2008 Senate Races (Least Vulnerable to Most Vulnerable)

[SPC]

33. Idaho
32. Illinois
31. Wyoming
30. Rhode Island
29. Kansas
28. Michigan
27. Alaska
26. Nebraska
25. Massachusetts
24. West Virginia
23. Virginia
22. New Mexico
21. South Carolina
20. Delaware
19. Alabama
18. Georgia
17. Tennesee
16. Kentucky
15. Texas
14. Mississippi
13. Oklahoma
12. New Jersey
11. Oregon
10. Arkansas
9. Iowa
8. Montana
7. North Carolina
6. Maine
5. South Dakota
4. Minnesota
3. New Hampshire
2. Louisiana
1. Colorado

[Joe Biden 2020]

33. Idaho
32. Illinois
31. Wyoming
30. Rhode Island
29. Kansas
28. Michigan
27. Alaska
26. Nebraska
25. Massachusetts
24. West Virginia
23. Virginia
22. New Mexico
21. South Carolina
20. Delaware
19. Alabama
18. Georgia
17. Tennesee
16. Kentucky
15. Texas
14. Mississippi
13. Oklahoma
12. New Jersey
11. Oregon
10. Arkansas
9. Iowa
8. Montana
7. North Carolina
6. Maine
5. South Dakota
4. Minnesota
3. New Hampshire
2. Louisiana
1. Colorado

Interesting list, and I agree in all but two states, though I would maybe move Oklahoma up to number 10 and move Maine down to high single digits to mid-teens.  I just don't see Susan Collins being seriously threatened.  If she were to retire, then, yes Maine would be a 5 or 6, but she is one of the more popular (and one of the few) northeast Republicans left.  While I think Mississippi ought to be pretty competitive if Cochran retires, I agree with your assessment and ranking of Mississippi at 14.

[Boris]

Maine isn't vulnerable. Collins has like a 70% approval rating. Incumbents with 70% approval ratings aren't known for their propensity to lose elections.

[Mr.Phips]

Maine isn't vulnerable. Collins has like a 70% approval rating. Incumbents with 70% approval ratings aren't known for their propensity to lose elections.

Tim Johnson almost lost in 2002 when he had a 73% approval rating.

[cp]

Collins isn't Johnson. She's got tight connections with the Portland elite and the primary industry leaders who work upstate.

That said, I think she'll be the bright spot of 2008. More Republicans seats are going to be competitive come then than are considered competitive now. AK, OK, TX, and MT, I think.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Montana will be competitive in 2008, guaranteed

[Alcon]

Montana will be competitive in 2008, guaranteed

Why's that?

Baucus is very popular.  Whom would they be running, Burns?

[DownWithTheLeft]

Montana will be competitive in 2008, guaranteed

Why's that?

Baucus is very popular.  Whom would they be running, Burns?

Burns, Racicot, and Rehburg are all viable candidates and I think MT values a balance (even though they haven't in the past, but now is not the past), and in a presidential year there is no reason this can't be competitive

[Alcon]

Burns, Racicot, and Rehburg are all viable candidates and I think MT values a balance (even though they haven't in the past, but now is not the past), and in a presidential year there is no reason this can't be competitive

Burns?  Unpopular, lost-to-Jon-Tester Conrad Burns?  He seems like toast to me against a well-regarded, fairly moderate, established Democrat.  He can't even run as an outsider.  I think he'd be cooked alive.

Racicot is an interesting possibility.  He could make it a race, but is he actually interested?  Environmental record and name spelling/pronunciation mismatch aside, I like him.  But Baucus is so popular, I just can't really see the Montana GOP ousting him.  His approval rating is up by, what, 40 points?  That's pretty crazy high.

I doubt Rehberg is going to risk his house seat to run against Baucus.

[Gabu]

Montana will be competitive in 2008, guaranteed

Why's that?

Baucus is very popular.  Whom would they be running, Burns?

Burns, Racicot, and Rehburg are all viable candidates and I think MT values a balance (even though they haven't in the past, but now is not the past), and in a presidential year there is no reason this can't be competitive

Burns?

The same Burns who just lost to a guy much more liberal than Baucus?

As an incumbent, no less?

I think some justification is in order...

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Let's compare approval ratings in the last tracking poll with Burns.

Burns:
Approve: 41%
Disapprove: 56%
Net: -15%

Baucus:
Approve: 61%
Disapprove: 30%
Net: 31%

Yeah, I think Baucus might be just a little bit favored in that matchup...

[Mr.Phips]

Montana will be competitive in 2008, guaranteed

Baucus is even more popular than Collins.

[Mr.Phips]

Collins isn't Johnson. She's got tight connections with the Portland elite and the primary industry leaders who work upstate.

That said, I think she'll be the bright spot of 2008. More Republicans seats are going to be competitive come then than are considered competitive now. AK, OK, TX, and MT, I think.

So did Johnson.  Johnson had the most powerful Democrat in Washington making sure that he was reelected in 2002.

