Sam Spade's 2010 Predictions

[Sam Spade]

I can't agree on TN-8 - the Republican there is a fundraising machine and nearly all of his contributions come from in the CD.  Honestly, it's only toss-up to me because of the historic Dem nature of the region and the quality of the D candidate.  You'll notice that Mr. Longtorso is less optimistic than I am for Dems there, and I understand why.

Which Republican in TN-8 are you referring to? I see two who have raised a fair bit of money, confusingly.

Let me clarify:

Stephen Fincher has raised $620,000 in two quarters, which is roughly about the same as Herron did for both his abandoned governor's campaign and has so far in the House race total.  He's the one the NRCC is hot on and I must admit $620,000 in two quarters for a non-political, non-moneyed candidate in a not-rich district is quite impressive.

Ron Kirkland is his main opponent - he reported $365,000 in one month but didn't disclose whether it was loans, self-funding or what.

I have noticed that George Flinn (Shelby Commissioner) is running too - but he hasn't raised anything.

[J. J.]

Due to the favorable Senate maps they will be looking at in 2012 and 2014, if I were the GOP I'd rather take the Senate than the House,  even though normally the House majority matters more due to the filibuster, because if GOP does take the Senate this year they have an excellent shot at 60 seats by January 2015.

In fact, you could say it is already highly likely that either 2012 or 2014 will be great years for the GOP (2012 if Obama loses, 2014 if he wins), and thus the odds of the Dems having 59 or 60 Senate seats again anytime in the next decade are pretty slim.

I think you hit the nail on the head.

If this year turns into a 9-10 seat gain for the R's, the D's could have modest losses in 2012 and 2014 and be at 40 or below.

[Brittain33]

If this year turns into a 9-10 seat gain for the R's, the D's could have modest losses in 2012 and 2014 and be at 40 or below.

Interesting. You're predicting the largest Senate majority for Republicans since the aftermath of the Treaty of Versailles failure in 1921.

[J. J.]

If this year turns into a 9-10 seat gain for the R's, the D's could have modest losses in 2012 and 2014 and be at 40 or below.

Interesting. You're predicting the largest Senate majority for Republicans since the aftermath of the Treaty of Versailles failure in 1921.

And what happened prior to that?  The D's won a string of Senate elections, gaining 24 seats from 1910 to their peak in 1918.  The D's had a gain of 13 seats from 2004 to their peak in 1/2010.  One of the reasons for the D collapse post 1918 was the disproportionally large number of D seats up. 

A similar thing happened with those D's elected in 1974.

[Lunar]

This isn't addressed to Sam, but I guess I'll post it here.

How's Hodes doing in New Hampshire?  He has never been a strong fundraiser, but Ayotte hasn't seemed as strong in real life as she sounded on paper either.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

This isn't addressed to Sam, but I guess I'll post it here.

How's Hodes doing in New Hampshire?  He has never been a strong fundraiser, but Ayotte hasn't seemed as strong in real life as she sounded on paper either.

Hodes is about as close as you can come to having Generic Democrat running for office. So all Ayotte has to do to win is avoid making gaffes.

[Lunar]

This isn't addressed to Sam, but I guess I'll post it here.

How's Hodes doing in New Hampshire?  He has never been a strong fundraiser, but Ayotte hasn't seemed as strong in real life as she sounded on paper either.

Hodes is about as close as you can come to having Generic Democrat running for office. So all Ayotte has to do to win is avoid making gaffes.

and win her primary

[Sam Spade]

This isn't addressed to Sam, but I guess I'll post it here.

How's Hodes doing in New Hampshire?  He has never been a strong fundraiser, but Ayotte hasn't seemed as strong in real life as she sounded on paper either.

Hodes is about as close as you can come to having Generic Democrat running for office. So all Ayotte has to do to win is avoid making gaffes.

and win her primary

true, but can't answer that now.

