Scott Eliott’s first 2010 Election Projections

Scott Eliott (ElectionProjection.com) is up with his first nationwide ’10 projections, and it isn’t so bad.

Eliott is a wingnut – but he’s as objective as they come w/r/t election data. For example, he called every Senate race correctly in ’06 and just missed 1 in ’08.

His numbers after ’10:

Senate: 56-42-2  (D -2)

House:  249-186  (D -8)

I believe would be depicted as a huge D victory, a virtual endorsement of President Obama’s agenda by a majority of the country.

Scott Elliot has his views, which I disagree with strongly. But he runs a clean site, free of the virtol associated with the typical Wingnut blog (perhaps except for the banner ads).

His record is stellar – he was right on 48 of the 50 states in the ’04 election (he switched IA and WI). He called all six of our Senate gains in ’06, with obvious pain in his words.

Eight days before election day ’08, he said

Eight days from Election Day, here is this blogger’s conclusion:  Barack Obama will win this election in a landslide.  He will capture at least 350 electoral votes and win the popular vote by 7% or more.

2010 details – w/r/t the Senate, he currently sees

D losses in DE, CO, CT

D gain in OH

w/r/t the House, the current projection shows

R gains in

AL-02, FL-08, ID-01, KS-03, LA-03, MD-01, NM-02, OH-15, PA-07, TN-06, TN-08, and VA-05

While I disagree with him w/r/t FL-08, there will be a lot of wingnut money flowing to whomever opposes Grayson this year.

Eliott also projects D gains in

DE-AL, IL-10, LA-02, PA-06

His formulas are interesting as well. http://www.electionprojection….

a quantitative formula based on polls and pundits.

He even uses partisan polls – but includes a 3% correction factor.

The Northeast – Continuing the realignment in 2010?

That the Northeast has been trending blue in recent cycles is self evidently true. Will it continue in 2010?

Below the fold for all the details and hey go check out the 2010 Race Tracker Wiki over at Open Congress for all your House, Senate and Gubernatorial needs.

(Cross posted at Daily Kos, MyDD and Open Left)

Whilst current polls don’t look too good for incumbent Democrats across the Northeast I believe that we have hit the bottom. Now that Health Care reform is done I believe that the polls will rebound for Democrats, particularly in the Northeast.

Thus it is my contention that despite the current challenging environment the Northeast will continue its long term move towards the Democratic Party, despite a sure to be spiteful debate on cap and trade and despite an economic outlook that is improving in fits and starts.

The US Census defines the Northeast region as including 9 states as follows: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Vermont. And aggregating across all 9 states the lay of the land looks like this:

States that voted for Obama: 9/9

Governors: 5/9

US Senators: 15/18 (Counting Sanders and Leiberman as Dems)

House Districts: 69/83

State Senates: 8/9

State Houses: 9/9

Where I think a race is a safe Democratic hold I won’t be saying anything about it.

Going state by state then:

Connecticut

Gubernatorial – With GOP Gov Jodi Rell not running again it is very likely to be a Dem pickup.

US Senate – Both Dems. If Dodd runs he may lose for any other Dem it is a safe hold.

US House – All Dem, all Safe (including Himes in the 4th.)

State Senate – 24D/12R – Safe

State House – 114D/37R – Safe

Maine

Gubernatorial – Whilst it seems that half of Maine is running for the open Gubernatorial mansion I believe that the Democratic nature of the state will lead to a Democratic retention.

US Senate – Both Repubs! Not on ballot in 2010

US House – All Dem, all Safe

State Senate – 20D/15R – Safe (Margin is growing).

State House – 95D/55R – Safe

Massachusetts –

Gubernatorial – Whilst Deval Patrick really hasn’t set the world on fire the 2nd tier nature of his potential opponents should see him safely re-elected.

US Senate – Both Dems (at least after the upcoming special election.)

US House – All Dem, all Safe

State Senate – 35D/5R – Safe

State House – 144D/16R – Safe

New Hampshire

Gubernatorial – Safe Dem

US Senate – definitely a race to watch. I will be stunned if Hodes loses here. Hodes has almost $1 million dollars COH and there is a divisive GOP primary in the offing also. New Hampshire, whilst less Blue than almost all of the other states in the North East, is not going to elect a Republican as US Senator in 2010.

US House –

NH-01 – There has been a lot of focus on both of the New Hampshire congressional races. I don’t get it to be honest – Shea Porter will win, not by much but she will win.

NH-02 – Again a lot of focus here including a lot of hand wringing about how vulnerable it is to switch. Not gonna happen folks. Gore, Kerry and Obama all won this district – Obama by 13 points – and we have a quality field of candidates  running AND a divisive GOP Primary. Lead Dem Ann McLane Kuster has 250K COH as at the end of September.

State Senate – 14/10 – No change in 2008 really locks in our 2006 gains. If this one flips it will be a bad night for us.

State House – 223D/176R – Safe

New Jersey

Gubernatorial – Repub – Not on ballot in 2010

US Senate – Both Dems

US House –

NJ-02 – If State Senator Jeff Van Drew finally steps up and runs this race becomes very competitive. Hopefully he won’t wait until 2012. If State Sen Jim Whelan runs it could also get competitive in this district that Obama won 54/45 and that Bush won by less than 1% in 2004.

NJ-03 – Adler is safe.

NJ-04 – Gore carried this district and Obama lost 47/52 so a good candidate here is a must to get it on the radar instead of the second tier candidates we have run thus far.

NJ-05 – Unlikely to be on the radar in 2010.

NJ-07 – This district is winnable particularly with a freshman GOP incumbent. Obama carried it 51/48 also. Surprising then that there is no declared Dem candidate yet. Potentially a top tier race that will probably be a big miss for the DCCC.

NJ-11 – The safest GOP district in NJ and a rarity in the Northeast, (outside Pennsylvania,) a generically safe GOP district. Short of a fantastic candidate this one won’t be on the radar.

State Senate – Up in 2011

State House – Up in 2011

New York

Gubernatorial – Safe for Cuomo.

US Senate – Gillibrand will get over the line against 3rd tier opponents and Schumer is Safe too.

US House –

NY-03 – Unless Suozzi or another top tier candidate emerges then this will be a big miss for the DCCC.

NY-13 – McMahon is safe.

NY-20 – Murphy will prevail – bet on it. He had almost 1 Mill COH at the end of September!

NY-23 – One of two really competitive races in Dem held districts in NY. I think Owens will prevail, especially against Hoffman.

NY-24 – After a scare in 2008 Arcuri will be safe.

NY-25 – Maffei is safe.

NY-26 – Unless a good candidate pops up this will be a big miss for the DCCC.

NY-29 – Massa has his work cut out for him – that’s for sure. But for me Massa by a nose. Why? When was the last time the NY GOP won a District off us? Massa’s 500K COH as at end of September will help too.

State Senate – 32D/30R – A chamber to watch – big time. I expect us to hang onto or increase our majority.

State House – 109D/41R – Safe

Pennsylvania

Gubernatorial – A real worry this one could flip.

