Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
About Chris Cillizza  |  On Twitter: The Fix and The Hyper Fix  |  On Facebook  |  On YouTube  |  RSS Feeds RSS Feed

Congressional Countdown: 3 More Seats Lean Democratic

Congressional Countdown

A Key Race Scorecard -- Oct. 26, 2006

House (35 contested races)

Leans GOP
Leans Dem

Senate (9 contested races)

Leans GOP
Leans Dem

» Full Analysis

In today's Congressional Countdown we move three U.S. House seats currently held by Republicans from the "Tossup" category to the "Leans Democrat" category:

* New York's 24th

* Iowa's 1st

* Pennsylvania's 7th

Go to the Countdown page to read our full analysis.

Additional campaign information can be found in our Key Races interactive map.

By Editors  |  October 26, 2006; 9:18 AM ET
Categories:  House , Senate  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Fight For the Senate: Dole vs. Schumer
Next: 527 Group Slams Republican in CO-5


Rmill - Still disagree on the Rhode Island Governor race. Solid Republican - Fogarty just doesn't have any traction. One group of disgruntled state employee union workers won't harm Carcieri.

The Senate seat looks more and more to go to Whitehouse; while Carcieri stays Governor.

Posted by: Nor'Easter | October 26, 2006 2:53 PM | Report abuse

What is the impact of the cell phone only folks? They don't get polled?

Posted by: Merry | October 26, 2006 12:34 PM | Report abuse

Menendez avg for Oct. is only +3.59% compared to Kyl at +8.62%

Last weeks polls have Menendez up 3, up 4, up 9 and tied for an average of +4%, slightly better than monthly average.

Kyl last week has only one poll, up 47-41 or +6%, less than monthly average.

But one or two polls don't make it a trend.

Same goes for MN-6 where Bachmann was shown to have a 6 pt lead over Wetteling [MN-1 is Gutknecht(R)* vs Walz(D)]. Compared to all other available polling showing a close race, the MN6 is still a toss up with an average for October of Wetterling+0.2% and in the last two weeks, Weeterling +2% with this poll included.

Posted by: RMill | October 26, 2006 12:33 PM | Report abuse

One more thing on polls, they have come a long way since 1936 and 1948. One magazine conducted a telephone poll in 1936 and predicted an overwhelming victory for Alf Landon. Of course, in those days telephones were generally possessed only by the well-to-do. FDR carried 46 of 48 states that year and his campaign manager changed the old saying "As goes Maine, so goes the nation" to "As goes Maine, so goes Vermont" - those being the only two states that Landon carried. The pollsters stopped polling in mid October in 1948 considering it a waste of money since Dewey was headed to a landslide victory over Truman.

Posted by: JimD in FL | October 26, 2006 11:29 AM | Report abuse

Dan W

One of the keys to polls is whether they survey all registered voters or try to narrow it to likely voters based on voting history. Of course, you also have to look at the undecided voters and the trends for these undecided voters and who they are. For example, if there are a lot of disgruntled Republicans among the undecideds, they might be expected to "come home" to their party as the election nears. You also have to analyze how strongly the voters are attached to their candidate. Modern polls are accurate but that is within the margin of error which can be a fairly significant swing in terms of election results. Also, some polls are more refined than others in terms of sample size and how in depth the questions go to get at underlying trends and motivations. Get out the vote operations can produce unpredicted results if one side or the other manages to get certain groups of supporters to the polls in higher numbers than a pollster would predict based on their voting history.

Posted by: JimD in FL | October 26, 2006 11:21 AM | Report abuse

RMill: Question about Polls. How do they model the people that don't respond/hang up?

We have been seeing more and more that the polls don't seem to match the reality at the booths. Our conspiracy theorists give us one possibility.

Could another possibility be that Repub's just hang-up/don't answer pollsters more often than Dems?

Posted by: Dan W | October 26, 2006 10:32 AM | Report abuse

For those arguing about how to classify the AZ senate race, although it belongs in the "leans republican" category, I think it will be a very close race in the end for two reasons beyond the national democratic tide,

1. three congressional republicans in AZ may very well go down to defeat and drag republican votes away from Kyl, and

2. AZ has a very popular governor who will probably win with percentage in the high 50's...her coattail are gonna pull in some votes. With those factors at play in AZ lean republican or not I think the senate race will end up close and some expected votes for Kyl won't materialize.

