April Forecast

Overall: The Senate is now in play. However, like last month, I predict a three to five seat gain for Democrats.

Thirty-second analysis. The addition of Arizona to the "already competitive" tier gives Democrats a sixth potential pickup. Arizona moves up two tiers in one month with a wave of new poll results showing Kyl under 50%. In an otherwise stagnant environment, this sharp movement should offer hope to Democrats in states like Nevada, Tennessee, and Virginia. While Rhode Island threatens to slip back a tier, it still is not feasible to project Democrats capturing the Senate (yet). Democrats seem to be gradually improving their Senate chances every month.

You can see money totals here. Polling can be found at Rasmussen, Zogby, Survey USA, and Polling Report. Details on individual campaigns can be found in the extended entry.

There's more...

Overall: As in February, I currently forecast a three to five seat gain for Democrats.

Thirty-second analysis: In the Senate, the situation is stagnating. I continue to forecast a three to five seat gain for Democrats, but that is not quite as solid as it was two months ago. Further, the chances of Democrats putting more seats into the "already competitive" category are even lower than they were in February. Since my last forecast, there have been almost no changes. Only one race remains in the "likely pickup" category, Pennsylvania. Six races remain in the "already competitive" category. Four of these are strong Democratic challenges (MO, MT, OH and RI), and two are strong Republican challenges (MN, NJ). The only changes I have made at all come from downgrading two races out of the "potentially competitive" category (VA, MI) and into the "keep an eye out" category. I also downgraded one race, Florida, from "keep an eye out" to "off the board."

You can see money totals here. Polling can be found at Rasmussen, Zogby, Survey USA, and Polling Report. Details on individuals campaigns can be found in the extended entry.

There's more...

Part One: The Big Picture

Part two of the forecast focuses on the twelve races that estimate to have at least a 40% chance to switch parties. Nine of these seats are currently held by Republicans, and three are currently held by Democrats. These are the top tier races, and looking at our strength in this list has to bring a smile to even the most pessimistic Democrats out there.

Top Tier Democratic Targets (In alphabetical order; New York is already in the bag)

• Alaska. Democratic candidate: Ethan Berkowtiz
  For the second time in two years, the deep red state of Alaska has appeared high on a Democratic target list. However, unlike in 2004, this time Democrats are favored to take the seat. Governor, former Senator and father of a Senator Frank Murkowski is, to put it as politely as I can, in deep shit. He has a hideous sub-30 approval rating that has been low since time immemorial. No incumbent wins, or even comes close, with an approval rating like that. Dems are almost certainly going to pick one up here, which is excellent. If he does well as Governor, Berkowitz could one day become a Democratic Senator from Alaska.
  
  (Update from the comments: Murkowski is facing two primary challengers. If he loses the primary, this seat becomes a lot less winnable).
  
  
• Arkansas. Democratic candidates: Mike Beebe and Bill Halter
  This is an open seat because Republican Huckabee can't run again. Overall, Democratic chances look pretty good here. A Rasmussen poll from last month showed Beebe up ten on Republican Asa Hutchinson, which was nearly identical to the lead Beebe had in an October poll from the University of Arkansas. Zogby actually shows Hutchinson slightly ahead, but that is an internet poll. Beebe is the attorney general, so he will probably win the Democratic primary, and have a very good shot in the general. While Arkansas is one of the five most conservative states in the country, it remains a generally Democratic state. We look pretty good for a pickup here.
  
  
• California. Dems: Phil Angelides and Steve Westly
  The big prize. This is quite possibly the most important race in the entire country in 2006. Flipping this seat alone would put Democrats on the brink of having Governors in states with more than half of the national population. It was also reverse one of the worst Republican power grabs of the last decade, and deprive the national wingnut party of one of their "moderate" spokespeople. Schwarzenegger is clearly vulnerable. The Field poll, which is the only poll that really matters in California, puts the race at a dead heat. The good news is that Arnold's approval ratings and trial heat numbers are under forty, so that incumbent rule would place him in severe danger. The bad news is that Arnold has something like $100M+ for this campaign, so he can go nuclear against the Democratic nominee. Normally, a Republican Governor with low approvals in a solid blue state would be finished, but all that money sends shivers down my spine. Right now, I'd say this is a toss-up.
  
