Posted on 09/09/2004 9:40:24 AM PDT by K1avg
Senate Races 2004 Analysis
This started out as a simple reply to a thread on the subject, but it soon grew into another full-blown article - like my article on Friday concerning the mainstream media (here). Also, this is the third time I've written this, the first two lost to power sags from Frances.
This is my slightly-informed, slightly-plagiaristic analysis of the important Senate races in 2004. It was compiled with help from National Review's analysis, Townhall's take on the races, and an analysis from a left-of-center site, Modern Vertebrate.
A little background: the Republicans hold a 51-49 advantage in the Senate (Jeffords, of course, being a closeted Democrat). 34 seats are being contested this election season - 14 Republican-held (3 open) and 19 Democrat-held (5 - all Southern - open).
The races to watch (and, so you know, I consider "probably" to be more probably than "likely" - my semantics in this area have been questioned lately):
In Alaska, Lisa Murkowski is up for re-election and facing a stiff challenge from Tony Knowles. Polls show the race basically deadlocked, but Murkowski holds the advantage in incumbency and also that Alaska is a solidly Republican state. This race will probably break towards a candidate near the end, and it will probably be Murkowski. Likely Repub. retention.
In California, both the Senate race and the presidential race have tightened up as of late, but it is till highly unlikely that Republicans will take either race. Barbara Boxer's seat is likely Dem. retention. Still, if Arnold comes out swinging for both Bush and Bill Jones, anything could happen and this seat, and Cali's 55 EVs, could come into play.
In Colorado, the race between Coors and Salazar is essentially a dead heat. Still, Colorado is a conservative state, and Coors is gaining momentum. My gut feeling is that both its Senate seat and its EVs will go to the Republicans in November. Likely Rep. retention.
In Florida, my home state, Mel Martinez won a convincing primary victory over McCollum, and it shouldn't take much to carry that momentum into the fall campaign. If the White House pushes a bit for Martinez, Betty Castor will stand no chance. Likely Rep. takeover.
In Georgia, it's no contest. Easy Rep. takeover.
Illinois - who wants to take bets on whether Isakson or Obama gets more votes? Easy Dem. takeover.
Louisiana's election system is really wierd. Three Democrats and one Republican will all run on the Novermber 2nd ballot to fill Breaux's seat, and if no candidate gets a majority, there will be a runoff in December. This is quite likely to occur, and the results of the runoff will likely be influenced by the results of the other races nation-wide. If Republicans sweep up in the November elections, Democrat turnout here will be suppressed, but if Democrats can keep it close, they will turn out in great numbers here. As it stands, a tossup.
In Missouri, Kit Bond is cruising to an easy reelection, but an upset can't be ruled out. Still, Probably Rep. retention.
In Nevada, Harry Reid has been targeted by the NRSC, but a sluggish primary field essentially ruled out any major contest here. Probably Dem. retention.
In North Carolina, polls are showing Erskine Bowles ahead of Richard Burr, but Burr's war chest is quite large and Bush's 15 percent lead in this state could work to his advantage on Election Day. A tossup to fill John Edwards' seat, but look for the voters to break one way or the other in the last few days before the election.
In Oklahoma, Tom Coburn has come from behind to lead convincingly, and he will probably lead to election day. Carson is just too liberal for this midwestern state. Likely Repub. retention.
In Pennsylvania, Arlen Specter, love him or hate him, is an institution in PA politics. While Jim Clymer will probably siphon off a lot of the Toomey conservatives, ultra-liberal congressman Joe Hoeffel is still double-digits behind. Probably Rep. retention.
In South Carolina, Jim Demint has a definite advantage over Tenenbaum to steal Fritz Hollings' seat. In recent polls, he holds a double-digit lead. Likely Rep. takeover.
Suddenly, all eyes are on the solid Bush state of South Dakota for its Senate race. Tom Daschle, the top Democrat in the Senate, is in the fight of his political life against John Thune. Thune's leads in a recent poll, 50-48, and Daschle's campaign has made several fumbles as of late. At the moment, this can go either way, but it will probably trend towards one side or the other nearing election day. A toss-up to watch closely.
