Friday, May 01, 2020

Most Professional Political Prognasticators Said The Senate Was Out Of Reach For The Democrats But They're BeginningTo Admit They Were Wrong


2020 will be another big anti-red wave. The media isn't talking about it yet-- they're a lagging indicator-- but they will, and when they do, they will demonstrate how clueless they are by dubbing it a "blue wave," which it certainly won't be.

The video above was made by The Lincoln Project, a cabal of #NeverTrump Republicans-- George Conway, Jennifer Horn, Steve Schmidt, John Weaver, Rick Wilson, Mike Madrid, etc. In their mission statement they wrote that their goal is defeating Trump and Trumpism at the ballot box. "We do not undertake this task lightly nor from ideological preference. Our many policy differences with national Democrats remain. However, the priority for all patriotic Americans must be a shared fidelity to the Constitution and a commitment to defeat those candidates who have abandoned their constitutional oaths, regardless of party. Electing Democrats who support the Constitution over Republicans who do not is a worthy effort." Perfect for Justin Amash? Uh... no. they happily endorsed conservative, Status Quo Joe while spending money attacking Trump:

And now, as you can see in the video up top, they are also attacking vulnerable Republican senators, in this case Susan Collins (ME), Thom Tillis (NC), Cory Gardner (CO) and Martha McSally (AZ), the 4 of whom are the key to putting Chuck Schumer in charge of the Senate instead of Moscow Mitch. That's a big move for a bunch of life-long Republicans, more than just standing up to Trump. But it isn't #NeverTrumpers that are going to make the difference in the Senate and House races; it's millions of independent voters and the size of the Democratic turnout-- even with an incredibly bad Democratic candidate at the top of the ticket and mostly mediocre (at best) Democratic candidates in down ballot races. 2020 will be a referendum on Trump and his enablers in the Republican Party. The GOP risks more than Trump falling off the COVID-cliff; they risk him dragging the rest of the party over with him-- senators, Congress members, governors, state legislators... As Ben White wrote for Politico on Tuesday, "Republicans are trying to pull off a high-wire act over the next three months: Reopen the economy enough to get most jobless Americans back to work and off the public dole, while resisting another giant stimulus package. If they fail, they’ll face a coronavirus cliff-- an even deeper collapse in spending and sky-high unemployment in the months before Election Day. That could both damage President Donald Trump’s reelection prospects and put the party’s Senate majority at serious risk."

Goal ThermometerYesterday, Kyle Kondik's report for Sabato's Crystal Ball looked cautiously-- cautiously being the operative word for the always-a-month-behind Sabato operation-- beyond the Core Four highlighted in the Lincoln Project ad. "[T]he map may be expanding," ventured Kondik. "Democrats’ best bet among the other targets probably is Montana, but we still see a small Republican edge there." They moved Alaska Republican Dan Sullivan, who hasn't filed to run yet and probably won't, from Safe to Likely in his race against Dr. Al Gross, an Independent running as a Democrat. And they did the same with Lindsey Graham in South Carolina, which is just silly and pointless.

Since Alabama Democrat Doug Jones isn't likely to be reelected, the Democrats have to win Arizona, Maine, North Carolina and Colorado and the vice presidency, to send McConnell packing.
The best Democratic target right now outside the core four is Montana, in our view. Its emergence as a Senate battleground represents the best argument, for Democrats, that they are truly expanding the Senate map beyond the core four.

Gov. Steve Bullock’s (D-MT) late entry into the race last month prevented first-term Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT) from coasting to reelection: We were prepared to move the race to Safe Republican prior to Bullock’s entry; we now list it as Leans Republican.

Based on what we can piece together, the race seems like it’s neck and neck at the moment. But does that actually make it a Toss-up? We are not quite there yet.
They should be there-- and will be by June-- because that's what it is. The only current public polling available-- PPP's March 19 survey-- showed Governor Steve Bullock exactly tied with Senate incumbent and Trump enabler Steve Daines, 47-47%. Cook and Inside Elections, like Sabato, rate the race "leans Republican." In 2018 Democrat Jon Tester-- who isn't as popular as Bullock-- beat Republican Matt Rosendale 253,876 (50.3%) to 235,963 (46.8%).

