Can Democrats win back the Senate this fall?

[PROGRESSIVE1]

If so, which seats will we pickup besides Illinois and Colorado?

[JohnKleeb]

1. I hear Alaska is possible

[coloradodem2005]

2. I have also heard Oklahoma.

I am not sure, but I heard that Salazar was behind by 1 point against Coors. So, I am a little skeptical.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

3. Arkansas will stay Democrat

Blanche Lincoln is a conservative Dem and I've yet to see anything about her opponant.

[spotbird]

4. Oklahoma is doable, but Carson needs to be nice to his base.

He has been making everyone angry with some outrageous ads stating that he isn't really a Democrat, or similar words.

[fujiyama]

5. It seems unlikely

A poll showed Carson (D) trailing Coburn by ten points. I hope the democrat can win the AK and CO seats as well. Both are very close. Both OK and AK are very republican states so it should be difficult but the democrats running in all three of these states are somewhat popular.

A democrat would also have to keep the NC seat (Bowles looks like he can do that), the FL seat (I hope Castor beats Martinez) and LA (I haven't heard anything about this race). I'm assuming the SC and GA seats are lost causes, though I think there's a better chance in SC than GA.

One bright spot of course is Illinois, where Obama is a definite pick up.

[Toronto Ron]

6. I think there's about a 30-40% chance, and then

only if Kerry wins the Presidency so that the Dems break the 50-50 tie. The Repigs now have 51. They will almost certainly gain one in GA, to be cancelled by Obama in IL. So we need to win one more of (Alaska, Colorado, Oklahoma) than they win of (North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, Louisiana, South Dakota), to mention what seem to be the close races. From what I hear, our chances our good in Alaska and Colorado, and I'm pretty sure we'll hold North Carolina.

[NewJerseyDem]

12. If Kerry wins, we lose his seat

So, if there is a 50-50 split then it becomes a 50-49 split in favor of the Republicans until the special election in April. So, Democrats would be in a minority until then, assuming a Democrat wins that special election.

[DarthDem]

7. Yes . . .

. . . but it will not be easy. Still, remember 2000 - - the clowns were up 55-45 (imagine for a second how depressing that was), and we got a tie with a surprise five-seat gain that was not predicted by virtually any analyst. I think this year is very similar - - the national polls are garbage as usual, and, IMHO, not reflective of the state of the electorate.

State-by-state, GA is a sure "loss" while IL is a sure gain, so we stay 51-49 (I'm just treating Jeffords as a Democrat here).

I believe Salazar will beat Coors in CO - - Salazar is immensely popular and up in the latest poll there by 3-4%. Cumulative: +1.

I don't think there is any real question that in NC, Bowles will beat Burr, who has no statewide name recognition and has not distinguished himself one bit in Congress (he used to be my rep). Bowles only lost to Plasticwoman last time because of pure name value. +1.

Perhaps someone from SD can give better analysis than this, but if the great Thune couldn't beat Johnson, I see no reason why he can beat Daschle. Also, bear in mind that Rep. Herseth won the Kill Bill seat. Still +1.

In LA, Vitter is a zero and Chris John is Breaux's handpicked successor. There's been a tremedous Democratic trend here lately (in fact, I wish Kerry and Edwards would start paying some attention to the state immediately), so, although there will be a runoff, I think John will win just as Landrieu and Blanco did. +1.

There was a lot of initial buzz about Tenenbaum in SC, but now it looks as though she is polling behind DeMint, a real joker who (much like Burr) has never accomplished anything in the House. This is a real shame, but this is a "sleeper" seat for me. Still, at the moment, you have to give it to the Pukes. +0.

I think Betty Castor will beat McCollum, who will be the winner on Tuesday in FL. If it's Martinez, I may have to rethink my prediction, but there is a lot of anger at the Bushco dynasty in the state right now. +0.

In AK, a lot of people seem to think that Tony Knowles has an uphill battle, probably because it's a Republican state, but I really don't think so. Remember that these people elected Knowles twice, and much like the Dakotas, which are helping us field four Democratic senators right now, Alaskans elect on personality. Fortunately for us, Lisa M. has none; her dad is wildly unpopular as governor; and there's palpable anger at the nepotism that got her into office, where she's done exactly nothing. I think this is a pickup. +1.

