2012 Senate Outlook - - Good

[DarthDem]

Here's something to counter an MSM/Faux/Razz meme you might be hearing in the next few days or weeks that the Democrats have a "tough map" in 2012 in the Senate.


D SEATS (21)

Easy Holds (14)

Dianne Feinstein, CA - - also true if she decides to retire, but she won't
Daniel Akaka, HI - - also true if he decides to retire
Ben Cardin, MD
Bob Menendez, NJ - - there will be the usual MSM-fueled angst about Tom Kean or some such
Jeff Bingaman, NM
Kirsten Gillibrand, NY
Bob Casey, Jr., PA
Sheldon Whitehouse, RI
Amy Klobuchar, MN
Maria Cantwell, WA
Joe Manchin, WV
Herb Kohl, WI - - if he decides to retire, which I doubt, the probable recruit will be Feingold
Bernie Sanders, VT (I)
Lieberman-Held Seat, CT (Lieberman is toast in the primary process or will lose if running as a R)

Slightly Harder, but Still Likely Holds (4)

Tom Carper, DE - - I actually wish he'd retire; we'd get a better Dem in the seat
Bill Nelson, FL - - he's an institution and will be running in a year when there's excellent turnout
Debbie Stabenow, MI - - tough state for Dems right now but she's better liked than most
Claire McCaskill, MO - - bizarre state, but she's a good campaigner and seems to connect there

Vulnerable Seats (5)

Jon Tester, MT - - and honestly, not really that vulnerable; only on here because it's MT
Ben Nelson, NE - - he'll lose and no one will care
Kent Conrad, ND - - only subject to takeover if he decides to retire; otherwise he'll win
Sherrod Brown, OH - - with African-Americans voting again in 2012 I think he'll be fine
Jim Webb, VA - - also helped by presumed large African-American turnout


R SEATS (10)

High-Probability D Pickups (3)

Scott Brown, MA - - people will try to say this isn't in the bag for Dems, but it is
Olympia Snowe, ME - - she'll get teabagged and the D will win
John Ensign, NV - - may be indicted or resign first; I like Rep. Berkley to win this

Lower-Probability D Pickups (2)

Jon Kyl, AZ - - only if he gets teabagged and/or there's a terrific D with Latino outreach who runs
Richard Lugar, IN - - maybe if he gets teabagged or retires; otherwise, forget it


Likely R Holds (5)

Roger Wicker, MS
Bob Corker, TN - - may bet teabagged, but Dems can't win there
Kay Bailey Hutchison, TX
Orrin Hatch, UT - - see Corker
John Barrasso, WY


I'm looking for a somewhat boring cycle with a swing of about a seat or so either way, maybe two, but nothing larger than that. Dems go in effectively +4 with the MA pickup pretty much assured, and will have a good shot at whoever defeats Snowe in ME (or even Snowe herself). That should offset the Nebraska loss, a possible Conrad retirement and losses in tougher areas and we should keep the Senate rather easily.

Thoughts, anyone?

[CitizenLeft]

1. Sherrod Brown.

Of that list of vulnerables, he is the one that MUST be saved - he's a true working man's Senator, Democrat to the core, no blue dog bullshit with him. I think you're right, too... heavy turnout makes him safe. I'm pretty sure there will be. Even so... losing him would truly be a freakin' political tragedy, and that in and of itself makes me nervous.

[falcon97]

2. +1 n/t

[craigmatic]

4. You're right about Brown. He even looks like a democrat. I think he's safe too.

[krawhitham]

18. He is not safe, Ohio is red as can be right now

They have GOV, state chamber, 1/2 Senate & 9 of 14 house seats.

I hope he is on another ticket in 2012 anyway, Joe will be to old to run in 2016 and it would help bring Ohio to Obama in 2012

[karynnj]

38. Joe already said he is running - but if not Brown would make more sense than any other

name I have heard.

[krawhitham]

63. 2 years is a long time to change ones mind

[DarthDem]

43. Wait - -

You don't think he can win a Senate seat but he's going to help Obama win Ohio as the Veep?

Nah. He'll remain in the Senate, and, with better youth and African-American turnout, will win.

[krawhitham]

64. Yeah, people are stupid

He would get more votes as VP, people will want to see someone from their state in the white house

[Ozymanithrax]

3. Scott Brown will be primaried by a Teabagger.

He has pissed them off.

