www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball
Posted on 11/02/2006 8:52:38 AM PST by finnman69
www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball
Crystal Ball 2006: THE PREDICTIONSCampaigns Clamor for Last-Minute Midterm "Mo"
November 2, 2006
Just how Democratic a year is 2006?
Five days out, let's rephrase the question this way: when's the last time a major political party has failed to capture a single House seat, Senate seat, or governorship of the opposing party in a federal election year?
We bet it's never happened before, and it certainly hasn't happened in the post-World War II era. After all, even when a party suffers miserable net losses, it usually picks up at least several consolation prizes in the form of open seat pickups or an against-the-tide incumbent defeat.
Yet look at our 2006 predictions: at this moment, the Crystal Ball cannot identify a single election for Senate, House or Governor in which a Republican is likely to succeed a Democrat in office. Just imagine how devastating an absolute shutout would be in the eyes of history if this proves to be true!
Sure, we could easily be fooled by more than a few outcomes in this regard on Election Night, and we would probably place the odds of this historical unlikelihood's occurrence at no better than 50/50. But the very notion such a scenario is within the realm of possibilities is a testament to the lopsidedness of this year's theaters of battle.
If little changes between now and Tuesday, there remains little question that the GOP is headed towards devastating losses. And though candidates continue to stress various issues, only one has truly come to define our politics this year: war. Future historians may well look back on this wave election as "The Iraq Midterm," much we look back on the 1966 and 1974 elections as "The Vietnam Midterm" and "The Watergate Midterm" respectively.
Just as in 1975, it is likely that a substantially Democratic freshman class will be sworn into Congress in 2007 (though 2007's won't be nearly as big). Some entering members may prove "one term wonders" and others may show staying power. Most we will have seen coming. But if history is any guide, a handful will have scored fluke victories with under-the-radar, last-minute momentum. Wave elections are volatile, and in our years of publishing, we have never gazed into a stormier Crystal Ball.
Here's our best reading from the perspective of today, and as always, we're sticking our neck out on every race--no fence-straddling allowed--even if "he who lives by the Crystal Ball ends up eating ground glass!"
No one credibly argues that Democrats aren't going to win at least 3 or 4 Senate seats, bringing the GOP down to 51 or 52 seats. But increasingly it looks like they will win five (Pennsylvania, Ohio, Montana, and Rhode Island, in that order, and at least one of Missouri, Virginia, or Tennessee). To get the magic 6 they need for control, Democrats need 2 of those 3. Gravy would be all 3, giving them a 52 seat majority.
The Crystal Ball sees either 5 or 6 seats going to the Democrats, resting party control of the Senate squarely on the edge of the butter knife. Are there places the GOP could gain a seat? The only nearly even-money bet is New Jersey, followed closely by Maryland, but both states usually disappoint Republicans in the end. Long-shot possibilities are Michigan, Nebraska, and Washington, with none looking likely at the moment.
Several weeks ago, we collectively referred to the races in Missouri, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Tennessee, and Virginia as the "Fundamental Five." But with New Jersey and Rhode Island looking less likely to fall to the GOP, we might as well refer to the remaining great triumvirate as the "Threshold Three." Whichever party wins the heart of these races will win control, and as of now, here are our best bets:
(Note: These calls are susceptible to change as events warrant!)
Each race is categorized by its current Crystal Ball Outlook, with a colored arrow denoting noticeable momentum in one direction or the other. Red arrows (
) indicate momentum for the Republican candidate, while blue arrows (
) signify momentum for the Democratic candidate.
