Welcome back to Election Watch 2010 with Matt and Bridgit! Today were a taking a look at the great state of California, Matt’s home state and one of the most liberal-leaning in the United States. Currently, California is home to two Democratic senators, the most liberal Republican governor in the nation, and Democratic majorities in both the State Assembly and State Senate. However, due to recent political feeling, Republicans and pollsters alike have claimed that this state could elect a GOP candidate to national office.

The Senate seat up for grabs here currently belongs to Barbara Boxer, a three-term incumbent who was the second female Jewish Senator ever elected. Boxer is originally from Brooklyn, and her first career was as a stockbroker. Boxer moved to California in the late 1960s, and first ran for political office in 1972, losing a close election for Marin County Supervisor. She won her first election in 1976 to that very position, and moved on to the House of Representatives in 1982, representing a Northern California district. Eventually, she ran for the Senate in 1992, filling an open seat vacated by Democrat Alan Cranston, winning by 5 points. Boxer was reelected in 1998 by 10 points, and in 2004 by 20. Unfortunately, her approval ratings have since fallen in the state, with a current Survey USA poll showing that 47% of Californians disapprove of her (compared to 41% approval).

The Democratic primary is not a serious one, as Boxer has the full support of both the state and national party. The Republican side, however, is hotly contested. Three candidates have basically split primary support, those being Tom Campbell, Carly Fiorina, and Chuck DeVore. Campbell is a former U.S. Representative from Northern California, and he has a Ph.D. in economics from the University of Chicago and a J.D. from Harvard Law School. Campbell is liberal on social issues but is quite conservative when it comes to economic policy. He voted no on Proposition 8, and maintains a strong libertarian following. Fiorina is the former CEO of Hewlett-Packard and a former McCain 2008 economic strategist. She has never run for political office, and her first and only foray into the field was with the McCain campaign, which ungraciously dumped her after a few ill-advised comments. DeVore is a member of the California State Assembly representing Orange County. DeVore served in the Reagan administration in the Department of Defense, and has served in the National Guard since 1985.

Current polling has shown this race to be quite close. The Republican primary currently has Campbell with a slight lead, but he and Fiorina are within single percentage points of each other. DeVore has been running a distant third the entire time, whereas Campbell and Fiorina keep switching off in the top spot. When Boxer is placed against these candidates, the race becomes closer than one might expect. Against Campbell, the most recent polls have them in a statistical tie, with Boxer holding a 2 point advantage. Against Fiorina, Boxer is up by 4. Finally, against DeVore, Boxer is only up by 3. So no matter who takes the Republican primary, Boxer will be in for a tough fight.

Californians have been very reluctant to elect Republicans to national office in statewide elections, not having done it since 1988. However, this political climate has made it appear possible for a moderate Republican to take the seat. Nevertheless, with 10% still undecided, Democrats have reason to feel confident that this three-term incumbent will have a good chance to stay in the chamber.

Next Week: Our final post of the semester! We take a look at Indiana, where retiring Evan Bayh leaves a seat ripe for GOP picking… or is it?

I don’t always get political, but when I do, I prefer the Democrats. Stay liberal my friends.

For those gentiles who did not understand that introductory remark, this past week was Passover, the holiday when Jews cannot eat any bread products, in remembrance of the exodus from Egypt. In honor of this holiday, your delightful board members, Bridgit and Matt, did not post on New Hampshire last week. But today is your lucky day, because here it is!

New Hampshire, once the bastion of New England conservatism, has been trending Democrat over the last couple elections, going for John Kerry in 2004 and Barack Obama in 2008. The seat up for grabs currently belongs to Judd Gregg, a retiring third-term incumbent. Gregg turned down a chance to be part of President Obama’s administration and now seems to be moving out of politics for good. Due to the recent nature of New Hampshire’s politics, it seems that this could be a possible pick-up for Democrats in 2010.

