Senate Update: October 2007
Small good news for the Rs
By Adam C Posted in 2008 — Comments (46) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Despite the unfriendly map and dangerously anti-R environment, there has been some good news recently for Republicans who care about the Senate. Note that my descriptions of states and their lean comes from 2006, not 2004, because it better represents where the national environment is.
1) In NM, the retirement of Domenici gave Ds another good pickup opportunity in a slightly blue state. However, GOV Richardson (D) passed and REP Udall (D-NM 03) passed on the race. Not-so-popular Albuquerque Mayor Chavez (D) seems to be the biggest name in the race on the D side. On the Republican side, Domenici-protege REP Wilson (R-NM 01) has already declared and transfered money from her House account. Wilson represents the swing district that went 51% for Kerry and includes most of Albuquerque (Chavez's home turf). REP Pearce (R-NM 02) is more conservative and represents a more Republican district. He is still considering running in the primary. Either Wilson or Pearce will be slight favorites against Chavez, but would be underdogs against Richardson. Either of the likely match-ups here is a rare piece of good news for the Rs.
2) In NC, Senator Dole (R) has not drawn a major challenge despite 6 Democratic Congressmen and all state offices being held by Democrats. The LT GOV and AG are running for GOV and the D Representatives have all passed. Despite being a purple state with a recent propensity to vote Democratic, NC may not have a competitive Senate race.
3) In OR, the Democrats have not found a substantial challenger for Senator Gordon Smith (R). In a lean D state, this recruiting failure must hurt for the Ds.
4) In ME, despite a good recruitment of Rep. Allen (D) by the DSCC, Senator Collins (R) led 57-32 in early polling. This race could turn out like 2006 when despite an anti-R environment, moderate Senator Snowe won by the largest margin of any Senator facing a major party opponent: 74-21. If anyone has more recent polling on the Collins-Allen race that would be helpful.
Note that these reassuring developments are all defensive. These are R seats that are looking less vulnerable. Still NH and VA look very bad for the Rs. CO and MN are leaning D. So a 4 seat loss is still a likely outcome. After the LA GOV election in November, the 2008 SEN race will begin in earnest which may give Rs a pickup opportunity.
But unless Huckabee jumps into the AR SEN race and a major candidate challenges SEN Johnson (D) in SD, there are few bright spots for R pickups. If AR, WV, SD, MT, and LA don't draw top challengers, the Rs are in for a very steep uphill climb just to stay even in 2008.
[UPDATED by Erick:] And in Texas we have time to prepare. KBH says this is her last term and she may step down in 2009 instead of waiting around to 2012 when her term actually ends.
[UPDATED by Adam:] If you want to help the Rs in the Senate, go here to donate to the top 9 most important races so far. If you can put $10 on each, that'll make a difference. If you pick one and drop $25 or $50, that's a good start.
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | Eric Egland Smacks Down John Doolittle — Comments (27) »
Senate Update: October 2007 46 Comments (0 topical, 46 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
I'll try to be more regular. Right now I'm just procrastinating real work by posting this. So more real work, more posts. :)
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
But we always here of states becoming "purple" or "blue" or "trending left." Are there any "trending right"? I fear the long term outlook is very bad, unless the Republicans grow some stones and learn how to effectively communicate ideas as they once could.
The naive forgive and forget.
The foolish forget but do not forgive.
The wise forgive but do not forget.
I think GA and LA have continued to shift to the right. WV and AR were shifting that way, but there is not much of a R bench to challenge the D dominance of statewide offices (except for Huckabee which is why he should be running for SEN against one-term Senator Pryor (D)).
Looking at the 2000-2006 era, most states have shifted left 2-5 points. There are exceptions, but yes the map has gotten worse. Maybe the Presidential lineup will change that (for example, Giuliani might put PA, NJ, CT, RI, NH, and MI into real play) but it might not changes things.
Hispanic concentrations have become more D friendly after the immigration debate which makes NM, AZ, TX, CO, and NV less R than they were 4 years ago. The Northeast finally gave up on the Rockfeller Republican idea and kicked them all out except Chris Shays. So there is now one R Congressman in all of New England.
The upper-midwest had trended R for 10 years (see MN going from the only state never to vote for Reagan to 51D - 48R in 2004). But it has started to trend back, especially Illinois that is no longer competitive.