In OK, I think Carson has a real shot, but I had not heard of that poll with Coburn (a worthy prospective addition to the U.S. Senate in the mold of legendary Jim Inhofe) way up, so I guess I'll go worst-case and assume that we will not pick this one up. However, no one should write this seat off. +1.

Then there are the potential surprise upsets, like Farmer over Bond in MO and Hoeffel over Specter in PA. Both quite possible. (Incidentally, if Specter wins, this is it for Repuke senators from PA for a long time; Sanitarium is going down in 2006 and the Pigs have a weak bench to field when Specter steps down after this term.)

So, the way I look at it, in my worst-case scenario (which may still be a bit optimistic), with no win in SC and no win in OK, we gain a seat and a tie (depending on how the MA situation is resolved, assuming Kerry wins). Moreover, we've weathered the storm of retirements in Southern seats that we knew, at least in part, was coming, so we're in good shape for the future.

Comments welcome.

[Hippo_Tron]

11. Chris John isn't necesarilly the nominee in LA

Although, it is likely. John would have an easier time winning in the runoff, but he's kind of a DINO.

[DarthDem]

17. Right

I know. But he seems to be the favorite. Breaux is a bit of a DINO himself, so it shouldn't matter. John will certainly be no Zellout.

[liberalpragmatist]

8. YES - here's the total view

There are 51 Republicans, 47 Democrats, 1 independent caucasing with the Democrats (Jeffords), and 1 DINO who caucases with the Republicans and would vote with them in a leadership vote if one were held. So Republicans total currently hold the Senate 52-48.

Georgia is a near-certain "loss" although actually it's a Republican keep. We will certainly pick up Illinois (+1), so we have a good chance to at least make the Senate 51-49.

However, I think we can up that by 2 or 3. Here's why:

Alaska, Oklahoma, and Colorado are extremely possible Democratic pickups. Realistically, we may break the results at 2-1, maybe, say, take Alaska and Colorado but not Oklahoma. Taking all 3 is very possible however.

There's a second tier which includes Pennsylvania and Missouri, and a third tier which consists of Kentucky. We could probably realistically expect no gains here or 1, but if there's a strong Democratic trend and these races tighten towards the end, it's very possible that we'll pickup Pennsylvania and/or Missouri.

In the South, we have even or better-than-even chances at keeping our seats in Florida, North Carolina, and Louisiana. South Carolina's a possibility, although it'll probably have to take a strong national showing and a strong pro-Kerry trend throughout the country, enough so that it can lift Tenenbaum to victory even in an otherwise pro-Bush state. However, South Carolina is realistically, probably a loss.

Then there's South Dakota, where Daschle faces a close race and could well lose.

Worst case scenario: we stay at an R-D ratio of 52-48.

Best (realistic) case scenario: 47-53 (R-D).

Bestest of the best scenario: 46-54 (R-D).

Realistic takeover scenario: 49-51 or 50-50.

Remember that often, the slightest national trend can tilt all the close senate races one way. Even in 2000, an otherwise close election, the narrow Gore trend caused the Democrats to pick up 6 seats and make a net gain of 4, something nobody had guessed. Most expected us to just make a net gain of 2 or so. We only ended up losing 2 seats, one of which wasn't competitive, and we nearly won in another competitive race in Montana. So we ended up winning almost ALL the close Senate races, exc. for Virginia and Montana. The same could happen this year.

[Droopy]

10. Nice analysis.

Very informative. Thanks for posting.

[Hippo_Tron]

14. Zell didn't vote for Frist as majority leader

Granted, that's the ONLY thing he doesn't do for the GOP.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

16. Thank you! I need some optimism right now.

It will be a hard long 2 months.

[keyzersoze13]

9. I can see it happening if

Colorado, Illinois, Alaska, and Oklahoma go our way. If we can hang on everywhere else, then we'll jump up to a two seat majority, right? (If my highly suspect math skills prove right). If not this year, then very soon we will have a majority.

[welshTerrier2]

13. check out this website

http://www.electoral-vote.com/info/senate.html

[featherman]

15. Most likely not but very close

I like IL, AK, and CO to flip to DEM (+3)
Most likely GA and SC flip to GOP (+2)
Dems need to hold FL, NC, SD
OK is a stretch but possible.
Maybe a +2 overall and effective control with VP Edwards casting tie breaker but more likely stays same or +1 for DEMS