The conventional wisdom for this election cycle is that we're poised to make gains in the House and Senate, if not take control of one or both. This makes sense, considering the fact that Bush's job approval is
still in the crapper and
Democrats still enjoy an advantage in the generic ballot.
Yet while voters may tell you that they're upset with the Republicans and Bush in general, there is one quirk in the American system of government that could insulate the GOP from a bad election, and perhaps
benefit: people vote for "the man" and NOT the party. While we may pick up a seat or two from the Republicans (I'm betting that we will knock off at least two with Santorum and Chafee, and possibly Burns) it's becoming more and more likely that we may NOT keep all of our current seats, and voting for "the man" is what will cost us, as voters will be short-sighted enough to not realize the ramifications of what putting a person with a "R" next to their name does collectively in the Senate (I don't believe that we will lose any House seat, but I'm more worried about the Senate because of
Social Security privatization and possible future SCOTUS nominations (what if Stevens or Ginsberg die or step down?)
Here's my list of our four most vulnerable Senate seats:
NJ-Sen:
New Jersey hasn't elected a Republican Senator in more than 30 years, and we hope that it keeps this trend. Unfortunately, Senator Robert Menendez's poll numbers are anemic
Menendez is also due for some serious swiftboating by Kean While we know that the testimony allegation is false, all Kean has to due is cast seeds of doubt in the minds of voters. His aim is to cast Menendez as a corrupt, big-city (and Hispanic) machine pol. Unfortunately, Governor John Corzine may also be a drag on Menendez, as the recent government shutdown and problems with Corzine's Attorney General have made/are making headlines. New Jerseyans have a tendency to punish incumbents statewide for actions that Governors have taken. For example, in 1990, Christie Todd Whitman came close to unseating Bill Bradley because voters were going after him as payback for then-Governor Jim Florio's tax hike. New Jersey voters in November won't be thinkking about Bush or the GOP, they'll be voting for Kean, if he can make himself look "moderate," and hope that Corzine continues to get bad press to drag down Menendez. Right now, Menendez is starting to aggressively go after Kean on Social Security phaseout which Kean supports, but timidly.
MD-Sen:
Lt. Governor Michael Steele is a wingnut to the first degree. His comparison of stem-cell research to the Holocaust is proof of this. He also received support from the people behind the infamous 1988 Willie Horton ad Unfortunately, he's busy trying to distance himself from Bush (although now we find out that he's the anonymous candidate who criticized the GOP why didn't he do so openly and in public? He lacks the cojones to do so because he's a still a quisling of their's.)
Unfortunately, the GOP wants MD voters to see him as a upstanding black professional who is righteous and "moderate." Erlich picked him to be his runningmate in 2002 as a way of scoring points with black voters in places like heavily Democratic and African-American Prince George's County.
The looming fratricide in the Democratic primary isn't helping. Right now we have Congressman Ben Cardin facing off against former NAACP head Kweisi Mfume. Personally, I believe that if Mfume is nominated, we will be a trouble (Steele leads Mfume in fundraising $3 million to $171,000 in cash on hand, while Cardin has $2.3 million on hand. Mfume also has allegations of sexual harrassment and favoratism at the NAACP. THis, coupled with the fact that he has five out of wedlock children (which, by itself, shouldn't be an issue because he had them before he got married) can be used by Steele in a narrative against Mfume. Mfume will be perceived (wrongly so) as a MD version of Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton by voters in places like Baltimore COunty and Anne Arundel County (while PG County voters may be more loyal to Mfume than they would for Cardin, the losses in BaltCo and AA offset any gains in PG that Mfume would make from African-Americans there.) While Mfume leads Cardin in a Washington Post primary poll, Cardin beats Steele by margains ranging from 6-11 points (those margains are from the most recent Rassmussen and Baltimore Sun polls, respectively) while Mfume either only beats Steele by two in the Sun poll, and trails Steele in Rassmussen's by 1%. Nominating Mfume would lead to a draining of our resources (both the netroots and DSCC) in trying to assist Mfume. This money could be better spent on Claire McCaskill or Jim Webb or Jon Tester or Sherrod Brown. If Cardin is the nominee, then we don't have to worry about this race as much in the way of devoting our resources to it.
