New poll: what’s going to happen in the US mid-terms?

by Stephen Tall on November 3, 2006

In four days’ time, 7th November, Americans will go the polls to elect 435 members of the House of Representatives, and 33 members (one-third) of the Senate. What will happen? That’s the question I’m asking over at m’other site, and you have four possible options:

  • A clean Democrat sweep: gain both House and Senate
  • Dems control House, Republicans keep Senate
  • Republicans keep House, Dems capture Senate
  • A Republican recovery: House and Senate stay with GOP

Can the Democrats capitalise on President Bush’s dismal popularity, and a Republican Party beleaguered by scandals? Or might Karl Rove’s much-vaunted tactical ability, and the GOP’s fearsome GOTV strategy, yet pull a rabbit out of the hat?

Democrats who are simply bursting to get their own back after the tight presidential races of 2000 and 2004 should perhaps be careful what they wish for. As Adam Nagourney noted in the New York Times six months ago:

As strange as it might seem, there are moments when losing is winning in politics. Even as Democrats are doing everything they can to win, and believe that victory is critical for future battles over real issues, some of the party’s leading figures are also speculating that November could represent one of those moments.

From this perspective, it wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world politically to watch the Republicans struggle through the last two years of the Bush presidency. There’s the prospect of continued conflict in Iraq, high gas prices, corruption investigations, Republican infighting and a gridlocked Congress. Democrats would have a better chance of winning the presidency in 2008, by this reasoning, and for the future they enhance their stature at a time when Republicans are faltering.

Indeed, some Democrats worry that the worst-case scenario may be winning control of Congress by a slim margin, giving them responsibility without real authority. They might serve as a foil to Republicans and President Bush, who would be looking for someone to share the blame. Democrats need a net gain of 6 seats in the Senate, and 15 seats in the House.

“The most politically advantageous thing for the Democrats is to pick up 11, 12 seats in the House and 3 or 4 seats in the Senate but let the Republicans continue to be responsible for government,” said Tony Coelho, a former House Democratic whip. “We are heading into this period of tremendous deficit, plus all the scandals, plus all the programs that have been cut. This way, they get blamed for everything.”

Result of last poll: as you can see, John Reid was by far your favoured Labour leader from a Lib Dem perspective (ie, the guy most likely to be bad for Labour and good for us): he polled 47% to Gordon Brown’s 17%; trailing were David Miliband (16%), John Hutton (11%) and Alan Johnson (9%).

Though it looks like it’s all fairly academic now.

Enjoy reading this? Please like and share:


I think the Republicans will rally somewhat, enough to keep the senate, but not enough to keep the house – that’s too far beyond them.

I also think Lieberman will win, defeating the Democrat nominee who ousted him.

by Tristan on November 3, 2006 at 11:26 am. Reply #

Lieberman has about a 12 point lead IIRC so it’s a certainty that he’ll keep his seat (though he has said he’ll caucus with the Democrats if elected so the Dems won’t be losing a seat).

My feeling is that the Democrats are heading for a backlash; one of the things Republican strategists are good at is playing down expectations. With the Democrats they risk the base not turning out if they think a victory is inevitable.

They’ll still make gains but my guess is that the Dems will take the House but not the Senate.

by AidanB on November 3, 2006 at 12:53 pm. Reply #

Incidentally, one thing I forgot: in some ways you’re right about needing to be careful what they wish for. In some ways they’ve got it the wrong way around – they look to be taking over the House which has the responsibility for the budget and might struggle in the Senate where they would wield influence on appointments, etc.

Where the Democrats really want to win to make 2008/2012 realities is in the gubernatorial races however. Four out of the last five Presidents were governors before and if the Democrats have a good field of well-respected governors it only strengthens their reputation which would be invaluable heading into those two elections. It would also doubtlessly help to control State Legislatures and Governors’ Mansions when the next reshaping of district lines takes place in 2010.

by AidanB on November 3, 2006 at 1:02 pm. Reply #

I’ve had a small flutter on the Dems winning the House. They seem to be far enough ahead that even they can’t lose now.

Too many GOP candidates seem to have been hit by sleaze problems or just being awful for them to hold on.

GOP appear to have alraedy pulled out of several races that would previously have been considered safe for them.

The Senate will be much harder – and we shouldn’t forget that even getting close is a real achievement give the electoral cycle.

It does look, sadly, that Joe-mentum will scrape through and it’s also looking tight for the excellent Jay Fawcett, despite him being clearly the best candidate by far.

by Liberal Neil on November 3, 2006 at 1:47 pm. Reply #

Leave your comment


Required. Not published.

If you have one.