2006 US Midterm Election Predictions by SoupCatcher

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

2006 US Midterm Election Predictions

POSTED BY: SOUPCATCHER
UPDATED: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 16:28
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 2258
PAGE 1 of 1

Wednesday, November 1, 2006 10:20 AM

Well, less than a week to go. What does everyone think? What will the House and Senate look like? Any races you're watching with particular interest?

Current Congress
House: 201 Democrats, 230 Republicans and 1 Independent (3 vacant)
Senate: 44 Democrats, 55 Republicans and 1 Independent

I've been periodically checking out http://www.electoral-vote.com/ and http://www.pollster.com/ just to see what the polls are saying. I'm pessimistic when it comes to Democrats winning elections, and the GOP has a strong GOTV operation, but I actually think the Democratic Party has a chance at controlling the House.

Here's my predictions (pessimistic)
House: 220 Democrats and 215 Republicans
Senate: 47 Democrats, 51 Republicans and 2 Independents (1 w/Democrats {VT} and 1 w/Republicans {CT})

I hope I'm pleasantly surprised. I see this as a pretty important election. I feel that we need to have Congress fulfilling it's oversight role and that won't happen as long as Republicans are in charge. This is the first election where I've actually donated money to campaigns. And there are many races I'm interested in: Races where progressive Democrats have a shot (although some of these are really long shots: CA-04, CA-11, CA-25, CA-45, CO-04, CO-05, MN-02. Races where Democrats shouldn't even be competitive: ID-01, SD-AL, TX-22, WY-AL

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 1, 2006 11:57 AM

RAZZA

Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
Well, less than a week to go. What does everyone think? What will the House and Senate look like? Any races you're watching with particular interest?

Current Congress
House: 201 Democrats, 230 Republicans and 1 Independent (3 vacant)
Senate: 44 Democrats, 55 Republicans and 1 Independent

I've been periodically checking out http://www.electoral-vote.com/ and http://www.pollster.com/ just to see what the polls are saying. I'm pessimistic when it comes to Democrats winning elections, and the GOP has a strong GOTV operation, but I actually think the Democratic Party has a chance at controlling the House.

Here's my predictions (pessimistic)
House: 220 Democrats and 215 Republicans
Senate: 47 Democrats, 51 Republicans and 2 Independents (1 w/Democrats {VT} and 1 w/Republicans {CT})

Soup:

I think your predictions are pretty close, though not sure why you put Leiberman with the Republicans. He only agrees with them on the war, otherwise he's a pretty liberal politician who has said he will caucus with the dems. I think the democrats will take the house as you predict, but I'm not prepared to say by how much. The GOP will probably keep the senate, if barely. Regardless, whatever happens, not much will change if you ask me, so don't get your hopes up for a radically different world when you wake up on wednesday.

I'm watching the VA, MD, NJ, and TN races mostly. I tend to agree about the GOP's turnout apparatus, but Dem's are motivated more today than ever. Though some said the same thing in '04, and that didn't turn out to be the case. One of my problems are the whole concept of polls in the first place. Frankly, I don't trust'em, especially when they are so close.

Thanks for the links though, even if I don't trust them it's still interesting to look at them

-----------------
"History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon."

---Napoleon Bonaparte

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 1, 2006 12:01 PM

DREAMTROVE

I concur, but I'd go with 215 dems to 220 reps

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 1, 2006 12:42 PM

SOUPCATCHER

Razza,

It's hard for me to judge how motivated the Democrats are this year. Online, where I spend a lot of time reading the heavy hitters on the left side of the blogosphere, there's tremendous enthusiasm. However, where I live, there's very little enthusiasm. The big deal around here is the San Jose mayoral race (and even there, our neighborhood doesn't get to vote in that race due to the whim of incorporated and unincorporated designations). My rep is Zoe Lofgren, who will easily win. The senator up for reelection is Dianne Feinstein, who will easily win (even though I wish she would get seriously challenged from the left in a primary one of these years). I haven't seen any ads for either of those races. As far as governor, it looks like Schwarzenegger will cruise to reelection.

Gerrymandering has made most House races uncompetitive. When you add in that incumbents have all the advantages, it makes it really hard for a challenger. I do think that there is a general feeling of discontent with the GOP Congress this year, but I don't know if it's enough to overcome both of these realities in many of the second tier races. And most of my friends and family don't pay attention to a midterm election until right about now, if they're planning on voting at all.

I'm hoping for the Democrats to take control. But it's hard to separate out the enthusiasm of the left blogosphere from what's happening on the ground. I can't help but think back to the the excitement right before the release of Serenity.

