Sam Spade's (FINAL, see p.10) Congressional and Senatorial prediction thread...

[7,052,770]

You don't think we have any shot at hastert's district?

[Sam Spade]

Sam, just curious, but why do you list Wyoming at large as Lean R yet believe it will go Democratic, whereas several tossup seats are predicted to be Republican holds? Also, IL-8 being considered Lean D but yet predicted to be a GOP gain.

I do realize your ratings are based on where you feel the races stand at this moment, not an ultimate prediction of where things will be come November 7, so that's the reason why the predictions are not congruent with the rankings. But I am still curious why you think the Democrats will come back in Wyoming, and why the GOP will come back in IL-8. Also, why IL-6 will stay GOP when it's ranked as the 15th most vulnerable GOP seat (which would seem in theory then to make it the "tipping point" and the one single most critical seat in determining the majority).

My ratings have to do with the way races are if they were held today.  My predictions have to do with the way I think the races will be come November 7.  You have this correct. 

This does mean that there will be some oddities, but I place WY-AL because I think it will be such an oddity in the end.  Keep in mind that we haven't had a poll there in ages.  I am allowed to think certain things about the race if I want to in that situation.  However, as election day gets nearer, you will see my prediction list come closer and closer to where I view the placement list. 

I would suggest for right now that you pay more attention to the placement list than the prediction list.  You may not have the same suppositions that I do, and the placement list is less built on suppositions than on day-to-day factual analysis.

I should add, in a general analysis point, two things: 

1. I really don't see too big of a difference between most of the seats in the Toss-up category.  My guess is that as of today, roughly about half would fall and the other half wouldn't.  But distinguishing between 11 and 24 is quite difficult actually and it might be better to think of these seats as a group, rather than individual entities.

2.  Past seat #30, the chances of Democrat wins really, really drop off in my mind (exception WY-AL), so much so that I think the chances of the Democrats winning a seat under #30 is probably less than 1 in 4 or 1 in 5, even.

[Sam Spade]

You don't think we have any shot at hastert's district?

Nope.  Your candidate has no money (differentiating it from NY-26), Hastert does, and it is not (even @ Bush 55%) a marginal seat to me.  In addition, also differentiating it from NY-26 and Reynolds, Hastert has consistently run way ahead of national Republican margins in the CD.  Non-incumbent, we would be discussing a different story.

[Sam Spade]

I am putting a couple of more races on my hope list based on spending by certain groups. 

[Sam Spade]

My Congressional and Senatorial predictions will probably be a little slow in coming this week.  There are a number of changes that are being made, especially in the House, and it's going to take me quite a while to put together.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I didn't notice this before, but Cubin did vastly underperform Bush in 2004. She only got 55%.

She might be a bit too extreme, even for Wyoming. I do recall her comments on the House floor a few years ago when she said a bill that would ban selling firearms to anyone under drug treatment would mean no blacks could buy firearms. With the right wave, she very well could go down.

[Sam Spade]

Let me preface my Senate reporting in the same way I will preface my House reporting.  There is good evidence that a national wave may be forming through the polls.  When a national wave forms, it is always tough to tell where it will hit and who it will take out (this is much more important for the House than the Senate).  I am still not taking this totally into account yet, because I need to see how the polls react over the next couple of weeks before I give my final opinion.  If anyone is curious, though, I would be quite willing to give you my opinions as to how things would shape up if the national wave forms. 

I am also keeping in mind that the Republicans, based on the FEC reports I'm seeing for the 3rd quarter, will probably be spending roughly $55 million more than Democrats in this upcoming election.

My conclusions for right now, in both the House and the Senate, take these two factors into play most of all (in addition what I think about the candidates).

You will also notice, as in the Governor's thread, that I am starting to take races off the table.  Also, the Likely, Lean and Toss-ups are rated in where I think they fall right now.

Feel free to make comments or ask questions.  I might get to the House later tonight.

Senate

Safe D
California
Delaware
Florida
Hawaii
Massachusetts
Michigan (from Likely D to Safe D)
Minnesota* (from Likely D to Safe D)
Nebraska
New Mexico
New York
North Dakota
West Virginia
Wisconsin

Likely D
Washington
Pennsylvania (R)

Lean D
Maryland*
Montana (R)
Rhode Island (R)
Ohio (R)
New Jersey (D) (from Toss-up to Lean D)

Toss-up
Missouri (R)
Tennessee* (R)

Lean R
Virginia - As I have said before, show me a poll with Webb ahead, I will move into Toss-up.  However, if a wave hits, this seat could be affected.

