March Senate Predictions

I’m going to forecast some Senate races in 2008. These are obviously extremely preliminary, but early polling data can give us a rough estimate over what to expect in the fall. And I decided to be gutsy and not lump them into “Democratic favored” or “leans” categories…

I’ll keep up with Senate race predictions on my new “Senate Races” section.

Democrats Keep: (11 seats)

Pryor (D-AK), Biden (D-DE), Durbin (D-IL), Kerry (D-MA), Levin (D-MI), Reed (D-RI), Rockefeller (D-WV), Harkin (D-IA), Baucus (D-MT), Lautenberg (D-NJ), Johnson (D-SD)

Republicans Keep: (14 seats)

Stevens (R-AK), Sessions (R-AL), Chambliss (R-GA), McConnell (R-KY), Wicker (R-MS), Dole (R-NC), Inhofe (R-OK), Graham (R-SC), Alexander (R-TN), Cornyn (R-TX), Roberts (R-KA), Cochran (R-MS), Enzi (R-WY), Barrasso (R-WY)

Democratic Takeover: Close races but are currently trending Democratic takeover (4 seats)

Norm Coleman (R-MN) to Al Franken, John Sununu (R-NH) to Jeanne Shaheen, Pete Dominici (R-NM) to Tom Udell, Open Seat to Mark Warner (D-VA)

Republican Takeover (1 seat)

Mary Landreau (D-LA) to John Kennedy

Too Close: Close races with no clear front-runner (3 seats)

Bob Schaffer vs. Tom Udall- Colorado, Gordon Smith (R-OR) vs. No Clear Challanger, Susan Collins (R-ME) vs. Tom Allen

I put in the “too close” category because there are truly a few races that will be very close in November, or at least they’re trending that way right now. Republicans Smith, Collins, Sununu and Coleman are vulnerable while Democrats have their eyes on open seats in Virginia & Colorado. If everything goes as planned for the Democrats, they could walk away with a net gain of 5 seats in November, giving them a 56-44 majority in the Senate. It currently looks like, unfortunately, Mary Landreau (D-LA) will lose her seat. In the after math of Hurricane Katrina, thousands of New Orleans residents fled Louisiana, depressing the city’s Democratic electorate. Landreau squeaked by in 2002 (before Katrina). Now it looks like without the base that elected her, she will be unable to win in November. That’s the only bad news for Democrats–and the only reason she is vulnerable is because of the political implications of a natural disaster. Republicans are certainly going to be on the defensive this year.

Once again, this is where I stand as of right now. I’ll post more in depth info about some of these races and new predictions as the year progresses. Public opinion changes, events happen, controversies erupt: you never know what can swing an election.

Can Obama can declare victory in Texas?

As I said yesterday, the story in the coming days is going to be the delegate math.

Check out this, reports CNN:

Texas Primary Results- 99% Reporting- 126 Total Delegates

Hillary Clinton, 1,455,959, 51% (65 delegates).

Barack Obama, 1,356,330, 48% (61 delegates).

Texas Caucus Results- 40% Reporting- 67 Total Delegates

Barack Obam, 56%

Hillary Clinton 44%

The Texas Primary is worth 2/3 of the delegates, and the caucus is worth 1/3. Clinton and Obama are reletively close in the delegates linked to the primary (65-61). If Obama sustains this margin, which it is predicted he will, Obama will win the state of Texas, netting 3 delegates.

So here is a question for the media: Who wins? The delegate winner? Or the popular vote winner? Isn’t this a delegate race?

Democrats, be warned

Why Democrats should be Proud: Turnout & Enthusiasm
This year, turnout is unprecedented. Record numbers of people are involved in the Democratic primaries and turnout has consistently been two to three times that of the Republicans. In the swing state of Ohio, precincts saw ballot shortages and experienced extremely long lines. In Texas, the collective vote of both Obama and Clinton were about one million votes higher than John Kerry’s total in 2004. And in red states across America, Democratic turnout consistently trumps Republicans, creating some speculation that the state of Virginia might actually be in play.

With a resurgence of African Americans, youth and independent voters, as well as an unprecedented level of traditional Democrats turning out, it is inconceivable that the Dems could lose in 2008.

Why Democrats Should Worry: Hillary Rodham Clinton
Hillary Clinton won last night in terms of momentum, but she will ultimately lose the night in delegates. Rhode Island and Vermont will cancel each other out, and Clinton will net approximately 12 delegates out of Ohio. Because the Texas popular vote was so close and Obama won the inner cities where the most delegates are apportioned, he will win just enough to tie Clinton in the primary portion of the ‘Texas Tw0-Step.’ BUT Clinton’s lead will not hold up: Friday or Saturday the Texas Democratic party will release caucus totals, where Obama is expected to do exceeding well. 67 delegates are awarded by the Texas caucus, about 1/3 of the Texas Democratic delegation. The result, a net for Obama.

