Mediaboss Marketing

Spotlight PA is an independent, nonpartisan newsroom powered by The Philadelphia Inquirer in partnership with PennLive/The Patriot-News, TribLIVE/Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, and WITF Public Media. Sign up for our free newsletters.

HARRISBURG It was supposed to be a historic year for Pennsylvania Democrats.

Riding the blue wave of 2018 and further gains in local elections the next year, the party hoped it would deliver the state to former Vice President Joe Biden, sweep the three statewide row offices, and flip the GOP-controlled legislature. Democratic groups from inside and outside the state spent hundreds of millions of dollars to make it happen.

By Friday, those dreams had evaporated.

While it looked increasingly likely the state would break for Biden though the race hadnt yet been called there wasnt a lot of other good news for Democrats. Republicans had not only held the majority in the state House and Senate, but were poised to possibly gain seats.

For the first time since 2008, Republicans claimed a row office through an election, with Republican Tim DeFoor winning the auditor general race. And the GOP also held onto congressional seats in the Philadelphia and Harrisburg suburbs Democrats had considered to be within reach.

These results are clearly disappointing for any Democrat here in Pennsylvania, said Mike Mikus, a Democratic strategist in Pittsburgh.

So why didnt Bidens apparent success in the state have coattails for state candidates? While political strategists and candidates warned it was still too early to assess the full extent of the damage, and uncounted ballots could change the picture, they offered a number of theories for why Democrats came up short from ticket-splitting to a backlash against coronavirus restrictions, to Trump over-performing his turnout expectations.

Matthew J. Brouillette, a prominent conservative linked to political action committees that spent millions boosting GOP candidates, said the results were a complete repudiation" of Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf and his COVID-19 lockdowns and policies.

Wolf and the legislature have clashed frequently this year, after Wolf in the spring ordered the temporary closure of businesses to slow the spread of the coronavirus. Fights over limits on bars and restaurants, high school sporting events, and crowd sizes continued into the fall, with some Democratic lawmakers breaking with the governor.

But public health experts widely credit Wolfs moves for slowing the spread of the virus this summer and reducing hospitalization rates and the number of deaths.

J.J. Abbott, a former press secretary to the governor, said he didnt think the results represented unhappiness with Wolf, but rather district maps that favored Republicans. Flipping the chambers required historic voter turnout in favor of Democrats and significant grassroots organization.

Abbott thinks Democrats got the latter, but not the former. Biden got more votes than Hillary Clinton did in 2016, but Trump also bested his vote totals from four years ago, as turnout surged across the board.

Its clear that folks underestimated the level of turnout that the president would generate this time, said Abbott, now the executive director of the progressive advocacy group Commonwealth Communications. And he was able to build an even bigger coalition of voters than in 2016.

This was also the first presidential election in Pennsylvania without a straight-ticket voting option, which lawmakers eliminated as part of the 2019 election law that also greatly expanded mail voting.

Ticket-splitting when voters pick a candidate from one party at the top of the ballot but candidates from the other party in down-ballot races was also a factor, both Mikus and Brouillette said. Statewide, Biden had received about 3.3 million votes as of Friday, about 300,000 more than Nina Ahmad, the losing Democratic auditor general candidate.

Republicans in the Philadelphia suburbs appeared to benefit from this, Brouillette said, but so did Democratic incumbents in Trump-friendly districts, like Rep. Frank Burns of Cambria County.

I think it likely cut both ways, Brouillette said.

G. Terry Madonna, a pollster at Franklin & Marshall College, was not surprised by the results for two reasons: Elections tend to favor incumbents, and its not unusual for row office candidates to garner less support than presidential hopefuls at the top of the ticket (although Democrat Josh Shapiro outperformed Clinton when he was first elected state attorney general in 2016).

In many ways, it was sort of status quo, Madonna said.

Shapiro defeated Republican challenger Heather Heidelbaugh to win reelection, according to the Associated Press. The AP late Friday had yet to declare a winner in the race for state treasurer, in which incumbent Democrat Joe Torsella trailed Republican challenger Stacy Garrity.

The AP had also called 17 of 18 congressional races in Pennsylvania for the incumbent. In the remaining race, Democratic Rep. Conor Lamb, in the Pittsburgh suburbs, was leading.