The Democratic primary, which occurs on September 14th, is not a very exciting race. Two candidates have declared, U.S. Representative Paul Hodes and Joseph Nadeau, a former state Supreme Court justice, but Hodes is the clear favorite to win the nomination. Hodes currently serves as the Representative from New Hampshire’s 2nd District. He graduated from Dartmouth College in 1972 and Boston College Law School in 1978, after which he worked under then-New Hampshire Attorney General David Souter. Hodes first ran for political office in 2004, challenging incumbent Republican Charlie Bass in the 2nd District. He garnered only 38% of the vote, losing handily. However, he won the rematch in 2006, defeating Bass with 53% of the vote. Hodes has had some controversial moments in the House, most notably being the first to demand that Rep. Charlie Rangel surrender his gavel as Ways and Means Chairman. He did however, vote for the recent health-care bill.

The Republican field is quite crowded, as it seems to have been in every state we have covered thus far. However, Republicans seem to uniting behind former New Hampshire Attorney General Kelly Ayotte. Ayotte is a Penn State graduate and a Villanova Law alum and is nationally known for her victory in Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood, where the Court said unanimously that a minor’s parents must be notified prior to an abortion taking place. Ayotte has had some big names appear at her fundraisers, most notably NRSC Chairman John Cornyn and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. Ayotte is pro-life, against government bailouts, and is against the just-passed health-care bill.

Currently, according to the RealClearPolitics average, Hodes is down by about 8 points. Ayotte has led from the get-go, and recent political feeling has increased her support. However, Hodes is quite popular in his district, which makes up half of New Hampshire, and currently, he has a substantial lead over Ayotte in fund-raising numbers. In any case, this is going to be a difficult fight for Democrats, but is one which can be one if Hodes runs a well-thought-out race. Hopefully he can pull it off!

Next Week: California! (Matt’s home state and home of Barbara Boxer, a woman who could never lose… or could she?)

By the way, today’s post featured help from the wonderful Lead Activist Helen Kilian. If anyone else would like to aid Bridgit and Matt in writing these posts, come to the Diana Center on Thursdays at 1! We’d love to see you.

I don’t always get political, but when I do, I prefer the Democrats. Stay liberal my friends.

On an initial welcome, HEALTH CARE!

Welcome back to school, and welcome back to Election Watch with Matt and Bridgit! Today we take a look at Missouri, where four-term Republican Senator Kit Bond is retiring. Missouri has become one of the most competitive states politically of late, with John McCain defeating Barack Obama in the 2008 Presidential election by less than 4,000 votes, which comes out to less than .14%. In addition, Missouri has voted for every single victorious Presidential candidate since 1964, except for, of course, this past election. Currently, Missouri’s other Senator is Claire McCaskill, a first term Democrat who won election in 2006.

Neither party’s primary appears to be very exciting, but let’s begin with looking at the Democratic candidate. Robin Carnahan, the current Secretary of State of Missouri, is running unopposed in the Democratic primary. Carnahan comes from the most famous political family in Missouri; her father was a two-term Governor of Missouri, and was elected a United States Senator posthumously following his plane crash during the campaign. His wife, Jean Carnahan, filled his seat for two years before a special election outed her. In addition, Robin’s brother, Russ, is a current U.S. Representative, also from Missouri, and her grandfather also served as a Congressman and Ambassador to Sierra Leone. Robin Carnahan is wildly popular in Missouri, winning reelection to the Secretary of State job in 2008 with 62% of the vote, receiving over 1.7 million votes, the most votes ever cast for a candidate in Missouri history.

The Republican side of this election does have a primary, but one candidate has certainly been labeled the front-runner. Roy Blunt, a current seven-term incumbent Congressman from Missouri, has stormed to a virtually insurmountable lead over his two opponents. Blunt is the former Acting Majority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives, stepping in for Tom Delay when he was removed from office. Blunt has also served as the Republican Whip, being replaced only in this Congress by Eric Cantor. Blunt has been the subject of ethics violations while serving if the House, having been named in CREW’s “Crew’s Most Corrupt,” and he has been linked to Jack Abramoff, a man convicted on multiple counts of fraud. Blunt’s other opponents are James H. Schmidt, a police officer, and Chuck Purgason, a current State Senator in Missouri. Neither of these two men appear to have any chance of defeating Blunt.