US Senate – 2 Dems – Whoever emerges from the Dem primary will beat Toomey. The good folk of Pennsylvania wouldn’t be crazy enough to sent Toomey to the US Senate would they?

US House –

PA-03 – Dahlkemper will have her work cut out to win this District that Obama JUST lost. Race to watch.

PA-04 – Altmire will be safe.

PA-05 – This central Pennsylvania district will not be on the radar unless we have an ultra conservative candidate. One of 4 super safe districts in the state for the Republicans.

PA-06 – Generic Dem beats generic Rep – Period. Doug Pike’s massive COH advantage (largely self funded) of 750K as at end of September should help him pull this one out.  

PA-07 – Not quite sure why so many people are predicting this will flip. Top tier candidates for both parties makes for a tough race but this district was won by Gore, Kerry and Obama. Add in a competitive GOP Primary and it is Dem for me.

PA-09 – One of 4 super safe districts in the state for the Republicans. This central Pennsylvania district will not be on the radar unless we have an ultra conservative candidate. Yep just like PA-05.

PA-11 – Against Lou Barletta Kanjorski will be fine. Tough part of Pennsylvania for Democrats though.

PA-12 – Murtha is vulnerable but i expect him to survive (just).

PA-15 – Like PA-06 Obama carried every county in this one and yep it is also one of only 5 won by Kerry that is occupied by a GOP House Rep. Dem Callahan is a top tier challenger and is fundraising like one (325K COH as at end of Spetember).

PA-16 – Another super safe district for the GOP. Like the 5th and 9th unlikely to be a priority.

PA-18 – In theory could be vaguely competitive in 2010 (Bush only got 54% here in 2004) but unlikely given the low hanging fruit in the 6th and 15th.

PA-19 – Another super safe district for the GOP. Like the 5th, 6th and 16th unlikely to be a priority in 2010, unless Todd Platts lands the Government job he is chasing. Even then unlikely to be competitive.

State Senate – 20D/30R – Safe GOP

State House – 104D/99R – Definitely a chamber to watch.

Rhode Island

Gubernatorial – GOP Gov Don Carcieri is term limited so either a Dem or former Repub Sen now Indy Lincoln Chaffee will be elected. The GOP bench here is terrible.

US Senate – Both Dems

US House – All Dem, all Safe

State Senate – 35D/5R Safe

State House – 69D/6R Safe

Vermont

Gubernatorial – With GOP Gov Douglas not running the GOP have scored their best possible candidate in Lt Gov Brian Dubie; who will lose to a Dem (unless the Progressive Party act as a spoiler).

US Senate – Both Dems

US House – All Dem, all Safe

State Senate – 28D/7R Safe

State House – 95D/48R Safe

So with 10 months until election day it is off to the races!

What do you think?

IA-Gov: Vander Plaats pins health care reform on Branstad

Developing a line of attack he has used before, Republican gubernatorial candidate Bob Vander Plaats asserted yesterday that Terry Branstad’s past support for Democratic Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska makes Branstad partly responsible for any health care reform bill Congress passes this year.  

From the Vander Plaats campaign press release of November 23:

“Ben Nelson gave Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid the vote he needed to get the 60 votes to steamroll Republican opposition. It means the Democrats will be able to proceed with legislation that will effectively destroy our private health care system while saddling businesses and working families with hundreds of billions of dollars in new taxes and limiting our access to care,” said Vander Plaats, who is seeking the 2010 Iowa Republican gubernatorial nomination. “Whatever happens from here on out, Terry Branstad is going to have to accept some responsibility because he was a very active supporter of Ben Nelson in his first campaign for the Senate.”

Several Senate Democrats have said their vote for cloture over the weekend was merely in favor of allowing debate on the health care bill. However, their votes opened the process for a final vote that only requires 51 votes to win passage of any legislation.

“In other words, it’s more politics as usual where Ben Nelson will be able to vote against the bill later and insist he opposed the government takeover of health care. But the real vote was Saturday and the Democrat that Terry Branstad supported as a ‘conservative Democrat’ sided with Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi,” Vander Plaats said.

Branstad, who contributed $1,000 to Nelson’s general election campaign on May 31, 2000 and $250 to Nelson’s 2006 campaign on July 17, 2002,  stood beside Nelson on May 31, 2000 at a news conference and endorsed the former Nebraska governor, saying, “It’s all right to help your friends. If he were in Iowa, he probably would be a Republican.”

Vander Plaats said, “We’re all going to pay an extremely high price for that friendship and that’s especially true for thousands of Iowans who work in the insurance industry. If Ben Nelson really did think like an Iowa Republican he would’ve voted no this weekend – just like Chuck Grassley did. Once again, this proves that elections have consequences and ideologies have consequences. The Democrats want to control us with our own dollars by taxing us more to pay for their ridiculous health care plan and Terry Branstad helped give them the leverage to do it.”

To my knowledge, Branstad did not get involved in Nelson’s unsuccessful 1996 Senate campaign against Chuck Hagel. By 2000, Branstad was no longer governor and probably never imagined he’d run for office again.

Todd Dorman of the Cedar Rapids Gazette mocked the Vander Plaats attempt to blame Branstad for health care reform, but my hunch is that this argument will resonate with some Republican primary voters.

The conservative noise machine has and will continue to whip up intense opposition to the Obama administration’s so-called “socialist” agenda. If Democrats defeat another Republican filibuster with exactly 60 votes, the media will emphasize that every Democrat voted to let the bill proceed.

By itself, Branstad’s past support for Nelson might seem insignificant, but it could reinforce doubts some conservatives already have about Branstad’s loyalty. Vander Plaats has gone out of his way to remind audiences that his running mate will share his values. Branstad picked pro-choice Joy Corning for lieutenant governor during his last two terms. Many of the business leaders who helped recruit Branstad for this race supported Mitt Romney for president, and Romney’s not the current favorite among Iowa Republicans.

The Branstad campaign struck a dismissive tone in its response to yesterday’s attack:

“Governor Branstad does not favor the health care reform bill being considered by the Senate. It spends too much money we don’t have and does nothing to create the jobs we so desperately need,” Tim Albrecht, a spokesman for Branstad, said in a written statement.  “Bob would do well to keep the focus on that and not violate Ronald Reagan’s 11th commandment.”

They’ll have to do better than that as the campaign goes forward. There are plenty of vulnerable points in Branstad’s record, and Vander Plaats won’t be the only Republican attacker. Branstad is raising tons of money and rolling out endorsements, but Vander Plaats should have enough cash to get his message across statewide. He was featured on the cover of the November issue of Focus on the Family’s nationwide magazine, and last Friday, Chuck Norris hosted a $5,000 per couple fundraiser for Vander Plaats at his Texas ranch. If we’re lucky, national Teabaggers will get involved in this race too. They might be encouraged by the recent Des Moines Register poll showing Vander Plaats ahead of Governor Chet Culver.

I assume Branstad will have the resources to win the Republican primary next June. That said, I doubt he can spend the next six months asking his rivals to follow Reagan’s 11th commandment. Besides, Branstad has already broken his own rule by criticizing Vander Plaats’ proposal to halt same-sex marriage in Iowa by executive order. At some point Branstad will have to defend his past actions, and whatever he says probably won’t satisfy his detractors on the right wing.

