Prediction Map

* = Pickup via defeat of incumbent; ^ = Pickup of an open seat

Prediction States Won

		25 |	33 |	50 |
Dem	17
Rep	14
Ind	2
Non	17

Confidence States Won

		25 |	33 |	50 |
Dem	11
Rep	11
Ind	2
Tos	9
Non	17

State Pick-ups

	Gain			Loss			Hold			Net Gain
	Inc.	Open	Total	Inc.	Open	Total	Inc.	Open	Total
Dem	+3	0	+3	-1	-2	-3	13	1	14	0
Rep	+1	+1	+2	-3	0	-3	11	1	12	-1
Ind	0	+1	+1	0	0	0	0	1	1	+1

Predicted Senate Control (110th Congress):

Party Seats Up Seats Not Up Total Seats Democratic 17 27 44 Republican 14 40 54 Independent 2 0 2

Prediction Score (max Score = 66)

Score	State Wins	State Percentages
41	28	13

Comments

Sadly, my head finally took over and I switched both Minnesota and Pennsylvania, though I took both steps with a heavy heart.

I still am hoping for Steele in Maryland and I think Keane is pulling away in New Jersey.

I still think Corker and Talent win. Michigan appears to be a lost opportunity, as does Washington.

But I think this map is realistic.

Prediction History

Comments History - show

Version History

3: 2006-10-01 @ 00:24:56 2: 2006-08-12 @ 10:10:43 1: 2006-06-16 @ 20:51:12 View Version

Member Comments

 By: gumball machine (L-CA) - 2006-10-01 @ 00:31:54

This is your best map yet. you fixed PA and MN! This map is relistic. Keep up the good work!

---

 By: RepubforDem (R-IL) - 2006-10-01 @ 00:41:19

I agree gumball. Now, if Polpro would only fix Ohio this map would be near perfect.

---

 By: polpro (R-NV) - 2006-10-01 @ 00:42:48

Thank you for the comments. I didn't want to switch either one but Santorum can't get closer than 10 and the wrong Kennedy is losing.

---

 By: polpro (R-NV) - 2006-10-01 @ 00:52:52

DeWine is not as "out of it" as Santorum. I still think he can pull it out in the end

---

 By: RepubforDem (R-IL) - 2006-10-01 @ 00:57:41

Under normal circumstances I would agree with you polpro. However, with the Ohio Republican Party in such disarray, I think Dewine's chances are limited. RCP average has Brown ahead by 5.2% Not an insurmountable lead, but Brown has been consistently ahead since June. Sadly, Dewine maybe voted out not because of his record, but because of his party affiliation. Similar to how the Republican Party suffered in Illinois in 2002.

---

 By: polpro (R-NV) - 2006-10-01 @ 01:02:48

I agree that the worst thing that ever happened to the Ohio GOP is Bob Taft being elected Governor in 1998. But I still think DeWine has the political skills to surmount the problems of Taft.

---

 By: RepubforDem (R-IL) - 2006-10-01 @ 01:11:37

Perhaps you will be right about DeWine pulling it through in the end. Honestly, I will be surprised if he does... However, stranger things have happened in politics. May I ask why you appear certain that Burns will lose in Montana? That race as well appears to favor the Democrat. However I do not feel it is a safe win for Tester by any means.

---

 By: polpro (R-NV) - 2006-10-01 @ 01:18:46

Montana is a solidly "red" or (or "blue" in this site's case) state in Presidential elections. However, in Congressional elections, it is a different story. I think Denny Rehberg would have won the seat if Burns had retired, but Abramoff is will take Burns out. The wrong candidate can be fatal--and though I don't want to call it, Burns is toast.

---

 By: RepubforDem (R-IL) - 2006-10-01 @ 01:31:29

I actually feel that he should be toast. Several of Burns' comments have been unprofessional to say the least. Besides, Tester appears to be the type of guy who I would enjoy watching a football game with and slugging a beer or two.

---

 By: Olawakandi (G-CA) - 2006-10-01 @ 01:36:21

But DeWine's approvals are at 42% right now I don't think he can win at those present approvals. I still think Brown can win.

