Predictions For Nov 2

Predictions For Nov 2


First off, I think almost all of the major Tea Party Senate candidates will lose. That means O’Donnell, Angle and Miller will not be going to Washington. However, I think Rand Paul will squeak out a victory in Kentucky.

So what will the split end up looking like?

Dems – 52
Repubs – 48

I’m not sure what this will do to the mood of the Tea Party, but it could very well energize them (meaning conservative Republicans who simply call themselves Tea Partiers) to continue to push for more extreme candidates.

What I think is obvious from the results above is had they not fielded candidates like O’Donnell and Angle (and to some extent Miller, although Repubs are very likely to retain their seat in Alaska) they’d be looking at a majority in both chambers of Congress. So there’s that.

In the House, Repubs are set to gain quite a few seats and my guess is 50+. Centrist Dems simply won’t be able to hold on to the gains they’ve made over the past 6 years and 2012 is likely to yield even more swing towards the Repubs with redistricting happening across the nation in the next couple years.

Repubs – 231
Dems – 204

However, will all the pomp about the Tea Party, I see them having a negligible effect on the day to day of that branch. Still, we’re sure to see some really crazy speeches in the next couple years, which may help Obama get reelected.

What are you predicts?

Previous articleHonda Asimo Gets Mindcontrol
Next articleVoter Apathy
  • Dan H

    With each passing day, each passing campaign event, each passing debate, each passing revelation about Tea Party candidates, the prospect of the Tea Party being placed ina position of power goes from frightening, to terrifying, to outright dangerous to our Democracy. Like sheep in wolves clothing, the Tea Party represents the most dangerous terrorist threat this country faces, all wrapped in the false veneer of being patriots. They are anything but as shown here – http://wp.¬me/pNmlT-v¬w

  • bubbaquimby

    Tea Party candidates losing Senate is one of the most over-hyped memes of the election. If they would have gotten all of those four, they still need to get 4 of the other toss-ups (WA,WV,PA,IL,CO). That was never very likely.

    Also Paul is walking away with his race and in the end was a fine candidate for KENTUCKY. While O’Donnell was a terrible choice but I think that the GOP never had a real chance there, it would be much closer but my bet is still a GOP loss.

    Angle was also a bad choice but I feel she’ll win anyways.

    Miller could be the big Tea Party blunder if he doesn’t win and Murk’s votes get knocked out and the Dems win by default. However I sense that is unlikely and in the end Miller wins since Alaska is hard to poll.

    So my tally for Senate 51 Dems – 49 GOP

    I feel the same as you with the House 200 Dems, 235 GOP

    I have always said since just after Obama was elected that as long as the economy is good (that includes unemployment) and the wars aren’t extremely violent than he’ll win no matter what. The only difference is landslide (i.e. Palin) or comfortable win (ie Pawlenty).

  • kranky kritter

    You numbers are in the right ballpark.And it really is demonstrable that some tea-party -fueled nominees are overreaches that will lead to GOP losses in winnable contests.

    But I think it’s completely unsupportable to contend that the GOP tide would have risen even higher without Tea Party activism.

    The tea party has been the seed crystal and the ongoing passionate core of the wave about to sweep over congress. I don’t think anyone needs to like or agree with the tea party to acknowledge this crashingly obvious fact.

    And one note to add on national election eve, from MA where Scott Brown kicked things up a notch last spring. Democrats were still cautiously optimistic about Martha Coakley on Monday night. And Brown supporters were no better than hopeful. Trust me on this. Estimates from all quarters on the strength of the tide ended up being on the low side. I chalk this up to a substantial component of the public who I would call the quiet angry. They weren’t making a big stink, they didn’t want to get caught up in any debate. They simply decided on their own that they wanted the deck shuffled.

    So I won’t be all that surprised if the GOP tide tomorrow is a couple feet higher than predicted. Especially given that the senate races in Nevada and California, just to name 2, present deeply unsatisfactory options on both sides.

  • mw

    I’ll stick with my 10 in 10 prediction and agree with both Bubba and Kranky.

    Angle wins, Nevadans hate her less than Reid.

    Miller squeaks by because Alaskans really do not want a Dem Senator and he is easier to vote for than Murkawski.

    We wind up 51-49 Dem and by the time the new Senate is seated, Lieberman switches caucus and Nelson switches parties – giving the GOP 51-49 majority control.

    I’ll take the “under” on a 50 seat switch in the House, as I think expectations are getting a little frothy and it is still hard to flip the House. The GOP will do it, but with a closer margin than expected. This will be the Dems one straw to grasp after the election. Expect Dems to explain that a 45 seat switch is consistent with a normal mid-term election for a new president. Let them save a little face with this contention.

    As Kranky notes, in wave elections the polls usually underestimate the size of the wave as undecideds break with the wave in greater numbers than expected. My hope (but not expectation) is this effect, combined with a depressed Dem turnout in California (after watching the wave crash across the rest of the country while polls are still open here) will finally rid of us of the embarrassment of Senator Boxer.



  • Joe Average

    Wow…how left sided can you be? I love your tag line “…surprisingly reasonable.” Kind of silly to say the least after reading this blog. You last paragraph about the Tea Party making crazy speeches, I don’t know where you’ve been for the past 2 years but the craziest stuff has come hands-down from Biden and Obama. Here’s a taste:

  • Rich Horton

    House: Republicans 227 Democrats 208 (Dems lose 48 seats)
    Senate: Democrats 53 Republicans 47 (Dems lose 5 seats)

    You heard it here first.

  • Simon

    I agree with KK and MW—55 seat gain in the House; Miller and Paul by comfortable margins, Angle by the skin of her teeth; O’Donnell will be beaten like a drum by ten although her supporters will claim victory because it wasn’t by twenty. I also agree that it’s simply silly to pretend that we aren’t where we are today because of the tea party, and I say that despite profound misgivings about the movement’s populist streaks. I’m not a tea partier, I have some real concerns about where they’re taking us, but it’s undeniable that they brought us this far. Anyone who doubts that should review the media’s narrative about the GOP future from the fall of 2008 and the spring of 2009.

  • Wickedways

    Democrats 435. Republicans 0.

    Democrats 100. Republicans 0.

    How is that possible? Because in todays government if you are not the party in charge. You are window dressing. Insignificant and pointless. You might be able to hold up the others iniative but you can create none of your own.

    Secondly and most importantly if you have both houses and the president has a veto pen that is not veto proof………game over man. Game over.

    You heard it here first.

  • Alistair

    Democrats 54
    GOP 46

    And the GOP wins 47 seats.

  • Trescml

    I think that Angle and Miller will win, but Miller won’t be confirmed for weeks if not months. I think the numbers are in the general ballpark, but I disagree on the impact of the Tea Party. Although they don’t have the ability to halt legislation like in the Senate, their rhetoric will drive the House leadership to the right in fear of being thrown out themselves in 2012. Too many Republicans (and not just moderates) ignored the Tea Party at their peril.

    What I think will be interesting to watch is if the Tea Party will try and grind the Senate to a complete stop by putting holds on every piece of spending that comes up.