Senate 2006: Not So Bleak

[election_2004]

I know that many of you have resorted to whining "the sky is falling"..."I'm moving to Canada"... (I know this because I've been lurking and reading posts over the past 3 weeks, but I decided to speak up because I just couldn't take it anymore)

But before you whip out your passports and resign yourselves to an assumption that Roe vs. Wade will be inevitably overturned and there's absolutely nothing we can do to stop it, let me propose what should be done for 2006:

First, and most importantly, BBV - - this needs to be brought to the top of the public consciousness. I don't care who does it, but we need to scream it from the rooftops and innundate the media before it's too late and the 2006 elections completely pass us by.

Next, as an Independent voter, let me stress the importance of keeping moderate Republicans in the Senate...even if you think they're out-of-touch with reality (if they believe they can change the GOP), they are still important votes against confirming the likes of Luttig/Alito/Garza/Jones. In other words, for now, they're our allies, and we need them when it comes to SCOTUS voting. So quit all of this nonsense about targeting Snowe and Chafee - - spending money to target them will only drain/divert resources away from saving the vulnerable Democratic incumbents.

The following is a quick rundown of how the Senate makeup could potentially shift (toward the Democrats, even) in the 2006 midterms. The Democrats are unlikely to capture a Senate Majority...however, the Republicans are by no means guaranteed a filibuster-proof 60/40 majority. Also, this list takes into account possible retirements along with possible future decisions by stronger (more electable) candidates to enter the race or challenge a sitting incumbent. I cite projections of who I predict might be likely to replace any retiring incumbents, if they choose not to run for reelection in '06.

If any of you live in any of these states, please throw in your two-cents, as I certainly don't claim to know everything about state-by-state politics:

VULNERABLE DEMOCRATS

MN: Dayton (against Mark Kennedy)
WA: Cantwell (against Jennifer Dunn or Dino Rossi)
FL: Bill Nelson (against Katherine Harris, Mark Foley, or Ileana Ros-Lehtinen - - I don't believe Jeb Bush will run)
NE: Ben Nelson (against Mike Johanns)

VULNERABLE REPUBLICANS

PA: Santorum (against Barbara Hafer, Bob Casey, or Chris Heinz)
MO: Talent (against Jay Nixon, Joe Maxwell, Robin Carnahan, or Claire McCaskill - - I think the nerdy little pipsqueak can be defeated, but only if the Dems make a strong attempt to unseat him)

LEANING DEMOCRATIC

TN: Frist (retiring) - succeeded by Harold Ford Jr. (Dem) vs. Marsha Blackburn, Bob Corker, or Beth Harwell (Rep) - - I give Ford an edge because of his star power
MS: Lott (whether he retires or not) - seriously challenged by Mike Moore
NJ: Corzine (presumably elected Governor in 2005) - succeeded by Bob Menendez (Dem) vs. Christine Todd Whitman (Rep)
VT: Jeffords (probably safe, unless he retires) - succeeded by Deb Markowitz, Bill Sorrell, or Elizabeth Ready (Dem) vs. Jim Douglas or Brian Dubie (Rep)
MI: Stabenow (challenged by Candice Miller, Mike Rogers, or Nick Smith)
NY: Clinton (only vulnerable if challenged by Rudy Guiliani or George Pataki)

LEANING REPUBLICAN

VI: Allen (only vulnerable if challenged by Mark Warner)
MT: Burns (potentially vulnerable if a strong challenger emerges)

SAFE DEMOCRATIC

CA: Feinstein
ND: Conrad
WI: Kohl
IL: Durbin
MA: Kennedy
WV: Byrd
DE: Carper
MD: Sarbanes (still a Dem hold if he retires - - Michael Steele isn't running)
CT: Lieberman (unless he retires, and is replaced by Nancy Johnson, Rob Simmons, or Chris Shays)
HI: Akaka (unless he or Inouye dies/resigns due to health problems, and Governor Lingle appoints Barbara Marumoto to fill the seat)
NM: Bingaman (although a GOP pickup if he retires and Heather Wilson runs for the open seat)

SAFE REPUBLICAN

AZ: Kyl
OH: DeWine
ME: Snowe
RI: Chafee
NV: Ensign
WY: Thomas (still a GOP hold if he retires, replaced by Barbara Cubin)
IN: Lugar (still a GOP hold if he retires, replaced by Pete Hostettler)
UT: Hatch (still a GOP hold if he retires, replaced by Nolan Karras, Chris Cannon, or Olene Walker)
TX: Hutchison (a GOP hold if she runs for Governor, replaced by Henry Bonilla, Rick Perry, or Kay Granger)

I make these projections as someone who, although I'm an outsider to the Dem party itself, has a vested personal interest in making sure that any extremists Bush tries to appoint to the Supreme Court are blocked, or that radical Constitutional Amendments are filibustered/defeated. I don't mean nominees who are merely strong conservatives - - I'm talking about blatantly theocratic right-wing ideologues.