Virtually every political website has this as one of the three most competitive races in the nation this year, with polls indicating an absurdly close race. The most recent poll, conducted by Rasmussen on March 9, had Blunt 6 points ahead of Carnahan, with 12% undecided. However, earlier polls had Carnahan up by virtually the same amount. Opposition to health care reform is higher in Missouri than it is nationally, which might account for Blunt’s recent rise. In any case, this is sure to be an exciting and hard-fought contest, with one of the most powerful Republicans in the House running against a popular Democrat with strong family ties to the Senate. It is sure to be a race to watch! Hopefully our girl can turn this red seat back to blue.

Next Week: New Hampshire (Let’s take back the Northeast!)

I don’t always get political, but when I do, I prefer the Democrats. Stay liberal my friends.

Well, that whole health care thing is (basically) over. That didn’t take long, did it? Okay, fine, the whole process was a fourteen-month death march for many Democratic partisans. Still, there were still some valuable lessons to draw for the future.

Nancy Pelosi Is A Brilliant Speaker: Many a Democrat seemed ready to give up in despair after Scott Brown’s special election to the Senate. Not Nancy Pelosi. On the eve of Brown’s electon, the speaker told reporters, “”Whatever happens in Massachusetts, we will have quality, affordable health care for all Americans, and it will be soon.” Within the week, she was backing reconciliation as a winning strategy, and her work for every last vote this past weekend paid dividends with hours to spare (including Bart Stupak’s better-late-than-never defense of the bill on the House floor, which made for great televison). By the way, while Pelosi comes out of this shining, the weekend didn’t help Rahm “let’s go incremental” Emanuel.

Polls Can Be Deceptive: All through the debate, opponents of health reform pointed to many polls suggesting that a majority of Americans were opposed to the bills. Those stats provided nice GOP talking points, but Democrats shouldn’t worry too much about them, for two reasons. First, as Nate Silver pointed out in December, much of the opposition actually came from the dissatisfied left; this remained true through the weekend. Second, numerous polls that went deeper and actually explained the bill to voters found that support noticeably improved after respondents heard the actual changes. Going into November, Democrats can be confident that voters will respond favorably once their representatives get a chance to explain the reforms.

This Ain’t 1993: Recalling the failure of Bill Clinton’s attempt at health reform, the GOP went all out again in opposition. In retrospect, even a quick look at the differences between 1993 and 2010 makes one wonder why they felt that would be a winning strategy. For starters, Bill Clinton was elected with less than 45% of the vote in a three-way race, and his House majority was tired and corrupt, whereas Barack Obama was coming off of the biggest Democratic victory at the polls since 1964. Conversely, while Obama had much more political strength to draw on, his health care reform is far more moderate than Clinton’s. As Jon Chait outlines over at The New Republic, Obama’s bill not only occupies the middle of the road when one breaks down the polls, but also counts Romneycare in Massachusetts and the 1993 Republican alternative to the Clinton plan among its chief inspirations. Combine those two, and it’s hard to understand why John Boehner and Mitch McConnell thought they could win.

Welcome to Election Watch 2010: Spring Break edition! This is Freshman Rep Matt reporting from beautiful Southern California, where it is a balmy 81 degrees (go ahead and hate me). Today we will be examining the convoluted race for Arlen Specter’s seat in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania, as of late, has been trending towards the Democratic Party. It went for Obama with over 54% of the vote in 2008, and currently has a Democratic Governor and two Democratic Senators. In addition, the state’s House of Representatives is controlled by the Democrats, although the state Senate is controlled by the Republicans. Nonetheless, one must take Pennsylvania as a place where Democrats would be favored, especially since the state has not voted for a Republican Presidential candidate since 1988. Despite these positive signs, many political observers have labeled this seat as a toss-up, one that the Republicans could easily snag.

This reason that this race is so interesting is because no one is quite sure what to make of Arlen Specter, the incumbent. He was first elected to the Senate in 1980 as a Republican, and is currently serving his fifth term in office. Although he identified as a Republican, his liberal views on abortion, immigration, and the environment kept him out of the conservative wing, and he was widely known as a moderate. In April of 2009, Specter, fresh of his controversial vote to support the $800 billion stimulus plan, switched parties to become a Democrat, giving the party its coveted 60th vote. Since then, Specter has voted fairly consistently with his new party, although he retains his Republican ideals with regards to gun rights and foreign policy. In appreciation for his switch to the Democrats, Specter is now endorsed by President Obama, Vice-President Biden, Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Only one Democrat has mounted a serious primary challenge to Specter, and that is Representative Joe Sestak. Sestak, however, has yet to make a serious move up the polls, and has consistently trailed Specter by at least 15 points. When the primary comes on May 18, it is highly unlikely Sestak will be able to take Specter down.

