July's GOP Asshat of the Month

The competition was particularly intense this month. There are four in the running, any of whom could have walked away with the honor on an increasingly rare quiet month in GOP wingnuttia circles. On the other hand, there is no certainty that some of these gaffes will even end up hurting the Republican who muttered them.

Let's start with the most benign of this month's asshats....Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, whose campaign hacks probably thought they won the lottery when they discovered Santorum's opponent, Bob Casey, was endorsed by al-Jazeerah. Turns out the endorsement was real, but unfortunately for Santorum, it was not the al-Jazeera he was hoping for. Instead of the inflammatory Middle Eastern media monopoly, the al-Jazeerah that endorsed Bob Casey is a small group of peace activists based out of Dalton, Georgia, which "promotes cross-cultural understanding between people all over the world." Yet the embattled Santorum went so far as to produce a TV ad bashing Casey over his "al-Jazeera endorsement". D'oh!

Equally benign but comical was the quandry Maryland Senate candidate Michael Steele got himself into last week when he "spoke off the record" to Washington Post reporter Dana Milbank about how being a Republican in the current climate is like "wearing a scarlet letter". Milbank's story referenced Steele's remarks as the thoughts of an anonymous GOP Senate candidate, but it only took a matter of hours before it was revealed to be Steele. When asked whether he's ashamed to be a Republican, Steele backtracked, assuring Republicans that George Bush is Steele's "homeboy" (Steele is an African-American) and backpedaled further from there, generally making a complete ass of himself. Had he stood by his original statement, Steele may have been able to warm up to black voters in Maryland who would otherwise be willing to give him a shot. Since he didn't, he may have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory with the statement given that Steele would have an exceptionally hard time finding too many voters in Maryland willing to describe George Bush as their "homeboy".

More ominous with his blunder, Rhode Island Republican Steve Laffey let slip his true feelings about the liberal GOP establishment in the state supporting incumbent Lincoln Chafee in the primary when he said early this month that he wanted to shake the hold that the Old Line members have on the State GOP. He said they're happy with the scraps they get from the Democrats, don't want to rock the boat (and just want to collect fees for services) and they didn't want to win. He than offered that, "Luckily those people are old and are dying." Tell us how you really feel, Steve. Gotta love the rock-solid moral foundation that guide the orthodoxies of these "pro-life" Republicans. Hard to get rhetoric more vicious than that....and probably not the best strategy for winning a primary against an incumbent when polls show you'd lose by more than 25 points up against a Democrat if you were to win that primary.

But among this crowded field, I'd have to say the biggest stooge is Montana Senator Conrad Burns, already up to his neck in corruption scandals and trailing in every poll to a Democrat even though he represents a state that voted for George Bush by 20 points in 2004. Burns' latest act of malice is mind-blowing given how big of a hole he's already dug for himself. It seems that wildfires were burning up hundreds of acres of Montana ranches and woodlands in the past month, and that a firefighting crew from Virginia came into try to combat the flames. Old Conrad ran into a few of these firefighters at an airport recently and proceeded to unload his fury on them with the following screed:

"See that guy over there? He hasn't done a God-damned thing. They sit around. I saw it up on the Wedge fire and in northwestern Montana some years ago. It's wasteful. You probably paid that guy $10,000 to sit around. It's gotta change."

Picking a fight with firefighters, Conrad? And by the way, these firefighters were of the $8-12 an hour variety....products of the cheap labor dystopia your party so fervently celebrates. Maybe Conrad was so infuriated with these firefighters he couldn't control his outburst. Maybe he thought it would endear him to Montana voters also upset by the inability to control the fires. Whatever he was thinking, the smackdown backfired on him as he's been hammered by a week's worth of bad press and public criticism by Montana firefighters. Of course, Burns is backpedalling now with the usual "wish I had chosen my words more carefully" quasi-apologies, but it's gonna be awfully hard to unring that bell.

Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy.

Lieberman vs. Lamont

Like most people, I seriously underestimated the challenge multi-millionaire businessman Ned Lamont posed to three-term incumbent Senator and former Vice-Presidential candidate Joe Lieberman in the Connecticut primary. I no longer underestimate Lamont, and at this point expect him to win next Tuesday's primary, probably by a fairly wide margin.

I've made no secret about the fact that I believe this primary was the wrong battle for Democrats to choose. Lieberman has made himself the poster boy for squishy "bipartisanship" and his national profile will turn the media into sharks in a feeding frenzy if he loses. For weeks, if not months, following the likely defeat of Lieberman, Democratic leaders attempting to convey their efforts to unseat Republicans in the fall will instead be forced to choose sides between the "Democrat" Lamont or the "independent" Lieberman.....with Chris Matthews and Tim Russert relishing every opportunity they get to make Chuck Schumer squirm on the topic.

An even worse scenario is the likelihood that the GOP uses a Lieberman primary defeat as a sword to thrust into the bosoms of red-state Democrats in places like Missouri and Montana. I can hear the GOP ads now...."How can Claire McCaskill be an 'independent voice for Missouri' like she claims when she belongs to a party who refuses to support its former Vice-Presidential candidate because he only voted for them 90% of the time instead of 100%?"

Apprehensions aside, it does me little good now to wish this primary distraction would go away. It's here to stay and Democrats have to be prepared to sleep in the bed we've made for ourselves after August 8. I have nothing against Lamont and have little doubt he'd be a better Senator for Connecticut than Lieberman if he wins. I'm no longer convinced a general election victory is out of the question for Lamont given the strength of his campaign, the weakness of Lieberman's campaign, and the fervent anti-war attitude in Connecticut. I just hope the Democratic Party has a plan (fat chance, huh?) to quell the "party divided" web the media will inevitably spin if (or more likely when) Lieberman loses the primary next Tuesday and plods onward as an independent candidate. At least for now, I can only foresee obstacles for the Democratic Party's November goal of defeating Republicans as a result of this primary. I sure hope I'm pleasantly surprised.

The Politics of Stem Cells

Two weeks ago, George Bush had rebounded to 40% in several public opinion polls. The hemorrhaging appeared to have been quelled and it appeared as though he turned a corner. It was later that week that Bush pointed a Texas-sized revolver at his foot and squeezed the trigger when he used his veto pen for the first time in five and a half years in office on a wildly popular bill to fund embryonic stem cell research. In the last 10 days, Bush's poll numbers have dropped back into the mid-30's. I doubt it's a coincidence and I don't suspect the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah is contributing to the decline since that's the one issue where Bush is getting high marks for his performance.

At least on the surface, it appears the Democrats finally have a social wedge issue to exploit at the polls. By a 2-1 margin, the public isn't buying into the deranged conservative position that clusters of cells represent aborted human life, and should be thrown away rather than used in scientific research that could conceivably cure diseases. Expect the Dems to demagogue this issue mercilessly in an effort to seize upon just how delusional the position of Bush and his hard-right enablers is and how it's only succeeding in outsourcing key scientific research to other nations of the world whose governments aren't straitjacketed by misguided puritanism.

I'm nothing close to an expert on the science of this issue, but my fear is that the Dems are allowing stem-cell research advocates to oversell the public health windfall that this research has the potential of bestowing upon us. Just as I find it unsavory that the Republicans continue to campaign on anti-abortion sentiment every two years even though the majority of them have no interest in seeing Roe vs. Wade overturned, I would be just as appalled if the Democrats exploited the voting public by convincing them that Aunt Gertrude's cancer can be cured by stem cell research if there is little evidence to suggest that will happen. I'm in no position to suggest that is or is not the case, but time should tell if the hype surrounding stem cell research has merit. If stem cell research ends up being like the MDA telethon, where $60 million is raised every Labor Day with the assurance that "a cure is right around the corner", I suspect there will be a backlash by a public convinced they've been sold snake oil.

Lastly, there's a cold financial calculation that should be taken into account here, but will not be because of political correctness. This country, along with most of the civilized world, faces a demographic crunch of rising life expectancy and declining birth rates that is poised to bankrupt us in the 21st century. If stem cell research lives up to the hype and results in the elimination of countless diseases, the pace of imminent bankruptcy would accelerate. This is by no means an endorsement on my part to cease and desist with vital stem cell research, but it's an issue that deserves to be raised since it threatens the standard of living of citizens throughout the globe. At some point, would it not be more prudent to accept basic laws of human mortality than to continually press forward with our obsessive, yet futile, quest to attain eternal life?

Mike Hatch is Ahead of the Curve in the Yard Sign Wars

I just took an extended road trip to western Minnesota this weekend and was very surprised at the number of "Mike Hatch for Governor" signs already dotting the edges of farm fields and small-town front yards. I can't recall seeing high volumes of yard signs for any candidate as early as July before, but political campaigns are getting longer and the stakes for winning have become higher.

Typically, yard sign wars are engineered by the county chairs of the respective political parties, often creating a groundswell of a given candidate's yard signs in a single county, even if every county surrounding it has little or no yard sign presence for the candidate. That was not the case with these Mike Hatch signs as they were distributed fairly evenly in remote rural counties such as Traverse, Big Stone, Swift, Grant and Stevens. I spoke to another Minnesota political junkie who also saw scores of Hatch signs this weekend between the Twin Cities and Winona in southeastern Minnesota. My best guess is that the Hatch campaign has been proactive in distributing these yard signs early as a means of generating some psychological momentum. Laugh if you will, but this low-cost advertising strikes me as an intelligent way of getting voters' attention.

Particularly in the case of the aforementioned western Minnesota counties, the Hatch campaign seems to know what it's doing. This is a rural area with a disproportionately senior population and a continued affinity for the Democratic-Farmer-Labor party that was born there. Even the hapless 1998 and 2002 gubernatorial campaigns of DFLers Skip Humphrey and Roger Moe pulled out victories in several of these counties. Mike Hatch seems like exactly like the kind of straight-talkin', straight arrow DFLer who could mop the floor up with the smooth-talking suburban yuppie Pawlenty, and Hatch will need every vote he can find outstate to make up for Pawlenty's advantage in the Minneapolis-St. Paul suburbs.

It was very heartening to see all the Hatch signs erected in such strange places this far before the election. It strikes me as a sign that the DFL may actually be planning to run a competent gubernatorial campaign this year. The last time that happened, "The A-Team" was a hit on network television.

Waxing Nostalgic for the Elections of Yore

Every fall, thoughts of the elections of yesteryear dance through my head. As an election junkie, I feel like I'm getting robbed on odd-numbered years, especially last year after the high-intensity 2004 Presidential election. The nasty TV ads, the yard sign wars, the telephone push polls.....it's all such an adrenaline rush for odd ducks like me. And the more outrageous the campaigns get, the more fun they are.

With that in mind, indulge me as I dig deep from within and share my thoughts on each election cycle dating back to 1988, grading each year based on the excitement of the campaign and the election-night outcome.

