealthier county overall that PG, it is also considered liberal. But that's changed a bit in recent years. I live there and it is no longer, in my mind, a solid blue area. On the other, other hand, the black middle class tends to be in the Columbia area, and that's very much a blue area ... so who knows .... except that it is a state of some change.

Cardin is a straight ahead middle left Democrat or long standing - and generally a good guy. But he's unexciting and tied to old time Baltimore Couty politics - the heart of the 'take 'em for granted' crowd. I don't know for sure how Cardin, the man, plays with the black population, but for most whites, he's pretty much a neutral. Unexciting but solid.

Mfume is my personal choice, but he's got some serious leftovers from his time as NAACP head. WaPo did a hit job on him shortly after he announced and he's still climbing out of that hole. That all being said, he would be a HUGE asset on the national scene - for Maryland and for the Party. He's been in the House already. he's a populist who knows what living in the city means, but also is very familiar with the halls and trappings of power. He's even had his own teevee talk show, doing mostly political stuff. Handsome and telegenic, articulate and politically savy, and no shrinking violet, I think he'd be the darling of the yakker class. He would also clean Steele's clock. The question is how he would connect with white voters. I'd like to think Maryland's more enlightened than that, but who knows.

Cardin and Mfume, right now, are a toss up, with a slight edge to Cardin.

[TheVirginian]

66. I think Cardin will win the primary...

but it won't be easy for him. Mfume is by far his strongest competitor, but there are also three or four spoilers in the race who could easily chip away at Cardin's support. There's a self-funding moderate councilman from Balitmore to Cardin's right and there's an activist attorney to Cardin's left. Combined with Mfume and any percieved strength of Steele, Cardin could face a messier-than-usual primary that, even if he wins (which I believe he will), will make him weaker, not stronger, against Steele in November.

Thank you for your insight into Maryland politics. From reading the Washington Post and the National Journal everyday, some of that is hinted, but not as clearly as you put it.

[Lasher]

56. The Democratic incumbent in MD has a 10 point lead

That's why I didn't list Maryland.

Maryland: Ben Cardin (D) 45% Michael Steele (R) 35%

This was according to an April 18 Rasmussen poll.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2006/State%20Polls/April%202006/Maryland%20Senate%20April.htm

[Stinky The Clown]

61. MD doesn't have an incumbent. Its an open seat

Sarbanes is retiring.

Cardin has a primary to navigate first, against former congressman and NAACP head Mfume.

[Lasher]

62. Correct you are.

Since Sarbanes is a Democrat, I treated the Democratic candidate as the incumbent, for sake of simplification. Please see response 4 in this thread.

Edit: And I guessed that Cardin would win the primary against Mfume since he is projected to do better against the likely Republican opponent, Steele. My goal was to look past the primaries for a view of the November general elections.

[Stinky The Clown]

75. Okie doke

Understood :thumbsup:

[JNelson6563]

70. MI not as safe as we'd like

but we're working on it.

[TheVirginian]

71. Really?

I haven't seen any poll with Stabenow under 50%, and I haven't seen any poll with Bouchard or Butler above 35%. I suppose now that Zandtra failed to qualify, the two-man GOP battle could increase their individual profiles before Bouchard wins the primary, but I can't see him coming within five points of Stabenow.

[JNelson6563]

74. Yeah, wait till their primary's over

They'll be uniting to take her down. They know Levin's untouchable and thsi is their only shot. Though Granholm's got a much tougher fight ahead than Stabenow.

Julie

[TheVirginian]

76. Its funny..

Like twenty minutes after I posted that, I read the National Journal which has a poll in it:

Stabenow: 48%
Bouchard: 36%

So, never mind about that whole "not polling under 50%" thing.

[Imagevision]

52. yeah well the other shoe hasn't dropped on Rove yet....

[fujiyama]

54. I'm really pessimistic about our chances of taking back the senate

People say we have a chance in AZ and TN, but these are real outside chances. Both states had huge margins of victory for Bush and while his popularity has undoubtadly fallen, both are largely republican states. Similar case with VA - while not as republican, it still leans that way. Allen uses his dimwitted 'aw shucks' bullshit to his advantage. And already we see some Dems bitching about a Dem not being 'enough of an improvement'. People have to realize that it doesn't get much worse than Santorum and Allen. Sure Casey sucks for the most part and I don't expect a real liberal with VA either, but they'll both be a million times better than those two freaks.

Hell, I think there's a better chance of keeping NJ than winning MO. We may have a chance in OH, simply because of the GOP's implosion in that state. BTW, if what people say about NJ's race is true, then we can forget about making any realistic gains in the senate. This isn't a state the party can lose a senate seat in. It's been pretty reliable these last few years. Usually the undecideds and independants break for the Democrat in the state.