As far as Lieberman, I think I'm buying the theory that he will be reelected and then resign to take a cabinet position. Then the Republican governor will appoint someone to take his place. There's just been too much support for him from the Republican party. Kind of sucks to be the Republican nominee. You win your primary and then the national party tries to sandbag you right out of the race. Sortta the same thing is happening with the Democratic nominee and the national party leadership. For the most part, I don't buy that the two parties are the same. At least on the local level. But the way both parties are trying to make sure Lieberman retains his seat sure makes it hard to continue to believe that with respect to the DC portion of each party.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 1, 2006 1:39 PM

RAZZA

Whoa! Leiberman taking a cabinet postion? I hadn't heard that one, I can see it as a possibility though. Very interesting.

I live in VA and I've got to tell you the senatorial race here has been extremely ugly on both sides. You need neck waders to make it through the filthy mudslinging. The MD race is more interesting if you ask me. Steele is running a very positive campaign and has just picked up support from some prominent local african-american democrats. I think he's got a chance, but it's probably a longshot, MD is a pretty democratic state.

Turnout is always hard to predict. I think the current wind blows in the Dems favor though. There is a lot of disatisfaction on my side of the aisle as well as yours, and that's likely to fall your way as conservatives proclaim their disatisfaction by not voting.

One interesting trend I've noticed are all the moderate conservative candidates the Democrats rolled out this election cycle. Despite the leftist rhetoric from the blogosphere, they have smartly sought out moderates like Ford and Webb to compete in those key states. So even if they take the seats, those candidates won't be able to afford standing lockstep with a liberal agenda. That's why I don't see much changing even if they win. The majority will be a weak one regarless. I'm just looking forward to '08 and the chance to vote for a candidate I actually want to rather than the lesser of two evils.

MCCAIN 2008 BABY!

-----------------
"History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon."

---Napoleon Bonaparte

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 1, 2006 2:19 PM

RIGHTEOUS9

Problem with McCain is he rolls over for this administration. He really wants to be President and he really thinks he needs the NeoCons.

The result is that he has been an enabler of pretty heinnous policies. His complaints have all been lip service. Even when he got Bush to sign that bill about torture, he allowed Bush to get away with exempting himself with a signing statement.

Maybe once he's elected he will actually become the man of integrity and accountability that is his platform, but I'm not taking that chance with my vote.

To be fair, even if I liked a Republican, ala lincoln Chafee, I would vote the democrat(all other things being equal) who more closely represented my ideology, over him...so its not like McCain actually lost my vote by being a Bush Toadie, just some of my respect.

He's still a war hero, and I certainly wouldn't question whether he has done anything good for our country - but in office, he's done some harm.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 1, 2006 2:26 PM

RAZZA

Quote:
Originally posted by Righteous9:
The result is that he has been an enabler of pretty heinnous policies. His complaints have all been lip service. Even when he got Bush to sign that bill about torture, he allowed Bush to get away with exempting himself with a signing statement.

Those signing statements aren't worth the paper they are printed on if you ask me. They just give a glimpse of the administration's legal strategy should they ever be challenged in the courts.

-----------------
"History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon."

---Napoleon Bonaparte

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 1, 2006 2:46 PM

DREAMTROVE

Razza, Righteous,

Both excellent points:

1. McCain '08 yeah baby
2. McCain rolls over for this administration.

The ticket will be the ticket. If it's McCain/Condi it's suspect, if it's McCain/Allen it's doomed.

It would have to be McCain/Hagel or some such thing. It would need an administration opponent as a VP. It would probably be even better if that opponent were not a moderate. Ron Paul or Lindsay Graham.

Atm, I'm afraid Mr. Dobbs is my most likely vote for '08.

For you dems, also, watch the VP. If Obama is Obama/Hillary, then you're voting for the same policy you've seen for the last 6, 8, 16 years. Obama/Feingold would not be re-electing Bush.

If Cheney has told us anything it's that the VP does matter. Oh, yeah, also, if you shoot your friend in the face from more than 15 yards he won't die and then you can't deny being there and this leads to bad photo ops where the world is reminded that you look like Fester Adams.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 1, 2006 6:00 PM

SOUPCATCHER

The left side of the blogosphere is definitely more progressive than the Democratic party. For some areas of the country, such as Virginia and Tennessee, a liberal Democrat doesn't stand a chance of getting elected. In those areas, it makes sense to support a more moderate candidate like Ford or Webb. Or Kansas, where many former Republicans are running as Democrats. Where the progressive side of the party has a chance to make an impact is in heavily blue areas of the country. Challenging moderate Democrats from the left in primaries only makes sense if a liberal Democrat can get elected.