In Washington, Patty Murray is facing a stiff challenge from George Nethercutt (famous for knocking off a sitting House Speaker in 1994), but she holds a big lead. Still, if voter sentiment trends to the Republicans towards the election and Washington becomes a battleground state again, this could get interesting. As it stands, likely Dem. retention.
Wisconsin's late primary, and the tough fight going on for the GOP nomination now, has effectively weakened any Republican opposition to sitting Sen. Feingold. WI is aslo a presidential battleground, though, so watch for surprises here. Still, likely Dem. retention.
Republicans in Alabama (Shelby), Arizona (McCain), Idaho (Crapo), Iowa (Grassley), Kansas (Brownback), Kentucky (Bunning), New Hampshire (Gregg), Ohio (Voinovich), and Utah (Bennett) ahould be easily reelected.
Likewise, Democrats in Arkansas (Lincoln), Connecticut (Dodd), Hawaii (Inouye), Indiana (Bayh), Maryland (Mikulski), North Dakota (Dorgan), New York (Schumer), Oregon (Wyden), and Vermont (Leahy) will face little contest.
Impressions: The overall election could break down into several possible scenarios, as follows:
Possibility #1: So, ceteris paribus, Republicans stand to gain Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina, while Democrats will pick up Illinois. The three tossups (LA, NC, and SD) are all Democrat-held, and Republicans can easily pick up at least one, and maybe two. I'll be conservative and say only one, thus Republicans on the whole net +3 seats, and the Senate is 54-46.
Possiblity #2: If Bush's convention bounce holds, and Kerry implodes further, Republican candidates in all three tossup races could coattail to victory. Republicans would thus gain FL, GA, SC, LA, NC, and SD, with Democrats only picking up IL, a gain of +5 (not to mention a deepely saddened and deposed ex-Minority Leader), and a 56-44, nearly filibuster-proof Senate.
Possiblity #3: If voter sentiment were to break strongly towards Republicans in the days before the election, three more races - those in CA, WA, and WI - could come into play. If Republicans could win all three, they would net and overall +8 seats, and a near-supermajority 59-41 Senate. Were Republicans to pick up the nigh-impossible Nevada seat, it would be +9 and 60-40.
Possiblity #4: The DSCC and co. have been blatantly optimistic about taking back the Senate this year, although common sense is against them. To regain Senate control, the Dems would have to hold all three tossups and Florida. They would have to win in both CO and AK just to pull it even at 50-50 (which would technically still be 50-49 R because of Jeffords). So, they would also have to pull an upset in MO, OK, PA, or SC, which are all seats looking solidly Republican and polling double digits for the R candidate. Not very likely.
So, what's my overall prediction, then? Clearly, the first scenario seems the most plausible. Republicans pick up FL, GA, SC, and NC, while Dems take IL. Republicans +3 and a 54-46 Senate come January. Kudos to George Allen and team for picking such a great slate of candidates.
Look for most of these races to open up towards one candidate or another towards the election. I doubt we'll see more than one or two hotly-contested races (SD is looking very interesting, though). The coattail effect factors into my predictions quite a bit, although there is evidence this year that it could be less-pronounced. This should be reflected in the next several polls for these races.
Also, mod, please re-place as you wish. This seems to be the best fit in Editorial, but it can be moved to Extended or Announcements or {gasp} Personal & Bloggers, if you so desire.
Just curious - if not for the 17th amendment, how would the Senate look at this point?
Re: Your Scenario #2.
If Kerry continues to implode, watch the DNC move money OUT of the Presidential race TO key Senate races (SD, NC especially). Increased advertising funded by the DNC for Daschle and Knowles in the next month is a sure sign the DNC has thrown in the towel on Kerry, and is concentrating on avoiding big losses in the Senate.
Next to Dubya's re-election, this is perhaps the most important race this year. I'd give my left "you-know-what" to see that weenie Daschle lose. Thune's a good man, too.
I predict a 59/41 split.