The Republican side of this election is almost as bland. Four people have formally declared for the race, but the frontrunner at this point is Pat Toomey, a former Congressman who almost defeated Specter in the 2004 Republican primary, losing by only 1.7% of the vote. He is virtually a lock to win the nomination from his party, and no polling has been done to put him against other Republican candidates. It is when Toomey is put against Specter that the race becomes exciting. Polls have shown the race sliding back and forth as of late, and it seems that national political feeling is almost dictating the race. Specter’s age and health has become a factor in the race, as he is 80 years old and has revealed that he is fighting Hodgkin’s disease. Specter and Toomey have already begun fighting each other on the airwaves, with Specter attacking Toomey’s support for deregulation and other deep conservative values.

There is no question that this is going to be an interesting race, considering Specter and Toomey have gone at it before. However, if Specter can prevail with just Republicans voting, one must assume that he has a good chance with his own (albeit new) party voting in addition. If Specter is able to harness his popularity as moderate and swing votes from Republican voters, he should be able to win handily. We can only hope.

Next Week: Missouri (Can Democrats grab a Red Seat for themselves?)

I don’t always get political, but when I do, I prefer the Democrats. Stay liberal my friends.

Once again your delightful and exuberant board members Matt and Bridgit greet you to discuss the upcoming Colorado Senate election (even though we can barely function — midterms). Colorado is a brand new liberal-trending state. Who would have thought, considering that Focus on the Family was founded there? But its true. Currently both Senators and the Governor are Democrats, and Obama carried the state by roughly 8 percentage points. In addition, both the Colorado State Senate and House are controlled by the Democratic party. Despite all these wonderful things, virtually every political website is labeling this race as a toss-up. Let’s find out why.

This seat was vacated by Ken Salazar, who gave it up to become Secretary of the Interior in the Obama administration. Governor Bill Ritter appointed Michael Bennet, the Denver Public Schools Superintendent, to the seat to serve out Salazar’s term, which ends in 2010. Currently, Bennet is the youngest Senator in the body, being a fresh-faced 44 years young. Bennet entered public service in 1988, serving as an aide to Ohio Governor Richard Celeste, before entering law school. He followed in his father’s political background, who was an ambassador to India as well as an aide to Vice President Hubert Humphrey. After working in the Clinton White House, Bennet then moved to Colorado and served two years as Chief of Staff to Denver Mayor  John Hickenlooper. Prior to his Senate appointment, he served as Superintendent of Denver Public Schools.

Bennet has never been exceedingly popular in Colorado. His was an unexpected appointment, and his approval ratings have no broken 50% since he took office. As a result, former Colorado House Speaker Andrew Romanoff has entered the Democratic primary race, which takes place on August 10th, 2010. Although it would appear that Bennet should be vulnerable, it is in reality highly unlikely that he will lose, having secured the endorsement of President Obama, fellow Senator from Colorado Mark Udall, and Representatives Betsey Markey, Jared Polis,and John Salazar. We expect Bennet to have a relatively easy time securing the Democratic nomination, but we believe that Romanoff has a bright future. On the Republican primary side, there are 6 confirmed candidates, the most important of which are former Lieutenant Governor Jane Norton and Weld County District Attorney Ken Buck. The most recent poll had Norton dominating Buck, but the poll was taken months ago so know one really knows what’s going on there.