1988--I was 11 years old when George H.W. Bush and Michael Dukakis squared off, paying more attention to the campaign than most 11-year-olds but still disconnected from the specifics of the campaign, in this case for the best given that Republican character assassins accomplished one of their most successful smear campaigns of all time against Dukakis. With my dad being the eternal optimist, I discounted faint background rumors of Dukakis getting clobbered in the polls and was convinced he would be victories come November 8. The tears flowed pretty thick by 8:30 that evening when a sea of Bush-41 red could be seen even in Democratic bastions like Maryland. It was the first of what would be several ugly election nights for me. Excitement of campaign: B- Election Night Result: F

1990--I was very disconnected from midterm elections back in the days when MacGyver was still on the air and Super Mario Bros. 3 needed to be conquered. Nonetheless, I couldn't help but pay a little attention to the 1990 midterms, which grew to become particularly exciting in my home state of Minnesota. A juicy sex scandal pushed Republican gubernatorial candidate Jon Grunseth out of the race only weeks before the election and a little-known college professor named Paul Wellstone was insurgent in a campaign against Republican incumbent Rudy Boschwitz. On election night, two of the biggest upsets were the victories of Wellstone, one of the biggest political Cinderella stories of all time, and moderate Republican Arne Carlson, who waged a very brief gubernatorial campaign after Grunseth left the race.
Excitement of campaign: B- Election Night Result: B+

1992--As early as December 1991, I was engaged in the Democratic nomination dogfight and was a strong supporter of Iowa Senator Tom Harkin in the field of underdog candidates. My excitement waned by March, when Harkin's campaign ended, and it remained in the dumps throughout the summer as I was unimpressed by the "triangulation" of Democratic nominee Bill Clinton at his party's convention. The presence of eccentric billionaire Ross Perot helped spice the race up, however, and I was very much engaged in the race after Labor Day. I couldn't bring myself to believe that a Democrat was poised to win a Presidential election after 12 years of rule by noxious Republicans, but I lit up with excitement on the night of the election when the map filled with blue and it was obvious that Bill Clinton was gonna win. Democrats padded their majorities in the Senate and House that evening as well. Fun election year.....great election night.
Excitement of campaign: B+ Election Night Result: A

1994--Like most Democrats, I was caught snoozing in 1994, unable to fathom the possibility that Democrats could lose their Congressional majorities, specifically their supermajority in the House. I wasn't paying any attention at all until the month before the election, and then only because news reports indicated that even stalwarts like Ted Kennedy and Mario Cuomo were in danger of defeat. It became obvious that November 8, 1994 was gonna be an ugly night for Democrats, but I remained steadfast in my belief that they'd hang onto their majorities.....but it didn't take long to find out how wrong I was. It was evident early that night that things were gonna be ugly for Democrats, and the bad news just rolling in from there. The landslide re-election of Minnesota's GOP Governor Arne Carlson and the victory of conservative Rod Grams for MN's open Senate seat pour salt on my wounds on that most awful of nights.
Excitement of campaign: F Election Night Result: F

1996--Even though the 1996 Presidential election lacked drama, I still really enjoyed the political climate of the year. For one thing, it was a wonderful point of escape for me in my miserable freshman year of college. Early on, I tracked the Republican nomination battle and didn't see anyone in the bunch who really scared me. Frontrunner Bob Dole got the nomination, and I had very little fear of him denying Bill Clinton a second term. A terrific rematch of Paul Wellstone and asshat Rudy Boschwitz in the Minnesota Senate race added to the excitement as the race took shape. On election night, there were no surprises and little excitement, but most of my preferred candidates were victorious (although the Dems didn't win back either House of Congress which I had some hope for), which in itself was a welcome development and made for a great evening.
Excitement of campaign: B Election Night Result: A-

1998--This was the first midterm election that I actively tracked for several months preceding November. I was prepared for a bloodbath with the multiple developments of Clinton's impending impeachment hearings, the proverbial "six-year itch" that typically batters the incumbent party, and several very vulnerable Democrats. There was widespread speculation of the Republicans gain six or more Senate seats and scoring a filibuster-proof majority. Excited as I was on election night, I was nonetheless demoralized. But almost right away, it was evident that things weren't going according to the Republican script. Democrats were easily winning races they weren't expected to (John Edwards in NC, Fritz Hollings in SC, Chuck Schumer defeating incumbent Al D'Amato in NY). One by one, every vulnerable Democrat was spared from the sword, save for Illinois Democrat Carole Moseley Braun. But even with all of these victories, the Dems only managed to do damage control in '98, maintaining their 45-seat Senate minority and gaining only five seats in the House. The Republicans' only positive development of the evening was unfortunately one that would prove ominous in the very near future....the landslide election of the "Bush brothers" in Texas and Florida gubernatorial races. Nonetheless, a very exciting night....and the groundswell of hilarious campaign ads from throughout the country made getting there fun too.
Excitement of campaign: B+ Election Night Result: A

2000—Hands-down the best election year of my lifetime, this one looked like it was gonna be a snoozer, a coronation of candidates Gore and Bush hand-picked by party operatives. The Democratic primary was a snoozer, with Al Gore quickly laying waste to challenger Bill Bradley. The Republican primary, on the other hand, was an absolute barnburner where an insurgent John McCain got the full wrath of Karl Rove foisted on his chest with the ruthless ferocity that no Viet Cong captor could have matched during McCain’s POW days. The Dems avoided a blowout defeat when McCain couldn’t get his party’s nomination, but the election fight became jaw-droppingly boring throughout the summer of 2000. It wasn’t until after Labor Day that things heated up again, and it became abundantly clear that this would be a very close race. Never before had I experienced a genuinely close Presidential election, and being unemployed with nothing but time on my hands to overanalyze the contest, I became obsessed with Electoral College math and tracking candidate campaign stops. I had convinced myself Bush was gonna win up until the final week of the campaign when I realized that the states where Gore led in the polls would get him to the more than 270 electoral votes he needed even if he didn’t win the popular vote. Election night 2000 was a night of breathless, roller coaster thrills for me and I’ll never forget it. The weeks of partisan hissing that followed was every political junkie’s dream come true, and even though it didn’t end the way I wanted it to, I can definitely say that it changed me from being a moderate political junkie to a hard-core obsessive. That can probably be said about many people who followed Election 2000.
Excitement of Campaign: A Election Night Result: A+

2002—I went to the 2002 election year with modest expectations and a great deal of nervous enthusiasm about the fate of my political hero Paul Wellstone, who was locked in an incredibly close race that rose to national prominence as early as March that year. It was clear even before Wellstone’s death that “national security” meme was not doing any favors for the Democratic Party, and that they would be very lucky to hang onto the Senate that they then controlled by one seat. Still, the excitement of election season was inescapable, but the death of Wellstone and the memorial service gone awry sucked nearly all the enthusiasm out of me with only a few days to go in the campaign. I eventually regained it when I saw polls the Sunday before the election showing Democrats favored in most of the battleground Senate races. It didn’t take long on the evening of November 5, 2002, to realize the Dems were getting clobbered, both nationally and in Minnesota. I went to bed around 2 a.m. with the pit of my stomach aching. The only bright spots were two incredibly close races (the South Dakota Senate race between Tim Johnson and John Thune, and a local legislative race in my home district in southern Minnesota) where the winner wasn’t determined until around noon the next day, both swinging in the direction of the good guys. Still, an awful election cycle that still gives me nightmares.
Excitement of Campaign: B Election Night Result: F

2004—As engaged as I had been in previous elections, I reached new heights with my energetic involvement in the 2004 Presidential election….and I was definitely not alone. For nearly a year, I spent hours a day where I should have been working engaged in blogosphere pissing matches. Every step of the way, I was convulsing with excitement over one of the hardest-fought Presidential elections of all time, gleefully jubilant with every good sign for Kerry, woefully glum with every positive development for Bush. I had discovered in the past three election nights that I never really knew what to expect while awaiting the election returns to roll in, but like most leftist political junkies, I was overcome with confidence after seeing the irrationally exuberant exit poll numbers the afternoon of November 2, 2004. Most of us had our finger on the champagne bottle cork by evening, just waiting for Kerry’s “victory” to be official. And what a nightmare we ended up living instead. It was clear early on the exit poll data was completely wrong, and that red states were redder than they were in 2000 while blue states were less blue. After 7 p.m., it was clear Kerry and the Democratic Party in general would be defeated and there wasn’t a single positive development the entire night (Tom Daschle defeated along with three other Democrat-held seats). I had hoped to never again be sucker-punched by election returns as badly as I was in 2002, but I ended up with an even darker black eye that night.
Excitement of Campaign: A+ Election Night Result: F-

How will Election 2006 compare to the historic evenings of the recent past? Only time will tell…….

Cigarette Smuggling Funds Hezbollah

CBS News just ran a story that let slip the long-held secret suppressed by MSM....that Hezbollah's main source of funding is the smuggling of cigarettes by their American operatives into high-tax states. The Washington Post gave a more detailed account of this in a 2004 article. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A23384-2004Jun7.html This is a huge story, but it's consistently swept under the rug because it's politically incorrect to question the sainthood of our homegrown mullahs in the anti-tobacco jihad.

Year after year, state after state, regressive "sin taxes" are foisted on smokers even though our elected officials know the black market conditions that originate from pricing tobacco far above its market value ultimately fund "people trying to kill us". But the states are addicted to the short-term revenues they cash in on from the dwindling number of tobacco consumers willing to pay their oppressive taxes, and Big Anti-Tobacco's soldiers applaud ANY measure that they see as beneficial to the holy war they're waging against smokers, consequences be damned. It's an appalling quid pro quo, and would be appalling even if its endgame was merely sacrificing personal freedom on the altar of a health and wellness police state. The fact that it's financing the very people we're engaged in this epic struggle of civilizations with makes it even more diabolical.

I realize the tyrannical true believers in the "protect you from yourself" anti-smoking industry will be undeterred, willing to accept whatever level of global carnage as is necessary to reduce tobacco consumption and make them feel better about themselves. But I suspect the majority of rational Americans on both sides of the aisle would be willing to let go of their support for the growing epidemic of regressive excise taxes if they were properly educated of the consequences. I salute CBS News for at least raising the topic in light of the current mess in the Middle East, but I'm not confident that the association between outrageous "sin taxes" and terrorist smuggling operations will be outlined to the point that it could bring about a change of policy. Again, offending smug anti-smoking authoritarians at home would be a much more devastating consequence to the world than allowing the bounty of the tobacco black market to finance bloodthirsty terrorists' operations of mass murder!

