Democrats & Liberals Archives

Woody's 2006 Senate Forecast - Final Edition

Only a few days left to be wrong. How can I resist?

Predicted Breakdown: 51 D - 49 R

Predicted Democratic Pickups (in order of certainty):

PA – No matter what happens before Tuesday, no matter how many campaign videos Bin Laden makes, no matter how many jokes Kerry botches, liberals can take comfort in one thing: Rick Santorum will not be in Congress next year.

OH – Sherwood Brown has taken a commanding lead.

RI – Bye bye Linc/ Bye bye Chafeeness/ Outta things to write / La la la la la

MT – In my last installment, I wrote, “Since it’s Montana, the GOP probably still has a chance of pulling this one out.” In fact, the race has tightened up a bit in the last couple of weeks. But the latest Rasmussen poll shows Tester at the magic 50% level.

VA – Like the Missouri race below, this one is pretty close to being a tossup. A month ago I wrote, “Some races are so straightforward I’m not sure what say. In this case it’s just the opposite – so many bizarre things have happened I don’t know where to begin.”

That was before Webb was slammed for incestuous passages in his fiction. To take Allen’s attack seriously, you have to believe that people who write about immoral fictional characters are immoral. Fortunately, this silly line of reasoning does not seem to have attracted many takers.

MO – All the prognosticators seem to agree that this one is a pure toss-up. Averaging their last five polls, Pollster.com shows McCaskill ahead by 1 percent. RealClearPolitics shows her up by 1.4 percent. When I last looked, intrade.com was selling shares for either candidate for 50 cents on the dollar. I’m in optimist, so I’ll go for McCaskill.

Potential Democratic Pickups
:

TN – This one was looking good for a while, but the RNC’s sleazy ads were apparently effective. Bob Corker appears to be sitting on a 5 point lead.

The Playboy Bunny ad WAS racist, in my opinion. I can see the argument that they were pointing out the hypocrisy of Ford going to a Playboy party* and making a commercial in a church. The killer for me, however, is the last shot. The blonde makes the phone-to-head gesture and says, “Harold, call me”, winking at the camera. The message here is pretty unmistakable: Ford f&*ks white women. The fact that the woman basically looks naked pretty well hammers in the point.

I’m sure some Republicans aren’t buying that, but consider what you guys would be saying if the Democrats made a similar ad targetting Black Republican Michael Steele. Skanky-looking white woman says, “Michael, call me.” Nope, nothing racist there!

A prediction: Within ten years, Republican leaders will be saying that they aren’t like those bad, old Republicans who made that racist ad in Tennessee. (Which was approved by the RNC, by the way.)

AZ – Depending on whose poll you believe, this race could be pretty close or not close at all.

Potential Democratic Loss

NJ – Bob Menendez is back in the driver’s seat.

MD – Still a slight chance of a Republican upset here. I think that Michael Steele is basically a decent guy, but I have a few bones to pick with one of his ads.

Here is a transcript, courtesy of Hugh Hewitt:

Michael Steele: I’m Michael Steele, and I approve this message.
Dr. Monica Turner: I’m Dr. Monica Turner. Congressman Ben Cardin is attacking Michael Steele with deceptive, tasteless ads. He is using the victim of a terrible disease to fight people all for his own political gain. Mr. Cardin should be ashamed. There’s something you should know about Michael Steele. He does support stem cell research. And he cares deeply for those who suffer from disease. How do I know? I’m Michael Steele’s little sister. I have MS. And I know he cares about me.

Pretty moving, but a couple of problems.

First of all, Michael Steele does not support embryonic stem cell research (ESCR). He actually compared it to Nazi research during the Holocaust! This is the only kind of stem cell research that is at all controversial. So who, pray tell, is making deceptive ads? While it tells the truth in a literal sense, this ad is certainly deceptive.

Secondly, it is blatantly hypocritical. She accuses Cardin of “using the victim of a terrible disease to fight people all for his own political gain”. Uh, HELLO, what is your brother doing with this ad?! She is playing exactly the same role that Fox played in Cardin’s ad.