MN-Sen
Running to replace retiring Senator Mark Dayton are Amy Klobucher and Mark Kennedy. This is possibly, as of the moment if you count momentum, our best retention. Klobucher is leading Kennedy in cash raised during the 2nd quarter AND on hand.
She is also aggressively hitting the airwaves attacking HMO's and oil prices.
Kennedy, on the other hand, is trying to make himself out as an "Independent" fellow. His ad tries to portray him as a down-to-earth family man. He has gone to such great lengths to distance himself from Bush, that he has removed almost every picture of him from his website.
Despite the DSCC and Minneapolis Star-Tribune polls show healthy leads for Klobucher, I would take them with grains of salt. In 2002, the Star-Tribune had Mondale leading Coleman 46% to 41%, when Coleman won 50%-47%. In 2004 Kerry lead Bush 49% to 41%, when he only won Minnesota 51% to 47%. As for the DSCC...well, I don't trust polls commissioned by Sentorial groups that are in charge of supporting the candidates, regardless of party. I think that Klobucher is doing well, but not as well as the DSCC and Star-Tribune say.
Klobucher needs to make sure that voters don't fall for Kennedy as some "moderate" candidate who is "independent." But like I said, people in American politics vote for the man, not the party, and if Kennedy can do his "makeover" right, he'll be albe to leverage this to his advantage. It's up to Klobucher to make sure that he doesn't do it.
WA-Sen
And finally, this one is one of our most endangered races based on trend-lines. According to Rassmussen (hopefully things are getting better for Cantwell, since this most recent poll was taken on June 13) Cantwell is only beatin SafeCo CEO Mike McGavick 44%-40%. Just this past January, she was beating him 50%-36%, and looked fiarly secure. What gives, you may ask? Well, for starters, she's pissed off her base over Iraq. Unfortunately, she has refused to fully apologize for voting for the war, which unstandably is a stupid move (although she did vote for the Reed-Levin bill for phased withdrawal.)
Her term has been a mixed bag, with her votes against drilling in ANWAR and against the late-term abortion ban clash with her votes for CAFTA and for cloture on Alito.
Unfortunately, Washington State isn't Connecticut, and vanity campaigns from the left against her (that means you, Aaron Dixon and Hong Tran, the Green candidate and primary challenger, respectively) will only have a Nader effect. I can't understand the frustration of progressives in Washington State, but to replace Cantwell with a guy who will vote with Ted Stevens on ANWAR and SUPPORTS PHASING OUT SOCIAL SECURITY.
Unfortunately, the "man, not the party" premise may hold up here. For example, McGavick has been trying to position himself as an "outsider" against DC. In an ad launched in May, he said this:
"Taking responsibility and solving problems," says McGavick. "That's exactly what we need as a nation again." McGavick adds that America faces "terrible challenges" including the "war, to the deficit to the health care system" but "by coming together we will solve them.""
He also declines to list his party affiliation in this ad.
..So there you have it, Kossacks, if the voters of NJ, MD, MN, and WA "vote for the man, not the party," we could potentially see a Sentorial caucus of only 40 DEMOCRATS (plus Sanders, but we should be cautious there, since Tarrant has oodles of money.) This means that Social Security could potentially be phased out in 2007 (assuming a Democrat or two rejoins the Fainhearted Faction out of fear that they'll be targeted by the Republicans for not doing so in 2008...that means you Mary Landrieu and Tim Johnson!), and it also means solid votes in favor of the next wingnut that Bush nominates to the Supreme Court.
If you are a resident of any of these four states, you must spread this message "Steele/Kean/Kennedy/McGavick are tools of the GOP. They will vote for the GOP on Social Security, Iraq, and judges that will overturn Roe v. Wade. They are just rubberstamp Republicans masquerading as "independents."