In the legislature, Republicans in both the House and Senate were poised to keep their majorities, based on races called by the AP. Democrats flipped one seat, as Sen. Tom Killion, a moderate Republican from Delaware and Chester Counties, lost to Democrat John Kane. But Republicans were up in one other closely watched Senate race and scored a victory in another Friday evening.

Of the House races not called by 5 p.m. Friday, six were Republican-held seats in the Philadelphia suburbs. Democrats failed to flip any of the seats they had targeted in Allegheny County, according to AP projections.

Tension over down-ballot Democratic failures went public Thursday. Emily Skopov, who lost her campaign for an open Republican-held state House seat in the Pittsburgh suburbs, while responding to a tweet that accused progressive lawmakers of tone-deaf messaging, described herself as a casualty/collateral damage of this offensively poor messaging. Skopov later apologized for her offensively poor choice of words.

State Rep. Summer Lee (D., Allegheny) said white Democrats shouldnt blame Black organizers and activists for their losses.

You did NOT lose in your suburbs where youve allowed racism to fester because defund police or progressive messaging, she wrote on Twitter. You lost because the Democratic Party has no down-ballot strategy, no message that resonates w/the masses, no field strategy, no vision.

Mikus, the Democratic strategist in Pittsburgh, said the law enforcement issue and accusations of wanting to defund the police was a common attack from Republicans this year. He said Biden, as a presidential candidate, was in a better position to push back on those kinds of attacks than low-profile legislative candidates.

Joe Biden was able to wade through some of the trickier national issues, Mikus said.

In a few of the races still not called, Democratic incumbents trailed, including House Minority Leader Frank Dermody, who represents parts of Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties.

State Rep. Leanne Krueger (D., Delaware), the chair of the political arm for House Democrats, acknowledged that Republicans appeared likely to keep their majority. She pointed to many provisional ballots still uncounted that could potentially turn the tide in some races. Democrats havent conceded in some of the races that were called against them.

But, no matter what, she thought Democrats deserved credit for helping at the top of the ticket.

I absolutely believe that our candidates contributed to putting Joe Biden over the top, Krueger said. Aggressive races at the bottom of the ballot drive turnout up to the top of the ticket like nothing else does.

100% ESSENTIAL: Spotlight PA relies on funding from foundations and readers like you who are committed to accountability journalism that gets results. Give now and your contribution will be TRIPLED: spotlightpa.org/donate

See the original post here:
Biden may win Pennsylvania, but Democrats fell in races across the state and the infighting has begun - Spotlight PA

The association representing for-profit colleges and universities is coming under fire after a news report that it is targeting Democratic members of Congress in urban areas to oppose efforts to further regulate the industry.

U.S. News & World Report reported Thursday on a political strategy memo written by Steve Gunderson, president of Career Education Colleges and Universities, for the steps the group will take if Democrats gain control of Congress and the White House in Novembers election.

As Inside Higher Ed has reported, the industry is worried Democrats would restore regulations passed by the Obama administration but repealed by Trumps education secretary, Betsy DeVos.

In internal documents, Gunderson wrote that the group should try to get help from Democrats in urban areas, because there are many for-profit colleges in their districts.

Senator Dick Durbin, a Democrat from Illinois who has been a strong opponent of the for-profits that have been accused of misleading prospective students about the value of the education theyd receive, condemned the group in a statement.

The for-profit colleges recent strategy memo tells all, Durbin said. Former Republican Congressman Steve Gunderson, now president of this group, has set his sights on exploiting Black and Brown students and the politicians who represent them. Add this disgusting strategy to the list of for-profit college outrages: worthless diplomas and mountains of debt -- just what young people dont need.

However, as reported by the news site, a letter Gunderson wrote to members last month appeared to describe a political strategy instead of saying for-profits should target minorities. It appeared to be a political strategy.

According to the report, Gunderson wrote that if Democrats take political control, the result would be "a new wave of ideological opponents at the Department of Education seeking to reverse positive changes in policy over the past four years." The Aug.19 letter continued, "We need approximately 20 reliable Democrats to join with Republicans in ways that can stop some of the most harmful proposals."

Gunderson said the group should focus on the Congressional Black Caucus and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, as well as the conservative Blue Dog Democrats.