Any thoughts on the Iowa governor’s race are welcome in this thread.

IA-Sen: Conlin has an uphill battle against Grassley

The Des Moines Register released more results from its latest Iowa poll by Selzer and Co., and Senator Chuck Grassley’s approval rating was 57 percent, the same as in the Register’s September poll. Only 32 percent of respondents said they disapproved of Grassley’s work.

Grassley’s 57 percent approval figure remains well short of the 75 percent he began the year with. […]

Political independents and Democrats have been responsible for much of Grassley’s slide since January. He made up little ground with them this fall. […]

More than half of Republicans say he did an excellent or good job on health care, while only about a quarter of Democrats and 39 percent of independents rate his work positively.

In a head to head matchup against Roxanne Conlin, Grassley led 57 percent to 30 percent. Last month’s Research 2000 poll of Iowans found Grassley leading Conlin by a much narrower margin, 51 percent to 39 percent. I’d like to see more polling of this race, but given Selzer’s track record in Iowa, I’m going to assume that the Register poll is close to the mark.

Since the media won’t be as focused on health care reform in the autumn of 2010, Democrats will need to build a case against Grassley that goes beyond his double-dealing on that issue. Even if Democrats run a near-perfect campaign against Grassley, he is very likely to be re-elected unless he makes some unforced errors.

On the other hand, it’s worth remembering that Grassley’s never been re-elected with less than 66 percent of the vote before. Holding him below 60 percent, or better yet below 55 percent, would greatly help down-ticket Democratic candidates next November.

Incidentally, Selzer’s poll for the Register found Senator Tom Harkin’s approve/disapprove numbers at 54/33, which is fairly strong but down from the 70 percent approval rating Harkin had in the Register’s January poll.  

IA-Sen: Conlin announces candidacy in video

Roxanne Conlin made her candidacy for U.S. Senate official today, releasing this two-minute video:

Conlin narrates the video herself, and it’s mostly a biographical piece. Her parents lived paycheck to paycheck. She worked her way through college and law school.

Conlin was U.S. Attorney for Iowa’s southern district from 1977 to 1981. In this video, she says that as a prosecutor, she “took on drug dealers, corrupt politicians, and corporations who violated the public trust.” She then started a small law firm “to give a voice to everyday people who had none, like taking on the big banks to help family farms at risk of foreclosure.”

Conlin tells viewers, “Taking on the special interests has been the cause of my life,” and she is running for U.S. Senate “to take this fight to Washington.” She promises to help small business and promote renewable energy and other strategies for creating jobs in Iowa.

She doesn’t mention Senator Chuck Grassley directly, but she outlines the case she will make against him. Career politicians in Washington have lost their independence. Iowans were left behind when banks got bailed out and their top executives got huge bonuses. Grassley voted for the Wall Street bailout, which Conlin mentions twice in this video. No doubt we’ll hear more in the coming months about Grassley’s ties to various special interests and his votes for tax breaks companies use when they ship jobs overseas.

Conlin looks at the camera as she delivers her closing line: “Join me in taking on this fight, because the special interests have had their turn. Now, it’s our turn.”

Her campaign logo reads, “Roxanne for Iowa.” I would like to hear from campaign professionals on the merits of branding women candidates with their first names, like the Hillary for president signs and bumper stickers.

I like that we hear her own voice, instead of an actor’s voice-over, and her life experiences that many Iowans can relate to. (Republicans are already referring to Conlin as a “liberal, millionaire trial attorney” from Des Moines.)

What do you think?

UPDATE: Transcript of the ad:

 Today, Roxanne Conlin filed paperwork with the Federal Elections Commission to enter the race for U.S. Senate and released a video to Iowans.  The video can be viewed at

http://www.roxanneforiowa.com/  

The text of the video follows:

   Iowa, a place of quiet resolve.  In tough times, overcoming the odds with strength and independence.  But somewhere along the way, career politicians in Washington lost theirs.

   As the big banks got bailed out and CEOs got outrageous bonuses, we got left behind.

   I’m Roxanne Conlin.  I grew up right here in Iowa, Sioux City, Clinton and Des Moines. My parents lived paycheck to paycheck, moving from town to town in search of work.

   To help our family, starting at fourteen, I worked as a waitress, and then worked my way through college and law school.

   When Jim and I married, we had nothing.  But we had each other and we built a loving family.

   As a prosecutor I took on drug dealers, corrupt politicians, and corporations who violated the public trust.

   I started my own business – a small law firm to give a voice to everyday people who had none.  Like taking on the big banks to help family farms at risk of foreclosure.  Taking on the special interests has been the cause of my life.  I’m running for U.S. Senate to take this fight to Washington.

   We need a senator who’ll help small businesses in Iowa, not big corporations that ship jobs overseas; fight for relief on Main Street, not more bailouts for Wall Street; and preserve the jobs we have, while also creating new ones with a renewable energy revolution in wind, solar, ethanol, and biomass.

   We have the most educated, skilled workforce right here in Iowa ready to turn this economy around.

   I’m Roxanne Conlin.  Join me in taking on this fight because the special interests had their turn.  Now.  It’s our turn.

Here’s more biographical information from her campaign website:

Battling organized crime, corruption and giant corporations, Roxanne Conlin has spent her life standing up to special interests for Iowa families who have been hurt by powerful forces. At an early age, Roxanne experienced personally the hardships many families face. She learned to never give up, no matter what the odds.

Growing up in Iowa, Roxanne’s family lived paycheck to paycheck, moving from town to town in search of steady work. Her father was an alcoholic, who struggled to hold down a job, while her mother tried to put food on the table for their children. The oldest of six children, Roxanne went to work as a waitress at the age of 14 to help the family make ends meet.

At the age of 16, Roxanne entered Drake University – taking on extra classes while holding down several jobs at the same time. Roxanne worked her way through college, graduating at 19 and Drake Law School graduating at just 21 years old. She chose to dedicate her legal career to speaking for those who cannot speak for themselves.

As an Assistant Attorney General for Iowa, Roxanne fought public corruption and wrote the first law of its kind protecting rape victims. Then, as the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Iowa, she worked hand in hand with law enforcement – leading major drug busts and cracking down on violent crime.

For more than 25 years, Roxanne has owned and managed a small law firm in Iowa. Her firm is dedicated to representing everyday people who do not have a voice. She has never worked for a single corporate interest. Instead, Roxanne has chosen to fight for family farmers squeezed by big banks, police officers wronged by the system, and workers hurt by large companies. A successful small business, Roxanne Conlin & Associates was recently cited by a national magazine as one of the best firms to work for because of its family-friendly practices, welcoming the children of staff into the workplace.

With each new milestone – serving as United States Attorney in Iowa, earning the Democratic nomination for Governor of Iowa, being elected as the first woman President of the American Association of Justice, and selected as one of the first women in the Inner Circle of Advocates – Roxanne leaves behind a trail of shattered glass. Through it all, she still sees the world through the eyes of the courageous, everyday Iowan who refuses to give up in the face of overwhelming odds.

