Information
ARCHIVES
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
By Steven L. Taylor

If you are looking for the best rundown of yesterday’s Senate contests including those that have yet to be called, I would recommend the NYT’s page.

As of 9:00 EST, the Democrats have 56 seats (including the two Independents, Sanders and Lieberman, who caucus with them) and the Republicans have 41 seats. There are three seats as yet undecided and they are leaning Republican:

Ted Stevens of Alaska has a 48.2%-46.7% edge over challenger Mark Begich (99% reporting)
Gordon Smith of Oregon has a 47.8%-46.5% edge over Jeff Merkley (75% reporting)
Saxby Chambliss of Georgia has a 50.3%-46.3% edge over Jim Martin (99% reporting).

Of the three, Smith would appear to have the more tenuous of the three leads given that 25% of the precincts are extant at this point.

The Chambliss race is of interest beyond the seat count issue because Georgia has a 50% requirement. As such, should he fall below 50%, even if he is in the lead, that race will remain an open question until a run-off is held. 1

The Stevens race is interesting if anything because he is a convicted felon who will be ejected from the Senate should he win. While that is interesting in its own right, it is also worth noting that that means that Governor Palin will get to appoint his replacement. If anything, that will give her another shot, albeit a brief one, at the national stage. And, there is the possibility that she could appoint herself.

Back to the seat count–it would seem at the moment likely that the final count will be 56 Dems (54 D + 2 I) and 44 Reps. Even if all three above end up going D, the Rs would still have the 41 votes needed to mount a filibuster. 2

Another note: the NYT count has given Minnesota to Coleman–although given the numbers, I am not sure why it isn’t still considered a toss-up. If that ends up going D and akll three of the above-mentioned leaners go D, then the Democrats would reach the magical 60 seat total.

Sphere: Related Content

  1. Matthew Shugart discussed the situation, along with some other Senate election related issues here. []
  2. It should be noted, however, that on any given issue some of the Rs may side with the majority and some of the Ds may side with the minority. Press accounts that make it sound as if the parties will always vote as leadership wishes oversimplify the legislative process. []
Filed under: 2008 Campaign, US Politics | |
The views expressed in the comments are the sole responsibility of the person leaving those comments. They do not reflect the opinion of the author of PoliBlog, nor have they been vetted by the author.

One Response to “Senate Scorecard”

  1. Buckland Says:

    A couple of late notes:

    – On some issues that Republicans will have Lieberman on their side in search of 41 votes. He’ll be stripped of committee his chairmanship. Usually he’s Democrat on economics and Republican on military issues.

    – Coleman still looks to have beaten Franken, but the lawyers will have to find all of the gnats in the Minnesota procedures. Coleman will probably prevail, but that’s not certain.

    – Somebody on TV said that Stevens of AK may have benefited from Obama winning in the East. The later voters in AK knew that Obama was winning and may have preferred a felon to another Dem vote.

    – Smith of Oregon is still the most likely of the 4 Republicans to fall with a current 7000 plurality with 67% of votes counted. One problem with Oregon’s vote by mail system is that it takes a long time to count the paper ballots (giving the conspiracy folks lots of time to formulate their theories). I’m guessing the ballots still to be counted are from the population (Portland, Eugene)where they have more to count. That doesn’t bode well for Smith.

    – In my state of Kentucky an iron law has always been that for a Dem to win statewide he needs to win Jefferson County (Louisville and ‘burbs) by 25,000 votes. Last night Lunsford won Jefferson by 40,000 votes. However he was destroyed in the Cincinnati ‘burbs. That was interesting that McConnell ran much better there than he ever had before. McConnell won the small counties like Republicans usually do, but that fact that he smashed Lunsford in the Cincy counties was unexpected, and the reason he won. I’m guessing (no evidence) that McConnell may have been on the air in Cincy much more than Lunsford.

    One historical note: The Republicans had 43 seats on ‘93 when Clinton took office. It could end up right back there.


blog advertising is good for you

Blogroll

Wikio - Top of the Blogs - Politics
---


Advertisement

Advertisement



Visitors Since 2/15/03

Powered by WordPress