Since I couldn't manage to make a list for July, we have 2 months of developments in just one update. The Republican position has improved since May. Their "all-men-on-board" approach is doing its best to prevent another Democratic wave election in the Senate, even though that means a loss of talent elsewhere. For example, Mark Kirk is the only viable republican candidate in the Senate in Illinois, and he runs. Mike Castle would be the only one in Delaware, but I wonder if he still wants to run, after his recent encounter with his birther base. I don't know.... I get the feeling that the 2010 election is mounting up to be a last-stand election. After that, the Republicans have to go through a severe reform process.
Anyway, for now they are not looking THAT bad. Sen. Bunning is going to retire, that's helping, too. And who knows, maybe New Hampshire AG Kelly Aiotte can mount an effective campaign against Paul Hodes.
A lot depends on the status of the Obama presidency, especially the races in the swing states, Florida, Ohio, Missouri.... That's why there's still a lot of uncertainty in some races.
Incumbent, State Dem | Rep % change for Dems
Richard Shelby, Alabama 0 100 0
Lisa Murkowski, Alaska 0 100 0
John McCain, Arizona 10 90 +0,1
Blanche Lincoln, Arkansas 80 20 -0,2
Barbara Boxer, California 90 10 -0,1
Michael Bennett, Colorado 80 20 -0,2
Chris Dodd, Connecticut 60 40 -0,4
(Ted Kaufman), Delaware 70 30 -0,3
(Mel Martinez), Florida 20 80 +0,2
Johnny Isakson, Georgia 0 100 0
Daniel Inouye, Hawai'i 100 0 0
Mike Crapo, Idaho 0 100 0
(Roland Burris), Illinois 80 20 -0,2
Evan Bayh, Indiana 100 0 0
Chuck Grassley, Iowa 0 100 0
(Sam Brownback), Kansas 0 100 0
Jim Bunning, Kentucky 50 50 +0,5
David Vitter, Louisiana 20 80 +0,2
Barbara Mikulski, Maryland 100 0 0
(Kit Bond), Missouri 70 30 +0,7
Harry Reid, Nevada 80 20 -0,2
(Judd Gregg), New Hampshire 50 50 +0,5
Chuck Schumer, New York 100 0 0
Kirsten Gillibrand, New York Jr. 100 0 0
Richard Burr, North Carolina 30 70 +0,3
Byron Dorgan, North Dakota 100 0 0
Tim Coburn, Oklahoma 0 100 0
(George Voinovich), Ohio 50 50 +0,5
Ron Wyden, Oregon 100 0 0
Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania 90 10 -0,1
Jim DeMint, South Carolina 0 100 0
John Thune, South Dakota 0 100 0
(Kay B. Hutchison), Texas 30 70 +0,3
Bob Bennett, Utah 0 100 0
Patrick Leahy, Vermont 100 0 0
Patty Murray, Washington 100 0 0
Russ Feingold, Wisconsin 100 0 0
Overall Estimate of Democratic gains: +1,6
I've realized that only minor changes were necessary. For example, Charlie Melancon's candidacy in Louisiana is countered by the possibility of Bobby Jindal jumping into the race (noone wants to be a governor right now...). Also, I had already expected some of the developments, and there's not much that shocked me. I considered pushing the Democrats to 60% in Ohio after several similar polls, showing Portman behind Fisher AND Brunner, but too much depends on the state of the economy. I had Kentucky as a 50:50 before, and a Grayson vs. Conway race will be just that.
Senate Ranking:
1. Missouri (open) -
2. Ohio (open) +2
3. New Hampshire (open) -1
4. Kentucky (open) -1
5. Connecticut (Dodd) -
6. Texas (open) +2
7. Delaware (open) +3
8. North Carolina (Burr) -2
9. Lousiana (Vitter) +3
10. Illinois (open) new
11. Nevada (Reid) -2
12. Colorado (Bennett) -1
13. Florida (open) -6
14. Arkansas (Lincoln) -
15. Arizona (McCain) -2
Republican improvements in New Hampshire and Connecticut benefit the Ohio race, and the Delaware race continues to climb (maybe I underestimated the potential at the beginning - still, it's more a benefit of Mike Castle being in the news, while the other races, Nevada, Colorado, Arkansas are suspiciously quiet....). The Florida race has dropped by a lot, I can't really quantify it, and maybe it should be higher because of all the endorsements Marco Rubio is getting, but things should go well for Crist....
Wednesday, 29 July 2009
Monday, 1 June 2009
Sonia Sotomayor - will she be confirmed?
First answer: yes!
By the time she is going to be confirmed, Al Franken will most likely be a sitting Senator. That means that the Democrats have 60 votes at their disposal, theoretically. Ben Nelson has said that he is open to a filibuster, Blanche Lincoln also said that she doesn't automatically confirm the hispanic judge. Mark Pryor and Mary Landrieu are not facing re-election this year, so I guess they are relatively safe votes in Sotomayor's favor.
That means that there are about 55 safe Democratic votes for Sotomayor.
The chances of confirmation by the few Democratic exceptions stand at:
Ben Nelson 60% (+0,6)
Blanche Lincoln 70% (+0,7)
Al Franken 80% (+0,8 - a small chance that he is not confirmed at that time)
Mark Pryor 90% (+0,9)
Mary Landrieu 90% (+0,9)
Total: 55 + 3,9 = 58,9 Democratic "yes" votes.
The Republican abilities to vote against her confirmation are severely limited by electoral calculations. Some Senators simply cannot affort to disenfranchise hispanic voters, either out of consideration for the whole party or out of personal consideration of their future. Additionally, Sonia Sotomayor was originally appointed to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York by President George H.W.Bush. Some of the current Republican Senators already voted to confirm her back then. The same happened again with her confirmation to the U.S. court of appeals in 1997 by Bill Clinton. Additionally, many Republicans cannot legitimately claim a right to filibuster a judge since they rejected that position during the Bush administration.
So the likelihood of a vote against Sotomayor's confirmation is impacted by:
- the partisan make-up of the state of said Senator (as always)
- personal preferences
- percentage of hispanic population in the state
- position on Sotomayor's earlier confirmations
- position on up-and-down vote of judicial nominees
Now, let's list all the Republican Senators and their likelihood of voting "nay"
Alexander 60% (+0,6)
Barrasso 80% (+0,8)
Bennett 40% (+0,4)
Bond 60% (+0,6)
Brownback 90% (+0,9)
Bunning 90% (+0,9)
Burr 50% (+0,5)
Chambliss 100% (+1)
Coburn 100% (+1)
Cochran 60% (+0,6)
Collins 30% (+0,3)
Corker 70% (+0,7)
Cornyn 70% (+0,7)
Crapo 100% (+1,0)
DeMint 100% (+1,0)
Ensign 60% (+0,6)
Enzi 100% (+1,0)
Graham 50% (+0,5)
Grassley 80% (+0,8)
Gregg 50% (+0,5)
Hatch 40% (+0,4)
Hutchison 60% (+0,6)
Inhofe 100% (+1)
Isakson 80% (+0,8)
Johanns 90% (+0,9)
Kyl 80% (+0,8)
Lugar 40% (+0,4)
Martinez 40% (+0,4)
McCain 50% (+0,5)
McConnell 80% (+0,8)
Murkowski 80% (+0,8)
Risch 100% (+1)
Roberts 100% (+1)
Sessions 100% (+1)
Shelby 100% (+1)
Snowe 20% (+0,2)
Thune 100% (+1)
Vitter 100% (+1)
Voinovich 80% (+0,8)
Wicker 90% (+0,9)
Total: 29,8 votes
Combine these 29,8 republican "nay" votes with the 1,1 Democratic "nay" votes (5,0-3,9=1,1) and you get a total of 31 votes against Sonia Sotomayor and 69 votes in her favor. I guess there might be a few (one or two) abstentions, so my final prediction is: 68-30.