Roxanne lives in Des Moines with her husband of 45 years, James. They are most proud of their four adult children and five grandchildren.

IL-Sen: Kirk working for Palin endorsement

According to Chris Cillizza at The Fix, he's got his hands on a memo penned by Mark Kirk agitating for an endorsement from Sarah Palin.  

Kirk apparently sent the memo to Republican 'bigwig' Fred Malek, who's been affiliated with Palin for a while.

After noting that Palin will be in Chicago later this month to appear on "Oprah", Kirk writes that "the Chicago media will focus on one key issue: Does Gov[ernor] Palin oppose Congressman Mark Kirk's bid to take the Obama Senate seat for the Republicans?"

 

Kirk goes on to write that he is hoping for something "quick and decisive" from Palin about the race, perhaps to the effect of: "Voters in Illinois have a key opportunity to take Barack Obama's Senate seat. Congressman Kirk is the lead candidate to do that."

Not sure what Kirk is worried about, as Patrick Hughes seems to be having problems getting his campaign off the ground, but nonetheless Kirk is definitely running to the base as quickly as possible.

At the same time, I’m sure any of the Dem candidates in this race would just love to bring up Kirk being “the candidate of Sarah Palin” or some such thing in the general election.  

The 20 Most Exciting Senate Races of the Last 20 Years

Every fall I get election fever.  And when it comes to odd-numbered fall like this one, nostalgia gets the best of me and I get to remembering the dramatic moments of elections past.  I got to thinking today of how many great Senate races I’ve witnessed over the last 20 years, which entails the time period where I’ve paid attention to Senate races, and ultimately decided it would be fun to make a list of favorites.  As usually happens with me, I originally intended to make a top-10 list but thought of so many great races that I had to extend the list to a top 20.  The two primary factors I considered were the excitement level and corresponding twists and turns of the Senate campaign, and ultimately the closeness of the margin.  In some of these races, the bad guys prevailed, which I usually docked some points for but didn’t rule them out entirely simply because an exciting Senate race is an exciting Senate race no matter who wins.  My choices below the fold….

Before I get to the top-20, I have to cite four races for honorable mentions….

1998 New York (Chuck Schumer vs. Al D’Amato)–A very high-profile race between two street fighter candidates made for some memorably salty ads and campaign banter.  It was expected to be close but Schumer pulled away in the end and won very decisively (11 points).

2000 Michigan (Debbie Stabenow vs. Spencer Abraham)–There were a number of great Senate battles in 2000 and one of the best was in Michigan where one-term GOP incumbent Spencer Abraham was narrowly edged out by Congresswoman Stabenow in large part because of Al Gore’s better-than-expected showing at the top of the ticket provided coattails.  Even so, the race wasn’t declared for Stabenow officially until the wee hours of the night (as in after all the networks prematurely called the Presidency for Bush).

2006 Montana (Jon Tester vs. Conrad Burns)–Right up until that last two weeks of the race, I had thought Tester had an easy win coming given incumbent Conrad Burns’ multiple scandals, especially his alleged involvement with Jack Abramoff.  When late polls showed Burns catching up, I didn’t believe them at first, but sure enough come election night it was razor thin as Tester hung on by a mere three thousand votes and wasn’t declared the winner until mid-morning Wednesday.  For some reason, even in the darkest moments, I still sensed that Tester would prevail, however, but for the life of me I’ll never understand why a turd like Burns made it so close in that environment.

2002 Minnesota (*Paul Wellstone vs. Norm Coleman)–Here’s a contest I give an asterisk for because it was poised to be one of the best Senate races in memory.  I lived in Minnesota at the time and the excitement surrounded this race was electric even during the summer, always testy but never plunging to the depths of sleaze that Coleman was capable of.  This was the peak period of suburban shift to the GOP in Minnesota, so Wellstone was depending upon a very traditional “DFL” coalition of urban and outstate working class voters and farmers, who generally had a rising opinion of Wellstone given his advocacy for agriculture issues.  When Wellstone began to pull away in mid-October at the very time Republicans were counting on him to implode due to the Iraq War vote, it was an amazing development.  Of course we all know the tragedy that killed Wellstone and sucked all the oxygen out of the exciting race.  Walter Mondale admirably filled in for Wellstone at the 11th hour, but the memorial service was such a PR trainwreck that I definitely sensed things had imploded in the final days of the campaign and that Coleman would win.  One of the most exciting races I’ve ever seen ended in the most disastrous way, thus keeping it from my top-20 list by default.

Now, onto the top-20…..

#20.  2008 Oregon (Jeff Merkley vs. Gordon Smith)–Most late polls suggested two-term incumbent Gordon Smith was poised to lose his seat to Merkley, and I became pretty comfortable with the narrative that Smith was toast.  I was thus surprised when the returns rolled in showing Smith ahead with ALL of the Portland vote in.  I had written this race off until some point the next day when new information became available saying that most of the Portland vote was in fact not yet in and that the information saying it was was incorrect.  It was one of those not-as-rare-as-you-think moments where the media gets it wrong and the amended figures give new life to one candidate presumed dead and punches the other candidate who thought he/she had a lead in the gut.  Luckily, in this case, the Democrat Merkley got the good news.

#19.  1992 Georgia (Wyche Fowler vs. Paul Coverdell)–I don’t remember much about incumbent Democrat Wyche Fowler, only that he was considered too liberal for Georgia.  So even when Georgia was giving a narrowly 43% plurality to Bill Clinton in the Presidential election of 1992, Fowler had similar difficulties in attaining a 50% plus one majority, which is of course required for official victory in Georgia.  Fowler narrowly beat the conservative Republican Coverdell on the election night vote, but fell short of a majority.  As a consequence, there was a runoff a few weeks later which gave a decided advantage to Coverdell.  As expected, Coverdell won the runoff, but even that was closer than one may have guessed considering how soundly Saxby Chambliss crushed Jim Martin in a similar runoff this year.  Coverdell won by about one percentage point and regrettably led the way for a much more Republican Georgia in the years ahead.

#18.  2004 South Dakota (Tom Daschle vs. John Thune)–I know, I know.  The outcome was disastrous, but the magnitude of the grudge match was ferocious beyond anything I’ve ever seen and made for a yearlong bout of hand-to-hand combat that I got to experience first hand when I visited South Dakota a few times in the summer and fall of 2004.  In that tiny corner of America, the epicness of that Senate race exceeded by leaps and bounds what was the most intense Presidential campaign I’ve ever witnessed.  As someone who’s always been fascinated by the battle lines in South Dakota’s many jarlid-tight state elections, I knew exactly what to look for amidst the early returns to see how things were going on election night.   I felt things slipping away in the final week of the campaign and was thus not surprised when those early returns were not where they needed to be to sustain a Daschle victory.  I had a heavy heart by evening’s end when I saw that Daschle was keeping it close, but with 10% of the vote left it was clear he was not gonna win.  Sad ending, but an exhilirating 12 months getting there.

