Latest polls indicate we'll pick up 5 Senate seats

[Lasher]

Assuming the general election will be fair, and assuming all the most recent polls are correct, and ignoring the margins of error, and if the election were held today, we would pick up 5 seats in the US Senate. We need a minimum of 6 to regain control there.

Those pickups would be in Missouri, Montana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island.

In the New Jersey race, a July 15 Quinnipiac poll put Kean (R) ahead 40% to 38%, but Menendez (D) regained the lead 43% to 40% in a July 20 Fairleigh Dickinson University PublicMind Poll.

http://www.wnbc.com/politics/9550402/detail.html

Here is a link where you can check out the latest 2006 Senate race polling for each state. Wikipedia is doing a good job of keeping this information current, but the NJ Fairleigh Dickinson University poll had not yet been accounted for the last time I checked.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_Senate_elections_by_state

Other close races include Tennessee and Virginia. Feel free to flame away if there are other Senate races that you think I should have mentioned.

Edit: Oops, NJ is not a pickup because we already hold that seat. Edited to correct. Duh.

[thatsrightimirish]

1. he already have the new jersey seat

it wouldn't be a pickup

[Lasher]

4. Oops, that's right.

I got excited today when I found the Fairleigh Dickinson University poll that turned things around in the NJ race. I'm tempted to self-delete but I think I'll just go back and edit.

All better now, I hope. Thank you.

[BOSSHOG]

2. trent lott will be safe and secure in Mississippi

his opponent is the fucking invisible man who chooses not to answer emails of those who want to give him money and work for him as a foot soldier. He's really pissing me off.

[democrank]

3. I hope you`re right but

I`m taking nothing for granted. Rove`s dirty tricks machine will be in high gear.

[David Dunham]

5. But we could easily lose the US Senate seat in CT

I have copied below Kos' analysis from Dailykos today on the CT Senate race. The big problem with his analysis is that it assumes that the Republicans in CT are really dumb and really weak. Neither of those assumptions is correct. Kos assumes first (at least implicitly) that the Republicans are dumb enough to retain their present US Senate candidate, Schlesinger, who was revealed this week to have bounced checks on payment of gambling debts in Atlantic City. What I am told the Republicans will in fact likely do is wait until after the August 8 primary and if Lamont wins they will replace Schlesinger with a moderate Republican like State Senator John McKinney of Fairfield, who is known because he is the son of popular former US Representative Stewart McKinney and has a very engaging personality.

Second, Kos assumes incorrectly that CT Republicans are really weak and that there are "not enough" of them. Kos ignores conveniently the fact that CT's Republican governor, Jodi Rell, will win election this year with 65-70 percent of the vote and that Republicans will have won the governorship for 4 straight elections (16 years). More importantly, Kos misses entirely the crucial fact that if Lamont is the Democratic nominee, 1/3 of the Democrats will very likely remain loyal to Lieberman and will vote for Lieberman over Lamont in the general election. This 1/3 of the Dems in CT is not liberal and will vote for Lieberman because they agree largely with his positions. They have voted in the past for Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and Bush I. More on point, in 1970, this 1/3 of the Dems voted in the general election for the pro-Vietnam War Senator Tom Dodd, who (like Lieberman) ran as an independent, over the anti-Vietnam War Democratic party candidate Joe Duffy. The result was that with the Democratic vote divided, Republican Lowell Weicker won the Senate seat and remained there for 18 years until he was beaten by Lieberman in 1988.

To illustrate the above consider my family's town of Westport, CT, which although fairly affluent has voted pretty much consistently with the rest of the state over the past three decades for president, senator, governor, and so forth. In the August 8 primary, Lamont will very likely beat Lieberman in Westport by a 60-40 percent margin (or even an greater margin). However, about 1/3 of Westport Dems (and independents) will very likely not shift over to Lamont in the general election. The result will be that in the general election the combined vote for Lamont and Lieberman may exceed the vote for the Republican who replaces Schlesinger, but that the Republican's vote total will exceed the votes for Lamont and Lieberman separately. If John McKinney replaces Schlesinger as the Republican nominee, he may even win an outright majority of the vote in Westport and other Democratic-trending towns and cities because his father was very popular in Fairfield County.

A moderate Republican running against a divided Democratic party will also make it harder for the Democrats to win any of the three closely contested US House seats in CT, which the Dems need to win at least two of to help with their chances on winning controla of the US House.

