Here are my predictions for who will win in individual Senate races. An asterisk indicates a non-incumbent. A ‘D’ and ‘R’ or an ‘Ind’ indicates a change in party. At the end, I’ll tally it up and I’ll discuss individual races and consequences in the comments.
Arizona- Richard Carmona* D+1
California- Diane Feinstein
Connecticut- Chris Murphy* D+1
Delaware- Tom Carper
Florida- Bill Nelson
Hawaii- Mazie Hirono*
Indiana- Joe Donnelly* D+1
Maine- Angus King* Ind+1
Maryland- Ben Cardin
Massachusetts- Elizabeth Warren* D+1
Michigan- Debbie Stabenow
Minnesota- Amy Klobuchar
Mississippi- Roger Wicker
Missouri- Claire McCaskill
Montana- Danny Rehberg* R+1
Nebraska- Deb Fischer* R+1
Nevada- Shelley Berkley* D+1
New Jersey- Bob Menendez
New Mexico- Martin Heinrich*
New York- Kirsten Gillibrand
North Dakota- Heidi Heitkamp*
Ohio- Sherrod Brown
Pennsylvania- Bob Casey Jr.
Rhode Island- Sheldon Whitehouse
Tennessee- Bob Corker
Texas- Ted Cruz*
Utah- Orrin Hatch
Virginia- Tim Kaine*
Vermont- Bernie Sanders
Washington- Maria Cantwell
West Virginia- Joe Manchin
Wisconsin- Tammy Baldwin*
Wyoming- John Barrasso
If my predictions are correct, we will lose one Independent in Joe Lieberman and gain one in Maine’s Angus King, but since King will caucus with the Democrats, there will no change in the D/R split. In other words, Connecticut’s Chris Murphy is technically a pickup for the Democrats, but not really. Bernie Sanders and Angus King will be independents who support Harry Reid as Majority Leader and who sit on the left side in committee hearings. I have the Democrats (if King is included) picking up five seats currently held by Republicans and the Republicans picking up two seats currently held by Democrats.
The current composition of the Senate is 51 Democrats + 2 Dem-caucusing Independents + 47 Republicans. The new numbers would be 54 Democrats + 2 Dem-caucusing Independents + 44 Republicans.
There would be fourteen freshmen senators (for a 14% turnover) and eleven of them would be Democrats while only three of them would be Republicans. The only three incumbents to be defeated would be Democrat Jon Tester of Montana and Republicans Dean Heller of Nevada and Scott Brown of Massachusetts. Sen. Heller was appointed to his seat.
The bottom line would be a new Senate with a 56-44 split instead of the current 53-47 split.
The toughest calls for me were Arizona, Nevada, Montana, and North Dakota. I ultimately sided with the Dems in three out of four of those races, but they could be decided in any permutation from a 2-2 split to a 4-0 blowout in either direction. If we lose them all, we come out even at 53-47. If we win them all, we get up to a 57-43 split. Maximum possible outcome is 58 seats if Bob Kerrey continues his surge in Nebraska, and he is coming on strong.
Going into this election season, I though the best the Dems could do is hold onto 52 seats. Right now, my worst case scenario is 53 seats. I think we have to give Patty Murray a hand for kicking John Cornyn’s ass. We still have to count the votes, but I can’t see any outcome that isn’t a gigantic disappointment for the Republican Party.
And, maybe give Jon Tester a hand. He needs it.
Worst case scenario, Joe Lieberman will still be gone.
Boo, anything in particular giving you confidence about the ND race? I noticed a couple recent polls putting Heitkamp marginally ahead, but that’s it. I don’t know anything about ND politics other than assuming they trend rural/conservative. And in that light, Heitkamp must be quite a pol if she’s making a strong defense of Obamacare as I’ve heard.
She’s polling ahead; she’s a popular figure, and her opponent is a nut job.
I’ve absolutely no respect whatsoever for Heitkamp’s opposition, mr Berg, however I’ve not heard “nutjob” applied to him.
He’s known here in Fargo as a slumlord and sleaze in business affairs. Word is many Republicans can’t stand him although, they’ll likely hold their collective noses and vote for him anyway, diehard Rs as they are.
Recent polls have given us some hope Heidi can pull this off. There’s a tremendous amount of “Rove” money working against her, but she’s known to have run one hell of a campaign. And I’m actually amazed at how well she’s done.
I’d say this race is neck and neck to voting day.
I’ll sadly predict the state will go 2/1 for Romney, so you see what Heidi’s up against.
If you have any extra of Bernanke’s QE sloshing around in yer pockets I’m sure she could use a bit of it to counter the Rove Machine ads.
Losing Lieberman is not a loss.
The Senate is still not filibuster-proof, unless the requirement is dropped to 55 votes or eliminated completely, so gridlock continues.
Texas! look forward to hearing more.
I guess on second thought the Texas situation is too off the charts to discuss. I’m curious about Sadler though.
