If you can believe the Democrats’ internal polls, Heidi Hetkamp is on pace to retain Sen. Kent Conrad’s North Dakota seat. There are a lot of close Senate races this year, but it looks like the Democrats are ahead in Massachusetts, Connecticut, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin, Missouri, North Dakota, and Nevada, and Angus King has the advantage in Maine. The Arizona race is too close to call. Other than Pennsylvania, none of these races are in the bag, but we could be looking at a really strong result on election day.
Currently, the Dems have 53 senators caucusing with them. If things stand as they are, the Dems would lose their seat in Nebraska, but pick up seats in Maine, Massachusetts, Indiana, and Nevada. That would be a three-seat pick up. Winning Arizona would make it a four-seat pick up. The Dems could wind up with 56 or 57 seats. Add in that Joe Lieberman will be replaced by an actual Democrat, and the shift is even better.
Women would have something to celebrate, too. We could add the following women to the Senate:
Deb Fischer (R-NE)
Elizabeth Warren (D-MA)
Tammy Baldwin (D-WI)
Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND)
Shelley Berkley (D-NV)
Mazie Hirono (D-HI)
Of course, the Senate is losing Olympia Snowe and Kay Bailey Hutchison, both of whom will be replaced by men. By that’s still a potential net addition of four women to the upper body. That three of them are strong progressives is a big plus, too.
I should have added that Jon Tester of Montana is in a real fight and could easily lose. That would be a shame because he’s a good fit for his state and has represented them well. Adding him into the mix makes it a little less likely that the Dems can get to 57 seats.
The last race to keep an eye on is Nebraska. I don’t think Bob Kerrey can pull it off, but it’s not impossible. I hear he had a good debate, for what it’s worth.
In any case, the assumption has been that the Dems would lose control of the Senate. That is still a real possibility. But it’s actually looking more likely right now that the Dems will add a seat or two or four.
That’s a testimony to the compelling nature of Mitt Romney’s campaign themes.
Fingers crossed! How are you feeling about the House these days? I saw a pessimistic post from Dave Wiegel, I think, saying that GOP redistricting is going to prevent a Democratic takeover. Curious to hear your take!
For what it’s worth, those guys from Princeton remain quite bullish:
http://election.princeton.edu/2012/09/28/a-house-flip-enters-the-pundit-imagination/#more-6375
Also, consider that each day there are more and more signs that this will be a wave election (the 4th one in row). And think about how these things have played out over the past few cycles.
In early 2006, most people thought Dems would gain seats in the House and Senate, but not win back control. Then you started to hear noise about a House takeover, but the Senate would stay GOP. Then on election night, the political world was stunned when Jon Tester and Jim Webb won their iconic elections, and Dems picked up enough of the other Senate races to deliver the fancy office to Harry Reid.
In 2008, the Prez race was tied after the conventions (or McCain may even have been slightly ahead). But the twin Palin/financial meltdowns in Sept accelerated a probable-but-slight Dem victory into a landslide.
In 2010, we heard for months about worsening Dem fortunes, and by September pretty much everyone knew it would be a bad year for us. But how many people do you remember predicting the biggest Republican Congressional victory in 50 years? I remember a pre-election Mike Lux article where he detailed all the different races he was focusing on, and what a win or loss in each one would mean for progressive fortunes. I think it was like 10 or 15 races and the polling margins were different in each one. He was confident we’d win in some of them, less confident in others. But in the end, pretty much all of those Dem candidates lost.
Now think about this year. Early 2012, a generic Republican was favored to beat Obama. Then after Mitt Romney became the inevitable nomineee, the race between him and Obama was tight as a tick for months. The GOP was a sure bet to win the Senate back, and the idea of getting Nancy Pelosi her gavel back was laughable. Where are we now? Obama appears to have broken out into a near-insurmountable lead and GOP Senate hopes are gone. You think that polling shift isn’t reflected in the House races? Think again.
After wave elections, most peoples’ predictions look too cautious in retrospect. They tend to hit harder then you think they will. My guess is that’s because undecideds tend to commit en masse to one side or the other right near the end, and in wave elections that choice is much more lopsided than in “normal” years.
We could definitely win back the House. It’s a real possibility. As far as I can tell, it depends on just how badly Romney performs over the next few weeks; how well the GOP use their cash advantage (so far, they’ve done a wretched job with it); and on how much rank-and-file Dems commit to GOTV.
