The Senate is different.  Even with a reduced target of 10 pick-ups for control, that mountain is imposing and scaling to the top of it improbable.  But hey, the election's still 9 months away, so why not scope it out and see what it would take?

Election Projection currently projects 6 seats switching to the GOP column.  North Dakota is a sure thing now that Byron Dorgan has retired and John Hoeven is running.  Beau Biden's recent decision not to run in Delaware gives Mike Castle an almost sure thing there.  That's two easy ones.  Eight to go.

Two other seats appear likely to go to the GOP - Arkansas and Nevada.  In Arkansas, Secretary of State Congressman John Boozman just announced he will run.  His candidacy probably moves Blanche Lincoln's seat from tilt takeover to lean takeover.  In Nevada, Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman - the one Democrat polling better than the two front-running Republicans in the race - opted to stay at the helm of Sin City.  His choice to avoid the Senate fray improves the likelihood of a GOP takeover there.  Now we're up to 4. Six more.

Pennsylvania follows Arkansas and Nevada on the takeover probability scale.  Pat Toomey's poll numbers have been remarkably strong for a Republican with views allegedly too conservative for the Keystone State.  After a long prosperous run over the last several cycles, Democrats may have out-stayed their welcome here.  In addition to Toomey's double-digit lead over Traitor Arlen Specter and Democrat Joe Sestak, Pennsylvania boasts no less than 5 Democratic House seats on Election Projection's hotly-contested list and 3 more on the potentially competitive list.  Six month's ago, Specter's only real challenge seemed to be from his own party (Sestak).  Now, it appears somewhat likely he will lose to the party he forsook.  This is takeover number 5 on our Senate mountain climb. We're halfway there.

Colorado and Illinois are next.  Both will be tough, though the Colorado seems the more winnable.  How winnable, at this stage, depends on whom you believe.  Rasmussen gives three Republicans leads varying from narrow to comfortable over Democratic incumbent Michael Bennet and his strongest Democratic challenger, Andrew Romanoff.  On the other hand, other polling firms show mixed results, the majority within the margin of error.  Election Projection has this seat in the red takeover column right now, so we'll call it number 6 in our quest.

Numbers 7 thru 10, starting in Illinois, get much more iffy.  Given the Democratic lean of Illinois and Barack Obama's native son status, I will be mildly surprised at a GOP win.  Still, polls show this race to be competitive, and given the right wind come November, it is entirely possible that a Republican could prevail.  Number 7.  Three more to go.

After Illinois, pickup opportunities become scarce.  Only California is what you might call competitive as things stand now.  Democrat Barbara Boxer won a third term in 2004 by a comfortable 20 points, but she is polling under 50% against just about everyone running against her on the GOP side.  As an incumbent, that's not an enviable position in January of an election year.  She is beatable in November.  Former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina presents a decent threat to Boxer, polling just single-digits behind her.  More encouraging, though, is Congressman Tom Campbell's recent entry in the race.  He polls even better against the Democratic senator.  Either Fiorina or Campbell could ride a large GOP wave to an upset in this race.  If the GOP is to realize their extreme long shot attempt to take back the Senate, an upset here is almost a necessity.  Eight down, two left.

The last two almost certainly won't materialize without the candidacy of Republicans currently not running.  There are four seats which the right person could make competitive, but without them these races are strong to solid holds for the Democrats. They are Indiana, New York, Washington and Wisconsin.

Evan Bayh in Indiana is one senator whose seat got a closer look by the GOP in the wake of Scott Brown's Massachusetts triumph.  Former Congressman John Hostettler has already declared his challenge, but he's not the strongest candidate.  Bayh can weather a very large red wave against Hostettler.  Not so against Mike Pence.  One poll showed the third-ranking House Republican beating Bayh in late January.  Alas, perhaps salivating at a possible House majority, Pence has decided to stay put.  But the GOP's chances against Bayh do not begin and end with Pence; there's another who could give him a solid run - Indiana Secretary of State Todd Rokita.  A Bayh-Rokita test has not been conducted yet, but word is Rokita might win.

