I've mentioned this before, but we have a good opportunity to create a filibuster-proof majority by the end of the 2010 senate elections. In order to take advantage of this we need to look at making sure that we exploit every last possibly competitive seat this cycle and the next one.
First of all, this is my estimation of what the competitiveness of the 2010 senate cycle is going to look like:
(Held by Democrats)
(Likely competitive)
- Salazaar (Colorado)
(Unlikely competitive [barring retirement or strong challenger])
- Lincoln (Arkansas)
- Boxer (California)
- Inouye (Hawaii)
(Held by Republicans)
(Likely competitive)
- Bunning (Kentucky)
- Specter (Pennsylvania)
- Burr (North Carolina)/
- McCain (Arizona)
(Unlikely competitive [barring retirement or strong challenger])
- Coburn (Oklahoma)
- Bond (Missouri)
- Voinovich (Ohio)
- Kansas open seat (Brownback)
- DeMint (South Carolina)
Now, this is a preliminary look at the 2010 map, and I'm certain there is going to be some disagreement as to the specifics, but 2010 is probably going be another year with a field that the Democrats can take advantage of (since the Republicans have already take most of the southern seats up in 2004, they have no real pool for picking up seats in 2010). Assuming we can win 5 seats in 2008, we'd have to pick up at least 4 more in 2010 in order to get that filibuster-proof majority we want (let''s face it, even in the best-case scenario, we're not getting a filibuster-proof majority in 2008).
That's the good news, the bad news is in 2012, where the map is stacked very heavily against us. There are going to be 24 Democrats up for re-election in 2012 compared to only 9 Republicans (ok, fine 22 Democrats 2 independents, one of which could conceivably turn in that time period). Here's the estimation for 2012:
(Held by Democrats)
(Likely competitive)
- Tester (Montana)
- McCaskill (Missouri)
- Webb (Virginia)
- Byrd (West Virginia) *assumes retirement*
(Unlikely competitive [barring retirement or strong challenger])
- Casey (Pennsylvania)
- Brown (Ohio)
- Klobuchar (Minnesota)
- Akaka (Hawaii)
- Cardin (Maryland)
- Kennedy (Massachusetts) *assumes retirement*
- Bingaman (New Mexico)
(Held by Republicans)
(Likely competitive)
- N/A (subject to change due to open seats)
(Unlikely competitive [barring retirement or strong challenger])
- Corker (Tennessee)
- Kyl (Arizona)
This is the consequences of winning this many seats in a year that, quite frankly, by the numbers should have favored Republicans in the Senate. 2012 will be a miserable year for us in the Senate, there is no way around that fact, but if we take appropriate measures now, we can have build a large enough buffer that we can not only retain the senate, but we can keep a working majority of at least 55 seats after the Senate elections.
Because so much can and will change between now and 2010 and especially 2012, its difficult to rule out races as competitive or uncompetitive. If a Democrat is elected President in 2008, historically speaking the Republicans will pick up seats in 2010. The political landscape changes constantly. For instance, Republicans had a good year in 2002 and then 2004. So what if in 2003 they started thinking like you did, and plan for 2006 and 2008? Would they have anticipated their strength diminishing, or were they, like you, anticipating gaining a filibuster-proof Senate?
To your list, I would make the following additions:
Democrats:
Competitive:
Colorado (Salazar)
Arkansas (Lincoln)
Nevada (Reid)
Possibly Competitive:
Connecticut (Dodd, if retiring)
Hawaii (Inouye, if retiring)
Illinois (Obama, if not in Senate)
Indiana (Bayh)
California (Boxer)
Washington (Murray)
Wisconsin (Feingold)
Republicans:
Competitive:
Kentucky (open seat [Bunning])
Kansas (open seat [Brownback])
Ohio (Voinovich)
New Hampshire (Gregg)
Florida (Martinez)
Pennsylvania (Specter)
Possibly competitive:
Arizona (McCain, if retiring or not in Senate)
Louisiana (Vitter)
North Carolina (Burr)
Missouri (Bond)
I would bet on an open seat in Texas in 2012. Hutchison wants to be governor and no one seems to knwo what th Republicans are doing in 2010. Perry can run for another term, but no one likes him but the righty base. Hutchson wants to be governor, as does Lt. Gov. Dewhurst, and apparently so does Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings.
Meanwhile, we SHOULD be running Houston Mayor Bill White.
Beyond that, I dunno how much Hutch loves being a senator, she is starting to hit the age limit. I’d say it’s 50/50 she is not in the senate in Jan. 2013.
Byrd has said, “God willing, I’ll run again in 2012!”
Which means, if he’s alive, he’s going to be in the senate. So… I would doubt he ups and retires.
if she runs and loses, she will still be in the senate. If she wins, she will appoint a successor. Either way, no open seat, and the appointed Republican should have a strong advantage in Texas, assuming it’s not Perry…
n/t
Republicans:
Competitive:
– McCain (Arizona) Retirement? Unpopularity?
– Open Seat (Kansas) retirement.