I agree with 98% of your post, but do not think that the GOP’s hopes of winning the Senate are gone. Not yet. Every one of those races except PA is too close to call right now.
Fair enough. I suppose I’m jumping the gun a bit on that one. All the more reason I’m glad to have never-take-anything-for-granted-ever people like Messina and Plouffe at the head of our army.
It’s hard to identify the seats we’ll get to move us over 25. There just isn’t polling data out there yet to support a takeover. But it’s more a matter of not having the information to judge.
Personally, I think we are probably maxed out at about 28 seats (net) which would be good enough, but just barely. And that leaves no margin of error.
Fingers crossed. Hoping we’ll see some more numbers soon so we can identify some races that could use some dollars. The House feels critical to me — in order for Obama to get anything done, he needs it. And in order to quash the inevitable GOP push for impeachment, we need it.
Sure wish we had some polling on Wayne Powell v’s Cantor
I know he has a huge money disadvantage but he is never mentioned
Tell me about it. I live here. I haven’t seen any signs for Cantor or Powell. The only signs I’ve seen are in Fredericksburg for Obama and Kaine, which is a different district, and voted for Obama 62% last time around. Oh, I also saw a sign for Romney in Spotsylvania, but it’s in front of a civil war store.
I’m in Midlothian, and I have seen Powell signs in the neighborhood and one on Huguenot Road. THere those dueling signs: For sale: Cantor. Nor for sale: Powell.
Powell is at least a credible candidate. Still don’t expect Cantor to lose.
I mean, “Not for sale, Powell.”
No one could find them in ’06, either. In wave elections, stuff just falls out of trees.
From Mark Shields, though it’s not original with him:
Nice cherry-picking on the polls! Have you looked at the partisan divide on these polls?
Hmmm…same old, same old…I guess we’ll have to wait until November 7th, although, almost miraculously, the polls all seem to converge the closer you get to the election…
I guess the real question is do they converge to Radmussen, or to PPP!
We shall see!
Did you see Jay Cost’s excellent analysis of the current partisan identification divide? Or did you read about how, since 1952, the average challenger to the average incumbent gains 3.7 percent support between September and election day? Or how no incumbent who has won re-election since 1952 has had this small of a lead in September? Oh…of course not…he’s not Nate Silver! (Cost takes points out a few criticisms of Nate’s “model” in his articles…you should expose yourselves to new ideas and read them!)
Let’s assume Dem support is overstated by 3 to 3.7 percent in the current RCP averages…GOP gets to 50 or 51 seats…we shall see!
Yeah, we’ll see.
Personally, I don’t find your spin very convincing though. You were shaking your Ryan/Romney pom-poms and touting the wind at their backs at the start of this month and now you’ve jumped on the Republican “the number don’t mean what they seem” bandwagon.
So, you’re right, we’ll see.
Good knife! I can’t shake the Romney/Ryan Pom-poms because Romney’s got shaky again and won’t let Ryan be aggressive about WINNING THE ARGUMENT about entitlement reform and the proper role of government…
Look, Progs, I’m not going to lie to you…to most radical right-wingers like me, Romney is a disappointment…to cautious, no true core convictions…but make no mistake, our disdain for Obama FAR outweighs our disappointment in Romney…we truly that Obama despises what we stand for…despises the principles of the founders…We feel Obama considers us the enemy…he’s even used such language…
Jay Cost alludes to this when he note that, historically, Republican Presidential Candidates have a more reliable base than Democrats by an 84 to 79 percent margins, yet this years polls show it to be even…
Given Obama’s disdain for our values, rest assured, when the time comes to pull the trigger, despite our disappointment in Romney, will, at a minimum, hold true.
Your not going to win base turnout, and your not winning Independents.
There is no other path to victory for this failed President.
That’s one way of looking at it. Another way of looking at it is that when a party is as terrible as the Republicans are right now people are less willing to identify as one. They start to call themselves other things, like, I dunno, the Teaparty for example. The Dems suffered from this identification gap for many years for the same reasons.
So yeah, while I admire your plucky spirit I’m afraid most of the country doesn’t agree with your appraisal of the President or the values of your party. All of the national and statewide polling backs this up. Darling-of-the-base Paul Ryan is getting booed by white seniors, formerly a safe Repub constituency, while Romney is running around flapping his arms like a turkey and loyal Pubbies like yourself are reduced to either ridiculous silver-lining arguments like yours or denying that the evidence of the impending beating means anything at all.
