Which Democratic Senate seats will a Republican win?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Vote

[Sam Spade]

Only Minnesota and New Jersey are realistic shots in my view.  Klobuchar has not run what I would consider a very strong campaign so far, though we're early in the game.

Washington has polled closer than I thought it might, but we're not really past Kerry numbers in the state, yet.  If the margin gets below 5% in three or four polls within a decent time span, I might consider this stronger.  Still, I have always been and continue to be surprised how Cantwell always polls lower than Murray does and seems a weaker candidate generally.

Maryland is all about Cardin winning the primary.  If he does, it's probably as close to being likely as Tennessee is for the Republican winner.

In Nebraska, Ben Nelson has a good opponent with money that'll probably keep him under 60%, maybe to 55%, but I really can't see a win barring changes in the macro world.

Michigan is going to be odd state this year, I think, with the bad economy and all.  But it's hard to predict whether this will have any impact on the Senate election, as opposed to the Governor's race.  I think Stabenow stays under 60%, but still wins, but I would still watch it.

In West Virginia, Byrd is probably going to get above 60%, probably, but I don't think we're going to see above 65% and definitely not the above 70%'s we've seen in the past.  He doesn't have a total joke opponent, though it's not a great one.  There are simply a lot of changes going on in this state at present.

Florida is so partisan nowadays, it's still hard for me to see Harris getting under 40%, but it may happen.  She won't win, though, obviously.

My guess at present is a 50-50 chance of picking up one or picking up none, 5-10% chance of picking up two. 

The resiliency of a lot of Republican Senate candidates this turn (not Florida obviously) is one of the reasons why I continue to place Dem chances at taking over the Senate so low (as opposed to the House).  This can change, however.

[Soaring Eagle]

None. Maybe New Jersey if they get lucky, but this will be the year where we start taking their seats.

[7,052,770]

It's not looking like they're going to get any

[Galactic Overlord]

Interestingly, since 1996, members of both parties have picked up seats from the other, even when one party picked up more, so a single pickup from this list is a real possibility.  In any event, I think it's either Minnesota or New Jersey.  Menendez has the problem of being an appointed incumbent, which lately has been fatal or at least problematic (see Alaska for problematic, Texas in 1994 for fatal).  Klobuchar may have problems outside the Twin Cities, though she will probably do better than Mondale did in 2002 in Hennepin County, she may do worse in other areas than Mondale did elsewhere. 

[© tweed]

Minnesota

[Gabu]

Minnesota

Not all of them?

C'mon, Boss, you're slipping.

[nclib]

None, but Republicans best chances are in Minnesota and New Jersey (and Maryland, but only if Mfume wins the primary).

[The Dowager Mod]

The most likely is Minnesota i think.

[Downwinder]

New Jersey, Minnesota, Washington, Michigan, will all bear watching, but I don't see any of them switching in 2006.

[Eraserhead]

I don't think they will get any but the best shot is in Minnesota.

[Jake]

I'd be surprised at anything more than New Jersey or Minnesota, and I view our chances there to be no more than 50/50.

[Nym90]

None.

Democrats didn't win any in 1994, though this was the last time either party was shut out.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Klobuchar has not run what I would consider a very strong campaign so far, though we're early in the game.

Neither has Kennedy. There's been barely any campaign at all so far. I've seen two Klobuchar bumper stickers and one Kennedy, that's about the extent of any campaign I've seen so far. I haven't even seen any ads yet.

[Sam Spade]

Klobuchar has not run what I would consider a very strong campaign so far, though we're early in the game.

Neither has Kennedy. There's been barely any campaign at all so far. I've seen two Klobuchar bumper stickers and one Kennedy, that's about the extent of any campaign I've seen so far. I haven't even seen any ads yet.

I was speaking mainly of fundraising.

[Gustaf]

The only realistic chances are NJ and MN, but I think Democrats will retain both. I don't get why Byrd keeps showing up on these lists. While West Virginia has swung heavily Republican on the presidential level, it's about as Democratic as ever on the state level and Byrd is popular and famous. Last time, in a presidential year, he recieved almost 80% of the vote. Just two years ago, in what was a fairly successfull Republican year, especially in WV, Manchin won the gubernatorial, breaking 60%.