In New York, Kirsten Gillibrand is seeking election to the Senate in her own right this November.  The Empire State is strongly Democratic, and under normal circumstances against normal GOP fare, she will win easily.  However, in this GOP-friendly climate, someone like Rudy Giuliani or George Pataki could compete for her seat.  Giuliani is definitely out, and Pataki probably is.  Still, I wonder if Pataki could be convinced to run if a shot at majority standing awaited him.

Dino Rossi lost a razor-close gubernatorial election to Christine Gregoire in 2004 when hundreds of ballots were "discovered" in King County days after Election Day.  He lost again in the blue wave election of 2008.  Nevertheless, he has proved a strong statewide draw, and a poll recently showed him running close behind entrenched Democratic incumbent Patty Murray.  A Rossi run is not likely, and, should he go for it, a victory would be another upset.  But we're shooting for the stars here, so the possibility can't be ignored.

Finally, there's Wisconsin.  Russ Feingold is invulnerable here to any Republican save former Governor Tommy Thompson.  But like John Hoeven to Byron Dorgan in North Dakota, Thompson is Feingold's Achilles heel.  A Thompson challenge would be even money at this point, and, again, the possibility of sitting with the majority might be enough to entice him to run.

So here's what the GOP needs to regain the majority in the Senate.  First, they'll have to protect four vulnerable seats of their own (KY, MO, NH, OH).  Next, they'll have to take care of business in relatively easy Democratic states (ND, DE, AR, NV, PA).  Then, they'll have to pull upsets in Illinois and California.  And finally, they will be reliant on late entries to compete in four more states (IN, NY, WA, WI) and must win two of them.

It's an unlikely road to 51 seats, and everything will need to go in the GOP's favor to have a prayer.  But the events that have transpired so far, from Brown's victory to the decisions of Hoeven, Boozman, Biden, and Goodman, are what answered prayers are made of.

So, why not dream? And to Pataki, Rokita, Rossi and Thompson, I say "Hear that, boys? It's the Republican Senate majority calling."



Filed under:  Senate  2010 Elections 

So, the Pennsylvania Senate race becomes the 6 sixth projected GOP pickup - not counting Brown's victory in Massachusetts last week and moves the projected Senate tally to 51 Democrats, 47 Republicans and 2 Independents.  The next 5 takeovers needed to regain the Senate majority will be much more difficult to come by for the GOP.  Yes, there's a big red wave brewing but, unlike the House where the GOP has a decent shot at power, the odds of taking the Senate remain very low, probably around 10% in my estimation.



Filed under:  Ratings changes  Senate  Pennsylvania  PA Senate 

Here is the list of rating changes in today's projections:

• Arizona CD-8:  not tracked -> Mod DEM
• Arkansas CD-1:  Weak DEM -> Weak GOP
• Arkansas CD-2:  Weak GOP -> Mod GOP
• Colorado CD-3:  not tracked -> Mod DEM
• Indiana CD-9:  Mod DEM -> Weak DEM
• Michigan CD-7:  Weak DEM -> Weak GOP
• Mississippi CD-1:  Weak DEM -> Weak GOP
• New York CD-13:  not tracked -> Mod DEM
• North Dakota CD-AL:  not tracked -> Mod DEM
• Pennsylvania CD-4:  not tracked -> Mod DEM
• Pennsylvania CD-8:  not tracked -> Mod DEM

There were 51 changes between Charlie Cook, CQ Politics and Stuart Rothenberg.  Overall, the GOP was beneficiary in 49 of them.  Only John Shadegg's (AZ-3) recent decision to retire moved a seat toward the Democrats as Charlie Cook and CQ Politics changed their ratings from Safe GOP to Likely GOP.  Here is the breakdown between the three pundits providing updated ratings today.