"Many of our schools are in urban areas and thus Democrat Congressional Districts," Gunderson wrote, noting that 51percent of students enrolled in degree or certificate programs that are two years or less in length are Black or Hispanic.

"We see some evidence that as we communicate to these urban Members of Congress how some of these proposals would impact students in their district, we are seeing some evidence of emerging support," U.S. News reported Gunderson writing. "For many, they see our sector as the bridge to reducing the current income inequality gaps in America today."

In an email to Inside Higher Ed, Gunderson wrote, "We are not targeting anyone. Rather, we are trying to communicate to Members of Congress who have a large number of students attending our career colleges in their district. We want them to engage with the students attending these schools, and the schools themselves, to see how successful we are in serving their constituents."

Link:
For-Profits Hope Urban Democrats Will Help Them - Inside Higher Ed

The Hidden Common Ground initiative will explore areas of agreement on major issues facing the nation and how communities have worked to solve issues. USA TODAY

The coronavirus pandemic has narrowed a long-standing divide between most Republicans and Democrats on a wide range of proposals to support the U.S. economy, from raising the minimum wage to making child care more affordable, challenging the conventional belief that Americans are divided heading into the 2020 election.

A Public Agenda/USA TODAY/Ipsos survey reveals that Americans across the political spectrum support many measures to create good jobs and boost opportunity. The poll of Democrats, Republicans and independents is part of the three organizations Hidden Common Ground project,which seeks to explore areas of agreement on major issues.

Most Americans, regardless of party affiliation, support proposals to raise the minimum wage; make child care more affordable; and provide anti-discrimination policies that would help their communities build a strong economy that gives everyone the chance to succeed.

Agreement on juicing the economy: Democratic, Republican voters actually agree on issues. What's in the way? Politics

Wage hikes: Minimum wage hikes in three states, 21 localities to aid low-paid workers slammed by COVID-19

Communities of color are dying at higher rates from the novel coronavirus than white Americans. Here's how structural inequities play a role. USA TODAY

Though most Americans say they think the economy is rigged to benefit the rich and powerful, most also say it is OK for the rich to get richer as long as everyone has a chance to succeed. The survey of more than 1,000 adults was conducted from Aug. 28-31.

Theres a lot of other research that talks about how divisive America is right now, but when you get down to the policy dimensions, theres actually a lot of unanimity, says Chris Jackson, vice president at Ipsos.

The divide were seeing between Republicans and Democrats isnt really a division about where Americans want the county to go. Its much more about an us vs. them mentality," Jackson says. "But in the policy domain, most people are actually on the same page.

'Theres a lot of other research that talks about how divisive America is right now, but when you get down to the policy dimensions, theres actually a lot of unanimity,' says Chris Jackson, vice president at Ipsos.(Photo: Elijah Nouvelage, Getty Images)

For years, the Republican-majority Senate has refused to consider any hike in the federal minimum wage, including a bill passed by the Democratic-dominated House last year that would more than double the amount from $7.25 to $15 an hour. More Americans favor the proposal, suggesting there could be space for negotiation on how much to increase the minimum. The federal minimum wage hasn'tchanged since2009.

Most Americans (72%) support raising the minimum wage, including most Republicans (62%), Democrats (87%) and independents (69%). Thats up from 66% of Americans who supported raising the minimum wage in February before the pandemic shuttered the economy in March.

Lisa Toner, a registered Republican, is one of those Americans who supports raising the minimum wage. She works as a certified home health care aid in North Tonawanda, New York, outside Buffalo, making $16.50 an hour. She favors a system where low-skilled workers would start at minimum wage, setting a floor from there to boost wages for those with more experience.

People who are older and have more experience should have their starting pay above the minimum wage. It makes me upset that someone flipping burgers is making almost as much as me, says Toner, 49, whois still on the fence on whether to vote for President Donald Trump or Democratic nominee Joe Biden in the U.S. presidential election in November.

Linda Lee, a retiree in Manistee, Michigan, worked in law enforcement for a quarter of a century in Indiana, making $25 an hour. In the late 1990s, she and her husband moved to Michigan after he retired from more than 30 years of work at a General Motors factory. She took a job as an auditor at a casino for the next 15 years, making $13 per hour before retiring in 2012.