By the time she is going to be confirmed, Al Franken will most likely be a sitting Senator. That means that the Democrats have 60 votes at their disposal, theoretically. Ben Nelson has said that he is open to a filibuster, Blanche Lincoln also said that she doesn't automatically confirm the hispanic judge. Mark Pryor and Mary Landrieu are not facing re-election this year, so I guess they are relatively safe votes in Sotomayor's favor.
That means that there are about 55 safe Democratic votes for Sotomayor.
The chances of confirmation by the few Democratic exceptions stand at:
Ben Nelson 60% (+0,6)
Blanche Lincoln 70% (+0,7)
Al Franken 80% (+0,8 - a small chance that he is not confirmed at that time)
Mark Pryor 90% (+0,9)
Mary Landrieu 90% (+0,9)
Total: 55 + 3,9 = 58,9 Democratic "yes" votes.
The Republican abilities to vote against her confirmation are severely limited by electoral calculations. Some Senators simply cannot affort to disenfranchise hispanic voters, either out of consideration for the whole party or out of personal consideration of their future. Additionally, Sonia Sotomayor was originally appointed to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York by President George H.W.Bush. Some of the current Republican Senators already voted to confirm her back then. The same happened again with her confirmation to the U.S. court of appeals in 1997 by Bill Clinton. Additionally, many Republicans cannot legitimately claim a right to filibuster a judge since they rejected that position during the Bush administration.
So the likelihood of a vote against Sotomayor's confirmation is impacted by:
- the partisan make-up of the state of said Senator (as always)
- personal preferences
- percentage of hispanic population in the state
- position on Sotomayor's earlier confirmations
- position on up-and-down vote of judicial nominees
Now, let's list all the Republican Senators and their likelihood of voting "nay"
Alexander 60% (+0,6)
Barrasso 80% (+0,8)
Bennett 40% (+0,4)
Bond 60% (+0,6)
Brownback 90% (+0,9)
Bunning 90% (+0,9)
Burr 50% (+0,5)
Chambliss 100% (+1)
Coburn 100% (+1)
Cochran 60% (+0,6)
Collins 30% (+0,3)
Corker 70% (+0,7)
Cornyn 70% (+0,7)
Crapo 100% (+1,0)
DeMint 100% (+1,0)
Ensign 60% (+0,6)
Enzi 100% (+1,0)
Graham 50% (+0,5)
Grassley 80% (+0,8)
Gregg 50% (+0,5)
Hatch 40% (+0,4)
Hutchison 60% (+0,6)
Inhofe 100% (+1)
Isakson 80% (+0,8)
Johanns 90% (+0,9)
Kyl 80% (+0,8)
Lugar 40% (+0,4)
Martinez 40% (+0,4)
McCain 50% (+0,5)
McConnell 80% (+0,8)
Murkowski 80% (+0,8)
Risch 100% (+1)
Roberts 100% (+1)
Sessions 100% (+1)
Shelby 100% (+1)
Snowe 20% (+0,2)
Thune 100% (+1)
Vitter 100% (+1)
Voinovich 80% (+0,8)
Wicker 90% (+0,9)
Total: 29,8 votes
Combine these 29,8 republican "nay" votes with the 1,1 Democratic "nay" votes (5,0-3,9=1,1) and you get a total of 31 votes against Sonia Sotomayor and 69 votes in her favor. I guess there might be a few (one or two) abstentions, so my final prediction is: 68-30.
Senate predictions - June
Time for new Senate rankings!
Incumbent, State Dem | Rep % change for Dems
Richard Shelby, Alabama 0 100 0
Lisa Murkowski, Alaska 0 100 0
John McCain, Arizona 20 80 +0,2
Blanche Lincoln, Arkansas 80 20 -0,2
Barbara Boxer, California 90 10 -0,1
Michael Bennett, Colorado 80 20 -0,2
Chris Dodd, Connecticut 60 40 -0,4
(Ted Kaufman), Delaware 80 20 -0,2
(Mel Martinez), Florida 70 30 +0,3
Johnny Isakson, Georgia 0 100 0
Daniel Inouye, Hawai'i 100 0 0
Mike Crapo, Idaho 0 100 0
(Roland Burris), Illinois 90 10 -0,1
Evan Bayh, Indiana 100 0 0
Chuck Grassley, Iowa 10 90 +0,1
(Sam Brownback), Kansas 0 100 0
Jim Bunning, Kentucky 50 50 +0,5
David Vitter, Louisiana 20 80 +0,2
Barbara Mikulski, Maryland 100 0 0
(Kit Bond), Missouri 70 30 +0,7
Harry Reid, Nevada 80 20 -0,2
(Judd Gregg), New Hampshire 70 30 +0,7
Chuck Schumer, New York 100 0 0
Kirsten Gillibrand, New York Jr. 100 0 0
Richard Burr, North Carolina 30 70 +0,3
Byron Dorgan, North Dakota 100 0 0
Tim Coburn, Oklahoma 10 90 +0,1
(George Voinovich), Ohio 50 50 +0,5
Ron Wyden, Oregon 100 0 0
Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania 90 10 -0,1
Jim DeMint, South Carolina 0 100 0
John Thune, South Dakota 0 100 0
(Kay B. Hutchison), Texas 30 70 +0,3
Bob Bennett, Utah 0 100 0
Patrick Leahy, Vermont 100 0 0
Patty Murray, Washington 100 0 0
Russ Feingold, Wisconsin 100 0 0
Overall Estimate of Democratic gains: +2,6
Senate Ranking:
1. Missouri (open) -
2. New Hampshire (open) -
3. Kentucky (Bunning) -
4. Ohio (open) -
5. Connecticut (Dodd) +1
6. North Carolina (Burr) +1
7. Florida (open) -2
8. Texas (open) +2
9. Nevada (Reid) -
10. Delaware (open) +6
11. Colorado (Bennet) -3
12. Louisiana (Vitter) -1
13. Arizona (McCain) -
14. Arkansas (Lincoln) -3
15. Oklahoma (open?) new
There were a few big announcements last month, Crist's run for the Senate and Roy Cooper's decision not to do the same in North Carolina. Ironically, the North Carolina race moved up even further in my ranking, even though the likelihood of a seat change has decreased. Well... I still think that Burr is very vulnerable, and Heath Shuler is reconsidering a run. But Cooper was the Democrats' best chance of getting that seat. We have to see if there is another major development in this race. If not, it's going to drop a lot. Florida has already dropped. I think it's possible that Rubio defeats Charlie Crist in a primary, especially if he is backed by the Jeb Bush-camp (and Huckabee's evangelical support doesn't hurt either). Also, the midterm elections will give a boost to the more partisan primary candidates and their more active supporters. Still, Crist would be a heavy favorite in the general election against presumable Democratic nominee Kendrick Meek. In any case, the republican primary will be interesting to watch, it's the kind of primary we didn't get in Pennsylvania.
At the top of the ranking, everything stays the same. Carnahan is the best possible candidate in the Missouri race, no matter which Republican runs. Paul Hodes continues to be the only candidate in New Hampshire. Jim Bunning is still not retiring.... Dodd is somewhat rebounding and getting heavy boosts from Obama. Time will tell if the anti-Dodd sentiment is going to prevail. Texas moves to a new record standing, mainly because other races with a similar likelihood of change are getting less interesting, and that Texas seat is still looking like a real battle, once it is open. On the other hand, Blanche Lincoln will not face Tim Griffin, Reid and Bennet continue to poll badly but don't face serious challengers, and Chuck Grassley is not retiring either.