[craigmatic]

6. Doesn't matter who primaries him. The dem will win.

[Ozymanithrax]

31. In that we agree.

Mas. doesn't appear to be amenable to reading the tea leaves.

[BlueStater]

5. The hypocritical shithead voters in Louisiana reelected Vitter.

Ensign can win too. Granted, Nevada might be less nuts than Louisiana but I refuse to count my chickens before they hatch.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

7. If The Economy Doesn't Improve We Will See A Repeat Of 2012

At every level

Diffferent actors. Same plot.

[DarthDem]

8. A Repeat of 2010 . . .

. . . would mean Democrats doing fairly well in the Senate. So that squares with my prediction of no loss of the majority.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

9. They Lost Six Seats And Failed To Pick Up One

How does that equate to doing fairly well?

[DarthDem]

14. The Answer!

I know from your other posts that you're very positive and open-minded, so I'm sure this will assuage your concerns.

First, three of the six losses were unavoidable due to somewhat surprise retirements in states with no bench or a poor Dem bench. There's really no seat that fits that recipe for 2012 except Conrad's.

As for the other three losses, Giannoulias in IL was a bad candidate (even though I liked him) with ties to the banks, PA wasn't much of a loss in that we'd only had the seat for 18 months or so, and WI was just one of those things - - three-term incumbent, purple state with a history of being fickle. I might add that we barely lost PA and IL, and in a presidential year, wouldn't have lost either one.

The 2012 map doesn't fit with these sorts of losses.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

19. I Am Open Minded But I Consider Myself To Be A Stone Cold Realist

If you lose six senate seats a cycle pretty soon you run out of senate seats.

As an aside, IL is a solidly blue state and it was the president's old seat. Pennsylvania is a solidly blue state and we fielded a really good candidate, a retired admiral, and lost. I don't think WI is purple. It hasn't gone red in a presidential election since Reagan's 1984 49 state landslide.

I will make this simple. If the economy recovers we will do well in 2012. If the economy doesn't recover we won't.



on edit-I admire your optimism. However I see the need for balance so folks don't continue to be surprised or disappointed when elections don't turn out the way we expect.

[golfguru]

70. You are correct, it is the economy stupid

nothing else matters as much.

[mikekohr]

75. BINGO! "it's the economy stupid."

Wild Bill's campaign had the above banner on headquarters walls. For all this talk about color there is one color that matters most of all to Americans, and that color is green.

mike kohr
Bureau County Democrats
http://bureaucountydems.blogspot.com/p/job-growth.html

[Ter]

11. We lost 6

A repeat would mean we lose 6 more, then they will have the majority.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

12. Yeah, I Didn't Get That

I'm not Descartes but it seems to me if you lose six senate seats an election you will run out of seats to lose.

I'll go out on the proverbial limb. If unemployment is > 9% in 2012 we will lose the White House, and every "contested" Senate seat as well among other things.

[sweetapogee]

36. I'm on that limb with you.

If the economy doesn't emerge from the shit can, and I mean real soon, we will be lucky if we only lose 6 Senate seats. Our top 10 list of priorities should begin with the economy and end with the economy and should include all things economy. If the republicans bring forth legislation that will help improve the economy and we refuse to give it the light of day because it originates from the republicans, then we are going to suffer. Key phrase: improve the economy.

[DarthDem]

15. We Exceeded Expectations

You're using an inappropriate mathematical construct that is rather obtuse. In any case, I debunked it above, if you by chance don't want to continue the pity party.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

20. "We Exceeded Expectations"

Respectfully, that's a bit of sophistry or casuistry there. "We exceeded expectations" is really camouflage for the fact that we didn't do as bad as expected; instead of being massacred like we were in house races, senate races, gubernatorial, and state legislative races, we were merely badly beaten. I give credit to candidates like Michael Bennett and Harry Reid who ran terrific races and snatched victory from the jaws of defeat.

[DarthDem]

21. Sophistry?

LOL.

We weren't badly beaten at all in the Senate races. Look at the numbers. We lost three that we had no chance of winning. The mirror image was the open seat in CT - - do you think Rethugs are crying that they were "badly beaten" based on that seat's outcome? Those seats were 60% of our losses.

