No Country For Republican Senate Challengers

I'm going to start to write about House races, Senate races, initiatives and referenda and other down ballot races.

The filing deadline passed today for Republicans in Arkansas to field a credible challenger against Sen. Mark Pryor (D), and so Democrats have one less seat to worry about.

The GOP's strongest potential challenger in South Dakota, businessman Steve Kirby, has likewise declined to run against Sen. Tim Johnson (D).

In fact, of the 12 Democrats up this cycle, only one of them -- Sen. Mary Landrieu, faces a challenge worth calling a challenge, from state treasurer John Kennedy.

Prognosticator Charlie Cook has four Republican-held or incumbent toss-ups and one likely Dem pick-up -- Virginia.

So getting to 60 is not a pipe dream.

Comments

50 + 5 = ?

Posted by neil | March 10, 2008 4:17 PM

Neil,

First it's 51, not 50. So that gets us to 56 (and worth noting that NM and NH are much more lean Dem than toss-up at this point).
And then there are a whole set of seats that are leaning Republican right now but could go either way: Alaska, Maine, Oregon are the top three. The last poll from Mississippi has Musgrove up double-digits on the Republican... and that gets us to 60.
Check out these detailed Senate rankings for a full list and race-by-race analyses.

Posted by Daniel | March 10, 2008 4:32 PM

Yep, getting to 60 would require almost everything to go the Democrats' way--but so did getting to 51.

Posted by DTM | March 10, 2008 4:44 PM

I'm happy with any margin so long as it marginalizes Holy Joe Lieberman. Anything else is just gravy.

Posted by Jeff Larson | March 10, 2008 4:44 PM

Yep, getting to 60 would require almost everything to go the Democrats' way--but so did getting to 51.

I guess. It was almost a clean sweep in 2006 -- just as Republicans had similar clean sweeps in 2004 and 2002, and the Democrats did in 2000. The Senate seems to be proving remarkably wave-like in recent years. 2008 is shaping up strongly, so it's not out of the question.

It seems to me the Democrats are very likely to win in Virginia (Warner), New Mexico (Udall), New Hampshire (Shaheen), and fairly likely to win in Colorado (Udall again!), with strong shots in Minnesota (Franken), Alaska (Begich), Maine (Allen).

Still, with that they fall short of 60. There's a shot in Oregon though neither Democratic candidates seem particularly strong right now. Even with that they'd need to win a *really* unlikely race -- like Texas, North Carolina, or Kentucky. Hard to see any of them falling, but stranger things have happened.

Posted by jbryan | March 10, 2008 4:56 PM

Neil,

First it's 51, not 50. So that gets us to 56 (and worth noting that NM and NH are much more lean Dem than toss-up at this point).
And then there are a whole set of seats that are leaning Republican right now but could go either way: Alaska, Maine, Oregon are the top three. The last poll from Mississippi has Musgrove up double-digits on the Republican... and that gets us to 60.
Check out these detailed Senate rankings for a full list and race-by-race analyses.

Posted by Daniel | March 10, 2008 4:32 PM

You have made at least one major error! Mayor Mike Fahey pretty much can't win against former Governor Johanns...

It's basically the fall out from a purely local issue. Mike Fahey just lost Omaha millions of dollars in tax and commercial revenues. For over a quarter century the College World Series {CWS) has been in Omaha. Mayor Fahey and his friends on the city land commission, lost this contract by pushing to replace Rosenblatt stadium http://www.ci.omaha.ne.us/parks/rosenblatt/rosenblatt.htm the home of the CWS with a stadium that would literally be located where two of the parking lots of The Qwest Center are currently located. http://www.qwestcenteromaha.com/ This felicity already has parking issues, that would only be made worse by tearing down the old ball park and building a new one at that location. This doesn't even cover the expense of the project now that the CWS has moved to Wichita Kansas, and a very strong chance exist they're not going to come back to Omaha...

PS For anyone to dense to figure it out I'm from Omaha!

Posted by SC Rose | March 10, 2008 5:16 PM

As I halfway indicated in my earlier comment, I don't think it's very wise to include the esteemed Senator from Connecticut in any tally of Democratic votes. And really, you might as well make the count 49 -- can you ever really trust a socialist?

Posted by Jeff Larson | March 10, 2008 5:27 PM

SC Rose,

You may be from Omaha, but the critical error in your argument is that Mike Fahey isn't running -- Scott Kleeb is.

Posted by jbryan | March 10, 2008 5:34 PM

Worth noting: Mike Ciresi just dropped out of the Minnesota Senate contest, so Al Franken can begin focusing solely on Norm Coleman.

Posted by jbryan | March 10, 2008 7:13 PM

You may be from Omaha, but the critical error in your argument is that Mike Fahey isn't running -- Scott Kleeb is.

Posted by Jeff Larson | March 10, 2008 5:27 PM

Perhaps I wasn’t clear about what I was attempting to say. I was trying to point out why Mike Fahey isn’t running for Senate!

Posted by SC Rose | March 10, 2008 10:53 PM

I think 60 seats is a real stretch. But I certainly think 54-58 is the more reasonable expectation, as well as 10-25 seats in the House.

I actually suspect if Obama is the nominee that those gains should on the higher end, if things go well for him.

I just think the chances of things going well are less certain with him than Clinton.

Posted by Tim K | March 10, 2008 11:20 PM

Someone needs to talk John Edwards into running again in NC

Posted by Mark | March 11, 2008 9:04 AM

"The GOP's strongest potential challenger in South Dakota, businessman Steve Kirby, has likewise declined to run against Sen. Tim Johnson (D)."

Wow, the GOP doesn't even want to run against a guy with brain damage.

Posted by Jon H | March 11, 2008 1:51 PM