If people are working, they need to have a livable wage, says Lee, 69, an independent who remains undecided on whether to vote red or blue in the election.

I came from an area in Indiana that had big corporations. People had jobs, they made good money and had decent health care and retirement, Lee says. When we moved to Michigan, that was like living in a dream world to these people. Many are working two or three jobs just to get by.

Rebecca Beebe drops her 5-year-old son, Truman, off at child care at University Avenue Discovery Center in Madison, Wis., on Aug. 13.(Photo: AMBER ARNOLD, AP)

The push to reopen the economy during the COVID-19 pandemic has left millions of working parents in a bind as they struggle to return to work without someone to care for their children, who attend school from home. Three-quarters of Americans (77%) support making affordable, high-quality child care available to all families, including most Republicans (71%), Democrats (86%) and independents (75%).

Kevin Moses, a Democrat, wants affordable child care and supports a hike in the minimum wage.

Moses, who lives in Columbia, Tennessee, has been on disability for 15 years. He worked in a steel factory for nearly two decades, making $13.75 an hour.

It takes two parents to make a sufficient living for a family these days," saysMoses, 52. "With the pay scale being what it is, you cant do it alone. There has to be someone to care for the children, but it has to be affordable.

Toner and Lee agree there should be affordable child care.

Protesters fill College Avenue during the Athens Anti-Discrimination Movement's "Justice For Black Lives Rally" in downtown Athens, Ga., on June 6.(Photo: Joshua L. Jones, Athens Banner-Herald USA TODAY Network)

Voters expresspartisan differences on issues such as whether racial discrimination in their community makes it more difficult for people of color to succeed. About 43% of Americans somewhat or strongly agree that racial discrimination makes success more difficult, and 47% somewhat or strongly disagree. Ten percent dont know.

Most Americans (68%), including Moses, say strong anti-discrimination policies would make a difference to their community economically.

Blacks really endure unnecessary hardship when it comes to getting decent jobs in the South, says Moses, who plans to vote for Biden. Stereotyping and profiling usually limit opportunities to get better positions.

Toner, an African American, says she's witnessed "subtle racism" in her community and somewhat agrees with anti-discrimination policies.

Lee says she'storn on whetherracial discriminationhas made it harder for people of color to succeedin her community. She still agrees thatanti-discrimination policies would help her local economy.

Most Democrats (60%) agree that racial discrimination makes it more difficult for people of color to succeed, compared with 28% of Republicans and 30% of independents. Most Republicans (61%) and more than half of independents (54%) say that having strong anti-discrimination policies that ensure everyone is treated fairly would help their community thrive economically.

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2020/09/24/2020-election-republicans-democrats-less-divided-worker-support/5865607002/

Go here to read the rest:
COVID-19 has narrowed the divide between GOP, Democratic voters on ways to support workers from pay to child care - USA TODAY

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) It wont be known until Election Day if a poll showing a tightening contest between Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham and Democrat Jaime Harrison portends an upset but the gains are real enough in the Democrats campaign account.

On the heels of a Quinnipiac University poll that has him tied with Graham among likely voters in South Carolina, Harrisons campaign has marked two back-to-back fundraising days of $1 million apiece, bringing his total fundraising to over $30 million.

Its a staggering sum, unheard of for a Democrat competing in this conservative state, and matches what Graham has also raised in his pursuit of a fourth term. It also dwarfs the $10 million figure Harrison previously told The Associated Press he thought necessary to win.

The influx of cash for Harrison a Democratic National Committee associate chair and former state party chair is providing a rare opportunity to blanket the airwaves in a place where Democrats havent won a statewide contest in 15 years, bolstering the party in their fight to win back the Senate majority.

On Labor Day, the pro-Harrison political action committee Lindsey Must Go flew a banner plane along the South Carolina coast deriding Grahams stance on offshore drilling, a day before President Donald Trump expanded a moratorium on the practice. This week, the PAC announced it would spend $300,000 on a Charleston-area television ad on the same topic.

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has also pledged to spend at least $1 million in the races closing weeks, funding polling, field organizing and advertising.

