GOP Senate Gains in 2006 May Overshadow gains in 2004 (analysis)

I have put together analysis of 2006 Senate Races. Bottom Line: We look STRONG! There are many more retirements on the Democratic side (Feinstein, Byrd, Kohl, Bingaman, and maybe even Ted Kennedy) versus less on the GOP side (Frist plus Lugar, Lott, and Hatch are rumored to be mulling retirement). There are also a lot of other factors:

Win - Conrad Burns of Montana – Democrat Brian Schweitzer gave him a run for his money in 2000, but Schweitzer is the only prominent democrat in MT and he had to squeak out a congressional race.

Loss - Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island – I will make a confident prediction: Chafee or Snowe will lose in 2006. The Club for Growth absolutely detests Chafee, Snowe, and Collins and hey will spend millions to defeat on of them IN THE PRIMARIES. IF Chafee makes it through the primary, I think he’ll lose. His father’s name recognition is starting to wear off, and it’s a blue state.

Win - John Ensign of Nevada – Swing state, but win. Ensign is a very popular tax-cutter in NV and should pull it out. Ensign’s influence is growing rapidly and with Democrat Reid being the probable Minority leader, Nevadans will be very happy with major influence on both sides of the aisle. Besides, there’s not much Democratic competition outside of Shelley Berkley.

Retirement, Loss- Bill Frist of Tennessee - Frist will retire, as he has pledged, and conservative democrat Harold Ford jr. will win the seat. I’m not saying that Republican congressman Wamp can’t win the seat, but he can’t compete with Ford’s star power.

Solid Win - Orrin Hatch of Utah – Even if Hatch retires, there’s no way that Rep. Matheson (D) will beat the very popular Rep. Chris Cannon (R).

Win, but poss. Retirement - Trent Lott of Mississippi – Lott wins if he stays, but State attorney General Moore could put this seat in the democrat’s camp if he retires.

Win, regardless of retirement - Richard Lugar of Indiana – Outgoing Gov. Kernan (D), who was just voted out of office, might take a shot at Lugar’s seat. Other than that’ there aren’t many prominent democrats in the state not named Bayh.

Possible Loss - Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania – The Dems hate this guy like we hate Daschle or Harkin. There’s a good chance that the Democrats run Bob Casey jr. (fmr. Gov Bob Casey Sr.’s son), who is pro-life just like his father. Casey can piggyback off the Philadelphia political machine and go toe-to-toe with Santorum in Western PA on social issues.

Possible Loss - Olympia Snowe of Maine – Either the Maine GOP will purge her and get their soul back, or the Dems will simply beat her in the open election. Win - Jim Talent of Missouri – Missouri is moving out of the swing state category and more towards the red state category. I can’t see Talent losing unless Rep. Russ Carnahan (D) (Mel and Jean’s son) runs, but he’s pretty green (elected to the House in 2000).

Democrats (17) Solid Win - Daniel Akaka of Hawaii – Unless Gov. Lingle decides to run for Senate instead of Governor in 2006, which is highly unlikely, this is as big a lock as any seat.

Win, unless he retires - Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico – Heather Wilson, a former US Air Force Officer and current congresswoman, is going to run regardless. She has a good shot against Bingaman, but a great shot vs. an open seat.

Loss after Retirement or Death - Robert Byrd of West Virginia – Unless the former Klansman dies, he’ll probably retire. Although I’m hoping for the former, Shelley Capito (R), a moderate republican, should win in a state trending red. She’ll have to duke it out with two young conservative democratic congressmen, but she should pull it out.

Loss - Maria Cantwell of Washington – Although liberal whackjob and fellow Washington senator Patty Murray makes Cantwell look conservative, she is completely out of touch with those outside of Seattle. Republican George Nethercutt’s campaign against Murray caught on late, but the giant killer (he beat the unbeatable Tom Foley 10 years ago) has recently stated he’s considering “pulling a Thune” and running against Cantwell. Nethercutt will win in 2006. Guaranteed.