In sum, Kos and his colleagues do not understand how the Dem party voters in CT function. A significant minority of those voters are blue collar, ethnic voters who are not liberal and who basically agree with Lieberman. They will not vote for Lamont in the general election regardless of how much money Lamont spends. The likely result will be a Republican senator and the demise of whatever chances the Dems have of winning control of the US Senate this year. I do not consider this result worth any potential benefit of getting rid of Lieberman.

--Doug

Kos' analysis:

The challenge for Lamont isn't just to win the primary, which looks increasingly likely, but to crush Lieberman. A small victory, while better than a loss, would fuel Lieberman's claims that the primary was decided by a bunch of people not representative of the state's electorate. A good turnout and a crushing defeat (as in Tester's win in Montana) would send a different signal -- that Lieberman has utterly lost the state's rank and file Democrats.

Given the incredible press a solid Lamont victory would generate, what little support Lieberman had would evaporate. No one wants to back a huge loser. Well, except, perhaps, Connecticut Republicans. But there aren't enough of those and they'd be just as likely to back their candidate in the hopes of stealing a seat in this safe, blue state.

With such a vote of no-confidence hanging over Lieberman's head, party elders would be more motivated to lean on Lieberman heavily to exit the race.

So polls showing the race swinging in Lamont's favor shouldn't be a sign to slack off. It should be a sign to throw Lieberman an anchor. If you have family, friends, or neighbors in Connecticut, help get the word to them about Lamont. It doesn't cost anything. And as always, please help however you can, whether it's volunteering (preferred) or contributing.

[ps1074]

6. it will be Joe's fault if CT goes republican

First I don't agree it will happen. Chances are slim to none. But if it happens, we could thank Joe for that. Instead of accepting defeat in the primary, he is willing to risk the democratic majority in the Senate. Remember 2000? When he ran for his senate seat as well as VP... In a 50-50 senate as it was in 2001, if Joe was VP, then the republican Governor of CT would have apointed a republican to Joe's seat and giving republicans 51-49 majority. Joe is only interested in himself.

[David Dunham]

7. CT went for Weicker in 1970. It will go Rep. if CT Dems divide again now

You can say it's Joe's fault, but we will all suffer in the end if we have a divided CT Dem party in the fall and the Rep wins. Kos needs to stick with CA and the western states that he knows better.

[ps1074]

8. it will be Joe's fault

If he loses the primary and still goes to the general election. I really can't understand the Lieberman apologists. HE is a democrat. He goes to primary and loses it. He is out. Peroid. Like a good democrat he should endorse Lamont and move on.

[David Dunham]

9. Lieberman will run as an independent, and we will lose the CT seat

Whether we like it or not, Lieberman will run as an independent if he loses the Dem primary. That means the Dems will be divided and a new Rep candidate will likely win. Nothing Lamont does will change that result. He will not win the votes of the 1/3 of CT Dems who support Lieberman's positions.

[ps1074]

12. it may happen

But Lamont can't lose in a 2 way race. Lamont will crush the repub in a 2 way race. If Joe goes to the general and the repub wins it - we know who will be responsible for that.

Or perhaps you suggest Lamont dropping out after winning the primary?

[thatsrightimirish]

20. i don't think is going to happen either

in the last rasmussen lieberman and lamont were already evenly split and the republican only had 13% of the vote. It probably hurts the republicans that lieberman is running as an ind

[David Dunham]

24. Poll results will be a lot different if the Reps replace their candidate

[salin]

31. longer they take to do that... the less name recognition...

hard to guess without knowing who that would be.

[Ken Burch]

40. They don't have any candidates to replace their guy WITH.

The only possible alternative was Chris Shays, and he's made it clear that he won't run. Plus, if he did, he'd probably be too Weicker-like for the LieberDems to back.

[David Dunham]

23. I agree Lieberman will be responsible, but we all will lose if a Rep wins

[ChiciB1]

21. Big Dawg Clinton Is Headed To CT to campaign For Lieberman....

so what will THAT do?? I don't think I understand CT very much. I saw poll results stating that if Lamont wins Dem primary, Lieberman runs as Independent and the Repuke wins!

I just don't get it!