Gubernatorial Race Updates

Things have changed quite a bit in some of the 2006 gubernatorial races since I last profiled them in February. Here's a rundown on this fall's contests and my thoughts on how they'll end up on November 7:

Alabama--The primary was held last month and shook out the runners-up for this contest which was challenged by both parties. On the GOP side, incumbent Republican Bob Riley overcame his early negatives to comfortably defeat evangelical nutball Roy Moore. On the Democratic side, Lieutenant Governor Lucy Baxley was victorious over former Governor Don Siegelman, thankfully considering Siegelman was convicted of the crimes he was accused of just a few days later. While incumbent Riley seemed very vulnerable a year ago thanks to some unpopular tax increases he endorsed, he has won back many of his conservative detractors and now seems poised to be comfortably re-elected. Baxley could still turn this into a contest, but I have little doubt Riley will prevail.

Alaska--Unpopular Republican incumbent Frank Murkowski surprised alot of people when he declared his intent to run for re-election, despite approval ratings running below 25%. It's starting to look as though former Democratic Governor Tony Knowles will be Murkowski's likely challenger. Alaska is much more open to electing Democratic Governors than Senators, and have elected Knowles before. With that in mind, I can't imagine Murkowski can win re-election with approval ratings as low as his.

Arizona--Democratic incumbent Janet Napolitano appears poised to cruise to a second term by a wide margin. Her Republican opponent has yet to be determined, but it seems unlikely that any of them will be able to overcome the more than 20-point deficits they're currently facing against Napolitano, a prospect enjoyed by Democrats who hope Napolitano can help lead to victory two Democratic challengers in hotly-contested House races.

Arkansas--Every poll is showing that Democratic Attorney General Mike Beebe has a steady and consistent lead over former Republican Congressman Asa Hutchinson to fill the gubernatorial seat being vacated by Republican Mike Huckabee. It's too soon to rule out Hutchinson, but as I said in February, Hutchinson's northwestern Arkansas baseline represents the only Republican foothold in the state, meaning he'll have to win over voters everywhere else in the state who are already familiar with the popular twice-elected Beebe and who are overwhelmingly Democratic. Barring a gaffe, Beebe should pull out a victory in Arkansas.

California--Back in February, I considered a Schwarzenegger comeback to be a one in a million shot given his toxic approval ratings following his ugly political year of 2005. My how things have changed. It's not that Schwarzenegger has gotten considerably more popular, it's just that California Democrats have all but destroyed their would-be momentum following a nasty primary battle in which liberal Phil Angelides got the best of the more electable centrist Steve Westly. Political demographics being what they are in California, Angelides could still sneak out a win if Schwarzenegger's rapid move to the center keeps conservatives from heading to the polls, but I'm less than confident about Angelides' prospects at winning over moderate Democrats and I'm expecting conservatives will still stand by Schwarzenegger as the best option they have. At this point, I'd give Arnold 60-40 odds.

Colorado--The race for this open seat is now down to pro-life Democrat Bill Ritter and Republican Bob Beauprez. My initial lean was towards Beauprez, but Ritter has actually led in the early polls. This is a tough race to handicap since Ritter's social conservatism could suppress turnout among the true blues, while Beauprez's Congressional representation of the swing district in the western Denver suburbs will be very useful towards his ability to win statewide. With that in mind, I'm standing by my initial prediction that Beauprez will pull this out come fall.

Connecticut--Republican Jodi Rell is the most popular Governor in the nation. She'll easily win re-election even in a state that's getting bluer all the time.

Florida--An open primary remains unsettled and leaves this race hard to predict. Frontrunners for the nomination are Democratic Congressman Jim Davis and Republican Attorney General Charlie Crist. Here you have the reverse as Arkansas, where the Republican is a known statewide entity and the Democrat is a D.C. transplant who represents a heavily blue district. Geography is clearly on Crist's side, as are the political trendlines in Florida. I'm not sure of the charisma gap between the candidates, but at this point, any reasonable assessment has to lean towards the advantage of Crist.

Georgia--A primary next Tuesday will determine whether Cathy Cox or Mark Taylor will be the Democrat who gets to take on incumbent Republican Sonny Purdue. I'm not well enough informed on either challenger to opine on who stands the strongest chance of upsetting Purdue. Hypothetical match-ups have been much closer than I would have anticipated, but this is the South where the benefit of the doubt almost always has to go to the Republican candidate. My guess is Purdue is re-elected with comfortable, but perhaps not overwhelming margin.

Hawaii--Despite its impressive bench, no prominent Democrat was willing to take on Republican incumbent Linda Lingle, who is seeking a second term. As staunchly Democratic as Hawaii is, the lack of serious opposition will be very unlikely to topple Lingle this fall.

Idaho--Current Republican Governor Dirk Kempthorne was recently tapped by the Bush administration for a Cabinet job, leaving his seat open. I must confess to knowing nothing about the race or the candidates, but will nonetheless call it for the Republican simply because Idaho is a 70-30 GOP state.

Illinois--Republicans chose wisely in this spring's primary selecting moderate State Treasurer Judy Baar Topinka as the challenger to unpopular Democratic incumbent Rod Blagojevich. With that said, Topinka does not appear to have the kind of momentum she'll need to wipeout an incumbent in an increasingly Democratic state. It's early of course, and low voter turnout in the city of Chicago, could upset Blagojevich, but at this point things aren't looking as promising for Topinka as I expected they would. I'm leaning towards a less-than-enthusiastic voter request for Blago encore.

Iowa--A hotly-contested three-way primary for the Democratic nomination yielded a victory for golden boy Secretary of State Chet Culver, the youngest and most photogenic candidate, but perhaps not quite ready for primetime. Being wet behind the ear will not be an option for Culver to challenge political pro Jim Nussle, the conservative Congressman who has long represented a Democratic-leaning district in northeastern Iowa. Those demographics will make a Culver victory brutally difficult given that he'll have to overperform the Democratic standard throughout western and central Iowa to make up for the Democratic votes he'll inevitably lose to Nussle in eastern Iowa. Early polls have been surprisingly favorable for Culver, but I'd be surprised if he pulled it out with geography working so fiercely against him.

Kansas--In a state that has become the poster child for fanatical conservatism in recent years, it seems strange to be predicting with almost certainty that DEMOCRATIC incumbent Kathleen Sebelius appears poised to win re-election comfortably, but that's exactly what should happen.

Maine--Democratic incumbent John Baldacci is not particularly popular and early polls have showed him either even or slightly trailing Republican challenger Chandler Woodcock. At the end of the day, however, I expect Northeasterners to be going to the polls strongly favoring the Democratic party. It'll be close, but for no other reason than that, I have to give Baldacci the edge.

Maryland--With his primary opponent dropping out of the race recently, Baltimore Mayor Martin O'Malley will be the Democratic nominee challenging Republican incumbent Bob Ehrlich, who has been carefully walking a tight rope between moderation and pleasing his Republican base in one of the nation's most Democratic states. Early polls have been all over the place, but O'Malley is leading in just about all of them. The even higher-profile Maryland Senate race will likely boost turnout, and that would seem to favor the Democrats in both races. I doubt the most recent poll showing O'Malley running 16 points ahead will come to fruition, but am I expecting O'Malley to prevail by a modest margin.

Massachusetts--A hotly-contested three-way primary on the Democratic side continues to make this race unpredictable. Attorney General Thomas Reilly was the early frontrunner, but a mini-scandal and some uneven position points have sunk his fortunes of late. Rising at his expense is African-American legislator Deval Patrick and fellow Democratic challenger Chris Gabrieli, one of whom is now likely to prevail in the late September primary over Reilly. The good news for Democrats is that all three Democrats lead in hypothetical matchups with Republican Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey, running for the top spot in her party. Healey’s situation got considerably worse last winter when Republican businessman Christy Mihos declared his candidacy as a third-party independent, thus dividing the paltry center-right vote in one of the nation’s most Democratic states. Whichever Democratic candidate wins the primary is the heavy favorite to be the first Democratic Governor of Massachusetts since Michael Dukakis.

Michigan—Times are tough in Michigan. Very tough. So tough in fact that attractive young Governor Jennifer Granholm has suddenly found herself the most vulnerable Democratic Governor in the nation in a state that should be comfortably blue. Granholm’s opponent is multimillionaire Amway founder Dick DeVos, who has self-financed a flashy multi-million dollar ad barrage that has impressed enough Michigan voters to put DeVos either even or slightly ahead of Granholm in most polls. With all of this in mind, I’m still not ready to write Granholm’s obituary. Even after DeVos’ mostly unanswered ads, the best he can do is a tie or small lead with Granholm. Couple that with the closet full of baggage DeVos has incurred after his many years of peddling the Amway pyramid schemes to the public, and the many horror stories that these schemes have produced, and you have a perfect recipe for DeVos’ unfavorable numbers to soar. Furthermore, Michigan’s Legislature is already dominated by Republicans. It’s very hard to imagine that a state where the least popular politician is Republican George Bush would elect a very conservative Republican Governor peddling an identical Bushian message to go along with an equally hard-right GOP Legislature who refuse to do anything but cut taxes. I’m not as confident as I was two months ago, but am still leaning towards a Granholm victory here.

Minnesota—Another race that looks to become exciting this fall is the Minnesota gubernatorial race where youthful and affable Republican rising star Tim Pawlenty has a battle on his hands in his pursuit of a second term against Democratic Attorney General Mike Hatch. Most polls show a tight race, with a couple even indicating a Hatch lead. Pawlenty’s tenure gets decidedly mixed reviews, but he remains very popular in the Minneapolis-St. Paul suburbs where state elections are won and lost. Hatch, however, has always been popular among older voters and in outstate Minnesota, where he could conceivably cancel out Pawlenty’s suburban deficit. It will take a perfect storm for Hatch to win and any other year than this one, where Republicans appear to be in trouble all over the map, and Pawlenty would likely be a shoo-in. I’m still leaning towards a Pawlenty victory for two reasons, the charisma gap that favors Pawlenty and will become evident as the campaign kicks into high gear, and the presence of center-left Independence Party candidate Peter Hutchinson poised to steal votes almost exclusively from Hatch.

Nebraska—Last spring, acting Republican Governor Dave Heineman upset Congressman and former Nebraska Cornhuskers head coach Tom Osborne in the primary for this fall’s race. Now that the hard race is over, Heineman should breeze into a full term against Democratic challenger David Hahn.

Nevada—It’s still a wide open race for the Nevada gubernatorial contest, but most polls show the frontrunner to be Republican Congressman Jim Gibbons. Given my modest knowledge of specifics of this race, I’m leaning towards a Gibbons victory.

New Hampshire—Democratic incumbent John Lynch is very popular even in this fiscally conservative state. He’ll win another term by a 2-1 margin.

New Mexico—Democratic Governor and future Presidential candidate Bill Richardson will have no trouble at all winning a second term against token GOP opposition.

New York—If ever there was a sure thing for a statehouse to change hands, it’s in New York where outgoing Republican George Pataki is virtually guaranteed to be replaced by wildly popular Democratic Attorney General Elliot Spitzer. Spitzer leads his soft Republican challenger by nearly 3-1 margins in every poll.