Posted by: SCOTT | October 26, 2006 10:24 AM | Report abuse

you're right Sterling, I followed a link and was on CBS. I don't know which anchors work for which networks, because I don't watch TV news much anymore because of its rightwing spin. EvenCBS has gone into the rightwing sewer now, just like all the rest.

Posted by: drindl | October 26, 2006 10:23 AM | Report abuse

News: A team of political scientists took information from past polls, current polls and created a computer simulation to predict how many seats the democrats would gain in the house. The results, "we forecast an expected Democratic gain of 32 seats with Democratic control." Hence, my prediction of 37-39 and suggestion of expanding the list to 50 battle ground seats seems reasonable Chris!

Posted by: SCOTT | October 26, 2006 10:15 AM | Report abuse

Chris, you are WAAAAAAYYYYY to conservative on the toss-up column. If you wanted to do a real analysis your total list would be longer and the toss-up column shorter! I'm sticking with my 37-39 seat pick up for the democrats and my toss-up list is really short.

Posted by: SCOTT | October 26, 2006 10:11 AM | Report abuse

stoopid typo above; Bachmann-Wetterling is MN-06, not MN-01 (which is Gutknecth-Walz).

Posted by: bsimon | October 26, 2006 10:03 AM | Report abuse

P-POD asks "With respect to the Senate, what happens if Lieberman wins as an independent? It this essentially Jeffords all over again? "

You mean in reverse? I don't see it that way. I think Lieberman is using the Republicans. He knows that his Dem colleagues in the Senate have to respect the voters in the primary & thus support Lamont. But after the election, if he wins, Joe will continue to caucus with the Dems. If anything, the parallel is to Kerry's clumsy overtures to McCain for the Veep slot on the 2004 ticket. McCain enjoyed the compliment and used the exposure for his own gain, leaving Kerry hung out to dry & looking foolish.

Posted by: bsimon | October 26, 2006 10:02 AM | Report abuse

I completly agree with you that let the negative ads stay in the gutter with the republicans.
Recently here in Massachusetts Healey (R) ran a disgusting ad targeting the demcratic frontrunner Patrick. It seems from recent polls that this ad has backfired big time and that any gains she had made in the past have now evaporated. If you look at the Tennessee race it will be decided by the 4% who are undecided such as TJM. Ford needs to come out with his own commercial where he stands in front of the camera and talks about issues like the war, stem cell research, and the minimum wage. If you sound like Senator then people will think you should be one.

Posted by: Andy R | October 26, 2006 9:59 AM | Report abuse

Have you seen the latest SurveyUSA? Sure, its Robo-polling, but its showing a 6% lead by Bachmann in MN-1. 49% to 43% for Wetterling. Still within the margin of error, but implies that trends are changing.

Posted by: bsimon | October 26, 2006 9:55 AM | Report abuse

'And yet when I phonebank all over the country it's hard to detect a trend. Sometimes it feels like the wave is real and other nights no. Of course that's not a scientific assessment. All the empirical evidence suggests the bough is ready to break.'

Intrepid Liberal: What do you mean by 'the bough is ready to break' - it is vague as to if you mean in favor of the Republicans or the Democrats. . .I am thinking you mean in favor of the Dems and if so, I agree - but I also have something that is telling me that the empirical evidence is going to wrong - to my dismay. . .

Posted by: Anonymous | October 26, 2006 9:55 AM | Report abuse

I know that the polls have been consistent with Kyl up around 8 percent, but Survey Usa and AZ state have the race at 5 and 6% respectively. I mean if we are gonna put NJ as a toss-up with Menendez consisteintly up by about 5% then we can at least say AZ is a lean Republican. Now I will admit that the only way it breaks is if the national wave really takes off, but I think it will.

Posted by: Andy R | October 26, 2006 9:53 AM | Report abuse


I respect your opinion and used to believe that would be the right way to run campaigns. However, you are a diamond in the rough. Unfortunately, I can easily see Corker winning in TN because of the "racist" ad that the RNC put up. I just can't help but conclude that the Negative campaigns the Republicans run sways enough voters to swing their way in elections. I guess I am just extremely frustrated with the success the Republicans appear to have with dirty campaign tactics.