Loss - Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York – Rudy Giuliani WILL BEAT HER! In fact, there’s even a possibility that she resigns in 2006 to run for President in 2008 if she feels Rudy has a chance of winning. If that’s the case, Rudy easily beats AG Spitzer.

Win, but I don’t under stand why - Kent Conrad of North Dakota – How many years behind South Dakota is North Dakota politically. Both are HEAVILY RED states that elect two democrats to panhandle for farm subsidies. Conrad doesn’t have Dorgan’s political clout in D.C, so if popular – and just re-elected, Governor Hoeven decides to run, he could win. But I think he likes sitting in the Governor’s chair.

Loss - John Corzine of New Jersey – Backlash Alert! The backlash against McGAYvey will break the democratic political machine in Jersey. Corzine will be the first victim.

Loss - Mark Dayton of Minnesota – The already-vulnerable Dayton is now a laughingstock after fleeing D.C. last month due to concern over terrorism. The Minneapolis Star-Tribune, no bastion of conservative thought, called Dayton "Cassandra," a "flake" and a "little chicken." Up-and-coming Conservative Rep. Mark Kennedy has been foaming at the mouth to take out Dayton since his friend Norm Coleman won a senate seat two years ago.

Loss after retirement - Dianne Feinstein of California – The gun-grabbin’ grandma will probably retire in 2006, and the Republicans will have a competitive primary between Rep. Issa, grassroots superstar Tom McCLintock, and National Security Advisor Condi Rice may all throw their hats in. Tom has stated he is already preparing for a run for Lt. Governor in 2006 instead, but we shall see. If Condi Rice runs, which I expect, Condi the Moderate will ride the Governator’s moderate coattails during his Gubernatorial campaign. Another reason why I think that the GOP will pick up this seat if Feinstein retires is that the Democrats will be throwing everything they have to defeat Arnie, leaving the senate seat ripe for the picking. An Arnie-Condi-Tom ticket could sweep the GOP back into prominence in the Golden State.

Win, even if he retires - Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts – Even if Teddy retires, it won’t be much of an improvement with gay icon Rep. Barney Frank in his seat. Gov. Romney could win the open seat, but I believe he’s eying the White House (which he will not win).

Loss after Retirement - Herb Kohl of Wisconsin – Rumors are a-flyin’ that Kohl will retire and HUD Secretary and former Gov. Tommy Thompson will run for his seat and take it.

Win - Joe Lieberman of Connecticut – It may sound strange, but keeping a moderate anchor in the Democratic Party in the senate is a good thing for this country.

Loss - Bill Nelson of Florida – You heard it here first: Jeb Bush will run for the Senate in 2006 and win. His Governor's seat is up that year too, so Jeb will decide to follow in his grandpappy's footsteps and become a Senator. I've heard is a bit of a policy wonk so he sounds great for the Senate. What's more, having Jeb in the senate is like keeping a spare tire in the trunk. If the wheels fall off the GOP in the 2008 election, we have an EXCELLENT "spare candidate" waiting in the wings in the senate for 2012.

Win - Ben Nelson of Nebraska – Nebraskans love having two moderates hugging the center from both sides.

Loss, even if he retires- Paul Sarbanes of Maryland – “The Man of Steele” will win. LT. Gov. Michael Steele, the black conservative who wowed so many at the convention, will run in 2006 for the Senate AND WIN. He was going to run against Sen. Mikulski this year, but the Governor asked him to wait. Steele has strongly hinted he will run in 2006.

Win - Debbie Stabenow of Michigan – A crappy candidate, but there’s little competition right now.

Win, but we won’t pick up the seat - Jim Jeffords of Vermont – probable democratic pick-up in a very liberal state.

So, what does this all add up to? Well, the GOP will pick up 5 Seats for the second election in a row, the democrats will lose four, and Jeffords will either (1) become a Democrat or (2) lose.

