Senate Midterm Election Overview
With less than three months to go, I thought it'd be a good time to take a quick look at how the midterm elections are shaping up in the Senate. For now, we'll ignore the House races (because, truth be told, there are just too many of them to keep track of in such a microscopic fashion). While there are still a few remaining primary races to lock in who will be the nominee, in most states the slate is set for the Senate at this point. Which means we can finally take a close look at the situation.
I should say, up front, that I think Democrats are going to lose a few seats in the Senate, but that they will retain control of the chamber after the votes are counted. But while the House remains volatile in this respect, the landscape for the Senate has noticeably improved for the Democrats. So there's a little good news and a little bad news for everyone.
There are 37 Senate seats up for grabs this year. Democrats start off with a built-in advantage over the Republicans, since of the 63 seats not up for election this year, 40 are in Democratic hands, to the Republicans' 23. But this is about the only advantage Democrats have this year, and it becomes quickly eroded when you look at the landscape of the 2010 races. To break them down, we'll shuffle them all into five categories -- Safe Republican, Safe Democratic, Lean Republican, Lean Democratic, and Too Close To Call. We're going to start off pigeonholing these fairly skeptically, so that as the election gets closer we can see how things firm up.
Safe Republican
[AL, AK, AZ, GA, ID, KS, ND, OK, SC, SD, UT]
These are the races which are already "in the bag" for Republicans, and there are quite a few of them. The Mountain West states (Arizona, Idaho, Utah, and Alaska) are all Republican strongholds, as are all the Great Plains states (Kansas, Oklahoma, and both Dakotas). North Dakota will be a pickup seat for the Republicans, due to the retirement of Democrat Byron Dorgan. Add to this three Deep South states (Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina), and Republicans wind up with 34 safe seats (adding this group to the senators not up for re-election) this year.
Safe Democratic
[HI, MD, NY(a), VT]
Democrats, however, only really have four races in the bag this year -- Hawai'i, Maryland, Vermont, and one of the races in New York (both New York seats are up for grabs this time around), where Senator Chuck Schumer is going to coast to re-election. Adding these safe seats to those not up for election this year gives us a total of 44 seats.
Lean Republican
[DE, IA, IN, MO, NC, NH]
In Delaware, Joe Biden's old seat is likely going to fall to the Republicans, due to Biden's son deciding not to seek his father's Senate seat. Iowa's Charles Grassley also looks pretty solid. So does Indiana, for that matter. In Missouri, as of this writing it looks good for the Republicans, but this is a fairly volatile race, and things could change in the future. Missouri is an open seat, which was previously held by a Republican. North Carolina is another seat which could turn volatile, but at this point looks like it'll go Republican. In New Hampshire, Judd Gregg's retirement has left another open race, but at this point it seems to be going Republican as well.
Republican lean states plus Republican safe seats equals 40, at this point. Delaware and Indiana are the second and third pickup states for Republicans, putting them up three seats over Democrats overall.
Lean Democratic
[CT, NY(b), OR, WV]
Connecticut's race will be catnip to political reporters this year, because the Republicans have nominated quite a colorful character this year. I'm not sure any other senatorial candidate in this election cycle has a video of them kicking a man in the crotch, for instance. But the Democrat in the race is well-known and well-loved by the voters, and even with his stumble (on military service claims) he will likely coast to victory in November. In New York state, appointed Senator Gillibrand will almost certainly defeat her Republican nominee (this race will likely move to Safe Democratic soon). Likewise in Oregon, where the Democrat's polling numbers are pretty solid. West Virginia is having a special election to fill Robert Byrd's seat, and will also likely go to a very popular state Democratic politician.
If Democrats pick up all their leans, together with their safe seats, they will hold onto 48 seats, giving them a big advantage in retaining control of the chamber.
Too Close To Call
[AR, CA, CO, FL, IL, LA, KY, NV, OH, PA, WA, WI]
This leaves twelve races in the tossup category. Again, I'm being fairly conservative about which races to include here, and some of these will likely firm up one way or another before the actual election. Since there are so many of them, a quick overview of each is all we've got time for.
Arkansas had a hard-fought primary among Democrats, but at this point it looks like the nomination was fought over who gets the chance to lose to a Republican.
California has had Republicans salivating over the prospect of defeating Barbara Boxer, but my guess is that this isn't going to happen. California's electorate may decide on a Republican governor this time around, but I think they'll also send Boxer back to Washington.