This puts Clinton in a tough spot mathematically. She has snapped his momentum but she will still need to win about 70% of the remaining delegates to win the nom. Even if both candidates were to win every single delegate awarded by the 16 remaining states, neither would reach the magic number of 2025.

Hillary will be behind by between 130-160 delegates (depending on your source). Her only way to victory remains through a ’smoke-filled room.’ She can only win the nomination by carrying superdelegates, and if the superdelegates decide this nomination, it will be hell at the DNC in Dever. There WILL be a riot. And I honestly don’t see myself voting for Clinton if there is any appearence of a backroom deal with party elite.

But Hillary’s campaign will not see the mathematical reality. They never will. She has too big an ego and the media thinks this is too good of a horse race to continually remind her that it is near impossible to win the nom without shady dealings.

So what we are about to witness is 7 weeks of hell until Pennsylvania (Apr. 22). I predict that Clinton will spend the next 3 weeks running positive TV ads in the 6 major media markets in the state, and then toward week 4, go increasingly negative. By the time it is Apr. 22 in PA, she will not only have thrown the ‘kitchen sink’ at Obama, but the entire kitchen. She will attack him on all his vulnerabilities–experience, foreign policy credentials, leadership qualities– and ultimately, only to her peril, lose us the election in 2008. She won’t win the 70% necessary for the nom, and I pray to God she won’t be nominated by shady dealings. So I only see her campaign as seeking to bloody up our eventual nominee, and expend valuable financial resources fighting an expensive primary campaign.

Republicans, sit back and enjoy. Hillary Clinton may be your best friend.

Projected United States’ Senate

It’s time to state the obvious: the Republicans screwed up. As a result, the effects on the U.S. Senate will be something like this:
There are 100 Seats in the U.S. Senate
- Currently: 55 Republicans / 44 Democrats / 1 Independent (retiring)
- Democrats need at least 7 seats to regain control of the US Senate
- 33 Seats are Open in 2006
- 18 Safe Democratic Seats
+ 4 Republican Seats
+ 1 Independent Seat
= 23 Democratic Seats
- 9 Safe Republican Seats
- 2 Tossup
- 26 Democratic Seats not open + 23 = 49
- 40 Republican Seats not open + 9 = 49
Missouri and Virginia to decide balance of power

2006 Senate Predictions

PENNSYLVANIA: DEMOCRATIC PICKUP
Senator Rick Santorum has been trailing in the polls for the past several weeks. As of right now, he’s still trailing Democratic challenger Jon Casey 9 to 15 points. Sorry Santorum, you’re gone.

RHODE ISLAND: DEMOCRATIC PICKUP
I didn’t illuminate it as one of the “eight races that will change America” because Republican Senator Lincoln Chaffee has been performing miserably. Compared with Democratic challenger Sheldon Whitehouse, he’s been trailing anywhere between 10 and 13 points in America’s smallest state. It’s unfortunate for Chaffee, because he was among the most liberal senators in Congress, but Rhode Island is prepared to throw him out.

MONTANA: DEMOCRATIC PICKUP
Jon Tester has had a lead on Conrad Burns for months. Acknowledged, Burns has been catching up to Tester in recent weeks- be he maintains between a 5 and 6 percent lead going into Election Weekend. Last week, Burns appeared with Vice President Dick Cheney at a rally- because Cheney’s approval ratings are lower than the president’s, it’s unforeseen whether or not this strategy will hurt the incumbent senator, or drive out the Republican vote. Nevertheless, Tester has the advantage.

OHIO: DEMOCRATIC PICKUP
The Republican Party is part of the reason why incumbent Mike DeWine is going to lose. Since he started slipping in the polls, the RNC has stripped him of his funding, and diverted it to Missouri and Virginia. As a result, Sherrod Brown has an eleven-point advantage going into Election Weekend.

MARYLAND: DEMOCRATIC HOLD
It was long thought that the Republicans can pickup Maryland. They after all run a masterful campaign with African-American liberal Republican Michael Steele, however many in the RNC underestimated how liberal Maryland really is. Going into Election Weekend, Steele trails Democrat Ben Cardin between 5 and 7 points.