Finally, the “I know he cares about me” bit is manipulative even by the standards of political ads. She seems to be arguing that her brother obviously supports stem cell research, because he cares about her. But Steele, again, strongly opposes what most people think of as stem cell research.

So to review: Michael Steele really hates ESCR. He compared it to the Holocaust. But he doesn’t mind if voters think he supports ESCR. In fact, he doesn’t mind if voters think that his fictitious support for ESCR stems from his love for sister with MS. If Democrats say he doesn’t support ESCR, they are implying that he hates his sister. The bastards!

Actually, I take back the part about him being a decent guy. He’s a sleazy pol who deserves to lose.

Summary

Even at this late stage, it is surprisingly hard to predict who will control the Senate. If the Democrats win the six seats I predict, they win by the narrowest of margins, 51-49. Whatever happens, I highly doubt that either side will end up with more than 52 seats. It should be a tense couple of years.

Someone commented earlier that two of seats I am handing to the Democrats will probably be held by Independents. Joe Lieberman, who calls himself an “independent Democrat”, has promised to caucus with the Democrats as long as they don’t take away his seniority. The other Independent, Bernie Sanders, is so left-wing that no one could fathom him caucusing with the GOP.


*The party had thousands of guests, by the way. It wasn't a freakin' orgy.

Posted by Woody Mena at November 4, 2006 6:39 AM
Comments
Comment #193262

Predicting so late is very brave, Woody. I respect that, I just hope you are mistaken. I dare not handicap the races, except I think the Steele and Allen will pull it off.

I figure the House is lost and when people get a load of Pelosi, Waxman, Ragel and Convyers, they will remember why they voted Republican.

It will have the minor, but imporant, side effect of making Dems doubt some of their voting conspiracy theories (maybe not).

The Senate is a little different. We are still hoping that one of those liberal Supreme Court Judges will decide to go and generally we would like the Judges to get a vote. The Dems managed to bottle enough up in a minority. It would be worse if the inmates were in charge of the asylum.

My son will be voting for the first time this year. I have tried to bring him up right and I think I have. As we were watching 20/20 yesterday, a Dem ad came up and he said that those Dems sure can make things seem different than they are. Good we are voting Republican.

Smart boy, and he had not even read the factcheck.org">http://www.factcheck.org/article461.html”>factcheck.org article.

Posted by: Jack at November 4, 2006 7:46 AM
Comment #193263


Sorry. Factcheck.org:When Democrats Attack

Posted by: Jack at November 4, 2006 7:47 AM
Comment #193266

Jack,

If he detects B.S. only from the left side, then he’s just halfway there. Perhaps you can point out this article to him.

Republican Mudslinging On An Industrial Scale

Posted by: Trent at November 4, 2006 8:08 AM
Comment #193276


Talking Points Memo has a link to another video at you tube. George Michael does George W. I think it is called Freedom.

Posted by: jlw at November 4, 2006 9:32 AM
Comment #193289

Woody,

[No matter what happens before Tuesday, no matter how many campaign videos Bin Laden makes, no matter how many jokes Kerry botches, liberals can take comfort in one thing: Rick Santorum will not be in Congress next year.]

As a independent/Libertarian who tends to swing right, I am still content in that fact. Amen my brother.

Posted by: Bryan AJ Kennedy at November 4, 2006 1:49 PM
Comment #193291

Tax cut for Gates and Buffet and Bush. Personal protection for the troops. Which would you pay for?

Posted by: marky joh at November 4, 2006 2:21 PM
Comment #193294

Jack said: “I figure the House is lost and when people get a load of Pelosi, Waxman, Ragel and Convyers, they will remember why they voted Republican.”

Wow, there are a lot of dynamics missed in your comment above, Jack. First, it will be a decade or more before voters forget why they voted Republicans out. They are aren’t voting Democrats in, they are voting Republicans out. That is a subtle but, monumentous distinction, in terms of future races.