Republican Held Seats up for Election in 2006: 15 (out of 55 held)
|
|
||||||||
|
|
Solid R (7) | Likely R (0) | Leans R (1) | Toss-up (3) | Leans D (2) | Likely D (1) | Solid D (1) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
IN (Lugar) | AZ (Kyl) | VA (Allen) |
MT (Burns) |
OH (DeWine) |
PA (Santorum) |
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
ME (Snowe) | MO (Talent) | RI (Chafee) |
|
||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
MS (Lott) | TN (OPEN) |
|
|||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
NV (Ensign) |
|
||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
TX (Hutchison) |
|
||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
UT (Hatch) |
|
||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
WY (Thomas) |
|
||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
WV (Byrd) |
|
|||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
WI (Kohl) |
|
|||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
NY (Clinton) |
|
|||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
NM (Bingaman) |
|
|||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
ND (Conrad) |
|
|||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
MA (Kennedy) |
|
|||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
HI (Akaka) |
|
|||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
FL (Nelson) |
|
|||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
WA (Cantwell) | DE (Carper) |
|
||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
NE (Nelson) | CT (Lieberman*) |
|
||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
MN (OPEN) |
VT (OPEN) |
|
|||||
|
|
||||||||
| NJ (Menendez) |
MD (OPEN) |
MI (Stabenow) | CA (Feinstein) | |||||
|
|
||||||||
| Solid R (0) | Likely R (0) | Leans R (0) | Toss-up (1) | Leans D (1) | Likely D (4) | Solid D (12) |
|
|
|
|
Democratic Held Seats up for Election: 18 (out of 45 held)
The Brutal B - November 2, 2006: +5 to +6 D
Click here for individual Senate race analysis.
In a volatile election year such as 2006 (and volatile is a big understatement), the playing field can expand quickly, and it only expands more rapidly closer to the election. Our list of truly competitive House seats is now up to about 60, and its composition only vaguely resembles the target lists of 30 to 40 both we and party committees adhered to in the summer and early autumn. Lucky for us, we don't have to shell out any money to add a new race to the Crystal Ball's competitive list!
For leaders of party committees, though, an expanding field is a complex nightmare and seeking to plug in to every district legitimately in play is like playing a game of whack-a-mole. They must plot and re-plot to cover as many contestable races as possible without spreading resources too thin. The side that adapts with the most speed and agility usually comes out on top.
We at the Crystal Ball have this creeping suspicion: the decision of both parties to go to bat in the neighborhood of 50 target districts means that Democrats will likely win more than enough races to take control (+23 to 30), but will end up leaving several of their 2nd or 3rd tier candidates stranded on 2nd or 3rd base with 47 or 48 percent of the vote on Election Night. Below are our best bet predictions for the current "toss-up" races; for the rest of our forecasts, see the following HotRace Readings chart.
(Note: These calls are susceptible to change as events warrant!)
Each race is categorized by its current Crystal Ball Outlook, with a colored arrow denoting noticeable momentum in one direction or the other. Red arrows () indicate momentum for the Republican candidate, while blue arrows () signify momentum for the Democratic candidate.
Republican Held Seats in Play: 81 (151 Safe/Solid R)
Democratic Held Seats in Play: 9 (194 Safe/Solid D)
The Brutal B - November 2, 2006: +24 to +30 D
Click here for individual House race analysis.
The part of the election that is arguably most important gets the least coverage, and here the Democrats are nearly guaranteed to do very well. Don't forget that there are nine open REPUBLICAN governorships and just one open DEMOCRATIC governorship (Iowa). Most change occurs in open races, ergo, the Democrats have had a superb chance to make gains from the beginning. And they've capitalized on it.
The Crystal Ball projects that Democrats will easily claim a majority of the statehouses after the votes are counted, moving from 22 today to 28-30. The prized pickup for Democrats will be Ohio: although the Empire State's population dwarfs the Buckeye State's, Ohio towers over New York in presidential importance and a big win there will give the state's Democrats newfound confidence and institutional thrust moving forward towards 2008. Colorado and Arkansas will also be key Democratic pickups; Maryland and Massachusetts are guaranteed to vote Democratic in 2008 so gubernatorial gains there won't matter as much for the White House.
Note that the endangered Democratic incumbent governors may all win--not because they are strong, but because the GOP is so weak this year (think Michigan, Oregon, Maine, Wisconsin, and Illinois). Also keep in mind that even strong GOP governors may lose simply because of the R next to their name (think Maryland and Minnesota). Here are our best bets:
(Note: These calls are susceptible to change as events warrant!)
Each race is categorized by its current Crystal Ball Outlook, with a colored arrow denoting noticeable momentum in one direction or the other. Red arrows () indicate momentum for the Republican candidate, while blue arrows () signify momentum for the Democratic candidate.