---

 By: RepubforDem (R-IL) - 2006-10-01 @ 01:40:12

I think Brown will more than likely win. New England and Midwestern Republicans are not doing well in this election cycle for various reasons. Plus, I am surprised no one has commented on the Foley resignation yet. I am extremely upset with the Congressional Republican response to this event and I feel this will carry over in November. Especially if an investigation is launched.

---

 By: gumball machine (L-CA) - 2006-10-01 @ 14:16:04

I see this as the GOP's best case scenario while still within the realm of possibility. If this really happens, I am doubtful the GOP will have any trouble in '08 Last Edit: 2006-10-01 @ 14:51:06

---

 By: db099221 (--CA) - 2006-10-01 @ 16:02:56

Harry Reid has asked the Attorney General to launch an investigation to the Republicans' knowledge of Foley's actions.

---

 By: polpro (R-NV) - 2006-10-01 @ 20:34:09

Thank you for the kind comments, Gumball. We appear to agree except for Ohio. I watched the DeWine-Brown debate today on "Meet the Press" and thought DeWine did a better job than Brown. If Santorum was closer than 10 points behind, I would not have changed that race. Frankly, Mark Foley's conduct was disgraceful and I say "good riddance to bad rubbish." Until there is evidence otherwise, I will believe Denny Hastert's and John Boehner's explanation that they knew about the photo request (which was deeply inappropriate but not criminal) but not the instant messages which are extremely creepy. All that said, I think personal scandals (like this one) have little play on other elections.

---

 By: db099221 (--CA) - 2006-10-01 @ 21:09:09

1998, as I'm sure you know, contradicts your last sentence, polpro. The Republicans didn't gain because the GOP started the impeachment process, which was unpopular with the American public. But I don't wanna get into a debate over that whole thing again. However, this is different. There's incontrovertible evidence that Foley was soliciting sex with a minor for a long time. And there are serious allegations that Hastert and Boehner knew about it and tried to cover it up. I am NOT making a judgment, but I think it deserves to be investigated, and the effect the scandal will have on the House elections remains to be seen.

---

 By: polpro (R-NV) - 2006-10-01 @ 21:14:41

How much affect did the Barney Frank scandal have on the next election? Zero. How about the Fred Richmond scandal earlier? Or the Jon Hinton scandal? (remember him?). Most Americans can figure out that Mark Foley was engaging in disgraceful conduct that has nothing at all to do with his political affiliation.

---

 By: db099221 (--CA) - 2006-10-01 @ 21:25:47

Actually, no, polpro, I don't remember Jon Hinton. Who was he? But there was no evidence that Democratic leaders or other Democrats knew about the Frank or Richmond scandals. Foley, however, is a different situation. You're right: it has nothing to do with his political affiliation; however, if the Republicans covered it up, it has everything to do with this year's elections. Last Edit: 2006-10-01 @ 21:26:27

---

 By: polpro (R-NV) - 2006-10-01 @ 21:34:37

Jon Hinton was a Republican Congressman from Mississippi whom I believe was actualy caught in a bathroom stall with another man. His Congressional career ended in short order. Again, the Hastert and Boehner explanations make sense--they knew about the inapproprite email. Foley's instant messages were much, much worse. Assuming they are being honest, what, pray-tell, should they or the Ethics Committee have done? Rodney Alexander looks good--The kid's parents reported it and he took it to leadership. Tom Reynolds took it to Denny Hastert. All that said, how does this affect ANY other Congressman running for re-election? Last Edit: 2006-10-01 @ 21:36:02

---

 By: db099221 (--CA) - 2006-10-01 @ 21:45:25

Again, there should be an investigation because there are serious charges that Hastert and Boehner knew about Foley's actions. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/30/AR2006093001265.html http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/01/washington/01foley.html?ex=1317355200&en=3cc73da1de57ef98&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss And when the honesty of a party's Speaker and Majority Leader is questioned, how does that NOT affect other Representatives' elections?