#17.  2004 Florida (Betty Castor vs. Mel Martinez)–Another race with an unhappy ending but nonetheless a political scientist’s dream contest due to demographic anomalies of the contest.  It was a masterstroke for Republicans to nominate Martinez to run for the open seat vacated by Democrat Bob Graham given that they needed to consolidate the increasingly less reliable Cuban vote around George Bush in the Presidential race and simultaneously inflate Republican margins in Hispanic-heavy central Florida near Orlando.  It worked like a charm at both levels and Martinez carried Miami-Dade County and Orange County (Orlando), and likely giving Bush an assist with the same voters.  On the other hand, Democrat Castor seemed to benefit from not being a person of color in northern Florida, winning rural counties near Tallahassee that usually lean Republican in state elections.  Furthermore, Castor’s home base in the Tampa-St. Petersburg area boosted her margins there and almost offset Martinez’s advantage in Miami-Dade and Orlando.  Martinez eked out a win of less than two points but it was a fascinating horse race until the wee hours of the night when it finally became clear Martinez was gonna win.

#16.  2000 Nebraska (Ben Nelson vs. Don Stenberg)–In one of the toughest states for a Democrat in what was arguably their toughest year in recent memory, the party had a herculean task of holding onto the Senate seat vacated by Bob Kerrey.  Formerly popular conservative Democratic Governor Ben Nelson was their only hope, even though he managed to blow what was thought of as a sure thing in the 1996 Senate race against Chuck Hagel.  And this time he had a better-known challenger in GOP Attorney General Stenberg.  Fighting a ferocious partisan tide where Bush was beating Gore 2-1, Nelson’s race became very close in the end and holding it was a necessity for any hopes the Democrats had of retaking the Senate in 2000.  Democrats swept all but one of the incredibly close races that drug on into the a.m. hours just like that year’s Presidential elections.  It wasn’t until about 15 minutes after Bush was wrongly declared the winner in 2000 that the Nebraska Senate race was called for Nelson who prevailed by less than two points.  Nelson’s definitely not my kind of Democrat, but it’s the only close statewide race in Nebraska I remember, and thus provides a helpful geographic baseline for where Democrats can be expected to win in future competitive Nebraska elections, assuming there is another one.

#15.  1998 Kentucky (Jim Bunning vs. Scotty Baesler)–Incumbent Democrat Wendell Ford was retiring in a state that was rapidly trending Republican in the late 1990s, leaving Lexington-based Democratic Congressman Scotty Baesler a tough Senate seat to hold.  We all know Bunning as the cantankerous and senile Senator who sleeps through health care hearings, and the only thing different about him in 1998 was that he was only a Congressman from the uber-conservative southern suburbs of Cincinnati in northeastern Kentucky.  The regional split was one of the primary contributors to the battleground Senate race’s ultimate tightness, with margins that stayed within a few thousand votes almost the entire evening and well into the a.m. hours.  Unfortunately, it seemed like it was Bunning who was always narrowly ahead with each new set of returns that rolled in.  And so it went as Bunning ultimately prevailed by about one-half of one percentage point. The upside from the race is that even though he’s on the blue team, it strikes me as doubtful that Baesler would be capable of as much unintentional comedy as Bunning has during his Senate tenure.

#14.  2008 Alaska (Mark Begich vs. Ted Stevens)–This was very close to

becoming the #1 most depressing Senate election of all-time as a corrupt incumbent less than two weeks removed from a felony conviction came within a hair’s breadth of retaining his Senate seat. Particularly after the selection of Sarah Palin as the Vice-Presidential nominee, I knew that unless he was convicted before the election, Stevens was likely to get another term.  But following the conviction, I thought Begich’s victory was secured.  How could this possibly be, I thought to myself when the final count the morning after the election showed that Alaska voters decided to go with the felon. Initially I held out little hope that Begich could come from behind, and I came across alot of online crowing by Republicans defending the felon in their ranks and his would-be defeat of Begich.  But then I started hearing murmurs that the remaining votes appeared to be in Begich-friendly terrain.  Alaska is the most annoying state in the country as far as determining where the vote count in any given race is coming from, so Begich’s comeback struck me as more of an article of faith than anything else.   Nonetheless, he pulled it off in the end. Still, Begich’s microscopic marging of victory against a convicted felon with an (R) next to his name underscores how difficult this seat will be to hold in 2014.

#13.  1996 South Dakota (Tim Johnson vs. Larry Pressler)–Almost all of the battleground Senate races were going against us in 1996, including Maine, New Hampshire, Nebraska, Arkansas, and even Oregon.  There were two bright spots, one of which was South Dakota, the state that has had by far the most close Senate elections in the last quarter century.  In this case, three-term Republican incumbent Larry Pressler was facing a challenge from the state’s lone Congressman, Democrat Johnson.  It struck me as a ballsy move for Johnson to give up his safe House seat to take on Pressler, particularly in Republican South Dakota and with Bill Clinton coming up 11,000 votes short of winning South Dakota even against Bob Dole.  But he gauged Pressler’s vulnerability well and narrowly won in what was the most geographically divided race in a state that’s always geographically divided as the split between Pressler’s red counties and Johnson’s blue counties was almost perfectly divided between the west and east sides of the Missouri River.

#12.  1998 Wisconsin (Russ Feingold vs. Mark Neumann)–I was going to ollege in the northeast corner of Iowa in 1998, which is in the La Crosse, Wisconsin, media market.  For that reason, I was personally invested in this reelection race, especially it was for one of my favorite Senators who had been made vulnerable for his own convictions.   Riding a 20-point lead in the summer, Feingold wanted to stand by public financing quotas rather than take PAC money, but his Republican opponent Neumann, a Congressman from southeast Wisconsin, had no such trepidation from taking PAC money and ultimately saturated the airwaves with Feingold-bashing ads.  That 20-point lead melted and by October the race was a tie.  The Democratic Party was furious with Feingold for making himself vulnerable, especially since there were some indications the Republicans could gain enough seats for a filibuster-proof majority that year.  Things didn’t work out at all as expected of course and the Democrats began winning almost every battleground Senate race, and winning them quite handily.  After seeing all those victories accumulating, I found myself less fearful that Feingold would be taken out.  Sure enough, only about an hour after the polls closed, they called the race for Feingold.  Still, his winning margin was a mere two points, far closer than it should have been against a douchebag like Neumann.

#11.  2000 Washington (Maria Cantwell vs. Slade Gorton)–There were about five hotly contested Senate races still not called after midnight on election night 2000. If the Democrats ran the table on them, they could take over control of the U.S. Senate. Called fairly early was the Washington race, with Cantwell declared the winner far sooner than she should have been.  In case nobody noticed, the networks had a bit of an issue with prematurely calling election contests in 2000.  Washington does so much of their vote by mail-in ballots and whatever early advantage Cantwell had all but disappeared as the late votes began to be counted disproportionately for the GOP incumbent Gorton.  She held on, but by a mere 2,000 votes out of nearly 2.5 million cast.  In a year full of close Senate contests, this one was the closest….and it was days before Cantwell’s victory was made official.