When Bennet is put against the Republicans, one begins to see why this race is so exciting. Against Norton, Rasmussen has Bennet down by 14 points. However, a Daily Kos poll taken the same day as another Rasmussen poll has Bennet up by one. In addition, Norton has never run a race on her own; the only office she has occupied is the Lt. Governor position, which she won on a ticket. In a Buck versus Bennet election, recent polling has the Republican up by 4, but just last month Daily Kos had Bennet up by 3. Keep in mind, though, that Bennet has not yet begun to spend his treasure troves of money. During Bennet’s first three months in office, he raised a record $1.37 million, a record for a Colorado Senate candidate in an off-year before an election. In addition, both President Obama and Rahm Emmanuel have hosted fundraisers for him, making Bennet very financially stable. Everyone in the state is ready for incredible amounts of money to be thrown around, and if the Democrats are able to rally grassroots support for Bennet, it is very likely that he will win the election. Or so we can only hope.

Next Week: Pennsylvania (Brand-new Dem Arlen Spector goes for reelection! Will either side actually vote for him?)

I don’t always get political, but when I do I prefer the Democrats. Stay liberal my friends.

Welcome back to the 2010 Election Watch with your brilliant, exquisite, and utterly incomparable board members Matt and Bridgit! Today, we look at the complex Senate race currently underway in the great state of Kentucky, home of amazing basketball, Mitch McConnell, and fried chicken. Now you might be asking, why are you two blogging about Kentucky? That’s a Republican state, it went for John McCain, Mitch McConnell is from there, and its a terrible time for Democrats! It’s not going to be close, right? Wrong! Kentucky is actually a Democratic leaning state, with 57% of registered voters aligning with the Democrats, compared to only 36.5% who align with the Republicans. In addition, both the Governor and Lieutenant Governor are Democrats, as is the Speaker of the House. To even further this point, Kentucky voted for Democratic Presidents Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter, and Bill Clinton (twice). In fact, Kentucky voted for the winner of every Presidential race from 1964 through 2004, only losing that streak in the 2008 election when it went for McCain.

Kentucky has become one of those states, such as West Virginia, that is full of conservative Democrats and likes to elect Dems to state offices, but then vote for Republicans in national elections. Luckily for us, the Democrats have a very strong field in the election, and are looking to turn this seat blue. The seat is being vacated by two-term Republican Senator Jim Bunning, a baseball Hall of Famer and a man prone to horrific political gaffes, who was essentially forced into retirement by the Republican party, which saw him as a weak candidate (he barely survived reelection in 2004, winning 51% of the vote compared to Democrat Daniel Mongiardo’s 49%). Currently, the Democratic primary has two real candidates, one of them being Lt. Governor Mongiardo. The other is current Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway. Conway is young and emphatically defeated his Republican counterpart in the race for Attorney General, leading many Democrats to believe that he too would be a very strong candidate.

The Republicans, unfortunately, also field a strong primary, with many candidates who will surely do better than the incumbent would have done. Two strong candidates have come forward, the first being current Kentucky Secretary of State Trey Grayson, who actually used to be a Democrat and actively campaigned for Bill Clinton in the state, which has worried some conservatives. The other major candidate is Rand Paul, son of infamous Libertarian congressman Ron Paul of Texas. Paul has never been in government, but did found the Kentucky Taxpayers United, a “nonpartisan” but ideologically conservative organization that ranks Kentucky’s representatives on how the raise or lower taxes. Both candidates have pledged to keep conservative values in the Senate, which is hugely important to the voters of the state.

Kentucky’s primary election is on May 18, and thus far no candidate has been able to gain a substantial lead over his rival. A late December poll has Conway up by 4 points over Mongiardo in the Democratic race, and on the Republican side a recent poll has Paul up by 19 points, but only 3 months before that Grayson was up by 15, so we’ll just to have to wait and see how that race turns out. In putting the four candidates against each other, the Republicans are winning every time, with the biggest spread being Grayson versus Mongiardo (Grayson is up 9 on average) and the smallest being Paul versus Conway (Paul is up 3 on average). In any case, this race is much closer than many Democrats expected, and we believe that the Dems have a fighting chance to win this seat, which would be huge considering the losses we may be taking in other places (North Dakota, so sad). This is a race where TV time, money, and volunteers are going to be hugely important, so expect the Obama machine to come out in full force to try to take this seat. Hopefully we can do it! We believe!

Next Week: Colorado (Will this new liberal-leaning state stay with the Dems?)

I don’t always get political, but when I do, I prefer the Democrats. Stay liberal my friends.

