Prediction for 2006 senate race. Rep. +4 to +10 ACCURATE

[DixieOklahoma]

ARIZONA: Republicans retain
CALIFORNIA: Democrats retain
CONNECTICUT: Democrats retain
DELAWARE: Democrats retain
FLORIDA: Republican PICK-UP
HAWAII: Democrats retain
INDIANA: Republicans retain
MAINE: Republicans retain
MARYLAND: Democrats retain
MASSACHUSETTS: Democrats retain (Teddy)
MICHIGAN: Toss-up (would be REP. pickup)
MINNESOTA: Toss-up (would be REP. pickup)
MISSOURI: Republicans retain
MISSISSIPPI: Republicans retain
MONTANA: Republicans retain
NEBRASKA: Republican PICK-UP
NEVADA: Republicans retain
NEW JERSEY: Democrats retain
NEW MEXICO: (Weak) Democrats retain
NEW YORK: Democrats retain
NORTH DAKOTA: Republican PICK-UP
OHIO: Republicans retain (strong candidate)
PENNSYLVANIA: Toss-up (Would be democrat pickup)
RHODE ISLAND: Republicans (HUGE-RINO) retain
TENNESSEE: Republicans retain
TEXAS: Republicans retain
UTAH: Republicans retain
VERMONT: Independent retains (Jim Jeffords)
VIRGINIA: Republicans retain
WASHINGTON: Republican PICK-UP (Roe effect started taking place in 2004 and will overtake democratic voter fraud in two more years)
WEST VIRGINIA: Democrats retain
WISCONSIN: (weak) Democrats retain
WYOMING: Republicans retain


Grand Total: Republicans + 5 (60) Outstanding: 3 toss-ups, 2 weak democrats

A total of 17 democrats and 15 republicans are running for re-election.

Also this is in my opinion a conservative estimate. Even though that is a conservative estimate (IMHO), I will nevertheless counter for any possible bias in my humble post. And will say that republicans stand to pick up between 4 and 10 senate seats. We will have 55 in the new congress.

I will say that I believe we will stand at (R-D-I), 60-39-1 after the 2006 elections. However we very well could end up with 62-37-1. Only whishfull thinking says 65-34-1.

[discostu]

Was that this year? I can't keep track anymore, all the elections keep running together. Kyl's low profile should get him re-elected.

[penowa]

"I think that Robert KKK Byrd - West Virginia, will be gone."

Not unless they carry him out feet first. Really sorry, but I think it is your wishful thinking.

[penowa]

West Virginia - Byrd will NEVER retire. WV Senators (Democrats, of course) get carried out feet first. They do not retire.

Pennsylvania - Santorum is not too conservative for PA. Except for Philly and surrounding area, PA is probably as conservative as most border states. Pittsburgh is getting so small thanks to the reign of Democrats since eternity, it has very little impact anymore. The surrounding counties despite the overwhelming Democrat registration are almost evenly split in voting, only slightly favoring Democrats and changing with every election as more Roosevelt D's die. W PA might be one of the few places left the Republicans have made no push to change from D to R, but is changing anyway. You must be a conservative D to be elected to congress.

I think it all depends on who the Democrats run whether Santorum is re-elected. He is in trouble with his base not because he's too conservative, but because he backed Specter strongly as did Bush. He is the one that can be held accountable and he may be. Plus with Rendell, there will be unlimited fraud in Philly once again.

[dmc8576]

I agree with you that Santorum will probably win, but probably not by lanslide. The base will be there despite his supporting Specter. His support for Specter will actually probably help in the general election. I also think that it will help Santorum that this isn't a Presidential year, because the drive to get the usually apathetic, ignorant voters (Democrats) to the polls will be lessened. Even if it was a Presidential year, he'd probably win, but I'm just saying that it's a race that could be, and I expect to be close.

