The Senate – a worst case scenario

One of the major developments this cycle thus far has been Republican recruiting successes for the Senate.  At the beginning of the 2010 cycle, it appeared that the Democrats had a good chance of picking up seats for the third consecutive cycle.  But due to a multitude of happenings, the situation has turned on it’s head.  A lot of that has to do with the change in the national environment, but a lot of it is due to individual events independent from the environment.  Let’s run down the laundry list. (Note that I don’t think all these moves weren’t necessarily the right moves, I’m just sticking with the electoral ramifications)

Phase I – The governor appointments to the White House

A.Arizona – Janet Napolitano is appointed by Obama to be secretary of homeland security.  This takes off the board what could have been a blockbuster race in AZ between McCain and Napolitano.

B.Kansas – Kathleen Sebelius is picked by Obama to be secretary of health and human services.  This takes off the board a potential pickup in Kansas, where Sam Brownback is leaving to run for governor.

Phase II – Republican recruiting success

1.Delaware – Perhaps the most glaring of all examples this cycle, Mike Castle, DE’s lone house rep, unexpectedly launches a bid for Senate at the age of 70.  Beau Biden, Delaware’s attorney general and presumed Senate secessor to his father, vice president Joe Biden, declines to run.  This flips the seat from Safe D to Likely R.  

2.Illinois – wildly popular attorney general Lisa Madigan, the Democrats’ top prospect to replace president Barack Obama, declines to run for the Senate (and the governorship).  Perhaps the only person that could win the seat for the Republicans, representative Mark Kirk, does.  This puts what should be a safe seat into tossup status against treasurer Alexi Giannoulias.

3.North Dakota – Byron Dorgan looked like a shoo-in for re-election, just so long as that one shoe by the name of governor John Hoeven didn’t drop.  Well the shoe dropped, and Dorgan dived out of the way to avoid a sure loss.

Phase III – Unpopular incumbents

4.Colorado – Ken Salazar’s appointment as Interior Secretary was followed by what some call a lackluster appointment of Michael Bennet.  I think the GOP was going to strongly contest this seat regardless however.

5.Nevada – majority leader Harry Reid is incredibly unpopular in Nevada, and despite the Republicans’ recruiting woes here, he is no better than even money (and perhaps worse) of beating the republican nominee.

6.Arkansas – Blanche Lincoln’s constant waffling and selling out of democratic principles has killed her standing with the base in AR, and prompted Lt governor Bill Halter to primary her.  Her standing with independents is also in the crapper, making it hard to imagine her winning.  Halter’s liberal politics would seem to make it a tough race for him as well if he wins the primary.

7.California – Barbara Boxer appears now to be in hotter water than any of us anticipated, barely ahead of opponents Tom Campbell and Carly Fiorina, with the consensus being that Campbell is the most electable of the republican challengers.  I’m not sure we can really group Boxer in with Reid and Lincoln as her situation isn’t nearly as dire, but a lot of the same dynamics are at play here.  

Phase IV – The Flip-Flopper

8.Pennsylvania – Arlen Specter decided that the GOP’s run to crazy had driven him out of the party, and he flipped to the Dems, presumably to avoid losing the primary to Pat Toomey.  Now those two will face off in the general election.

Phase V – Evan Bayh

9.Indiana – This seat was also looking to be an easy democratic retention until Bayh bolted just days before the filing deadline.  It now appears that the democrats aren’t as bad off as feared, as Brad Ellsworth will take on either Coats or Hostettler for the GOP.

Now, I’ve mentioned 9 vulnerable democratic seats.  In rough order of flipping likelihood, they are ND, DE, AR, NV, CO, IN, IL, PA, and CA.  If the Republicans were to run the table, without losing any of their own seats, then control of the chamber would be split 50/50, with the vice president breaking ties.  But let’s say that the Republicans want to take control of the chamber.  There are many ways in which they could conceivably do it, and in a “sky is falling” type situation, could actually win firm control of the chamber.  If you don’t like horror stories, I suggest you stop reading now.

If you’re still on board, here we go.

10.New York – It’s been claimed as unlikely that George Pataki will challenge Kirsten Gillibrand.  But that’s what they said about John Hoeven and Mike Castle.  If Pataki jumps in this race turns into a toss-up.  

11.Wisconsin – Another situation similar to Delaware and New York, where everybody is waiting to see what Tommy Thompson does.  If he gets in, the polls show that his race against Russ Feingold turns into a toss-up as well.  The fact that the polls show Feingold in such bad shape shocks me, but it is what it is, I guess.