Like you said, we’ll see how things turn out.
What values? Belief in the Flat Earth and Phlogiston? Female Servitude? Homophobia? Putting Granny on the ice floe?
Jay Cost? The same clownshow that was recommending you to short Obama on Intrade the other day? Hahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!
If his arguments are correct, then you should short Obama.
Can you refute his arguments?
If I shorted Nate Silver’s Democrats retention in the house in 2010, I would have won the big bucks!!!
To claim a President with an approval percentage under 50 percent, overseeing pathetic GDP growth of 1.3 percent with falling median income and job creation that doesn’t even keep pace with inflation, has over an 80 PERCENT chance of winning this election is an absolute joke!!!
It’s not a joke when the opposition is…Mitt Romney. Why would a party that made John Kerry unpalatable think that a more elitist, flip-floppier version of the same guy would succeed?
Good point, to a degree.
Even though Carter was a failed President, much like Obama, early spin scared Americans into thinking he was some kind of scary “wing-nut”…would starve old people and kids, and start World War Three…etc…Carter was leading in October…
Then something happened…Reagan had a chance to talk directly to the electorate, without the liberal media bias, in the debates! He wasn’t nuts! If Romney even draws a tie in the debates, he will win…he’ll be an acceptable alternative to a failed President!
Referring to Reagan, of course!
Cost’s argument will be refuted on election day. When it matters.
Perhaps…or perhaps Nate Silver’s “model” will be refuted.
We shall see!
Remember, I like my tears chilled, no chaser.
Ha Ha!
Look at it this way…if Romney wins, and the Republicans take the Senate, you probably won’t hear from me for a long time! Bittersweet!
If Obama wins, and if the Democrats retain the Senate, I’ll be on here frequently until at least 2014…Bittersweet!
Pick your Poison!
Well then…looking forward to having you around.
Only bittersweet for you. I’ll take that second tradeoff in a heartbeat.
God! My spelling and Grammar is so much worse after a few drinks! Embarrassing!
Boo…didn’t you have a spell check feature at one time? Bring it back!
Friends don’t let friends drink and post.
billmon is back and is as good as ever: Skewed Polls and the Power of Magical Thinking”
FWIW – billmon was one of the first two “guest posters” at dKos after a month of so of posting comments far superior to what others were contributing.
Just read the article…
Anything other than name calling?
He doesn’t actually defend the oversampling of party identification, does he? Did I miss it?
He doesn’t go into historical, fact-based analysis of party identification, does he?
Does he mention the historical fact that challengers, on average, have gained 3.7 percent between September polling and the final vote tallies in November, which should not be particularly reassuring to Obama with his 4.0 advantage in the RCP average…I didn’t see that…I just saw name calling and ridicule…did I miss something?
Some things don’t need to be explained.
Billmon doesn’t even touch on the main thing, which is that the originators of the skewed polls theory don’t believe it for a second.
The whole idea is to give folks like you false hope just long enough for you to keep making your arguments and keep working until the polls close.
It’s not about Romney; it’s about trying to keep control of the House and maybe take over the Senate.
Only the worst kind of dumbasses take it at face value.
Nick, are your meds up to date?
The article wasn’t about the veracity of the polls, but about the reactions to those polls. He is pointing out that hundreds of thousands (presumably) of people actually believe that for the latest Virginia polls, 9+ organizations (ARG, PPP, Rasmussen, Purple Strategies, Fox, We Ask America, Quinnpiniac, WaPo and YouGov) entered into a conspiracy. Hundreds of employees. Millions of dollars spent. To do what? Convince some poor mis-guided Romney lover to not vote? Right.
But, hey. Whatever floats your boat.
Thank you and have a CherryGarcia day.
His own blog — Whiskey Bar — was one of the glories of the early blogosphere.
I’d say it was the best.
Yo, NickN — even your BFF Rasmussen has turned to the dark side:
September 29:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_trac
king_poll
Ha. Ha ha ha.
“By that’s still a potential net addition of four women to the upper body. “
I don’t understand the significance of this statement. Sarah Palin, Michele Nachman. Sharron Angle, Jan Brewer, are all women. Very happy about the possibility of picking up Democratic seats, though.
When Booman said “upper body”, I think he meant the senate.
Yes, obviously.