Kondik uses history to suggest Bullock will lose: "[I]t is very rare for an incumbent senator to lose reelection while that senator’s party is winning the state for president. There are only four examples of that happening in the last seven presidential election cycles, and there were confounding circumstances in three of those four races. Donald Trump would really have to crater in order to lose Montana, which he carried by 20 points in 2016." Like I said, by June Kondik will change his rating to "Toss-up."

Trump did well against Hillary in 2016-- 274,120 (56.5%) to 174,521 (36.0%), but she was an exceptionally bad candidate for the state and didn't campaign there. Since the inauguration, the Morning Consult Trump Tracker has seen Trump's job approval rating collapse by a mammoth 18 points and his lead now (Feb 20, pre-pandemic) is 52% approve, 46% disapprove, a 6 point net approval. Expect that to head underwater in their next report. (In November it was underwater, 48% approve, 49% disapprove.)

An even worse rating for Sabato is their leans Republican for Joni Ernst. The 5-way Democratic primary is still month away. Michael Franken is probably the best shot the Democrats have to take the seat but Schumer recruited the worst shot, conservative nothing Theresa Greenfield, Ernst's best shot to hold on. Trump won the state 798,923 (51.8%) to 650,790 (42.2%) in 2016 but a better number to look at would be 4 Iowa congressional district races in 2018, after voters had already decided they hate Trump. (The Morning Consult Tracker showed Trump underwater already in February. His net approve numbers had gone down 14 points since he was inaugurated and now stand at 46% approving and 51% disapproving, negative 5.) In 2018 extremely mediocre congressional candidates defeated 2 GOP incumbents. Statewide, so combining all 4 district results, 665,676 voters chose the Democrats and 612,338 chose the Republicans, a catastrophic GOP result, likely to be as bad or worse in November for Ernst. Ernst's approval rating has followed Trump's down the toilet, the latest poll showing her down 10 points since last year.

Both Senate seats are open in Georgia, a special election where the bitterness among appointed, crooked Senator Kelly Loeffler (R-GA) and extremist sociopath Rep. Doug Collins (R-GA) is further poisoning the well for Republicans. Rev. Raphael Warnock has a good shot there. The other seat, held by David Purdue (R), is up in the air because of a murky primary. Former Columbus mayor Theresa Tomlinson would be the best bet to beat Purdue but the establishment prefers a centrist order-taker, either "ex"-Republican Sarah Riggs Amico or careerist looser Jon Ossoff. As of the March 31 FEC deadline, Tomlinson had spent $1,631,918, to Ossoff's $1,533,898 and Amico's $1,074,393. The primary is on May 19.

Other states Democrats have slight chances to win away from Republicans-- if and only if the wave is big enough-- are Alaska, Kansas, Kentucky and West Virginia. The Blue America 2020 Senate page can be accessed by clicking on the thermometer above.

Labels: , , , ,


At 10:05 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

IF we had a real opposition Party in this nation, taking the Senate would be a slam dunk.

IF the Party would allow the voters to make choices without manipulation and interference, support for the Democrats would be strong.

We don't, and they won't.

INSTEAD, the Democrats are promoting ONLY corporatist candidates and pressuring their media assets to ignore progressives.


I will not be supporting the Democratic Party this fall. Only a few progressive candidates for whom I can vote will get my vote. Everyone else can go beg for crumbs from their donors, because I have no money. My "stimulus" check has yet to arrive. I cannot work. My "unemployment" is in progress. All because I don't have Inc., Co., Corp., or LLC. after my name.

When the Democrats become a party worthy of voter support, they will win easily. Until then, read up on the Whigs. The Democrats are headed to the same fate.

At 11:04 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

So, if the fantasy of a narrow scummer majority comes true, the question remains... what then?

As we saw in 2008, 60 plus veep still means nothing meaningful is done... except putting a worthless feckless spineless corrupt neoliberal fascist democrap into the chair instead of Moscow's bitch. In 2008 it was harriet reid, and nothing at all got done and the democrap bloodbath that ensued in 2010 has yet to be undone.

The senate is less subject to gerrymandering than the house, but no mention of state leges being flipped back from that same 2010 bloodbath?

And keep in mind that most of the architects who were responsible for that bloodbath are still in charge now (Pelosi, obamanation and ideological heirs).

so, I ask again, what then?

As we saw, even when the democraps win one every so often, they never actually do anything with it... and are soon swept away again.

so... how is this going to be different? Or is it not different?

wouldn't you WANT it to be different? No? Oh... I see.


Post a Comment

<< Home