These minor changes in probability also affect the open race for the Delaware Senate seat - a race without any candidate at all so far! Mike Castle hasn't decided yet and might be waiting for the return of Beau Biden and his reception (Biden's standing will depend on the standing of the Obama government like noone else). No other Republican has a chance to win, and no Democrat wants to piss off the Vice President by jumping in.
I wonder if the nomination of Sotomayor is creating any trouble for Sen. McCain. I guess he has to reject her because of his anti-immigrant challenger. That would severe his relatively good ties with hispanics and make a Democratic challenge more promising. But who is going to run?
At the very end, the Oklahoma seat makes a first entrance into the ranking, but it might very well be the only appearance, since Tom Coburn is going to announce his plans for the future today. If he retires, Democrats have 2 very good candidates, but since it's Oklahoma, even that might not be enough. If Coburn doesn't retire, the seat is his.
Taken all together, the Republicans enjoy a breath of fresh air after a series of misfortunes. They can continue their good streak by recruiting Mike Castle and Bob Beauprez. However, their improved outlook comes at a price of moderation. Charlie Crist and Mike Castle would be fairly moderate Senators, voting with the Democrats maybe half of the time or so. They'd gain more support for their agenda from Delaware, but they'd lose some in Florida. And since the Democrats already have their 60 seats, these new Republican senators would merely counter the conservative Democrats Ben Nelson, Blanche Lincoln, Mark Pryor and Mary Landrieu.
If you pointed a gun at my head, I'd say that Carnahan, Hodes, Conway and Fisher flip their seats, and Castle wins the Delaware seat if he runs. The Republicans "should" be focussing on Nevada and Colorado, since they can change the partisan makeup of the Senate much more in these states than in New Hampshire or Florida (with Crist). At best (for Republicans), the 2010 elections will be a draw, with Carnahan winning in Missouri, Castle winning in Delaware, the Democrats picking up one seat ...somewhere.... (NH, OH, KT) and the Republicans also picking up one seat ...somewhere... (CO, NV, CT).
Incumbent, State Dem | Rep % change for Dems
Richard Shelby, Alabama 0 100 0
Lisa Murkowski, Alaska 0 100 0
John McCain, Arizona 20 80 +0,2
Blanche Lincoln, Arkansas 80 20 -0,2
Barbara Boxer, California 90 10 -0,1
Michael Bennett, Colorado 80 20 -0,2
Chris Dodd, Connecticut 60 40 -0,4
(Ted Kaufman), Delaware 80 20 -0,2
(Mel Martinez), Florida 70 30 +0,3
Johnny Isakson, Georgia 0 100 0
Daniel Inouye, Hawai'i 100 0 0
Mike Crapo, Idaho 0 100 0
(Roland Burris), Illinois 90 10 -0,1
Evan Bayh, Indiana 100 0 0
Chuck Grassley, Iowa 10 90 +0,1
(Sam Brownback), Kansas 0 100 0
Jim Bunning, Kentucky 50 50 +0,5
David Vitter, Louisiana 20 80 +0,2
Barbara Mikulski, Maryland 100 0 0
(Kit Bond), Missouri 70 30 +0,7
Harry Reid, Nevada 80 20 -0,2
(Judd Gregg), New Hampshire 70 30 +0,7
Chuck Schumer, New York 100 0 0
Kirsten Gillibrand, New York Jr. 100 0 0
Richard Burr, North Carolina 30 70 +0,3
Byron Dorgan, North Dakota 100 0 0
Tim Coburn, Oklahoma 10 90 +0,1
(George Voinovich), Ohio 50 50 +0,5
Ron Wyden, Oregon 100 0 0
Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania 90 10 -0,1
Jim DeMint, South Carolina 0 100 0
John Thune, South Dakota 0 100 0
(Kay B. Hutchison), Texas 30 70 +0,3
Bob Bennett, Utah 0 100 0
Patrick Leahy, Vermont 100 0 0
Patty Murray, Washington 100 0 0
Russ Feingold, Wisconsin 100 0 0
Overall Estimate of Democratic gains: +2,6
Senate Ranking:
1. Missouri (open) -
2. New Hampshire (open) -
3. Kentucky (Bunning) -
4. Ohio (open) -
5. Connecticut (Dodd) +1
6. North Carolina (Burr) +1
7. Florida (open) -2
8. Texas (open) +2
9. Nevada (Reid) -
10. Delaware (open) +6
11. Colorado (Bennet) -3
12. Louisiana (Vitter) -1
13. Arizona (McCain) -
14. Arkansas (Lincoln) -3
15. Oklahoma (open?) new
There were a few big announcements last month, Crist's run for the Senate and Roy Cooper's decision not to do the same in North Carolina. Ironically, the North Carolina race moved up even further in my ranking, even though the likelihood of a seat change has decreased. Well... I still think that Burr is very vulnerable, and Heath Shuler is reconsidering a run. But Cooper was the Democrats' best chance of getting that seat. We have to see if there is another major development in this race. If not, it's going to drop a lot. Florida has already dropped. I think it's possible that Rubio defeats Charlie Crist in a primary, especially if he is backed by the Jeb Bush-camp (and Huckabee's evangelical support doesn't hurt either). Also, the midterm elections will give a boost to the more partisan primary candidates and their more active supporters. Still, Crist would be a heavy favorite in the general election against presumable Democratic nominee Kendrick Meek. In any case, the republican primary will be interesting to watch, it's the kind of primary we didn't get in Pennsylvania.
At the top of the ranking, everything stays the same. Carnahan is the best possible candidate in the Missouri race, no matter which Republican runs. Paul Hodes continues to be the only candidate in New Hampshire. Jim Bunning is still not retiring.... Dodd is somewhat rebounding and getting heavy boosts from Obama. Time will tell if the anti-Dodd sentiment is going to prevail. Texas moves to a new record standing, mainly because other races with a similar likelihood of change are getting less interesting, and that Texas seat is still looking like a real battle, once it is open. On the other hand, Blanche Lincoln will not face Tim Griffin, Reid and Bennet continue to poll badly but don't face serious challengers, and Chuck Grassley is not retiring either.
These minor changes in probability also affect the open race for the Delaware Senate seat - a race without any candidate at all so far! Mike Castle hasn't decided yet and might be waiting for the return of Beau Biden and his reception (Biden's standing will depend on the standing of the Obama government like noone else). No other Republican has a chance to win, and no Democrat wants to piss off the Vice President by jumping in.
I wonder if the nomination of Sotomayor is creating any trouble for Sen. McCain. I guess he has to reject her because of his anti-immigrant challenger. That would severe his relatively good ties with hispanics and make a Democratic challenge more promising. But who is going to run?
At the very end, the Oklahoma seat makes a first entrance into the ranking, but it might very well be the only appearance, since Tom Coburn is going to announce his plans for the future today. If he retires, Democrats have 2 very good candidates, but since it's Oklahoma, even that might not be enough. If Coburn doesn't retire, the seat is his.
Taken all together, the Republicans enjoy a breath of fresh air after a series of misfortunes. They can continue their good streak by recruiting Mike Castle and Bob Beauprez. However, their improved outlook comes at a price of moderation. Charlie Crist and Mike Castle would be fairly moderate Senators, voting with the Democrats maybe half of the time or so. They'd gain more support for their agenda from Delaware, but they'd lose some in Florida. And since the Democrats already have their 60 seats, these new Republican senators would merely counter the conservative Democrats Ben Nelson, Blanche Lincoln, Mark Pryor and Mary Landrieu.
