Sitting two weeks out from the election, it seems clear the Democrats will make serious gains in the US Senate. At least 4 GOP seats in Colorado, New Hampshire, New Mexico and Virginia are all but certain to go to the Democrats, which means they will have at least 55 seats in 2009.
Seats in Alaska, Minnesota, North Carolina and Oregon are at least leaning to the Democrats and will probably fall as well. Alaska is only salvageable for the GOP if Senator Stevens is acquitted, the other seats seem likely to tip but are a bit more in play. That puts them at 59 seats.
Seats in Georgia, Kentucky and Mississippi are possible switches, and just one of them would give the Democrats the magic 60. So it seems like good news for them. But not everything is quite as easy as it seems.
One of the truisms of US politics, especially on the Congressional level, is that in order to win big you need to broaden your political spectrum. This was what the GOP tried to do in the 70s and 80s and it’s what helped them succeed during the 90s. The Democrats have learned the lesson and broadened their base during the 90s, which is why they are where they are.
But part of such success means that part of your majority is (in the case of the Democrats) well to the right of your political base. That is certainly true this time around.
Just looking at the races listed above for example….
Virginia will elect Mark Warner, a pro-business Democrat with a history of opposing tax hikes.
The Udall brothers in Colorado and New Mexico are fairly liberal on some domestic policy issues but more conservative on social and national security topics.
Senator Johnson of South Dakota has often crossed party lines, along with Senator Nelson of Nebraska. The same would seem likely of Democrats elected in North Carolina and Georgia.
By contrast, some of the Republicans retiring this year (whether by choice or on Election Day) are those who have shifted over to the Democrats on some issues.
So while the Democrats might well hit the upper 50s in Senators, they will find that when it comes to any bold ‘progressive’ agenda that the numbers are much smaller than they thought.