I'm being won over to the position that the DCCC is crap, the DSCC is not much better and the DNC has promise. Dean's 50 State Strategy was supposed to pay dividends many years down the road. But it appears that the infrastructure that the DNC has been putting in place over the past few years will pay off this year.

No matter what happens in Congress this election, Bush still has veto power. So I don't see much of a chance of rolling back some of the more egregious (at least from my point of view) legislation. A Democratic House will manifest itself in two ways: oversight and limiting the passage of more egregious legislation. Many compromise bills that were passed in the Senate during this Congress were gutted during negotiations with the House. This House has been particularly regressive (once again, from my point of view). So stopping that legislation is a good thing. But also, I'm really looking forward to having people like John Conyers in charge of committees.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 1, 2006 6:02 PM

JAYNEZTOWN

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15517752/

* Scenario I: Democrats ride a wave of discontent over President Bush and Iraq, and they pick up at least 30 House seats and at least six Senate seats.
* Scenario II: Democratic momentum stalls a bit, and the party narrowly picks up the House -- but only by a three- to five-seat margin. And the party's gains in the Senate are no more than a net of three seats, keeping the GOP in control.
* Scenario III: The Republicans narrowly hold on to their majorities in both chambers.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 1, 2006 6:16 PM

SOUPCATCHER

Thanks for the link, JaynezTown. Interesting read. One thing popped out at me that goes against everything I've been reading online:

Quote:

There's a pretty decent chance liberal bloggers could start a grassroots effort to get behind Emanuel for speaker.

Really?

Rahm Emanuel is often held up on the liberal blogs as exemplifying everything that is wrong with the current Democratic party. I just don't see people doing an about face and embracing him, no matter what the outcome. In other words, he's often portrayed as the enemy to the progressive side of the party.

* edited to add: Looks like I'm not the only one surprised by that line ( http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/11/1/224758/403 )

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 1, 2006 6:31 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

I really haven't thought about it much. But a co-worker (an optimistic man in general) made these predictions:
The democrats will gain 31 in the House to go to 232, and will gain 8 in the Senate to go to 52 (republicans will drop to 48, and indepedents to 0).

Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
Well, less than a week to go. What does everyone think? What will the House and Senate look like? Any races you're watching with particular interest?

Current Congress
House: 201 Democrats, 230 Republicans and 1 Independent (3 vacant)
Senate: 44 Democrats, 55 Republicans and 1 Independent

I've been periodically checking out http://www.electoral-vote.com/ and http://www.pollster.com/ just to see what the polls are saying. I'm pessimistic when it comes to Democrats winning elections, and the GOP has a strong GOTV operation, but I actually think the Democratic Party has a chance at controlling the House.

Here's my predictions (pessimistic)
House: 220 Democrats and 215 Republicans
Senate: 47 Democrats, 51 Republicans and 2 Independents (1 w/Democrats {VT} and 1 w/Republicans {CT})

I hope I'm pleasantly surprised. I see this as a pretty important election. I feel that we need to have Congress fulfilling it's oversight role and that won't happen as long as Republicans are in charge. This is the first election where I've actually donated money to campaigns. And there are many races I'm interested in: Races where progressive Democrats have a shot (although some of these are really long shots: CA-04, CA-11, CA-25, CA-45, CO-04, CO-05, MN-02. Races where Democrats shouldn't even be competitive: ID-01, SD-AL, TX-22, WY-AL

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, November 2, 2006 4:21 AM

HERO

I think the polls are typically undersample Republicans. Its part intentional and part because many Republicans don't answer polls. Some, like myself, identify ourselves as Republican and then claim to be voting for the Democrat when in fact that was never going to happen.

So my final numbers will be close, because the country is still split.

House: 221 Republicans, 213 Democrats, 1 Commie-Independent from Vermont

Senate: 53 Republicans, 45 Democrats, 1 Former Democrat, 1 Former Republican

I think the Democrats will see very positive gains in State races for governor and state houses.

I think Kerrygate will be the biggest factor in turning out the Republicans to offset Democratic momentum, after all voting against Kerry never gets old.