Ohio—Another statehouse that seems poised to change from red to blue this fall is Ohio, where a litany of Republican scandals has went right to the top and helped outgoing Republican Governor Bob Taft secure the worst approval rating in the nation (an average about 17%.) The open seat pits centrist Democratic Congressman Ted Strickland from rural southern Ohio against the GOP’s arch-conservative African-American Secretary of State Ken Blackwell. There’s still a great deal of bad blood between Blackwell and Kerry voters based on some questionable election tactics Blackwell employed while overseeing the Presidential election. Combine that with Strickland’s cross-party appeal and the result is likely to play out as polls indicate….a comfortable victory for Strickland that could potentially help out Democratic Senate candidate Sherrod Brown.

Oklahoma—In national politics, Oklahoma is about as bright red of a state as there is. At the statewide level, however, there are still plenty of conservative Democrats willing to vote for like-minded Democratic candidates. A good case in point is incumbent Democratic Governor Brad Henry, who toes a pretty conservative line and has left little room for Oklahoma City Congressman and Republican challenger Ernest Istook to operate. Early polls show Henry with a commanding lead. I expect the lead to shrink, but unless Henry makes a gaffe (which wouldn’t really take much for a Democrat in OK) he should get another term.

Oregon—This race has been pretty low-profile and my knowledge of it is minimal, but polls seem to indicate that since winning last spring’s primary, Democratic Governor Ted Kulongoski is poised to defeat his Republican challenger and win a second term. Until I see evidence to the contrary, I’ll abide by that call.

Pennsylania—Last winter, Pennsylvania Republicans took advantage of some terrific timing (the Steelers’ Super Bowl win) to rally around a candidate that seemed like a recruitment lottery, former Pittsburgh Steeler icon Lynn Swann. And for awhile, the photogenic African-American candidate was giving incumbent Democrat Ed Rendell a serious run for his money in the polls, but Swann has been making a seemingly endless number of mistakes as he proceeds with his campaign and has found himself running 15-25 points behind in more recent polls. Unless he recaptures his footing, and fast, the not-quite-ready-for-primetime reputation that Swann has built for himself with his lackluster campaign will assure Rendell of cinching a second term.

Rhode Island—In February, I speculated the incumbent Republican Donald Carceiri should be able to win another term because he has decent approval ratings and because liberal Rhode Islanders don’t mind electing moderate Republicans to provide a check against the Democrat-dominated Legislature. I still feel that way, but with not nearly as much confidence as before. Carcieri is essentially tied with his Democratic challenger in most polls, indicating a visceral disgust with the GOP at every level among Rhode Island voters. Carceiri still has a pretty strong case to make for his re-election, and may in fact get it accomplished, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised if he’s yet another casualty of the anti-GOP tide sweeping the northeast.

South Carolina—Back in February, I confidently stated that Republican incumbent Mark Sanford was a sure bet for re-election in this uber-conservative state. I wasn’t aware of some controversial comments and votes Sanford had made which undermined his popularity with fellow Republicans, so much so that conservative legislator Jake Knotts strongly contemplated challenging him as an independent in the fall. Just last week, Knotts decided against challenging Sanford, which makes him quite secure again simply because he’s running in South Carolina with an (R ) next to his name. A divided conservative vote between Sanford and Knotts could have helped Democratic challenger Tommy Moore sneak in a victory, but in a one-on-one race with Sanford, it’s hard to imagine how Moore can win in this state no matter how unpopular Sanford is.

South Dakota—Despite the embarrassing controversy surrounding the idiotic abortion ban supported by incumbent Republican Mike Rounds, his popularity remains high and he is strongly positioned for a landslide re-election against Democratic rival Jack Billion.

Tennessee—Even though Tennessee gets more Republican with each passing year, conservative incumbent Democratic Governor Phil Bredesen has only token opposition this year and is poised for a landslide victory, potentially helping Democrat Harold Ford in the Senate race.

Texas—An intriguing four-candidate race has developed in Texas, but the likely outcome will be the same as always comes from Texas anymore….a Republican victory. A smorgasbord of center-right and center-left candidates including Democrat Chris Bell and Independents Carole Strayhorn and Kinky Friedman will sufficiently divide the vote amongst each other and let unpopular Republican incumbent Rick Perry to sneak in with 38-42% of the vote. It’s possible Perry could have been defeated with a unified opposition, but all but impossible with three candidates running against him from the left.

Vermont—Moderate Republican incumbent Jim Douglas does not seem likely to suffer the fate of other northeastern Republicans this year. Despite governing one of the most liberal states in the country, Douglas enjoys a commanding lead over token Democratic opposition.

Wisconsin—Democratic incumbent Jim Doyle has never been very popular and his re-election is far from a shoo-in, but he represents a centrist counterbalance to Wisconsin’s strongly Republican Legislature, and it appears voters are recognizing that as recent polls have showed Doyle enlarging his lead against Republican challenger Mark Green.

Wyoming—Even though it’s in a near three-way tie as the nation’s most Republican state, Wyoming elected a centrist Democratic Governor in 2002 and he’s enjoying stratospheric approval ratings. Dave Freudenthal’s re-election seems all but assured and could conceivably give the Democrats a top prospect for a Senate candidate as soon as one of the GOP incumbents retires.

All in all, the Democrats are looking pretty good for the 2006 gubernatorial races, but by and large, these races are just for decoration. The really important gubernatorial races will come in 2008 and 2010, as whoever happens to be Governor of the battleground states come 2011 will play a large role in shaping Congressional district lines after the next Census. The Democrats got filleted by Republican-friendly gerrymanders in important states like Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Florida, among other places, after the 2001 reapportionment, and continue to suffer for it today. Meanwhile, the Dems made out like bandits in Southern states like North Carolina and Georgia that had Democratic majorities in 2001 but are far less likely to in 2011. The Dems could be solidified as a long-term minority party if they don’t win state elections heading into 2011. With that in mind, I have mixed feelings on how well I want the Dems to do in 2006 gubernatorial races. If they position themselves to lose ground come 2008 and 2010, a string of 2006 victories could prove more of a setback than an asset.

Updated House Race Predictions

Like the Senate races I profiled this weekend, there has been a great deal of movement in the unusually long list of competitive House races coming this November. Many of my original predictions last January are now obsolete, necessitating this update which I will divide into three tiers. Top-tier races are what I consider to be the most competitive races that are shaping up for the fall; second-tier races have a good chance of being competitive in the event of strong partisan movement nationally or a change of circumstances locally; and third-tier races are longshot bids where the incumbent party is unlikely to lose but the potential exists for an upset. In a few of these races, I'll be changing my call from January. Without further adieu....

Top-tier races

Arizona, District 8--The retirement of moderate Republican Jim Kolbe in this "pink" district in the southeastern corner of Arizona has given Democrats a definite pickup opportunity. Photogenic Gabrielle Giffords is challenging Desert Storm veteran Jeff Latas in the Democratic primary while the frontrunner in the wide-open field of Republicans is immigration hawk Randy Graf. There's some fear in GOP circles (and glee in Dem circles) that Graf will not play in this border district, but I think he will. In a normal election cycle, the Dems would have a good shot at this seat, but with the immigration issue white-hot and likely to benefit the GOP, I'm increasingly pessimistic about Democrats' chances here.

Colorado, District 7--This Kerry-voting district in the affluent northern and western suburbs of Denver is considered one of the Democrats' best opportunities in the nation for a pickup. Two-term Republican Representative Bob Beauprez is running for Colorado Governor, abandoning a district that is trending towards the Democrats. There's a somewhat contentious primary battle between Democratic candidates Ed Perlmutter and Peggy Lamm, while Republicans have consolidated their support behind candidate Rick O'Donnell. All three candidates work within Colorado's state government and it's hard to point to a clear frontrunner, but with the local and national wind at their backs this year, I'm predicting the Dems pick up this seat (+1 Dems)

Connecticut, District 2--Of all the districts in the country represented by Republicans in Congress, this rural district in eastern Connecticut is the bluest, going for John Kerry by double digits in 2004. Republican incumbent Rob Simmons has long been considered highly endangered despite a moderate voting record, and his 2002 opponent Joe Courtney is poised to wage an aggressive, well-funded challenge this year. I predicted in January that Simmons would be unseated and still feel that way, although with the Lieberman-Lamont primary mess dividing Connecticut Democrats, I'm less confident today than I was then. (+2 Dems)

Connecticut, District 4--Moderate Republican Christopher Shays narrowly escaped defeat against neophyte challenger Diane Farrell two years ago in this affluent southwestern Connecticut district, mainly because of opposition to the war which Shays unapologetically supports. Shays is playing such a tough defensive game in this year's re-match with Farrell that I'd be surprised if he won. Given that Lieberman primary opponent Ned Lamont is a native of this district (from uber-affluent Greenwich no less), having Lamont on the ballot may actually be an asset to Farrell and the Democrats in this district (+3 Dems)

Florida, District 22--Here's a race where I'm changing my call in favor of the Democrat. Long-time Republican incumbent Clay Shaw has always had the backing of many Democrats in this blue Palm Beach County district, and has won re-election with varying margins (he barely survived 2000). This year, however, facing a top-tier challenge from Democratic State Senator Ron Klein, along with nagging health issues following a recent lung cancer diagnosis, many Democrats seem to sense their time has come and are withholding support for Shaw. Given that Shaw has had trouble holding onto this seat in the past even with many Democrats backing him, 2006 seems to be the year where his parade could come to an end. (+4 Dems)

Georgia, District 8--A GOP court challenge to this central Georgia's district lines has made the district less favorable for conservative Democratic incumbent Jim Marshall. Meanwhile, former GOP Congressman Mac Collins is challenging Marshall for the seat this year, and holding the seat will be no easy task. An early poll showed Marshall clobbering Collins, but I'm doubtful it will hold in staunchly conservative Georgia, particularly with Republicans thoroughly exploiting illegal immigration as a national wedge issue. I think Marshall is well to the right of his party on immigration, but could very easily be the victim of guilt-by-association charges at the hands of Collins. Whatever happens, I'm expecting the political climate of the fall will heavily favor the GOP in the South, meaning I stand by my original prediction that Marshall will lose. (+3 Dems)

Georgia, District 12--Here's another district where the lines were recently re-drawn after a court challenge, making the district less favorable for one-term incumbent John Barrow, who faces a re-match from the Republican he beat two years ago, Max Burns, with less Democratic turf in this eastern Georgia district than what Barrow won with last time. I predicted a narrow re-election for Democrat Barrow in January because this district still leans Democratic, but immigration, national security, Burns' widespread name recognition, and a host of other issues make me now believe that Barrow will be defeated. (+2 Dems)

Illinois, District 6--I was originally confident that double amputee Iraq war veteran Tammy Duckworth could pull off a win for the Democrats in this open seat in the affluent western suburbs of Chicago held for decades by retiring Republican Henry Hyde. I'm less confident now for a number of reasons, not the least of which being the complete lack of message by the Democratic Party on the Iraq war, of which Duckworth's gravitas as a candidate has been based upon. Republican Peter Roskam will likely win this race, a reversal of my previous prediction favoring Duckworth.