Likely R
Arizona - If you believe a wave is forming, put this one in Lean R.

Safe R
Indiana
Maine
Mississippi
Nevada
Texas
Utah
Wyoming

Safe I/D
Vermont

Likely I/D (as opposed to likely D)
Connecticut (from Lean I/D to Likely I/D)
Prediction (as of October 15, 2006)
Democratic gains
Pennsylvania
Ohio
Rhode Island
Montana
Tennessee

Republican gains
None

Independent gains
Connecticut

110th Senate
50 R, 48D, 2 I

[Sam Spade]

I bring this link as informative, not speculative.

As of September 30, 2006, we can now see the FEC numbers that House candidates who have filed electronically have in terms of money here:

http://tray.com/cgi-win/pml1_sql_house.exe?DoFn=2006&sort=EndCash&enddate=09/30/2006

This list is organized by Cash-on-Hand, so it's kinda confusing.

This does not include anyone who has not filed by hand, but they're few and far-between in the big races.  Also does not take into account independent group expenditures.

[Sam Spade]

Here it is, the House update, three weeks out.

As conditions have changed, my markup of the races has changed.  My Dem list will now be up to 50 seats, with 25 others.  My GOP list has been shrunk to 8 seats, w/ 8 hopes

The conditions are such right now that, if the polling were correct in its indications, a prediction of a Dem pickup of roughly 40 seats would be the most correct one to make.  The only thing that is keeping my prediction down to 25 seats (and it could be as low as 20, frankly) is the sizable (and it is sizable) money advantage Republicans will maintain overall during the last three weeks of the campaign, one which I think can be fairly estimated to be roughly $50 million or so.

Here we go:

House
Top Dem opportunities

Likely D
1. AZ-08 (open)
2. NY-26
3. TX-22 (open)
4. PA-10
5. IN-08

Lean D
6. CO-07 (open)
7. OH-15
8. IA-01 (open)
9. FL-16 (open)
10. IN-02
11. NM-01
12. NY-24 (open)
13. PA-07

Toss-Up
14. PA-06
15. CT-02
16. NC-11
17. IN-09
18. OH-18 (open)
19. CT-04
20. OH-01
21. WI-08 (open)
22. FL-22
23. IL-06 (open)
24. MN-06 (open)
25. VA-02
26. KY-04
27. WA-08
28. FL-13 (open)
29. OH-02

Lean R
30. PA-08
31. CT-05
32. AZ-05
33. NV-02 (open)
34. NY-20
35. AZ-01
36. IA-02
37. NY-03
38. KY-03
39. NH-02
40. MN-01
41. NC-08
42. CA-11
43. CO-04
44. CO-05 (open)
45. NV-03
46. NY-25
47. ID-01 (open)
48. VA-10
49. WY-AL
50. OH-12

The Dem List of Hopes (not in any order - and getting more hopeful by the day)
1. CA-04
2. CA-50
3. FL-08
4. FL-09 (open)
5. IL-10
6. IL-11
7. IL-14
8. IN-03
9. KS-02
10. KY-02
11. MI-08
12. MN-02
13. MT-AL
14. NE-01
15. NE-03 (open)
16. NH-01
17. NJ-05
18. NJ-07
19. NY-19
20. NY-29
21. PA-04
22. TX-23
23. VA-05
24. WA-05
25. WV-02

Top GOP opportunities

Lean Dem
1. GA-12
2. IL-08
3. GA-08
4. VT-AL (open)
5. IA-03
6. OR-05
7. LA-03
8. WV-01

The GOP List of Hopes (not in any order)
1. CO-03
2. KS-03
3. IL-17 (open)
4. LA-02
5. OH-06 (open)
6. NC-13
7. TX-17
8. SC-05

Prediction (as of October 17, 2006/three-week mark)
Democratic gains
AZ-08 (open)
CO-07 (open)
CT-02
CT-04
FL-13 (open)
FL-16 (open)
FL-22
IA-01 (open)
IN-02
IN-08
IN-09
MN-06 (open) (to make BRTD happy)
NC-11
NM-01
NY-24 (open)
NY-26
OH-01
OH-15
OH-18 (open)
PA-06
PA-07
PA-10
TX-22 (open)
VA-02
WI-08 (open)

Republican gains
None

110th House
227D, 208R

[Sam Spade]

I am adding this little commentary this week to answer a few question about how to spot a "national wave".

"What is a wave?"

Waves can be either regional or national, but for our purposes, we will devote our time only to national waves. 

