I find political prognosticators to be boring when they fail to predict what will happen on election day and merely tell you what would happen if the vote happened today. Who cares what would happen today? Political campaigns are geared to election day. Resources are gathered and strategies are plotted and to ignore the actual campaign is pretty unilluminating. So, yes, Stu Rothenberg, you’re boring.
Right now, Democrats look poised to lose five to eight [Senate] seats, and any net loss short of that would have to be regarded with relief by Democratic strategists. But as recent developments in Nevada and Illinois have demonstrated, things can change quickly in the fight for control of the Senate.
Rothenberg credibly predicts that the Democrats will lose four seats: in Indiana, North Dakota, Arkansas, and Delaware. But he ignores that the Democrats might gain seats in North Carolina, Florida, Ohio, Missouri, Kentucky, and New Hampshire. David Vitter in Louisiana and Chuck Grassley in Iowa are also going to have to at least fight to retain their seats. There are going to be real races in all of these states, and in California, Washington, and Wisconsin, too. Who wins and who loses will not be solely determined by the national mood, but by the quality of the campaigns and the candidates. And, in every case, the Democrats have the better candidate.
I predict that Charlie Crist will win in Florida and caucus with the Dems. I also predict that Jack Conway will eventually pull away from a media-averse Rand Paul in Kentucky. I think Joe Sestak will demolish Wall Street’s Pat Toomey in Pennsylvania, and Lee Fisher will chew up George W. Bush’s budget director, Rob Portman, in Ohio. A recent poll shows Elaine Marshall already ahead of incumbent Richard Burr in North Carolina. If I had to put money down, I’d probably bet on the Democrats losing opportunities for pickups in Missouri, New Hampshire, and Louisiana, but those races will get interesting. I don’t think Boxer, Murray, or Feingold will lose their seats. And I don’t think the Republicans will knock off Harry Reid or Michael Bennet, or take over Obama’s old seat in Illinois.
So, as things stand, here’s how I predict things will look on election day.
- Democratic Holds
CA- Barbara Boxer
CO- Michael Bennet
CT- Richard Blumenthal*
HI- Daniel Inouye
IL- Alexi Giannoulias*
MD- Barbara Mikulski
NY (A)- Chuck Schumer
NY (B)- Kirstin Gillibrand
NV- Harry Reid
OR- Ron Wyden
PA- Joe Sestak*
VT- Pat Leahy
WA- Patty Murray
WI- Russ Feingold
WV- Joe Manchin*
Democratic Pickups
FL- Charlie Crist*
KY- Jack Conway*
NC- Elaine Marshall*
OH- Lee Fisher*
Republican Holds
AL- Richard Shelby
AK- Lisa Murkowski
AZ- John McCain
GA- Johnny Isakson
ID- Mike Crapo
IA- Chuck Grassley
KS- Jerry Moran*
LA- David Vitter
MO- Roy Blunt*
NH- Kelly Ayotte*
OK- Tom Coburn
SC- Jim DeMint
SD- John Thune
UT- Mike Lee*
Republican Pick-Ups
AR- John Boozman*
DE- Mike Castle*
IN- Dan Coats
ND- John Hoeven*
[* indicates freshmen]
So, that’s a prediction of no net change in the makeup of the Senate caucus ratio. And I don’t think this is a particularly bold or optimistic assessment. I am basing it on the relative strengths of the candidates and the likely mood of their particular constituents. In a better year, we’d be favored to win the elections in New Hampshire and Missouri, and David Vitter could always implode. I still think Chuck Grassley is going to find himself in a fight, and we might see Indiana become competitive. I see it as slightly more likely that the Republicans will gain a handful of seats than that the Democrats will reach 60 votes, but it’s in the margin of error as far as I am concerned. It’s a Republican year but they have poor candidates and no positive message.