Losing two contested Senate seats in a midterm with a terrible economy isn't getting "badly beaten," and if you think so, you're beyond help. Were the Dems supposed to pick up seats? I don't get your point of origin. (As I suspect I'm not supposed to.)

[DemocratSinceBirth]

22. PN, IL, And WI

Those are states we should have won. We didn't. If you think losing six senate seats is a good night for any party there is nothing I can do to disabuse you of that notion.

[FBaggins]

24. It was "good" in the sense of "could have been FAR worse"

CO and WA were obviously too close, and NV and DE were only saved by the tea party... and WV was lost until the democrat insisted he was a republican.

Given the bloodbath we took at all other levels (I'm only just getting a handle on the nightmare that was the state legislative races), losing six was pretty good.

[reformed_military]

29. I will respectfully disagree on some levels.

First, Manchin did run as a Rep. He is a two year Senator. Generally speaking when someone like him (Democrat talking like a Republican) is elected, he can take off the Republican coat for a few years then "play the game" the last year or two to get re-elected. Rinse, repeat. Manchin does not have that luxury. He is going to be under the microscope the ENTIRE time and he is going to stay towards the right or we lose the seat. AFTER he gets a full term election victory, then he can be a Democrat.

Second, Webb (VA), Casey Jr (PA) and Brown (OH) are three Frosh Senators in three states that went WAY red. I didn't follow Casey Jr or Brown, but Webb did the Democrat talking as a Republican game during his first campaign. Look for him to run towards the center after voting 100% with Obama the last two years. I count all 3 as Vulnerable.

Third, you mentioned NV and DE. I expect that the RNCC won't make the same mistake they made this year and they will get behind whoever their nominees are. For pity sake, they actually gave Charlie Crist the same amount of money that gave Angle (source opensecrets.org). We might not be able to pull off those squeakers next time.

Also, OP, your numbers are off. There are 21 Dems, but you counted the two Indies that caucus with the Dems in your numbers. It should be 23 and 10 for the header.

Last election was 18 and 19 seats up for election. It would have taken an inside straight for them to pull the +10 they needed for majority. And they almost did. You think that it will be harder to pull another batch of 5 or 6 when twice as many Dems are up vice Reps this time around?



Color me concerned.

[FBaggins]

32. Did you intend that as a reply to the OP?

My "good" was just a comment that THIS year's Senate races were not as bad as they COULD have been.

They were by no other measure "good".

One thing in your post that I will comment on is DE. We won Delaware because they knocked Castle out of the contest. They may not "make the same mistake", but Castle won't run again(he was going to retire before THIS race) and he's the only Republican that I can think of who could win that seat.

[DarthDem]

53. Sorry About the Math . . .

The numbers on the drilldown add up to 23, but I should have put 23 in parentheses instead of 21 after Dem seats. M'bad.

I don't follow you on them almost "drawing an inside straight" in 2010. They won two competitive Dem-held seats - - IL and WI. PA was not a Dem-held seat in anything but the technical sense. And we all know the scatterbrained decisionmaking that led to the mess in IL. So they won ND, AR, and IN. Big deal! They're not likely to get three gifts like that again. Meanwhile, we DO get a gift in MA and possible another in ME - - just depends on teh baggurs.

There's no one to run in DE against Carper. So that's why the seat is safe and it doesn't really matter what they do.

I'm pretty sure Angle was better-funded by Rs and their outside groups than Crist was. But in any event, that's an R-held seat and would be a bonus pickup for us.

The breakdown just isn't that bad.

[Ter]

33. We were supposed to lose like 8 and we lost 6

The only reason was two (Colorado and Washington) were extremely close. We got extremely lucky. There are many more Democrats up than Republicans next time around. We'll see what happens, it's early now.

[golfguru]

71. DE & NV could have easily gone repuke

if Mike Castle was the nominee instead of the witch.
Also in NV they picked the weakest nominee in Angle.

Let's just say luck was on our side and leave it at that.
CA was in the bag from day 1 with Boxer. WA was the only
real close race and a good win.

[Ter]

10. You're delusional if you think Orrin Hatch is just a likely hold

It's flat out impossible for any Democrat to win, even if he gets Tea Bagged in the primary by a nut.

[DarthDem]

16. Thanks

Yes, you are correct about Utah. I should have said "easy holds" there, for those Rehug seats, just as I did for the Dems. And thanks for calling me delusional. Heh.