[Mike in Maryland]

I'd say none of the above at this point.  Only Minnesota and New Jersey really bear close watching, but I don't think either is likely to switch, given Bush's low popularity and the fact that they didn't vote for him when his popularity was higher.  Some other states are potentially competitive, but not really in contention at the moment given their local politics and national trends.

As for West Virginia, that only comes into contention if Byrd really "shows his age" (88) in a really obvious way.  And if so he could drop out for health reasons and another strong Dem could be substituted.

[Republican Michigander]

I'm going to be an optimist and go with Minnesota and Michigan. Minnesota and Michigan are both more friendly in off-years.

As for Stabenow, she is not a strong incumbent at all and IF the primary winner has a good campaign going and destroys her faux-populist campaign we got it.

As for Jersey, we always seem to get our hopes up there, and always seem to crash and burn there.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Kennedy is a strong nominee

No, he's not. Someone who rubber stamps Bush's agenda on every single issue except ANWR drilling is not a strong nominee for a state where 65% of the population hates Bush (and rising)

[Nym90]

I'm going to be an optimist and go with Minnesota and Michigan. Minnesota and Michigan are both more friendly in off-years.

As for Stabenow, she is not a strong incumbent at all and IF the primary winner has a good campaign going and destroys her faux-populist campaign we got it.

As for Jersey, we always seem to get our hopes up there, and always seem to crash and burn there.

Anthing is possible, I suppose, but I think you are really reaching if you think Michigan is competitive, especially with this national environment for the GOP.

[Galactic Overlord]

Kennedy is a strong nominee

No, he's not. Someone who rubber stamps Bush's agenda on every single issue except ANWR drilling is not a strong nominee for a state where 65% of the population hates Bush (and rising)

A recent article suggests Minnesota is still moving away from the Democrats despite national GOP problems:

http://www.startribune.com/191/story/446346.html

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Kersten? Ha. The only reason she's there is so the StarTrib can have a token conservative. She's a joke who typically gets about 3 LTTE published in rebuttal to each of her columns and her most recent one was an attempt to claim the DFL's roots are in communism.

[Keystone Phil]

Kennedy is a strong nominee

No, he's not. Someone who rubber stamps Bush's agenda on every single issue except ANWR drilling is not a strong nominee for a state where 65% of the population hates Bush (and rising)

A recent article suggests Minnesota is still moving away from the Democrats despite national GOP problems:

http://www.startribune.com/191/story/446346.html

You're talking to a complete hack so don't waste your time. He'll use the same lines over and over even as the polls show a close race. He also believed that Minnesota absolutely hated Bush in 2004 even though he carried 47% of the vote in the state.

[Alcon]

Kennedy is a strong nominee

No, he's not. Someone who rubber stamps Bush's agenda on every single issue except ANWR drilling is not a strong nominee for a state where 65% of the population hates Bush (and rising)

A recent article suggests Minnesota is still moving away from the Democrats despite national GOP problems:

http://www.startribune.com/191/story/446346.html

The 2004 party identification was three points toward the Democrats.  A poll with this MoE on an issue that drifts so considerably is hardly the basis on which I would consider a trend.  Democrats still hold the registration advantage in Oklahoma, I believe.

However, ignoring the poll wholesale like BRTD is doing because it was included in a conservative column is ridiculous.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

No, I say Bush is absolutely hated now, which is true since he currently has a net 32 point Disapproval.

And yeah, the polls are close, but they are still similar to the 2004 polls. The point is, Kennedy is not particularly strong, there is really nothing that makes him better than "generic Republican", which is hardly suprising since that's basically what he is. Of course Klobuchar is pretty close to "generic Democrat", but in Minnesota generic Democrat almost always beats generic Republican, even if its close.

The poll can be ignored however because it's a StarTrib poll, and all StarTrib polls are crap.