12.Washington – The Republicans have several options here that could be competitive and possibly beat Patty Murray.  Dino Rossi I know has been mentioned a lot, but another strong contender is Dave Reichert.  If he were to get in, this race would become very similar to Illinois, in which the one guy that could probably win the race does get in.

13.Hawaii – Now I know you’re thinking this is ridiculous throwing Hawaii up there, but what if somehow, Daniel Inouye suddenly retires and governor Linda Lingle runs for the open seat.  That would open up another very blue seat for a potential Team Red takeover.  

14.Maryland – Now admittedly, this isn’t likely, but what if that report from last week that Bob Ehrlich was serious about challenging Barbara Mikulski was true?  What if fearing a competitive race, Mikulski retired, turning a safe D seat into a Lean/Likely R one in a hugely blue seat.  It’s already happened in nearby Delaware.

Now, if this nightmare scenario were to play out in total, the Democrats would retain just 3 seats in the 2010 cycle, New York (Schumer), Oregon (Wyden), and Vermont (Leahy), who are unassailable.  The Republicans would hold a 54-46 advantage in the chamber just 2 years after facing a democratic filibuster-proof majority.

On the other hand, the Democrats gaining seats is probably more likely than this pie in the sky GOP outlook on things.  

Next time, I’ll have the opposite viewpoint, one in which the Democrats could actually pull off gaining more than a few seats this cycle.

25 thoughts on “The Senate – a worst case scenario”

  1. 10.New York – It’s been claimed as unlikely that George Pataki will challenge Kirsten Gillibrand.  But that’s what they said about John Hoeven and Mike Castle.  If Pataki jumps in this race turns into a toss-up.  

    Except Hoeven and Castle didn’t jump in until the seat was open.  I doubt Pataki is going to jump in against a well-funded incumbant in NY.

  2. But truth, neither is likely to happen. I’d anticipate the Republicans gaining a couple of seats this cycle, ND for sure, probably Delaware and Arkansas, maybe NV (although I think Reid’s chances are better than anyone thinks). I don’t think the Repubs are going to lose any seats this cycle, but they are definitely vulerable in MO, OH and possibly NC.

  3. most of the close Senate races in an off year election swing to one party, i.e.

    if the election were being held next month, we’d lose either (net) 1-2 or 6-7 seats.  

  4. “without losing any of their own seats.”  The open-seat races in Missouri, New Hampshire, and Ohio would have to be considered tossups or, at worst, Lean R at this point.

    The other caveat is that Republicans still aren’t particularly well-liked.  While voter turnout is clearly going to be a big issue, most voters aren’t stupid, and the memories of the Bush years are still fresh on people’s minds.

  5. Even if Pataki were to run–which I doubt–Gillibrand would still win. Chuck Schumer is ultra-safe for reelection to New York’s other Senate seat, and not since 1966 (in South Carolina) has a state simultaneously voted for Senators of different parties.

  6. I live in Harford and am a giant Ehrlich fan, but Mikulski would have her way with him if he got in the Senate race. Also the only way Mikulski will stop running is if she dies, literally that would be the only thing that would prevent her from running again.

    Maryland has a pretty deep Dem bench, so even if Barbara stepped aside there are plenty of pols who would run in her stead. The last 3 ex-Senator Sarbanes, Mikulski, and Cardin all represented Maryland’s 3rd district before stepping up to the Senate. The 3rd is currently occupied by Sarbanes Senior’s son, John. Dutch Ruppersberger could also run in this hypothetical and totally unlikely to happen scenario. I doubt Hoyer or Hollen would give up their current positions in the House. Finally, all the other state offices (governor, attornery general, treasurer, etc) are held by Dems so they have both depth and quality to their statewide bench.

    From what I have read in the Sun though, Ehrlich was just making an off the cuff remark about the Senate and is really only seriously considering a run for governor.  

  7. I like your work, is very interesting. I think sometimes about this, and I think the phase II is the bad nominations for replace former senators. That originate much problems in NY, CO, IL, DE, and we can include too MA. Democratic governors failed nominating new senators. No-one think really in assure the seats with the strongest nominations what later run for reelection.

    Imagine if the governors nominate:

    NY: A Cuomo

    IL: L Madigan

    CO: J Hickenlooper

    DE: B Biden

    MA: J Kennedy

    All would be different now.

    I think this is a key phase.

  8. It would lead to a very lopsided Senate Class and thus it would also make the 2016 elections a very democratic year senate wise since the Republicans already have more seats to defend (even before this election)

Comments are closed.