– Specter (Pennsylvania) Retirement? Will he survive this time?
– Gregg (New Hampshire)
– Martinez (Florida)
– Bunning (Kentucky) Unpopularity/Retirement
– Burr (North Carolina) lukewarm approval, trending dem state
– Voinovich (Ohio) currently unpopular
Potentially Competitive:
– Murkowski (Alaska) Corruption?
– John Thune (South Dakota) payback, possibly?
– Chuck Grassley (Iowa) retirement possibility
– Kit Bond (Missouri) Dems always run against him, he may retire, and he always performs weakly.
– David Vitter (Louisianna) zipper problem
– Richard Shelby (Alabama) potential retirement
– Oklahoma/South Carolina – maybe voters will reconsider having absolute nuts as Senators.
All in all, a very good list for Democrats
For the Dems:
Competitive:
Salazar (Colorado)
Inouye (Hawaii) probably retiring
Boxer (California) news on the street is that Ahnold will run against her, plus she will potentially retire.
Potentially Competitive:
Reid (Nevada) it is likely that they WILL target him hard.
Bayh (Indiana) If he retires
Leahy (Vermont) possible retirement
Obama (Illinois) possible presidency
Feingold (Wisconsin) likely safe, but maybe they can run TThompson against him.
Lincoln (Arkansas) Likely safe, but Huckabee could make it interesting.
Very good year for us, 2010 will be. Let’s not screw it up.
2012:
Republicans Potentially Competitive:
Ensign (Nevada) May finally get a real challenge
Kyl (Arizona) barely survived defeat in ’06
KBHutchison (Texas) possible retirement
Lugar (Indiana) possible retirement
Snowe (Maine) possible retirement
Trent Lott (Miss) possible retirement
Corker (Tenn) fishy senator
Lieberman (CFL) because he’s freakin’ Lieberman
Democratic potentially competitive:
Tester (Montana) Freshman, red state
Webb (Virginia) Freshman, purple state
McCaskill (Missouri) Freshman, swing state
Brown (Ohio) Freshman, swing state
Akaka (Hawaii) likely retirement
Feinstein (California) possible retirement
Byrd (West Virginia) Either retirement or, god forbid, appointment
Bill Nelson (Florida) a real challenge this time?
Ben Nelson (Nebraska) probably safe, but it is nebraska
Herb Kohl (Wisconsin) possible retirement
Kennedy (Mass.) possible retirement
Bingaman (New Mexico) possible retirement
our senators are getting really old.
Ziser wasn’t a serious challenger. Reid got a pass in 2004. Look at 1998 when Reid beat John Ensign by only a handful of votes (48%-48%, if you were wondering).
Trying to say that Reid will not have a problem getting re-elected because he beat Rich Ziser is like me telling you that Mitch McConnell isn’t going to have any troubles because he beat Lois Weinberg in 2002 (64%-35%, if you were wondering).
And the reason all you’re hearing from me is rhetoric is because the election is three. years. away. All anybody can give, including yourself, is rhetoric. I’m offering my speculation why I think Harry Reid will be vulnerable and a top target in 2010. You are free to disagree, but you can’t prove me wrong.
Boxer and Inoyue have already committed to re-election in 2010. Inoyue probably should reture, but whichever. Boxer could also still be endangered by Ahnold, but we’ll see. I’d be surprised that Ahnold would not hold off to the more likely open seat in 2012.
That could put Iowa into play.
I made no such claim. I personally don’t believe that Mitch McConnell is particularly vulnerable, but it has little to do with some sort of mystical attribute of being a Senate leader.
In fact, if my memory serves me correctly, I believe I made the opposite point. Someone (maybe you?) commented how a Senate leader hadn’t lost in like 100 years. I replied with a list of four that had lost since the position was created in the 1920’s. I also calculated the approximate number of times that a majority or minority leader would be up for re-election, and found that their overall re-election rate was lower (slightly) than the overall re-election rate of the Senate as a whole. If that statistic meant anything (and I don’t believe it does), it would actually mean that Mitch McConnell (and Harry Reid) *can* lose because they are Senate leaders.
He’ll be 77 on 2010, while he can make a Byrd move and serve until he’s in his 90s, but i’ve heard that he hasn’t been too happy in the minority.
Also look out for Specter’s retirement… he’ll be 80.
I’m sorry, I just need a second to get over that. Inouye is one of the more progressive voices of the Senate, Case is an all out DLC triangulating tax cut conservative who used his cousin, Steve CAse to get Time Magazine to attack Akaka when he ran against him. I’ve always been a strong opponent of term limits, and I tend to support older Senators and Congresspersons running for reelection as long as their health is good, and they’re still sharp. Byrd deserved his 9th term, that’s why I donated. Lingle might try to beat Inouye, but he’s a bedrock institution like Byrd, only even more popular. His next term will also be his last one, and that is only appropriate, we actually need him to run, if he doesn’t Lingle will run and win because no other Democrat could beat her, probably at least, and I really shudder at the thought of electing Case to anything ever again.
we got Bingamen and Feinstein to reconsider in 2006, I’m sure that while there sitting with their powerful committee gavels in 2012 we should be able to convince to to. Neither will be that old comparitively. Both will only be their early seventies, Bingamen may only be in his late sixties.