Illinois, District 8--Since I'm changing calls right on down the line here, allow me to do the same in IL-08, located in the wealthy northwestern suburbs/exurbs of Chicago, where one-term Democrat incumbent Melissa Bean's Republican-lite voting record seems to be winning her friends among the country club Republicans and their special interests which dominate this conservative district. Selling out her party on nearly every vote, the Democrats may question whether a Bean win is really a "victory", but GOP challenger David McSweeney has little room to operate given his fundraising deficit and the fact that his opponent managed the endorsement from the GOP-friendly Chamber of Commerce. The only way Bean loses is if angry Democrats stay home because of her abysmal voting record.

Indiana, District 8--This largely rural district in southwestern Indiana has re-elected (however narrowly) arch-conservative Republican John Hostettler several times, but Hostettler finally faces a top-tier Democrat challenger at the worst possible time in Vanderburgh County Sheriff Brad Ellsworth, a socially conservative Democrat who leads according to early internal polls. Hostettler cannot be counted out, but I continue to favor the premise that Ellsworth picks up this seat for the Dems. (+3 Dems)

Indiana, District 9--In 2004, Democratic incumbent Baron Hill fell victim to a surprise upset by Republican challenger Mike Sodrel. Two years later, voters get to either correct or validate their 2004 votes as the two candidates are locking horns for a re-match in this southeastern Indiana district across the Ohio River from Louisiville, Kentucky. An internal poll from Hill campaign reinforced by January prediction that he is poised to win back his seat. Internal polls should be taken with a grain of salt, but the momentum and political mood definitely is working in Hill's favor. (+4 Dems)

Iowa, District 1--Last month's primary carved out each party's nominees for this Democrat-leaning open seat in northeastern Iowa, vacated by Republican Jim Nussle who is running for Iowa Governor. Democrats see this as perhaps their best pickup opportunity in the country and are running candidate Bruce Braley against moderate Republican Mike Whalen. This is still a wide-open race featuring untested candidates, making it hard to declare a definite advantage, but demographics are certainly on the side of Democrat Braley in a district John Kerry won by seven points. (+5 Dems)

Iowa, District 3--This central Iowa district, where I currently live, is home to the Democratic incumbent whom many analysts consider to be the most vulnerable in the nation. Leonard Boswell was largely reapportioned into most of this 50-50 district in 2002, and has never really seemed to consolidate his support, particularly in the Des Moines area. His health failed him last year and while he's reportedly healthy again, he's lacking in the fundraising horserace against State Senate President Jeff Lamberti, a strong Republican candidate who is likely to run the table in the conservative Des Moines suburbs which he represents in the Iowa Legislature. Just as I was sweating for Boswell six months ago, I continue to sweat for him today. I'm anticipating a very close race, but continue to lean narrowly in Boswell's favor given that it looks to be a Democratic year.

Kentucky, District 4--Nobody saw this one coming in January, but retired three-term conservative Democrat Congressman Ken Lucas decided to un-retire and challenge the one-term Republican who won his open seat in 2004, Geoff Davis. Lucas has his work cut out for him as this northeastern Kentucky district across the river from Cincinnati is very Republican and barely re-elected him in 2002. Nonetheless, Lucas is the only Democrat who could win this district, and it's very possible that he may. Unfortunately, I'm leaning towards it not happening as immigration and other wedge issues are sure to make places like this very inhospitable for Democrats come November. Without the power of incumbency, Lucas will have a hard time pulling out a win.

Louisiana, District 3--Conservative Democrat Charlie Melancon would seem to have his ducks in a row for re-election, having fought mightily against the CAFTA agreement which deeply undermines the sugar industry that dominates his southeastern Louisiana district. And he was widely praised for revealing unfavorable FEMA e-mails to the public after Hurricane Katrina. Still, I'm not confident about Melancon's re-election prospects at this point. First, Republican opponent Craig Romero seems to be reining in some significant endorsements, including some from Democrats. Second, it remains a mystery the quantity and demography of voters that have vacated this district after last fall's twin hurricanes. Third and perhaps most important, Louisianans are outraged about the glacially slow pace of rebuilding, and are furious about the saturation of their communities by low-wage undocumented workers doing the rebuilding work at much lower wages than what locals would otherwise make, which plays right into the GOP's anti-immigration platform. With all these things working against him, I'm now betting on a loss for Melancon. (+4 Dems)

Minnesota, District 6--My dreams came true when Republicans nominated uber-wingnut Michele Bachmann as their candidate in this conservative suburban/exurban district north of Minneapolis-St. Paul over more moderate Republican challengers. Any other Republican would most likely defeat Patty Wetterling, the surprise candidate for the Democrats, but Bachmann has built such a bad reputation for her extremist views in the Legislature that I'm narrowly favoring a Wetterling victory at this point. If Bachmann manages to win, my "dreams" of today will become a nightmare for tomorrow. (+5 Dems)

New Mexico, District 1--This Democratic-leaning district in and around Albuquerque features Republican incumbent Heather Wilson up against her first strong Democratic challenger, State Attorney General Patricia Madrid. This promises to be a very competitive race as Wilson is a skilled campaigner who may be able to hold back the Democratic tide in her district yet again if she runs her campaign right. I'm narrowly betting on Madrid, however, given that Democratic incumbents Bill Richardson (Governor) and Jeff Bingaman (Senator) will win re-election by landslide margins and will likely have some coattails. That could cut the other way too, however, suppressing Democratic turnout. Nonetheless, I continue to favor Madrid picking up a seat for the Dems here as this heavily Hispanic district may be one of the few places where the Republican immigration platform hurts the GOP more than Democrats. (+6 Dems)

New York, District 20--The Democrats think they have a good shot at unseating upstate New York GOP incumbent John Sweeney this year on the strength of an unpopular national Republican party and a forecasted Democratic tidal wave in New York (Elliot Spitzer and Hillary Clinton). Indeed, the Dems have an attractive young candidate in Kirsten Gillibrand who could make some waves, but I'm not yet convinced Sweeney will be unseated in one of New York's few districts that is comfortably Republican.

New York, District 24--The retirement early this year by centrist Republican Congressman Sherwood Boehlert left an open seat that gives Democrats their best chance to pick up a seat in New York this year. Don't let the Democrats' optimism fool you though....this is a district where George Bush won by six points in 2004. With that in mind and the fact that a moderate Republican (whose name escapes me) will be running for the GOP while the Dems have yet to settle on a candidate leads me to believe that this will be another missed opportunity for the Democrats.

New York, District 29--The most Republican district in New York narrowly elected conservative Republican Randy Kuhl to the open seat in 2004. Two years later, the controversial Kuhl is being challenged in this southwestern New York district by Democratic Iraq war veteran Eric Massa. Early polls indicate a close race and I'd love to be surprised here, but this is pretty solid GOP turf and I continue to find it hard to believe an incumbent like Kuhl will be beaten.

North Carolina, District 11--The Democrats pulled off a recruiting coup in this rural and conservative district in western North Carolina when former NFL quarterback Heath Shuler agreed to take on scandal-plagued Republican incumbent Charles Taylor. Six months ago, I predicted a Shuler victory and early polls have been favorable, but Shuler's lack of political experience and a nationalized anti-immigration platform by the GOP (likely to be very well-received in NC) now strike me as likely to drag Taylor across the finish line for another term.

Ohio, District 6--Democrat Ted Strickland is abandoning this rural southeastern Ohio district to run for Governor, forcing the Dems to play defense in a 50-50 blue-collar district. An almost fatal gaffe was made was Democratic candidate Charlie Wilson when his ballot petition was submitted without enough signatures to qualify. This forced Wilson to run an aggressive write-in campaign in the Ohio primary, which was more successful than anyone imagined and may end up to be a net positive for Wilson since the campaign raised his name ID heading into the general election. Wilson was already the frontrunner in this race against Republican State Senator Chuck Blasdel, but with the improved name ID, is now probably faring even better than he did before the insufficient ballot submission. Couple this with coattails in the district from gubernatorial candidate Strickland and I'd very surprised if Wilson didn't win.

Ohio, District 18--As predicted, incumbent Republican Bob Ney is up to his neck in the Jack Abramoff scandal and could easily face indictment between now and election day. Luckily for Ney, Democratic primary voters royally screwed-up and passed over Chillicothe Mayor and Vietnam vet Joe Sulzer in favor of New Philadelphia attorney Zack Space, a fourth-rate challenger running an exclusively anti-Ney campaign. With that in mind, Space's only hope of winning is if Ney gets indicted. If Ney escapes indictment, Space's entire campaign theme has fallen apart. And even if Ney is indicted, I'm not convinced voters will choose in favor of the lackluster Space in this heavily Republican eastern Ohio district. At this point, I'm betting on Ney to pull this out against all odds.

Pennsylvania, District 6--Republican incumbent Jim Gerlach from this suburban Philadelphia district barely won his two previous bids for Congress and is considered perhaps the most endangered Republican incumbent in the nation as he faces another challenge from his 2004 opponent Lois Murphy. Given the anti-incumbent and anti-GOP sentiment that seems pervasive in Pennsylvania these days, I can't see how Gerlach wins re-election. (+7 Dems)

Pennsylvania, District 7--This race wasn't even on my radar screen six months ago, but conservative Republican Curt Weldon in the suburbs of southwestern Philadelphia has emerged as vulnerable due to the partisan trendline in his district, some of his moonbat and gaffe-prone tendencies, and a top-tier challenger in military Democrat Joe Sestak. Given his 20 years of incumbency, I'm still favoring Weldon here, but it's definitely one to watch on election night.

Pennsylvania, District 8--I continue to be told that one-term Republican incumbent Mike Fitzpatrick is unbeatable in this Democrat-leaning district in the northern suburbs of Philadelphia, but I have yet to see any hard evidence that he can't be beat, particularly with Iraq war veteran Patrick Murphy challenging him on Democrat-trending turf. I remain confident that Fitzpatrick will be unseated. (+8 Dems)

Texas, District 17--Democratic incumbent Chet Edwards was the only Democrat to survive Tom DeLay's gerrymander gambit in 2004, beating a fire-breathing right-wing opponent 52-48 in a central Texas district George Bush won with 70% of the vote. With that kind of partisan tide to swim against and largely new political terrain, Edwards continues to be living on borrowed time in TX-17. This time, millionaire Iraq war veteran Van Taylor will be Edwards' opponent. On paper, Taylor looks like he'd be a tough opponent, but the conventional wisdom is that he's already made a number of mistakes and will have a tough time beating the very polished Edwards, considered the most skillful Democratic politician in Texas. While I think this race will be close and would not be at all surprised if Taylor pulled it off, I'm narrowly leaning towards Edwards hanging on.