[Ter]

34. I didn't mean it as an insult

n/t

[DarthDem]

44. Okay

n/t

[JI7]

13. i would feel bad about Lugar losing even though he is a Republican

we really need to target those Maine Senators though. those should be ours. and they have shown that they can't be relied on certain key votes which you would usually expect from east coat republicans.

scott brown needs to go, he should never have been elected and if Coakley had not taken the seat for granted he would not be there.

hopefully Ensign's will be an easy win.

[DarthDem]

17. Brown . . .

. . . is toast. Ensign, I don't know. If they can get Shelley Berkley to run, she'll have name recognition with a huge portion of the electorate statewide since she's Las Vegas' Rep, and she would beat him, I think.

I don't think Snowe will be in the Senate come January 2013, one way or another.

[FBaggins]

23. That's wildly optimistic today... but the good news is that it's two years from now.

If you looked at the senate focus two years ago, we held only a single seat that was even "leans Dem"... and nothing else that was expected to be competitive. AR and IL were rated as safe seats.

Republicans, OTOH, were expected to have four seats in danger (FL,KY,LA,MO) and two more (KS,PA) that were competitive but leaned R.

Just look what two years can do. We've lost seven since then (assuming we hold on in CO and WA), and the closest we came in those six R states was PA.

It's ridiculously optimistic that WI is an easy hold, for instance, even if Kohl retires. Feingold just got his but kicked by their second string and you think he steps back in for an easy win? Manchin in WV? There are two possibilities. He governs like he ran, in which case it doesn't matter if we hold the seat, it's already lost. Or he votes like a democrat in which case he has a real race on his hands. Not "vulnerable", but by no means easy.

There are a number of other examples, but the point is that things need to get better first before you're right. Unlike this year (in most of our opinions) the 2012 race WILL be about Obama. If the economy recovers and the President effectively runs against the republican do-nothing House... then the senate races look MUCH easier.

If those same 20 seats had been up this year it would have been a bloodbath.



Another factor to consider is redistricting. You sometimes end up with some surprisingly good senate opponents (or even primary challengers) in a redistricting year.

[DarthDem]

52. The Point of My OP . . .

. . . was to counter the meme that it's a "tough map" for the Democrats.

But you're right; things change. And in this case, the changes would probably favor the Democrats, because the political winds blowing from a depression-afflicted electorate are really fickle.

Manchin is already an institution in WV, young, and won't lose in 2012. He would have lost this time if he was really going to be in danger; instead, he crushed Raese. I'm sure the Goopers will try to get Moore Capito to run, but she seems comfy as a Rep and I doubt she would beat Manchin anyway.

Feingold ran a strange campaign against Johnson. He ignored him, IMO, until it was too late, and never really did fight back. He's a gentleman, to put it in the best possible light - - but he still lost. I can see him coming back with renewed fire. But I don't think Kohl is going to retire anyway, and Ryan doesn't scare me as a statewide candidate for federal office.

[JCMach1]

25. But will Perry go after Hutchinson in TX?

either way, we probably lose the General.

[gkhouston]

30. If it's a three-way with a teabagger, perhaps not. n/t

[LynneSin]

26. Why is Tom Carper not considered easy? There is no republican that can beat him...

and more than likely it'll be Christine O'Donnell running again.

I have to agree I wish we had a better candidate like Beau Biden, but I think we're stuck with Carper for one more term. And I'd rather have DE in the clear so I can help out with other states.

[FBaggins]

27. Castle could... but there's no way that he's running again.

n/t

[DarthDem]

42. Well . . .

There have been rumors of a retirement. I really didn't want to bring that up, but yeah. If he retires then it might be a problem, but the Rethug bench is pitiful in that state and I agree with you - - Castle is done.

[michreject]

28. I don't know where you're getting this from

Slightly Harder, but Still Likely Holds (4)


Debbie Stabenow, MI

Are you just taking a SWAG?

MI just went Red in the Senate, gained seats in the House and won the Executive office in a landslide.

Sheesh!!!

[DarthDem]

45. Because the U.S. Senate is Different

It's more of a personality contest than the U.S. House. Plus, the Republicans have to have a candidate to run against Stabenow, who (correct me if I'm wrong) is fairly popular, like Levin. Who will that be? Engler? I doubt it.

The governor's contest was a landslide because our candidate was poor.

