• Markets
• Economy
• Federal Reserve
• Housing
• Energy
• Digital Media

Senate Battleground States

Interesting map via WSJ on the Senate races. It looks like the Senate will stay under GOP control, while the House is more up for grabs

click for larger graphic

Friday, March 31, 2006 | 05:15 PM | Permalink | Comments (10) | TrackBack (0)
add to de.li.cious | digg this! | add to technorati | email this post

Comments

Not to pull a Bushism, but, "You forgot Montana!"

Conrad Burns is done. Not sure why anyone outside the state doesn't realize that.

Posted by: Isaac Greten | Mar 31, 2006 6:32:51 PM

Between immigration reform, trade protectionism, the continued unfolding of various washington scandals and a potential housing bust, they all have plenty of time to shoot themselves in the foot. I would be hesitant to call anything so far out when all of these major impending issues are still in the air.... remember the gingrich led takeover? that didn't get that going untill well into the year.

Posted by: Mike | Mar 31, 2006 6:49:52 PM

1994 was a result not only of a similar 'impending issues' but of a wholesale rollover in districts that had been electing Dixiecrats instead of Republicans. As there's no similar realignment in the offing for now, I would not expect a repeat.

Burns, however, would seem to be done. Does the polling not back that up yet?

Posted by: wcw | Mar 31, 2006 6:56:10 PM

Let's see this chart updated with polling from this week... The Grand Ole Party TOTALLY alienated this country's second largest minority group in a matter of days. The GOP is a fantastic opposition party, but a dismal failure as a ruling party.

Glad to see Santorum behind in the polls. That guys is an ass-clown and an embarrassment to the great state of Pennsylvania.

Posted by: todd | Mar 31, 2006 7:11:02 PM

Nov is many moons away!

Although the GOP seems like self-destructing right now with all the corruption scandals, Iraq, warantless spying on Americans, etc, the Democrats do not have a recent track record of closing the deal with electoral success. They do not seem to have the chutzpah to seriously challenge Bush and Rove and create momentum for a change election like Gingrich was able to lead in 1994.

The Dems may win some seats by default if people are really upset when they get to the polling booth but I doubt they'll gain a majority in either the house or senate.

Posted by: zanzibar | Mar 31, 2006 7:39:47 PM

I predict that the Democrats will spend tens/hundreds of millions and run a strong campaign and get exactly what they aimed to accomplish; George Bush will not win a third term.

Posted by: Robert Cote | Mar 31, 2006 7:49:52 PM

I don't see how Nebraska isn't a battleground state. The incumbent, Ben Nelson (D) is strong now, but the state is only 25% Democratic. It will be neck-and-neck by November.

Posted by: Nebraska | Mar 31, 2006 9:38:49 PM

Barry,

In case you hadn't seen yet - yours is the featured blog in this week's BusinessWeek "UpFront"

Posted by: Mike | Mar 31, 2006 9:56:21 PM

Where else but on bigpicture can you dissect political and economic minutiae every day with rational people while patiently waiting for both the financial markets and GOP to implode later this year...

I love this site.

Posted by: drey | Apr 1, 2006 12:29:28 AM

Wisconsin is not a battle ground except in the sense that Democrats use real knives in their campaigning. Madison is as whack left as Berkeley. Milwaukee is as Democratic as Chicago. Votes in the rest of the state don't count.

Posted by: Lee | Apr 1, 2006 9:23:00 AM