---

 By: polpro (R-NV) - 2006-10-01 @ 22:02:57

You are assuming that they are covering something up. I have yet to see ANYONE IN the Republican leadership defending Foley. If they were, there might be legs to this. Otherwise, I doubt a single vote goes to a Demcrat over this (outside of Foley's district).

---

 By: db099221 (--CA) - 2006-10-01 @ 22:08:47

Okay, polpro, when I did I say that they were covering something up? I didn't. I think there should be an investigation, though. Of course they're not defending Foley. Who the hell's going to defend a pedophile? That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about a possible cover-up by top Republicans.

---

 By: RepubforDem (R-IL) - 2006-10-01 @ 22:30:32

What I find interesting is the somewhat confusing statements made by Speaker Hastert and Majority Leader Boehner. Hastert claims he does not recall people bringing this up to him. While other Republicans claim that they did bring it up with House Leadership. Well if somebody brought something like that up to me, even I thought it was a total lie, it seems like the type of thing that would stick in someone's memory. The initial response from the Republican leadership appeared like every man for himself. I am not suggesting at all that there was a planned or coordinated coverup here, but something really stinks about this story and I have not yet put my finger on it.

---

 By: RepubforDem (R-IL) - 2006-10-01 @ 22:32:57

Oh and polpro before I forget. If the Democrats or somebody else can give the appearance that this Foley situation could have been handled differently and better by the House Republican Leadership, then I would argue that this situation will hurt the Republicans, especially in close House races. I doubt that it would have much effect on the Senate races.

---

 By: Olawakandi (G-CA) - 2006-10-01 @ 22:38:30

Again, polpro I think Strickland leading by 20 points in the governor race I think will help Brown to victory. Brown in the Mason Dixon poll is carrying Southeast OH, where dems don't run strong in.

---

 By: polpro (R-NV) - 2006-10-02 @ 00:39:01

Olawakandi--The movement is in DeWine's direction. I still think he wins. db--you ask in your first sentence where the coverup is and in your last sentence implies there might be one. Be that as is may, I don't see it affecting the election in any significant way.

---

 By: Olawakandi (G-CA) - 2006-10-02 @ 00:42:34

Yes, if DeWine gets his approvals near 50% which is plausable I see him winning but not in its current form at 42-45%. Cook still rate it as tossup and so do I. Last Edit: 2006-10-02 @ 00:58:19

---

 By: db099221 (--CA) - 2006-10-02 @ 00:42:34

polpro I said "possible," and that's true. And if a cover-up is revealed, the GOP's chances in competitive House races will be severely damaged.

---

 By: ryer (R-VA) - 2006-10-02 @ 01:03:13

Judging from today's New York Times article, db099221 - provided you read the article in its entirety - it doesn't appear likely that any cover-up occurred. It appears that the e-mails to the page in Louisiana - and not the instant messages to other pages - were the only items of which the Republican leadership was aware. While the e-mails may have caused some concern, they were hardly salacious on their face.

---

 By: db099221 (--CA) - 2006-10-02 @ 21:35:32

ryer I find it strange that no one detects anything wrong with a grown man interested in a sixteen-year-old boy and asking his birthday and for a photo of him. But again, THERE SHOULD BE AN INVESTIGATION TO DETERMINE "WHAT THEY KNEW AND WHEN THEY KNEW IT." I hope that all agree with that.

---

 By: polpro (R-NV) - 2006-10-02 @ 22:37:50

I think just about everyone detects something wrong with what Congressman Foley did--and I think that there should be an investigation to find out what can be done to fix the problem so it doesn't happen again. This is not a political issue and the Dems should be ashamed of themselvlves if they try to politicize it. All that said, the leadership of the House needs to look at their own actions so something of this nature does not happen again.

---

 By: db099221 (--CA) - 2006-10-02 @ 22:55:29

The Dems shouldn't be "ashamed" if the Republicans did in fact try to cover it up, but we don't know if they did, and there should be an investigation - not only to fix the problem - but to find out what Hastert and Boehner knew and when they knew it.

