Future Senate composition?

[Gustaf]

On the map, red states are states where Democrats hold both senate seats, blue where Republicans do and grey are split. (I've counted Jim Jeffords as a Democrat here)

How will this evolve in the future? Who stand to gain and who does not? Gonna post another map like this one soon with predictions. It seems reasonable that polarization will be increasing in the future though with the Democrats losing their seats in states like Arkansas, West Virginia and Lousiana but Republicans losing in Oregon, New Hampshire and Maine.

[Gustaf]

Going by geography there seems to be 11 Dem senate seats in states where Republicans are strong nationally (West Virginia, Arkansas, Lousiana, Montana, Nebraska, The Dakotas, Indiana) and 7 where it's the other way around (New Hampshire, Maine, Rhode Island, Oregon, Minnesota). One could also argue that the Republicans holding all of the seats in Pennsylvania and Ohio is somewhat unsustainable. I'm counting on the Southwest to move towards Democrats, so I see the Colorado seat more as a sign of things to come. I also think the Democrats should be expected to manage to hold on to at least one seat in Florida.

[Gustaf]

We might be looking at something like this in the future:



This would leave the senate exactly where it is today...55-45 to the GOP. The problem for Democrats is that Republicans hold more states so taking over the senate will be very hard indeed.

[Ben.]

The Senate today, or as of January 2005 to be exact… 



The Democrats are going to have to make inroads in the South again and to do that they do have a number of strong candidates for some of the races that will emerge in states like Mississippi, Virginia and Tennessee. At the same time Jim Talent will be stepping down in Missouri and Rick Santorum will be high on the list of Democratic targets. 

So the Dems will probably be targeting… PA, MS, TN, VA and MO… while at the same time having to defend seats in FL, MN and possibly WI and NY added to this you’re bound to have a “surprise retirement” or two like with Campbell and Breaux this year. As things stand I’d say the Democrats should make minor net gains perhaps one or two seats while also possibly losing in NY if Rudy runs and in WI if Kohl retires… If everything went perfectly for the Dems they’d be looking at net gains of around 6 seats, but it won’t so 2-3 is most likely, that said it’s a long way off…     

Best case for Democrats…

 

Best case for Republicans…

 

Assuming that Warner and Giuliani run, this is the most likely situation…

 

…so net gain of +2 for the Democrats. 

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Going by geography there seems to be 11 Dem senate seats in states where Republicans are strong nationally (West Virginia, Arkansas,

It's worth remembering that WV and Arkansas are (and will remain)  Democratic states (big Democratic majorities in State Legislatures and Congressional Delagations, most statewide offices held by Democrats. Arkansas has a GOP Governer (elected in unusal circumstances in the early '90's) and I think one or two other statewide posts, after the 2004 elections Democrats hold all statewide posts in WV, except for Secretary of State where both parties played a game of "who can nominate the worst candidate")
Presidential Elections can be a world away from other Elections.

[Gustaf]

Good points Al, but wasn't this true of say Georgia or Louisiana less than a decade or so ago?

I view it as likely that Democrats will start losing ground here as well at some point. The same will happen to Republicans in the Northeast though. Democrats seem to be a little better at winning in Republican areas than vice versa but on the other hand they need to.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Good points Al, but wasn't this true of say Georgia or Louisiana less than a decade or so ago?

Up to a point. Demographic changes in Georgia (the massive growth of Atlanta suburbia) doomed the Democrats there, while the main reason  Vitter won in Louisiana (an insanely divided state in so many ways) was the higher Evangelical etc. turnout 'cos of the Presidential election. Some Louisiana Republicans have admitted that if it had gone to a runoff, Vitter would probably have lost.

[Gustaf]

OK, I won't pretend to be an expert on the South, but I think that generally a GOP trend in the South can be spotted and that simply some states have changed slower than others.

[7,052,770]

just wondering what MS Democrat could win a seat in 2006?  Trent Lott will be up for reelection, and no one could beat him, and if he retires Chip Pickering will get the seat.