  
• Colorado. Bill Ritter, (Update from the comments: Gary Lindstrom has dropped out)
  This is Bill Owens's open seat. Dems across the country should be singing John Denver tunes this year. The Vast Left Wing Conspiracy is fully operational in Colorado, and in 2006 it is going to get even better. You can expect the big gains we made in Colorado in 2004 (and 2005) to be replicated in 2006. Ritter looks very strong in Colorado right now, and the strong possibility of a Democratic trifecta, coupled with a Democratic majority in the congressional delegation, is very real. If only I could share with the blogosphere what I have seen concerning the progressive operation in Colorado. I'm telling you, when Democrats are once again in power across the country and Republicans are writing their strategic equivalents to The Republican Noise Machine, What's the Matter With Kansas, and Crashing the Gate, they will devote an entire chapter to what started happening in Colorado three years ago. We have closed the infrastructure and conspiracy gap here, and now Republicans are the ones facing a gap. I feel very confident that we will score more big wins in Colorado this year.
  
  
• Maryland. Dems: Martin O'Malley, Doug Duncan
  Another outstanding pickup opportunity for Democrats. Baltimore mayor Martin O'Malley is the favorite to defeat Republican incumbent Eldrich. Zogby shows O'Malley with a commanding lead and favorable trends. In fact, the only poll that has not shown O'Malley up comfortably is Rasmussen, but even Rasmussen admits that the it had poll showing Erhlich up was an outlier. Not to take anything away from Duncan, who I hope stays in the race, but O'Malley is young, cool and charismatic. He should already be Governor, but unfortunately was urged to get out of the race in 2002 so someone named Kennedy to blow it for the Dems. Look for for people like O'Malley and Spitzer to run for President one day.
  
  
• Massachusetts. Dems: Deval Patrick, Tom Reilly
  Mitt Romney made the right decision to get out of Doge before Dodge voted him out. In an unusual twist, Democratic chances of taking this seat actually dropped when it became an open seat. Right now, Patrick and Reilly are even in the Democratic primary, and most polls (Zogby, Suffolk, State House News) show both candidates ahead of likely Republican nominee Kerry Healy (it's a relief to see that Irish-Americans will be represented in the race :-) ) Patrick seems to have the mo' on the Democratic side, and he also seems to have grassroots support. The winner of the Democratic primary will probably become the first Democratic Governor of Massachusetts in a long, long time.
  
  (Update from sco in the comments: "Yesterday, Millionare Republican Christy Mihos (former member of the Turnpike Board) decided he was going to run for MA Governor as an independent, mostly because he thought he was going to lose to Kerry Healey. So, it will be a three-way race now, and the conventional wisdom is that Mihos is going to steal more votes from the GOP than the Dems")
  
  
• Minnesota. Mike Hatch, Steve Kelley, Beck Lourey, Kelly Doran
  In something of a surprise to me, Democrats appear to have a good chance to defeat Republican Tim Pawlenty in Minnesota. Rasmussen and Zogby both show Pawlenty a little behind his challengers, which is very bad news for an incumbent. I remain worried about what I notice to be a disturbing entry of Thune-esque blogging in Minnesota (MN is also the national capital of right-wing blogging), but I am also heartened to see a fairly substantial, highly targeted Democratic online response. Considering the new tactics and many close races, Minnesota is possibly the most interesting state to watch this year.
  
  
• Nevada. Dem: Dina Titus, Jim Gibson
  This is another open seat. The Democratic candidates appear to be very close in the primary, and to likely Republican nominee Gibbons in the general (see Zogby and Rasmussen). I have no special insight on this race. It looks like one that we can win, but our chances here seem lower than pretty much every other race I have listed thus far.
  
  
• Ohio Dems: Ted Strickland
  Another open seat race where Democrats are favored to take over. Sitting Republican Governor Bob Taft has the lowest approval rating of any statewide elected official in history (probably). Rasmussen shows Strickland surging against both major Republican contenders. Zogby shows Strickland tied with Blackwell, which I suppose is worrying. I wonder how much Strickland has to win by in order to, you know, actually take office, considering that Blackwell operates the election machinery in Ohio.

Feeling good yet? Those are nine races that Democrats have a good chance at taking over from Republicans, six of which they are favored to win (CA, MN and NV are toss-ups). The six sates where Democrats are favored combine for 11% of the national population. The three toss-up states make up 15% of the national population. If we win the six seats where we are favored plus the toss-up in California, we will almost certainly take over a majority of total Governorships and a population majority in Governorships, no matter what happens elsewhere. We are looking really, really good among Governors in 2006.