[Smash255]

33. Idaho
32. Illinois
31. Wyoming
30. Rhode Island
29. Kansas
28. Michigan
27. Alaska
26. Nebraska
25. Massachusetts
24. West Virginia
23. New Mexico
22. South Carolina
21. Delaware
20. Alabama
19. Georgia
18. Tennesee
17. Kentucky
16. Texas
15. Mississippi
14. Virginia (very vulnerable if M. Warner runs)
13. Oklahoma
12. New Jersey
11. Oregon
10. Arkansas
9. Iowa
8. Montana
7. Maine
6. North Carolina
5. South Dakota
4. Louisiana
3. Minnesota
2. New Hampshire
1. Colorado

Did a copy and paste with some changes.  Only the bottom four are really that competitive, South Dakota & North Carolina I doubt but could be if Johnson or Dole decide to retire

[SPC]

Here are my Senate rankings:

33. Idaho                   STRNG  GOP
32. Illinois                  STRNG  DEM
31. Wyoming              STRNG  GOP
30. Rhode Island        STRNG  DEM
29. Kansas                 STRNG  GOP
28. Michigan               STRNG  DEM
27. Alaska                  STRNG GOP
26. Nebraska             STRNG GOP
25. Massachusetts     STRNG DEM
24. West Virginia        STRNG DEM
23. New Mexico          STRNG GOP                 
22. Virginia                 LKLY  GOP
21. South Carolina     LKLY GOP
20. Delaware              STRNG DEM
19. Alabama               LKLY GOP
18. Georgia                LKLY GOP
17. Tennesee             LKLY GOP
16. Kentucky              LKLY GOP
15. Texas                   LKLY GOP
14. Mississippi            LKLY GOP
13. Oklahoma             LKLY GOP
12. New Jersey           LKLY DEM
11. Oregon                 LEAN GOP
10. Arkansas              LEAN DEM
9. Iowa                       LEAN DEM
8. Montana                 LEAN DEM
7. North Carolina        LEAN GOP
6. Maine                      LEAN GOP
5. South Dakota         LEAN DEM
4. Minnesota              LEAN GOP
3. New Hampshire     TOSSUP
2. Louisiana                LEAN DEM
1. Colorado                LEAN DEM

[okstate]

Racicot or Rehburg could concievably beat Baucus, but I doubt either runs.

In other areas, I personally think Louisiana is just as likely to switch as Colorado is. Landrieu has done an excellent job of toeing to the political center, but with the New Orleans voter base essentially gone, the GOP should be able to find someone to knock her off - especially with "the Democratic albatross around her neck" Blanco atop the ticket.

[Mr.Phips]

Racicot or Rehburg could concievably beat Baucus, but I doubt either runs.

In other areas, I personally think Louisiana is just as likely to switch as Colorado is. Landrieu has done an excellent job of toeing to the political center, but with the New Orleans voter base essentially gone, the GOP should be able to find someone to knock her off - especially with "the Democratic albatross around her neck" Blanco atop the ticket.

Blanco will be gone in by 2008. 

[SPC]

Racicot or Rehburg could concievably beat Baucus, but I doubt either runs.

In other areas, I personally think Louisiana is just as likely to switch as Colorado is. Landrieu has done an excellent job of toeing to the political center, but with the New Orleans voter base essentially gone, the GOP should be able to find someone to knock her off - especially with "the Democratic albatross around her neck" Blanco atop the ticket.

Normally, I would agree with you. However, I don't see any major Republican running against her, since Bobby Jindal probably won't want to run after being governor for only a year. If a popular GOP candidate gets in, I will move this to tossup.

[sethm0]

 Louisiana shouldn't be number 2. The Republicans have no strong candidate announced and Landrieu's popularity levels are pretty high.

 Oregon will be much more competetive than #11.

[Verily]

Racicot or Rehburg could concievably beat Baucus, but I doubt either runs.

In other areas, I personally think Louisiana is just as likely to switch as Colorado is. Landrieu has done an excellent job of toeing to the political center, but with the New Orleans voter base essentially gone, the GOP should be able to find someone to knock her off - especially with "the Democratic albatross around her neck" Blanco atop the ticket.

Blanco will not be atop the ticket in 2008; she's up for reelection in 2007 and will probably lose, either to another Democrat or to Jindal.

[SPC]

>30%..........Most likely to switch to the other party
>40%..........Somewhat likely to switch to the other party
>50%..........Could switch to the other party under certain circumstances
>60%...........Not a chance in hell of switching to the other party

[jokerman]

Under your descriptions Arkansas should rather be 50%, or "could switch party under certain circumstances," because a generic GOP candidate will not even break within 10% of Pryor, let alone beat him.

[CPT MikeyMike]

If Tim Johnson is healthy enough to run in '08, there is no way he's going to lose.

[MarkWarner08]

Oregon will be decided by candidate recruitment. If the Dems can lure State Treasurer Randall Edwards or Rep. Earl Blumenauer into the race, Smith will in big trouble. If neither of those two formidable foes run, Smith will easily win reelection.

[cp]

>30%..........Most likely to switch to the other party
>40%..........Somewhat likely to switch to the other party
>50%..........Could switch to the other pasrty under certain circumstances
>60%...........Not a chance in hell of switching to the other party

Good map.

I think you're a bit optimistic about the GOP's chances, though. SD is a red state, but Johnson is popular and has done a pretty solid job. There's nothing to forment a groundswell of opposition to him. Also, AR is all but a Democratic lock. The state GOP hasn't got the institutional strength to mount a campaign that could knock off Mark Pryor.

The GOP is also more vulnerable in VA and OK than you give credit. OK has a pretty solid Democratic Party now, and there's a sense that this year is the 'big show' - a chance to stage a bit of an upset and put OK back into the contested column. VA's demographic changes are accelerating and by Nov. 2008 I think they will have finally tipped into the Democrat's favour (assuming it didn't already in 2006).