• Charlie Cook, 16-1 for the GOP
• CQ Politics, 5-1
• Stuart Rothenberg, 28-0

As a result of these changes, three more seats will move from blue to red, and 5 more races will be listed among the hotly-contested, all of them currently in Democratic hands.



Filed under:  Ratings changes  House 

Then just yesterday, Mason Dixon released a poll showing her losing to two GOP challengers and barely keeping her head above water against three or four more.  Finally, this approval rating poll comes out today pegging her approval/disapproval at 38% to 56%.  Reaffirming a nationwide trend against Democrats, independents in the poll disapprove of her job performance by an overwhelming 69% to 24% margin.  Any sitting politician would be hard-pressed to win an election with those numbers.

While the pollster in the that survey is Republican, the last approval poll three months ago by the same outfit gave her a split 45/45 mark.  The tide is clearly moving against Lincoln.  As a result, Election Projection is changing the preliminary rating of this race from Mod DEM Hold to Weak GOP Gain. This change moves the projected Senate tally to 52 Democrats, 46 Republicans and 2 Independents, a net 5-seat gain in addition to Scott Brown's pick-up in Massachusetts this week.



Filed under:  Ratings changes  Senate  Arkansas  AR Senate 

That's 14 seats, 4 more than the GOP needs to take back the Senate.  Yes, I know, many of these races, unlike Massachusetts, will feature incumbents who will undoubtedly outperform one Martha Coakley, but the way the voters spoke in the Bay State on Tuesday, I don't believe any of these seats can be deemed completely safe.  That said, do I think the GOP will win the Senate in November?  No ... but it is not outside the realm of possibility if everything goes right for red team.

Obamacare:  Even though Nancy Pelosi announced today that the votes aren't there in the House to pass the Senate's version of Obamacare, I don't believe Brown's 41st vote and the stinging message it brings are enough to stop the Democrats from pursuing other avenues.  In the moments following the call for Scott Brown on Tuesday night, I listened to Juan Williams on Fox News.  His opinions on the ramifications of the election result found little concurrence among the others on the panel, but I felt he was right on.

Williams believes the Obama/Pelosi/Reid triumvirate will not let the Massachusetts Miracle deter them from driving Obamacare into law at all costs.  Rather than yielding to the obvious and overwhelming will and desire of the people, he asserted that they will use every measure to get health care passed.  Fighting against protests around the table, he explained why.  The Democratic leadership will refuse to face voters in November having done essentially nothing of substance to fulfill the great promise they felt Barack Obama's presidency represented.  They will wager their collective political futures to bring home the "accomplishment" of Obamacare.

I see and agree with the point he makes.  But I'll take it a little further.  Rather than choosing Obamacare over nothing as a condemned prisoner might choose a noose over starvation, they are resolved to give salesmanship and spin another opportunity to save them.  November is still a long way off, and the American electorate has proven its short attention span many times over.  If they pass Obamacare, they and their agents in the mainstream media will have 10 months to tout that all Americans now have health insurance, 10 months to produce juiced up numbers showing how they did it without extending the national debt, 10 months to paint Republicans as ogres and monsters for wanting to "take away" health insurance from the very ones who need it the most and can afford it the least.

For sure it will be a risky play, they probably reason, but it beats the alternative.  If they reach November empty-handed, they will have conceded utter defeat, leaving dozens of congressional seats to be swallowed up in the red tsunami now well-developed across the nation.  Those are the only options they see.  Give up now and lose everything, or try a Hail Mary passage of health care hoping they can convince us to catch it in the end zone when November rolls around.  Unfortunately for them, their liberal elitist minds are blind to the best play they have - work with Republicans to reform health care in a way that will be healthy for America, for her society, her economy and her liberty.