The third and final part of the forecast, which I will release tomorrow, will focus on the top tier Republican targets (IL, IA, ME, PA, WI), the second-tier Democratic targets (AL, FL, RI, SC), the second-tier Republican targets (KS, MI, OR) and the strangest race of all, Texas.

This part of the forecast only deals with the big picture of the Governor picture. The second part, which I hope to have up tonight or tomorrow morning, will give a brief rundown of the competitive races. As always, I am open to comments and possible corrections--Chris

Following in the footsteps of my regular Senate forecast, and my new House forecast first released earlier this month, we now arrive at the completion of my forecast trilogy: Governors. I have held off on this one the longest, mainly because Governors races are much trickier to forecast than either House or Senate races. These races tend to be trickier than federal races because partisan voting tendencies at the federal level generally do not apply to Governors. For example, the four most pro-Democratic states in terms of Presidential voting tendencies all have Republican Governors (New York, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Vermont). In the same vein, some of the most pro-Republican states in terms of Presidential voting tendencies have Democratic Governors (Wyoming, Oklahoma, Kansas and Montana). Another reason these races tend to be more difficult to forecast is because financial information on the races is not generally available. Campaign finance and disclosure laws for Governors races are on a state-by-state basis, and there is no central location where these numbers are reported.

Now, having said all that, I am going to give this a go anyway. First, look at these two maps.



This is the current Governor's map. Republican control 28 states, and Democrats control 22. Now, here is another map:



This is the Governor's 2006 election map. Blue states are either forecasted as safe for Democrats in 2006, or as not up for re-election. Red states are either forecasted as safe for Republicans, or as not up for election. Purple states are states that I forecast to be competitive in 2006, at least for now. As you can see from the differences between the two maps, far more Republican held seats, fourteen, are danger than are Democratic held seats, eight. The population numbers tell an even more dramatic tale:

• Democratic safe: 26% of the population
  
• Republican safe: 13% of the population.
  
• Democratic endangered: 12% of the population
  
• Republican endangered: 49% of the population

Even though the Democratic base in 2006 is twice the size of the Republican base, fully half of the nation is under threat of switching from a Republican Governor to a Democratic Governor (except in Texas, where the threat is mainly to switch to Independent). Another 6.5%, represented by the state of New York, has already all but switched. This goes a long way toward describing just how tremendous the Democratic opportunity is this year, and just how severe our deficit has been in Governorships since 1994. In the extended entry, I discuss both of these issues in greater detail.

There's more...

January forecast

Overall: In by far my best forecast for Democrats yet, right now I project a three to five seat gain in the Senate. Not enough for control, but close.

Thirty-second analysis: The good news is that our chances of making large gains look better than ever before. The bad news that that our chances of retaking the chamber actually look worse than they did before. The key races to watch right now are New Jersey, Ohio, Minnesota, Tennessee and Virginia. In a rapidly solidifying environment, changes in these five states still seem very possible. Making sure they break in our direction is key to maintaining, and improving on, the gains I have forecasted here.

Likely Pickups
Democrats: Pennsylvania
Republicans: None

Notes: Republicans do not have any seats in this category right now, and for Democrats to have a realistic shot at retaking the Senate, it needs to stay that way. However, New Jersey has a real chance to move into this category. The Democratic Party in the Garden state seems to have nine lives, but there are lots of reasons to be really worried about Menendez's chances against Kean. Of course, if Menendez survives and wins by ten ala Corzine, then I will never forecast any Democrat ever being in trouble in New Jersey again.

Already Competitive
Democrats: Rhode Island, Missouri, Montana, Ohio
Republicans: New Jersey, Minnesota

Notes: Give a big hearty welcome to Rhode Island, where both Democratic challengers would now give Chafee serious problems (and where both would crush Laffey). Ohio and Minnesota barely maintain their standing in this category. Minnesota becomes competitive as a result of the thinning of the Democratic primary field, and Ohio almost drops out of the category because of the thinning of the Democratic primary field. In both of those cases, I think we would have been helped by a little intra-party competition. Candidates would have honed their message, raised their name ID, and generated increased on-the-ground activism statewide. Sadly, we seem to have decided that saving a few bucks is better than all of that. When it comes to primaries, I am a big believer in the free market.

Potentially Competitive
Democrats: Tennessee, Virginia
Republicans: Maryland, Michigan, Washington

Notes: Tennessee remains very close to breaking out of this category, but it isn't going anywhere until Ford's support breaks out of the low forties. Even when he gets close in the polls, it is because support for his opponents drops, not because his rises. Virginia stays in more because I am hedging my bets than anything else. Webb's entry could change the dynamic there, but we still don't know how of if it will change the dynamic. On the Republican side, Steele is melting down in Maryland, dropping poll numbers, fundraising, and staff members at a remarkable rate. The competitive Democratic primary in Maryland will also ensure that the cream of the Democratic crop will rise to the top. However, it also assures that this race will stay "potentially competitive" instead of "longshot" untilthe primary is over and we can reassess the situation. In Washington and Michigan, Cantwell and Stabenow remain safe, but just barely. Things could still change there.

Longshots
Democrats: Arizona, Nevada
Republicans: Florida, Nebraska, Wisconsin

Notes: At best, we are spinning our wheels in these two western states. At worst, we are actually losing ground in two states that were always going to be difficult. On the Republican side, I will leave Wisconsin in for two more months. If Thompson hasn't made a decision to challenge Kohl by then, I'm removing it from the board entirely. I'm keeping an eye on Florida, which I still think is a hopeless cause for Harris, primarily for entertainment value. In Nebraska, Nelson's approval rating continues to rise (it's 68% now) and his opponents have no money. Thus, the race has been downgraded to "longhsot" status.

Detailed Analysis
Several months ago I laid out what I saw as the two criteria for Democrats to retake the Senate:

• 1. At least six very strong Democratic challenges to Republican held seats. (the "control" effect)
  
• 2. A numeric Democratic advantage of at least three when it comes to very strong challenges to Senate seats held by the other party. (the "landslide" effect)

As of this writing, I am happy to report than Democrats have achieved the second goal. In this forecast, I give Democrats a five to two advantage in the number of serious challenges to seats held by the opposing party. This three-seat advantage triggers the "landslide" effect among all competitive seats, where the party challenging the most seats becomes favored to win all, or nearly all, of these campaigns. As Chuck Todd, through Charlie Cook, once wrote:[A]s Charlie Cook has pointed out, Senate races never break evenly for both parties.

The key for the party that's got that little breeze at the end is putting enough races in play to win all those toss-ups. In a neutral climate, the 0-2 Democratic pickup prediction would make sense. But it's hard to foresee a neutral 2006 environment.

The makings for a Democratic advantage are brewing. There's no difference between netting three Senate seats and netting six or seven. Once the Democrats are in a position to net a third, it probably means all those slightly-leaning GOP seats are going their way and the gain will be closer to six than to two. With a five to two advantage in competitive, "toss-up" seats, Democrats are currently forecasted to have the wind at their backs, so to speak. However, since we currently only have five Republican held seats in the "already competitive" or "likely pickup" categories, we still do not have all of the pieces in place to retake control. To do this, we need to move at least one more seat from the "potentially competitive" category into the "already competitive" category. Realistically, we need to move two more seats into the "already competitive" category.

This is where the bad news comes in. While we are looking good to gain seats, the overall Senate picture is solidifying, and the number of seats we could put in play in addition to the five we already have put in play is dwindling. In Nevada, Carter is not making up ground or money on Ensign, and I have downgraded that race from "potentially competitive" to "longshot." In Arizona, Pederson actually seems to be losing ground, and recently had some very bad press concerning his son (not good for a candidate with low name ID). In Virginia, I have kept the race at "potentially competitive," but only because James Webb has entered. However, we still do not have any indication as to whether or not Webb will actually be an effective campaigner, and this race is just as likely, if not ore likely, to be downgraded to "longshot" status as it is to be raised up to "already competitive" status. Only Tennessee has a better than 50% of chance of reaching the "already competitive" category. As I said above, that would give us the minimum number of competitive seats to retake the chamber, but realistically speaking we need at least a one-seat cushion for margin of error.

There is more bad news for Democrats when it comes to retaking the chamber. New Jersey has emerged as a far ore serious Republican challenge to a Democratic held seat than Minnesota and Maryland ever were. If Republicans can come up with even one "likely pickup," then the entire math of the forecast changes. Suddenly, Democrats would require a minimum of seven seats in the "already competitive" or "likely pickup" categories to have any chance at retaking the chamber. Looking at our options above, I am not overly optimistic at our chances of pulling that off.