The Senate Races Already Done by Bob Geiger HuffPost

[Demeter]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-geiger/the-senate-races-already-_b_33318.html



11.05.2006

The Senate Races Already Done

I just want to close the loop on the fact that there were indeed 33 Senate seats up for grabs this year and not just the 10 to 12 you've heard so much about.

While it is undeniably true that the ultimate balance of power in the Senate comes down to a handful of competitive races, you should at least get the names involved with the others and a one-liner for how they'll turn out. Here it is: SEE ORIGINAL FOR LIST AND COMMENTARY--VERY INTERESTING!

I've left these two for last because they're kind of special cases:

Connecticut: We're all pretty disgusted with Joe Lieberman and there's a lot of speculation about him bolting the party and causing the Democrats major problems if he wins -- that's not how it's going to happen. The same stubbornness that caused him to not accept the will of Connecticut Democrats, will make him adamantly against making us right about what a turncoat he really is.

He may still give us heartburn with his support of Team Bush on the Iraq war, but he will continue to caucus with the Democrats. So whether he or Ned Lamont wins, this Senate seat continues to contribute toward a Democratic majority.

Vermont: When it comes to the balance of power in the Senate, it's all about who you caucus (align yourself) with. Independent Bernie Sanders is more liberal than most Democrats, is enormously popular in Vermont and will destroy Republican Richard Tarrant on Tuesday. This counts effectively as a Democratic hold as Independent Jim Jeffords, who is retiring, also caucused with the Democrats.

So when you add up the 67 Senate seats that were not contested this year, with the expected results detailed above, we are at 47 seats for the Republicans and 40 for Democrats. With 13 races outstanding, you can see that the conventional wisdom that Democrats need to "run the table" on the rest to take control really is true.

I predict the Democrats will do it and will explain how tomorrow.

You can read more from Bob at BobGeiger.com.

[longship]

1. Well, Bob. It's tomorrow.

I'd like to read what you're thinking.

BTW, I've got to agree. We'll get both houses of Congress.

[Demeter]

2. The Final Analysis: How The Senate Looks After Tuesday

http://bobgeiger.blogspot.com/


The conventional wisdom for many months has been that Democrats would need to run the table of all toss-up races to have a net gain of six seats and take control of the Senate.

That's exactly what's going to happen -- here's how: LIST OF 12 RACES WITH COMMENTARY AT LINK

So how's Connecticut going to turn out? I have no freaking idea. Ned Lamont supporters are so motivated, they would crawl through three feet of snow to vote for their guy, while Lieberman's supporters -- those putting him in the lead in all polling -- may be largely Republicans and Independents who will stay home on election day at the drop of a hat.

I suspect Lieberman will find himself in a position that should disgust him: An alleged Democrat who wins because he gets more votes from Republicans than Democrats.

If I'm wrong about anything when this is all over, I hope so much that it's this.

So here's the bottom line: Of the 13 hotly-contested races, Democrats win 11 of them with Cardin, Stabenow, Klobuchar, McCaskill, Tester, Menendez, Brown, Casey, Whitehouse, Webb and Cantwell. The GOP gets victories out of Kyl and Corker.

And the Democrats take the Senate 51-49.

[longship]

3. Precisely my thinking.

Except, I'm thinking we may see Harold Ford pull it out in TN.

I'm not trusting those last polls because I think the pollsters have changed their analysis models in the last week.

[yurbud]

4. they've got two years to make it count, and if they forgive and forget

as usual, that will be it and we won't get another shot at fixing things peacefully for a while. Every time these assholes come back, they are meaner, more extremist, and more anti-democracy.