That will put the Senate at 60-40 GOP. I feel very confident in this number because the GOP seats I picked to lose aren’t extremely weak, but merely vulnerable. Many people will vehemently disagree with my pick that BOTH New England RINOs up for reelection in 2006 will lose, that the majority leader will retire and the Democrats will take the seat, and that Rick Santorum will out and out lose. I’m also assuming that Sen. Bingaman (D-NM) will win, even though he’s definitely beatable and may even retire. I’m also assuming that Mitt Romney will not run for Teddy Kennedy’s seat if he were to die or retire. So technically, the GOP could get as many as 65 seats and should pick up at least 2 or 3 seats at a minimum. It’s pretty simple: in 2006 the Democrats have far more vulnerable seats than the GOP. The Democrats also have far more potential retirements than we do.

But there could there be a downturn to such a bright future in 2006??? Yes. If the GOP expects to make massive gains in 2006, there’s a chance that they will hold off on stronger, more controversial legislation until they get above 60 votes. They can then pass many of the historic pieces of legislation that we all want: Social Security privatization, Fundamental Tax Reform, Major Tort Reform (although I expect tort reform this spring), etc. So we could see the 109th Congress as nothing more than setting the stage for the 110th. The next two years will still be critical, however, as we may see MULTIPLE Supreme Court appointments.

Here's a great speech by McClintock:

Conservatism Triumphant
October 15, 2003
I want to begin by thanking all of you for your stalwart support—not only for my own recent campaign—but also for all you have done—year after year—for the cause of freedom. YAF has always been that reliable—and essential—"anchor to windward" that has kept the Republican party properly positioned as the party of liberty no matter which way the political winds have blown.

And that's a good thing, too, because today those political winds are more favorable than ever before. The events of the last several weeks here in California have been truly stunning—and at moments like this one can only stand back in awe.

The historical significance of events is difficult to judge close up, but I will venture a guess that the election of October 7th will be seen as one of the great climacterics in California's history—and possibly the nation's.

California has had the recall in its constitution for 92 years. In those 92 years, 31 attempts were made to recall a governor. None had come even close to qualifying.

Just eleven months ago, Democrats swept every constitutional office in California for the first time since 1882. And yet, just a few months later, this recall qualified with TWICE the required number of signatures with five weeks remaining in the allotted time.

It's been said that the only reason the recall qualified was that that money bought the required signatures. Wait a second. 155,000 Californians carried recall petitions. Three thousand were paid. The other 152,000 were acting in their capacity as citizens. And how else do you explain the fact that two million signatures were collected—including a half a million AFTER the paid gatherers were sent home?

More than 30 percent of the signers to recall a twice-elected Democratic incumbent were registered Democrats.

And then this stunning development: In a state where 35 percent of the voters are registered Republicans, the two major Republican candidates took a combined 62 percent of the vote—twice that cast for the Democrat.

Could it be that Californians have finally figured out that socialism hasn't worked any better here than anywhere else it has been tried?

And let us look carefully at that race. The conventional wisdom is that Arnold Schwarzenegger's election was a victory for the so-called "moderates" of the Republican Party. Well whatever Arnold Schwarzenegger's personal views might be, he certainly didn't campaign as a moderate. He campaigned as a Milton Friedman supply-side tax-fighting budget-cutting re-incarnation of Ronald Reagan.

It was a great frustration to me—but a great victory to the conservative cause—that the key themes that I outlined at the outset of my campaign were rapidly adopted and promoted by Mr. Schwarzenegger: abolish the car tax, restore freedom to the electricity market, and roll back the regulations that are choking our economy—starting with workers compensation. This was the foundation of his contract with California, a contract that must be—and will be honored.

So I believe that we can be proud of the fact that our campaign acted as the conscience of the election—and framed the issues upon which the contest was ultimately decided—the issues which a combined 62 percent of Californians supported.

And here's another fact: Consistently—in every poll conducted—voters said they viewed the Republican candidates in a positive light—ironically, I had the highest positive rating in every poll.