Posted by: Political Junkie | October 26, 2006 9:51 AM | Report abuse

Drindl: I thought that Leslie Stahl worked for CBS and that "selective" interview was taken from 60 Minutes. Am I wrong? Additionally, while I don't disagree with Ms. Pelosi's observations, it IS personal. Just because it's personal, doesn't make it wrong, or inaccurate....

What the whole Congress is lacking is the Tip O'Neil, Bob Michael pragamatism in getting things done, and not getting stampeded into sound bites by media hacks like, Matthews, Russert, Hannity, etc.. It seems that the media hacks are running the campaign through their nightly screeds and screeches, and not letting the candidates address the issues whether legitimate or not.

Posted by: L.Sterling | October 26, 2006 9:45 AM | Report abuse

There aren't many things that could keep me from voting for Jim Webb on Election Day. Seeing his campaign air ads of the kind that other posters here seem to be advocating would do the trick, though. I'm voting for Democratic candidates this November because I want an end to the current Republican leadership's "playing in the gutter", as one contributor put it. A person's style of campaigning generally reflects his or her style of governing: one sees all sorts of Republican candidates running foul and destructive ads, and then governing as though those who disagreed with them were nothing but dangerous enemies to be attacked. If I see Democratic candidates in my district going down the same road, I'll stay home. Putting a different name on the same mindset isn't worth the trouble.

Posted by: TJM | October 26, 2006 9:45 AM | Report abuse

With respect to the Senate, what happens if Lieberman wins as an independent? It this essentially Jeffords all over again?

Posted by: P-POD | October 26, 2006 9:40 AM | Report abuse

I agree with most of that, except of course that Wyoming is Safe Dem, and from what I've heard, Tony Knowles is coming back. I don't know, I've never been within 1000 miles of the state. Also, the allegations against Jim Gibbons might affect the race in Nevada.

Posted by: JoeyJoeJoe | October 26, 2006 9:37 AM | Report abuse

'A young rising star in the Republican Party has boasted to witnesses of his sexual relationship with Charlie Crist, the frontrunner in the Florida governor's race who has repeatedly denied that he is gay.

The GOP staffer, 21-year-old Jason Wetherington, told friends at separate social functions in August that he had sex with Crist, according to two credible and independent sources who heard Wetherington make the claim first-hand.

Wetherington, who recently worked as a field director for U.S. Senate candidate Katherine Harris and currently works for state representative Ellyn Bodganoff's reelection campaign, also named a man whom he said is Crist's long-term partner, a convicted thief named Bruce Carlton Jordan who also recently worked for Harris in her long-shot Senate bid.

Jordan made headlines recently when the Miami Herald learned that the felon was working as Harris's travel aide. The newspaper noted that Jordan, 42, was reported to be close friends with Charlie Crist, whom he convinced to attend an annual Florida Funeral Directors Association meeting in 2003.

Jordan was charged in 2003 with stealing thousands of dollars from two organizations for whom he worked, including the Tallahassee-based Florida Funeral Directors Association, where he served as executive director. He completed a 60-day jail sentence in February and will be on probation until the year 2011, according to state records.

When the Herald questioned Crist about Jordan this past August, the frontrunner in the governor's race told the newspaper that he doesn't remember the man. "I don't know who Bruce Jordan is," he said at the time. "It doesn't mean I haven't met him.

I asked Crist during a phone interview on Monday morning if he had ever had sex with Jordan.

"No," he said. "I don't recall the name."

That Crist doesn't remember Jordan seemed incredible to me. Not only did the attorney general make a special appearance at the funeral directors' conference, but former presidents of the association say Jordan was known to be pals with Crist.

Attempts to reach Jordan weren't successful, but his father told me that Crist and his son are friends.

"He talks about [Crist], but I don't think he's seen Charlie in a while," said Albert Jordan, who lives in Inverness, where he and his wife raised their son.''

Posted by: Anonymous | October 26, 2006 9:36 AM | Report abuse

Kyl(R)+8.67% avg. for Oct.
+8.62% in past two weeks
+6% for past week (only 1 poll)
+8.14% avg. for Sept.