#10.  2006 Tennessee (Harold Ford vs. Bob Corker)–I have a special fascination with the regional eccentricities of Tennessee politics, particularly in the post realignment era where Democratic victories have become increasingly difficult.  With that in mind, the longshot 2006 Senate race featured such a herculean uphill fight for so many different reasons that I couldn’t look away.  I don’t care for him that much personally, but Harold Ford is nonetheless a smart politician who seemed more capable than just about anyone else with a (D) next to his name of winning this seat, despite being an African-American in a Southern state and the controversies surrounding his family. Furthermore, there was a contentious GOP primary featuring three players with different strengths and weaknesses to bring to a contest with Ford.  Even after Labor Day, when polls showed Ford ahead, I was extremely doubtful the blue team could win this one because I knew that, among other things, the Republicans would blow the race card dog whistle and manage to turn the contest into a racial pissing match.  I left Ford dead in the final two weeks, but I’ll be damned if Ford didn’t fight his way back at the very end.  The good news for Ford is that he held Gore’s 2000 coalition almost down to the county, pulling off wins in the rural Yellow Dog Democrat strongholds in the Tennessee River Valley in West Tennesse and the Cumberland Plateau in Middle Tennessee, as well as a margin about six points higher than Gore did in metropolitan Memphis.  The bad news was it still wasn’t enough.  The missing puzzle piece for both Gore and Ford was shoring up the majority of Lincoln Davis’ TN-04 district in the Jack Daniels country south of Nashville and east of the Cumberland Plateau, and area that has been trending very Republican this decade.  Still, for a brief moment in time when those boffo numbers out of Memphis were rolling in, I thought Ford may be able to pull off what would have been an astounding and historical victory.

#9.  1996 Louisiana (Mary Landrieu vs. Woody Jenkins)–The media’s frame of this “historic” race was that Louisiana was about to have either its first woman Senator or its first Republican Senator. Landrieu struck me as a bit of a longshot in conservative Louisiana, but she could not have chosen a better year to run riding the coattails of Bill Clinton who won the state by what now seems like a mind-blowing 12 percentage points (yes Virginia, there was a time when Louisiana was winnable for a Democratic Presidential candidate).  Even with that strength on the top of the ticket, Landrieu was locked in mortal combat well into the a.m. hours.  Most battleground Senate races went to the bad guys in 1996, but Landrieu prevailed with a ridiculously small 50.1-49.9 margin, making it by far the closest Senate race of the 1996 cycle.

#8.  2006 Missouri (Claire McCaskill vs. Jim Talent)–I watched all of the Meet the Press debates featuring candidates from the battleground Senate races in 2006, and found the Missouri debate to be the best of the bunch.  Both candidates seemed above-average in both style and  ubstance.  I had gone out on a limb predicting early on that McCaskill would upset Talent after some promising early poll numbers.  It was a seesaw struggle the entire cycle and the conventional wisdom played out on election night with a two-point race.  With the majority of the vote in, it looked as though Talent was comfortably ahead but most of the Kansas City and St. Louis vote was still hanging out there….but would it be enough?  My sense is that it was, and I was right, but only by about 20,000 votes.  The most surprising development of the race was that the stem cell initiative on the ballot that was supposed to provide coattails to McCaskill prevailed by even smaller margin than did McCaskill.

#7.  1998 Nevada (Harry Reid vs. John Ensign)–I never quite understood what Nevada, formerly a Republican stronghold, saw in the milquetoast Harry Reid, who is hardly a charismatic figure to make him the one acceptable Democrat they were willing to continually re-elect.  But Republicans got aggressive in 1998 by nominating Ensign, the two-term Congressman from the least conservative part of the state (Las Vegas), to take Reid on.  The race was below my radar screen for the longest time so I was actually quite surprised to see it become the closest race of the cycle, with Reid prevailing by a mere 400-some votes and not declared the winner until about 24 hours after the polls closed on election night.  In retrospect it seems a little surprising Reid was able to beat Ensign in that situation.  If Reid is lucky, he’ll score another 400-vote victory in 2010, which may make November 1998 seem like the good old days to him.

#6.  2000 Missouri (Jean Carnahan vs. John Ashcroft)–I suppose it’s a little ghoulish rating this race so high since the Democratic nominee on the ballot, Governor Mel Carnahan, died two weeks before the election in a plane crash, but the surreal nature of the aftermath is nonetheless about as compelling of a political narrative as I’ve ever come across with Carnahan’s widow poised to get appointed to the seat if Mel Carnahan posthumously won the election.  The Missouri race was one of several 2000 Senate elections that was so close that it wasn’t called until well after midnight, and it didn’t become real for me until the race was officially called for Carnahan.  And the outcome of the race took on special meaning when Ashcroft was appointed as Attorney General.  For the next several years, Democrats got to rub Bush supporters’ noses in the fact that their own controversial Cabinet members couldn’t even hold onto a Senate seat when their opponent was a dead man.

#5.  2008 Minnesota (Al Franken vs. Norm Coleman vs. Dean Barkley)–In terms of tightness of margin and length of recount, this should perhaps be higher on the list, but for me the race lacked drama.  At no point before the final month of the campaign did I buy the premise that the stoic Scandinavians who I grew up with would be able to take Al Franken seriously.  But when Franken proved to be a serious candidate and Coleman, who had ran contentious but by and large civil campaigns in his previous two statewide elections, plunged to a level of campaign sliminess that drove Coleman’s own negatives down further than Franken’s.  The gadfly Independence Party saw the opening and ran their best-known candidate in Dean Barkley, who seemed like a sane alternative for those who at that point disliked both Franken and Coleman.  Once Barkley was scoring double digits in the polls, the race became not only unpredictable, but almost impossible for even a hard-core political aficianado to handicap.  In the end, the race played out the way polls suggested, with Barkley scoring 14% and Coleman and Franken deadlocked for the rest.  Strangely enough, for as uncharted of territory as this race originally appeared to be, the county map for the 2008 Senate race looked almost identical to the 2004 Presidential county map in Minnesota, with the only difference being Coleman scoring wider margins than did Bush in the second and third-ring suburbs.  And of course enough has been said about the six-month recount that ultimately drug on far too long and ultimately stained the legacy of this race, at least for me.

#4.  2004 Kentucky (Dan Mongiardo vs. Jim Bunning)–Seriously, the 2010 Senate election is gonna be boring with Jim Bunning around.  The 2004 race took on dimensions of weirdness of which I could have never imagined…and certainly wouldn’t have guessed would be rewarded with re-election.  To be fair, Bunning’s comfortable Labor Day lead collapsed after the otherworldly detours (using teleprompters during debates; not attending public events out of fear that Osama bin Laden was after him; and accusations of “little green doctors pounding on his back”) started popping up almost every other day.  Had the election been a week later, it’s likely that the surging Mongiardo would’ve prevailed but the clock ran out too early and Bush’s 20-point shellacking of Kerry at the top of the ballot proved too strong of a headwind to successfully wade through.  Looking at the county map, one would have presumed Mongiardo had done enough to win.  He scored impressive double-digit margins in Jefferson County (Louisville) and Fayette County (Lexington) and ran up the score big-time in the Democratic coal counties of east Kentucky, which is where Mongiardo’s legislative district was.  He even won most of the conservative Democratic counties in western Kentucky which have been mostly out of reach for Democrats since the dawn of the Bush era.  Bunning’s 51-49 margin came on the strength of his performance in northeastern Kentucky, where Bunning had been the House member before moving to the Senate.  And not only did Bunning run up the score in the Cincinnati suburbs, he also overperformed typical Republican numbers in the more rural counties in and around Ashland in northeastern Kentucky.  Had Mongiardo only managed to pull in the usual numbers that Democrats do

in those counties, he’d likely be running for a second term rather than a first term next year.