NEW JERSEY: DEMOCRATIC HOLD
Like Maryland, Republicans thought they could swipe New Jersey from the Democratic column; how wrong they were. New Jersey does have a liberal population but an unpopular Democratic governor led the Republicans astray. Democratic Senator Bob Menendez quelled the Republican revolution and will hold his seat against Republican Thomas Kean since he leads going into Election Weekend between 6 and 7 points.

TENNESSEE: REPUBLICAN HOLD
The Democrats and the Republicans have spent a ton of money in Tennessee. Before 2006, Republican senatorial candidate Bob Corker was a virtual unknown throughout the state. His political experience was only being the mayor of Chattanooga, but the national Republican Party has elevated him above Democratic Congressman Harold Ford, Jr. Ford’s campaign has been based on Christian values- making him a conservative Democrat in a staunchly Republican state. While Ford ran a fantastic campaign, and put up a great challenge in Tennessee, polls indicate that in the race’s final stretch, Ford is trailing Republican Corker 5 to 6 points.

Missouri: Jim Talent (R) vs. Claire McCaskill (D)

Like Virginia, Missouri is an intensely close race. Three-term Republican incumbent Jim Talent is fighting for his political life against Missouri State Auditor and Democrat Claire McCaskill. McCaskill is not a novice to Missouri politics; she lost a primary battle against the Democratic governor in 2004, and has since has served as the auditor of the state. Unlike Virginia, the political mud slinging hasn’t been as profound, but this is not to say that Democrats and Republicans haven’t poured millions into this crucial race.

Democrats believe that Talent is vulnerable. Polls justify this assumption as since September of 2005 when McCaskill entered the race- polls have shown each with remarkably close numbers (often within 2-4 points of one another). Now in November of 2006, it seems that McCaskill is polling no differently than she was last year at this time; last November a Rasmussen poll showed McCaskill with 47% of the vote, as opposed to Talent’s 45%. The most recent Rasmussen poll of October 30 has Talent trailing McCaskill 48-47%.

The very fact that polling agencies have been monitoring this election is evidence of how long Democrats have sensed Talent’s vulnerability. One would assume that Talent would have understood this last year, and subsequently have taken more moderate stances on the issues in order to swing moderate votes. Instead, he voted for legislation banning stem cell research, and against a raise in the federal minimum wage. Talent’s opposition to these issues may hurt him at the ballot box, as both are regarded as Propositions A & B in a Missouri referendum.

Talent in recent days has received tremendous support from the National Republican Party. Despite his remarkably low approval rating, President George W. Bush appeared with Talent just this morning in an effort to drive the Republican support on Election Day. The Democrats have responded by flooding Missouri with their resources as well, but given the unpopularity of the Republican Congress, their need to project their message has been replaced by a simple disdain of the status quo.

Missouri is one of the few states where stem cell research has taken center stage; actor and Parkinson’s disease sufferer Michael J. Fox aired in a campaign commercial criticizing Senator Talent for opposing federally funded research. The Republicans remained quiet regarding the commercial, but conservative talk-show radio host Rush Limbaugh described Fox’s movements during the ad as “[…] exaggerating the effects of the disease […]” Limbaugh later apologized while adding that “When you wade into political life you have every right to say what you want, but you cannot in turn argue that no one has the right to take you on.”

Whatever the impact single issues will play November 7th, I find it remarkable that presently Senator Talent has a warchest of $19,602,725 plus $6,921,577 of his personal finances to run his campaign as opposed to McCaskill’s $4,572,707 campaign dollars and only $2,684,766 of personal finances. Talent has outspent McCaskill, and despite the amount of money he’s spending to keep his seat, the race has only been within one or two points of each candidate. Missouri is as good as a coin toss- heads or tails folks- and we’ll see on Nov. 7th since it’s definitely a battleground state for control of the US Senate

Virginia: Allen (R) vs. Webb (D)

The race in Virginia is an insane contest of mudslinging and name-calling. It is without a doubt one of the most contested races in the nation, with Republican incumbent Senator George Allen fighting for his political life against former Secretary of Navy and writer, Democratic challenger Jim Webb.

It is difficult to even describe the insanity of this race. Perhaps this quote is a good place to start:
This fellow here over here with the yellow shirt, Macaca, or whatever his name is. He’s with my opponent. He’s following us around everywhere. And it’s just great. We’re going to places all over Virginia, and he’s having it on film and it’s great to have you here and you show it to your opponent because he’s never been there and probably will never come. [...] Let’s give a welcome to Macaca, here. Welcome to America and the real world of Virginia

This is but one aspect of this race that is so profoundly nuts. During a speech before an RNC crowd, Senator Allen pointed out a Webb campaign staff member who was monitoring the Allen campaign. The guy’s name was Sidrath; he was an African-American man who wore a baseball cap and had a Mohawk. Reports from the Allen campaign in the subsequent days of his remarks explained that Allen got the word “macaca” from his staff. Evidently, in Tunisian francophone culture “macaca” refers to a monkey and it happened to be that Sidrath was French Tunisian. Allen responded by saying that the word must have morphed among his staff members from “Mohawk” to “macaca”- but the press did not buy it. In the following week after the controversy, Allen apologized on numerous occasions even calling Sidrath to apologize in person. Webb’s campaign responded by labeling him as a racist.

