VauxhallVelcraux

...remember having to hear stupid people on tv point to a county-by-county map of the US, awash in a sea of red jurisdictions with fewer residents--to say nothing of actual voters--than a small commuter college?

Remember how the 51-48 Bush re-election was a mandate (i.e. the smallest margin of victory for a second term since pre-stroke Woodrow Wilson in 1916) that would cement the Republican Party's power as the future of America? Or whatever bullshit hauteur Tom DeLay uttered that I dimly remember and can now but quasi-paraphrase.

Well. Fuck. Those. People.

Here's my prediction: a 50-50 Senate and a House safely ensconced in Democratic hands at 234-201, a 31-seat shift. (I don't really care about governors that much; if there's one spot you have to have a Republican, you want him or her there, where they don't vote with others to determine national policy. Thus speaketh my closet federalism).

I think the Democratic Senate candidates will win in Rhode Island, Montana, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Virginia and barely squeak out in Missouri, while hanging on in New Jersey (easily) and Maryland (way tighter). Tennessee is a loss and Arizona was never in play, but after Colorado it remains the Western state with the greatest potential for purplization. (As a sidenote, should Jim Talent defeat Michael J. Fox in Missouri, that would basically mean that Tennessee has fucked us twice in six years: Harold Ford, right-wing Democrat and he of the so-called "perfect campaign" is hardly someone I'm going to weep for, but who deserves to win, and if Al Gore could have just won his home state in 2000, we wouldn't be anywhere near where we are now, although that's like pondering what happened before the Big Bang).

(-)(-)(-)

In the House, Democrats will pick up:

2 of the 3 in Connecticut (Farrell over Shays and Courtney over Simmons, but not Murphy over Johnson, thanks to Joe Lieberman)

3 in New York (Massa over Kuhl, Gillibrand over Sweeney and Arcuri over Meier in the open seat vacated by Sherwood Boehlert, but not the ghastly Peter King, who called the AARP a radical organization and whose name sounds too much like mine; not Vito Fossella, the only Republican to represent a part of NYC--Staten Island [duh, of course] and grossout-townie Brooklyn; and not Tom Reynolds, enabler and go-between in the whole Foley matter. It would be delightful if Hall beat Kelly, but I'm skept)

3 in Indiana (Hill over Sodrel, Donnelly over Chocola, and Ellsworth over Hostettler...take that, throbbing red heart of America)

3 in Ohio (Wulsin over Schmidt, Space over Padgett and Kilroy over Pryce)

3 in Pennsylvania (Sestak over Weldon, Murphy over Gerlach, and Carney over Sherwood)

2 in Florida (Mahoney over not-Foley aka Negron, and Jennings over Buchanan for the seat held by Katharine Harris, archfuck who's destined for defeat in her Senate race. It's possible for Klein to prevail over Shaw, but I'm skeptical)

2 in Colorado (Perlmutter over Beauprez, and Paccione over Musgrave; the only race I'm obscenely optimistic about is Marilyn Musgrave, who is so insanely homophobic that I hope her dog dies, her couch collapses and her sons, should she have any, get raped by Ted Haggard)

1 in Iowa (Braley over Whalen)

1 in Illinois (Duckworth over Roskam...this might be too optimistic. WTF, Illinois?)

1 in New Mexico (Madrid over Wilson)

1 in Texas (Lampson over Sekula-Gibbs)

1 in California (there's no God, but please God let it be x over McNerney over Richard Pombo, the most staunch anti-environmentalist in the universe)

1 in North Carolina (Shuler over Taylor)

1 in Virginia (Kellam over Drake)

1 in New Hampshire (Hodes over Bass)

1 in Minnesota (Wetterling over Bachman, but Gil Gutknecht will hang on)

1 in Wisconsin (Kagen over Gard)

1 in Idaho (Grant over Otter)

1 in Kansas (Boyda over Ryun)

1 in Arizona (Giffords over Graf)

1 in Kentucky (I don't know which, but losing all 3 would be tough)

1 in Wyoming (Trauer over Cubin)

Regrettably, we will likely shed a seat in Georgia (which against all mathematical possibility somehow seems to be growing more Republican) and not pick up seriously good chances in Washington (two), Virginia, Texas, Illinois (two), Colorado, California (two), Illinois (two), Nebraska and New York (for the last, as stated above). As I look back, this is optimistic by 3 seats (Musgrave in particular...but what a cunt!). Although, in the best case scenario, New York and New England will have a mere 4 of their 51 combined seats in the House held by Republicans. That's particularly amazing if you look at the election of 1936.

A lot of these winners will lose in 2008. That's for certain (I'm thinking Trauner, Grant and most of all, Lampson). However, there are a couple more things to note: first, Howard Dean will be vindicated as a total genius for pursuing the 50-state strategy when the conventional wisdom is that Democrats aren't, weren't and could never be competitive in a vast number of districts, some of which they are going to win. The Democratic establishment hates Dean--fine. They hate the bloggers--fine. Their fear of students/hippies/moms/critical thought borders on the pathologically self-destructive--fine. But they at least had to recognize the shrewdness of fielding so many people-funded candidates, if only to spread the GOP's resources thin. Many a Republican rep grew soft and complacent, many beleaguered Democrats in vermillion districts grew into their disenchantment, and in less than two years the alignment is about to undergo a seismic shift--thanks to Dean. The end result is that in ten years, 'conservative' should be as generally embarrassing as 'liberal' is now, and Nebraska will have a functioning Democratic party on the ground. The ultimate electoral point is to isolate the GOP within the South...and Southern California. Second, Ohio, Michigan and New Jersey are the states to pummel in 2008, at the local level. Among them, they have 26 Republican-held seats (11, 9 and 6, respectively), and are bluer than they appear. Rumors about New Jersey's succumbing to the Red Death are greatly exaggerated, as much as they were after the GOP convention in '04.

And finally, something needs to be said about poor Ned Lamont, who will lose and retire from being a known commodity. I really like Ned. I made the girl who sits next to met at work vote for him in the primary. To say that Joe Lieberman is an asshole is seriously boring, but as for my provocative prediction of the cycle, I think he'll have the decency not to defect in the 50-50 Senate (although I think a couple Republicans will quietly switch sides in the House, and a lot of retirements will suddenly pop up in '08--I'm thinking of you, Mike Castle of Delaware), when the Republican party circles its wagons to lay the ground for making 2006 a monstrous aberration, they will demand that Donald Rumsfeld be fired and they will install Joe Lieberman. CT Gov. Jodi Rell will appoint a GOP to fill Lieberman's term, and the Senate will be 51-49 for the GOP, or 51-48-1 as long as Bernie Sanders is alive.