Texas, District 22--Despite profound changes in this race since my January prediction, the anticipated matchup between former Democratic Congressman Nick Lampson and former Republican House Majority Leader Tom DeLay could still end up being a race between Lampson and DeLay. In a final effort to game the system, DeLay, seeing internal polls showing him trailing Lampson, "moved" to Virginia after the candidate filing deadline passed. His logic was that if he didn't live in TX-22, he couldn't very well be on the ballot there....and Republicans should be free to nominate another candidate for the seat, preferably one who can win. Unfortunately for the master schemer, his great plan didn't meet with the approval of a judge, who declared DeLay's name must remain on the ballot. The appeal process is underway, and it's certainly likely that DeLay could find a conservative Texas judge willing to throw out the previous judge's ruling, but that may not be determined for months. Meanwhile, DeLay has already publicly declared his retirement from the House, has disassembled his campaign staff, and has no money. It's now highly speculated that he may choose to run for the seat again. Confusing stuff, but the controversy surrounding DeLay and his involvement in this debacle is unlikely to win him any favors in the polls, even in this Republican district in the western and southern suburbs of Houston where a surprising 45% of voters rejected DeLay's re-election effort in 2004. Certainly if 45% of TX-22 residents voted against pre-indictment DeLay against a token opponent in 2004, 50.1% or more of them will vote against post-indictment DeLay up against the competent and amiable Lampson, who served some of this district's southern reaches in his previous district. If DeLay is replaced with another Republican, the seat will be more challenging for Democrats to win back, but given the compressed timeline a replacement Republican would be dealing with, Lampson's name ID and well-oiled campaign would still seem to have a serious enough advantage to pull out a win. I'm betting on Lampson here. (+9 Dems)

Virginia, District 2--This Virginia Beach-area race was in my second-tier of House races in January, but an early poll indicated a very competitive contest between one-term Republican incumbent Thelma Drake and Democratic opponent Phil Kellam. I don't much in the way of specifics in this race, but I know that former Navy Secretary James Webb running for the Senate as a Democrat could be a useful ally to Kellam in picking up votes in this military-heavy district. Still, I don't have a great deal of optimism about this race and am leaning towards Drake holding on.

Washington, District 8--One-term Republican incumbent Dave Reichert narrowly won this open seat in the eastern suburbs of Seattle in 2004, despite the district going for John Kerry in the Presidential contest. Two years later, he faces a tough and well-funded Democratic opponent in Microsoft executive Darcy Burner. Despite the quasi-celebrity status of Burner, she has two things working against her. Reichert is well-liked and respected in the area due to his successful prosecution of a renowned Seattle-area serial killer from 20 years ago. And perhaps worse yet, Washington Republicans (and many swing voters) are outraged about they believe was a stolen gubernatorial election in 2004...and this is the kind of district that would be home to a fairly large number of Dino Rossi voters. Lingering hard feelings could potentially cut against Burner's efforts. Much as I'd like to see this seat swing to the Democrats, I'm doubtful it will.

West Virginia, District 1--Six months ago, this race was on nobody's radar screen. Today, conservative Democrat Allan Mollohan faces corruption charges for allegedly pocketing money meant for his constituents. Mollohan wears his "prince of pork" reputation with pride and would have otherwise been safe in this Republican-trending district in northern West Virginia, but the corruption charges may very well have made him vulnerable. There is no polling data indicating that that is the case yet, so I'm predicting Mollohan hangs onto the seat. Still, it won't surprise too many people if Mollohan is a victim of the very "Culture of Corruption" that Democrats were hoping to beat their opponents with.

Wisconsin, District 8--This remains a wide-open race with several candidates from both parties jockeying to fill this open seat in northeastern Wisconsin left behind by Republican Mark Green, who is running for Governor. There is a definite Republican tilt to this largely rural district and knowing little of the various candidates, I have to give the benefit of the doubt to the district's partisan lean which clearly points to a Republican holding the seat.

Well, those are the top-tier races....the only ones where I'm predicting party turnovers at this time. Less optimistic than I was in January, I'm now predicting the Democrats will only gain nine seats this fall, six short of winning back the House. I may have been too conservative in a few of my guesses, particularly in regards to seats in the South, but I firmly believe that support for the Senate immigration bill will cost the Democrats control of the House this fall. Only time will tell, and I'll be making a final round of predictions in mid-to-late October that I will be more inclined to stand by that the ones I've made here.

Now, here is a brief list of what I consider second-tier House contests (many of the races I considered first-tier have been downgraded since January). I expect the incumbent party to hang onto these seats as of right now, but I will keep a very close eye on them if a whiff of additional competitiveness emerges. Here are my second-tier races....

AZ-05 (currently held by Republican J.D. Hayworth)
C0-03 (Democrat John Salazar)
C0-04 (Republican Marilyn Musgrave)
CT-05 (Republican Nancy Johnson)
IL-17 (open seat vacated by Democrat Lane Evans)
NH-02 (Republican Charles Bass)
NJ-07 (Republican Mike Ferguson)
NC-08 (Republican Robin Hayes)
OH-01 (Republican Steve Chabot)
OH-15 (Republican Deborah Pryce)
PA-10 (Republican Don Sherwood)
SC-05 (Democrat John Spratt)

Not alot there as I'm being pretty conservative in separating my second-tier races from the more remote third-tier races, where I'm doubtful about the incumbent party being defeated, but don't rule out the possibility in the event of a particularly strong challenger or a partisan tidal wave. Here are the races I qualify as third-tier.....

CA-11 (Republican Richard Pombo)
CA-50 (Republican Brian Bilbray)
FL-09 (open seat vacated by Republican Michael Bilirakis)
FL-13 (open seat vacated by Republican Katherine Harris)
HA-02 (open seat vacated by Democrat Ed Case)
ID-01 (open seat vacated by Republican Butch Otter)
IL-10 (Republican Mark Kirk)
IN-02 (Republican Chris Chocola)
KY-02 (Republican Ron Lewis)
KY-03 (Republican Anne Northup)
LA-02 (Democrat William Jefferson)
LA-07 (Republican Charles Boustany)
MN-01 (Republican Gil Gutknecht)
MN-02 (Republican John Kline)
NE-01 (Republican Jeff Fortenberry)
NV-02 (open seat vacated by Republican Jim Gibbons)
NV-03 (Republican John Porter)
NY-19 (Republican Sue Kelly)
NY-25 (Republican James Walsh)
NY-26 (Republican Tom Reynolds)
OH-02 (Republican Jean Schmidt)
OH-04 (open seat vacated by Republican Michael Oxley)
OH-13 (open seat vacated by Democrat Sherrod Brown)
PA-04 (Republican Melissa Hart)
PA-13 (Democrat Allyson Schwartz)
TX-21 (Republican Lamar Smith)
UT-02 (Democrat Jim Matheson)
VT-AL (open seat vacated by Independent Bernie Sanders)
WA-02 (Democrat Rick Larsen)
WY-AL (Republican Barbara Cubin)

That's my July House prediction update. Feel free to take me on if you'd like....I welcome the input either way. Later in the week, I'll update by 2006 gubernatorial race predictions.

The Fight For the Senate: Updated Thoughts

Last January, I outlined my thoughts on the 2006 Senate races in their early stages. Quite a bit has changed in some of these races while very little has changed in others. Six months after those initial race profiles, here are my thoughts on where they stand now....

Arizona--The Democrats still seem to think former Democratic Party Chair Jim Pederson has a chance against two-term incumbent Jon Kyl. Despite Kyl's lukewarm approval ratings, Pederson's gonna be an almost impossibly tough sell, particularly in Arizona where the issue of the day will be immigration and where Pederson's support of McCain-Kennedy is not likely to be a winner. Even a sweeping Democratic landslide is unlikely to put Pederson into the U.S. Senate and I would recommend the Democrats shift priorities to softer targets soon.

California--Dianne Feinstein should score a 2-1 victory over challenger Dick Mountjoy. My guess is Feinstein will get more votes than any other Senate candidate in history, beating colleague Barbara Boxer's record of 6.9 million set in 2004.

Connecticut--What a sad story here. A race that was expected to be one of the easiest Democratic victories in the country is now a total mess. Incumbent Joe Lieberman has so thoroughly pissed off anti-war voters with his steadfast support for Bush's policy in Iraq that he's generated an articulate, well-funded, and insurgent primary opponent in Ned Lamont, a Greenwich businessman who has earned the adulation of the left-wing blogosphere. If Lamont wins the August 8 primary, which looks more likely by the day, Lieberman will run as an independent in November, where he will by a landslide in the general election against both Lamont and insignificant Republican challenger Alan Schlesinger. Thankfully, Lieberman still plans to caucus with the Democrats if he is indeed forced to run as an independent. This is gonna be such an ugly distraction for the Democrats, particularly if Lieberman loses, which will set the media into a firestorm of informing moderate voters "how far left the Democratic Party" has become and its "intolerance of dissent" that will surely sound alarm bells to conservative-leaning voters nationwide who may otherwise be considering voting Democrat this year. Lieberman is far from my favorite Democrat, but it's nonetheless infuriating to me that so much leftist energy is being put into defeating OTHER DEMOCRATS rather than Republicans, and the only possible thing that could be gained by this ploy is that if Lamont is on the ballot in November, a heightened turnout of anti-war voters could help Democratic candidates in three hotly-contested House races also running on an anti-war platform. Whatever happens, it's almost a certainty that Lieberman will be re-elected to a fourth term in the U.S. Senate, whether as a Democrat or an Independent, given his broad support outside of official Democratic Party circles. But my what a mess the Dems could create for themselves in the process.

Delaware--Moderate Democrat Tom Carper should still cruise to re-election against whoever's running against him.

Florida--Democratic incumbent Bill Nelson could have just well won the lottery when no other Republican candidate was willing to challenge Katherine Harris for the Republican nomination, despite wishful thinking by Republicans everywhere that somebody (anybody!) would run against Harris, whom they rightly deemed unelectable. Short on campaign funds and suffering from misstep after misstep, Harris consistently trails Nelson in every poll by a 2-1 margin or better. I suspect the final result won't be that much of a landslide, but don't be surprised if Nelson, considered vulnerable just last year, wins with 60% or better.

