[William McKinley]

Obviously, these are merely my opinions.

[KC Burke]

good overview and much appreciated

[curmudgeonII]

In all probability the generally Republican state of Indiana will go very heavily for Democrat Bayh [unfortuately].

[comebacknewt]

Excellent analysis.

I would add only three points.

1. If Bayh runs in Indiana, move it to strongly leaning RAT. The GOP doesn't have a candidate groomed to make a strong run at him.

2. In Florida, I think there is a reasonable chance that Bob Graham will retire. If he does, this one leans GOP.

3. In North Dakota, there is talk that Ed Shafer will run. If he does, I would move this race to a toss-up.

[Axenolith]

When it comes to competitions I subscribe to the "Captain Kirk" philosophy of life. In a nutshell, there is no such thing as a no win situation. Therefore, we will hand Barbara Boxer her ass on a platter in 2K4, particularly after 2 more years of Davis taxes and Pelosi shrewing it up in congress.

ONWARD TO VICTORY FELLOW REPUBLICANS! DRIVE THE 'RATS BEFORE US!!!

[RonF]

I like Fitzgerald in Illinois, but we'll see who the Democrats put up. The Democrats swept the state this last election, and one big resason for that was the scandals within the GOP officeholders. Some of it was the "bribes for licenses" scandals that occurred under George Ryan's watch in the Secretary of State office, but there's others as well; the State GOP Chairman had to resign his chairmanship when it was found that he was using the taxpayer-paid staff in his State House office (he was also the state's House Majority Leader) for political party work. All in all, there's likely to be a pretty big parade of GOP defendants though the courts and the jails over the next two years. Depending on how big, it could have an impact in 2004.

The one big thing going there for Fitzgerald, though, is that he's appointed the U.S. Attorneys that are chasing all this down. So he can say he's got clean hands and is doing his bit to clean up the mess. He wasn't a member of the regular GOP structure, and in fact they opposed his candidacy for the Senate. It's an example of a wealthy man funding his own campaign, and unlike most, he actually won.

The GOP would have the knives out for him, but they've got other problems now; the Democrats now hold both houses of the state legislature and the Governorship and all but one of the other State Constitutionally mandated offices.

[Poohbah]

California Strategery: talk up Green Party. Bitch and moan in Birkenstock stores and Bay Area coffee houses about Boxer being a "sellout to the Oil and War Party." (If you can suggest that she's an Israeli sock puppet in a PC manner, so much the better.)

[Freebird Forever]

Thanks for your analysis.

Bookmarked

[RetiredArmy]

Didn't they just pass a law in SD that would prevent Dash-hole from running for both President and Senate at the same time?

[southernnorthcarolina]

Southernnorthcarolina, from his perch practically on the state line, is already looking forward to the 2004 races in both Carolinas, even while continuing to enjoy the 2002 results. I am optimistic with respect to both venues, even if the Democrat incumbents seek re-election.

Unless our world looks very different 20-24 months from now, having Dubya at the top of the ticket will be a powerful boost to the Republicans all the way down the ticket in both states. Not only the U.S. Senate races in the two states, but the NC Governor's race, and the State House and State Senate races in both states. The GOP already controls the SC Senate and House, and the NC House, and is within striking distance in the NC Senate.

The vicious circle down here in the South has been broken -- the one that allowed Dems to continue to win down-ballot contests even while the GOP mopped up at the Presidential level. Until the last couple of elections, a lot of conservatives persisted in voting Democrat at the State and local levels because the Dems were likely to win, and possess the influence. And of course, the Dems kept winning because people voted for them. That sounds ludicrously obvious, but think about it. Once the GOP is perceived to have a legitimate chance to become the majority party in, say, a State legislature anywhere in the South, there is a strong momentum toward them.

But as far as the U.S. Senate races in NC and SC are concerned: I think Congressman Richard Burr of Winston-Salem will take out Edwards, who is only making Presidential noises to keep his name in front of NC voters. And Congressman Jim DeMint of Greenville will take out Senator Foghorn Leghorn, or scare him into retirement.

Things are lookin' good down here.

[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?

[DoctorMichael]

Wow! Thanks!

[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

[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!

[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.

[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?

[For the Unborn]

Mike Crapp=Mike Crapo (in Idaho)