'06 Senate preview: Will the Democrats take back the Senate?

[MarkWarner08]

By most accounts,  Senator Chuck Schumer is a not a man cowed by a challenge. At the age of 23, just months out of Harvard Law, Schumer was elected to the State Legislature. He quickly rose to the US Congress and in 1998 he defeated  entrenched Republican Senator Al D’Amato in one of the nastiest Senate races in NY political history. Schumer now faces an even more daunting challenge -- taking back the US Senate.

The reason why Democratic hopes for taking back the Senate are so slim rests on the DSCC’s success in 2000, failure in 2002 and its abject failure in winning races in 2004.

What many people forget about the 2000 election cycle is that despite the relative closeness of it overall, the Democrats unseated five Republican Senators. On election day 2000, Republican Senate seats in Delaware, Washington, Michigan, Missouri and Minnesota all went down to defeat and the Dems took back a seat in Florida. Were it not for Republican pickups in Virginia and Nevada and Bush’s coattails in Montana the GOP would have lost the Senate. Remarkably, the pundits in 1999 seemed convinced  that the Democrats had a better shot of winning the House and the Presidency than even gaining one or two Senate seats. Ironically this good news for the Democrats  is would is holding them back today. Their 2000 victory shifted that cycle’s political composition from 20 Republicans to 15, thus lowering the number of target for Democrats in 2006

In 2002, the Democrats were sunk by the 9-11 effect, Bush’s popularity, the Wellstone funeral and a backlash in Georgia. Democratic Senators Max Cleland, and Jean Carnahan lost and Norm Coleman defeated Walter Mondale to steal a Senate seat. The Democrats only major victory came in Arkansas thanks to an imploding incumbent. 

Two years later, the Democrats lost all five open seats in the South and watched their former leader go down in flames. Their victories in Colorado and Illinois were barely solace for distraught Democrats. Were it not for the gay marriage ban in Kentucky and the smearing of Democratic Senate candidate’s sexual orientation, senile Jim Bunning would rightfully have lost and the Senate would have been 54-45-1, a near carbon copy of where it was after Republican Senator Paul Coverdell’s death in 1999.
This would have made it so  for Democrats to take back the Senate in 2006  all they had to do was sweep  “Big Five” vulnerable GOP Senate seats. But it wasn’t to be. Now, even if Schumer can lead his party to victory in Ohio, Missouri, Montana, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island and hold off any losses in Washington, Maryland and Minnesota, the Democrats will still be one seat short of the majority.

This leaves the Volunteer State as the Democrats last major target.

The only way Harold Ford, Jr. wins the open Tennessee Senate seat is by smearing Bob Corker’s record. Simply put Ford needs a Hail Mary miracle to win this seat. Luckily, his opponent has a pro-abortion, tax-hiking, big-government supporting past. Ford and the DSCC’s only chance for victory is if they have effectively destroyed Corker’s character, ran a flurry of pro-Ford ads, run an amazing GOTV effort and nationally there is a massive Democratic wave. The worst news for Dems is that this is their BEST tier two pickup opportunity.

It is becoming more and more likely the Democrats will sweep into the majority in the lower House, but their colleagues in the Upper Chamber will still be waiting for another cycle.

[Flying Dog]

I think we'll pick up Montana, Pennslyvania, Rhode Island, and Missouri and hold on to all our seats. I can wait till 2008 to take back the senate. Good chances to win in Maine(If collins doesnt run) New Hampshire(If lynch runs) North Carolina(If easly runs) Minnesota, Texas(OK im being optimistic), Colorado, and new Mexico. Of course the republicans can win in New Jersey,Delaware,Michigan,Louisiana. Thats A LOT of ifs, but anything can happen.

[TheresNoMoney]

Things have to work out pretty much perfectly for the Dems to take the Senate in 2006. One little mistake and we won't do it.

I think we will in 2008, though.

[Frodo]

If we don't win either house of Congress this year, it's safe to say that it is pretty much assured that there will be a Democratic sweep in 2008 of both the legislative and executive branches of the federal government, and by lopsided margins, particularly if civil war does break out in earnest in Iraq and ordinary citizens still don't see much in the way of benefits from our supposedly recovered economy. 

[nini2287]

2000 was a good year for the Democrats in the Senate so the Democrats already have most of the 'swing seats'--as compared to the other two election cycles.

I see the Democrats picking up PA and MT this time and in 2008 (with more GOP-held 'swing seats') they should have a good chance to pick up the Senate.

[Eraserhead]

I said yes but it is far from a sure thing. I could see them winning the five obvious ones though and picking up one of the four tough ones (VA, NV, TN or AZ).

[MarkWarner08]

I said yes but it is far from a sure thing. I could see them winning the five obvious ones though and picking up one of the four tough ones (VA, NV, TN or AZ).

It's good to see at least one "yes" vote.

I worry about the polarization of America growing worse in a nation with a liberal Congress and an unpopular reactionary President bent on increasing his own power at the expense of democracy.

 At least the Democrats could keep Bush in check. Who knows, things might turn around and the GOP might survive. It's still too early to tell.

[Tender Branson]

I´d like to answer this question on the morning of November 7. Currently it looks like a 50-49-1 Senate for the Republicans and 2008 looks like a big opportunity.

[Adlai Stevenson]

I voted Yes; I may be being partisanly optimistic but I believe that this election will be a wave election - ala 1974, 1986 and 1994.  The Democrats seem likely to retake the House of Representatives and when that happens it is very rare historically for the Senate not to go the same way. 

I think that the party will retain their own more competetive seats in Minnesota, New Jersey and Washington.  In addition a wave would see us take Missouri, Montana, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island; these are the top-tier races - I believe that if the election were held today we would win these seats.  That puts us on a 50-50 tie. 

Given that, I think that either Arizona, Nevada, Tennessee or Virginia could potentially put us over the top; all of them are interesting possibilities but at the moment the open seat in Tennessee is undoubtedly the most competetive.  I think Ford is an exciting candidate who is a right fit for the state.  He can raise money, hopefully produce a high turnout amongst African Americans and take on Corker effectively.  Corker is untested and has emerged from a primary battle.  He is a moderate in a conservative-leaning state and in a bad year for his party - I still think Ford has a chance.