[michreject]

56. Those same people who vote local, vote national

If you look at a state map, there isn't a whole lotta blue.

No one knew who Snyder was 2 years ago. Terry Lynn Land, the SoS, is very popular statewide. Don't sell em short. That's one of the reasons they won.

[blue_onyx]

59. I think you're underestimating Stabenow

If it's another year like 2010, then she could be in trouble. Otherwise, I'm not sure there are any Republicans that will win. Terri Lynn Land didn't even have enough support to stay in the gubernatorial primary. I remember reading that she had fundraising problems and was still paying her 2006 Sos debts. You can't run a strong campaign without money.

Yes, 2 years ago nobody knew Snyder. 2 years ago, Michigan also went strongly Democratic electing Obama by 16% and taking control of the state House. The economy isn't expected to get better for a while and with complete Republican control in Michigan, there's nobody to blame but the GOP.

[DarthDem]

68. Great Post

Agree 100%. Also, it's actually easier for gubernatorial candidates to come out of nowhere than it is Senate candidates, at least viable ones, because Senate candidates have to have statewide apeal and connections AND Washington apeal and connections. I'm not saying that's true in every case, and there are exceptions, but to challenge a pretty popular sitting U.S. Senator, the person is going to have to have some serious name recognition. I don't see a good candidate right now, which is why I'm not worried about the seat.

[pbrower2a]

72. Stabenow -- don't assume a victory

She loses if Michigan votes like Oklahoma as it did in Two Thousand F---ing Ten. I expect the Reactionary Party (a/k/a John Birch Society) to throw huge money for another Orwellian smear campaign against any liberal or moderate. The Michigan economy is in terrible shape, and the financial "angels" of the GOP want to take over America. Until I see overwhelming evidence of unpopularity of the Reactionary Party, Michigan's status as a Blue state, and indeed the evidence that America can preserve democracy is in question.

The big-money supporters of the Reactionary Party are the same sorts of people who bankrolled the successes of Mussolini in Italy and Hitler in Germany and tried to get France to go fascist before Vichy -- and similarly ruthless and corrupt. FoX Newspeak Channel is very much on the air. Karl Rogue is the de facto boss of the GOP, and he is as ruthless as a General Secretary of a Communist Party. The whole democratic system in America is in grave danger. Note what fascism really is: Bolshevik methods in the service of groups who want a feudal social order.

I can say this: if Americans let the Hard Right take over America in 2012 then they will deserve the norm of 40-year lifespans and 70-hour workweeks instead of 70-year lifespans and 40-hour workweeks.

I have hope that Michigan will vote out the right-wing Stepford robots that it voted in in 2010 because their solutions (serve non-Michigan interests) will prove a ludicrous failure by November 2012. I expect the House to do everything possible to ensure that unemployment remains high for the next twp years.

[michreject]

73. Look at a map

Michigan IS a red state now. Millions of auto jobs have disappeared. Many of those union. Union membership is a fraction of what it once was.

[blue_onyx]

74. MI is not red state

MI has not changed politically. The difference from 2008 and 2010 is that the Democrats stayed home in a Republican year. In 2012, MI could easily vote strongly Democratic again.

[michreject]

76. I'm sorry to say

I disagree with you. They control the state Senate, state House, Exec office and the U.S. House.

A lot of workers have left this state. I see a right to work state in our future. Nothing we can do to stop it.

[blue_onyx]

77. So?

Some people have moved. Why do you assume that it was Democrats that moved and not Republicans?

It was a Republican year with a poor Democratic candidate for governor. Dems stayed home and independents went Republican. In Democratic years (like 2008), the GOP stays home and independents go Democratic. The political beliefs of the state haven't changed much...just the political circumstances. The GOP controlled everything except AG in 2000 and it didn't stay that way forever. Things change and they will again.

[Scurrilous]

35. Thanks.

K & R :thumbsup:

[totodeinhere]

37. I am not paying attention to any political predictions at DU anymore.

Prior to the election, too many DU posters were insisting that the Dems would keep control of the House. And when someone pointed out that a lot of polls predicted otherwise, some DU posters would say that the polls were rigged to help the GOP. But it turns out that many of the polls were spot on and we did lose the House. So no more DU predictions for me.