Hawaii--Another race I rated as a slam-dunk for Democratic incumbent Daniel Akaka six months ago has become interesting. Concerned with the aging Senate delegation in his party, conservative Democratic Congressman Ed Case has decided to challenge liberal incumbent, 81-year-old Daniel Akaka, for the nomination. Hawaiians seems to really respect tradition and seniority, which gives Akaka a slight edge, but Akaka is a less-than-dynamic speaker and Senator who lacks the political impulse of the younger Case, who makes a strong case (no pun intended) for his candidacy given that Hawaii's Republican Governor would appoint a Republican to the seat if one of the geriatric Senators were to pass on. With that said, I'm still pulling for Akaka simply because he's much better on the issues than Case. Akaka's health has not been a concern thus far, so I'm willing to take the gamble. The good news is that whether Akaka or Case wins the primary in early September, this seat is almost certain to remain in Democratic hands.

Indiana--Republican Richard Lugar will have no problem winning another term. The potential good news is that Lugar's assured landslide could keep Republican voters at home, helping three Democrats in competitive House races in the state.

Maine--Liberal Republican Olympia Snowe is popular with voters of all affiliations. She'll win a third term handily.

Maryland--This race is far from over as there's still a top-tier Democratic primary coming up in September, pitting white Baltimore-area Democratic Congressman Ben Cardin against black former Congressman and NAACP President Kweisi Mfume. Cardin has long been perceived as the frontrunner, but a new poll put that into question. Given the high number of blacks who vote in Maryland's Democratic primary, a Mfume upset is a real possibility. Certainly, African-American Republican challenger Michael Steele would love to see a contest with Mfume, who suffers from trust issues based on a couple previous scandals. If Cardin wins the primary, he wins the general election handily. If it's Mfume vs. Steele, the race is a total toss-up. I'll continue to put my money on Cardin, and even give Mfume a slight edge against the very conservative Steele in this likely Democratic year where I simply can't see Maryland electing a George Bush ally.

Massachusetts--Ted Kennedy in a landslide.

Michigan--It's looking more and more likely that potentially-vulnerable Democratic incumbent Debbie Stabenow will have an easy victory as her three potential GOP opponents are far from first-tier. The best challenge would undoubtedly from Oakland County Sheriff Michael Bouchard, but I'd be surprised if he got within 10 points of Stabenow in a year like 2006.

Minnesota--For a race repeatedly hyped as a marquee Senate contest, the grudge match between Amy Klobuchar and Mark Kennedy for Democrat Mark Dayton's open seat sure has been a snoozer thus far. Wellstone and Coleman were at each other's throats by March of 2002. What gives? Klobuchar holds small but steady leads in every poll taken on the race, but still needs to raise her name ID beyond Hennepin County. I continue to give her the edge, but unless some advertisements start appearing and raise voter interest in this contest, I fear low turnout will benefit Kennedy, whose rural and exurban base is more likely to show up at the polls in a low turnout race.

Mississippi--With Trent Lott long ago committed to seeking another Senate term, the longshot hopes of a victory by former Democratic Attorney General Mike Moore are but a quaint and distant memory. Lott wins another term handily.

Missouri--Despite early Republican dismissals of the prospect of GOP incumbent Jim Talent being vulnerable, several months worth of polls confirm that he is indeed so, with the most recent giving Democratic challenger Claire McCaskill a six-point lead. With the business community dismayed over Talent's opposition to a stem cell research bill on the state ballot this fall, Talent threatens to further fracture his base. Meanwhile, McCaskill's "rural strategy" seems to be working in winning over unlikely fans. Last year at this time, it's doubtful too many people expected the Missouri Senate races to have any potential for a Democratic takeover, but I'm increasingly optimistic that will indeed be the case. The wild cards are abortion and immigration, where the Democratic Party position is at odds with the majority of Missourians. If those issues continue to dominate the headlines in the fall, Talent could sneak back in.

Montana—Last month’s primary victory by Jon Tester over scandal-tainted John Morrison was a net positive in the Democrats’ efforts to topple the even more scandal-tainted Conrad Burns, the GOP’s second most vulnerable incumbent in the Senate. With Tester leading in the early polls and Burns with approval ratings less than 40%, this is a seat the Democrats should win….and if they don’t, November 7, 2006, won’t be any better of an evening for them than November 2, 2004, or November 5, 2002.

Nebraska—Six months following my original assessment that Ben Nelson (or any candidate in Nebraska running as a Democrat) will have a tough re-election fight, nothing has changed to reverse that assessment. After Zell Miller’s departure in 2004, Nelson is easily the Senate’s most conservative Democrat and it has earned him approval ratings in his conservative state of more than 70% according to most polls. With that said, he’ll still have to deal with a national Democratic party that is radioactive in Nebraska, and a self-funding millionaire challenger in Pete Ricketts. Early polls show Nelson with leads approaching 20%, but that’s been in the case in previous elections featuring Nelson as well, and he’s ending up either losing them or narrowly winning them. I’m still betting on Nelson to pull this out, but by a margin of five points or less that will surprise most analysts.

Nevada—With last spring’s announcement by Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman that he wouldn’t be challenging Republican Senate incumbent John Ensign, the prospects of this seat remaining in GOP hands grew much stronger. Jack Carter, son of former President Jimmy Carter, is waging a spirited campaign against Ensign and it’s still possible that he could prevail considering Ensign’s approval ratings are hovering just barely above the 50% threshold that typically qualifies a candidate as vulnerable. Nonetheless, place your Vegas bets in favor of the incumbent in this race.

New Jersey—This is a very messy race that is assuredly giving Democrats the willies. Former Democratic Senator Jon Corzine gave up his Senate seat last fall to become the state’s Governor. Sincere in his efforts to fix New Jersey’s systemic budgetary problems, he’s forced the state into an ugly government shutdown that has resulted in the temporary closing of Atlantic City casinos. This is relevant to the Senate race because, as Governor, Corzine got to appoint his successor, Congressman Robert Menendez to fill out the remainder of his Senate term. That term expires this fall and Menendez could suffer from his connection to the increasingly unpopular Corzine. Adding to Menendez’ headache is a top-tier GOP challenger in young State Senator Tom Kean, Jr., son of popular former Governor and 9-11 Commission Co-Chair Tom Kean, Sr. Yet with all of these strikes against him, a favorable Democratic climate still leaves Menendez the leader in most polls and the perceived frontrunner by most analysts, simply because the least popular politician in New Jersey is George Bush, and New Jersey voters will be extremely reluctant to nominate a Bush ally to the U.S. Senate in 2006. Beyond that, the consensus opinion is that Menendez bested Kean in an early debate and that Kean is probably overmatched by the veteran Menendez.

New Mexico—Finally, an easy call. Democratic incumbent Jeff Bingaman handily wins another term.

New York—Another easy call. Hillary Clinton beats whichever fourth-rate Republican challenger is nominated to challenge her by a 2-1 margin.

North Dakota—Democrat Kent Conrad long ago dodged the bullet of a faceoff with popular GOP Governor John Hoeven. With Hoeven out of the picture, the Democrats’ Congressional dominance of North Dakota is certain to continue with a landslide re-election of the populist Conrad.

Ohio—Since my last report, a lot of unfavorable events have occurred for the Democrats in their effort to beat incumbent Republican Mike DeWine. An awkward primary battle between Democratic Congressman Sherrod Brown and firebrand Iraq veteran Paul Hackett ended with Hackett angrily withdrawing before the primary vote, understandably outraged at the Democratic Party originally persuading to enter the Senate race, then pleading with him to bow out as soon as Brown declared his candidacy. The liberal Akron-area Congressman Brown is now the Democratic candidate, and even though center-right incumbent DeWine is still vulnerable, I’m less than optimistic about Brown’s chances, particularly with the milquetoast campaign he’s run so far. Wearing his liberalism as a badge of honor, Brown may be overreading the anti-GOP mood in Ohio, where Bush has become very unpopular and where scandals with the state GOP bode poorly for the Republicans’ prospects in Ohio this fall. Brown seems like an easy target for the demagoguery that is inevitably coming his way, and DeWine’s recently politically-motivated tack to the center will make him seem like much less scary to swing voters. My fear is that Brown will not catch on outside the Democratic bastion of northeastern Ohio and will suffer the same narrow defeat that John Kerry did in the state. At this point, I’m betting in favor of a third-term for DeWine and a hold for Republicans.

Pennsylvania—In the last few years, Republican incumbent Rick Santorum has made himself the poster-child for Republican hard-right wingnuttia, which was apparently not a politically smart course for a Senator in a blue state. Even up against a lackluster opponent (but one with high name recognition) in State Treasurer Bob Casey, Santorum finds himself running behind by an average of 15 points in most polls. Most analysts figure the race will tighten, and I agree given the charisma gap favoring Santorum which will be much more visible as the campaign really heats up. Still, Santorum is playing an entirely defensive game in a state where there appears to be a ferocious anti-GOP and anti-incumbent sentiment. That bodes very poorly for Santorum and makes his re-election prospects seem all but dead.

Rhode Island—In another of the nation’s most interesting and hotly-contested Senate races, liberal Republican incumbent Lincoln Chafee continues to find himself in an unpleasant dual election fight against his own party and the Democrats. In September, Chafee faces a tough primary against a “real Republican”, Cranston Mayor Steve Laffey. Originally, I believed this was the best chance of picking off Chafee, but it now seems as though Rhode Island Republicans will be likely to err on the side of pragmatism, holding their nose and voting for Chafee realizing he’s the only Republican in the state capable of winning a Senate race this year in this deeply blue state. Laffey didn’t help his cause with the recent embarrassing gaffe of publicly cheering on the deaths of the centrist old-guard who control the Rhode Island GOP establishment and favor Chafee. But even if Chafee prevails against Laffey, his prospects for holding onto his Senate seat are probably no better than 50-50 as Democratic Attorney General Sheldon Whitehouse is putting up a strong challenge and has fought his way to a statistical tie with Chafee in recent polls. If Chafee is victorious in the September primary, which I now expect him to be, he’ll likely get a bounce heading into the general election campaign. But I’m not confident that bounce will last into November, where fierce anti-Republican sentiment (along with a lack of participation by conservative voters disgusted by Chafee’s liberalism) could very easily be the end of Lincoln Chafee. My money is on a narrow victory for Whitehouse.

Tennessee—With Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist retiring to pursue his ill-fated Presidential bid, the race to fill his Senate seat is just as wide open today as it was six months ago and will continue to be until the August 3 primary. Three Republicans, each with their own strengths and liabilities, will face off against conservative black Democrat Harold Ford. Even though I don’t particularly like Ford, he’s run a strong campaign thus far, choosing his battles carefully and wisely in a state where he’s running against a ferocious Republican tide. Unfortunately for him, Chattanooga Mayor Bob Corker appears to be the frontrunner for the GOP nomination, and he will be a tough candidate. Arch-conservative former Congressman Ed Bryant would probably be Ford’s most beatable opponent, but he may end up splitting the far-right vote with former House colleague Van Hilleary in the primary. There’s no ideal scenario for Ford, who is running against almost impossible odds, and I still suspect he will lose no matter who prevails in the GOP primary. It may not even be close in the end. Still, this race intrigues me because of its interesting geographical demographics and the fact that it represents such an extreme longshot for a Democratic victory, but one in which polls repeatedly reinforce Ford’s continued status as a contender.