Much of this shift has occurred in the inner-suburbs like Northern Virginia and the ring around Chicago. These are R strongholds that are now evenly split. The D domination of the urban areas combined with a split in the suburbs makes R wins difficult in states with big cities dominating the population (NYC, Chicago, LA/SF, Seattle, Portland). The exceptions are some Southern states (FL, TX, GA, NC) but those are less R than the mostly rural states (KS, NE, WY, etc).
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
So says Rasmussen:
51% - Hillary Clinton
40% - Rudy Giuliani
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/new_jersey_2008_...
I haven't seen any polling, but Rhode Island is THE MOST Democrat state in the nation, last time I checked. Giuliani won't win Rhode Island, and Romney probably has a better chance of winning New Hampshire than Giuliani does simply because he's from next door.
I know this is older, but the detailed state-by-state polling and comparison to Bush-Kerry is helpful to seeing where Rudy-Hillary would be quite different (everywhere from OK to NJ). Rudy runs far better in RI, CT, NJ, NH, and PA. He does worse than Bush in heavy red states like OK, MS, AL, WY, and ND.
Of course, this could and will change over time. But the shifts make general sense. The Texas Cowboy thing did well in D bastions like WV and AR. The ethnic, urban New Yorker thing will do better in RI, CT, and NJ.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
Or even close to winning.
Rudy will do better in RI, CT, NJ, NH, and PA. I will concede that. Of those, he could win only NH and PA, though. Not that PA is a small potato, mind you. Winning PA would be a major, and actually attainable coup.
But it is ludicrous to suggest that Rudy will win RI, CT, or NJ. Simply ludicrous. It has been 20 years since those states have voted Republican, and they are not about to start again this election cycle.
HTML Help Central for Red Staters
Let's nominate the Nash Equilibrium for President.
Rs should win there and did regularly until 1992. Many sympathetic voters have left the Rs for the Ds as the Rs became more focused on social issues.
But even in 2004, President Bush won 46% in NJ. Rudy could get 4 more points there. He should definitely put time and money into it (especially in the Philly area helping in PA).
And in CT, Bush got 44% in CT. Rudy should start with 47 or 48% and could get to 50%.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
If it's 'focus on social issues' that is costing national Republicans in that state, then why aren't Republicans in New Jersey who *aren't* focused on social issues able to win there?
HTML Help Central for Red Staters
Let's nominate the Nash Equilibrium for President.
Rs have gotten in the 47-49 range several times recently. But the R association has been just enough to hold them under 50.
Your question is the same as asking why Brad Carson isn't the Junior Senator from Oklahoma despite running on socially conservative / fiscally liberal platform. He was still a D and that hurt him enough to lose, IIRC, 53-42. Carson ran 10 points ahead of Kerry, so it was a good campaign but still lost.
That's been true of the last several NJ GOPers. They have exceeded the trend of the state but not by enough to win.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
It's only for the Presidential election, but Hillary and Rudy were even in a SurveyUSA poll among Washington state voters.
Good God KBH is frustrating. If she was stepping down, why in God's name did she run for re-election in 2006? I mean, good grief. It just seems so unnecessary. We could have had Senator Bonilla, which would have been a lot better then her.
“I am telling people loosen your ties, fire up the coffee pots, get ready for the weekend, ... We've got a lot of work to do.”
- John Bolton
She will step down in 2009 to run for the governor's mansion in Texas, I presume. And I will certainly be voting for her. Rick Perry is such an embarrassment to the state and to the party. With all of the conservative intellectual heavyweights in Texas, I couldn't believe that he was the best candidate running last time around.
This news must just crush the Democrat hopefuls who dreamed of beating Rick Perry next time around. Chris Bell still sends out e-mails as if he's going to try to run next time. LOL
The only thing I really worry about is that this gives Perry the opportunity to fill the open Senate seat. I hope that he is not able to nominate himself!!
Either Henry Bonilla or Jeb Hensarling would be excellent.
She is okay for US Senate, but not governor. I won't even vote for her in the general! Are people not aware that she is not a conservative?
But you don't have to be a conservative to be a good Republican. Conservatives are just one faction, and definitely not the biggest one.