Colorado's primary just happened, so it'll likely take a few weeks for polling numbers to settle down into showing the electorate's mood, now that everyone knows who will be on the ballot. At this point, the Tea Party/Republican candidate is up a bit, but not all that much, so we'll have to see how this settles out. For now, I'll put it in the Republican column.
In Florida, there's a three-way race going on, which former governor (and former Republican) Charlie Crist may just win. If he does, the expectation is that he will decide to caucus with the Democratic Party in the Senate, meaning that this race could be one of the few bright spots for Democrats, since if this does happen it will effectively be a pickup for the Democrats.
Illinois is another tight one, but for the moment the Democrat is slightly up in the polls, so we'll chalk it up in the Democrats' column, for now. Since it is a very close race, this could change at any time, however.
If Louisiana's David Vitter survives a primary challenge, he will likely hang onto his seat (even after he weathered a prostitute scandal). But his primary challenger could steal it away from him, so we're leaving this in the tossup category for now, although the seat is likely to stay Republican either way.
Kentucky's Rand Paul has been leading in the polls pretty consistently, but (due to being Rand Paul) he could always say something wacky which causes this to turn around. For now, we'll put this in the Republican column, though.
Nevada will most likely be the closest-watched race this year, because Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid may be in trouble. Helping his chances out, however, is the candidate he's now running against, who is just about the Tea-Partiest Tea Party candidate running this year. In other words, you can all but count on her saying something wacky. Reid's chances have noticeably improved since the primary, and we're going to say that Harry squeaks it out on election day.
Ohio is going to be a very close race, if the polling is any indication. The lead has gone back and forth a number of times already, and could switch several more times before the actual election. For now, it appears the Republican is up, so we'll put it in the Republican column, but chances are this will change.
Pennsylvania is another close race, and Joe Sestak may pull it out in the end. For now, however, the Republican seems to have a decent lead, so we'll call it Republican for now.
Washington state will likely stay in the Democratic column, but polling has been fairly close, so it's not a guarantee.
Wisconsin's Russ Feingold is in a very tight race, but at this point it looks like he'll hold onto his seat in November.
Conclusion
Of the tossup states, Democrats look (at this point) like they'll take six of them (CA, FL, IL, NV, WA, WI), and Republicans will take six (AR, CO, LA, KY, OH, PA).
This means Democrats will pick up one previously Republican-held seat (FL), while Republicans pick up six seats (ND, IN, DE, AR, CO, PA) from the Democrats. This adds up to a net five-seat pickup for the Republicans, and puts the next Senate at 46 Republicans, 54 Democrats (51 plus three independents, really). This will make it harder for Democrats to get anything done in the chamber, obviously, but is also a far cry from Republicans taking over the majority.
Of course, the election isn't being held today, meaning that all of this could change as we get closer to November, so stay tuned as we'll be revisiting these numbers occasionally before election day dawns.
Cross-posted at The Huffington Post
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
-- Chris Weigant
I love when you do your poll articles. It's like ice cream night at the CB house. 'D
This is all very best-case scenario, of course, because you're going by the say-so of registered voters, less than half of whom traditionally end up bothering to vote in a midterm. Frankly, I'd be flipping over to Likely Voters polls, exclusively, if I were you, given the "enthusiasm" factor that's gonna play a major roll in this election.
By way of example, look at the turnout in Missouri (a state McCain carried by the skin of his teeth) a couple of weeks ago, with Prop-C was on the ballot. 939,000 voted, which was the biggest turnout for an off-year primary in the history of the state. 578,000 were Republican and 316,000 were Dems. And 45,000 of those Dems voted for Prop-C (i.e., against HCR).
Now, one might immediately argue, "Yeah, but not every state is gonna have a Prop-C referendum on HCR." But with 60% of likely voters seeking appeal, nationwide, the same referendum impetus is gonna be there.
What's more, let's not forget that a lot of Dems in 2008 came into office of Obama's coattails, and an awful lot of that had to do with Indies (who are standing strongly behind Republican candidates now) and, most importantly, the YUTE vote. LOL. About 5M yutes turned out and pulled the "D" lever for candidates of Obama's party.