This is not to say that Webb has a monopoly on mudslinging. Allen’s campaign recovered some excerpts from several of Webb’s published works that seem to be suggestive in nature and reveal his position on woman in combat operations written during his time as a navy officer. Webb responded to the “suggestive passages” by saying that they were real-life occurrences that he was documenting as a writer while serving in the armed forces. (Some of his passages contained such demoralizing acts as sodomey of a father and a son, among others.) His response to memos regarding woman in the military was the he simply participated in a navy discussion at that time about woman. Webb reemphasizes that this does not currently represent his opinion of woman in the military. Allen labeled him a sexist.

Webb has painted Allen as racist, a proponent of big business and a proxy of special interests. Allen has painted Webb as immoral, sexist and crude. Nothing has been left unsaid- from Allen’s alleged racial slurs in college to his religious affiliation.

Dead Heat
It shouldn’t be a surprise that this race is tied. There is no definitive poll that shows either of them outside of the margin of error. www.electoral-vote.com within the past week has been calling Virginia interchangeably for Webb and Allen since many polls throughout October show a dead-heat for the senate seat. The most recent poll has Webb slightly ahead by 1%, 48-47. Virginia is a state that Democrats feel is vulnerable, and consequently has dumped millions of dollars into Webb’s campaign. Allen likewise has been receiving tremendous support form the RNC for his endeavor to keep his seat. Where Ohio was the tossup state that determined the control of the presidency in 2004, Virginia may very well be that state for the US Senate in 2006. It will be interesting to watch this race evolve as we get within days of the election.

Maryland: Cardin (D) vs. Steele (R)

Living at the University of Delaware, I have the fortunate opportunity to be just 1.5 miles from Maryland; if I had the initiative I could walk the distance. This is not to say however, that a thin line less than two miles away separates me from the political brawl that is occurring in that state. Maryland is one of the two states where Democrats are vulnerable and shocks many political observers.

While listening to the radio a week ago, I came across an analysis of the Maryland senate race. It fascinated me that a state with a soul that is so inherently liberal can fall to a Republican senate challenger. Remember that Cardin is Democrat in a liberal state and is popular. By all counts, Maryland is not a swing state- but Steele is making it so. What kind of strategy is he implementing?

Cardin’s campaign is making every attempt to paint Steele as a follower of the president. His campaign commercials repeatedly show him in an embrace or shaking hands. This is not really Steele. The only reason why the Republicans have been successful in Maryland is because they have run a very moderate campaign where Steele really distances himself from the president and his party. Steele, opposite Ford in Tennessee, is a fiscal conservative with liberal social values. He is in favor of gay marriage and pro choice, and like his opponent- against the War in Iraq. I suppose it’s interesting then that Maryland voters don’t have much of a choice when they go to the polls this November (both candidates are anti-war).

When listening to that radio show they aired one strategist who spoke with Steele at a cocktail party. Steele told this person (and I paraphrase) “the one thing he regrets is being a Republican in this race.” It fascinates me that we have such an interesting race in Maryland, and voters have the opportunity to choose between liberal Cardin and libertarian Steele. If elected, Steele will be the second African-American in the US Senate (next to US Senator Barack Obama (D-IL)) As much as I want to see the Democrats take back the Senate, and as much as I do support Cardin in his reelection bid, Steele isn’t a bad choice for Maryland either. Unfortunately for Steele, polls are not reassuring as the latest Rasmussen poll of October 26 puts Cardin at 52% and Steele at 43%.

Montana: Burns (R) vs. Tester (D)

Republican incumbent Conrad Burns has been labeled the second most vulnerable senator in Congress (next to Santorum). However, if polling is any indication of a candidate’s performance, Burns has been performing much better than previously thought. Just a few weeks ago polls across Montana indicated that Burns trailed Democratic challenger Jon Tester by 10 points. Now, a recent Rasmussen poll of October 26 puts Burns trailing only 4 points 47% to 51%.