Regarrding Jon Tester — I’d just point out that Huffpost Pollster (which is a poll aggregator) has Tester with a very slight lead over Rehberg, increasing steadily since overtaking him six weeks ago.
There aren’t that many polls, but PPPhas it at Tester 46/44 as of 10/15, and Rasmussen has them tied at 48/48 on 10/14, which 9qs far as it goes) suggests Tester may have a slight lead. Some earlier polls lend support to this.
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2012-montana-senate-rehberg-vs-tester
So I’m not saying he’s in, I just don’t know that you can count him out, either. Unless you heard something different.
MT is not a swing state for Obama– but the DCCC may have a ground game anyway. Can any Montanans out there fill us in?
An article from the Billings Gazette of 20 October states: “Recent polls have shown the race to be a dead heat, with two weeks until Election Day. Montanans also have been voting absentee for the past two weeks.
http://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/montana/tester-rehberg-have-testy-exchanges-over-
obamacare-other-issues/article_66b87239-176b-5198-b138-a52b2dbdfedb.html
If Boo’s predictions pan out, this would be a perfect time to require 45 votes to sustain a filibuster, with the onus on the minority to sustain it. Not on the majority to overcome it.
Assuming Harry Reid is OK after his car accident, will his newfound feistiness continue into the new term with enough force to make meaningful filibuster reform happen? If not, moving to 56 seats won’t really improve things much.
Re: the car accident – Harry’s gonna be fine. No apparent injuries. He walked into the hospital to be examined.
if wishes were horses…and all that.
never. gonna. happen.
not that it shouldn’t mind you, but l’ll believe it when l see it.
Harry Reid promises filibuster reform if Dems win the election, July 17th, 2012.
How does it help them to keep the status quo? Without it, there’s a good argument that Obama and the Dems could be in a much better electoral position right now. There’s certainly no popular love for gridlock, or for anything else about Congress. You could probably get a neck-and-neck vote to abolish the whole thing. There’s no definable constituency, even among “conservatives” or their puppeteers to defend the filibuster.
The only argument against it is that the Reps would then do the same thing once they get back in charge. That makes no sense at all: What the Dems do now has absolutely no effect on what the Reps do next. If the Dems fail to take this opportunity — again — I think they’ll get enough blowback to power a viable third party made up of their best and brightest.
it doesn’t, and your point about obama and the dems being in a much better electoral position is had they acted when they had the chance is well taken.
as for arguments against it they’re all specious at best, and self-servingfor the baser members of both parties at worst. unfortunately, the filibuster has become a political cudgel, and frankly, l do not see the will to change it, let alone abolish it, presenting itself anytime soon.
stranger things have happened, but my confidence in harry reids’ ability to get it done is, shall we say, minimal.
as l said, l’ll believe it when l see it.
Remember, DaveW, the filibuster/cloture rules don’t just empower legislative minorities. They empower individual senators.
It is plainly in the interest of the Democratic Party, and Democratic Senate caucus as a whole, to get rid of the filibuster, but that doesn’t mean it is in the interest of each individual member of that caucus to do so.
The filibuster has been convenient for both sides in the past…. “I would have voted for the bill, but it couldn’t get 60 votes.” Like card check.
But it’s gotten too expensive to keep and I think Harry knows it. I don’t want to sound hysterical, but there are issues out there that will wreck us if we keep tying our hands. Moody’s would probably upgrade the US if Dems got rid of the filibuster. (Though they might downgrade us again if the Republicans gained the Senate. lol)
Harry Reid said publicly that he was wrong to block the filibuster change last time, and he regrets his actions.
I think he knows it cost us some good legislation, and I really believe this is part of why Harry has been fighting so hard for the past few months. He knows he screwed up and he’s doing everything he can to make it right.
Of course, I completely disagree.
Of the listed predictions, Dems are not going to win AZ,
ND, IN, or NV–Dems’ best case scenario is 50-50. My best guess now is. 51-49, with Allen winning VA, as well.
Allen winning VA? LOL. Dude, you are out of your depth.
He’s the troll under a new name. Beware.
I can concede the 50-50’s he’s got, but Allen? Heh, yeah..no.
Don’t concede anything. He’s just here through Nov 6 to poke a stick at the Liberals. Don’t let him get to you. Ignore him or give him donuts.
Oh, Greg. You don’t really think the Republicans are done giving Senate seats away, do you?
The question isn’t whether there will be another Todd Akin/Macaca moment for a Republican Senate candidate. The question is, which one is it going to be?
If you are correct about IN, MA, and MO, then we have Richard Mourdock, Todd Akin, and Scott Brown to thank. All three of them were unforced errors of bluntness. They were supposed to keep the GOP platform hidden.
This ad made McKyl’s collective heads asplode in AZ: Confirmation.
Donations can be made at CarmonaForArizona.com
Wow. I hadn’t looked at the Senate comprehensively in a long time – as in, since the Republicans were even money to gain control of the chamber.
Unbelievable.
Someone called earlier this evening polling Presidential and US Senate preference (Donnelly or Mourdock). Don’t know who the pollster was working for, though.