#3.  2006 Virginia (Jim Webb vs. George Allen)–Only a year before the 2006 Senate elections, George Allen was considered one of the most secure incumbents in America and at or near the top of the 2008 Presidential candidate short list.  There was even talk in some circles of the Democrats recruiting actor Ben Affleck to run against him. Thankfully that went nowhere but it still seemed far out of reach for would-be Democratic challenger Harris Miller to take out Allen.  Then, from out of nowhere, former Republican and Secretary of the Navy Jim Webb stepped up to the plate.  At first he seemed a longshot even to win the primary but ultimately pulled it off, and it was after the primary win that I finally envisioned a scenario where Democrats could conceivably win this race.  Still, Allen could probably have not spent one minute on the campaign trail and prevailed in this race due to his artificial popularity.  Thankfully he did head out onto the campaign trail, making mistake after mistake after mistake, at one point sending campaign goons to slam a peaceful protestor into a plate-glass window a week before the election.  Despite this comedy of errors, I was shocked that the race was as close as it was on election night.  Having seen the baseline for a narrow Democratic win in Virginia only one year earlier by Tim Kaine, I wasn’t seeing comparable numbers roll in for Webb, especially in the Tidewater area.  With about 80% of the vote in, I was starting to doubt Webb’s ability to win.  He would have to win as big if not slightly bigger than Kaine had in northern Virginia to pull this thing out.  But lo and behold, the numbers from Loudoun and Prince William Counties came in along with a few heavily black urban centers and Webb came from behind, albeit by the narrowest margin of the entire election cycle (50.1-49.9), and Webb was declared the winner the evening after the election.  I’d be interested to see Webb’s approval ratings heading into his 2012 reelection race…just to see how vulnerable he would be.

#2.  2002 South Dakota (Tim Johnson vs. John Thune)–Here was a race where early polls suggested trouble for one-term incumbent Tim Johnson,

who now found himself in the same situation he had put Larry Pressler in six years earlier facing the state’s sole House member.  But Johnson battled his way back by the fall of 2002, largely by default.  South Dakota was suffering a severe drought in 2002 and Mr. Popularity (at the time) President Bush came to South Dakota to campaign on behalf of Thune….or at least in theory.  Bush actually had the arrogance to tell a group of South Dakota ranchers they’d have to suck it up without any federal drought relief…and put Thune in the awkward position of agreeing with Bush.  As a result, Johnson surged in the polls to either a tie or a small lead.  Of course, almost every battleground Senate race went against us in 2002 and by the time I went to bed around 2 a.m., it looked as though the South Dakota race was going the wrong way as well (when I go to bed before dawn on an election night you KNOW things are going badly!).  The Thune-friendly West River numbers were rolling in and Thune was starting to pull ahead.  When I woke up in the morning, the first place I looked was South Dakota to see if Johnson pulled it out.  Thune was 500 votes ahead with ONE PRECINCT left to report.  I thought to myself that there was only one single precinct in the state of South Dakota capable of making up that much ground for Johnson and quickly checked on Shannon County, home of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, to see if that was indeed the precinct yet to report….and it was!   It was the equivalent to a half-court hail mary shot at the buzzer, but when I  checked South Dakota again a couple hours later, the final precinct reported and the margin had been reversed.  Thune’s 500-vote lead had become Johnson’s 500-vote victory.  It doesn’t get much more dramatic than that.

#1.  1990 Minnesota (Paul Wellstone vs. Rudy Boschwitz)–This race isn’t at the top of my list due to the breathtaking closeness of its margin, but rather the shock-the-world caliber of the upset and the fact that the winner of the race would become my favorite Senator in my lifetime. Early in 1990, slimy two-term Republican Rudy Boschwitz was rated as the safest incumbent in the nation. The Democrats had difficulty finding a credible challenger and ended up selecting a flamboyantly liberal activist and college professor named Paul Wellstone, who Democrats privately feared would be so weak that he would hurt other Democrats down the ticket. But sometime around Labor Day, something happened. Boschwitz was running “positive” ads just dripping with the arrogance of an out-of-touch incumbent (“when you see Rudy at the fair, he may only have a few moments to talk to you….because he’s the Senator for ALL of Minnesota”)Meanwhile, the penniless Wellstone campaign was starting to generate some buzz with its colorful candidate and his humorous and offbeat TV ads. Boschwitz was caught flat-footed and reacted with a panic, making a megagaffe a week before the election when it sent out a letter to Jewish supporters citing Wellstone as an “improper Jew” because he married a Christian woman. Meanwhile, the energy surrounding Wellstone was explosive and contagious. I was in seventh grade and barely tuned in, so it wasn’t until the final couple of days of the campaign that I began to

seriously entertain the idea that Wellstone could win.  But win he did, prevailing by three points in the a.m. hours.  Even if Dan Mongiardo had prevailed against Bunning in 2004, it wouldn’t have been as mind-blowing of an upset as what Wellstone accomplished in 1990.  I’d be incredibly surprised if an upset of this magnitude is ever seen again in a U.S. Senate race.

So there’s my top-20 list.  I hope people have enjoyed the list and welcome any additions others may have, either from the last 20 years or some golden oldies of decades past.

IA-Sen: Christie Vilsack rules out challenge against Grassley

Former First Lady Christie Vilsack released a statement today confirming that she will not challenge Senator Chuck Grassley next year.  

Excerpt:

Commiting to a campaign for the US Senate next year requires more than the confidence that I have the right experience, the necessary support and the resources to be successful. It must come with an understanding that it is the best way for me serve our State and my fellow Iowans in the most effective way possible at this time. I have decided not to run for the United States Senate in 2010. I will continue my work with the Iowa Initiative to Prevent Unintended Pregnancy and will be active in our Party and across the state in issues that affect the quality of life for all Iowans. […]

While I will not be a candidate for office in 2010, never doubt I am committed to a life of service and to Iowa.

So, the mystery challenger Iowa Democratic Party chair Michael Kiernan promised for Grassley is almost certainly Roxanne Conlin, who has said she’s leaning toward running.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see former Governor Tom Vilsack run for the U.S. Senate in the future. I expect Christie Vilsack to run for Congress when Leonard Boswell’s seat (IA-03) becomes open.

Speaking of Boswell’s district, I saw at Iowa Independent that CQ Politics is calling it a “safe Democratic” seat in the House.