Having that kind of cash available means you can explore many different strategies at one time, which will be difficult for the Republicans to deal with, said Democratic media consultant Martha McKenna, who has previously helmed media buying for the DSCC. I think its a huge advantage for Democrats that we have not enjoyed in previous cycles.

National GOP groups including the National Republican Senatorial Committee havent devoted the same level of resources to Graham, but the group told the AP on Friday it was monitoring the contest and felt Graham was well-positioned to win it. A pro-Graham PAC, Security is Strength, showed about $1.6 million in fundraising. On his own, Graham has run a vigorous advertising campaign, including criticism of Harrisons past work as a Washington lobbyist.

Much of Harrisons money has come from out of state, with national Democrats long ago marking the contest among their top targets. Harrison launched his campaign not in local media but on MSNBC, where he has been a frequent guest and where his campaign regularly advertises.

Harrison and the groups backing him argue that Graham, a Trump critic turned close ally, is too easily influenced by the president. But Graham, who has said elections have consequences to explain his previous support of Obama-era Supreme Court picks, used that same explanation in a 2018 interview with the AP as to why his attitude toward Trump had shifted from animosity to alliance.

Trump carried South Carolina by double digits over Democrat Hillary Clinton in 2016, and Republicans control both legislative chambers, all statewide offices and most of the states congressional seats. South Carolina is assumed to be safely in his reelection column, and Trump hasnt announced plans to stump there for himself or Graham and is instead spending time in states that are general election battlegrounds.

Trumps popularity in South Carolina is a significant challenge for the groups working against Graham. Steve Schmidt, co-founder of The Lincoln Project an outside group of Republicans devoted to defeating Trump said hes trying to convince voters that Trumps relationship with Graham speaks poorly to Grahams character. His group has paid for jarring ads portraying Graham as a parasite.

You voted for Lindsey Graham before, but this is really the first race where you get to vote for Lindsey Graham where you know, really, who he is, Schmidt said during a recent meeting with AP reporters. Lindseys got an affectation as a goofy sidekick, a funny guy. But I think when you strip it all away in 2020, its really not that funny.

Graham, who easily bested several primary challengers, has rarely faced formidable general election competition. In 2014, he defeated a longtime state senator by double digits, with both candidates raising a combined total of less than $8 million.

Terry Sullivan, a GOP consultant who headed up media for Marco Rubios 2016 White House bid, said that, while Grahams national profile has been on the rise since 2016, his home-state status has suffered because of linkages to Trump.

Lindsey Graham, prior to the last two years, always had the ability to seem the most real and authentic politician in South Carolina, and maybe the country, Sullivan said. I cant help but think, as much as I love Lindsey Graham, is that hes lost a lot of that in the age of Trump.

Regardless of Democrats attention, said Matt Moore, who chaired the states Republicans during the 2016 election cycle, South Carolina voters remain conservative and do not want Democratic representation in the Senate.

South Carolina Republicans always show up at game time, Moore said. Despite the claims of Democrats that theyve made up ground in the past, there are still no elections the party can point to where theyve won.

For Harrison, the survey data and the windfall its created backs up what hes said throughout the race: A statewide Democratic win is possible in South Carolina.

From day one I felt like I could win this race, Harrison told the AP recently. I just feel like everybody is coming to where Ive been since day one of this campaign.

___

Meg Kinnard can be reached at http://twitter.com/MegKinnardAP.

Follow this link:
Donor cash surges to Harrison, the Democrat taking on Graham - The Associated Press

Democrats are slight favorites to regain control of the Senate, according to the FiveThirtyEight Senate forecast, which launched today. But the map is wide open, with at least a dozen competitive races none of which are certain pickups for Democrats including some states where Democrats are playing defense.

In fact, while its possible that Democrats will wind up controlling 54 seats or perhaps even more, the most likely outcome is a much more closely divided chamber, including the possibility of a 50/50 split in which control of the Senate would be determined by whether the vice president is Kamala Harris or Mike Pence. (Joe Biden and Harris currently have a 76 percent chance of winning the presidential race, according to our forecast.)

Our Congressional model (our forecast for House races will be released soon) is largely the same as the version we built in 2018, which was quite accurate in predicting the number of Senate and House seats that each party would win. Weve made a handful of changes since 2018, most of which were designed to create more consistency with our presidential forecast, including assuming that uncertainty is slightly higher this year because of an increase in mail voting under COVID-19. But these adjustments dont greatly change the outlook. For a complete list of changes, see our methodology guide.