Filed under:  2010 Elections  Senate  Healthcare  Massachusetts  MA Senate 

There were 48 Democratic representatives elected in 2008 from districts that also voted for John McCain.  All of them must now be considered prime GOP pickup opportunities.  The GOP need win just 83% of them to regain control of the House.  That is a manageable task.  The voters in Massachusetts voted for a Republican senate candidate by 5% after voting for Barack Obama in 2008 by 26% - a 31-point swing.  In addition to what that says about the mood of the electorate, sitting Democrats, who now see the red tsunami on the horizon, will be much more inclined to retire than face its onslaught.  Moreover, prime GOP candidates waiting in the wings, contemplating challenging for blue seats, will see the chance to jump on that wave and decide to go for it.  Watch the Democratic retirements mount in the coming weeks and Republican recruitment soar.  The GOP may not win the House in 2010, but anyone who doesn't think it is in play was not watching Massachusetts last night.

I'll have more on ramifications of Brown's victory, including a look at the Senate and the future of Obamacare, tomorrow.



Filed under:  2010 Elections  Senate  House  Massachusetts  MA Senate 

Click here for election results starting shortly after 8pm EST.

I'll be posting thoughts and reactions here throughout the evening.  My first thought is how broad - even at this late hour - the range of possible outcomes is.  We could see a narrow Martha Coakley victory by two or three points, or Scott Brown could walk away with it by a dozen or more.

Update (8:00pm):  Polls are closing - if you haven't already voted and you're not in line in Massachusetts, you'll not be voting this time 'round.  Here we go...

Update (8:12pm):  Fox News reports high turnout in the Republican suburbs of Boston, not so much in the Democratic inner city.  Also, just heard late deciders broke 47-41 for Coakley, but 22% of Democrats voted for Brown.  My heart is racing - I hope it can hold on!

Update (8:23pm):  CNN - first returns reported - less than one percent - Brown 54%, Coakley 45%.  It doesn't mean much yet, but I'm thrilled that some votes have actually been counted and reported.

Update (8:30pm):  The race is tightening.  51-48% with 7% reporting.

Update (8:40pm):  Brown lead grows with 18% reporting - 52% to 47%.

Update (8:48pm):  Here's a better source for results. At 8:41pm, with 543/2168 precincts reporting (25%), Brown 52%, Coakley 47%.

Update (8:54pm):  Coakley back to within 5% with 39% reporting.  Wolf Blitzer just mentioned the votes so far are coming more from the west which is more Republican.  This one is not over yet.

Update (9:06pm):  We're well over halfway now.  60% reporting and Brown's lead is holding so far.  He's still up 53%-46%.  One note of caution - only 35% of Boston has reported.

Update (9:16pm):  A reader writes in "that conservative West is mighty blue while the east is very red," referring to this site's map.  He's right, but there are still almost 50% of the precincts in Boston yet to be counted.  Now 70% reporting statewide, and we're still stuck on 53%-46% (which is fine with me!)

Update (9:22pm):  The AP has called it.  Did Coakley just concede?

Update (9:45pm):  Last update on this post.  Well, the unimaginable has happened. Scott Brown (R) will be the next senator from Massachusetts. He didn't win by quite as much as I predicted, but, hey, I'm not complaining!  The final margin looks to be around 6% or two points less than my 7.9% forecast.  Still, 6% is a solid victory and spells much trouble for the Democrats in November.



Filed under:  Senate  Massachusetts  MA Senate 

But the momentum didn't stop when Brown got close.  Last week, polls started showing Brown ahead, some even giving him a healthy lead of 10 points or more.  And the energy, both anecdotal and measured, appeared to be all in Brown's corner.  All of a sudden, with just a couple days remaining, Brown looked like the favorite to win.  Now, on Election Day, the landscape has completely changed from late last year.  Instead of this being a sure victory for the Democrat, expectations in most circles are that Brown will win.

As expectations have changed, so have the stakes for the GOP.  Early on, even a close Brown defeat would have been seen as a repudiation of Democrats on Capitol Hill and their corrupt power management and a negative referendum on Obamcare.  But with expectations of a Brown victory the current conventional wisdom, a close Brown defeat becomes spinnable for the Democrats.