Before your utterly brilliant board members Bridgit and Matt start discussing the Nevada Senate race today, we would like to air one grievance we have noticed lately. Does anyone else think that it is utterly ridiculous that pundits are saying that it is possible for Republicans to regain the Senate? After looking briefly at RealClearPolitics, it appears that in order for the Republicans to do the unthinkable, they would have to win every single toss up race, every lean Democrat race, and then take California away from Barbara Boxer. Would that ever happen? Of course not! The media is overreacting to a big load of nothing, and it is very frustrating for your bloggers to listen to.

Moving on to our topic of the day, Harry Reid’s fight to keep his seat representing Nevada. Reid is currently the Senate Majority leader, stepping into that role in January 2007, when the Democrats swept back into the majority following a huge victory in the 2006 elections. Previous to that, he had been the Minority Leader since 2005, taking Tom Daschle position when he lost. Reid is currently running for a fifth term, having represented Nevada since 1987. Reid has only had one close election, that being in 1998 when he faced a stiff challenge from John Ensign, now the junior Senator from Nevada. Reid also has a history of gaining Republicans’ support in the state, having garnered several key endorsements from the opposition party during his reelection bid in 2004.

This election, however, appears to be moving in a different direction. Anger over the current direction of Congress, shaped by President Obama’s ideas, have generated anger in Nevada and led to a very anti-liberal feeling in the state. Reid, being the head of the Democrats in the Senate, is therefore seen as representative of all of it, and is an easy target for attacks. The Republican primary is chock full of characters, with 12 people having filed for the June 8th primary. However, two candidates, Danny Tarkanian and Sue Lowden, appear to be the only legitimate candidates, with just a couple percentage points  separating the two. Tarkanian is a real estate owner and former UNLV basketball player, who has run for public office twice in the state of Nevada (both races ended in defeat for him). Lowden is the current Nevada state Republican Chairwoman and a former state senator, representing Democratic-leaning Clark County.

There has not been a recent poll showing voters’ opinions regarding the Republican primary. As such, we can only wait until the primary, which figures to be hotly contested, to see who Senator Reid needs to fight. Current polls have Reid losing to Tarkanian by an average of 8.7%, and losing to Lowden by 8.8%. However, the most recent poll regarding both possible opponents has Reid closing the gap on both. In addition, Reid has an incredible amount of money, with $8.7 million in his war chest, destroying the next closest GOP candidate John Chachas (who isn’t even a legitmate candidate)  by $7 million. In addition, the DSSC has obliterated the NRSC in campaign fundraising over the last few election cycles, though the Republicans matched the Democrats in monetary donations for the first time in over two years last month. With their leader on the line, we expect the DSSC to have a fundraising blitz in Nevada, no doubt aided by President Obama, who as we all know, had the most successful grassroots fundraising campaign of all time. In any case, it is likely that Reid will be able to outspend his opponent, whoever that might be in November.

Many political websites, as of today, have the Nevada Senate election billed as either a toss up or a leaning Republican race. However, these polls are very preliminary, and without the potential effects of heavy Democratic spending in the state, we would hesitate to write off Majority Leader Reid. It is these two bloggers sincere hope and belief that Senator Reid will be reelected, and continue to guide the Senate.

Next Week: Kentucky (Can we win in a traditionally Republican state?)

I don’t always get political, but when I do, I prefer the Democrats. Stay liberal my friends.

Welcome to the third installment of Senate Election Watch 2010 with your tremendous board members Matt and Bridgit. Today we are looking at President Obama’s old standby, the Illinois senate seat being vacated by one Roland Burris. Burris, who has only been in office for two years, has had his tenure shrouded in controversy, being that he was appointed by ex-Governor Rod Blagojevich, who has since been impeached and removed from office on corruption charges. Burris, at the urging of the Democratic Party and President Obama, has declined to seek reelection, leaving the Democratic primary open to a variety of characters.

The Illinois primary was this past week, on February 2, making it the first 2010 election in the nation. On the Democratic side, a hotly contested battle ensued, with current Illinois treasurer Alexi Giannoulias coming out with 38.9% of the vote, about 5% more than the runner-up, David Hoffman, the current Inspector General of Chicago. The Republican half of the race was much less exciting, with current U.S. Congressman Mark Kirk taking 56% of the vote, a solid 35 points over his next closest competitor.