Most Americans don’t know who Dennis Hastert is. Ergo, in 2008, most Americans won’t know who Pelosi, Waxman etc. are either. The shrinking Democratic and GOP parties should not fear each other in the future, but, the rapidly growing Independent Voter class which is voting against bad results, and the number of organizations springing up to organize Independent voters.

When people hear the word Republican in 2008 and 2010, they will think record debt and that failed war in Iraq. And if Democrats aren’t able to zero out the deficits (presuming they take control of Congress), Independents and their candidates will grow even more. As for Iraq, Republicans own it. It does not matter now how Iraq goes, or what Democrats do regarding Bush’s war, Iraq belongs to the Republicans, and given, there is no victorious exit from that war even conceivable, Iraq will haunt Republicans for many election cycles to come.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 4, 2006 2:49 PM
Comment #193304
As for Iraq, Republicans own it. It does not matter now how Iraq goes, or what Democrats do regarding Bush’s war, Iraq belongs to the Republicans, and given, there is no victorious exit from that war even conceivable, Iraq will haunt Republicans for many election cycles to come.

Agreed. In fact, here is another prediction for you: The political climate will be even worse for the GOP two years from now than it is now. Reason being Iraq. Even as doubts grow about Iraq, the GOP has still been able to forestall reality a bit and reassure their base that we are going to stay in Iraq until there is a complete victory.

This charade isn’t going to last for another two years. In fact, I don’t think it will last for another six months. Once the GOP base realizes they have been duped about Iraq there will be hell to pay.

Posted by: Woody Mena at November 4, 2006 3:48 PM
Comment #193319

I think you are probably quite correct Woody, on your last point.

The Baker/Hamilton study group on Iraq’s report due out at the end of the year, is likely to make that very same point.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 4, 2006 6:23 PM
Comment #193358

Correct me if I am wrong the Democrats had control of the house for about 40 years. In 1994 the republicans took both houses. It seems 12 years is not all that long and people have come back to the left. Makes one think. And is it just me or is it the more anti-gay you are the more likley you are to be gay. Makes one wonder.

Posted by: Jeff at November 4, 2006 10:26 PM
Comment #193364

Trent

I take care of my side. I expect others to do the same for theirs. My post didn’t require me to be as fair and balanced as Fox News.

David

You know when all the dust clears, I suppose the Dems will hold a majority of five or ten seats, not exactly a landslide. The Dems are expecting way too much. It kind of reminds of last year’s Fitzmas predictions.

Nevertheless, Dems will have to figure out some excuses to explain why they will be unable to accomphish anything useful. Making trouble for Bush will only be fun to watch for a little while.

Re Pelosi and Hastert. Hastert is a very forgetable character. He is the kind of guy who can live next door to you for ten years before you really notice him. Pelosi is much more annoying. She is like Mrs Kravets on the old Bewitched seris. You cannot miss her. She has all the attributes anyone could ask for in an opponent. Everyone will notice her.

Posted by: Jack at November 4, 2006 11:08 PM
Comment #193371


I would love to be very optimistic about a democratic takeover of Congress. But, I remember 2002 and I know that there are a lot of closet republicans out here. They vote republican and swear to God that they did not. While I will be keeping my fingers crossed, I am still very worried.

Posted by: jlw at November 5, 2006 12:36 AM
Comment #193387

Jack said: “Nevertheless, Dems will have to figure out some excuses to explain why they will be unable to accomplish anything useful.”

Jack, they will have the best excuse in the world. A Republican President’s veto. You see, that is the other quagmire Bush has put himself into. If he suddenly finds his veto pen after Dem’s get control in Congress, his vetoes will be viewed as obstructionist. If he doesn’t use his veto, and domestic circumstances improve for the voting middle class, then Republicans will have a helluva time explaining why Dem’s weren’t the right choice.

Mind you, I wish it were not thus. I don’t see Dem’s zeroing out the deficits, or passing the many reforms this nation desperately needs which Republicans wouldn’t. And they should be held accountable for that. But, with Bush as President, they won’t be. And that will impede somewhat the anti-incumbent movement growth to force responsible, efficient, and accountable government back into Congress, regardless of party.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 5, 2006 2:31 AM
Comment #193397
Pelosi is much more annoying. She is like Mrs Kravets on the old Bewitched seris. You cannot miss her. She has all the attributes anyone could ask for in an opponent. Everyone will notice her.