[Lunar]

Indeed, it just has never seemed like Hodes will win while Gillibrand, Boxer, and Feingold are  still threatened...but we've heard so little from the state, so the national media hasn't really paid too much attention to this race, or even Hode's votes.  I haven't ever seen an article discussing how Hode's voted, while pretty much every other senatorial or gubernatorial Congressman in a competitive state has generated plenty of media coverage.

[Brittain33]

Indeed, it just has never seemed like Hodes will win while Gillibrand, Boxer, and Feingold are  still threatened...but we've heard so little from the state, so the national media hasn't really paid too much attention to this race, or even Hode's votes.  I haven't ever seen an article discussing how Hode's voted, while pretty much every other senatorial or gubernatorial Congressman in a competitive state has generated plenty of media coverage.

I've seen nothing in the Boston Globe. But if there was anyone who should take fright from Scott Brown's win, it's him. I wouldn't trust N.H. to vote Democratic any further than I could throw it. (Can I say that?)

[Sam Spade]

Indeed, it just has never seemed like Hodes will win while Gillibrand, Boxer, and Feingold are  still threatened...but we've heard so little from the state, so the national media hasn't really paid too much attention to this race, or even Hode's votes.  I haven't ever seen an article discussing how Hode's voted, while pretty much every other senatorial or gubernatorial Congressman in a competitive state has generated plenty of media coverage.

He voted for HC - that's all I know.  But I don't really pay close attention to NH politics.

Also - the polling really puts Boxer in quite a different league than Gillibrand and Feingold.

[Sam Spade]

Moved Maryland GOV up to Lean D with Ehrlich's entry.

Also moved AR-01* to Lean D and MA-10* to Tossup as mentioned before.  Added MI-01 to Watch List for obvious reasons (plus addition of primary challenger supported by abortion folks).  Am close to moving SD-AL to Lean D too because of primary challenger to the left supported by Hildebrand but didn't do it now.

[Torie]

Governors:
Lean D
California* (R)

Sam Spade, if it were my list, I would put CA a  heavy lean to the GOP (yes I do at least follow local politics in CA if not elsewhere as to state offices). Whitman is well positioned now to win, and win by a clear margin. I am impressed with her presentation (including the detail), and the problem is the public employee unions to a substantial extent, and Brown is their symp. It is either about reining them in, or raising taxes, which at this point, probably won't raise that much revenue anyway, as the revenue to tax erodes as the rates rise. Even the Dems know they are trapped, which is why they are chatting about a state VAT and other such stuff, so that folks who are less able to decamp, can be soaked some more.

The state is in such desperate straits now (e.g., the LA mayor, a former symp of the public employee unions himself, is now close to at war with the unions), that I would put the Boxer Campbell race (assuming Campbell wins the nomination which is a pretty good assumption), as a tossup. Folks in California are now quite frightened. Social issues won't count. It will mostly be about government spending, and on that one, when folks want it cut, they know which party is more likely to do that, at least when in extremis.

[Sam Spade]

Torie - first of all remember that this list, at least as with regards to Governor and Senate, is more about where things are right now than where they are going to be.

Based on the polling, California Governor should be a Toss-up, not Lean R or Lean D - I'll make the change now.

In California Senate, Boxer is only getting the benefit of the doubt for me because of her historical talent.  Honestly, the polling we're getting right now and the fact that at least one poll shows Republicans ahead usually means toss-up to me, fwiw.  Another couple of polls showing the race tied or Republicans ahead here will force me to move it to toss-up.

I will admit that Boxer's approval ratings spell trouble to me - at least historically. 

[Sam Spade]

Also moved ND-AL to tossup and IN-09 to Lean D.

[Lunar]

Campbell really isn't a strong campaigner.  I met one of the staffers that worked with him, and he gets weird ideas in his head.  Like, he really wanted to make his last senate race all about the illegality of the Clinton war in Kosovo, and couldn't comprehend that no one in California cared about that.   I like Campbell a lot fwiw, and I view him as the most intellectually honest GOP politician in CA, and a good person (he also taught at my university)...it's just Boxer has a lot of money and a lot of talent.   