[dmc8576]

I realize, and it disappoints me, that the Parties' "choice" is quite limited. I am saying that we need a good recruitment effort. Obviously, the Parties have that idea going into every election. But why do I think it will be an easier sell in 2006? For one, President Bush just got reelected and Republicans control the House and the Senate. I feel like Bush's ambitious agenda will help recruitment efforts, as many of these potential candidates want to make a difference, and with a Republican President who wants to reform the tax code and social security, they could.
Another reason to run is the success of the Republican Party. The Republican Party is making history in the way it has taken control of the government, and I think people will want to be a part of that. Not to mention the fact that being a Republican will help, not hurt, the potential candidates in most of these states.
As for "fratricide", I don't think (I'm disagreeing with Karl Rove) that it is a bad thing, unless the ideal candidate (Johanns or Osborne in Nebraska, Guiliani in New York, etc.) is running. We saw this in Oklahoma when Humphries was running against Tom Coburn. Humprhies was the GOP leadership's pick, but wasn't the "ideal" candidate to most observers. So Coburn ran, got the nomination, and won? Would Humphries have won? Possibly, but I'm not certain, and I even doubt that he would have. Carson probably could have defeated him. So, in cases like this when the ideal candidate isn't running, fratricide is a good thing, in my opinion.
I hope it isn't, but right now may be the high point of the Republican Party. We need to ensure that we elect more Republicans so that we can change America for the better. I'm sure there is nothing more convincing than a call from President Bush asking these potential candidates to be a part of history and help the country by running. I am quite certain he has probably already started doing that. I just hope we don't have any missed opportunities, although I am quite certain we will, and that is why I think that we will fail in the effort to acquire a super-majority. I still think we will only pick up 3 seats due to mistakes and failures in the recruiting process.

[dmc8576]

Pataki could make it a race. But it would be a losing race. Guiliani could make it a winnable race for the Republicans. I may be underestimating Pataki completely (I don't think that I am), but Guiliani would definently be the safer pick with the greater chance of winning.

[DixieOklahoma]

Lott is running for re election.

[dangus]

Nelson of FL has run as a centrist in the past. He has now joined the Michael Moore school of loonatic-fringe liberalism. He's toast.

OTOH, I can't imagine a Republican winning a Senate race in Washington against any incumbent.

[dangus]

MArk Dayton has already retired, apparently believing he is not the Democrats' best chance to win election in Minnesota. Now if we can only get rid of Herb Kohl and Bob Target. (Yes, that last one is a joke.... Re-elect Stan Walmart!)

[dangus]

Byrd will get re-elected if he runs. And, oddly, I hope he runs. The GOP is too weak to start bumping off incumbents in WV, but is approaching the strength to win an open seat by 2012. But an open seat now would as likely as not simply lead to a new, young entrenched Democrat, like Blanche Lincoln in LA.

[dangus]

>> Byrd will get re-elected if he runs. And, oddly, I hope he runs. The GOP is too weak to start bumping off incumbents in WV, but is approaching the strength to win an open seat by 2012. But an open seat now would as likely as not simply lead to a new, young entrenched Democrat, like Blanche Lincoln in LA. <<

I meant AR, but Landrieu in LA is another good example.

[dangus]

"Mark Dayton, safe"

Bwa-ha-ha-ha!

Even Mark Dayton apparently thinks Mark Dayton is unelectable. He has already announced he's calling it quits. With that anouncement, I'm moving to GOP +3.

[PGalt]

Great post. Interesting comments. Optimism bump!

[Republican Wildcat]

PENNSYLVANIA: Toss-up (Would be democrat pickup)

I certainly hope not...though it would be wishful thinking to not believe that this is going to be one of the toughest races we will face for keeping an incumbent.

[JLS]

Nelson of FL has run as a centrist in the past. He has now joined the Michael Moore school of loonatic-fringe liberalism. He's toast. That sounds more like a guy not planning to run for reelection? Certainly after JEB was reelected he had to read the tea leaves of the state. I would say look to see where he is on the judicial fillibuster. If he votes to limit debate, he is likely running and running back to the center.

OTOH, I can't imagine a Republican winning a Senate race in Washington against any incumbent. I can imagine an electorate angry as can be that the Dims stole the governorship which the polls show they believe voting for in a GOP Senator. Of course the GOP would need a good candidate.