When occurring nationally, waves tend to focus their energies upon a particular state (or area) of the country more than others.  Good example of this are 1994 (Washington, Deep South), 1958 (Indiana, Rust Belt in general).  These types of waves are often uneven, leaving weak incumbents intact in places where the wave is light and knocking out often considered "safe" incumbents in areas where the wave is strongest.  Also, sometimes waves overly affect certain branches of Congress more than others.  The 1986 wave took out 9 Republican senate seats, but only 5 House seats.  The 1974 wave took out only 4 Republican senate seats, but took out nearly 50 House seats.

As a footnote, often incumbents caught within the wave of the storm come back and have fruitful careers afterwards.  Examples of House incumbents defeated in 1994 in politics now are Maria Cantwell (Senator - WA) and Ted Strickland (Future Gov. - OH).

I cannot stress this enough.  Even if one are sure that he knows where ground zero is going to occur in a wave, often times it is never the correct place.  This part of wave guessing is highly erratic and very unpredictable.

There are three things to look for to tell if a national wave is coming:  First, your party's voters must be closely aligned with their candidates, ie, very little if any crossover voting.  Second, the opposing party's voters must be depressed in terms of turnout.  Third, and this is often the toughest to notice, the opposing party's voters must be willing to crossover to vote for your party's candidates.

So far this year, the polling clearly indicates that attribute one is clearly in place.  Any problems or scandals by Democratic candidates have been totally ignored by their voters; they remain closely attached. 

Attribute two has only been noticed by me in Ohio, NY and another state here or there so far this year.  It is possible that these new polls will indicate to me that depressed turnout is becoming more likely.  I have no idea how the Republican GOTV machine will influence that.

Attribute three I have only noticed in Indiana, but there are signs that it may be spreading.  Shifting over of Republicans indentifying as Indys and Indys indentifing as Democrats would also count as this, though you have to make sure those Indys are still not voting for the Republican (in other words, a shallow shift).

That is all.  Keep a watch out in the upcoming weeks to see if a true wave is forming.

[Sam Spade]

I should note a number of important House media buys that the NRCC made today for consideration...

TX-22: $200,000
PA-04: $155,000
NY-20: $108,000
MN-01: $100,000
ID-01: $100,000
FL-22: $275,000
PA-08: $272,000

DCCC has been silent today.

[WMS]

Ugh, you flipped NM-01. Why couldn't this have happened with Richard Romero, a Democrat I actually liked? Instead I get a representative of the Democratic faction I'm most opposed to. Blah.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

MN-01: $100,000

Wouldn't do that in a non-competitive seat.

[Deano963]

How is OH-18 a toss-up when the last five polls on this race have shown Space leading Padgett by a decent margin?

Oh, and I forgot - get ready to maybe move IL-11 from 'Dem list of hopes' to Likely Dem. Rumor has it another shoe is about to drop in the page scandal, and this time it is far worse.

[Sam Spade]

Expect WA-05 to move up on the list next week along with PA-04, but not as high.  The DCCC has spent about $50,000 in advertising there today, which was rumored (along with them spending money on NV-03).  We'll see if the NRCC responds with anything.  That'll dictate how far I move up.

The NRCC also put about $200,000 of advertising into the NV-02 race today, but that mirrors my general feelings on the contest.

About the three responses I got today, I'll take you in order:
1. It's based on the polls and other stuff I've been reading as well.  But if Madrid wins in 2006, my best advice is to run Heather Wilson again in 2008.  And that'll probably happen.
2. Of course it's competitive, but I'll place it a little higher now.  Gutknecht's lack of a cash advantage probably explains it a little too.  I haven't seen the Dems pour any money into the CD yet at all.
3. OH-18 is there based on polls and what I think of candidates involved.  Also, Space has pretty much no money left and is relying on the national party.  I know about the Ohio factor and it's been taken in.  In case you haven't noticed, the race has been consistently moving up the list the past few weeks.
Secondly, I don't change my rankings based on rumors.  Next.

[Deano963]

3. OH-18 is there based on polls and what I think of candidates involved.  Also, Space has pretty much no money left and is relying on the national party.  I know about the Ohio factor and it's been taken in.  In case you haven't noticed, the race has been consistently moving up the list the past few weeks.

Silly me. I guess I thought five consecutive polls (2 Dem, 2 Indie, 1 Rep) all showing the same candidate with a high single-digit or low double-digit lead warranted better than a 'Toss-up' rating. Oh, and about Space having "no money left - your facts are extremely screwy. He has $150K and Padgett has $250K (wow, big difference), and the the NRCC has spent $2.6 million for ads in the 18th District for Padgett in the last 7 weeks compared to the DCCC which has spent less than $1 million on ads for Space in the entire cycle. So your assertion that Space is depending on the national party for money is somewhat curious seeing as how Padgett has beneiftted vastly more from her national party's help than Space has. I guess some people are'nt as sharp as others.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

2. Of course it's competitive, but I'll place it a little higher now.  Gutknecht's lack of a cash advantage probably explains it a little too.  I haven't seen the Dems pour any money into the CD yet at all.