HTML Help Central for Red Staters
Let's nominate the Nash Equilibrium for President.
Nationally, of course, but I don't think that is the case in Texas. I also do not believe that most Texas voters pay enough attention to politics to know much about her other than name recognition.
after this cycle.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
Ron Paul with a Filibuster. Imagine it.
HTML Help Central for Red Staters
Let's nominate the Nash Equilibrium for President.
for Governor.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
All his arguments based on the US Constitution go right out the window, heh.
HTML Help Central for Red Staters
Let's nominate the Nash Equilibrium for President.
it would be joy to watch. I would pay to be a fly on the wall when his first state budget is developed. And then there's that border thingy. But who will make sure the shrimp fishermen are cared for???
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
HTML Help Central for Red Staters
Let's nominate the Nash Equilibrium for President.
A small disagreement - I would rate MN as leans Republican. Al Franken is favored for the DFL, and barring a macaca style blunder, Coleman shouldn't lose to that joker.
Don't get too worked up about the seeming bleak national picture. Our two party system is pretty stable. Things will swing back towards the GOP. It is pretty natural that after two terms of one party in the Presidency, and a one party GOP government for the past six years, people are looking for a change (i.e., they are trending towards the out party).
The astonishing thing is that with everything going their way, because the Dems are acting so irresponsibly in foreign affairs, I believe they are giving the GOP the edge in the Presidential race. Plus, they haven't helped their chances there by promoting the three stiffs they are promoting for the Presidency (beginning with the big She).
Minnesota Public Radio poll:
Coleman 54
Franken 32
Coleman 52
Ciresi 29
----------
Rasmussen:
Coleman 46
Franken 36
Those are definitely lean R numbers and stronger than CO. But he is polling right around 50 in a lean D state, so it is near a toss-up. That said, if I had to bet I'd put money on Coleman.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
Rasmussen has some September poll numbers that show a closer race that was done in September.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008__1...
-----------------------------------------------
Notice to All - I am an independent who has voted for Senator Bayh (Democrat) and Senator Lugar (Republican) along with over 60% of my state. You may take what I say with a grain of salt at your own party'
I thought I had seen closer numbers but couldn't find them. Those are what I had in mind.
Coleman 46
Franken 41
Coleman 46
Ciresi 42
These are not good numbers for an incumbent. Unlike NH and VA, the R is ahead and relatively popular. But he could easily fall behind as the campaign continues.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
I don't think Franken is a great challanger nor do I think Ciresi is either so I don't think it will be anything like NH or VA.
VA and NH should be given up in my opinion and funnel money into Maine, MN, LA, and OR
I think Mary Landreu(sp) is gone. While she is a "popular" Democrat that doesn't mean much anymore in the South.
-----------------------------------------------
Notice to All - I am an independent who has voted for Senator Bayh (Democrat) and Senator Lugar (Republican) along with over 60% of my state. You may take what I say with a grain of salt at your own party'
Coleman is simply a far superior candidate. If Franken is the nominee, Coleman will win by at least 10. If Ciresi is the nominee, Coleman will win by at least 5.
I disagree with OR though because they got the House Majority Leader to run for the seat. I don't know what it is like in other states but the Majority Leader of House or Senate in the state gets a lot of press coverage.
I don't see why people think WV for some reason would ever go Republican. The Democratic Senator there is incrediably popular. Finally I would rate MN as a toss-up. While people may think that Al Franken is a joke of a challanger he is raising a lot of money and MN people tend to vote for people like him (Dont for The Body Ventura).
-----------------------------------------------
Notice to All - I am an independent who has voted for Senator Bayh (Democrat) and Senator Lugar (Republican) along with over 60% of my state. You may take what I say with a grain of salt at your own party'
I think Merkley is a decent recruit, but several representatives declined to run and the GOV passed on the opportunity as well. Merkley doesn't have a large base of support like those others would have.
I found this one poll. It doesn't seem to push undecided voters, but it shows:
Smith 38
Merkley 19
That's not a good place to be, but I'd like to see a poll with the leaners figured in.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
and I fear a dead white cat with a D after its name could win. I think Rudy at the top probably saves Smith, anyone else, it's a toss up.
___________________________________
Two thirds of the world is covered by water,
the other third is covered by Champ Bailey.
