Reality-BasedTM Political Numbers from Nicholas Beaudrot
Electoral Math
Reality-BasedTM Political Numbers from Nicholas Beaudrot
Once Again | Home | Friday Shuffle!
Mark Kleiman asked his friend to look into his 2006 crystal ball, where he [his friend] sees Democratic gains but not enough to take back either the House or Senate. I largely agree with his observations. Key among them, the fact that the Democratic party has not seen a gain in favorable ratings is not a problem; discontent with government is almost always taken out on the ruling party, and there isn't a particularly strong media campaign to change the image of the Democratic party at the moment (which is fine; there's not much such a campaign would accomplish right now).
At the moment, the only news events that could change this calculus are the DR-CAFTA vote and the war in Iraq. Democratic candidates have an easy hammer to use against representatives from anti-free trade districts (basically, any district with lots of small manufacturing towns) who were forced to vote Yea on CAFTA. And a district that has flipped from pro-war to anti-war will have a good reason to vote Democratic.
The Senate is much less friendly territory. In order to reach a majority, Democrats must retain seats held by retiring Senators in Minnesota and Maryland (the Maryland seat may be especially tough to keep), win Pennsylvania, Montana, Rhode Island, Ohio, Missouri, and hope Mark Warner changes his mind and decides to run for Senate. "Outcome unlikely".
| | technorati
Last
updated by Nicholas Beaudrot on 08:17 08 September 2005