Before anyone tries to attack me for being a "Freeper plant" or something to that extent, allow me to be blunt about myself: I'm a gay polytheist, but I'm extremely Independent in who I vote for. I supported Hagelin in 2000 and Kerry in 2004. As a Wisconsinite, I'm an ardent supporter of Russ Feingold, and am proud to have an independent-minded Democrat like Russ representing me in my homestate.

Because the Republicans haven't yet reached a 60/40 filibuster-proof majority, now is the time to make sure that the Democrats chip away at the 55% majority in the next midterms. While capturing the Senate Majority is unrealistic, Dems have what may be the final opportunity to stop a neoconservative surge by making a 2-3 seat net gain in 2006.

Keep in mind that, even if the GOP had 60, there still wouldn't be enough conservative purists (under current circumstances) to confirm anti-choice, anti-gay bigots to SCOTUS. Do you honestly think that Republicans like Snowe, Chafee, Specter, or Collins (not to mention the any potential additions of Whitman, Pataki/Giuliani, Dunn, or Marumoto) are seriously going to vote to confirm an Alito or a Luttig or an Edith Jones? They may not be huge allies to liberals, but they have a better sense of right-and-wrong than the bigoted lot of Santorum, McConnell, Brownback, Inhofe, DeMint, Cornyn, and Talent.

I personally want to see Santorum and Talent booted in the next election cycle, and I think the DLC, DNC, and PAC wagons should be circled most protectively around Dayton and Cantwell.

Any other thoughts on U.S. Senate strategy for 2006?

Let me clarify - - articulate, rational, constructively-critical thoughts. Debate and weighing options is healthy and helpful. Insults and sneers of "shut up and go away" aren't.

Or is this post just going to get innundated with a bunch of hopeless DemUnderground trolls posting about how the apocalypse has arrived, there's nothing we can do to stop the theocratic takeover, and we should all go out and buy burqas?

Then if that's the case, all of us are indeed doomed.

For those who haven't read it yet, I suggest everyone pick up a copy of The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood.

[GRLMGC]

1. Regarding Feinstein

It seems like a safe seat but I heard that Arnold may want to run. Do any of you think he can beat her?

[election_2004]

4. Feinstein vs. Scharzenegger

I also have a personal interest in this one, since I'll be presumably living in California a year from now.

From what I know about California politics, Feinstein is arguably the most popular politician in California. In theory, Schwarzenegger *COULD* beat Feinstein, *IF* he gets the strong backing from traditional conservative interest groups, *IF* Feinstein majorly pisses off NARAL/EMILY's List and the anti-gun lobby and gay rights groups, and *IF* he significantly outspent Feinstein - - none of which seem very likely to happen. Otherwise, no.

But beyond that, WHY would The_Governator even want to run for the U.S. Senate? He's barely been Governor for two years, and I think Arnold will want to leave a stronger legacy behind than that. 1 out of 100 isn't nearly as high-profile as sitting in the Governor's Mansion. Additionally, if by some fluke they do change the Constitution to allow foreign-born citizens to run for prez, I don't think he'd want to give up having been positioned in a powerful Executive-level spot. I just envision Arnold as getting bored and restless as a U.S. Senator this early in his political career. Maybe he'd run for the Senate if Boxer retires in 2010 or Feinstein retires in 2012, but not before then.

We must also remember that Arnold won the recall election largely because of the high unpopularity of Gray Davis. Feinstein doesn't have nearly as high public negatives as Davis.

In fact, I dare say that if Feinstein herself threw her hat into the ring for Governor, she'd have a good shot at defeating The_Governator. However, it looks as though either Bill Lockyer or Phil Angelides will be the Dem nominee to take on Arnold.

Finally, even if Scharzenegger did manage to overthrow Feinstein and make it to the Senate, I seriously doubt he would be a rubber-stamp for Bush's judicial nominees (Maria & The Clan would have his head!!!).

[janx]

2. I agree firmly about the moderate Republicans, especially

Snowe and Chafee. There aren't very many moderate Republicans left, and we need them very much.

[Lefty48197]

3. Remind voters that their Repub. Sen. voted for Trent Lott and Bill Frist

and any other radical right winger they may have voted for as a party leader. (Newt Gingrich, Tom DeLay etc.)
Don't let them hide behind any "moderate" label. A vote for an extremist like Trent Lott makes the voter and extremist.

[cire4]

5. great post....kick

[LiberalEconomist]

6. On the contrary, it is the so-called moderates such as

Snowe and Chaffee that ought to be targeted. They may be more "liberal" but they are enablers to the right-winged extremists. Only if they were to consider going the way of Jeffers or switching parties, should they remain "untouched."

[hopein08]

7. I agree

If the Democrats work to take out the moderate Republicans, it will lessen the pure numbers of general Republicans. Then the conservative branch will be even a little bit weaker which would be good for us.

I'm not even sure the Republicans won't try to take out people like Chafee during their primaries to get a more secure/conservative person in the general election. I mention Chafee because of his toying with changing parties. Patrick Kennedy should run against him. He was re-elected by a wide margin to the House.

The primary thing comes into play in Pennsylvania too. I've heard that the conservatives may run the same Twomey (sp?) wingnut against Santorum that they put up against Specter even though Santorum is a dyed in the wool conservative.