Republican Held Seats up for Election in 2006: 22 (out of 28 held)
|
|
||||||||
|
|
Solid R (6) | Likely R (4) | Leans R (5) | Toss-up (1) | Leans D (1) | Likely D (4) | Solid D (1) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
CT (Rell) | AL (Riley) | AK (OPEN) | MN (Pawlenty) |
MD (Ehrlich) |
AR (OPEN) | NY (OPEN) |
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
HI (Lingle) | CA (Schwarzenegger) |
ID (OPEN) | CO (OPEN) |
|
|||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
NE (Heineman) | GA (Perdue) | FL (OPEN) | MA (OPEN) |
|
|||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
SD (Rounds) | SC (Sanford) | NV (OPEN) |
OH (OPEN) |
|
|||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
VT (Douglas) | RI (Carcieri) |
|
|||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
TX (Perry) | |
|
|||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
WY (Freudenthal) | |||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
TN (Bredesen) | |||||||
|
|
||||||||
| WI (Doyle) |
PA (Rendell) | |||||||
|
|
||||||||
| MI (Granholm) |
OK (Henry) | |||||||
|
|
||||||||
| ME (Baldacci) |
NM (Richardson) | |||||||
|
|
||||||||
| IA (OPEN) |
NH (Lynch) | |||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
OR (Kulongoski) | IL (Blagojevich) | KS (Sebelius) | AZ (Napolitano) | ||||
|
|
||||||||
| Solid R (0) | Likely R (0) | Leans R (0) | Toss-up (1) | Leans D (5) | Likely D (1) | Solid D (7) |
|
|
|
|
Democratic Held Seats up for Election: 14 (out of 22 held)
The Brutal B - November 2, 2006: +6 to +8 D
Click here for individual Governor race analysis.
The Democrats will have to TRY to lose this election. Yes, they've had a lot of experience in snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, and Sen. John Kerry is doing his best to provide two of those election years in a row (Brilliant remark, John, absolutely brilliant, proving why you lost in '04 and why you're not going to be the Democratic nominee again in '08).
We are probably headed for a familiar period of divided government, just we had in 1947-48, 1955-60, 1981-92, 1993-2000, and June 2001-2002. Six Presidents have experienced divided government since World War II, including George W. Bush via the Senate for 18 months. Life goes on. Americans in many ways like to build in more checks and balances to the Founders' model of separation of powers. Dividing power reduces the potential for abuse of power, or so the theory goes, and since many Americans aren't crazy about either major party, the idea of letting them fight it out between the branches, or between the houses of a bicameral Congress, appeals to millions of citizens.
And fight they will. A short and maybe nonexistent period of "bipartisan working together," which may be measured in hours or minutes, will be followed by a two-year campaign to break the deadlock one way or another in the elections of '08. And your Crystal Ball will be with you all the way to catalogue the fun. Happy election, everyone!
NOTE: We'll be back in your in-box very early on Monday morning with any last-minute alterations to the predictions list. Late bombshells, scandals, and other developments can always alter the picture. We've cautioned a thousand times in every medium: "Don't pull down the curtain on an election until election day!" We really do believe that.
|
|
That is about what I have been saying. We retain control of both Houses and pick up a few seats, or at worst, lose 2 Senate and 5 House seats. The latter scenario will be trumpeted by the MSM and the Dims as a great victory. The former scenario will be trumpeted by the MSM and the Dims as a great victory.
Wisconsin did go for Kerry.
I think you have something there.
I think Kerry is actually enjoying the media attention because it is "Kerry the potential 2008 candidate" who is front and center.
The fact he was uninvited to a few meet and greet events is a plus for him. He gets to sit out and still be a good democrat.
All I can really speak to is my own area - Memphis. I think the country will receive one or two surprises from Tennessee. The one I am more sure of is that Corker will win with 54% + of the vote. The one I am less sure of, but getting hopeful about, is that with two libs vs. one Republican, the most Democratic House seat in Tennessee might flip to the Republicans for two years.
This really saddens me! I'm sorry I read it.
Nancee
Ford has been running around like a desperate high school junior running for student body president so it will look good on his college applications. Corker wins it, I'm with you.
ooops, I meant he had Wisconsin going for Bush and Florida going for Kerry in 2004.
You are kidding me right? Newbie.
First of all, you shouldn't throw around charges like 'liar' so carelessly. For it to fit, not only would what I said have to be false, but I would also have to have known that it was false and said it anyway. I'm not surprised that you missed that considering what you say next. As to me being a liberal; well, noone with a functioning brain could read my posts and come away thinking that.
