Rate Which 08 senate race look the most like 06 wins.

Each 2006 pickup had a distinctive reason, almost like a category in an award show; so let’s rate them that way.  The categories would be loss because of changing electorate (DeWine-OH), loss because of unpopular war despite personal popularity (Chafee-RI), Macaca moment (Allen-VA) corruption (Burns-MT), just plain unpopular (Santorum-PA), and battleground (McCaskill-MO).  Who will lose for these reasons this time around, and why?  Here are my ratings.

Unpopular: Sunnunu.  Especially if Shaheen jumps in, but either way the guy keeps running to the right in a suddenly left state.  He’s antagonistic, abrasive, and nothing like the traditional new England republican he needs to be if he wanted to have an ounce of a chance of winning.

Corruption: Ted Stevens.  We finally have a chance to take the nut down, between the FBI raids, and corruption charges he’s going to be this cycle’s Burns.  An incumbent who would have won easily without the corruption.  Burns may have faced a more difficult than normal challenge even without the Abramoff connections, he would have still had a safe win, maybe 55-45.  With Abramoff however, he’s out hunting buck, or screaming obscenities at his family, or whatever crazy old senators do when they lose.

Personal popularity:  this is a toughie.  Collins would seem like the obvious choice, seeing as how she’s quite popular (not Snowe popular) in a strong blue state.  Still, she seems more like a Macaca moment senator to me.  Gordon smith is moderately popular, but not chafee, nor is Oregon Rhode Island.  I’d have to stick with collins, but that’s just me. 

Changing electorate: Ohio was (is) in major political upheaval, as is Colorado.  As it’s an open seat, it becomes even more likely that the state that is becoming rapidly more blue will give us a win similar to brown’s over dewine.

Macaca: these are hard to gauge, because they’re unpredictable.  If anyone had asked last year who it would be, everyone would have said burns because of his history of making stupid remarks.  For the moment I’ll say Coleman, but it might go to Mitch down in Kentucky, or collins may win both categories. 

battleground: since Ohio and Missouri don’t have senate seats up this cycle, I’m going to say Oregon.  While it’s not a bellwether, it’s been a swing state for most of the last elections.

These are just my opinions, please tell me what you think.

6 thoughts on “Rate Which 08 senate race look the most like 06 wins.”

  1. For the Democratic seats:

    Changing Electorate would definitely be Louisiana and Mary Landrieu.  Katrina went a long way toward ethnically clensing Louisiana of its black population.

    Personal popularity would be Tim Johnson.  I’ve seen polls showing him having like the second highest approval rating of all Senators (this was before the 2006 election, though).  But South Dakota is a red state in a presidential year with the possibility of a powerful Republican governor running.

    I agree with your interesting assessment of the races this year.  Here are some more:

    Battleground: Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.  Kentucky went Democratic in 1992 and 1996 and Democrats have had gains and near misses in the past couple of years.  Plus, you have an unpopular Republican governor. 

  2. Of Ohio. I think of “changing electorate” as being a place like New Hampshire or Colorado, which are clearly trending Dem. I feel like Bob Taft and Tom Noe were big contributors to the GOP’s malaise in OH, but I don’t think I’m prepared to say I feel like the state is shifting blue in a long-term way. OH felt a little more “one-off” to me, but I’m happy to be proven wrong on this.

  3. Corruption:  I agree, Stevens.  The man is senile as all getout, but that alone wouldn’t be enough.  If we beat him, it’ll be because of the scandals.

    Changing Electorate: Sununu.  He’s a good candidate for Unpopular as well.  But I can’t get past the fact that NH hasn’t elected a Democratic senator since 1975 (the 6th longest losing streak, after Kansas, Wyoming, Utah, Idaho and Alaska), and looks almost certain to do so next year.  You don’t blow a record like that only due to personal unpopularity.  The granite shifted under him, if you will.

    Macaca: I have a feeling Collins is really going to put her foot in her mouth one of these days.  She’s already been awfully rattled by some pretty minor incidents, at a time when keeping her mouth shut would probably be politically smart.  (By the way, I think you could make the case that Santorum’s “man on dog” rant was arguably a Macaca moment.  In three years, his poll numbers never recovered.)

    Personal Popularity: Smith.  Give the devil his due.  The man really did reinvent himself (without really changing anything) in just nine months after losing to Ron Wyden in the 1996 special, and he’s never looked back.  But there’s every reason to believe that might not be enough this time around.

    Unpopular:  Cornyn.  Let’s face it, we couldn’t win in Texas without a Republican incumbent who does everything he can to help…and so far, Boxy is doing a great job!

    Battleground: Coleman.  Hate to say it, but Minnesota isn’t Hubert Humphrey country anymore.  But it does still lean blue, and Coleman doesn’t take that as seriously as he should.

Comments are closed.