I'm also worried about MN. What the hell is wrong there? The Dems lose to Coleman (OK that was a shady election especially considering the absentee ballot situation) and the governor's seat as well...and while this last election there was not as close as '00 (because of Nader voters goin for Kerry), it was still close. And Bush, while unpopular, still has relatively high ratings in the low forties.

I don't see us losing WA or MI. Both have been pretty reliable but as another poster said, there's always a chance. 2004 was much closer than many anticipated. Granholm will have a fight though against a real tool in DeVos. Yechhhh I hate his ads! She eeked through a victory in '02...

Chafee will likely win his primary and keep his seat.

Santorum is the only candidate, I feel is very likely to lose...though MT seems like a real possible pick up as well.

[TheVirginian]

67. There is definately a possibility...

That the Dems will only pick up one or two seats, if that. People talk about '06 like its inevitable, but we still have to fight for them, and if the GOP knows how to do anything, its campaigning.

I agree that this is a lot trickier than some people are assuming. In addition to PA (which is a foregone conclusion), we need Missouri, Montana, and Ohio to break for us. That could happen, but it might not. That's four seats, which puts us at 49-51.

Then we need New Jersey and Minnesota to stay in Democratic hands. Again, that could happen, but it might not. Assuming the worst, and we lose both seats, it goes back to 53-47.

So then we need states like AZ, VA, RI, and TN, where our chances aren't as good, and hope nothing radical happens in WV, WA, WI, or MI.

Could we win back the Senate? Sure. But reality doesn't support the manner in which people are expecting it to happen.

[Tiggeroshii]

57. i don't think we'll lose New Jersey.

Rasmussen general tilts more right, and New Jersey generally tilts more left. Menendez will prevail. Also, I'm guessing that MO, OH, PA, MT,and Rhode Island will also go our way. Pederson seems to be quickly catching up to Kyl in Arizona while Ford has also been gaining ground in TN. It really is too early to tell. I'm guessing we'll have a lot better sign of where this election will be leading in a couple months or so.

[Lasher]

63. I agree Rasmussen leans to the right

In the Real Clear Politics composite, for example, you will always see them giving Dubya the highest approval rating. I think I saw one time when they were tied with one other poll for the highest.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/

I am making an assumption that the apparent bias in the presidential approval ratings can be expected to influence their Senate race polls. To test this theory I compared Rasmussen with the March 30 WSJ poll.

Although I used the latest Rasmussen poll (April 11) to come up with the NJ projection in the OP, I compared the WSJ poll with an earlier Rasmussen poll (March 27) because that's pretty close to the date the WSJ poll came out. Here's what I found:

Ramussen March 27 poll: Menendez (D) 39% Kean (R) 41%
WSJ March 30 Poll: Menendez (D) 40.1% Kean (R) 39.7%

This causes me to suspect about a 2 point Rasmussen bias in favor of Republican candidates for Senate. Not very scientific since I only compared these 2 polls, but I'll do more comparison as time goes by.

Taking this factor into account, I think the race is actually about dead even. Then if demoralized repukes stay home and the undecideds go to the Democrat as they normally do, we'll win in NJ.

I really like the WSJ poll because it's easy to just look at it to see if we're going to win enough seats to regain control of the Senate, according to their projections. But I learned of a serious flaw in that poll: They do not list all competitive states. The omission of Montana and Rhode Island are of particular concern to me.

[TheVirginian]

68. Rasmussen...

Rasmussen has a tendency to poll "likely" voters, instead of registered voters like many polls do. (I'm unsure about WSJ, I'll have to look into that). While that skews his numbers from other polling, like Quinnipiac and Strategic Vision, among others, it also can produce a number closer to reality. Rasmussen, in 2004, was the most accurate polling group when it came to state-by-state results for the Presidential Election. Whether that was a fluke or whether their polling strategy works the best, its unclear. But I wouldn't be so quick to categorically dismiss them as Republican-biased.

[Lasher]

72. It is possible to be right when everybody else is wrong

This is not the first time I have heard about Rasmussen's accuracy in 2004. I have been cautious in my asessment of their bias. They might be right about their presidential approval ratings, but it is not likely that they are. The Real Clear Politics comparison is compelling, I think, but I'm doing my best to keep an open mind on the subject. One thing is certain: They trend higher on presidential approval ratings than any other of the many polls that RCP cites.

I'm glad you're still lurking around this thread. You have helped me with your contributions to it, and I know you share my enthusiasm in evaluation of the November matchups.

I am still working on my spreadsheet, and probably will until the midterms are over. It seems the more information I collect, the better it looks for Democrats. For example, I found a more recent Arizona poll, one done by The Behavior Research Center on May 9. It shows Kyle (R) at 40% and Pederson (D) at 33%, so this one is now in my category of close races.