As in 2018, there are three versions of the model, which build on one another and become increasingly complex:

The Lite version of the model relies as much as possible on polling. In races that dont have much or any polling, it calculates the candidates standing from other races that have been polled.

The Classic version relies on polling but also incorporates fundamentals such as fundraising, incumbency and a states partisan lean relative to the rest of the country.

Finally, the Deluxe version takes all of the above and adds in expert ratings from The Cook Political Report, Inside Elections and Sabatos Crystal Ball.

By default, were showing you the Deluxe version of the model this year. Its supposed to be the most accurate one and given everything going on were inclined to cut to the chase. But you can toggle between the versions using the magnifying glass icon at the bottom of the page.

You might want to get in the habit of doing this, too, because there are some fairly large differences between the model versions this year. This reflects the fact that the polling in individual Senate races is generally quite good for Democrats, while other indicators and expert ratings are more equivocal. For instance, the poll-centric Lite version of the model currently gives Democrats a 68 percent chance of winning the Senate, as compared to a 64 percent chance in the Classic version and a 58 percent chance in the Deluxe version.

These differences stem from the fact that despite their strong polling, conditions for Democrats are inherently a little challenging in the Senate. They need to gain a net of three or four seats to win control, depending on if they also win the presidency. More likely, though, they will need to flip four or five Republican-held seats, because chances are good that one seat will flip from blue to red: Democrat Doug Jones is an underdog to keep his seat in Alabama, which he won against a very bad opponent in a special election in 2017.

Furthermore, while there are a great many Republicans up for re-election this year, only two of them (Colorados Sen. Cory Gardner and Maines Sen. Susan Collins) are in states that Hillary Clinton won in 2016. Thus, Democrats will have to pick up seats in states that have traditionally been Republican-leaning, such as Georgia and North Carolina. They also have some more ambitious (but redder) targets in races in Kansas, South Carolina and Alaska.

National conditions are pretty good for Democrats they lead on the generic congressional ballot by 6.4 percentage points, and President Trump is fairly unpopular and an underdog for reelection but they are not spectacular. (Democrats won the popular vote for the House by nearly 9 points in 2018, for example, a bigger margin than their current generic-ballot lead.) Moreover, Democrats are mostly aiming to defeat Republican incumbents, and even though the incumbency advantage has diminished in recent years, its rare that you can take much for granted in races featuring incumbents.

Still, the sheer number of plausible Democratic pickup opportunities is surprising and favorable for the party given that the conventional wisdom in 2019 was that Democrats might have trouble finding enough targets to take the Senate. The table below is a list of Republican-held seats where Democrats have at least a 5 percent chance of winning in at least one version of our model. There are 16 (!) of these. In some cases, the model is being exceptionally conservative because of a lack of polling in the state, but the first dozen on the list are realistic pickup opportunities for Democrats.

Republican-held seats where Democrats have at least a 5 percent chance of winning in at least one version of FiveThirtyEights model, as of 5 p.m on Sept. 17

Democrats single best pickup opportunity is probably in Arizona, where Republican Sen. Martha McSally who lost to Democrat Kyrsten Sinema in the race for Arizonas other Senate seat two years ago badly trails Democrat Mark Kelly in polls. Nor is McSally, who was appointed to the seat following the death of Sen. John McCain, likely to benefit much from incumbency, as appointed incumbents typically perform much worse than elected ones.

Meanwhile, the two Republicans in Clinton-won states, Gardner and Collins, are also behind in polls. Still, it may be premature to write their political obituaries, especially for Collins. She won her last race by a large margin, she has a fairly moderate voting record, Maine only barely voted for Clinton in 2016, and experts continue to rate the race as a toss-up, all factors that help keep her afloat in our Classic and Deluxe models.

The fourth state where Democrats are currently favored for a pickup is in North Carolina, where Democrat Cal Cunningham, a former state senator, leads Republican incumbent Sen. Thom Tillis in polls and is also a slight favorite according to the fundamentals our model evaluates. And troubling for Tillis is that he has some of the hallmarks of a weak incumbent: He only barely won his seat in 2014, which was a much better political environment than the one Republicans face now, and he badly lags Cunningham in fundraising.