If there ever was a race (after Massachusetts of course) that would show the greater feelings of the country and its direction, Illinois must be it. Early polling, prior to the primary, had the race jumping all over the place, with both Giannoulias and Kirk seemingly having 5% leads over each other, depending on what poll you looked at. The first poll taken post-primary by Rasmussen the day after the primary, had Kirk with a 6 point lead. However, there is a 4.5% margin of error, and 10% of the Illinois voting population remains undecided.

Kirk has been able to take the lead in Illinois due to his strong fiscally-conservative record in the House, and socially moderate policies. Illinois has a strong Democratic tradition, and although they have no partisan registration, it is a state where true conservatives have had much trouble winning elections. Kirk has achieved popularity by playing off of independents’ and moderates’ current frustration with the direction of the country. Giannoulias is not a weak candidate however, having defeated State Senator Christine Radogno in 2006 for the Treasurer position, becoming not only the youngest person in the nation (at 30) to hold that office, but also becoming the first Democrat to hold it in 12 years.

The campaign has already gone negative, with the National Republican Senatorial Committee running an ad the day after the election comparing Giannoulias’s ethical record to that of Tony Soprano. Kirk himself criticized Giannoulias for mismanagement of a college savings program and for his work at Broadway Bank. Giannoulias responded by calling Kirk a “Washington insider” who is not right for Illinois. With things getting this hot nine months from Election Day, the state of Illinois and the country as a whole can only wait and see how it pans out. If the economy continues to struggle and Obama’s plans fail, it is likely that Kirk, a moderate, can steal the seats from the Democrats. However, if things improve (as they surely must), Giannoulias should bring out the Democrats and win a striking victory. We can only hope.

Next Week: Nevada Senate Race (Will Our Glorious Leader Survive?)

I don’t always get political, but when I do, I prefer the Democrats. Stay liberal my friends.

Nate Silver over at fivethirtyeight.com had a great piece last fall about the Democratic senators representing states that McCain won in November 2008. Of these thirteen senators, only two are up for reelection in 2010: Blanche Lincoln (AR) and Byron Dorgan (ND). These two seats are the focus of our post this week.

North Dakota: Open (D)

Dorgan announced in January that he would not seek reelection in the fall. While no democratic candidate has announced their intentions to run thus far, there is speculation that the former North Dakota Attorney General Heidi Heitkamp will run. She faces tough competition in North Dakotan Governor John Hoeven. Current polls have her down 21 points. However, these polls are premature considering neither party has started to spend significant amounts of money in the race and the primary isn’t until June 8.

Heitkamp was Attorney General from 1993 to 2000 when she lost a gubernatorial bid to Hoeven. Her biggest achievement in office was contributing to a multi-state lawsuit against the tobacco industry. Hoeven, meanwhile, sports an 87% approval rating after nearly a decade as governor, the highest of any governor in the United States.

It doesn’t look good for the great state of North Dakota.

Arkansas: Blanche Lincoln (D)

With her latest approval ratings at 27%, the Democrats chances look almost as bleak in Arkansas. Lincoln has not been able to connect with any portion of the voting electorate, having only 51% of her party’s support, 17% of independents, and just 9% of Republicans. It appears here initial resistance to health care reform and her continued berating of the public option has gotten her no where politically (shocking). The one possible advantage that the Democrats have in Arkansas is that the Republican primary is shaping up to be a brutal fight, which could enable Lincoln to solidify her support amongst her own party and try to make inroads with independents before the GOP has a candidate. In fact, there are 9 announced candidates in the Republican primary, including the vice-chair of the Washington County Tea Party (WOW). In any case, it is still unlikely that the Dems will hold on to this seat, but there does seem to be a slight glimmer of hope here, unlike in North Dakota.

These two feisty liberals are very sad to report on these two states today, but hopefully with an economy turning around and more impressive Democratic legislation to come in the next few months, the tide will be turned and the Dems will retain these two states.

Next Week: Obama’s Old Seat! Illinois.

I don’t always get political, but when I do I prefer the Democrats. Stay liberal my friends.