The three candidates they said they viewed in a negative light—by wide margins, were Bustamante, Davis and Peter Camejo of the Green party.

Now Peter Camejo I came to know as a perfect gentleman. There is not an offending bone in his body. People were rejecting his liberal ideology—as they were embracing ours.
Let me repeat: those who campaigned as conservatives were overwhelmingly viewed favorably by voters. Those who campaigned as liberals were overwhelmingly viewed unfavorably by voters.

So you can't call California the "Left Coast" any more. Welcome back to Reagan Country.
Once again this election has proven what has always been obvious to us—conservatism is not only right—it's popular.

However, tonight I must bring a new challenge to you as conservative leaders. Now we must convince many of our fellow conservatives of this.

From the outset of the race, we confronted a mantra that went something like this: Even though we agree with McClintock on practically everything, he just can't win and we can't afford to split the Republican vote.

When I was accused—even by conservatives—of being a spoiler in the race—my standard line was, the people aren't going to recall a governor for policies that have bankrupted our state and then elect another Democrat to carry on precisely those same policies.
That turned out to be right. The Republicans took a combined 62 percent of the vote.

Bustamante got 31 percent. The Republicans received twice as many votes as the Democrat, meaning that it didn't matter which Republican candidate drew from the other—as it turns out, the election of Bustamante was virtually a mathematical impossibility. This election really was about rejecting left-wing policies and replacing them with conservative policies. Pure and simple.

The last statewide L.A. Times Poll revealed the crux of the problem for principled conservatives in future races. They asked the question, "Do you think McClintock is too conservative to win in California? Ironically, more Republicans said "yes" than did Democrats. Bear in mind, they weren't saying that McClintock was too conservative for they, themselves, to support—the vast majority were saying they thought I'd do the best job. What they were saying is that they thought that others would think I was too conservative.

A near majority of self-described conservatives were afraid of that.
And yet, the final Gallup poll reported that in a head-to-head race, I would have beaten Bustamante by almost exactly the same margin as Schwarzenegger.

So there's a certain failure of conviction among conservatives. We like our philosophy, but we don't believe that others do.

So, the first lesson of October 7th is that conservatism sells. The second lesson is that conservatives need to recognize this—and to regain the courage of conviction that has always been the foundation of freedom.

And the third lesson is that freedom is the wave of the future, and if the Republican party is going to succeed, it must stand by the conservative policies its candidates pledged during this campaign, and which 62 percent of California's voters just affirmed.

We must recognize that a political sea change has occurred in California.
Five years ago, when I began the effort to abolish California's car tax, we conducted extensive focus group studies—and the last question asked of each group was this: "What kind of a politician do you think would abolish the car tax, Republican or Democrat?"

The near unanimous answer around every conference table was, "A Democrat would abolish the car tax, because that helps working families like mine," Obviously there was a complete disconnect between those voters and the candidates they were electing. One thing you can say about Gray Davis. He reconnected those voters to reality. And they can hear us now.

They say, "A conservative is a liberal who's been mugged."
Big government has mugged the people of California. And on October 7th, they finally figured it out. And they acted on it.

And now, they expect our party to fulfill its new contract with voters. It is now absolutely vital that this administration act on the conservative pledges that it made to the voters: to cut spending and balance the budget without tax increases.

And that brings us to the fine point of it all—and the reason all of you are here today.
The fight we are waging today is an eternal struggle—and one that I believe our generation is destined to win—as long as we stay true to our ideals.

There are many among us who have either lost sight of those ideals—or who have come seriously to question whether those ideals are politically triumphant.

Never has there been a more important time for the Republicans to confidently, clearly, and unequivocally make our case to the people of California. Never has there been a more important time to heed the advice of Ronald Reagan—to paint our positions in BOLD colors—and not hide them in pale pastels.

Great parties are built upon great principles. And they are judged upon their devotion to those principles. Freedom is such a principle—it is the natural condition of human happiness and prosperity and it is the imperative of our age.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.