The Cook Political Report - a journal that analyzes political races around the country - projects 10 Republican House seats as "toss ups" against only two "toss up" Democratic House seats. Altogether, they rate 46 Republican House seats as competitive against only 20 competitive Democratic House seats.
This means that for the Democrats to pick up the 15 seats they need for a 218 House majority, they'll have to hold most of their own competitive races and hope to win 15 to 20 out of the 46 competitive Republican House seats. Many see this as remote - doable only if Democrats do a better job speaking to voters and earning their trust.
Nevertheless, a 5-to-1 advantage in "toss up" races and a better than 2-to-1 advantage in the number of competitive races should signal Democratic House gains in November.
In the campaign for the Senate, Cook rates six Republican seats as "toss ups" against only one Democratic "toss up" seat. However, in the Senate, Democrats are defending three open seats compared with only one open Republican seat. And, according to Cook, Democrats have more races that could become more competitive if national trends start breaking against the Democrats.
So, for Democrats to retake the Senate where they face a 45-55 disadvantage, they'll have to just about run the table in the competitive races, while holding all their open seats. Here again, this could happen only if Democrats succeed in connecting with voters with a clearer national narrative of why voters should trust Democrats with governing.
Cook also rates 10 Republican governor seats as a "toss up" or "lean Democratic" against only one Democratic governor seat rated as a "toss up." Based on where most of these competitive governor races are, including solid blue states like California, New York, Maryland and Massachusetts, the prospect of Dems retaking a majority of the governors' mansions seems to be the easiest path for Democratic gains in the 2006 midterms.
But the fact that Democrats appear better positioned to have more success in governor races than in the national campaigns underscores the trouble the party faces when it comes to its national messaging. Governor races are less about the party brand than they are about the individual candidates and the local issues - from traffic jams to schools.
That's partly why Democrats have won governor races in solid red states like Wyoming, Kansas and Virginia. On the other side, it's also why Republicans have won blue-state governor seats in Massachusetts, Rhode Island and California.
Since governor races are mostly about domestic issues, Democrats should be at their best since they can focus on basic services like providing health care to kids and investing in state universities. On the other hand, running for House and Senate seats expands the issue playing field into foreign policy, national security and other areas that haven't been strengths for Democrats.
Democrats' Soft Underbelly
On a national level, Democrats will first need to explain effectively what it means to be a Democrat, what broad themes and goals they would bring to governing while still giving individual Democrats room to disagree on the finer points of policy.
Instead, what has happened too often is that without a unifying national theme, Democrats argue among themselves over narrow policies. The quarreling over details, in turn, creates the image that Democrats are mostly focused on single-issue politics, not higher principles.
By contrast, Republicans - with stark messages about "values" and "patriotism" and with a powerful media apparatus from print to radio to TV to the Internet - have presented themselves as the party that speaks from the heart to the American people while painting the Democrats as phonies who have no clear direction and are weak on national security.
Under this assault for a generation, Democrats have struggled to hold together their traditional coalition of supporters. The party has lost ground among Southerners, rural voters, Catholics, some blue-collar workers and married couples with families.
West Virginia is a perfect example of what's gone wrong for Democrats in recent national elections. Under normal circumstances, West Virginia should be part of the Democratic base.
Since the Great Depression, West Virginia had only voted for Republican presidential candidates in three landslide Republican victories - Eisenhower in 1956, Nixon in 1972 and Reagan in 1984. Jimmy Carter won the state in 1980 and Michael Dukakis won it in 1988 while both candidates were beaten badly elsewhere in the country.
This means that for the Democrats to pick up the 15 seats they need for a 218 House majority, they'll have to hold most of their own competitive races and hope to win 15 to 20 out of the 46 competitive Republican House seats. Many see this as remote - doable only if Democrats do a better job speaking to voters and earning their trust.
Nevertheless, a 5-to-1 advantage in "toss up" races and a better than 2-to-1 advantage in the number of competitive races should signal Democratic House gains in November.
In the campaign for the Senate, Cook rates six Republican seats as "toss ups" against only one Democratic "toss up" seat. However, in the Senate, Democrats are defending three open seats compared with only one open Republican seat. And, according to Cook, Democrats have more races that could become more competitive if national trends start breaking against the Democrats.
Cook also rates 10 Republican governor seats as a "toss up" or "lean Democratic" against only one Democratic governor seat rated as a "toss up." Based on where most of these competitive governor races are, including solid blue states like California, New York, Maryland and Massachusetts, the prospect of Dems retaking a majority of the governors' mansions seems to be the easiest path for Democratic gains in the 2006 midterms.
But the fact that Democrats appear better positioned to have more success in governor races than in the national campaigns underscores the trouble the party faces when it comes to its national messaging. Governor races are less about the party brand than they are about the individual candidates and the local issues - from traffic jams to schools.
That's partly why Democrats have won governor races in solid red states like Wyoming, Kansas and Virginia. On the other side, it's also why Republicans have won blue-state governor seats in Massachusetts, Rhode Island and California.
Since governor races are mostly about domestic issues, Democrats should be at their best since they can focus on basic services like providing health care to kids and investing in state universities. On the other hand, running for House and Senate seats expands the issue playing field into foreign policy, national security and other areas that haven't been strengths for Democrats.
Democrats' Soft Underbelly
On a national level, Democrats will first need to explain effectively what it means to be a Democrat, what broad themes and goals they would bring to governing while still giving individual Democrats room to disagree on the finer points of policy.
Instead, what has happened too often is that without a unifying national theme, Democrats argue among themselves over narrow policies. The quarreling over details, in turn, creates the image that Democrats are mostly focused on single-issue politics, not higher principles.
By contrast, Republicans - with stark messages about "values" and "patriotism" and with a powerful media apparatus from print to radio to TV to the Internet - have presented themselves as the party that speaks from the heart to the American people while painting the Democrats as phonies who have no clear direction and are weak on national security.
Under this assault for a generation, Democrats have struggled to hold together their traditional coalition of supporters. The party has lost ground among Southerners, rural voters, Catholics, some blue-collar workers and married couples with families.
West Virginia is a perfect example of what's gone wrong for Democrats in recent national elections. Under normal circumstances, West Virginia should be part of the Democratic base.
Since the Great Depression, West Virginia had only voted for Republican presidential candidates in three landslide Republican victories - Eisenhower in 1956, Nixon in 1972 and Reagan in 1984. Jimmy Carter won the state in 1980 and Michael Dukakis won it in 1988 while both candidates were beaten badly elsewhere in the country.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