[lunamagica]

39. Democrats will have 21 seats uo for election, Gop 10. The math favors them. Not good. nt

[DarthDem]

46. I Covered That

The "math" is only something that holds up until you look at the constituents of the "equation." That's why I said this is a meme that the Rethugs and the MSM are going to be pushing - - the "math" looks bad for the Democrats. However - - and this is the whole point of my post - - when you break down the individual contests, it becomes clear that it's not really that big of a deal.

[GSLevel9]

40. nah, wishful thinking.

D SEATS (21)

Easy Holds (14)

Dianne Feinstein, CA - - also true if she decides to retire, but she won't hold
Daniel Akaka, HI - - also true if he decides to retirehold
Ben Cardin, MD hold
Bob Menendez, NJ - - there will be the usual MSM-fueled angst about Tom Kean or some suchhold
Jeff Bingaman, NMhold
Kirsten Gillibrand, NYhold
Bob Casey, Jr., PAhold
Sheldon Whitehouse, RIhold
Amy Klobuchar, MN not so fast there... deffo not an "easy hold" For one thing she may be primaried, and Minnesota had one big CD flip... it will be close and tight.
Maria Cantwell, WAhold
Joe Manchin, WVthat's a big maybe... if Manchin GIVES IN ONE INCH to Obama he will LOSE. Obama has like a 30% AR in WV. The only way Manchin wins is to act like a pub
Herb Kohl, WI - - if he decides to retire, which I doubt, the probable recruit will be Feingoldeasy win? WI just lose Russ and 2 CD's... and Paul Ryan want to run.Close race!
Bernie Sanders, VT (I)hold
Lieberman-Held Seat, CT (Lieberman is toast in the primary process or will lose if running as a R)hold

Slightly Harder, but Still Likely Holds (4)

Tom Carper, DE - - I actually wish he'd retire; we'd get a better Dem in the seathold
Bill Nelson, FL - - he's an institution and will be running in a year when there's excellent turnouteasy win? In FL??? Have you seen the map? 3CD's flipped and Rubio won. And Scott.
Debbie Stabenow, MI - - tough state for Dems right now but she's better liked than mostfar from easy... bad trending state. Will take big $$ to win this race.
Claire McCaskill, MO - - bizarre state, but she's a good campaigner and seems to connect therefar from easy... bad trending state. Will take big $$ to win this race.


Vulnerable Seats (5)

Jon Tester, MT - - and honestly, not really that vulnerable; only on here because it's MT
Ben Nelson, NE - - he'll lose and no one will care
Kent Conrad, ND - - only subject to takeover if he decides to retire; otherwise he'll winin this climate... close race.
Sherrod Brown, OH - - with African-Americans voting again in 2012 I think he'll be fine should be ok
Jim Webb, VA - - also helped by presumed large African-American turnout lol... 2010 Va, aka the "Heart of the Confederacy" he's done.

I see 2012 being DEMS+2 and Pubs +8 Net Pubs +6

however... this is assuming that the political climate is similar to today. We never know whay could happen from now til then..

[DarthDem]

47. Thanks for the Breakdown

Can you list your eight D losses for me? (Or R pickups.) I looked at your projections and saw six.

[BootinUp]

51. I think we should assume Obama on the ticket

as a plus factor.

[denimgirly]

41. Back in 2008 predicting Nov 2010 was IMPOSSIBLE...Now this? Waste of time.

This post is meaningless....in 2 years the landscape will be changed.
No one predicted a slaughter for Democrats and an obsessively weak President back in November 2008 for this '10 mid-terms but here we are.

[DarthDem]

48. Thanks

I respect your opinion and simply suggest that you don't read posts like this. :hi:

[maryellen99]

49. There is speculation that Linda McMahon is planning to go after Liebermans seat

[DarthDem]

50. As With O'Donnell in DE . . .

That's pretty good news! Actually, in all seriousness, the Thugs will have difficulty fielding a viable candidate for that seat. We'll keep it, by which I mean gain it.

[Jennicut]

58. LOL. I doubt it. She wasted a lot of millions already.

I predict one of our Representatives will run against Lieberman. Could be Courteny, Himes or Murphy. We should win in 2012 against Lieberman and whatever pathetic Repub decides to run.