Boxer has money and a great campaign staff in California, and the GOP really hasn't been making any headway in CA as far as I can tell in the non-white communities, which are only growing day by day (although will be less represented than they were in 08 obvioustown).

I really disagree with Torie that the Governor's race should be considered lean-R.  In an anti-incumbent season, with a retiring, severely unpopular Republican governor in a Democratic state, Whitman still has a large hill to climb.  Brown's prospects went up a lot when he completely avoided a primary challenge and could tailer all of his platform to the general election.  

[Sam Spade]

I actually disagree with you here on a couple of points. 

I'm willing to bet good money that Brown is viewed more as the incumbent than Whitman (for any number of obvious reasons).  Besides, the great X-factor here is whether Brown will piss off the women voters as he is wont to do.  We'll see - but this one deserves to be called a toss-up now based on the polling and otherwise.

As for Boxer, her approval numbers spell trouble and sometimes even money and talent doesn't save that (which I agree that she has in spades).  I want to see what the numbers are after the primary is over before I say more though.  You see, with incumbent politicians, it's the trajectory that is most important to pay attention to, not the individual little details.

[Torie]

Campbell really isn't a strong campaigner.  I met one of the staffers that worked with him, and he gets weird ideas in his head.  Like, he really wanted to make his last senate race all about the illegality of the Clinton war in Kosovo, and couldn't comprehend that no one in California cared about that.   I like Campbell a lot fwiw, and I view him as the most intellectually honest GOP politician in CA, and a good person (he also taught at my university)...it's just Boxer has a lot of money and a lot of talent.  

Boxer has money and a great campaign staff in California, and the GOP really hasn't been making any headway in CA as far as I can tell in the non-white communities, which are only growing day by day (although will be less represented than they were in 08 obvioustown).

I really disagree with Torie that the Governor's race should be considered lean-R.  In an anti-incumbent season, with a retiring, severely unpopular Republican governor in a Democratic state, Whitman still has a large hill to climb.  Brown's prospects went up a lot when he completely avoided a primary challenge and could tailer all of his platform to the general election.  

Lunar, two thoughts that I have about the CA governor's race: 1) I am now persuaded that Whitman has the right "style" to shave off a big chunk of socially moderate to liberal voters, concerned about fiscal issues, that have been voting Dem for most races in California, and 2) the issue in CA will be about reining in public employee pensions (BK city is looming for many municipalities, and Calpers cf's are now pushing the State itself to the brink), and few will believe  Brown is capable of that. I am pretty confident on this one.

We will see is Campbell is "masculine" enough to get into the snake pit with Boxer, and just "do her." It will be a close race, and some of it will be how much the CA economy recovers, if at all, which if it does some, might reduce the angst enough among some Dem voters, who need considerably angst to effect a break with their usual voting habits.

[Sam Spade]

Moved HI-01 to Toss-up.  Not making any other big changes for now.

[nhmagic]

Campbell really isn't a strong campaigner.  I met one of the staffers that worked with him, and he gets weird ideas in his head.  Like, he really wanted to make his last senate race all about the illegality of the Clinton war in Kosovo, and couldn't comprehend that no one in California cared about that.   I like Campbell a lot fwiw, and I view him as the most intellectually honest GOP politician in CA, and a good person (he also taught at my university)...it's just Boxer has a lot of money and a lot of talent.  

Boxer has money and a great campaign staff in California, and the GOP really hasn't been making any headway in CA as far as I can tell in the non-white communities, which are only growing day by day (although will be less represented than they were in 08 obvioustown).

I really disagree with Torie that the Governor's race should be considered lean-R.  In an anti-incumbent season, with a retiring, severely unpopular Republican governor in a Democratic state, Whitman still has a large hill to climb.  Brown's prospects went up a lot when he completely avoided a primary challenge and could tailer all of his platform to the general election.  