Byrd is very popular because he has done a lot for the state, and brought a lot of money into WV. Of course, most of it was pork, but that doesn't bother most people as long as it is their pork. Rockefeller isn't terribly popular or unpopular. He has the advantage of incumbency, but there is really nothing else in his favor. A strong challenger like Capito might make it interesting.
When Senator Byrd leaves (probably in death because he will never lose otherwise), that could be a really interesting race as well. We tend to be very pro-gun and pro-life, so the liberal Dems don't do so well, and although WV is still something of a yellow-dog Democrat state, that is starting to change.
I've seen a couple of polls showing CO dead even (is Ciruli a partisan pollster?). Udall doesn't really fit the mold of Ds who have won there recently -- much more liberal and he's from Boulder. Ditto what's said above re Coleman, I think when push comes to shove, Franken can't really get that far above his base. In KA Kennedy switched parties, has won statewide, and will probably beat Landrieu imho. On the other hand, I agree with Hoosierlife that Merkley could be a formidable challenger for Smith. 2-5 seat Dem pickup is probably the best range for now.
The map got bluer for two reasons:
First many northeasterns flocked southward. These tended to be the more productive voters (working defense or high-tech jobs). My father was an engineer and was transferred from NY to Alabama. We know countless other northerns who followed that trend.
So Southern states became deep-red, and the northeast states went from red to blue.
Likewise, immigration has made the SW states more purple. I say, we only allow someone to become a citizen if they demonstrate a resolute allegiance to the United States.
There was a lot of immigration from the 1980s through 2006 and yet NM, AZ, CO, NV, TX, and FL were all pretty Republican. Bush won 50% of Hispanics in TX and 56% in Florida. NM and IA were the only states to flip from Gore 2000 to Bush 2004.
It's not the immigration itself that is hurting Rs. It has been the tone and rhetoric of the anti-immigration crowd. Regardless of the merit of the arguments, it is hurting Rs badly in Hispanic communities and that is translating into shifts in the Southwest.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
Maybe it'd help if our own party members would distinguish between the anti-immigration fringe and the anti-illegal immigration mainstream, heh.
HTML Help Central for Red Staters
Let's nominate the Nash Equilibrium for President.
I mentioned the tone and rhetoric of the anti-immigration crowd. The Lou Dobbs, the Tom Tancredos, and the others who are not just for law and order but also want to end "mass immigration" or what the rest of us call "legal immigration."
They have hurt the R brand in the Hispanic community. The greater Republican community has not shunned them the way David Duke was shunned.
So the most virulent anti-Hispanic rhetoric is coming from Rs. The Spanish media picks it up and replays it repeatedly. And in 2006 the Hispanic vote for Rs plummeted.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
Last I saw, Texas governor Rick Perry (a Republican) has the approval of a majority of Hispanics, who do make up a significant percentage of Texans. However, he does not have approval by the majority of Texans. Perry of course is soft on illegal immigration, but I'm not sure whether the two are related.
There has been a backlash among Hispanics because of the tone. Democrats who are anti-illegal immigration don't seem to be having the same problem for 2 reasons I believe
1) Democrats have done a great job stating they are the party of minorities. In turn they can get away with much more.
2) Democrats don't seem to join in as strongly on the illegal immigration debate as Republicans do.
Though I am out of the mainstream here because as an Economic Liberal I believe in the free flow of movement of individuals and I believe illegal immigration helps our economy.
-----------------------------------------------
Notice to All - I am an independent who has voted for Senator Bayh (Democrat) and Senator Lugar (Republican) along with over 60% of my state. You may take what I say with a grain of salt at your own party'
The poor love socialist rhetoric and the Republicans aren't offering much of that. That's a bigger factor than anything else here. The areas of Mexico that are contributing the most immigrants to the US overwhelmingly supported AMLO. People vote economics more than anything else.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
You overestimate Huckabee's popularity. He could not be elected in Arkansas. Arkansas is a Blue state that will vote republican for the presidency only.
You mean the two time elected Governor of Arkansas. He has already done it, which is why he is the strongest candidate against Pryor.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
But it's great to see you back running the numbers this comprehensively again. We all need to get our minds focused on the 2008 race and your analysis is invaluable.