The WSJ poll provides percentages on races that Rasmussen does not so far mention. Incorporation of this data caused me to conclude that Nevada is also very close, with Ensign (R) getting 48.1% and Goodman (D) at 40%. Likewise, Wisconsin bears watching with Kohl (D) at only 46.6% against Thompson (R) at 45.8%.

You're from Virginia, right? Too bad your boys at Virginia Tech got tired of getting whupped up on by WVU and quit playing us in football. Too bad, that was a great rivalry that produced some awesome games.

[TheVirginian]

73. Here's my thing...

I read the National Journal everyday, which publishes polls from a variety of sources, which is how I'm able to rely on more than just Rasmussen. The AZ poll was published two days ago, but its the first poll I've seen (out of at least five) that show Pederson anywhere within 15 points of Kyl. So I'm employing cautious optomism in Arizona... is the BRC's poll an outlier or a glimpse of things to come? Its hard to say until the next poll comes out. Trending is as important, or is more important, than individual polls are.

I would also be careful with Nevada and Wisconsin, especially Nevada. Las Vegas mayor Oscar Goodman announced two weeks ago that he wasn't running for Senate, so the only Democratic challenger right now is Jack Carter; thus, the Goodman poll is invalid. And in Wisconsin, Thompson hasn't declared he's running for Senate, and perhaps may never declare that. While its certainly newsworthy that someone who isn't even a candidate is polling so closely (or in other polls, ahead of) an incumbent, until Thompson is a candidate it doesn't matter. Kohl is running heads-and-shoulders above the nearest current GOP candidate, which is attorney Robert Lodge, with something like 60%-25% polling.

BTW, the National Journal put out three polls today and yesterday, which might be of interest to you:

MI:

Stabenow: 48%
Bouchard: 36%

NV:

Ensign: 52%
Carter: 32%

WA:

Cantwell: 47%
McGavick: 42%

[Lasher]

80. National Journal requires a subscription, right?

I did notice that AZ was quite a change. It might be a fluke, I don't know. I'm just taking down the latest polls I find.

Edit: Bad news, according to an April 30 Strategic Vision poll, Wisconsin is now a Republican pickup with Kohl (D) at 41% and Thompson (R) at 45%.

http://www.strategicvision.biz/political/results.htm

That's now a net gain of one stupid seat in the Senate.

[TheVirginian]

81. Yes, NJ is subscription

I have had the awesome benefit of it being provided to me both when I worked on the Hill and because my school paid for a subscription, everbody on campus has access to it. Its $1,600 a year for a subscription.

Again, wait until Thompson runs to write Wisconsin off. Thompson could easily decide that he's not running for Senate.

[Lasher]

82. Right, I had already made myself a note about Thompson

He's being quite coy about his decision whether to run or not. I wonder what his game is.

For the purpose of my spreadsheet I'm assuming for now that he will be the puke candidate.

What did you do on the Hill?

[LynneSin]

65. I don't think we'll lose New Jersey

Menendez's hispanic heritage will play well with the large hispanic population in New Jersey especially with all this bullshit about the illegal immigrants.

[janx]

77. What about Pennsylvania?

Any clue there?

[TheVirginian]

78. Santorum will lose.

It was in the original post.

[Lasher]

79. Like TheVirginian said, it was listed in the OP

But here is some new scoop I've found:

Pennsylvania: Richard J. Santorum (R) 36% Bob Casey Jr (D) 49%

My source is a May 11 Quinnipiac University poll, which is more recent that the Rasmussen poll that I used before.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x11358.xml

[NJ Democrats]

84. We will not lose NJ

Trust me here.
Sen. Menendez has a lot more $ than Kean (I think 4 or 5 million to one million). Kean is running on name alone. He has done nothing iin the St. Sen. Plus, I'm pretty sure he has a a Primary challanger whom is endorsed by many right-wingers which will make him spend more. Kean is pro-life and anti-Gay marriage. I think 70% or something of voters here say they are pro-choice and pro-gay marriage. Plus, the lastest Qunipiaic poll taking at the same time as the one you have posted shows Menendez winning 40-34, a loss of 2% for Kean. And Rassmusan is very right wing.

[Lasher]

85. I just updated NJ on my list

I found a May 14 Strategic Vision poll that reflects the following:

New Jersey: Robert Menendez (D) 35% Tom Kean Jr (R) 35%

http://www.strategicvision.biz/political/results.htm

I ran across the April 27 Quinnipiac poll that you mention, thanks to some contributions others have made in this message thread. I liked it better because it showed Menendez ahead, but did not use it because the Strategic Vision poll was more recent.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x11358.xml

Due to this and several changes I have made since my OP here, NJ is now a tie and Wisconsin is a Repub pickup. Montana, Ohio, and Pennsylvania are Democrat pickups, as before. In addition, there is a total of 7 more races that I consider to be close (less than 10 point lead for the incumbent): Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, Rhode Island, Tennessee, & Washington.