If you pointed a gun at my head, I'd say that Carnahan, Hodes, Conway and Fisher flip their seats, and Castle wins the Delaware seat if he runs. The Republicans "should" be focussing on Nevada and Colorado, since they can change the partisan makeup of the Senate much more in these states than in New Hampshire or Florida (with Crist). At best (for Republicans), the 2010 elections will be a draw, with Carnahan winning in Missouri, Castle winning in Delaware, the Democrats picking up one seat ...somewhere.... (NH, OH, KT) and the Republicans also picking up one seat ...somewhere... (CO, NV, CT).
Friday, 1 May 2009
Senate predictions - May
Sigh.... busy with work at the moment... better times are going to come by June...
Anyway... lots of things happened in April. The fundraising for the first quarter has been released and Arlen Specter switched to the Democrats, sending SHOCKWAVES throughout the political world. Maybe this switch has made Jim Bunning realize that there is no space for his ego as he has apparently "endorsed" the exploratory commitee of Kentucky SoS and personal friend Trey Grayson. Grayson is more popular than Bunning, but he is just as popular as the best democratic challenger Jack Conway. So the race moves back into the toss-up category.
Also, John McCain gets a primary challenger with Chris Simcox, basically a one-issue candidacy against McCain's stance on immigration. It is a somewhat dangerous challenge, we have to see if the Republican base is just as tired of McCain as they were of Specter, that is, if the anti-incumbency mood is stronger that electoral considerations.
Specter's switch changes the situation in Pennsylvania, of course. The seat will most probably remain democratic, even if Rep. Jim Gerlach runs. However, Specter might consider supporting an amended version of EFCA or he will face serious pressure from the left and the unions. Other changes in this month's chart are related to the results of the fundraising.
Incumbent, State Dem | Rep % change for Dems
Richard Shelby, Alabama 0 100 0
Lisa Murkowski, Alaska 10 90 +0,1
John McCain, Arizona 20 80 +0,2
Blanche Lincoln, Arkansas 80 20 -0,2
Barbara Boxer, California 90 10 -0,1
Michael Bennett, Colorado 80 20 -0,2
Chris Dodd, Connecticut 60 40 -0,4
(Ted Kaufman), Delaware 90 10 -0,1
(Mel Martinez), Florida 50 50 +0,5
Johnny Isakson, Georgia 0 100 0
Daniel Inouye, Hawai'i 100 0 0
Mike Crapo, Idaho 0 100 0
(Roland Burris), Illinois 90 10 -0,1
Evan Bayh, Indiana 100 0 0
Chuck Grassley, Iowa 20 80 +0,2
(Sam Brownback), Kansas 0 100 0
Jim Bunning, Kentucky 50 50 +0,5
David Vitter, Louisiana 20 80 +0,2
Barbara Mikulski, Maryland 100 0 0
(Kit Bond), Missouri 70 30 +0,7
Harry Reid, Nevada 80 20 -0,2
(Judd Gregg), New Hampshire 70 30 +0,7
Chuck Schumer, New York 100 0 0
Kirsten Gillibrand, New York Jr. 100 0 0
Richard Burr, North Carolina 40 60 +0,4
Byron Dorgan, North Dakota 90 10 -0,1
Tim Coburn, Oklahoma 10 90 +0,1
(George Voinovich), Ohio 50 50 +0,5
Ron Wyden, Oregon 100 0 0
Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania 90 10 -0,1
Jim DeMint, South Carolina 0 100 0
John Thune, South Dakota 0 100 0
(Kay B. Hutchison), Texas 20 80 +0,2
Bob Bennett, Utah 0 100 0
Patrick Leahy, Vermont 100 0 0
Patty Murray, Washington 100 0 0
Russ Feingold, Wisconsin 100 0 0
Overall Estimate of Democratic gains: +2,8
Senate Ranking:
1. Missouri (open) +3
2. New Hampshire (open) -1
3. Kentucky (open?) -1
4. Ohio (open) +1
5. Florida (open) +1
6. Connecticut (Dodd) +1
7. North Carolina (Burr) +1
8. Colorado (Bennet) +2
9. Nevada (Reid) -
10. Texas (open) +3
11. Arkansas (Lincoln) +3
12. Louisiana (Vitter) -1
13. Arizona (McCain) new
14. Illinois (Burris) +1
15. Iowa (Grassley) -3
The ranking suffers from the contradiction between vulnerable incumbents and incumbent fundraising advantage. Incumbents like Blanche Lincoln, Harry Reid and Michael Bennet really raised a lot of money, even though they are certainly vulnerable from a polling perspective. Blanche Lincoln is probably going to have 2 republican challengers, but none of them with her fundraising powers. The same is true for Michaee Bennet, and Harry Reid doesn't even have a challenger at the moment.
Missouri moves into the top spot because of Sarah Steelman's incoming primary challenge to Matt Blunt and Blunt's disappointing fundraising numbers, especially in comparison to Robin Carnahan's result. Carnahan has to be regarded as a favorite now.
New Hampshire loses its top position because of Paul Hodes' rather bad fundraising effort. But honestly, I think it is more of a "foregone-conclusion"-effect. There is still no challenger to Hodes.
Kentucky is a pure toss-up at the moment, just like Ohio where Lee Fisher would be a small favorite, but he has a small fundraising disadvantage against Republican candidate Rob Portman. This will allow Portman to catch up in name recognition while Fisher probably has to spend some of his money to defeat or intimidate primary challenger Jennifer Brunner. The Portman/Fisher race is going to be highly competitive.
In Florida, a lot still depends on Charlie Crist. Now that the Republicans have lost their 41st seat, it is somewhat less likely that Crist still runs. And he would probably have to come out against Obama's health care proposal which is going to dominate the political scene this fall. Still, Marco Rubio is a respectable Republican candidate on his own already, even though Rep. Kendrick Meek is enjoying heavy promotion from Bill Clinton which has had a great effect on his campaign account.
North Carolina is still waiting for Roy Cooper's announcement to run for the Senate which would elevate this race into the top ranks. The same is true for the yet-nonexisting Texas race for Kai Bailey Hutchison's seat. Bill White raised a formidable amount of money making him competitive against every possible Republican challenger. But well, the wheels need to start moving first.
Anyway... lots of things happened in April. The fundraising for the first quarter has been released and Arlen Specter switched to the Democrats, sending SHOCKWAVES throughout the political world. Maybe this switch has made Jim Bunning realize that there is no space for his ego as he has apparently "endorsed" the exploratory commitee of Kentucky SoS and personal friend Trey Grayson. Grayson is more popular than Bunning, but he is just as popular as the best democratic challenger Jack Conway. So the race moves back into the toss-up category.
Also, John McCain gets a primary challenger with Chris Simcox, basically a one-issue candidacy against McCain's stance on immigration. It is a somewhat dangerous challenge, we have to see if the Republican base is just as tired of McCain as they were of Specter, that is, if the anti-incumbency mood is stronger that electoral considerations.
Specter's switch changes the situation in Pennsylvania, of course. The seat will most probably remain democratic, even if Rep. Jim Gerlach runs. However, Specter might consider supporting an amended version of EFCA or he will face serious pressure from the left and the unions. Other changes in this month's chart are related to the results of the fundraising.