If Coakley wins, Democrats will be able to say that they took a Republican blindside - took their best shot - and emerged victorious all the same.  And after President Obama's visit here on Sunday, he'll be able to tout his "coming to the rescue" of an endangered Democrat.  As John Zogby said on a recent Sean Hannity radio show, a Coakley victory will enable Obama to use that message to assuage the fears of other Democrats contemplating retirement.  Of course, how effective they are in resonating that spin remains to be seen, and the GOP will for sure be touting any result today as an indication of voter angst with Obama and the Democrats.  However, the change of expectations will undoubtedly reduce the 'punch' that message would have had in the absence of Brown's major late-game surge.

Bottom line:  A Brown win today will be a huge victory for Republicans in so many ways.  It will energize the Republican base, facilitate GOP candidate recruitment, dampen Democratic recruitment, and most likely produce a greater number of Democratic retirements - if Massachusetts can fall, who can be considered safe? And that's just looking at the elections in November.  The GOP - and the nation, in this blogger's opinion - will benefit tangibly by regaining the power to filibuster the Democrats' agenda in the Senate.  Before the GOP enthusiasm tsunami hit the Bay State, a close loss would have still provided the GOP with much of these same advantages.  Now that Brown has become the de facto favorite, not so much.  The events of the last six weeks have transformed this race - as a matter of perception - from a no-lose situation to a win-lose battle that the GOP really needs to win.



Filed under:  Senate  Massachusetts  MA Senate 

Update:  It's 51-41!  The Merriman Group just released a poll showing Brown moving out to a 10-point lead!  There's way too much positive energy and positive polling data to deny that Brown has to be favored at this point.  Pinch me, I've got to be dreaming!  Hat tip: The Hedgehog Report



Filed under:  Senate  Massachusetts  MA Senate 

Senate:  Senior Senator Sam Brownback decided to come back home, so to speak, by announcing his candidacy to succeed Parkinson, who is not running, in Topeka.  His exit creates one of the most easily held open seats you'll ever see.  Political lightweights Stanley Wiles and Charles Schollenberger are two token Democrats either running or contemplating a run.  The real race inside this race, however, will be the GOP primary contest between two sitting congressmen.  Jerry Moran and Todd Tiahrt represent the 1st and 4th districts, respectively.  Both are similar in age, ideology and political experience.  Of the two, Tiahrt is the more conservative based on voting records while Moran represents a more conservative district.  Moran started the race with more cash, but Tiahrt's involvement in Kansas' right-to-life organizations should afford him a more statewide appeal.  In the end, the winner of this battle will be Kansas' next senator.  My hunch is that Tiahrt will win a very close vote and go on to win a very Solid GOP Hold in November.

Governor:  Another rarity, a sure takeover, awaits heir-apparent Brownback in Kansas' statehouse race.  Even though Brownback's approval numbers are not what you might call stellar (49% approval in the latest SurveyUSA poll), he is vastly favored over any Kansas Democrat, save perhaps Sebelius, and he won re-election to the Senate in 2004 with nearly 70% of the vote.  To be sure, Sebelius absence from the gubernatorial playing field sweetens the outlook for Borwnback, but even she probably would not have been able to keep him from becoming governor of Kansas at some point.  With her out of the picture, I'm starting this race off as a Strong GOP Gain, a rating that could very well move into the solid territory by Election Day.

House District 3:  Democrat Dennis Moore, whose 5 congressional election victories became more one-sided as time passed, has decided to step down.  That decision has put the Democrats lone Kansas House seat in dire straits.  In this Republican oriented climate, Moore would have been vulnerable to a solid GOP nominee.  Without him on the ballot, this seat becomes a prime takeover target.  Four Republicans with state government resumes have lined up to challenge for the GOP nomination, as have a few other folks.  Since Moore's decision came late last year, no Democrats have formally announced a run though several are mentioned as potential candidates.  Charlie Cook rates this race a toss-up and Stuart Rothenberg gives an early and very slight advantage to the GOP.  I'll go with Rothenberg's assessment and rate it a Weak GOP Gain.