---

 By: dgentile (G-NJ) - 2006-10-06 @ 00:41:18

Condolences on the prediction revision. There certaily have been a lot of ups and downs in this election cycle and still a lot of nail biters. It does seem like events are driving the shifts more than the candidates, particularly in the house. But, I agree that Foley is not going to drag down people like Snowe or Lugar. I think it is actually a negative distraction for Dems, ala Jon Benet in the middle of a bad news week for Reps. Did anyone notice we lost what, 20 GIs this week? On another note, 30 Polls in a few days, not one on NV! Maybe the Foley issue will spark interest there.

---

 By: Olawakandi (G-CA) - 2006-10-06 @ 00:51:09

They already polled NV, they had it a 9 pt race and a 20 pt lead in the Mason Dixon poll. NV and AZ aren't going to be close, so they aren't going to predict it.

---

 By: dgentile (G-NJ) - 2006-10-10 @ 01:05:18

My beef is that they've polled NY 20 times with an average spread of 30%, FL 25 times with similar wide spread, getting as wide as 45%. So it is certainly not an issue of being close. I think it is a 'small state' small market thing. That might explain why MSM is not paying attention, but why is DNCC? A few bucks could make a big difference when polls show Dems have an edge on the issues. I'm starting to see reports on Ensign going negative with the bogus, recycled NSA ad. I don't think he would be doing that if he weren't unnerved by something.., Foley, Iraq, anything or everything. That's why you have look beyond stale and widely differing polls.

---

 By: RepubforDem (R-IL) - 2006-10-10 @ 01:19:30

Nevada might be leaning Dem too. NV-2 is listed as a competitive race.

---

 By: Olawakandi (G-CA) - 2006-10-12 @ 18:34:57

NV and AZ aren't competetive, they aren't going to waist money on them. Just like MI isn't anymore.

---

 By: padfoot714 (D-OH) - 2006-10-13 @ 00:11:03

The Senate races in NV and AZ may not be competitive anymore but the Democrats could pick up as many as 4 seats in the House between those two states. Republicans have already essentially ceded Kolbe's old seat to the Dems. As for all the debate going on about Ohio, As a resident of the Buckeye State I can say with some certainty that DeWine has an uphill battle. Most of it is not his own doing though. Ohio is ripe with Republican scandals, we all hate Taft, and Strickland is trouncing Blackwell in the Givernor's race. All that plus the national scandals and a generally bad year for Republicans is what's making this a competitive race. As far as I can tell Brown hasn't really campaigned on anything besides Iraq and DeWine's "links" to unpopular Ohio and national Republicans. Basically what I'm saying is that this race isn't about voting for Brown its about voting for anyone but DeWine. So far its working pretty well but it remains to be seen if Brown can keep it up all the way to November without presenting voters with an actual platform.

---

 By: RepubforDem (R-IL) - 2006-10-13 @ 00:17:38

How interested do you feel the voters are in the Buckeye State? Do you think they will turn out or sit home? And who among them will turn out?

---

 By: gumball machine (L-CA) - 2006-11-01 @ 00:03:26

6 weeks ago this could have happened. Now, OH, MD, and NJ (and possibly MO, TN, and VA)are going Dem.

---

 By: padfoot714 (D-OH) - 2006-11-01 @ 00:15:04

I wouldn't be so quick to call TN and VA. Especially not TN.

---

 By: gumball machine (L-CA) - 2006-11-06 @ 19:47:31

Who do you think will have the most accurate map?

---

 By: padfoot714 (D-OH) - 2006-11-06 @ 23:37:26

Everyone thinks their own map is most accurate I'm sure. If I were to pick anyone though it would be RepubforDem.

---

 By: RepubforDem (R-IL) - 2006-11-06 @ 23:41:16

Don't go nuts there padfoot. Even at this stage, I am having little confidence in a few of my predictions.

---

 By: cm04g (I-FL) - 2006-11-07 @ 01:43:52

My final prediction is Pelosi will indeed be the next Speaker. The GOP will go down into defeat and Vice president Dick Cheney will break the tie (50R-48D-2I).