If you just use progressivepunch as a way for measurement, Inouye is the 14th most conservative Democrat in this senate. I suppose that this doesn’t mean that he’s all that conservative, but he is definitely in the moderate/conservative part of our caucus. I think Ed Case was about as bad. On the other hand, Akaka sits as the 15th most progressive member, and that’s probably higher considering 6 of the top 14 are freshman.
Kennedy’s not going to leave the Senate before 90 unless he’s carried out in a body bag. So much the better as long as he remains sharp. He’s the greatest progressive there today, and the Massachusetts Democratic party is getting filled up with more and more business conservatives these days, wer don’t really have a strong, liberal air to this seat.
I never claimed that Harry Reid would lose, only that the race would be competitive. It is my hope that Reid would lose, but given the vast number of factors that are just simply unknowable at this point, I don’t care to make any assertions one way or another.
he’s very unpopular, hasn’t crossed the 50% threshold in months, and is getting old. I think Rep. Ryan or Governor Strickland could easily beat him. Not to mention in Oklahoma, we might be able to get insanely popular Gov. Brad Henry to run against Coburn, who screw himself by making more rediculous and radical statements on the campaign trail.
If Clinton had not been elected in 1992, there would have been no “Republican Revolution” in 1994 that planted roots for what we saw happen from 2000 to 2006. Bush would not have won in 1994 in Texas and many of the right wing forces that sprouted up in the 1994 election would have never been elected had we had a Republican President during the 1994 midterm.
2010- Republican seats.
A)Freshman Republican Senators.
1)AK- Murkowski- Republican Favored. Red State.
2)FL- Martinez- Tossup/Possible Democratic Takeover-(Alex Sink.
3)GA- Isakson- possible open seat. Republican Favored. Red State.
4)LA- Vitter- Republican Favored- Tossup if Mitch Landrieu is the Democratic Nominee. Red State.
5)NC- Burr- Tossup?Possible Democratic Takeover(Richard Moore)
6)OK- Coburn- Republican Favored. Red State.Tossup is Henry is the Democratic Nominee.
7)SC- DeMint- Republican Favored. Red State.
8)SD- Thune- Republican Favored. Red State. Tossup if Herseth Sandlin the the Democratic Nominee.
Democrats will pick up FL and NC (+2D)
B)Republican Senators that narrowly won re-election in 2004.
1)KY- Bunning- Democratic Takeover- (Ben Chandler.)
2)MO- Bond- Possible Open seat- Democratic Takeover.- (Robin Carnahan.)
3)PA- Specter- Possible Open Seat- Democratic Takevoer-
Democrats will pick up KY and MO and PA(assuming Specter is retiring. (+3D)= (+5D).
C) Open Seats-
1)AL- Shelby- Republican Favored- Red State.
2)AZ- McCain- Democratic Takeover- (Janet Napolitano)
3)IA- Grassley- Democratic Takeover- (Tom Vilsack).
4)KS- Brownback- Republican Favored- Red State- Kansas has not elected a Democrat to the US Senate. Sebelius make the race a tossup.
5)OH- Voinovich- Democratic Takeover-(Lee Fisher.)
(+8D)
6)UT- Bennett- Republican Favored- Red State.Tossup if Matheson is the Democratic Nominee.
D)Republican representing a Blue State
1)NH- Gregg- loses to John Lynch-
(+9D).
Vulnerable Democratic Seats in 2010. NONE. CO(Salazar)is trending Democratic and Salazar is a moderate Democrat so I doubt he gets targeted.
2012
Republican Seats.
A)Freshman Republican Senators
1)Tennessee- Corker- Tossup/Democratic Takeover- Phil Bredesen. (+10D)
B)Republican Senators re-elected in 2006 by narrow margin
1)Arizona- Kyl- Tossup/Democratic Takevoer- Terry Goddard 2)Nevada- Ensign- Tossup/Democratic Takeover- Ross Miller,
(+12D)
C)OPEN Seats0
1)IN- Republican Favored- Red State- Tossup if Roemer is the Democratic Nominee.
2)MS- Republican Favored- Red State- Tossup if Mike Moore is the Democratic Nominee.
3)UT- Republican Favored Red State.- Tossup if Matheson is the Democratic Nominee.
D)Republican Senator representing a Blue State-
1)ME- Snowe- we can make the New England region entirely blue. Assuming Collins loses in 2008.
(+13D)
Vulnerable Democratic Seats in 2012- None.
Freshman Democratic Senators in purple or red states- McCaskill,Tester,and Webb have moderate voting records unlike the Republican Senators elected during the 94 Revolution. Grams-MN or Abraham-MO. Brown-OH was elected by a double digit margin and State is trending Democratic.
2008.
Democrats Pick up
CO-Udall
ME- Allen
MN- Franken
NH- Shaheen
OR- Merkley
VA- Warner.
(+19D)