[Tippy]

35. Also comming to Tennessee for Ford...n/t

[Awsi Dooger]

19. I've been wondering why the Republicans don't try to steal that race

I don't discount your scenario although I don't know enough about McKinney. Schlesinger's ethical problems may be the perfect excuse to dump him and replace with someone who could potentially get the necessary split in a 3-way general election. Not unlike what we did in '02, switching to Lautenberg in New Jersey.

I did get a kick out of Kos' analysis when I read it an hour or so ago. Funny how they went 0 for 12 last time, and now a few primary wins while backing much more solid and logical candidates like Tester have got Kos using words like crush and evaporate.

[David Dunham]

22. The Reps will try to steal the CT race and may well succeed

Lieberman has a lot more support among a significant minority of CT Dems and independents than Tester's opponent in Montana did.

[Awsi Dooger]

28. I didn't realize Schlesinger was a card counter

In my book I now have tons more respect for him. Using skill to beat a game and we throw you out, yeah that's sensible.

http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2006/07/update_from_ct.html

"Beecher, who was familiar with Schlesinger, says the Republican nominee told him he is, in gambling parlance, a card counter who has been thrown out of the Mohegan Sun casino. Schlesinger told Beecher and others he plays under an assumed name, Alan Gold. Beecher shared details of his startling conversation with Schlesinger in an email to Republican Governor M. Jodi Rell and others around the state.

Republican state chairman George Gallo has conferred with Schlesinger and is concerned about the implications of the brewing gambling scandal. Schlesinger confirmed to Gallo that he gambled under the name Alan Gold because he wanted to accrue points on his “Wampum card” at the Foxwoods casino operated by the Mahantucket Pequots.

According to Gallo, who sounds like he is ready to force Schlesinger from the ticket and find a replacement, “Our mistake is that we only vetted candidates using their real names, not aliases.”

Replacing Schlesinger could open a possibility for a serious Republican candidate to emerge for a three way November brawl should Democratic challenger Ned Lamont defeat incumbent Joseph Lieberman in the state’s August 8th primary. Lieberman is committed to running as independent if he loses in August and is counting on broad Republican support to win. If there is a serious Republican nominee, which Schlesinger has not been, Lieberman will lose an important part of the base for his “Plan B."

[calico1]

33. No Diebold machines in CT. n/t

[last1standing]

25. Why do you support Lieberman holding the voters hostage?

You can come up with any analysis you like. You can predict results and even repub candidate switches. However, you can't deny that Lieberman's decision to run as an independent is tantamount to holding the Democratic voters hostage by threatening splitting the vote if he loses the primary.

I'm usually a practical guy, but I'd rather see a repub in office than be held hostage by a self serving neo-con calling himself a Democrat. Looks like the majority of Dems in CT agree with me.

[David Dunham]

27. Lieberman votes with the Dems 90-plus percent of the time

A Rep will vote with other Reps and keep them in control of the Senate

[last1standing]

30. That's a false number.

Lieberman USED to vote with Dems 90% of the time. In the last decade or so, that number has been reduced dramatically. Also, the times he actually does vote with the Dems it's usually on procedural matters, votes that aren't close, or those with broad bipartisan appeal. Lieberman himself admitted to becoming more conservative in the 2004 primaries.

But once again, Why would you support someone trying to hold the Democratic party hostage? Do you refuse to answer that question?

[Zynx]

34. Lieberman gets so much of the Republican vote the worst case scenario

is that it remains in Lieberman's hands.

[DCCyclone]

38. David, your analysis is dead wrong......

Schlesinger can't be replaced unless he agrees to drop out. He is the Republican nominee and the rules in CT are such that he cannot be forced out. And he has stated categorically he's staying in the race. This after Guv Jodi Rell very publicly tried to get him to leave the race. Now she reportedly is "suing for peace" with Schlesinger.

Schlesinger will be the GOP nominee.

And even in the rare event he dropped out, there's no time for a new candidate to raise money and establish name recognition to make it competitive. CT Republicans concede this.

The only people who think Republicans can win this seat in a 3-way are people outside the state. CT Goopers don't think they can mount a serious race, and that says it all.

[Nimrod2005]

41. Will always blame him for losing us the presidency in 2000 and now

the Senate seat...

[snowbear]

10. Dayton's seat in MN

Oops. I read that wrong. It's good news for us..