[Awsi Dooger]

54. Ensign will never be the GOP nominee in Nevada

You can't look at our prospects in that race with an assumption the opponent will be Ensign. If he runs, he'll be defeated handily in the primary. Nevada Republicans already succeeded along those lines this year by dumping troubled incumbent Jim Gibbons -- and a certain defeat -- in the governors race in favor of an easy victory by Brian Sandoval. Unfortunately, they won't forget the lesson, even if it's more difficult to oust a Nevadan with strength in Clark County (Ensign) than someone whose base is northern Nevada (Gibbons).

Shelly Berkley is all but certain to seek the Democratic nomination and she'll be a great candidate. The one Republican who could make it an extremely tight race is congressman Dean Heller of NV-2. He's easily the most polished Republican in Nevada politics, youthful looking and articulate with a very good resume and bullshit qualities. Heller would have defeated Reid but chose not to run, perhaps worried about uphill challenges against an incumbent. By 2012 he will have served 3 terms in the House and I'm sure there will be party pressure to pursue the senate. His district is safe Republican.

Otherwise, I'm a math guy. It doesn't matter what the terrain looks like, when you're defending more than twice the number of seats the advantage rests with the other side. Too many factors can play out in their favor. Everything needs to break our way to break even or limit losses to 2-3 or fewer. I was desperately hoping we could maintain 55 this cycle. Based on raw probability, a loss of 4+ is the favorite in 2012. I'm sure Nate Silver would tell you the same thing right now. It's more vital than ever to isolate superior nominees.

[DarthDem]

57. Oh, Lordy, Not Silver

First, thanks for the informative information on Nevada. Yeah, I've heard spec about Heller. Do you think Berkley would beat him?

Math is just that . . . math. It's based on underlying assumptions, and I don't care what Nate Silver (who got the Senate wrong IIRC) would tell me - - probabilities based simply on seats defended without looking at the nature of those seats mean nothing. A loss of 4+ is nowhere close to the favorite, as I've argued by looking at it race-by-race. Put another way, give me a scenario where the Dems lose 4, let alone more than that, including the near-certain takeback of MA.

[Awsi Dooger]

60. I think Berkley would beat Heller if it's a 50/50 year nationally

Heller is not well known in Clark County. It will be interesting to see if he tries to change that. Gibbons, for example, put up billboards in the Las Vegas area long before his 2006 gov race.

Presidential years favor Democrats in Nevada. Reid is never in jeopardy in presidential years but always is life and death in midterms. This was essentially a 2-for-1 for him, if he seeks another term in 2016. The minorities turn out in presidential years and the Hispanic numbers, in particular, will swell by 2012 and be off the charts in 2016. Democrats had lousy outreach and GOTV for years in Clark County but now that's reversed. There are so many fliers and contacts you can't go a day without several.

If it's another GOP slant in 2012, like this one or even half as decisive, then Heller would be the favorite.

But I hope Heller remains in the House. I can't think of another Republican who can take out Berkley. She could hold that seat for several cycles. It's the reason I think the GOP will all but force Heller to run.

Per the senate bottom line, I don't care about scenarios two years in advance. Inevitably they would identify the wrong variables in state after state. For example, last year I was handicapping Harry Reid vs. Sue Lowden on a few message boards since that was the most likely matchup. Second most likely was Reid vs. Danny Tarkanian.

I would argue the long range view is more likely to be correct than a piece by piece analysis. If you lined up 100 new cars and asked me how many would reach 150,000 miles I'd be a fool to subjectively check the engines instead of defaulting to big picture logical data.

Right now Intrade has Democrats 50% to hold the senate after 2012. It's obviously very early and extremely low traded so numbers like that aren't great barometers. I think it's a bit high. I thought we would be 50/50 at 54, but below that at 53.

[DarthDem]

67. Thanks For This NV Info!

Thanks a lot for the Heller info . . . invaluable. If he's not very well-known in Clark County, in contrast to Berkley who obviously is, then he's going to have problems. Two years, starting right this second, isn't much time to saturate such a large market to improve name recog, and also, he can't really position himself in any way until the party decides what to do with Ensign, a decision that doesn't seem immediate. So he'll have far less than two years. The more I think about this race, the more I think it's good for a D takeover. Thanks again.