Lunar, two thoughts that I have about the CA governor's race: 1) I am now persuaded that Whitman has the right "style" to shave off a big chunk of socially moderate to liberal voters, concerned about fiscal issues, that have been voting Dem for most races in California, and 2) the issue in CA will be about reining in public employee pensions (BK city is looming for many municipalities, and Calpers cf's are now pushing the State itself to the brink), and few will believe  Brown is capable of that. I am pretty confident on this one.

We will see is Campbell is "masculine" enough to get into the snake pit with Boxer, and just "do her." It will be a close race, and some of it will be how much the CA economy recovers, if at all, which if it does some, might reduce the angst enough among some Dem voters, who need considerably angst to effect a break with their usual voting habits.

LOL, because I agree with you.

QFT: We will see is Campbell is "masculine" enough to get into the snake pit with Boxer, and just "do her."

[Sam Spade]

Moving Illinois Gov to toss-up and I'm close to moving Illinois Senate back there.

[The Duke]

I completely disagree that social issues won't matter.  Once Boxer begins running abortion ads against Fiorina, then Carly is toast.  That's why this race hinges on whether its Campbell or Carly.  If its Campbell, we have a chance.  If its Carly, we don't.

[Хahar 🤔]

As Lunar said, Whitman's been barfing money. Brown has no need to do anything yet.

[Sbane]

Campbell really isn't a strong campaigner.  I met one of the staffers that worked with him, and he gets weird ideas in his head.  Like, he really wanted to make his last senate race all about the illegality of the Clinton war in Kosovo, and couldn't comprehend that no one in California cared about that.   I like Campbell a lot fwiw, and I view him as the most intellectually honest GOP politician in CA, and a good person (he also taught at my university)...it's just Boxer has a lot of money and a lot of talent.   

Boxer has money and a great campaign staff in California, and the GOP really hasn't been making any headway in CA as far as I can tell in the non-white communities, which are only growing day by day (although will be less represented than they were in 08 obvioustown).

I really disagree with Torie that the Governor's race should be considered lean-R.  In an anti-incumbent season, with a retiring, severely unpopular Republican governor in a Democratic state, Whitman still has a large hill to climb.  Brown's prospects went up a lot when he completely avoided a primary challenge and could tailer all of his platform to the general election. 

Lunar, two thoughts that I have about the CA governor's race: 1) I am now persuaded that Whitman has the right "style" to shave off a big chunk of socially moderate to liberal voters, concerned about fiscal issues, that have been voting Dem for most races in California, and 2) the issue in CA will be about reining in public employee pensions (BK city is looming for many municipalities, and Calpers cf's are now pushing the State itself to the brink), and few will believe  Brown is capable of that. I am pretty confident on this one.

Yeah, I would put my money on Whitman at this point. As you said, nobody really cares about social issues right now. And even the hatchet job being done against Poizner is mostly based on fiscal issues rather than any social issues. The only thing Brown has going for him is that Whitman has been running an ugly campaign against Poizner and just this last weekend I saw some ads where Poizner responded in the same manner. Brown on the other hand has not had to get his hands dirty.

[nhmagic]

I completely disagree that social issues won't matter.  Once Boxer begins running abortion ads against Fiorina, then Carly is toast.  That's why this race hinges on whether its Campbell or Carly.  If its Campbell, we have a chance.  If its Carly, we don't.

Yeah, but dont you think Carly would be more willing in Tories words, to get in the snake pit with Boxer.  Some of the veteran analysts, particularly Sabato, think Carly is the strongest for that reason.  Boxer's gonna run a nasty campaign as she usually does - we have to go just as low as Boxer to beat her and she knows it.  That Boxer floating head ad, as weird as it is, is incredibly effective - it even incorporated the "Call me senator.  I earned it." flub.