The real question is what happens to the Democratic party after they fail to win control. When they lost in 2002 a number of the moderate mainstreamers were out. After '04 the party fell into the hands of Dean and Pelosi and the lunatic left (bye to Joe Lieberman). I think there are two possibilities. Either they will divorce themselves from the 5% fringe that presently runs them...or, that 5% takes the party over a cliff and they break apart on the way down. I think either result is probably good for the country.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, November 2, 2006 7:51 AM

RIGHTEOUS9

I think Hero, that you're on the same page as all the media talking points after Kerry lost the last election, and aside of your claim that you lie,

I think you could probably provide little evidence of the truth of this as a wide spread phenomenon.

The reality is polls sway public opinion. They shouldn't, but they seem to. There is a certain bandwagon effect. When W's numbers started to go down, it made it okay for people to dislike him in a time of war.

You know this, but you're going to tell me that Republicans especially, don't care about polls? The same GOP that focus tests every message before it puts it out to its target audience wants you to lie on polls and say that you're going to vote democrat?

Oh you're all just rogues with free spirits right? You aren't partisans. You'll just vote republicans because they are the lesser evil, but you'll be damned if you help that lesser evil to win when the polls come around.

The reality is this is a convenient obfuscation story because it helps to muddy the waters when the media tells us why the exit polls were so different from the actual results...because of those crazy republicans and their silly pranks...

bullshit dude.

P.S.

I know somebody who did the same thing to a poll on the other side. He's just not that political..doesn't give a shit, but tends to vote democrat. But to the pollster he told him he hated mexicans and hated gays and would vote for Republicans in every seat.

I'm sure it happens...I'll even take your word for it that you do it...but it isn't rampant and you do have foils on the other side too.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, November 2, 2006 8:20 AM

CITIZEN

Shock Headline:

HERO ADMITS TO LYING!

Whoda thunk it?

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, November 2, 2006 10:15 AM

WHIMSICALNBRAINPAN

I'm not even going to venture a guess about the rest of the country but I do know that it looks like my incumbent Congressman who is a Republican will be defeated next Tuesday. None of my states Senators are up for re-election however.

"Well, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle." http://whimsicalnbrainpan.blogspot.com/

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, November 4, 2006 10:22 PM

SOUPCATCHER

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
I really haven't thought about it much. But a co-worker (an optimistic man in general) made these predictions:
The democrats will gain 31 in the House to go to 232, and will gain 8 in the Senate to go to 52 (republicans will drop to 48, and indepedents to 0).

I certainly hope you're co-worker's predications are more accurate than mine.

I spent a large chunk of today in the neighboring district walking a precinct and talking to people about Jerry McNerney (hmmm, does that make me a carpetbagger, or does that only refer to someone who moves to another district to run for office?

). Didn't see one lawn sign for Richard Pombo, but then this part of the district is a long way away from his stronghold around Lodi. This race is a super long-shot but we need more engineers in Congress (especially forward thinking ones). And it doesn't hurt that Pombo is about as corrupt as they come.

* edited to add: The reelection rate for incumbents in the House of Representatives is 98%. I knew it was high, but I didn't know it was that high. Pretty much every pundit and pollster is talking as if the Democrats will take the House (a pick up of at least 16 seats). If that happens, it would be huge. To borrow from Kevin Drum, "Up through the 70s, big swings in House elections were common, but in the last 20 years there's only been a single year with a big swing (1994). Aside from that, the average change has been less than five seats." ( http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_11/010008.ph
p )

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, November 11, 2006 9:43 AM

SOUPCATCHER

Short summary: Rue's co-worker pretty much nailed the House. I don't think anyone really got the Senate. According to the MSNBC article JaynezTown quoted from, this election fit Scenario I (the best case scenario for the Democratic Party).

It's a good thing I don't get paid to make predictions. I suck. Fortunately, I was pessimistic in my predictions and I'm much happier with the reality.

There's nine House races still being decided. And it looks like the Democratic Party will pick up at least one seat, CT-02, and hold their only endangered seat, GA-12 (although WA-08 is really up in the air due to the huge number of absentee ballots they're working through). That would mean that the Democratic Party pitched a shut-out in House, Senate and Governor races. Has that ever happened before?

As far as the races I was particularly interested in... McNereney won in CA-11! Herseth held strong in SD-AL. Lampson won in TX-22. And Trauner still has a slim chance in WY-AL. The rest (CA-04, CA-25, CA-45, CO-04, CO-05, ID-01 and MN-02) had a disappointing outcome. Although some candidates got closer than others.

* edit to change first sentence

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 15, 2006 4:28 PM

DREAMTROVE

i think there was a screw up on the part of the team, and I goofed. It was more dem than i thought,

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE