Gaius' Quick Senate Scorecard for 2014 Races

-by Gaius Publius

As we move to election day, I'd like to offer the following as a quick scorecard, a list of Senate races to watch.

In the following table, the first seven races (bolded) are those marked "competitive" by the New York Times in an interesting interactive write-up. The second group (Roman font) lists races I'm interested in, for a variety of reasons. In some, the Republican is likely to win (for example, McConnell, Collins, Capito). In others, the Democrat is given at least a chance (Pryor, Landrieu). The Weiland race you've likely read about; he has an interesting but uphill path, to be sure.

In the last race listed (italicized), Amanda Curtis, the Democrat trying to take Max Baucus' Montana seat, is widely expected to lose. In every other race, the ones not listed, the incumbent party is expected by the Times to hold the seat.

Column 1 shows the name of the incumbent or the candidate of the former incumbent's party; columns 2 and 3, her/his state and party; column 4, her/his challengers.

2014 Senate Scorecard — Races to Watch

Begich	AK	D	Dan Sullivan
Udall	CO	D	Cory Gardner
Perdue*	GA	R	Michelle Nunn	*No inc.
Braley*	IA	D	Joni Ernst, Butzier	*No inc.
Roberts	KS	R	Orman (I)
Hagan	NC	D	Thom Tillis
Shaheen	NH	D	Scott Brown
Pryor	AR	D	Tom Cotton
McConnell	KY	R	Grimes
Landrieu	LA	D	Bill Cassidy
Collins	ME	R	Shenna Bellows
Weiland*	SD	D	Rounds, Pressler	*No inc.
Tennant*	WV	D	Capito	*No inc.
Curtis*	MT	D*	Steve Daines	*No inc; should flip

As I said, in all other races, the incumbent is expected to hold serve. This and a box of popcorn are all you need to enjoy the unfolding show.

Outcomes

The current Senate is composed of:

53 Democrats
2 Independents (Sanders and King)
45 Republicans

One of those Independents is reliably progressive (Sanders); the other is a "centrist" (King) and thus a man to watch. With the expected Democratic loss in Montana, the count becomes 52 Democrats, 2 Independents and 46 Republicans. If all Republicans lose in the "competitive" races bolded above, the lead grows to 53 Democrats, 3 Independents, 44 Republicans. (Note those three Independents.) At that point control of the Senate comes down to the second group of races.

Two things to keep in minds as you keep score. First, if the eventual composition (after run-offs) is 49 Democrats, 3 Independents and 48 Republicans, will the two non-Sanders Independents shop their wares to both parties — seek the best "deal" in committee chairs, appointments and other gifts and favors — in exchange for supporting that party's bid for the majority? If that occurs, by the way, I'd be willing to bet they "shop themselves" as a set, a new Gang of Two. (If so, I'd also bet that this exact phrase is widely used in the press. But you read it here first, folks.)

Second, if the Democrats do lose the Senate, it will be interesting to armchair-quarterback the mid-race support decisions. For example, what if the result is the above-mentioned 49(D)–3(I)–48(R) — better than it could have been — with Weiland losing? In that case, a Weiland win would have given them 50 and control of the Gang of Two. Could Harry Reid's early determination to back the deeply corporate, conservative Herseth-Sandlin, and his equal determination to withhold support from Weiland, mean he losses himself the Senate? If so, it would add some credence to this analysis.

We'll see. There's a lot of ball to play before second-guessing can start, but at least we're in the fourth quarter. Time for that popcorn.