Only yutes ain't "fired up and ready to go" this time around:
Obama’s Youthful Voters More Likely to Skip Midterms
http://www.chris11962.com/blog/files/bb490b1725009d553b5a5618d9fccbed-155.html
Which means they're not gonna be auto-pulling for the D's. Yet they're still among the respondents in "registerd voters" polls.
As for Harry, I'm not as hopeful for him as you are. He's a multi-term Senator who hasn't been over 50% in a poll yet. And anybody in the "undecided" column is likely not gonna go for him, historically speaking. Plus, he's gonna face the same turnout/enthusiasm problem as every other Dem. Interesting race, though. Rasmussen has them dead even: 47/47.
Of course, anything can happen (as we all like to say, to cover our butts), but if Missouri is any indication of things to come, enthusiasm-wise, I think the Dems are looking at a whole lot less of a hopeful picture than your RV numbers are presenting, Chris.
But I'm with you in terms of the Republicans having a tough job taking the Senate. Frankly, I just pray we don't end up with another 50/50 Senate. I rather give it to the Dems to put up with that crap ever again.
Oh, I forgot the Missouri outcome: 71% to 29%.
Chris1962 -
Actually, I'm taking all the polls into account, be they all adult, reg. voter, or likely voter. Actually, in some states you don't have a lot of choice, because there simply isn't a whole lot of polling to work with.
I overloaded the Tossup category this time, because this was the first 2010 election article I've done, so look for many of them to start moving.
As for Reid, if the GOP had nominated someone a bit less scary, I might agree with you. But Angle is causing many NV voters who might otherwise have voted against Harry this time around to rethink this -- I've heard from plenty of them. They have the same reaction to Angle that most Americans did to Sarah Palin -- "she ain't up to it."
Seriously, with Reid's numbers so bad (as you point out) it's downright embarrassing for the Republicans to be so close in this race. They should be up by ten points, minimum. They're not. That's due to the Tea Party candidate, and nothing else.
So far, Republicans have put two (possibly more) Senate races into "tossup" when they should be winning them far and away. And in CO, if Tancredo insists on his third-party bid, they'll hand the governorship to the Democrat by splitting the vote.
Meaning this year's going to be interesting in more than one way -- that's about the only thing I'd bet the farm on right now.
-CW
As for Reid, if the GOP had nominated someone a bit less scary, I might agree with you. But Angle is causing many NV voters who might otherwise have voted against Harry this time around to rethink this -- I've heard from plenty of them. They have the same reaction to Angle that most Americans did to Sarah Palin -- "she ain't up to it."
Don't bank on it, bro. She's 47/47 with this country's Senate Majority Leader. That ain't nothing. One thing I learned from sitting in more focus groups than I care to recall: don't ever assume you know how a consumer (voter) is gonna respond, because just when you think they can't, or won't do something, they do it. The key is leave one's personal sentiments, biases and even best guesstimates at the door and just look at the numbers. Take Palin, for instance: Her favorabilities are even-Steven with Obama's job approval. As many people who dislike Palin, disapprove of the job Obama's doing. Think of how many Lib/Progs on the HuffPo board would tell me I was I was completely insane, if I were to make that statement.
Seriously, with Reid's numbers so bad (as you point out) it's downright embarrassing for the Republicans to be so close in this race. They should be up by ten points, minimum. They're not. That's due to the Tea Party candidate, and nothing else.
Agreed. But they're still 47/47, aren't they?
I don't believe Angle is even Harry's biggest foe: I think Obama/Pelosi/Reid policies and legislation are. And his other big, big threat is gonna be turnout. I smell Republicans and their Indie leaners coming out, like, 2-to-1 over Dems. I base that on the disparity in enthusiasm levels.
As for CO, I haven't been following it too closely. Florida, either. Those three-ways — they're gonna be what they're gonna be.
We should make a Harry/Angle bet. If I win, I get to write a victory article on your site. In? 'D
I think that the enthusiasm (or lack thereof) factor is going to hit the Democrats and hit them hard..
Especially if Obama's poll numbers continue to tank, which is all but guaranteed.
This latest mosque fiasco is just the latest bonehead move by Obama.
The Senate take-over possibility is where the House take-over possibility was about a month ago..
Meaning it's becoming more and more possible..
Michale.....
I think that the enthusiasm (or lack thereof) factor is going to hit the Democrats and hit them hard..