Yes, much, or most, of the population growth is in red states, especially in the South and Sunbelt. But you make the same mistake that others (most prominently Michael Barone and Fred Barnes) make; you don't consider where the growth is coming from. Its as if you think there is something magical about red states that turns people conservative.
Most population growth overall is due to immigration, and the children born to immigrants. Advantage >>> Democrats. Both of the two largest immigrant groups -- Hispanics and Asians -- now favor the Democrats by wide margins. Sorry, but its true. And there is no reason to expect that the GOP can reverse this while maintaining high levels of immigration, be it legal or illegal. White-flight from California did help the GOP in the Sunbelt and Mtn West, but that tide seems to be receding.
Now, it is true that the GOP will benefit electorally (i.e. electoral college votes) from immigrant-driven population gains in states like Texas, Florida, Nevada, Arizona, North Carolina, Georgia, et al, but only so long as the immigrant community is not numerous enough to tip the balance to the Democrats. In other words, so long as the white share of the electorate remains high enough, and the GOP wins a big enough share of that white electorate. So long as that holds, then yes, the GOP will gain electorally. That is why the GOP currently dominates Texas, but as the Hispanic share of the electorate catches up with its share of the overall population, then that dominance will likely come to an end. And this is leaving out the fact that the Democrats have learned to run more moderate sounding candidates who can cut into the white vote. Sometimes they run as bonafide conservatives, like Ford Jr in Tennessee. And guess what? The media helps them perpetuate this fraud. Do you think Ford Jr would even be close if not for the media covering for him?
You are right about conservative birthrates, but again, you need to examine it more closely. Conservative white families have more children than liberal white families, and that should help the GOP, but lacking any data to the contrary, it seems a safe bet that the birthrates of Hispanic and black women are higher than even that of conservative white women, and that again will benefit the Democrats.
Going back to red states/districts; it is no surprise that population growth there is higher. For one thing, the weather is generally better, for another, there is generally more space available. And of course, conservative values make for better communities. They make for safer neighborhoods. They make for better schools. They make for better business envirnoments. They make for better family environments overall. All of these helps explain why so many blue staters won't to move to them. It explains why so many immigrants are now flocking to them, but like Yankees, most immigrants bring their blue-state politics with them, and vote Democrat. The influx of Northerners and immigrants is one reason why Virginia is bordering on becoming a purple state.
As to the mainstream media; I share in delight that it has lost power and influence. I am glad that public opinion of it is generally low, because it deserves low marks. But they still reach more people than any other single source. Again, other than Iraq-war malaise, how else to you explain how little credit is given to the President and the Congress for the economy? Forget the fact that its misplaced to give too much credit or blame to the govt for the economy; the fact is that most people do it. And while the media was a cheerleader for the 'Clinton economy', they have done all they can to ignore good economic news during the last 4 years.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061021/ap_on_el_ge/immigration_politics
But you go on believing that all of the trends are pro-Republican. But when Texas becomes a battleground state, maybe then you'll get you head out of the sand. The problem, of course, is that by then it will be too late.
Who you calling a newbie, Sabato lover?
"Leiberman crosses the aisle = 50-50, Cheney breaks the tie."
Lieberman won't cross the aisle. He calls himself an Independent Democrat. Not Independent; not Republican.
Lieberman wants, Oh so much, for his dem buddies to let him back into their club.
He is with them on virtually every issue, except Iraq.
IMO
How do you possibly infer that I am a "Sabato lover" from what I posted?
Larry Sabato's crystal ball predicts a tie
University of Virginia Professor and director of the U-V-A center for Politics... Larry Sabato...predicts an electoral college tie in the presidential election. While he goes on to say that the election probably will not end in an electoral college tie...if ever there was a year for such an outcome...it would be this year. The prediction also says that if turnout is around 115 to 117 million...Bush should win...however if turnout is higher Kerry may have the edge.
For more detailed information on Sabato's predictions...visit
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/2004/president/electoratemap.php Link: http://wtju.radio.virginia.edu/newsarch.rb?d=2004-11-02.html
bump
Right, but later in the day Sabato predicted a landslide Kerry victory. Sabato predicted the tie the Monday before the Eelction.
He does not just lean RAT he is is RAT and a big one.
I agree with your comments. The pollsters are going to have to build new models or go out of business. With people using cell phones as their only telecommunications device and the widespread use of Caller ID to screen out unwanted calls, their methodology is failing them.
FYI Sabato.
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.