This is a pretty stable lead for Kyl. No trend has yet developed despite isolated polls showing 5 or 6 pts.

Notes on others:
I am currently tracking 80 House races.
15 are likely R
22 are likely D (including the previous reported 9 seats switching from R to D)
9 are leaning R
AZ5, CO5, CT5, FL22, ID1, OH1, PA4, PA8, WY at large
13 are leaning D (including the previous reported 9 seats switching from R to D)
Others are Dem held seats leaning D- IL 8, LA2, LA3, VT at large

Tracking all 33 seats up
6 are solid Rep (IN, ME, MS, TX, UT, WY)
15 are solid Dem, including previous reported PA switching from R to D. Others- CA, DE, FL, HI, MA, MI, MN, NE, NM, NY, ND, WA, WV, WI
2 lean Rep AZ, NV
4 lean Dem including the 3 previously reported switching from R to D. Other- MD
2 are solid I- CT, VT

Tracking all 36 Governorships
11 are solid Rep- AL, CT, GA, HI, ID, NE, SC, SD, TX, VT, WY
13 are solid Dem including the 5 previous reported switching from R to D. Others- AZ, IL, KS, NH, NM, OK, PA, TN
5 lean Rep- AK, CA, FL, NV, RI
4 lean Dem including the 3 previously reported switching from R to D. Other- OR

Both OR and RI have the greatest likelihood of moving into the Toss up category. AK and NV are moving decidely in the wrong direction and FL has shown similar but much more gradual movement away from controlling party.

Posted by: RMill | October 26, 2006 9:31 AM | Report abuse

We should have started playing dirty a long time ago. Obviously, people in this country love playing in the gutter...

Posted by: Anonymous | October 26, 2006 9:31 AM | Report abuse

I agree with Pol. Junkie..The repugs are down and it's time to start kicking them..Kerry's down fall in '04 was taking the swift boat crap lying down..Really made the dems look weak..Think we can create actual non-fiction ads, unlike the repugs, hammering home Iraq and the utter tragedy that has become..We ought not back off one single centimeter on Iraq and the fact the middle class has in reality been obliterated in the last ten years or so..

Posted by: TheIrishCurse | October 26, 2006 9:29 AM | Report abuse

You know, I am tired of us Democrats being the nice guys. The Republicans have used the worst most below the gutter commercials and politics to retain their seats and majority. It worked for them in 2000, 2002, and 2004. They are using it again in 2006. I have come to the conclusion that "to hell with being above-board" in our ads and attacks. Lets knock him hard with some earth-shattering ads and politics. I say we play at their level. If that helps ensure a Dem takeover in the House and Senate. So be it. If they want to play dirty, then we should to.

Posted by: Political Junkie | October 26, 2006 9:23 AM | Report abuse

Watching that presidential press conference this afternoon was like listening to the world's most boring seminar on semantics, everyone acting as if the most important determinant of success or failure in Iraq is what comes out of the president's yap. It's idiotic for the press to let themselves get suckered into badmitton games of "benchmarks" versus "timetables" or "stay the course" versus "tactical adjustments" when this back and forth bears no relation to the reality of what's happening in Iraq. We're long past the point when Bush or Ken the undead Mehlman could craft a new catchphrase on their labelmaker that arrest the four horsemen of the apocalypse from making their appointed rounds.

Posted by: Anonymous | October 26, 2006 9:19 AM | Report abuse

The Democrats should happily take this Press Conference and use it to drum home the point that the President's will -- if it remains unlimited by a rubber-stamping Republican Congress -- is that we are going to stay in Iraq forever and almost certainly become further mired in the disaster.

Posted by: Anonymous | October 26, 2006 9:17 AM | Report abuse

Yet another example of why we need to fire them all and start over from scratch.

Posted by: Dan W | October 26, 2006 9:14 AM | Report abuse

U.S. generals call for Democratic takeover

Posted by: Anonymous | October 26, 2006 9:14 AM | Report abuse

And yet when I phonebank all over the country it's hard to detect a trend. Sometimes it feels like the wave is real and other nights no. Of course that's not a scientific assessment. All the empirical evidence suggests the bough is ready to break.