It's possibly because it's tough to run a media-based campaign here. We get most of our TV stations from the Twin Cities. The western part of the district probably gets it from Sioux Falls. I'm not sure about Rochester, it might have its own media market, but if so it's the only serious one in the district. Both candidates have seemed to focus more on radio ads for this reason.

[opebo]

I have been following your thread with interest, Sam Spade, and I think your predictions are very good.  However the one thing that I find a bit difficult to understand is why you think your tossup Tennessee will go Democrat and your tossup Missouri will go Republican. 

Is this based solely on poll-watching, or also in Talent's incumbency or a comparison of the scale of Republican money-advantage in each race?

I confess I find it difficult to imagine Tennessee electing a black before Missouri elects McCaskill - I think race is a hugely underrated factor in the TN contest. 

[Gustaf]

That prediction would give the above map of House delegations (30% is a margin of one House seat, 40% 2, etc) Democrats flip MN and WI from tied, Ohio from GOP to tied and CT, CO, IN, PA, NM and NC from Rep to Dem. That would make 24 Dem delegations, 24 Rep and 2 tied. The notion that it's impossible for Democrats to get a majority of House delegations would pretty much fall apart. 

[Sam Spade]

3. OH-18 is there based on polls and what I think of candidates involved.  Also, Space has pretty much no money left and is relying on the national party.  I know about the Ohio factor and it's been taken in.  In case you haven't noticed, the race has been consistently moving up the list the past few weeks.

Silly me. I guess I thought five consecutive polls (2 Dem, 2 Indie, 1 Rep) all showing the same candidate with a high single-digit or low double-digit lead warranted better than a 'Toss-up' rating. Oh, and about Space having "no money left - your facts are extremely screwy. He has $150K and Padgett has $250K (wow, big difference), and the the NRCC has spent $2.6 million for ads in the 18th District for Padgett in the last 7 weeks compared to the DCCC which has spent less than $1 million on ads for Space in the entire cycle. So your assertion that Space is depending on the national party for money is somewhat curious seeing as how Padgett has beneiftted vastly more from her national party's help than Space has. I guess some people are'nt as sharp as others.

Your logic needs work.  Just because more money is being spent on Padgett than Space does not mean that both are not depending on the national party, because both are.  Notice I never said that Padgett wasn't relying on the national party.  However, the national Republicans are simply better funded in this campaign, so Padgett will have a natural money advantage.

You've brought up the polling reasons as to why my placement of the race might be wrong (I doubt that you view my end prediction of it as wrong), and I've brought up the natural lean of the CD, my view of the candidates and a couple of other things.

I could well be wrong in my predictions, but calling me "not sharp" is not the best way to influence people.  I suggest you read Andrew Carnegie.

[Deano963]

3. OH-18 is there based on polls and what I think of candidates involved.  Also, Space has pretty much no money left and is relying on the national party.  I know about the Ohio factor and it's been taken in.  In case you haven't noticed, the race has been consistently moving up the list the past few weeks.

Silly me. I guess I thought five consecutive polls (2 Dem, 2 Indie, 1 Rep) all showing the same candidate with a high single-digit or low double-digit lead warranted better than a 'Toss-up' rating. Oh, and about Space having "no money left - your facts are extremely screwy. He has $150K and Padgett has $250K (wow, big difference), and the the NRCC has spent $2.6 million for ads in the 18th District for Padgett in the last 7 weeks compared to the DCCC which has spent less than $1 million on ads for Space in the entire cycle. So your assertion that Space is depending on the national party for money is somewhat curious seeing as how Padgett has beneiftted vastly more from her national party's help than Space has. I guess some people are'nt as sharp as others.

Your logic needs work.  Just because more money is being spent on Padgett than Space does not mean that both are not depending on the national party, because both are.  Notice I never said that Padgett wasn't relying on the national party.  However, the national Republicans are simply better funded in this campaign, so Padgett will have a natural money advantage.

You've brought up the polling reasons as to why my placement of the race might be wrong (I doubt that you view my end prediction of it as wrong), and I've brought up the natural lean of the CD, my view of the candidates and a couple of other things.