[snowbear]

11. I still think Tennesee is too close to call and Harold Ford may just win..

Looks like it's going to be down to Ford and Corker.

I think Big Dawg Clinton will be doing a lot of campaigning for Harold in the last few weeks..

I still think we have a fairly decent chance there.

[MrBenchley]

13. I hope you're right....

I'm glad to say Chuck Schumer and the DSCC have done a good job building a war chest for our candidates....

[ps1074]

15. what is Bob Boudelang up to these days?

:hi:

Is he still alive? I miss your column :(

[MrBenchley]

17. Blame the Republicans...

About the time Deadheart Dick Cheney, an NRA Man of the Year, shot a Republican in the face who then turned around and apologized for the inconvenience he caused Cheney, I felt that there was no way I could make Bob weird, craven and crazy enough to seem like a real Republican.

I'm thinking of bringing him back, though. And he was not in jail, so stop saying that!

[SaveElmer]

16. Yes they have!

Have really outdone Libby this cycle...

[MrBenchley]

18. I think the smart money sees the big wheel turning

and sees no reason to throw their money away on the GOP.

[Lasher]

32. Several of these races are too close to call.

I was just sticking my finger in the air, and ignoring the MOE. I think Tennessee can pull this off, though.

[MrBenchley]

14. Virginia would be especially sweet

since racist George Allen is being touted as a GOP presidential frontrunner in 08. A thumb in his eye would be great.

[McCamy Taylor]

26. Fair election, Congress is ours. We have crooks in DC. Will be no fair.

Be ready to document criminal activity everywhere.

And do not just win the election, win it by an overwhelming landslide.

[snowbear]

29. Republican Senatorial Cmte is so paranoid Chafee will lose his primary...

..that they've filed a complaint against Chafee's Republican challenger. Sheldon Whitehouse is already ahead of Chafee in the polls, but as much as the R's hate Chafee, they must be worried that he'd still do better than his Republican challenger.

...In a highly unusual move, the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) yesterday filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) against the Republican candidate challenging Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-R.I.)

Election-law experts say it is the first time they have heard of a party committee targeting one of its own in an FEC complaint.

http://www.hillnews.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/071106/news4.html

Chafee has to be sweating bullets! He's tied with his Republican challenger, and is behind Sheldon Whitehouse (D) by 5 pts.

[leftofthedial]

36. Latest Diebold staff meeting indicates

repukes will pick up three additional Senate seats.

[TheVirginian]

37. More important than the most recent polls are the trends.

Pennsylvania and Montana are in the bag, to be sure. Ohio has been trending towards Brown over the last month; that's a good sign. But Missouri and Rhode Island are too close to call. In Missouri, Talent and McCaskill have traded leads throughout the entire race, with neither of them getting a lead outside the MoE. In Rhode Island, Whitehouse took the lead for the first time over Chafee this month, but Chafee's support is being pulled by Laffey voters. If Chafee wins his contentious primary, expect a bump for him, at least enough to tie Whitehouse again.

Tennessee has always trended Republican, and once the moderate and well-financed Corker wins the primary, expect a bump for him as well.

New Jersey is much too close to call. Every month, a third of the polls show Kean up, a third of the polls show Menendez up, and a third of the polls show the race tied.

And Minnesota is trending Democrat. Kennedy is still a strong challenger, but the polls seem to indicate Klobuchar slowly pulling away with the race.

Arizona and Virginia are both heavily trending Republican. Washington State, one that you left off your list, is trending Democrat but Cantwell's lead has been steadily decreasing over the last five months. It may very well be likely that a poll in the next two months shows her tied with McGavick. Either way, the momentum is with the Republicans there.

I think we'll pick up three seats, possibly four, but we'll also possibly lose one, so a net gain of two to three.

[Lasher]

39. I share your concern about Washington

I confess I intentionally failed to mention that race because I was doing a little cheerleading.

You say trend, I say momentum. I think we're talking about the same thing, generally. You're probably right, the odds are against our regaining control of the Senate this year. But the odds have been against Lamont, and look where he is now.

Still, the pukes are quite vulnerable. Gas prices and Iraq loom as show stoppers, and neither is going to improve. I think it would be quite effective if we ran ads close to November that effectively show just what the pukes are going to do to Social Security if they retain control of Congress.

Thanks for sharing your thoughtful views. The next 3 months are going to be quite exciting.