Incumbent, State Dem | Rep % change for Dems
Richard Shelby, Alabama 0 100 0
Lisa Murkowski, Alaska 10 90 +0,1
John McCain, Arizona 20 80 +0,2
Blanche Lincoln, Arkansas 80 20 -0,2
Barbara Boxer, California 90 10 -0,1
Michael Bennett, Colorado 80 20 -0,2
Chris Dodd, Connecticut 60 40 -0,4
(Ted Kaufman), Delaware 90 10 -0,1
(Mel Martinez), Florida 50 50 +0,5
Johnny Isakson, Georgia 0 100 0
Daniel Inouye, Hawai'i 100 0 0
Mike Crapo, Idaho 0 100 0
(Roland Burris), Illinois 90 10 -0,1
Evan Bayh, Indiana 100 0 0
Chuck Grassley, Iowa 20 80 +0,2
(Sam Brownback), Kansas 0 100 0
Jim Bunning, Kentucky 50 50 +0,5
David Vitter, Louisiana 20 80 +0,2
Barbara Mikulski, Maryland 100 0 0
(Kit Bond), Missouri 70 30 +0,7
Harry Reid, Nevada 80 20 -0,2
(Judd Gregg), New Hampshire 70 30 +0,7
Chuck Schumer, New York 100 0 0
Kirsten Gillibrand, New York Jr. 100 0 0
Richard Burr, North Carolina 40 60 +0,4
Byron Dorgan, North Dakota 90 10 -0,1
Tim Coburn, Oklahoma 10 90 +0,1
(George Voinovich), Ohio 50 50 +0,5
Ron Wyden, Oregon 100 0 0
Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania 90 10 -0,1
Jim DeMint, South Carolina 0 100 0
John Thune, South Dakota 0 100 0
(Kay B. Hutchison), Texas 20 80 +0,2
Bob Bennett, Utah 0 100 0
Patrick Leahy, Vermont 100 0 0
Patty Murray, Washington 100 0 0
Russ Feingold, Wisconsin 100 0 0
Overall Estimate of Democratic gains: +2,8
Senate Ranking:
1. Missouri (open) +3
2. New Hampshire (open) -1
3. Kentucky (open?) -1
4. Ohio (open) +1
5. Florida (open) +1
6. Connecticut (Dodd) +1
7. North Carolina (Burr) +1
8. Colorado (Bennet) +2
9. Nevada (Reid) -
10. Texas (open) +3
11. Arkansas (Lincoln) +3
12. Louisiana (Vitter) -1
13. Arizona (McCain) new
14. Illinois (Burris) +1
15. Iowa (Grassley) -3
The ranking suffers from the contradiction between vulnerable incumbents and incumbent fundraising advantage. Incumbents like Blanche Lincoln, Harry Reid and Michael Bennet really raised a lot of money, even though they are certainly vulnerable from a polling perspective. Blanche Lincoln is probably going to have 2 republican challengers, but none of them with her fundraising powers. The same is true for Michaee Bennet, and Harry Reid doesn't even have a challenger at the moment.
Missouri moves into the top spot because of Sarah Steelman's incoming primary challenge to Matt Blunt and Blunt's disappointing fundraising numbers, especially in comparison to Robin Carnahan's result. Carnahan has to be regarded as a favorite now.
New Hampshire loses its top position because of Paul Hodes' rather bad fundraising effort. But honestly, I think it is more of a "foregone-conclusion"-effect. There is still no challenger to Hodes.
Kentucky is a pure toss-up at the moment, just like Ohio where Lee Fisher would be a small favorite, but he has a small fundraising disadvantage against Republican candidate Rob Portman. This will allow Portman to catch up in name recognition while Fisher probably has to spend some of his money to defeat or intimidate primary challenger Jennifer Brunner. The Portman/Fisher race is going to be highly competitive.
In Florida, a lot still depends on Charlie Crist. Now that the Republicans have lost their 41st seat, it is somewhat less likely that Crist still runs. And he would probably have to come out against Obama's health care proposal which is going to dominate the political scene this fall. Still, Marco Rubio is a respectable Republican candidate on his own already, even though Rep. Kendrick Meek is enjoying heavy promotion from Bill Clinton which has had a great effect on his campaign account.
North Carolina is still waiting for Roy Cooper's announcement to run for the Senate which would elevate this race into the top ranks. The same is true for the yet-nonexisting Texas race for Kai Bailey Hutchison's seat. Bill White raised a formidable amount of money making him competitive against every possible Republican challenger. But well, the wheels need to start moving first.
Thursday, 2 April 2009
I didn't have a lot of time in the past 3 weeks, I'll try to post more frequently in the future. Anyway, here's the updated list:
Incumbent, State Dem | Rep % change for Dems
Richard Shelby, Alabama 0 100 0
Lisa Murkowski, Alaska 10 90 +0,1
John McCain, Arizona 10 90 +0,1
Blanche Lincoln, Arkansas 80 20 -0,2
Barbara Boxer, California 90 10 -0,1
Michael Bennett, Colorado 80 20 -0,2
Chris Dodd, Connecticut 60 40 -0,4
(Ted Kaufman), Delaware 90 10 -0,1
(Mel Martinez), Florida 50 50 +0,5
Johnny Isakson, Georgia 0 100 0
Daniel Inouye, Hawai'i 100 0 0
Mike Crapo, Idaho 0 100 0
(Roland Burris), Illinois 90 10 -0,1
Evan Bayh, Indiana 100 0 0
Chuck Grassley, Iowa 20 80 +0,2
(Sam Brownback), Kansas 0 100 0
Jim Bunning, Kentucky 60 40 +0,6
David Vitter, Louisiana 20 80 +0,2
Barbara Mikulski, Maryland 100 0 0
(Kit Bond), Missouri 60 40 +0,6
Harry Reid, Nevada 80 20 -0,2
(Bonnie Newman), New Hampshire 70 30 +0,7
Chuck Schumer, New York 100 0 0
Kirsten Gillibrand, New York Jr. 100 0 0
Richard Burr, North Carolina 40 60 +0,4
Byron Dorgan, North Dakota 90 10 -0,1
Tim Coburn, Oklahoma 0 100 0
(George Voinovich), Ohio 50 50 +0,5
Ron Wyden, Oregon 100 0 0
Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania 60 40 +0,6
Jim DeMint, South Carolina 0 100 0
John Thune, South Dakota 0 100 0
(Kay B. Hutchison), Texas 20 80 +0,2
Bob Bennett, Utah 0 100 0
Patrick Leahy, Vermont 100 0 0
Patty Murray, Washington 100 0 0
Russ Feingold, Wisconsin 100 0 0
Overall Estimate of Democratic gains: +3,3
Some new polls have changed the situation slightly. Chris Dodd is in serious trouble against Rob Simmons. A seat in Connecticut is something the Democrats can't afford to lose, especially since there are enough possible contenders to replace Dodd. If he runs in the general, he will have to rely on people's short memories and the support of the Democratic machine - not impossible, but very hard. Arlen Specter is poised to lose the primary at the moment and the campaigns have already begun with Specter's first anti-Toomey ad. I also think that Specter's rejection of EFCA is not going to help his chances in a general election, so the seat might be slipping out of the Republicans' hands.
In New Hampshire, Paul Hodes leads in a hypothetical matchup against his strongest opponent, ex-Senator John Sununu (almost a quasi-incumbent). It is looking really good for him. Jim Bunning's situation remains essentially unchanged and pessimistic. Richard Burr shows signs of vulnerability. His approval rating is below 50%. The strongest Democratic challenger, Roy Cooper, would have a good chance at beating him, but he needs to enter first. Even if he doesn't, Burr will have to fight for his reelection.