I could well be wrong in my predictions, but calling me "not sharp" is not the best way to influence people.  I suggest you read Andrew Carnegie.

Your reading needs work. I didn't say that neither Space nor Padgett were relying on the national parteis, I said that both of them were. To correct your erroneous belief that Space is depending on the national party while Padgett is not, I pointed out to you that Padgett has recieved far more 9more than 3 times as much) assistance from the national party than Space has and that they both have very low COH amounts. I assumed from your statement that you did not know either of these things since you only mentioned Space, so I pointed them out to you. You shouldn't take them as an attack.

Oh, and I'm pretty sure you mean Dale Carnegie. I've read him. I'm surprised you have. Most people who have read him take constructive criticsim well.

[Sam Spade]

This week's Senate predictions.  Very little has changed.  I will frankly say that my prediction, while steady at +5 Dem, is leaning more towards 4 now than 6, because I have a sneaking suspicion the GOP will pick up both of the Toss-ups or grab one of the lean Ds.

Likely D
Washington
Pennsylvania (R)

Lean D
Maryland*
Ohio (R)
Montana (R)
New Jersey
Rhode Island (R)

Toss-up
Missouri (R)
Tennessee* (R)

Lean R
Virginia - Depending on the way you view the national market, put this one in Toss-up.  I am acting conservatively in my prediction, for now.

Likely R
Arizona - Depending on the way you view the national market, put this one in Lean R.  I am acting conservatively in my prediction, for now.

Note:  If you believe Rasmussen, put Nevada in Likely R.

Likely I/D (as opposed to Likely D)
Connecticut
Prediction (as of October 22, 2006)
Democratic gains
Pennsylvania
Ohio
Rhode Island
Montana
Tennessee

Republican gains
None

Independent gains
Connecticut

110th Senate
50 R, 48D, 2 I

[Gustaf]

3. OH-18 is there based on polls and what I think of candidates involved.  Also, Space has pretty much no money left and is relying on the national party.  I know about the Ohio factor and it's been taken in.  In case you haven't noticed, the race has been consistently moving up the list the past few weeks.

Silly me. I guess I thought five consecutive polls (2 Dem, 2 Indie, 1 Rep) all showing the same candidate with a high single-digit or low double-digit lead warranted better than a 'Toss-up' rating. Oh, and about Space having "no money left - your facts are extremely screwy. He has $150K and Padgett has $250K (wow, big difference), and the the NRCC has spent $2.6 million for ads in the 18th District for Padgett in the last 7 weeks compared to the DCCC which has spent less than $1 million on ads for Space in the entire cycle. So your assertion that Space is depending on the national party for money is somewhat curious seeing as how Padgett has beneiftted vastly more from her national party's help than Space has. I guess some people are'nt as sharp as others.

Your logic needs work.  Just because more money is being spent on Padgett than Space does not mean that both are not depending on the national party, because both are.  Notice I never said that Padgett wasn't relying on the national party.  However, the national Republicans are simply better funded in this campaign, so Padgett will have a natural money advantage.

You've brought up the polling reasons as to why my placement of the race might be wrong (I doubt that you view my end prediction of it as wrong), and I've brought up the natural lean of the CD, my view of the candidates and a couple of other things.

I could well be wrong in my predictions, but calling me "not sharp" is not the best way to influence people.  I suggest you read Andrew Carnegie.

Your reading needs work. I didn't say that neither Space nor Padgett were relying on the national parteis, I said that both of them were. To correct your erroneous belief that Space is depending on the national party while Padgett is not, I pointed out to you that Padgett has recieved far more 9more than 3 times as much) assistance from the national party than Space has and that they both have very low COH amounts. I assumed from your statement that you did not know either of these things since you only mentioned Space, so I pointed them out to you. You shouldn't take them as an attack.

Oh, and I'm pretty sure you mean Dale Carnegie. I've read him. I'm surprised you have. Most people who have read him take constructive criticsim well.

If you act that aggressively you're attacking. If you're gonna be rude, at least stick to your rudeness. Backing down like that only looks sad.

[WMS]

1. It's based on the polls and other stuff I've been reading as well.  But if Madrid wins in 2006, my best advice is to run Heather Wilson again in 2008.  And that'll probably happen.

Yes, NM-01 is the one exception to the usual ineptitude the local Reps display in elections here. And I agree - Madrid is simply not the type of Democrat who can easily hold NM-01. Too leftist.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

After watching the NM-01 ads, I don't think I've seen this much mud-slinging before in a congressional race, and from both sides. Both Wilson and Madrid are running two of the most pointedly negative campaings I've ever seen.