No Democrat or Republican thought Montana would be in play, but it is. Traditionally, we’ve often considered it to be part of the “grand ol’conservative west” because of its rugged lifestyle and rural pastures. Demographically, Democrats have preformed terribly in rural areas, which comes to many as a surprise that Montana is actually a swing state. It was only Bill Clinton who could last pull off a victory here in 1996 (but remember that Clinton beat Dole by a large margin). So what Democrat has the moxy to swing Montana? Jon Tester.

Jon Tester is the current President of the Montana State Senate. Born in Big Sandy, Montana, he earned his Bachelor’s Degree in music from the University of Great Falls. Many distinguish Tester from his haircut, or missing three fingers and his image conjures that of the tough woodsman.

Tester’s campaign in Montana has been successful firstly just because of that image. When you look at Tester you think of a person who is all but a U.S. Senator, and his campaign has even made a slogan of it, “Shouldn’t the Senate look a little bit more like Montana?” Secondly, he has run a common sense campaign painting Burns as “out of touch with Montana.” This is poison; Montana preserves a whole culture that is separate from the country. It is isolated in many regards, explains Governor Brian Schweitzer on CNN, “We don’t bring big name politicians up here namely because they don’t understand Montana and Montana doesn’t understand them.” So it is easy to see how Tester’s campaign can be so successful when Burns was connected with the Abramoff Scandal (Burns did after all take Abramoff’s money).

Finally, Tester is successful because of his positions. Like other Democrats in this election cycle, he is taking more mainstream views, and reconciling his beliefs with those of Montanans. For abortion, Tester is pro-choice but his campaign website states that it should be kept, “legal, safe and rare.” He is a proponent of alternative energy, a critic of Iraq, and against the Bush Administration. It will be interesting to see if Burns can catch up more in the coming week- but given the momentum of Tester’s campaign, I definitely see Burns retiring to his Helena ranch for a long winter.

Tennessee: Corker (R) vs. Ford (D)

This will without a doubt be a close race. Current projections put Tennessee in Republican Bob Corker’s column however his lead is slim (within the margin of error in fact). A current Rasmussen poll puts Corker at 47% and Ford at 45%. Unfortunately, the tricky part about polling is that you never know which poll is most accurate; some have Ford ahead by as much as 9 points, others have Corker demonstrating the same lead. The brunt of these polling results has been in the middle, with Ford and Corker between 3 to 5 percent of one another. Indeed, Tennessee is actually in play for the Democrats, and some are asking, “How?”

First consider the State of Tennessee and than the candidates’ stances on the issues. Corker is a traditional conservative with basic values that match Tennessee’s conservative culture. Likewise, Ford is a conservative Democrat with conservative social positions and liberal economic ones. It has only been through his centrist campaign that he has been able to appeal to Tennessee voters (lets admit that a traditional liberal couldn’t otherwise win in Tennessee). I was watching CNN the other night and Ford appeared on the Situation Room to defend his campaign. While listening to him I wouldn’t have otherwise known he was a Democrat had the little “(D)” not appeared on the bottom of the screen. Ford discussed how he uses his faith to guide his personal beliefs and morals. As a result, he’s against gay marriage, euthanasia and “after witnessing something several years ago” partial birth/late term abortion. He even went as far to say he was a “follower of Jesus”; something that would be shunned in any liberal culture but is respected in Tennessee.

I do wonder how he would be as a U.S. Senator? How would a Democrat from a fiercely Republican state vote on the Senate floor? I mean if the Democrats do regain control of both houses, would they be able to count on Ford’s vote when pushing their agenda? It’s an interesting question- and it further fascinates me that just six years ago he contested Nancy Pelosi for the House Democratic Minority position. I suppose he is loyal to his party, and if anything he would be a centrist, independent voice in the U.S. Senate

Interestingly, Corker is refusing to debate him. In a Corker press conference just a few weeks ago Ford showed up and challenged his opponent to a debate. Many in Tennessee criticized him for “unstatesman-like” activity, but you know what, he has balls and I praise him for doing something so gutsy. It is stupid for Corker’s campaign not to agree to a debate; what do they want to accomplish? Deny the voter the opportunity to hear two people in a forum of open ideas? Not draw the distinctions between the two candidates? Perhaps Corker’s campaign is compensating for Corker being weak on the issues. After all, it doesn’t even make strategic sense. In Pennsylvania, Casey isn’t debating Santorum because Casey has nothing to gain (he’s up 9-15%). Corker is neck and neck- and in an election you should be willing to do anything to get elected. How dare the Republicans pounce on Ford’s character? How dare they distract voters from the issues? Tennessee ladies and gentleman: a state where Corker wants to spew smack, and Ford wants to talk to issues.