Senate Outlook, 2004 Elections

[mwl1]

Excellent post, and good suggestion. Unload Mineta, and put Zell Miller in there, Sonny Purdue installs a GOP senator.

Other than Nevada and one or two other races, I think we are benefited in 2004 only if there are a number of long overdue retirements - FL, SC, SD, GA, in particular.

[Citizen of the Savage Nation]

Good work. However, even though you might think its not too early to start thinking about this, your own analysis indicates that it probably is. Much depends on who's running against who. We will know far more a year from now, but this is good information about the backdrop of the '04 elections.

Somehow, given what just happened and how things are trending now, I would think that the GOP stands to gain a little bit more than you might think. With so many seats to defend and outgunned in the campaign finances dept, right now I'm not putting any bets that the Rats can hold on to that many seats despite which states may appear to be safe or heavily leaning their way.

[AmishDude]

Pretty nice. You missed one piece of analysis which is essential for the 2004 elections that wasn't present for the 2002 elections. Any guess?

[Citizen of the Savage Nation]

True, Bush running will also get out more voters, the vast majority of whom like him. This will also be a good thing. I think Nevada, ND, NC, Florida, and Indiana have to be big targets for '04. Think big, after all who had Cleland losing, 2 years ago?

[AmishDude]

Well, you answered my question: The top of the ticket. Assuming the Iraq war goes quickly and smoothly and the economy is humming by 2004 (nothing is for certain, but both are highly likely). Then, Bush will be so popular that he is sure to sweep in a few close Senate candidates.

The question is: Who will head up the Democrats' ticket? Anyone inspiring on the horizon? Gore? Edwards? Kerry? Hillary??? With the recent losses in 2002, Edwards is an increasingly strong possibility -- he's from the South (the Dems have to stop the bleeding there and relatively unknown. Gore already has high negatives (not to mention Hillary) and Kerry has too long a track record to be portrayed as anything but an über-liberal.

The last time we were in a situation like this was for the 1992 election. The Democrat rising stars didn't want to go against the (then) popular President GHW Bush, so they got the relatively unknown but long-serving Gov. Clinton to run. With Perot added to the mix, the fix was in and the 2-against-1 campaign damaged 41 irreparably.

So, is there a long-serving Democrat governor out there who might run in 2004? Or a (perceived) right-leaning spoiler? Otherwise, it'll be a rout, up and down the ticket.

[For the Unborn]

Mike Crapp=Mike Crapo (in Idaho)

[agincourt1415]

JEB BUSH could be the next Senator from Florida!

[AmishDude]

It's hard to say with Condi, because she doesn't have a typical politician's aspirations. I'm sure she'd be happy to be NSA for the rest of her life, but it may be stressful and she'd want to move on after one term. If she gets tired of public life, she'll be a University president anywhere she wants to go. Count on it, she's already been provost at Stanford.

The thing is, she'll have to quit NSA to run against Boxer, who she could beat. (Boxer has the disadvantage of being a complete moron.) But Feinstein is much tougher, even though the timing there would be better. I think the higher-ups in the Republican party are whispering "VPOTUS" or "POTUS" in her ear and it depends if she wants to listen or not.

[AmishDude]

The timing's off for Jeb. He was just elected governor for the second time. (That's it, he's term-limited.) Look for him to run against Bill Nelson in 2006.

[waterstraat]

If the economy, and the situation of jobs for native born american citizens, does not get better, it doesnt matter how things look on paper.

[varon]

BUMP

[AlguyA]

'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?"

Man, from your lips to God's (or,at least, Karl Rove's) ear.

[Constitution Day]

Interesting analyses... I will ping the lists.

[Constitution Day]

NC ping!

[Constitution Day]

Indexing to Edwards Watch...

[wimpycat]

I was meaning to mention on Election Night that Edwards is up for re-election during a presidential election year, in a state that is decisively pro-Republican as far as presidents are concerned. He'll be on the ticket along with President Bush.

Edwards won election in 1998, against a one-term incumbent who ran a weak campaign (Lauch Faircloth), during a time when the voters were pro-Democrat in defense of Clinton during the impeachment hearings.

I think if we can find a viable candidate, we can knock Edwards out of his seat, assuming President Bush is as popular in 2004 as he is in 2002.

[conservative_2001]

Overall, you're placing too much emphasis on the partisan nature of the state and not enough on the individual candidates. These last elections, with Republican wins in Massachusetts, Hawaii, Maryland, and Vermont, and Democratic wins in Tennessee, Wyoming, and Oklahoma, should indicate that the right candidates from either party can win in most states. I'll go through my main disagreements state by state.

Alaska - Murkowski ought to just appoint Congressman Young, which keeps this a Safe R seat.

Arizona - Safe Republican with McCain, Leaning Republican without.

There is no way that we could assume one party or the other would have an automatic advantage using only unnamed candidates. It's Safe R if McCain runs again, Tossup otherwise until we see who runs.

California - Strongly Leaning Democrat.

Boxer isn't very popular. It just Leans D for now. If Republicans can recruit a good candidate, it could go either way.

Colorado - Safe Republican with Campbell, Strongly Leaning Republican without.

Again, if this seat is open there is no way to say that this seat strongly leans in either direction using only unnamed candidates. It's a tossup if Campbell retires. If the Democrats run Congressman Udall, we have a race on our hands.

Florida - Leaning Democrat

Graham is very popular here. If he runs again he's a shoe-in. If not, it's a tossup.

Illinois - Leaning Democrat

Last time I saw favorable ratings taken, Fitzgerald's were as high as Durbin's. He's done a very good job politically while in the Senate. The seat Leans R for now.

Indiana - Leaning Democrat.

Again, way too much emphasis on the presidential votes. Bayh is a very popular incumbent. He won his election with over 60% of the vote his first time out. Safe D if he runs again.

North Dakota - Strongly Leaning Democrat

If former Governor Schafer runs it's a tossup. Otherwise it's Safe D. We need to recruit him.

Nevada - Leaning Republican

Reid is the incumbent, he's survived quality opponents before. He hasn't hurt his standing since his last election. If Congressman Gibbons runs, it's either a Tossup or Slight Lean D; otherwise it's Lean D.

New York - Strongly Leaning Democrat without Guiliani, Strongly Leaning Republican with

Schumer is a very popular Democrat in a Democratic state. Safe D if Guiliani doesn't run. Likely D if Guiliani does run. He won't run, he's too smart to bother trying to beta Schumer. If he does run for Senate it's 2006 against Hitlery.

[William McKinley]

and not enough on the individual candidates

Agreed. This is for the very valid (IMO) reason that in most cases we do not know who the individual candidates will be. This is a view of the landscape; nothing more, nothing less.

[William McKinley]

That said, I simply don't agree with your premise that you can't make a call as to which way a state leans if you don't know even one of the candidates. Clearly Colorado is a Republican leaning state. Can a Democrat win? Sure. Is it likely? More times than not, a Republican is going to win there.

Just like if Maryland's seat was suddenly an open seat election because Babs decided not to run, I would not call that a tossup. That seat would lean Democrat. When names change or are announced, the leanings can and will change, but for now, that is where they stand IMO

[Green Knight]

Gotta log off, so bumping for a later read.

Also, let's pray that Thune uncovers fraud and that Terrell wins. Those 2 in the Senate will put us closer to winning a 60 seat filibuster-proof majority in 2004.