Senate Outlook, 2004 Elections

[William McKinley]

But I think he could "run" for the Democrat nomination without having to resign his seat. It would just be that come November, he could not be on the ballot for both positions. If I am recalling correctly. So he could try for the nomination, and if he doesn't get it, still run for the Senate.

[Monti Cello]

I agree Boxer could be vulnerable from her right and her left.

Davis won on LA and SF. Boxer may not have much to offer the libs -- the California economy will lag the rest of the nation and liberals, with extended 100% power, will be left holding the bag.

California Republicans have had scant success finding good statewide candidates though.

[southernnorthcarolina]

I'm not sure I like that new name you gave to the state of South Dakota, by the way. I'm not to happy with them because of the results Tuesday, but changing the state's name to Tom Daschle is harsh. :-)

Good outline, much appreciated.

[William McKinley]

One thing I meant to add, of the battleground states identified above, the following are currently in Democrat hands: Georgia, Oregon, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, North Carolina, Nevada, South Carolina, and Wisconsin. Nine of them. Right now, the Republicans hold 51 seats (and may have 52 after the Louisiana runoff). To me, in order to hold a filibuster, the Democrats will need the help of at least one of these. Which one is going to harm his or her re-election chances by opposing Bush on items that are popular in their states but not popular with the liberal base?

[William McKinley]

Wow, how embarrassing! LOL

Admin, is there any way you could fix that for me?

[DoctorMichael]

Wow! Thanks!

[Admin Moderator]

Fixed. Thanks.

[William McKinley]

Yoda da man.

[No Truce With Kings]

What happens if Condi Rice runs for Senate in CA as a Rep? Bush is keeping Cheney as Veep. What if that is because Condi (who is from CA) prefers being Senator to Veep?

[uncbob]

Gonna depend on the Iraq War and the economy

TOO early to speculate

[uncbob]

The seats up for contest in 2004 were last voted on in 1998, a year where Democrats bucked the trend of losing House seats in a midterm election while controlling the White House,

That's cause BOZO Clinton lost them all 4 years early in 94

[RetiredArmy]

Arnold for Gov!

[SamAdams76]

Way too early to make even educated predictions. Two years ago, we would have considered the seats of Wellstone, Cleland and Toricelli locks, for example. A lot can happen in the next year (and then we'll start to have a clue). All of the 'Rat strongholds can be contested with the right candidates. I expect the Bush/Rove team to come up with a good slate of candidates to run next year and ride the Bush wave to victory. No 'Rat seat is safe!

[jern]

You might want to ping the NC & Edwards list...

[comebacknewt]

Good points.

As I looked at the '02 Senate races in late 2000, I thought Gordon Smith would be our most vulnerable incumbent and Max Baucus would be the RATS' most vulnerable. As it turns out, they both won rather easily.

That said, I like the general looks of things from the GOP perspective. We have a legit shot to pick up a number of seats in '04.

[AsYouAre]

Great analysis. I have been looking for a thread like this for the last few days.

BTW, maybe Karl Rove is looking for some "strategerists" like you. :-)

[CharacterCounts]

Way too early to make even educated predictions.

This is interesting, but a lot can happen in two years. Perhaps Willam will update the thread in 6, 12, 18 and 23 months.

[Tennessean4Bush]

What if that is because Condi (who is from CA) prefers being Senator to Veep?

No way. Bush's VP or National Security Advisor is a much more powerful and interesting job. I would be very surprised if she leaves the President's inner circle and her position of extremely strong influence on international policy for a very risky race for a Senate seat once won will pale in prestige to National Security Advisor.

[mrsmith]

Thanks, this info will make watching the Republican's manipulation of vulnerable Dems' votes very interesting!

[Man of the Right]

Outstanding analysis. Several comments:

Arizona -- McCain's more likely to retire than switch parties. 2001 would have been the logical time to switch, to position himself for the 2004 Democrat nomination. Barring unforeseen circumstances, his time has passed, which he acknowledges freely and publicly. The State has become competitive for the Democrats based on Social Security and Mexican immigration. I wouldn't assume the Republicans will win it.

Georgia -- Clearly, Miller is not going to switch parties and he's too popular to defeat at this juncture. It is questionable whether he could survive an investigation into his personal affairs, but the Bush Administration is hardly likely to lead such an effort. At one time, Miller had national aspirations before being humiliated by Clinton. He would be a natural for Transportation or Education secretary, if he felt the job was big enough to justify giving up a safe Senate seat. That's the way to win this naturally Republican seat.

Iowa -- Grassley's independence works in his favor in Iowa.

Illinois -- I agree that Fitzgerald is toast unless the Democrats run an African-American. He may be anyway. This state has a tradition of turning out incumbents, even prominent ones.

Indiana -- Bayh has national aspirations, as did his father, though one assumes he's too conventional and shrewd to give up a reasonably safe Senate seat to run.

Louisiana -- Breaux is not going to lose. If he were, he'd accept a cabinet post in a heartbeat.

North Carolina -- It's now or never for Edwards in terms of national office. It might be easier to secure the Democrat nomination for President in a year when Bush is expected to win than to win re-election to the Senate.

Nevada -- This is a true bellwether state in national elections though the Republican association with the Christian right works against it.

New York -- I think Giuliani could win a race against Schumer but the question becomes: To what end, as junior senator with a Republican in the White House when Giuliani is perceived as too liberal on social issues to win the Republican nomination? He might prefer a business career or a latter switch to the Democrat party for a run in 2008.

Pennsylvainia -- With the Vice Presidency seemingly closed to him, Tom Ridge would be a natural for this seat if Colin Powell doesn't return to private life, thereby opening State for Rumsfeld and Defense for Ridge. If Cheney were incapacitated, Ridge would be a strong candidate for Vice Presidency, right to life or no right to life, as would Rumsfeld. If Bush was trying to position a Republican to win in 2008, Ridge would get the nod. If he were looking for a wise man, a la Ford's choice of Rockefeller, it would be Rumsfeld.

South Dakota -- I think Daschle will run for President in 2004 and then run a think tank or university. The Republicans should recapture the seat if they can stop the dead and phantom voters from casting ballots at the current rate.

Washington -- Only a major terrorist incident would reverse this state's relentless drift toward the left. Currently, a Republican is only marginally more electable to statewide office here than in California. Given the tolerance of Islamists in the state and the quality of the Seattle police force, this is by no means unlikely.







































The Republicans could pick up a seat in Georgia by appointing Miller to a cabinet post.