---

 By: polpro (R-NV) - 2006-11-08 @ 15:04:03

The elections are now over. The Democrats ran a smart campaign and attracted good candidates. Frankly, if I could choose two races I could change and keep the same apparent 51-49 Democratic margin, I would triple the size of the Senate Black caucus and switch Tennessee and Maryland. Both Michael Steele and Harold Ford, Jr. were outstanding candidates and I think both would have been excellent United States Senators. That said, I applaud all of those who took the time to post on this site--it has been an enjoyable experience overall. I will be interested when Dave Liep does the '08 map--and allows us all to play Eletoral College Prognosticator as well. For now, good luck to all of you and thanks to everyone who wrote a civil post. Until the final two weeks, when I finally burned out, this was one of my favorite sites. Finally, here are my predictions for the nominees in '08, just so you all can laugh at how off I am: The Democratic ticket will be Senator Clinton and Governor Richardson; the Republican ticket will be Governor Romney and Secretary Rice.

---

 By: dgentile (G-NJ) - 2006-11-09 @ 19:53:57

Nice send off and not a bad score despite sticking with your heart. 2008 Prediction, Gore/Edwards. Reid will announce he won't run in 2010 (at 70), step down, and Hillary will become majority leader.

---

 By: gumball machine (L-CA) - 2006-11-11 @ 21:27:48

Gore, Clinton, and Obama cannot become president. I think that the winning ticket will either be Edwards/Warner or Colbert/Stewart.

---

 By: RepubforDem (R-IL) - 2006-11-13 @ 03:08:42

I'll go with Colbert/Stewart.

---

 By: gumball machine (L-CA) - 2006-11-13 @ 19:15:48

Juging by his Hungarian bridge campaign, I think he will run as an Independent/write-in, which may be bad for the Democratic candidate.

---

 By: Olawakandi (G-CA) - 2006-11-21 @ 09:40:51

I will go with Bayh/Warner as presidential material, they are centrist to win.

---

 By: Olawakandi (G-CA) - 2006-11-21 @ 09:42:31

Although OH is a culturally conservative state polpro, that doesn't mean they are going to vote all the time republican. They will detour that path if they feel that the republicans aren't doing a good enough job.

---

 By: gumball machine (L-CA) - 2006-11-23 @ 18:14:15

The problem for the Dems in 08 is that they have history going for them, but they don't seem to want to use it. Judging by their candidates (Clinton, Obama, Gore, Edwards, Kerry, Biden, Bayh, Lieberman, Feingold, etc.) it would seem as if they are trying to lose in 08. It actually wouldn't surprise me, since they tend to pass more socialist legislation when they are NOT president.

---

 By: Olawakandi (G-CA) - 2006-11-24 @ 23:19:34

One thing for sure if the war continue on its current path, Democrats will probably win again in 2008. With electorial votes to spare. Last Edit: 2006-11-24 @ 23:19:56

---

 By: gumball machine (L-CA) - 2006-11-25 @ 23:00:31

I can eliminate every Dem candidate that I listed with historic records: Minority Democrats never win national elections: Clinton, Lieberman, Obama Ultra-Liberal Democrats haven't won since '64: Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Feingold Openly-Corrupt Politicians haven't won nationally since '60: Clinton, Kerry, Feingold, Biden Governors have won every election since '76 (except '88): Clinton, Kerry, Obama, Gore, Edwards, Feingold, Biden, Lieberman, Bayh, etc. The winning candiate has not lost their home state since 1912: Edwards, Bayh, Gore