Posted by: Intrepid Liberal Journal | October 26, 2006 9:12 AM | Report abuse

9 likely Dem (8%+ lead for D)
AZ8, IN8, NY19, NY24, NC11, OH15, OH18, PA10, TX22
9 lean Dem (5-7% pts lead for D)
AZ1, FL16, IN2, IN9, NM1, NY26, NC8, PA6, PA7
21 toss up (1-3% lead either way; 1 D, 20 R)
CA50, CO7, CT2, CT4, FL13, IL6, IL10, IN7*, IA1, IA2, KY3, KY4, MN1, MN6, NJ7, NY3, NY20, OH2, VA2, WA8, WI8
*Democrat incumbant

1 likely Dem (10%+ lead for D)
3 lean Dem (5-9% lead for D)
4 toss ups (1-3% lead either way; 3 R, 1 D)

5 likely Dem (10%+ lead for D)
1 lean Dem (5-9% lead for D)
3 toss ups (1-3% lead either way;1 R, 2 D)

Posted by: RMill | October 26, 2006 9:10 AM | Report abuse

Here's more of ABCs' slavish pandering to cons, just like The Rodent Halperin promised:

Pelosi has called her Republican colleagues "immoral" and "corrupt," and has said they're running a criminal enterprise.

"I mean, you're one of the reasons we have to restore civility in the first place," Stahl remarks.

"Well actually, when I called them those names, I was being gentle," Pelosi says. "There are much worse things I could've said about them."

Oh really? It's hard to imagine.

Here is what she said about the president's handling of Hurricane Katrina: "The president said he's going to lead the investigation into what went wrong. He need look only in the mirror, for starters."

"But if you're Speaker, I'm wondering - how you'll work with him. I mean, here are some of the things - only some of the things you have called him, 'an incompetent leader,'" Stahl says. "You said, 'In fact, he's not a leader. He's a person who has no judgment.'"

"That's right," Pelosi says.

"It even stings to hear it now. I mean, obviously, the two of you are bound to get along just great," Stahl replies, laughing.

"You know, we're professionals. We're professionals. You could go through a long list of things his surrogates have said about me. I know they have to do what they have to do, and they know I have to do what I have to do. And what I have to do is make a distinction in the public that's between the Democrats and the Republicans in order to win," Pelosi says. "This isn't personal."

"It sounds personal," Stahl remarks.

"This isn't personal," Pelosi says.

"He's "incompetent", he's...," Stahl continues.

"Well, I think he is," Pelosi states.

"Well, that's personal," Stahl points out.

"Well, I'm sorry, that's his problem," Pelosi replies.

"How does this raise the level of civility?" Stahl asks.

"Well, this is a - well - we're in a political debate here. We didn't come here to have a tea party together, and toss a coin to see who would win on an issue," Pelosi says. "I have very thick skin, I don't care what they say about me."

Leslie Stahl just blatantly attacks Pelosi. Sickening con ho.

Posted by: drindl | October 26, 2006 9:06 AM | Report abuse

For uncensored news please bookmark:

Los Angeles Times Added to homepage Thu 26th Oct 2006, 08:13 AM

Webb up 47-44 over Allen in new LA Times Poll
LA Times released poll results from five key races:

VA: 47-44 favoring Webb
NJ: 45-41 favoring Menendez
OH: 47-39 favoring Brown

In MO, Talent holds a 48-45 point lead.
In TN, this poll shows Corker up by five--49-44 over Harold Ford, Jr. Is that racist ad actually having some effect?



Posted by: che | October 26, 2006 9:02 AM | Report abuse

The Cheney family's pretty quirky, aren't they? I've never seen anybody quite so in to torture and S&M than Vice:

'Vice President Dick Cheney has confirmed that U.S. interrogators subjected captured al-Qaida suspects to a controversial interrogation technique called "water-boarding," which creates a sensation of drowning.

Cheney indicated that the Bush administration doesn't regard water-boarding as torture and allows the CIA to use it. "It's a no-brainer for me," Cheney said at one point in an interview.

Cheney's comments, in a White House interview on Tuesday with a conservative radio talk show host, appeared to reflect the Bush administration's view that the president has the constitutional power to do whatever he deems necessary.