More information is available on the Kansas state page.  Be sure to check it out.

Next stop:  Kentucky



Filed under:  Kansas  KS Senate  KS House  KS Governor 

Hat tip:  David Wissing at The Hedgehog Report



Filed under:  Senate  Nevada  NV Senate 

Senate:  In 2010, it is the five-term Republican's turn to seek re-election.  Chuck Grassley has not had a tough election season since he first won a place in the House back in 1974.  Since a 54-point outing in 1980, his first try at the Senate, he has not gotten less than 66% of the vote.  Moreover, his current approval numbers are in the upper 60's as well.  Put all this together, and you have the makings of another easy run for Grassley.  He keeps this seat in a Solid GOP Hold without breaking a sweat.

Governor:  Chet Culver wishes he were in the same political position as his colleague running for Senate.  The Democratic incumbent is not likely to attain the 9.5% margin he enjoyed in winning the statehouse for the first time in 2006.  In fact, whether he wins at all is very much in question.  Stuart Rothenberg and CQ Politics each rate his re-election bid as "lean Democrat," and the race will start off here at Election Projection as a Weak DEM Hold.  Of note, however, is that Charlie Cook now lists it as a toss-up and Rothenberg's latest update moved from "likely Democrat."  Clearly, this will be a hotly-contested race made only more so by solid contenders vying for the GOP nomination.  Two headliners for the GOP nod are former Iowa Governor Terry Branstad and former Iowa Speaker of the House Chris Rants.  As of now, the list of probable statehouse party switchers is long on both sides.  If the GOP's wave gets any larger, Iowa may very well join that list.

House District 3:  After losing 2 seats here in the blue wave election of 2006 - CD-1 and CD-2 - Republicans are looking toward a different seat to help offset one of those losses.  Leonard Boswell in CD-3 is not yet in serious trouble, but initial estimations indicate he could face a solid challenge in November.  Most likely the outcome of his re-election bid will hinge on the strength of the GOP wave.  For now, we'll leave it as a Mod DEM Hold.  An interesting note about Boswell - at 75, he is the focus of retirement rumors and, if he doesn't retire this year, may be forced out in 2012 as reapportionment costs Iowa one of its five House districts.

For the rest of the story, see the Iowa state page.

Next stop:  Kansas



Filed under:  Iowa  IA Senate  IA House  IA Governor 

In the Senate, I've pulled Ohio back into the GOP fold.  Rasmussen's recent polls in the state have shown GOPer Rob Portman to be moving out to a close but comfortable lead.  The jury is still out on 2010's version of Rasmussen polling, and some have questioned Scott's methodology (Scott Rasmussen, that is).  Frankly, I question it some myself - one reason why I've held out until now to change that race.

Be sure to check out the lists of vulnerable Senate and House seats.  They have been updated today as well.



Filed under:  2010 Elections  Senate  House 

Senate:  Evan Bayh is one Democrat who has found a way to win here without a strong Democratic wind blowing.  Now seeking his third term, Bayh won his first term in 1998, hardly a Democrat wave election, and was re-elected in 2004, at the same time Bush was garnering three-fifths of the presidential vote in the state.  His re-election is not what I would consider set in stone, but he looks awfully good even in an increasingly-Republican climate.  John Hostettler, a former congressman from district 8 who lost his seat in a landslide back in 2006, is running on the GOP side.  He has a reputation as a lazy campaigner and would probably not see north of 45% against Bayh.  His main competition for the nomination is Marlin Stutzman, an Indiana state senator.  Regardless of who wins the right to face Bayh, this seat will be a Solid DEM Hold.