Senate Ranking
1. New Hampshire (open) -
2. Kentucky (Bunning) -
3. Pennsylvania (Specter) +5
4. Missouri (open) -1
5. Ohio (open) -1
6. Florida (open) -1
7. Connecticut (Dodd) +5
8. North Carolina (Burr) -2
9. Nevada (Reid) -1
10. Colorado (Bennett) -1
11. Louisiana (Vitter) -1
12. Iowa (Grassley) -1
13. (Texas - open) -
14. Arkansas (Lincoln) -
15. Illinois (Burris) -
Incumbent, State Dem | Rep % change for Dems
Richard Shelby, Alabama 0 100 0
Lisa Murkowski, Alaska 10 90 +0,1
John McCain, Arizona 10 90 +0,1
Blanche Lincoln, Arkansas 80 20 -0,2
Barbara Boxer, California 90 10 -0,1
Michael Bennett, Colorado 80 20 -0,2
Chris Dodd, Connecticut 60 40 -0,4
(Ted Kaufman), Delaware 90 10 -0,1
(Mel Martinez), Florida 50 50 +0,5
Johnny Isakson, Georgia 0 100 0
Daniel Inouye, Hawai'i 100 0 0
Mike Crapo, Idaho 0 100 0
(Roland Burris), Illinois 90 10 -0,1
Evan Bayh, Indiana 100 0 0
Chuck Grassley, Iowa 20 80 +0,2
(Sam Brownback), Kansas 0 100 0
Jim Bunning, Kentucky 60 40 +0,6
David Vitter, Louisiana 20 80 +0,2
Barbara Mikulski, Maryland 100 0 0
(Kit Bond), Missouri 60 40 +0,6
Harry Reid, Nevada 80 20 -0,2
(Bonnie Newman), New Hampshire 70 30 +0,7
Chuck Schumer, New York 100 0 0
Kirsten Gillibrand, New York Jr. 100 0 0
Richard Burr, North Carolina 40 60 +0,4
Byron Dorgan, North Dakota 90 10 -0,1
Tim Coburn, Oklahoma 0 100 0
(George Voinovich), Ohio 50 50 +0,5
Ron Wyden, Oregon 100 0 0
Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania 60 40 +0,6
Jim DeMint, South Carolina 0 100 0
John Thune, South Dakota 0 100 0
(Kay B. Hutchison), Texas 20 80 +0,2
Bob Bennett, Utah 0 100 0
Patrick Leahy, Vermont 100 0 0
Patty Murray, Washington 100 0 0
Russ Feingold, Wisconsin 100 0 0
Overall Estimate of Democratic gains: +3,3
Some new polls have changed the situation slightly. Chris Dodd is in serious trouble against Rob Simmons. A seat in Connecticut is something the Democrats can't afford to lose, especially since there are enough possible contenders to replace Dodd. If he runs in the general, he will have to rely on people's short memories and the support of the Democratic machine - not impossible, but very hard. Arlen Specter is poised to lose the primary at the moment and the campaigns have already begun with Specter's first anti-Toomey ad. I also think that Specter's rejection of EFCA is not going to help his chances in a general election, so the seat might be slipping out of the Republicans' hands.
In New Hampshire, Paul Hodes leads in a hypothetical matchup against his strongest opponent, ex-Senator John Sununu (almost a quasi-incumbent). It is looking really good for him. Jim Bunning's situation remains essentially unchanged and pessimistic. Richard Burr shows signs of vulnerability. His approval rating is below 50%. The strongest Democratic challenger, Roy Cooper, would have a good chance at beating him, but he needs to enter first. Even if he doesn't, Burr will have to fight for his reelection.
Senate Ranking
1. New Hampshire (open) -
2. Kentucky (Bunning) -
3. Pennsylvania (Specter) +5
4. Missouri (open) -1
5. Ohio (open) -1
6. Florida (open) -1
7. Connecticut (Dodd) +5
8. North Carolina (Burr) -2
9. Nevada (Reid) -1
10. Colorado (Bennett) -1
11. Louisiana (Vitter) -1
12. Iowa (Grassley) -1
13. (Texas - open) -
14. Arkansas (Lincoln) -
15. Illinois (Burris) -
Saturday, 28 February 2009
Obama's opponent in 2012 - First edition
Here's another popular prediction game to play. Who will be the republican challenger for the presidency? I am assuming that the USA will have somewhat recovered by then (if not, we're in serious trouble and predictions would get pretty hard), so Obama will easily get the democratic nomination.
Several aspects have to be considered: the candidates - of course, the party structure, the primary election system, polls, and other minor factors.
The Republican Party changed their primary system. They will divide the states into three tiers, early states, small states and big states. So all the traditional early states will vote at the same time: Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Nevada. These states can give the winner a lot of momentum so we have to prefer candidates that can do well in these states.
We also have to follow the way the Republican Party is going. Will they go back to their conservative roots, that is, becoming even more conservative, or will we see a move to the center? At the moment by the way, I'd say it's the former, but it's not impossible that this is going to change at some point.
We're also getting the first polls now. The CPAC straw poll for example, showed a wide field of candidates, with Mitt Romney getting the most votes (but only 20%). A similar CNN poll a few days ago, saw Sarah Palin at the top, with Romney and Huckabee close behind, Jindal a distant 4th. But it's also very early, so the polls don't tell much yet.
At the beginning, I will give a list of the potential candidates (in my opinion) and make a few remarks about their chances in general:
Former governor Mitt Romney: As governor of Massachusetts, he proved that he could work across the aisle and he wasn't the hardcore conservative he tried to be during the 2008 primaries. There is some genuine appeal to him that seems to attract moderate republicans, pro-small business republicans, libertarians and hispanics. In fact, he has a natural appeal to every republican but the core republicans, and that's his problem. He has serious relevance problems. He needs to stay in the public eye and he needs to define his brand which is almost destroyed by his pandering. As a mormon, he can probably do whatever he wants, he will not win every single evangelical and further pandering will only hurt him. He is trying to build an intra-party network now by giving money to friendly congressmen. It reminds me of Nixon's post 1962-strategy to stay relevant. But Romney is going to collide with other Republicans there.
Former governor Mike Huckabee: As governor of Arkansas, he proved that he could work across the aisle and he wasn't the hardcore conserva... wait.... Well, Huckabee raised taxes, he isn't your ordinary fiscal conservative, but of course, he is a social conservative, probably THE social conservative in the field. He truly believes in what he says, and I suspect that this is why the republican establishment never really supported him. He is an honest man, with stern beliefs and that makes him one of the most popular republicans, with people that are no republicans. He is a good campaigner with a platform (his show on Fox News) so we can expect him to stay in the public eye for a while. Still, some very important conservative voices, Grover Norquist and every Republican who is against the strong emphasis on social conservatism, is not going to support him.
Governor Sarah Palin: She had to take a serious drubbing during the election. She missed the CPAC and an energy conference she was supposed to host along with Gov. Brian Schweitzer. Still, her popularity with the base is unrivaled. I suspect that she will focus on Alaska now, avoid the spotlight and try to get something done. Her job will be hard enough anyway. The collapse of the oil price could kill her ambitions, but most of the stuff that happens in Alaska doesn't get out. It will never be as it once was, but there is still tremendous potential in her rabid populist style and maybe she'll be a little better prepared next time.
Governor Bobby Jindal: His reply to the president's non-SOTU was not good, it was really bad. I'd go so far and say that it kills his chances for 2012. Yes, he is the conservative hope and future and all that, but there will be no Bobby Jindal-fraction within the party, not yet. If his false Katrina-story works against him he will be done for quite some time. Sometimes things change so fast....
Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich: A very interesting case. Gingrich has got the network that Mitt Romney only dreams of. He can have an idea that electrifies the whole conservative movement as long as it gets out next to 10 other, not so good ideas. Of course, he has to carry his problematic biography around: his divorces, infidelity and unpopularity at the end of his House career. Still, if the Republicans need a leader with more experience than personality, with more ideas than slogans, they will turn towards him. Maybe he'll prefer to stay behind the scenes and to lead someone else through the campaign, that's what I actually think, but if there is no such leader, he might be very tempted to run. He could be a very good compromise candidate. Evangelicals won't like him, but they'll prefer him over Romney. Movement conservatives can support him if Jindal implodes. And well, he is a southern white conservative - that might be a rarity in 2012 (and so, if Republicans choose Newt they will walk into the past).
Governor Charlie Crist: At the moment, it is pretty much impossible for him to win a republican primary. However, if the party moves towards the center he becomes the Nr. 1 choice VERY quickly. There is almost no other possible moderate choice (Utah Gov. Huntsman aspires to fill the void). If he wins the nomination, we will know that the Reaganite Republican Party is dead and something new is in the making. It requires that the influence of social conservatives and movement conservatives has waned. Well, we need to keep an eye on him.
The field: There are other potential candidates, and there is still a lot of time - well, not so much time if you still have to make up your mind, but enough time for a long-shot candidate already in the running to jump into the spotlight. I will write about them when I think that they are "worth" it, in terms of relevance. Here is a list of the people that I consider to be these potential long-shot candidates: Mark Sanford, Haley Barbour, Jon Huntsman, Eric Cantor, Jeb Bush, Tim Pawlenty, John Thune.
And so, my first, very basic ranking would look like this:
1. Mitt Romney (25%)
2. Sarah Palin (20%)
3. Newt Gingrich (20%)
4. Mike Huckabee (15%)
5. Bobby Jindal (5%)
6. Charlie Crist (5%)
7. The field (10%)
Romney has got the money and something of a hereditary right for the candidacy (he finished 2nd in 2008, which seems to be very good in a Republican primary under the aspect of future candidacies). The economy is his area of expertise. He is a relentless optimist, not unlike Obama, but he needs to get some authenticity, or else it looks a little phony. And of course, 25% are not that much. It's actually a rather bad sign for any party if there is no leader and no obvious successor. Romney tries to become that leader, and that's actually his only chance to stay relevant.
Several aspects have to be considered: the candidates - of course, the party structure, the primary election system, polls, and other minor factors.
The Republican Party changed their primary system. They will divide the states into three tiers, early states, small states and big states. So all the traditional early states will vote at the same time: Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Nevada. These states can give the winner a lot of momentum so we have to prefer candidates that can do well in these states.
We also have to follow the way the Republican Party is going. Will they go back to their conservative roots, that is, becoming even more conservative, or will we see a move to the center? At the moment by the way, I'd say it's the former, but it's not impossible that this is going to change at some point.
We're also getting the first polls now. The CPAC straw poll for example, showed a wide field of candidates, with Mitt Romney getting the most votes (but only 20%). A similar CNN poll a few days ago, saw Sarah Palin at the top, with Romney and Huckabee close behind, Jindal a distant 4th. But it's also very early, so the polls don't tell much yet.
At the beginning, I will give a list of the potential candidates (in my opinion) and make a few remarks about their chances in general:
Former governor Mitt Romney: As governor of Massachusetts, he proved that he could work across the aisle and he wasn't the hardcore conservative he tried to be during the 2008 primaries. There is some genuine appeal to him that seems to attract moderate republicans, pro-small business republicans, libertarians and hispanics. In fact, he has a natural appeal to every republican but the core republicans, and that's his problem. He has serious relevance problems. He needs to stay in the public eye and he needs to define his brand which is almost destroyed by his pandering. As a mormon, he can probably do whatever he wants, he will not win every single evangelical and further pandering will only hurt him. He is trying to build an intra-party network now by giving money to friendly congressmen. It reminds me of Nixon's post 1962-strategy to stay relevant. But Romney is going to collide with other Republicans there.
Former governor Mike Huckabee: As governor of Arkansas, he proved that he could work across the aisle and he wasn't the hardcore conserva... wait.... Well, Huckabee raised taxes, he isn't your ordinary fiscal conservative, but of course, he is a social conservative, probably THE social conservative in the field. He truly believes in what he says, and I suspect that this is why the republican establishment never really supported him. He is an honest man, with stern beliefs and that makes him one of the most popular republicans, with people that are no republicans. He is a good campaigner with a platform (his show on Fox News) so we can expect him to stay in the public eye for a while. Still, some very important conservative voices, Grover Norquist and every Republican who is against the strong emphasis on social conservatism, is not going to support him.
Governor Sarah Palin: She had to take a serious drubbing during the election. She missed the CPAC and an energy conference she was supposed to host along with Gov. Brian Schweitzer. Still, her popularity with the base is unrivaled. I suspect that she will focus on Alaska now, avoid the spotlight and try to get something done. Her job will be hard enough anyway. The collapse of the oil price could kill her ambitions, but most of the stuff that happens in Alaska doesn't get out. It will never be as it once was, but there is still tremendous potential in her rabid populist style and maybe she'll be a little better prepared next time.
Governor Bobby Jindal: His reply to the president's non-SOTU was not good, it was really bad. I'd go so far and say that it kills his chances for 2012. Yes, he is the conservative hope and future and all that, but there will be no Bobby Jindal-fraction within the party, not yet. If his false Katrina-story works against him he will be done for quite some time. Sometimes things change so fast....
Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich: A very interesting case. Gingrich has got the network that Mitt Romney only dreams of. He can have an idea that electrifies the whole conservative movement as long as it gets out next to 10 other, not so good ideas. Of course, he has to carry his problematic biography around: his divorces, infidelity and unpopularity at the end of his House career. Still, if the Republicans need a leader with more experience than personality, with more ideas than slogans, they will turn towards him. Maybe he'll prefer to stay behind the scenes and to lead someone else through the campaign, that's what I actually think, but if there is no such leader, he might be very tempted to run. He could be a very good compromise candidate. Evangelicals won't like him, but they'll prefer him over Romney. Movement conservatives can support him if Jindal implodes. And well, he is a southern white conservative - that might be a rarity in 2012 (and so, if Republicans choose Newt they will walk into the past).
Governor Charlie Crist: At the moment, it is pretty much impossible for him to win a republican primary. However, if the party moves towards the center he becomes the Nr. 1 choice VERY quickly. There is almost no other possible moderate choice (Utah Gov. Huntsman aspires to fill the void). If he wins the nomination, we will know that the Reaganite Republican Party is dead and something new is in the making. It requires that the influence of social conservatives and movement conservatives has waned. Well, we need to keep an eye on him.
The field: There are other potential candidates, and there is still a lot of time - well, not so much time if you still have to make up your mind, but enough time for a long-shot candidate already in the running to jump into the spotlight. I will write about them when I think that they are "worth" it, in terms of relevance. Here is a list of the people that I consider to be these potential long-shot candidates: Mark Sanford, Haley Barbour, Jon Huntsman, Eric Cantor, Jeb Bush, Tim Pawlenty, John Thune.
And so, my first, very basic ranking would look like this:
1. Mitt Romney (25%)
2. Sarah Palin (20%)
3. Newt Gingrich (20%)
4. Mike Huckabee (15%)
5. Bobby Jindal (5%)
6. Charlie Crist (5%)
7. The field (10%)
Romney has got the money and something of a hereditary right for the candidacy (he finished 2nd in 2008, which seems to be very good in a Republican primary under the aspect of future candidacies). The economy is his area of expertise. He is a relentless optimist, not unlike Obama, but he needs to get some authenticity, or else it looks a little phony. And of course, 25% are not that much. It's actually a rather bad sign for any party if there is no leader and no obvious successor. Romney tries to become that leader, and that's actually his only chance to stay relevant.