Patty Murray is going down!
63-37, Repubs. The 17th gave the Senate to the big cities, which are the last hold-out of Liberal political desease.
Arm?
Great job on the analysis. On the races I am most familiar with, I think this is pretty dead-on correct: we should gain at least some seats in the Senate.
Regarding your final comment, this is really key. Conservatives need to think ahead better in terms of getting good candidates moving up through the political system.
Looking at my native SD, I can tell you that John Thune is the only person in the state who could even give Daschle a run for his money (and boy, is he doing it) -- and even there, if it weren't for the last Senate election debacle, Thune wouldn't be as well-positioned as he is. We got luckier than we knew on that one.
The reason that guys like Daschle get into office in heavily Republican states is that the SD Democratic party chooses and grooms likeable (hard to believe that he once was somewhat likeable), intelligent, well-spoken candidates. They package them well, and once they get in, they pour pork that guy's way so he can take credit.
All too often the GOP in heavily GOP states just throws up a candidate, and doesn't seem to be thinking at all. We need to get smarter in this whole process.
We need, as politically active conservatives, to identify and encourage solidly conservative candidates (social, fiscal, small government, defense) who can keep winning at higher levels of politics. We need to get good Senators into governorships to make them Presidential material, etc...
Your analysis is much better than any of the political talking heads I have seen.
I think +3 is most likely, and that +5 is the best we can realistically hope for. A lot will depend on the length of Bush's coattails. It's sickening to think about all the blown opportunities in states like ND, AR, NV, WI. If only we could have fielded strong candidates!
At least the rats have virtually NO chance of gaining seats.
Re NC..when Kerry was in the state a few days ago, Bowles was unavailable " due to scheduling conflicts"..He had an ingrown toenail removed.. So I'm more optomistic. Liddy Dole whupped Erskine two years ago..she wants to beat him again, badly..she'll drag Burr all over the state to "introduce" him to the voters..
In LA..the Dems seem to be falling apart. Jindal's running away with his Congressional race, and expect for W. to drop into the state a few times...
What's your take on the best long shot surprise pick-up for the GOP? I think it could be in Nevada.. Daschle will have to crawl under his Senate desk to hide in this session, so Reid will have to do the heavy lifting on the Senate floor for the Dems. If they decide to block everything...like the Flag descration amendment, and the Defense of Marriage act, then Reid may wear out his welcome in Nevada..
Please put me on your ping list for your next opus..regards..
Nice analysis. It's too bad the GOP wasn't successful in recruiting heavyweights in Nevada(Jim Gibbons), Arkansas(Asa Hutchinson) and North Dakota (Ed Schaefer). Talk about a chance for a rout this November!
I'm still miffed at Marc Racicot for refusing to run against Max Baucus in 2002. Looking forward to 2006, the GOP will hopefully convince Rudy Guiliani and Steve Forbes to take out HRC and Corzine, respectively.
Good work.
Case-in-point: Ohio. Ohio is not a liberal state. The Northern cities (Akron, Toledo, Cleveland mainly) are Dem, as is the eastern Appalachia. The rest is heavy GOP. Canton-Massillon area is surprisingly Republican as well despite a heavy union influence. Even in the Democrat areas, Ohio is really "blue-collar-conservative" as opposed to truly liberal. We shouldn't have to elect RINO's like Voinovich and DeWine.
Forgot Youngstown, also heavily Democrat. However, Mayor McKelvey in Y-town has endorsed Bush!
Better Voinovich and DeWine than Metzenbaum and Glenn.
Ohio is definitely not a liberal state, but it's not a conservative state either. Republican, yes, but not Conservative. Taft, for example, is a big government guy.
There are just so many scum to choose from. What to do, what to do.
Hopefully the next Governor of Ohio will be Ken Blackwell our state Treasurer.......
Wouldn't Reid move up if Daschle loses?
That is my point. Its a moderate state but one that definitely leans Republican. I do think we can elect better conservatives than Voinovich however. Taft is a pretty miserable excuse for a Republican, IMHO.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.