House District 9:  Democrat Baron Hill is a veteran of Indiana politics.  After losing his seat to Mike Sodrel in 2004, he stormed back to recapture it in 2006's rematch.  Two years later, round three wasn't even close with Hill trouncing Sodrel 58-38.  This year, the climate is quite a bit different.  As a result, the pundits I track see Hill in a somewhat competitive battle once again.  It remains to be seen if the 2010 version of The Battle for District 9 tightens up into a truly competitive contest, but for now, I see it as only moderately interesting.  Call it a Mod DEM Hold.

The rest of EP's treasure trove of information on the Hoosier state is available in the Indiana state page.

Next stop:  Iowa



Filed under:  Indiana  IN Senate  IN House 

Republicans should do well in November.  If a few more surprise retirements like this crop up, they could do very, very well.



Filed under:  Senate  ND Senate  North Dakota 

Senate:  Pioneering African-American politician Roland Burris was appointed by then-governor Democrat Rod Blagojevich to fill the Senate seat vacated by Barack Obama.  His appointment was not without scandal.  Blagojevich was convicted afterward for trying to sell the seat to the highest bidder.  So shady were the circumstances surrounding Burris' appointment that Senate Democrats - Obama included - initially refused to seat him.  Eventually, Burris did gain official membership in the Senate, but, dogged by controversy and lacking the support of top Democrats, he has decided to forego a run for election in his own right.  His decision probably enhanced the Democrats' chances of keeping the seat in the blue column.  GOP hopes hinge on moderate Republican Mark Kirk, current U.S. Congressman from district 10.  On the Democratic side, State Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias is the frontrunner.  Most pundits call this one a toss-up, and Election Projection lists it among the top ten most vulnerable Senate seats.  However, Obama's weight will loom large in this race, and the many Chicago pols in his circle will surely be intimately involved with it.  As a result, I have a hunch Illinois will stick to its blue genes and make this race a Weak DEM Hold.

Governor:  As lieutenant governor, Pat Quinn ascended to the Illinois governorship when Blagojevich was removed from office by a 59-0 Illinois Senate vote last January.  He is running in 2010 for a first full term while serving out the remainder of Blagojevich's term.  His strongest asset - besides the 'D' after his name - is his lack of closeness with his disgraced predecessor.  He and Blagojevich ended up on the same ticket solely by virtue of Illinois electoral procedure which pairs primary gubernatorial candidates by party affiliation in the general election.  According to the Washington Post, they have not spoken since August, 2007.  He should be able to win in November, though former gubernatorial candidate and state Attorney General Jim Ryan is proving to be a solid challenger.  Because of Ryan's early strong polling, I'll designate this race a Weak DEM Hold to start.

House District 10:  GOPer Mark Kirk has entered the race to replace Roland Burris in the Senate.  That choice leaves this seat open in this Democratic-leaning district which voted heavily for President Obama in 2008.  One of just a handful of seriously vulnerable GOP seats, District 10 should flip to blue in 2010.  The race to succeed Kirk could come down to two Illinois state representatives, Republican Elizabeth Coulson and Democrat Julie Hamos.  If that is the case, Election Projection gives the nod to Hamos.  If not, give it to whatever Democrat emerges the primary victor.  Either way, call it a sure Weak DEM Gain.

House District 14:  One other House district in Illinois figures to be competitive this year, though not as likely to switch parties.  That race is Bill Foster's bid for re-election in district 14.  This seat was once held by former Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert and is traditionally Republican-leaning.  Battling to get the chance to unseat Foster are Republicans Ethan Hastert, the ex-speaker's son, and Randy Hultgren, a state senator.  Election Projection starts this race as a Weak DEM Hold, but even a moderate red wave in November could easily push it over into red territory.

There's a bunch of information on the Illinois state page.  Be sure to check it out.

Next stop:  Indiana



Filed under:  Illinois  IL Senate  IL House  IL Governor