Senate predictions - March
I plan to update my predictions as close as possible to the 1st day of a new month.
Incumbent, State Dem | Rep % change for Dems
Richard Shelby, Alabama 0 100 0
Lisa Murkowski, Alaska 10 90 +0,1
John McCain, Arizona 10 90 +0,1
Blanche Lincoln, Arkansas 80 20 -0,2
Barbara Boxer, California 90 10 -0,1
Michael Bennett, Colorado 80 20 -0,2
Chris Dodd, Connecticut 80 20 -0,2
(Ted Kaufman), Delaware 90 10 -0,1
(Mel Martinez), Florida 50 50 +0,5
Johnny Isakson, Georgia 0 100 0
Daniel Inouye, Hawai'i 90 10 -0,1
Mike Crapo, Idaho 0 100 0
(Roland Burris), Illinois 90 10 -0,1
Evan Bayh, Indiana 100 0 0
Chuck Grassley, Iowa 20 80 +0,2
(Sam Brownback), Kansas 0 100 0
Jim Bunning, Kentucky 60 40 +0,6
David Vitter, Louisiana 20 80 +0,2
Barbara Mikulski, Maryland 100 0 0
(Kit Bond), Missouri 60 40 +0,6
Harry Reid, Nevada 80 20 -0,2
(Bonnie Newman), New Hampshire 60 40 +0,6
Chuck Schumer, New York 100 0 0
Kirsten Gillibrand, New York Jr. 100 0 0
Richard Burr, North Carolina 30 70 +0,3
Byron Dorgan, North Dakota 90 10 -0,1
Tim Coburn, Oklahoma 0 100 0
(George Voinovich), Ohio 50 50 +0,5
Ron Wyden, Oregon 100 0 0
Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania 30 70 +0,3
Jim DeMint, South Carolina 0 100 0
John Thune, South Dakota 0 100 0
(Kay B. Hutchison), Texas 20 80 +0,2
Bob Bennett, Utah 0 100 0
Patrick Leahy, Vermont 100 0 0
Patty Murray, Washington 100 0 0
Russ Feingold, Wisconsin 100 0 0
Overall Estimate of Democratic gains: +2,9
Senate Ranking (after stimulus bill compromise)
1. New Hampshire (open) -
2. Kentucky (Bunning) +2
3. Missouri (open) -1
4. Ohio (open) -1
5. Florida (open) -
6. North Carolina (Burr) +2
7. Pennsylvania (Specter) +2
8. Nevada (Reid) -2
9. Colorado (Bennett) -
10. Louisiana (Vitter) new
11. Iowa (Grassley) -
12. Connecticut (Dodd) new
13. (Texas - open) new
14. Arkansas (Lincoln) new
15. Illinois (Burris) -2
Incumbent, State Dem | Rep % change for Dems
Richard Shelby, Alabama 0 100 0
Lisa Murkowski, Alaska 10 90 +0,1
John McCain, Arizona 10 90 +0,1
Blanche Lincoln, Arkansas 80 20 -0,2
Barbara Boxer, California 90 10 -0,1
Michael Bennett, Colorado 80 20 -0,2
Chris Dodd, Connecticut 80 20 -0,2
(Ted Kaufman), Delaware 90 10 -0,1
(Mel Martinez), Florida 50 50 +0,5
Johnny Isakson, Georgia 0 100 0
Daniel Inouye, Hawai'i 90 10 -0,1
Mike Crapo, Idaho 0 100 0
(Roland Burris), Illinois 90 10 -0,1
Evan Bayh, Indiana 100 0 0
Chuck Grassley, Iowa 20 80 +0,2
(Sam Brownback), Kansas 0 100 0
Jim Bunning, Kentucky 60 40 +0,6
David Vitter, Louisiana 20 80 +0,2
Barbara Mikulski, Maryland 100 0 0
(Kit Bond), Missouri 60 40 +0,6
Harry Reid, Nevada 80 20 -0,2
(Bonnie Newman), New Hampshire 60 40 +0,6
Chuck Schumer, New York 100 0 0
Kirsten Gillibrand, New York Jr. 100 0 0
Richard Burr, North Carolina 30 70 +0,3
Byron Dorgan, North Dakota 90 10 -0,1
Tim Coburn, Oklahoma 0 100 0
(George Voinovich), Ohio 50 50 +0,5
Ron Wyden, Oregon 100 0 0
Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania 30 70 +0,3
Jim DeMint, South Carolina 0 100 0
John Thune, South Dakota 0 100 0
(Kay B. Hutchison), Texas 20 80 +0,2
Bob Bennett, Utah 0 100 0
Patrick Leahy, Vermont 100 0 0
Patty Murray, Washington 100 0 0
Russ Feingold, Wisconsin 100 0 0
Overall Estimate of Democratic gains: +2,9
I just heard the news of Kathleen Sebelius nomination. That makes the Kansas seat completely safe for the GOP. A Dorgan vs. Hoeven match in North Dakota is also getting unlikely. A recent R2000 poll showed that Dorgan would beat Hoeven by a mile, not because Hoeven is unpopular, but because North Dakotans want him to stay right where he is, in the governor's mansion. I had almost lowered Bunning's chances to 30% after his kamikaze threat, but I am not quite there yet. Still, Bunning is essentially bankrupt and unpopular (and erratic). If things don't change it's looking pretty grim for him and the Republicans that cannot put up a primary challenger if they want to keep their 41st seat. Actually, barring a major change of trajectory, the seats in Kentucky and New Hampshire are moving into Democratic territory (because the Republicans don't have a first-tier candidate that could face their opponent. Missouri is a different case, by the way.) and I will gradually change my projection.
I also made some other changes, caused by the vote on Obama's stimulus bill and the decreasing chance that some of these candidates have to face credible primary challengers (Lincoln, Burr), so the ranking and the probability is synchronized again. Oh, and it seems that David Vitter is going to have a relatively hard time. There are rumors of a (serious) primary challenge, of a credible democratic challenger, and of course Stormy Daniels.
Although the trouble doesn't end for Roland Burris, the seat in Illinois is looking very safe for the Democrats, now that Obama's basketball pal Alexi Giannoulias has announced his bid for the seat.
I also made some other changes, caused by the vote on Obama's stimulus bill and the decreasing chance that some of these candidates have to face credible primary challengers (Lincoln, Burr), so the ranking and the probability is synchronized again. Oh, and it seems that David Vitter is going to have a relatively hard time. There are rumors of a (serious) primary challenge, of a credible democratic challenger, and of course Stormy Daniels.
Although the trouble doesn't end for Roland Burris, the seat in Illinois is looking very safe for the Democrats, now that Obama's basketball pal Alexi Giannoulias has announced his bid for the seat.
Senate Ranking (after stimulus bill compromise)
1. New Hampshire (open) -
2. Kentucky (Bunning) +2
3. Missouri (open) -1
4. Ohio (open) -1
5. Florida (open) -
6. North Carolina (Burr) +2
7. Pennsylvania (Specter) +2
8. Nevada (Reid) -2
9. Colorado (Bennett) -
10. Louisiana (Vitter) new
11. Iowa (Grassley) -
12. Connecticut (Dodd) new
13. (Texas - open) new
14. Arkansas (Lincoln) new
15. Illinois (Burris) -2
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)