It’s been a while, but I seem to remember Democrats saying the same kinds of things about Newt Gingrich in 1994. He was supposed to be a mean nasty guy who would hurt the Republicans. He did eventually step down, but the Republicans remained in power. Nancy Pelosi is replaceable.

Also, you guys have been already (apparently) been wrong about Nancy Pelosi once. She was supposed to be the guy to Republicans keeping the House. Trot out the scary witch from San Francisco. In a recent poll, 55% of adults had never even heard of her.

Posted by: Woody Mena at November 5, 2006 8:03 AM
Comment #193401


Woody: The real wicked witch of the “Heart of it All” is mean jean Schmitt, my republican rep. in the Ohio 02. She recently announced that Southern Ohio, twenty miles up the road from where I live, would be the perfect place in America to build a nuclear waste dump. I wonder haw many Congresspersons are clamoring to get one of those in their district.

Posted by: jlw at November 5, 2006 8:54 AM
Comment #193406

David R. Remer-
My goal for the next few years is to impede the anti-incumbent movement-

-by encouraging the Democrats to do their best and earn their gains!

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at November 5, 2006 9:53 AM
Comment #193417

Personally I would be quite happy if the only thing a Dem congress accomplished was to stop the Neo-con agenda in its tracks before they can do more damage to my country. It would be even more fun if congress starts doing their job and investigating. Can Bush pardon himself?

Pelosi is an Italian Catholic grandmother. Good luck demonizeing her. That dog won’t hunt.

Posted by: BillS at November 5, 2006 11:27 AM
Comment #193419

David

Newt managed to remake government from the House. Republicans managed to get to a balanced budget. Let’s hope the Dems can do as well.

Woody

Re Newt, Dems did manage to demonize him. Clinton used him and the Republicans very well to increase his popularity. Remember in 1994-5 Clinton was seen as a hopeless weakling. Maybe having opposition will bring out the best in Bush.

Posted by: Jack at November 5, 2006 11:36 AM
Comment #193461

Stephen, I hope you and yours are successful. The anti-incumbent movement is about restoring efficiency, integrity, accountability, and responsibility to the U.S. Congress. If that can be accomplished by either the Democratic or Republican party, I am all for it.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 5, 2006 4:15 PM
Comment #193464

Jack, Newt said recently on TV, that the tendency of the majority to use that status to write rules that preclude debate, amendments, and in the end representation of the will of the people, was just too great.

Newt is right. They started off with the best of intentions, and let power corrupt them absolutely to the point of precluding dissenting voices, not only from the opposition party, but, from within their own party when it came ramming legislation through from bill author, through committee, to the floor with closed rules preventing debate or amendment.

That corruption of our government has damaged our nation and her future for decades to come, if not beyond.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 5, 2006 4:21 PM
Comment #193479

I wouldnt count too many chickens before they are hatched. Your prediction for mr Chafee is already unravaeling.. msnbc reporting Chafee up one 46 to 45

This election is really mimicing the last election. Rep’s behind until the last weekend. The weeekend before the elections things tied up and by the time tues got here 3 pts ahead.

You dems also always forget the silent majority. You need to listen to your good friend Bill Clinton.
In fact Woody, I would google what Clinton has said numeorous times, about the silent majority and the differences between the last polls and the actual voting on tue. Then check how many races above that have already gotten much closer since you posted your article.
Then notice which way the momentum is swinging,

Woody, you are very brave to make such predictions. We will all be sure to point out whatever part you got wrong on wed.

I predict that just like the last election, dems are going to wake up on wed scratching their heads wondering how all those people can be so stupid.

Posted by: littlealphie at November 5, 2006 6:18 PM
Comment #193480

By the way,

Where has Micheal Moore, Babs, Cindy Shehan been the last couple of months. Maybe the higher ups finally decided that they were not helping.