Sorry, but the car analogy doesn't resonate with me at all. 100 new cars can't be analogized to 100 people (or in this case, about 33-35, x2 if you want to include potential challengers and their track records), all of whom are not machines, but personalities with track records and histories. New cars have none of these things. It's a good illustration why naked statistics really don't serve too well in the political realm. A better (but still flawed) analogy might be betting on a bunch of cars with performance histories to reach various milestones - - but that would still (a) completely exclude candidates' appeal to voters, a rather significant variable, and (b) ignore the fact that the age of cars isn't really comparable to the age of people.

[FBaggins]

65. No... you don't remember correctly.

Silver was only a single seat off on his Senate prediction (net).

Both his overall and race-by-race predictions for the House were closer than anyone else that I'm aware of.

I don't know about the race-by-race predictions for the gubernatorial side of things, but his net prediction was for 29.9 republican governors. They currently have 29 with four that are unfinished to a greater or lesser degree (though we lead narrowly in all four).


Put another way, give me a scenario where the Dems lose 4

Such a scenario (or even 6-7) would be easy to craft... but would be entirely beside the point - since we don't know what the 2012 landscape will be. If the President recovers and wins in a landslide against a dud of a candidate, we might not lose anything. If Republicans win the WH (or the President has no coattails), we could easily lose the Senate.

Cook (who most certainly looks at far more than just polling numbers), usually releases a next-election chart by the end of November. It will be worth discussing then.

[DarthDem]

66. Yes . . .

I know what his predictions were . . . I followed them. He got the Senate wrong and missed on more than one race.

Okay, you're not willing to defend your prediction . . . no prob. Thanks for responding, though.

[RBInMaine]

55. Snowe may not run again. Health issues, tired, and she almost stepped out in '06.

[DarthDem]

69. Hmmmm

I wonder what the bench in ME is like. I was heartened to see that both Pingree and Michaud won reelection.

[Brandlon]

61. I see a lot of posts that are trying to paint the best

chances for Democrats in 2012. There is nothing wrong with that and of course any disagreement with any post is subjective at this point in time since anything can happen between now and 2012.

I've read most posts on why Democrats lost in the mid-terms, but I don't think most of them, IMHO, are correct and are coloring the reasons to make a rallying point. I think that does a disservice to the overall goal of having Democrats in charge. But I digress.

Here is some interesting insights from The Hill about the Senate.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/127631-you-think-10-was-tough-check-out-12-

You think ’10 was tough? Check out ’12

By J. Taylor Rushing - 11/03/10 09:03 PM ET


For the first time in two cycles, Democrats will have more seats up for grabs than the Republicans, and the party could see its shrunken majority erased altogether.

Several of the senators up for reelection came in on the 2006 Democratic wave, when the party picked up six GOP seats and won control of the chamber.

...

That could change in two years, when Democrats have 21 seats up for grabs, compared to only 10 for Republicans. Also up for reelection are Sens. Joe Lieberman (Conn.) and Bernie Sanders (Vt.), the two Independents who caucus with Democrats — meaning the party has a total of 23 seats to defend.

“The numbers are really working against them, no question about it,” said Jennifer Duffy, a senior Senate analyst at The Cook Political Report. “It will come down to what it always comes down to: retirements and recruiting.”

Many of those Democratic seats up next cycle are in purple or red states, including those of McCaskill, Manchin, Tester, Webb and Sens. Kent Conrad (N.D.), Ben Nelson (Neb.) and Bill Nelson (Fla.).

One other point to note. I wonder how much fear has been put into those sitting Dems who have watched as their friends have been destroyed? Will that effect their attitude when it comes to voting the issues?

Did anyone notice how Manchin ran his campaign? He ran away from Obama. He ran away from Reid and Pelosi. Did anyone catch his TV ad where he takes a rifle and shoots a hole in the Cap & Trade papers that are pinned to a tree.

The ad - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIJORBRpOPM

This could be a rough two years if other politicians are looking at their own careers and what they might have to do to hold their seat. Meaning, how many will side with Republicans on the many issues?

[FrenchieCat]

62. The media is just starting to rub their hands together.......

I'm sure they'll come up with something, and we'll know what it is within
the few months. They tend to get started early.....

[Chatt]

78. Republicans disappoint Americans every time they finish governing

The same will happen in 2012.

[geek tragedy]

79. Republicans take control of the Senate in 2012.

McCaskill and Ben Nelson will get thumped, and Stabenow, Tester, and Sherrod Brown are all highly vulnerable.

Ensign will be replaced with another R, and no other R--including Scott Brown--will be particularly vulnerable.