Texas—When Republican incumbent Kay Bailey Hutchison opted for a third Senate term rather than a gubernatorial run, she removed all doubt that there may be a competitive race in Texas. Hutchison will easily take down third-tier Democratic challenger Barbara Radnofsky.

Utah—Another safe bet. Republican institution Orrin Hatch will make mince meat out of Democratic challenger Pete Ashdown in the nation’s most Republican state.

Vermont—Even though this is technically an open seat, polls confirm that Independent socialist (literally) Bernie Sanders is all but assured of a landslide victory as he transitions for the House to the Senate. Sanders will not only caucus with the Democrats (as did retiring Vermont Senator Jim Jeffords), but he will be the nation’s most progressive Senator upon election.

Virginia—What a difference six months made. It looked like GOP incumbent and 2008 Presidential prospect George Allen was a shoo-in for a second term this year…..until James Webb happened. Webb is a former Republican and Secretary of the Navy under Ronald Reagan. Disgusted with the GOP’s increasingly right-wing domestic agenda and the decision to go to war with Iraq, this Vietnam War veteran switched parties a few years back and is now challenging a surprisingly vulnerable Allen this fall. Allen has compounded his problems by suggesting he’s “bored” with the Senate and is more interested in moving forward with his Presidential ambitions. All that said, Webb is still a longshot. Since his primary win last month, most polls show him a good 10 points behind. That’s far from insurmountable for an insurgent campaign, however, and Webb’s likely appeal with military voters in the vote-rich Tidewater area (Norfolk, Virginia Beach, Newport News) could spell big problems for Allen come election day. I actually consider this seat more likely to swing Democratic than Tennessee, but ultimately expect both will stay in GOP hands. However, if Allen can’t do any better than 55% in his re-election bid, he’ll lose some serious momentum in his efforts to win the ’08 Presidential nomination.

Washington—Democratic incumbent Maria Cantwell, who beat three-term GOP Senator Slade Gorton by a whisker in 2000, is not looking to have a slam-dunk in her effort to secure a second term. Liberal voters in the Seattle area, of which there are many, are lukewarm on her moderate voting record and her unwillingness to admit her vote for the Iraq War Resolution was a mistake. Meanwhile, Washington Republicans are still smarting from what they believe was a stolen gubernatorial election by Democrat Christine Gregoire in 2004. Add to all of this self-financing millionaire SafeCo CEO Mike McGavick as the Republican candidate and you have a race on your hands. Polls show Cantwell with a consistent but shrinking lead as McGavick saturates the television airwaves with largely unanswered attack ads. While this is likely to be a close race, I’m still betting on Cantwell. The likelihood of Washington, a solid blue state, electing a Bush ally to Senate this year in not very high.

West Virginia—The man who is now officially the longest-serving Senator in U.S. history, Robert Byrd, appears to have dodged a number of bullets in his quest to extend that record in a state where the political tide is turning against his party. The first came last fall when GOP Congresswoman Shelley Moore Capito decided against challenging him. The next came with party’s nomination of John Raese for the GOP, a country club Republican running the exact wrong campaign for a blue-collar state like West Virginia. As Raese spouts off ideological vomit from the Cato Institute regarding the need to abolish, rather than raise, the minimum wage, he gives away votes that a culture war conservative may have been able to get. Even with an apparently lackluster opponent, I still expect Byrd to be re-elected with the narrowest margin he’s seen in decades, perhaps ever. He may struggle to get 60%....and if he doesn’t, it’s a terrible sign for long-term Democratic prospects in West Virginia, a state which leads the nation in the number of “registered Democrats”.

Wisconsin—With former Wisconsin Governor and national Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson choosing not to challenge Democratic incumbent Herb Kohl, the quiet but popular Kohl will have no trouble at all winning another term.

Wyoming—I don’t even know the fall guy that Wyoming Democrats are planning to run against Republican incumbent Craig Thomas, but I know it won’t matter in this very Republican state as Thomas will win another term by a landslide.

So there are my updates. The Democrats’ prospects have improved in some states (MT, VA, WV) since my last reporting, but have diminished in others (OH, WA) while internal party conflicts complicate matters in two other states (CT, HA). All that said, my current predictions would mean a gain of four Democratic Senate seats this fall, two short of what they need to win a majority. In January 2007, the makeup of the Senate will be 51 Republicans, 48 Democrats, and 1 Independent caucusing with the Dems if my predictions pan out.

Look my for updated thoughts on battleground House races and gubernatorial races in the days and weeks ahead.

Klobuchar Zings Opponent

Columnist David Broder profiled the Minnesota Senate race in his column today, and closed with Democrat Amy Klobuchar's clever one-liner directed towards opponent Mark Kennedy's greatest vulnerability: his House voting record's near-lockstep allegiance with the Bush administration.

Klobuchar's simple but perforating line goes as follows: "He's followed the Lone Star. I'll follow the North Star."

Ouch! If only Klobuchar's stump speech writers could save party leaders like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi from themselves and their "New Direction for America" snoozers.

Remember When Republican Smear Campaigns Were At Least Funny?

Last month, Montana's Democratic Senate primary was won by State Senate President Jon Tester, a farmer who currently serves as President of the Montana State Senate. Tester has a less-than-Senatorial flattop haircut that Republicans apparently fear emblematic of the sort of man-of-the-people populism likely to topple embattled Republican incumbent Conrad Burns. With that in mind, always eager to toss gasoline on the culture war bonfire in true Republican fashion, the Burns campaign busted right out of the starting gate by calling Tester a charlatan with an ad featuring a barber making the following statement:

"Fella comes in for a trim on his flattop because he's running for U.S. Senate. Guess he didn't want anybody to know he opposes a gay-marriage ban. Thinks flag burning is a right. And supports higher taxes. So I told him, 'You're gonna need a lot more than a haircut to cover up all that' ... Didn't leave much of a tip either."

As ridiculous as this ad may be, it's undeniably funny (as was the Tester campaign's response, which featured Tester's REAL barber speaking on his behalf and pointing out that the "barber" from the Burns ad was an actor). Reading about this ad online, it struck me just how long it's been since a Republican attack ad against a Democrat was actually humorous. Back in the heyday of the mid-to-late 1990's, it seemed every Republican was a comedian with clever (if idiotic) TV ads smearing their opponents. Since the Karl Rove era was ushered in, however, GOP campaign ads have simply become vicious ad hominems appealing to the lowest denominator without even a shred of humor to be found.

Particularly since 9-11, the GOP modus operandi has been to compare their opponents to the enemy during wartime, a most despicable methodology that has sadly yielded results. After the infamous and hauntingly successful 2002 ad comparing Georgia's Democratic Senator (and triple amputee Vietnam War veteran) Max Cleland to Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, Republicans across the country joined the bandwagon in 2004, including in Minnesota, where Congressional candidate Dan Stevens referred to Democratic Congressman Collin Peterson as a "friend of terrorism" and Congressman Mark Kennedy said that Democratic challenger Patty Wetterling "wanted to negotiate with the Taliban".

My, how far the party has regressed from 1996 and 1998 when the following masterpieces of humor entertained viewers of all partisan allegiances:

In 1998, current Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid faced a tough challenge from Republican Congressman John Ensign (who even though he lost to Reid...barely...would win the open seat two years later and join the Senate) in Nevada. Ensign featured an ad reminding voters all the pork-barrel earmarks Reid had supported "sending millions of dollars to states like West Virginia". The ad then cut to a hillbilly caricature with fists full of cash in both hands saying "Thank you kindly, Senator Reid". Hmmmm....I thought it was Democrats who were dripping with disrespect for red staters.

Also in 1998, there was a fury of controversy in the South Carolina Governor's race, where the main issue was the imposition of a lottery in the state which was fiercely opposed by then GOP Governor David Beasley and his Christian evangelical base. Beasley ran an ad against Democratic opponent Jim Hodges featuring a Tony Soprano-esque mobster type with a thick Jersey accent "endorsing" Hodges on the basis that "....if the lottery Mr. Hodges supports gets approved, South Carolina will become just like back home in Atlantic City...."

Just north of the border that same year, North Carolina Republicans took the cake with an ad politicizing the fictional North Carolina town of Mayberry. Andy Griffith had just made a high-profile contribution to the state Democratic Party and then Senate candidate John Edwards. Eager to spin this to their favor, the GOP "Mayberry" ad opined that "just about everybody in Mayberry would have been a Republican. Andy Taylor would have been a Republican....Barney Fife would have been a Republican....so would Aunt Bea....and Floyd the barber, etc., etc. In fact, the only resident of Mayberry who would have been a Democrat would be Otis, the town drunk."

Minnesota had some fun ones as well, particularly in 1996 when the always entertaining (though not always intentionally) Rudy Boschwitz came out with a series of comical ads smearing Democratic Senator Paul Wellstone as "embarrassingly liberal", the most memorable featuring a cartoon caricature of Wellstone who would raise a sign spelling out "LIBERAL" in big letters every time the narrator cited aspects of his voting record. That rascally Rudy got even more audacious from there, with a "retro" ad set in Wellstone's youth, where a small room thick with pot-smoking hippies was honoring Wellstone with the "1968 Liberal of the Year" award. Disappointingly, the 2002 Wellstone-Coleman race wasn't nearly as entertaining as I had hoped for after the endlessly amusing Wellstone-Boschwitz grudge matches of 1990 and 1996.

Also in 1996, Minnesota Republican Congressman Gil Gutknecht had a masterpiece of an ad against Democratic challenger Mary Reider. A huge influx of union money financed Reider's early campaign ads and Gutknecht's response featured a lady (seen only from the back but meant to represent Reider) sitting behind a desk, IRS-like, while a long line of weary and overworked taxpayers handed over all their money to Mary Reider. Gutknecht's voice-over suggested that "Washington labor bosses have financed Mary Reider's campaign...and will demand to be paid back". The closing scene featured a little girl with a piggy bank approaching the Reider caricature, recoiling in sadness and fear about having to fork over her money while Reider demandingly beckoned the girl to the desk with her hand. Comedy gold.

While the Republicans clearly beat the Democrats in the humor war back in the 1990's, the comedy did not yield them election victories. Of the examples I cited, the only winner was Gil Gutknecht who beat Mary Reider by a 53-47 margin in that 1996 race. The rest of the Republicans responsible for the entertaining ads (Ensign, Beasley, Faircloth (who ran against John Edwards), and Boschwitz) were all defeated. It was only when the GOP campaign ads became humorless, sleazy, and diabolically odious that they started to win elections. Who knows? There may be a connection. If there is, I can only hope that Conrad Burns' howler of an ad mocking Jon Tester's haircut is a sign of things to come....where Republicans bankroll clever ads but lose elections.