And NancyPelosi cautioned that the number of Democratic House victories could be higher or lower and said her greatest concern is over the integrity of the count — from the reliability of electronic voting machines to her worries that Republicans will try to manipulate the outcome. Pelosi should remember that there have only been two legal actions for voting fraud in the last 6 years.

ACORN and the bozo’s that punctured the tires on vans to be used by Rep’s on election day.

Posted by: littlealphie at November 5, 2006 6:41 PM
Comment #193483
Your prediction for mr Chafee is already unravaeling.. msnbc reporting Chafee up one 46 to 45

That’s the only recent poll that doesn’t show Whitehouse way ahead. And even there it is well within the margin of error.

But if Chafee wins, you can say my prediction unraveled. Now you are just in the dark as I am, so you can’t say I am already wrong…

This election is really mimicing the last election. Rep’s behind until the last weekend.

I don’t know where Republicans get this idea that Bush pulled off some sort of last-minute upset in 2004. He was AHEAD in the polls. So if you want to bring up 2004, then it’s argument for trusting the polls.

I predict that just like the last election, dems are going to wake up on wed scratching their heads wondering how all those people can be so stupid.

Anyone who was scratching their head wasn’t paying attention to the polls…

Posted by: Woody Mena at November 5, 2006 7:16 PM
Comment #193487

Okay, hypothetically, the Dems take both the House & Senate …

W says, hey you geniuses, what’re we gonna do in Iraq …

I’m betting on some hot air followed by radio silence …

Posted by: ubermike67 at November 5, 2006 7:27 PM
Comment #193488

They’ll say: You get us into this mess, brainiac. Give us a plausible plan and we’ll keep paying.

Posted by: Woody Mena at November 5, 2006 7:29 PM
Comment #193494

“Anyone who was scratching their head wasn’t paying attention to the polls…”

Woody,

Another point that’s missed by the “Ha-Ha, I won crowd” is that our country is now horribly divided. Even in areas like Kansas where I live the division is 70/30, well sheesh, that’s hardly just a “few” people that aren’t happy with the majority.

To make a long story short, it’s always good to realize that you’re still dealing with your fellow Americans (or in the case of “illegals”, fellow humans) before you begin the bravado.

At the end of the day that’s where “activist” judges come into play. No majority may assume total rule over any minority if it violates the basic precepts of human decency.

Posted by: KansasDem at November 5, 2006 8:22 PM
Comment #193536

More and More I am hearing campaigning Republican incumbents plea to their constituents, “Please believe me, I am not a rubber stamp for Bush, I am a human being. I disagreed with him on 3% of his proposals.”

It’s hilarious. And likely effective to the extent of protecting their majority in the Senate.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 6, 2006 3:09 AM
Comment #193537

I did not ever say you were wrong in your prediction. I said don’t count your chickens.

And you are both dead wrong and a simple search will find your answer. Bush was behind two weekends before, tied the weekend before. The news the whole weekend was that it was a 50 50 split.

Just dont count your chickens before they are hatched.


Posted by: littlealphie at November 6, 2006 3:16 AM
Comment #193538

Moore and Moore I have seen the Dems run from the likes of Micheal Moore, Cindy shehan, Babs. Where have they been the last couple of months. Where are the stars? Of course I am only asking the micheal moore wing of the dem party. The other intelectually honest side knows where they are.

Posted by: littlealphie at November 6, 2006 3:21 AM
Comment #193701

Hey lil Alphie, is this anything like the Florida candidate who got the hell out of the area when he heard the Shrub was coming to allegedly save the day? Seems like he was probably hoping to run into M. Moore.

Posted by: ray at November 6, 2006 8:07 PM
Comment #194040

Woody-

You came pretty close to complete accuracy in predicting the close races. Nice job.

Posted by: Kevin23 at November 8, 2006 2:08 PM
Comment #194143

Thanks for noticing. If Webb’s lead holds up I will have correctly predicted every single race.

Posted by: Woody Mena at November 8, 2006 8:01 PM
Post a comment