I don't think folks fully appreciate, yet, how much damage HCR did to the Dems. Just about every poll Rasmussen (likely voters) puts out inquires into the new HCR law. Check out Kentucky, where Rand Paul is 49% to 40% against Conway (+/- 4%). The poll that came out yesterday.
[excerpt] Thirty-four percent (34%) of voters in the state favor the requirement in the new national health care bill that every American must buy or obtain health insurance. Sixty-three percent (63%) oppose that requirement. This includes 18% who Strongly Favor it and 49% who are Strongly Opposed. These findings show a higher level of opposition to this requirement in Kentucky than among voters nationwide.
By a 52% to 33% margin, Kentucky voters favor their state suing the federal government to prevent this requirement from staying in the law.
Now, that's a state that Chris is giving to the Republicans. But look at Nevada, where Harry and Angle are dead-even at 47%:
[excerpt] Forty-three percent (43%) of voters in the state favor the requirement in the new national health care bill that every American must buy or obtain health insurance. Fifty-five percent (55%) oppose that requirement. This includes 25% who Strongly Favor it and 44% who are Strongly Opposed.
This is the kinda stuff that tips tight races. And Harry has 55% of Nevadans against his brilliant HCR. I think he needs that like a hole in the head. And every Dem on the campaign trail is having to contend with HCR, with a nationwide average of 60% feeling it should be repealed.
Guru Charlie Cook speaks:
http://www.chris11962.com/blog/files/7656d4ebff3043930bdfacc15057d362-209.html
The GOP winning back the House is a given...
In about a month, the GOP winning back the Senate will also be a given...
Michale.....
Michale,
You sure do know how to make someone's day. :)
And, the day has just begun ... which means it can only get better!
Chris1962 -
My Momma didn't raise no fools, so no, I'm not at the point where I'd bet on the outcome of the NV race. Actually, I wouldn't bet on many of these races at this point, one way or the other.
As for HCR, I don't think you've seen recent numbers. It's been gaining in support since it passed, and I bet it gains even more as those $250 checks arrive to seniors in the mail to begin to fill the donut hole in the prescription drug coverage. Last poll I checked, over 50% (53? 52?) supported HCR overall, and the number who wanted it repealed had sank to something in the 30s. This is why the GOP has focused in on the mandate part of it, which is much less liked. To be honest, even liberals don't much like that part of it, the only ones who do are the insurance companies, so if the mandate gets thrown out by the courts (leaving the rest of the package intact, of course), you won't hear a lot of voices on the left crying about it, since the left never really liked that part anyway. All I'm saying is, don't equate liking/hating the mandate with how people feel overall about HCR. Sooner or later, Republicans are going to have to come to grips with the fact that a lot of the pieces of "Obamacare" are actually quite popular with the public -- much like they all suddenly became champions of Medicare during the HCR debate (which was hilarious to anyone who can remember back past two years ago or so).
Unless they want to campaign to seniors on "Obama is getting rid of the prescription drug donut hole, and we're going to repeal that! Bring back the donut hole!" Which I seriously doubt is a winning strategy.
-CW
My Momma didn't raise no fools, so no, I'm not at the point where I'd bet on the outcome of the NV race.
Aw, c'mon, Chris. I already have the headline:
"Well, well, well..."
You ruin all my fun.
This is why the GOP has focused in on the mandate part of it, which is much less liked.
That's about the only part that isn't liked (perceived as unconstitutional; breathtakingly so, if you're asking me). Of course, the cost wasn't much liked, either.
Last poll I checked, over 50% (53? 52?) supported HCR overall
That poll was so out of step with the trend, I'm sure the pollsters pulled one of those crafty little moves, like polling in blue states, where "Republicans" make Olympia Snowe look conservative.
Look at the Likely Voters polls. They tell an entirely different, and very consistent, story. And it's the Likely Voters who are likely to show up at the polling booth, let's remember. Missouri's "71%" was no accident. That is a BIG number for a state that McCain just barely won, and it oughta scare the bejeezus outta Dems. A huge number of people didn't even bother casting votes for the candidates. They just voted on the Prop.
...so if the mandate gets thrown out by the courts (leaving the rest of the package intact, of course)...
That's just the thing: It's not gonna leave the rest intact. The whole legislation lives or dies on the mandate. Take away Big Bro's ability to "order" the people and states to comply with all those assorted edicts, and there's nothing left of it. Obama will be walking the 2012 trail with an historic flop on his hands, and an extremely expensive one, too. Let's not forget how royally peeved the American people were over the price tag.