Indeed, many Republican incumbents, such as Sens. Joni Ernst of Iowa, David Perdue of Georgia and Dan Sullivan of Alaska, face some version of this problem, as many of them won by single-digit margins in 2014, a year when Republicans won the popular vote for the U.S. House by about 6 points. But this year, the national environment favors Democrats by 6 or 7 points, so thats around a 12-point swing, putting Republicans who won by narrow margins last time in the danger zone.

Other Demoratic opportunities are more idiosyncratic. In Montana, theyre hoping to benefit from the personal popularity of Steve Bullock, who is currently the governor there (although the Republican incumbent is favored in our forecast at the moment). And in South Carolina, Democrat Jaime Harrison has run a surprisingly competitive race against incumbent Sen. Linsday Graham, who once had a reputation for moderation but has now become a major defender of Trump, a shift that may mean hes now not satisfying voters in either camp. In addition to Perdues seat, there is also a second seat open in Georgia, currently held by the appointed incumbent Sen. Kelly Loeffler. (This special election is unusual, though, in that multiple candidates from both parties will face off on Election Day, and if no one gets a majority, two candidates will move to a runoff in January.)

In an average simulation, our forecast has Democrats picking up about six Republican-held seats in the Lite model, around five in the Classic model and about four and a half in the Deluxe model. And that would be enough for them to win control of the Senate even if they fail to capture the presidency.

However, Democrats also have some seats of their own to defend. Most notably, there is Joness seat in Alabama. Running for reelection as a Democrat in one of the reddest states in the country puts him at a disadvantage, and this time around he doesnt have the benefit of running against Roy Moore, who multiple women accused of pursuing sexual relationships with them while they were in their teens. (Instead, his opponent is the former Auburn football coach Tommy Tuberville.) But like Collins in Maine, whose chances shift significantly depending on which version of the model you look at, Jones might not be completely done for. The polls do make it look like Jones is a goner (hence his low chances in the Lite forecast), but the fundamentals including the fact that hes raised a lot of money and has a track record of moderation give Jones an uphill chance at victory.

Democrat-held seats where Republicans have at least a 5 percent chance of winning in at least one version of FiveThirtyEights model, as of 5 p.m. on Sept. 17

After Alabama, there is a big drop-off in the likelihood of possible Republican pickups, but their next best chance is probably in Michigan, where John James, who ran a surprisingly vigorous race against Demoratic Sen. Debbie Stabenow in 2018, is within striking distance of Michigans other Democratic senator, Gary Peters. Minnesota, New Mexico and New Hampshire also represent long-shot opportunities for Republicans, although those seats will likely change hands only if the night is going very badly for Democrats.

So while we know youre tired of hearing this the outcome is, at this point, uncertain.

There are plausible upside scenarios for Democrats where tight polling margins against incumbents like Graham prove to be the canary in the coal mine for widespread Republican problems, and Biden and Harris get to craft an agenda with as many as 54 or 55 Democratic senators.

At the same time, though, the Senate is probably a heavier lift for Democrats than the presidency. Lets imagine, for example, that Biden flipped Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Arizona and retained all the states Clinton won, which would imply a solid but not overwhelming margin in the presidential race. In that scenario, even if every Senate race went the same way as the presidential election, Democrats would still come up one seat short, picking up Maine, Colorado and Arizona but losing Joness seat in Alabama.

And while its certainly possible that most of the toss-up races will break in the same direction as the presidential race, Senate races can be quirky. Democrats got a mixed set of results in 2018, for example, picking up seats in Arizona and Nevada but also seeing four of their incumbents lose.

One thing Democrats dont have to worry about: If they pick up the Senate, its very likely that theyll have retained the House, too; Republicans are starting out with a big deficit there and are playing at least as much defense as offense. There are scenarios where Republicans could win the House, but they involve the national climate unexpectedly turning into a Republcian landslide, in which case Democrats wont be competitive in the Senate anyway. But well discuss that more when we release our House forecast. In the meantime, please drop us a line if you have any questions about the Senate.

Go here to read the rest:
Democrats Are Slight Favorites To Take Back The Senate - FiveThirtyEight