According to Bleeding Heartland user mirage, State Senator Brad Zaun is planning to run against Boswell next year. (I am trying to confirm that rumor.) Zaun was mayor of Urbandale, a heavily Republican suburb of Des Moines, before getting elected to represent Iowa Senate district 32 in 2004. He was re-elected to a four-year term in 2008, so he wouldn’t risk losing his seat in the upper chamber by running against Boswell.

UPDATE: Kiernan approached Conlin way back in January about running against Grassley.

IA-Sen: Conlin “more likely than not” running against Grassley

Prominent attorney Roxanne Conlin spoke to the Des Moines Register on Thursday about a possible Senate bid next year.

Link:

“I never thought I’d run again,” Conlin said at her home in Des Moines. “But in my lifetime, I don’t ever want to say, ‘If only I had followed my dream or followed my heart.’ ”

“What has changed for me is Grassley.”

Conlin said she is “more likely than not” running, but first needs to iron out how she would staff a campaign and handle her law practice before making a final decision, which she expects to announce by next month.

She said she talked about running at length with state party chairman Michael Kiernan, who said last month a well-known Democrat was planning to enter the race. “I don’t know how this is going to come together, but I have reached the point where I would like to do it,” she said. […]

Conlin said Grassley’s tone on health care reform at public appearances in Iowa last summer pushed her toward running. […]

Conlin accused Grassley of being disingenuous, noting that he circulated a fundraising brochure stating he was working to defeat “Obama-care,” while continuing to participate in bipartisan negotiations.

“That’s not the Chuck Grassley I thought this state elected, and it really was a watershed moment for me,” Conlin said.

Conlin was the Democratic nominee for governor in 1982, the first year Terry Branstad was elected. Before that, she ran the civil rights division of the Iowa Attorney General’s Office and was the U.S. attorney for the southern district of Iowa.

She’s been a highly successful plaintiff’s attorney since 1983 and was the first woman president of the Association of Trial Lawyers of America. In addition,

She founded and was the first chair of the Iowa Women’s Political caucus, and was president and general counsel of the NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund. Most recently, she has been named by the National Law Journal as one of the fifty most influential women lawyers in America, one of the 100 most influential lawyers in America and one of the top 10 litigators.

If Conlin runs, she will be a lightning rod for attacks from Republicans and corporate-funded political organizations. On the plus side, she is a powerful public speaker and may be able to drive up turnout, especially among women voters. She will also be able to raise more than enough money to run a serious campaign against Grassley. Earlier this month, Research 2000 found Grassley leading Conlin by 51 percent to 39 percent among Iowa voters.

3Q Senate Fundraising Reports Roundup

Here’s our summary of FEC filings for the quarter that ended on September 30, for the hot (and not-so-hot) Senate races. (House filings are here.) These numbers come courtesy of Quinn McCord at the Hotline. The left column is total receipts for the second quarter. (This is based on slightly different criteria as “total raised” from the House list, which only counts donations – see Quinn’s post for the full explanation.) The right column is current cash on hand. All dollar amounts are in thousands. Click on table headers to sort.
























































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































State Candidate Party 3Q Receipts CoH
AK Murkowski (R-inc) $540 $1,520
AR Baker (R) $510 $504
AR Coleman (R) $55 $31
AR Lincoln (D-inc) $1,211 $4,130
AR Reynolds (R) $43 $43
AZ Mccain (R-inc) $1,681 $5,681
CA Boxer (D-inc) $1,645 $6,351
CA Devore (R) $383 $145
CA Fiorina (R) $0 $0
CO Bennet (D-inc) $1,013 $2,851
CO Buck (R) $159 $348
CO Norton (R) $510 $492
CO Romanoff (D) $293 $243
CT Caligiuri (R) $147 $112
CT Dodd (D-inc) $902 $2,081
CT Foley (R) $785 $1,183
CT McMahon (R) $3,502 $1,450
CT Schiff (R) $0 $0
CT Simmons (R) $968 $1,086
DE Castle (R) $58 $853
FL Crist (R) $2,489 $6,235
FL Meek (D) $772 $2,722
FL Rubio (R) $1,011 $903
GA Isakson (R-inc) $961 $3,642
IA Fiegen (D) $4 $1
IA Grassley (R-inc) $865 $4,434
IA Krause (D) $7 $3
ID Crapo (R-inc) $501 $2,543
IL Giannoulias (D) $1,118 $2,430
IL Hoffman (D) $888 $837
IL Hughes (R) $0 $0
IL Jackson (D) $367 $318
IL Kirk (R) $1,631 $2,300
IL Meister (D) $1,048 $1,038
IN Bayh (D-inc) $633 $12,730
KS Moran (R) $521 $3,476
KS Tiahrt (R) $344 $1,402
KY Conway (D) $675 $1,650
KY Grayson (R) $645 $1,118
KY Mongiardo (D) $514 $752
KY Paul (R) $1,011 $912
LA Melancon (D) $754 $1,803
LA Vitter (R-inc) $1,255 $3,910
MA Brown (R) $169 $150
MA Capuano (D) $425 $1,201
MA Coakley (D) $2,187 $1,954
MA Khazei (D) $1,124 $1,040
MA Pagliuca (D) $2,044 $674
MD Mikulski (D-inc) $306 $1,750
MO Blunt (R) $1,303 $2,274
MO Carnahan (D) $1,072 $1,844
NC Burr (R-inc) $1,117 $3,461
NC Etheridge (D) $154 $1,006
NC Lewis (D) $158 $184
NC Marshall (D) $178 $164
ND Dorgan (D-inc) $721 $3,935
NH Ayotte (R) $613 $563
NH Hodes (D) $587 $1,149
NV Amodei (R) $49 $41
NV Chachas (R) $1,404 $1,323
NV Lowden (R) $0 $0
NV Reid (D) $2,043 $8,733
NV Tarkanian (R) $271 $205
NY-A Schumer (D-inc) $2,004 $16,634
NY-B Gillibrand (D-inc) $1,633 $4,174
OH Brunner (D) $0 $0
OH Fisher (D) $621 $1,599
OH Ganley (R) $44 $23
OH Portman (R) $1,311 $5,170
OK Coburn (R-inc) $629 $1,134
OR Wyden (D-inc) $637 $2,824
PA Luksik (R) $217 $48
PA Sestak (D) $758 $4,700
PA Specter (D-inc) $1,822 $8,711
PA Toomey (R) $1,558 $1,808
SC Demint (R-inc) $524 $2,860
SD Thune (R-inc) $804 $5,530
TX Barton (R) $526 $1,710
TX Sharp (D) $615 $3,356
TX White (D) $1,550 $4,182
TX Williams,M. (R) $192 $118
TX Williams,R. (R) $336 $863
UT Bennett (R-inc) $403 $792
UT Chaffetz (R) $86 $102
UT Granato (D) $20 $9
UT Shurtleff (R) $0 $0
VT Leahy (D-inc) $495 $2,562
WA Murray (D-inc) $927 $4,622
WI Feingold (D-inc) $663 $3,128

The totals are blank for several prominent names on this chart. Some (like Jennifer Brunner) simply declined to provide the Hotline with their data. Others have not yet formally announced & presumably haven’t met FEC reporting thresholds yet.