To your point about the Left not being too thrilled about the mandate either, that goes to my point of how truly insane it was of Obama/Pelosi/Reid to have forced it. In Missouri, about 45,000 Dems voted in favor in Prop-C (against HCR).
All I'm saying is, don't equate liking/hating the mandate with how people feel overall about HCR. Sooner or later, Republicans are going to have to come to grips with the fact that a lot of the pieces of "Obamacare" are actually quite popular with the public...
Republicans have always acknowledged that. That's why they're seeking to repeal and REPLACE it. The party of "no" knows a little bit more about what they're doing than you may think. They stood on the side of the American people while Obama/Pelosi/Reid arrogantly ignored them — and even did an end-run around them with that reconciliation. When this "mandate" — which is so unconstitutional on its face, I can barely even believe Obama/Pelosi/Reid set themselves up like that — gets booted out by the Supreme Court, the Republicans are the ones who are gonna be riding in, in the white hats, to save the day. They're not half as dumb as they look, my friend. 'D
Unless they want to campaign to seniors on "Obama is getting rid of the prescription drug donut hole, and we're going to repeal that! Bring back the donut hole!" Which I seriously doubt is a winning strategy.
More bad news for the Dems: Seniors don't appear to be falling for scare tactics this time out. They're as pissed off about the mandate as anyone. If that mandate were allowed to stand, there wouldn't be anything the federal government wouldn't be able to DICTATE Americans buy. What's the next mandate after that? And electric car? A mandate that everyone must use public transportation x-times a week? A mandate that they MUST weigh a certain amount, "for their own good," or face a fine?
This is not the country those older folks grew up in. This is the kinda stuff those folks fought in wars against. And here it is in America, now: a "ruler," dictating what people SHALL purchase, lest they wish to answer to Big Brother.
And who comes out on the heels of Obama's grand HCR victory speech? None other than Fidel Castro, applauding and congratulating him. LOL.
NOT the brightest move the Dems have ever made. And we wonder why people in tricorne hats are marching in the streets, vowing to "take their country back"? This is a much hotter issue than Dems are realizing. Again, that 71% Missouri vote was no mistake, accident of fluke. Seventy-one percent, Chris.
Liz,
You sure do know how to make someone's day. :)
"One is glad to be of service."
-Robin Williams, BICENTENNIAL MAN
:D
CW,
The ONLY reason that the Insurance Companies went along with CrapCare is because of the mandate. You can bet that, once the mandate goes, the Insurance Companies will bring back even higher rates, limited service and denial based on pre-existing conditions.
If the mandate goes, then the ONLY logical course of action is to repeal CrapCare in it's entirety and start over.
It was a given that the mandate would not pass constitutional muster. Hell, even Dr Dean stated as much. Democrats really stepped on their wee wees by this legislation.
Michale.....
Michale
The ONLY reason that the Insurance Companies went along with CrapCare is because of the mandate. You can bet that, once the mandate goes, the Insurance Companies will bring back even higher rates...
That's already happening. The mandate has done absolutely nothing in terms of lowering premiums. Many an average family of four is seeing their cost go up a thousand bucks a year, and many a small business is deciding to even offer health care anymore. Somebody was gonna have to pay for these 30 million new share-the-wealth people. Just like the Republicans had said from the get-go, the insurance companies were invariably going to pass the cost along to customers. Make that MANDATED customers.
Chris, here's the extended Charlie Cook interview. He talks Harry and Rand Paul in this one:
http://www.chris11962.com/blog/files/cd9f6d3ae8c337b37f89db9cfb99694b-217.html
Looks like Palin has done it again:
[excerpt] (Palin had an extremely good night on Tuesday as all five of her endorsed candidates in Florida, Arizona and Alaska appeared to win.)
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/morning-fix/-1-2-3-both.html?hpid=topnews
Chris: Article on turnout in Florida and Arizona.
The returns from this week’s Florida and Arizona primaries show, once again, that Republicans have an impressive advantage in the balance of enthusiasm this year.
http://www.chris11962.com/blog/files/26c4ca85acbf6eeb5a00ac947f1f3036-273.html
This is what I think is gonna take Harry down in Nevada.