The U.S. Army, senior Republican lawmakers, human rights experts and many experts on the laws of war, however, consider water-boarding cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment that's banned by U.S. law and by international treaties that prohibit torture. Some intelligence professionals argue that it often provides false or misleading information because many subjects will tell their interrogators what they think they want to hear to make the water-boarding stop.

Republican Sens. John Warner of Virginia, John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina have said that a law Bush signed last month prohibits water-boarding. The three are the sponsors of the Military Commissions Act, which authorized the administration to continue its interrogations of enemy combatants.

The radio interview Tuesday was the first time that a senior Bush administration official has confirmed that U.S. interrogators used water-boarding against important al-Qaida suspects.

Water-boarding means holding a person's head under water or pouring water on cloth or cellophane placed over the nose and mouth to simulate drowning until the subject agrees to talk or confess.

Lee Ann McBride, a spokeswoman for Cheney, denied that Cheney confirmed that U.S. interrogators used water-boarding or endorsed the technique.

"What the vice president was referring to was an interrogation program without torture," she said. "The vice president never goes into what may or may not be techniques or methods of questioning."

Now, of course, during WWII the US considered waterboarding torture -- and punished Japanese who waterboarded our troops with long prison terms.

The odd thing though is how our military still considers it torture, and there are laws against it. When did you ever before see a Vice President who so proudly proclaims he is breaking the law? Isn't it odd? Even his spokeswoman is denying he said it -- even though it's on tape. We are so through the looking glass here... Kafka nightmare lala land.

Posted by: drindl | October 26, 2006 8:49 AM | Report abuse

CC: appreciate the links and being able to see these districts on a map BUT two of the summations state that there is "No Clear Favorite" when in fact this article states that there is.

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | October 26, 2006 8:40 AM | Report abuse

So I guess Bob Corker didn't think the bimbo ad was racist enough. So now their about to run one with -- JUNGLE DRUMS!

'Okay, so Election Central has just obtained a radio ad which you've got to hear: It actually has what sounds like tom-tom drums playing in the background every time the ad talks about Dem Harold Ford, Jr. The ad -- which says it was paid for by the campaign of GOP Senate candidate Bob Corker -- can be heard right here. When the ad mentions Corker, the music soars and no tom-toms are audible. Throughout the entire minute-long ad, you hear the rumble of tom-toms every time Ford is mentioned. This ad, keep in mind, quotes Bob Corker himself as having "approved" the message -- meaning it wasn't the work of the Republican National Committee, as in the case of the recent "bimbo" TV ad which drew charges of racism. More after the jump.

We got a copy of the ad from a producer from WGOW radio in Chatanooga. Bill Lockhart, the program director for WGOW, confirmed the authenticity of the ad and that it's running on the station. "They're freaking jungle-drums," Lockhart tells us. "It's racist -- it tries to conjure up deep, dark African moods. Yeah, it's overtly racial."

It's pretty interesting that this ad is running, wouldn't you say? After all, Corker disavowed the similar tactics in the recent "bimbo" ad which stirred controversy and charges of racism. The bimbo ad, which featured an actress playing what used to be called a "floozy." As you surely know by now, she claimed to she'd met Ford at a "Playboy" party and asked Ford to "call me." For some reason, people got the idea that it was supposed to be playing on fears of interracial sex, and they got very upset about it. Corker himself has called on local stations not to run the bimbo TV spot, saying that it "went too far."

Now -- despite Corker's disavowal of the racially-questionable tactics in the bimbo spot -- we get this new spot with the tom-toms. Apparently this one doesn't go "too far" for Corker at all.

Posted by: drndl | October 26, 2006 8:38 AM | Report abuse

Ever wonder what old Joe(Red Menace)McCarthy would think of Kurt Weldon?

Talk about collaborating with the rooskies!

Posted by: JEP | October 26, 2006 8:35 AM | Report abuse

CC, I think it is time you put the Arizona race on your chart too. It is still a leans republican, but the polling is as close as New Jersey, and is closer then Pennsylvania. Also Kyl hasn't gotten over 50% which does not bode well for his chances of retaining the seat.

Posted by: Andy R | October 26, 2006 8:33 AM | Report abuse

What was it I predicted, 42 or 43 total seats gained by the Dems?

Posted by: JEP | October 26, 2006 8:30 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company