[Ben.]

just wondering what MS Democrat could win a seat in 2006?  Trent Lott will be up for reelection, and no one could beat him, and if he retires Chip Pickering will get the seat.

Mike Moore the former AG, I'm expecting Lott to retire and Moore is very popular and is the only Democrat who could win, on top of which he'd probably enter the race as the narrow favourite. 

[7,052,770]

just wondering what MS Democrat could win a seat in 2006?  Trent Lott will be up for reelection, and no one could beat him, and if he retires Chip Pickering will get the seat.

Mike Moore the former AG, I'm expecting Lott to retire and Moore is very popular and is the only Democrat who could win, on top of which he'd probably enter the race as the narrow favourite. 

Hmmm, Moore vs. Pickering....sounds like fun.  I'd bet on Pickering however.

[Jake]

This is in January 2007

MO & VA go to the Democrats with Talent' retirement and Warner beating Allen

NY & NE go Republican with Johanns beating Nelson & Guiliani defeating Clinton

55-44-1

tossups       could go
MS,PA,TN---> D
WI,MN,FL--->R

[Ben.]

This is in January 2007

MO & VA go to the Democrats with Talent' retirement and Warner beating Allen

NY & NE go Republican with Johanns beating Nelson & Guiliani defeating Clinton

55-44-1

tossups       could go
MS,PA,TN---> D
WI,MN,FL--->R

I reckon the GOP will hold on to MO and Nelson should be fine in NE, however with the right candidate the GOP could give him a run for his money, but I don't think Nelson is going anywhere. At the same time a run for Warner against Allen would be tough and the race in Mississippi (assuming Moore runs) would be closer than it has any right to be.     

[Keystone Phil]

MO & VA go to the Democrats with Talent' retirement and Warner beating Allen

Why do you think Talent will retire? It's only his first term and he's pretty young.

[Ben.]

MO & VA go to the Democrats with Talent' retirement and Warner beating Allen

Why do you think Talent will retire? It's only his first term and he's pretty young.

I believe he’s mentioned that he only wanted to serve one term.

[Keystone Phil]

MO & VA go to the Democrats with Talent' retirement and Warner beating Allen

Why do you think Talent will retire? It's only his first term and he's pretty young.

I believe he’s mentioned that he only wanted to serve one term.

Hmmmm....possible Presidential candidate?

[12th Doctor]

The Senate today, or as of January 2005 to be exact… 



The Democrats are going to have to make inroads in the South again and to do that they do have a number of strong candidates for some of the races that will emerge in states like Mississippi, Virginia and Tennessee. At the same time Jim Talent will be stepping down in Missouri and Rick Santorum will be high on the list of Democratic targets. 

So the Dems will probably be targeting… PA, MS, TN, VA and MO… while at the same time having to defend seats in FL, MN and possibly WI and NY added to this you’re bound to have a “surprise retirement” or two like with Campbell and Breaux this year. As things stand I’d say the Democrats should make minor net gains perhaps one or two seats while also possibly losing in NY if Rudy runs and in WI if Kohl retires… If everything went perfectly for the Dems they’d be looking at net gains of around 6 seats, but it won’t so 2-3 is most likely, that said it’s a long way off…     

Best case for Democrats…

 

Best case for Republicans…

 

Assuming that Warner and Giuliani run, this is the most likely situation…

 

…so net gain of +2 for the Democrats. 

1) Who are these people who can take back the south, or any seats there for the Dems, other than Warner?  They better have absolutly no connection to any national Democrats or they are toast.

2) Why is Talent "stepping down"?

3) I know that it sucks to be a moderate Democrat in a party that has swung so far left that they are no longer electable nationally, but that doesn't mean you have to be dillusional.

[Jake]

The Senate today, or as of January 2005 to be exact… 



The Democrats are going to have to make inroads in the South again and to do that they do have a number of strong candidates for some of the races that will emerge in states like Mississippi, Virginia and Tennessee. At the same time Jim Talent will be stepping down in Missouri and Rick Santorum will be high on the list of Democratic targets. 