This would play very well for Democrats because there would be no fooling anyone that the Republican candidate might be moderate.

Just my take...

[PROGRESSIVE1]

17. Also, we can win those seats held by Repugs in Blue States.

It's the only way to get back to a majority!

[TheDonkey]

8. Very good post, good analysis

I hope we can unseat some of the vunerables, and get Harold Ford in the Senate.

[NoodleBoy]

12. I'd have to disagree

Attempting to defeat the moderate/maverick Republicans would be an exercise in futility-- alot of people will vote for someone if they are perceived as moderate no matter what. It's the way Chafee has been able to keep his seat, and if we mount a hard campaign against them we'd be easily paint-able as ridiculously left.

And by the way-- as for AZ, Kyl might be vulnerable if challened by AZ Democratic party leader Jim Pederson.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

16. BS! They attacked Daschle and we must do the same against.....

Chaffee. Chaffee is a Trent Lott Republican!

[NoodleBoy]

18. And run a really negative campaign against a popular incumbent who's

viewed as a moderate/maverick who sides with us against the far-right, potentially screwing all the other political campaigns we wage in that state for the next decade if we lose.

Yes, they attacked Daschle, but that means we have to go after Santorum, Ensign, and Frist, and we've got to defeat them. If we concentrate our resources on defending the seats we have and giving only token resisitance to the moderate Republicans which are coming up, we'll be able to unseat if not all three then just two of these. We're also two years away, so we can wait to see what scandals may blow up under other Republican Senators and target them as well.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

19. add DeWine to that list too!

[liberalpragmatist]

25. Liberals don't vote like Conservatives though

Red-state centrist Democrats are always more vulnerable than blue-state centrist Republicans because conservatives tend to be much more doctrinaire - there's the whole religious zealotry aspect to it, the idea, at least among a strong minority of red state voters that's enough to tip races - that they are voting for "God's candidate."

Blue-state Republican senators often benefit from the fact that many liberals eschew party labels, like mavericks and centrists, and don't think that if they vote for the Republican they're going to go to Hell. That's why it would be VERY difficult to beat Snowe, or Collins, or Chafee. I especially think trying to defeat Chafee would be futile. He has very high approval ratings and there's a strong chance we can get him to cross over, possibly for his reelection campaign.

[tsuki]

9. Florida will be a fight. With the large Cuban population in the south,

and the military population in the north, Democrats are becoming a rarity. We will fight. We were able to keep Rep. Boyd in the House, but only because ClubBev voted one of the largest Health Care Insurance increases ever.

The economy is strong on tourism and retirees here, so it's a "What Me? Worry?" mentality.

[Traction]

10. If you think Mississippi is leaning Democrat

And that Trent Lott would lose to Moore, you're living in a fantasy world. These same people predicted a Kerry landslide. MS is almost as bad as Alabama.

[goobergunch]

20. Concur. (n/t)

[thepagoda12]

11. Great post

We probably caught a break when Gov. Johanns took the Sec. of Ag. job. He was really the one factor making Ben Nelson vulnerable.

[Georgia_Dem]

13. Looks like the Republicans have the advantage for now.

I don't think Frist or Lott's seats are in danger, whether they retire or not. Scratch them off the "leaning Democratic."

The more I read, the more it looks like with or without fraud, the Republicans have the cards in their favor. More Democratic incumbents than Republican incumbents, more Democrats in danger than Republicans, and rigging to reverse some close races that would otherwise go Democratic.

A lot can happen in two years. With Bush getting more ambitious, and if the Democrats campaign well in the South, they could still win control of the Senate.

[NoodleBoy]

14. I was thinking the same...

they really skewed the 2002 elections, scaring people into voting Republican with terrorism. That was really just fucked up, but we can turn the tide.


By the way, let me be the first to say welcome to DU.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

15. We must target every Republican in 2006! Chaffee in weak.....

and we should run Patrick Kennedy against him. Chaffee supports Frist and Frist does NOT represent BLUE Rhode Island!

I'd rather have a Democrat than a Liberal Repug. We need every seat we can get!

[Lenape85]

22. You know what you should do

OK, there is a chance that Chafee might face a challenge from a more right-wing republican in the primaries. What you should do is register as a Republican and vote for the right-winger, so that if said right-winger beats Chafee, he could get beat by someone like Patrick Kennedy

Think about it, if Patrick Kennedy runs against a RWer in RI, Kennedy wins

[TayTay]

21. I heard Kennedy might retire in '06

The Boston Herald was printing rumors that Teddy might not run again.

[Lenape85]

23. Isn't the Herald a reich-wing rag though

[iwantmycountryback]

26. If that happens

I don't think we have to worry too much about retaining the seat.

[liberalpragmatist]

24. I don't know much about Luttig

I've read a few different things on him. Many say he's far too conservative. However, there was a piece in the New Republic a few weeks back detailing Bush's prospective SC nominees. He said that while Luttig was conservative, he wasn't nearly as activist as Jones, Alito, or Janice Brown. He said that Luttig at least showed some respect for precedents.

Don't flame me over this - I honestly don't know that much about him, and I'm not going to be happy with any Bush SC nominee.