---

 By: Olawakandi (G-CA) - 2006-11-26 @ 07:01:32

Ok, you want to play that game, I can play that game of the republicans as well. Mitt Romney and Guilliani are going to fail to capture their homestates of NY and MA and Guilliani is running ahead of everyone else for the republican nomination. As for McCain, we have never elected someone president that came from the southwest like AZ. Barry Goldwater can attest to that. Usually, the party coming out of the second midterm, the weakest, usually doesn't win the national election afterward, and the republicans are coming out of a slaughter this past election. The point is is that we that is what elections are for, to determine who is the best and the voters will decide not you or me. There can always be a first of anything just like JFK was the first Catholic. And by the way Evan Bayh was governor before he became senator, so he is a former governor. The point of the moderates is to get some of those swing states that the Dems lost last time like OH and NV and FL not win every state in the south like KY, SC, and GA. We won't probably win any of those states anytime soon. And John Edwards can certainly win OH or FL or NV. Last Edit: 2006-11-27 @ 07:02:09

---

 By: mgrossbe (D-IN) - 2006-11-28 @ 20:52:41

FYI Bayh was the two term governor of indiana before running for senator so there one off your list plus he really could win indiana look at the election results he would just need to increase carson margin which shouldn't be hard and hold the rest, with mitch be as unpopular as the french here he is only going to be drag on a rep canidate.

---

 By: gumball machine (L-CA) - 2006-11-30 @ 20:27:32

Sorry about that. I aws trying to type it fast so I could do other stuff. I do think that Bayh, Edwards, or Lieberman could be good candidates if they could do well in the polls. Call me crazy, but I think that the media may be responsible for Clinton and Obama doing well in the primaries. They could be publishing some fake polls to inspire Dem support for them. Dan Rather is still alive.

---

 By: Olawakandi (G-CA) - 2006-12-16 @ 19:54:13

Evan Bayh has stated today that he will no longer seek the presidency so Evan Bayh should be taken off the list.

---

 By: RepubforDem (R-IL) - 2006-12-20 @ 20:52:11

Does anyone else think it is an incredibly foolish idea for Mr. Obama to run for President in 2008? I can't believe this stuff is being taken seriously. Wait until the Republican attack machine gets their claws into Mr. Obama and his connections with the Illinois Democratic Party. The extended Honeymoon between Obama and the press will soon be over when that happens. Unbelievable...

---

 By: Olawakandi (G-CA) - 2006-12-21 @ 06:54:28

He is to the left of Hillary Clinton and he has a liberal voting record, done by the national journal, I think he should reconsider his shot at being president. Kerry learned that lesson. Although, since Daley endorsed Obama, yesterday, I don't know if he will reconsider, he still might jump in. Lastly, being the front runner makes you a target in the primaries, if Obama does jump in, he will be a target, let's see how well he will fair, when the debates occur. He has to win the debates to be nominated and Dick Morris said that he isn't that good of a debator. But Obama might vye to become a vice presidential pick. Last Edit: 2006-12-21 @ 07:04:00

---

 By: RepubforDem (R-IL) - 2006-12-22 @ 00:00:42

Outside of Chicago, I do not believe a Daley endorsement helps anyone. Second, the debate issue is important. Obama went up against the self destructive Alan Keyes in 2004 and has never really had to debate a credible candidate. Seriously, Obama should just relax and be Senator for Life from Illinois.

---

 By: Olawakandi (G-CA) - 2006-12-22 @ 14:53:50

I think we should wait until Obama announces before we can make conclusions.

---

 By: Olawakandi (G-CA) - 2006-12-28 @ 22:29:58

Some bad news for Obama, recent polls have shown him closing the gap between himself and Hillary Clinton, but polls released today suggest otherwise, he is trailing Hillary by double digits in every single primary state done by ARG www.americanresearchgroup.com. I think IA can be argued, but the other states, Hillary is the clear frontrunner or favorite right now. Last Edit: 2006-12-29 @ 01:16:36

---

 By: Olawakandi (G-CA) - 2007-02-11 @ 12:00:10

It seems as though I underestimated Barak Obama's chance, it seems as though that he has a realistic shot at winning the nomination. It seems as though the anti-war liberal wing of the Democratic party is strong enough to nominate even an African-American candidate even if he has so little experience.

---

Links

• View polpro Gubernatorial Predictions
• View Most Recent Entries
• View Entries with Most Recent Member Comments
• Go to Senatorial Prediction Home
• Update My 2006 Senatorial Prediction Map