So the Dems will probably be targeting… PA, MS, TN, VA and MO… while at the same time having to defend seats in FL, MN and possibly WI and NY added to this you’re bound to have a “surprise retirement” or two like with Campbell and Breaux this year. As things stand I’d say the Democrats should make minor net gains perhaps one or two seats while also possibly losing in NY if Rudy runs and in WI if Kohl retires… If everything went perfectly for the Dems they’d be looking at net gains of around 6 seats, but it won’t so 2-3 is most likely, that said it’s a long way off…     

Best case for Democrats…

 

Best case for Republicans…

 

Assuming that Warner and Giuliani run, this is the most likely situation…

 

…so net gain of +2 for the Democrats. 

1) Who are these people who can take back the south, or any seats there for the Dems, other than Warner?  They better have absolutly no connection to any national Democrats or they are toast.

2) Why is Talent "stepping down"?

3) I know that it sucks to be a moderate Democrat in a party that has swung so far left that they are no longer electable nationally, but that doesn't mean you have to be dillusional.

1) If Harold Ford runs in TN, he might win.  Warner in VA and Moore in MS

2) I'm pretty sure Talent said he would step down after one term.

[Ben.]

The Senate today, or as of January 2005 to be exact… 



The Democrats are going to have to make inroads in the South again and to do that they do have a number of strong candidates for some of the races that will emerge in states like Mississippi, Virginia and Tennessee. At the same time Jim Talent will be stepping down in Missouri and Rick Santorum will be high on the list of Democratic targets. 

So the Dems will probably be targeting… PA, MS, TN, VA and MO… while at the same time having to defend seats in FL, MN and possibly WI and NY added to this you’re bound to have a “surprise retirement” or two like with Campbell and Breaux this year. As things stand I’d say the Democrats should make minor net gains perhaps one or two seats while also possibly losing in NY if Rudy runs and in WI if Kohl retires… If everything went perfectly for the Dems they’d be looking at net gains of around 6 seats, but it won’t so 2-3 is most likely, that said it’s a long way off…     

Best case for Democrats…

 

Best case for Republicans…

 

Assuming that Warner and Giuliani run, this is the most likely situation…

 

…so net gain of +2 for the Democrats. 

1) Who are these people who can take back the south, or any seats there for the Dems, other than Warner?  They better have absolutly no connection to any national Democrats or they are toast.

2) Why is Talent "stepping down"?

3) I know that it sucks to be a moderate Democrat in a party that has swung so far left that they are no longer electable nationally, but that doesn't mean you have to be dillusional.

I’m not being delusional, what I’m anticipating is that Ford and Moore are both able to win in TN and MS respectively… nothing irrational or unlikely about that of the two Moore is probably the better bet, added to which I remain to be convinced that Warner would run in 06 if he felt certain that John Warner would not run in 2008 as he could well be a lock in an open race for the seat even if it where in a presidential year.   Added to which even if Talent steps down MO will proably stick with the GOP, that said if Geppy ran for the Dem it would be fun, he would proably lose but it'd be fun (ah... Geppy, man! even he was better than Pelosi [spits])   

[Keep cool-idge]

Lol

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

The Senate of the future! Someone please necropost this and laugh at it in 2030.

However, I seriously think that Democrats will gain in the SW and Deep South while the GOP gains in the PNW, the Midwest, and NE.

[Person Man]

Lol

Hey, it was reasonable guess in 2005. People thought it would take a major downturn to make the Democrats relevant again but that they would win "some seats" no matter what in 2006.

[SamTilden2020]

Back then, Ensign and Reid locked down NV, Smith and Domenici were a thing, and AR was still strongly DEM statewide (Lincoln, Pryor, and... Huckabee?). Oh boy how times have changed!

[Doimper]

Up to a point. Demographic changes in Georgia (the massive growth of Atlanta suburbia) doomed the Democrats there

How the times have changed.

[Orser67]

We might be looking at something like this in the future:

This was a really good prediction, except for Virginia.