2024 US Senate Races

Current Senate: 51 D and 49 R

Final Prediction: 50 D and 50 R
Democrats to pickup TX. Republicans to pickup MT and WV.

Overview: (6/20/23) Though confident for the moment of holding the White House and sanguine about regaining control of the House, the chances for the Democrats to hold the Senate after 2024 are slim. 23 seats currently held by the blue team are up for grabs versus only 11 for the GOP. Furthermore, the Democrats have a number of incumbents running for reelection in red states, while none of the sitting Republicans are in blue states.

Races are categorized as either likely or unlikely to be competitive. I put all open-seat races on the competitive list. This post will be updated continuously until election day.

Likely to be competitive and open-seat:

 

Arizona
Rating: Leans Democratic hold
Independent: Krysten Sinema (incumbent)

Democrat: Congressman Ruben Gallego

Republican: Former Journalist Kari Lake?
Overview: (6/20/23) The bad news is Krysten Sinema, now an "independent" still caucusing with the Democrats, may run for reelection. Although she has no chance of winning, she might siphon enough votes from Ruben Gallego to hand this race to the GOP. The good news is that Gallego is a great candidate, Arizona is trending blue, and Arizona Republicans are having a hard time coming up with a strong candidate.
(12/3/23): So far it looks like Sinema is running as an independent, and Republicans will get stuck with batshit-crazy former journalist Kari Lake, who still believes she is the Governor of Arizona even though she it not. Polls suggest Lake and Sinema will split the conservative vote, allowing Ruben Gallego to win with a plurality.

California
Rating: Likely Democratic hold

Democrat: Congressman Adam Schiff or Congresswoman Katie Porter (likely) (incumbent Laphonza Butler retiring)

Republican: ?
Overview: (12/3/23): California has a jungle primary, and it's looking like the runoff could be between two Democrats. That could give a big boost to Democrats in California up and down the ticket.

Delaware
Rating: Guaranteed Democratic hold
Democrat: Congresswoman Lisa Blunt Rochester  (incumbent tom Carper retiring)
Republican: ?
Overview (12/3/23): This race is competitive in name only. Democrat Lisa Blunt Rochester will win.

Florida
Rating: Likely Republican hold
Republican: Rick Scott (incumbent)
Democrat: Former Congresswoman Debbie Mucarsel-Powell
Overview 12/3/23: Scott is the overwhelming favorite at this point. There is the chance, however slim, that Florida will swing back to the left a bit. The Republican hegemony in Florida is increasingly unpopular.

Indiana
Rating: Guaranteed Republican hold
Republican: ? (incumbent Mike Braun retiring and running for Governor)
Democrat: ?
Overview 12/3/23: Mike Braun (R) is retiring to run for Governor, but Democratic chances in Indiana have gone from slim to none.

 

Maryland

Rating: Likely Democratic hold 

Democrat: Angela Alsobrooks, Prince George's County Executive (incumbent Ben Cardin retiring)

Republican: Former Detroit Chief of Police James Craig?
Overview 12/3/23: This race is competitive in name only. Democrat Angela Alsobrooks will win.

Michigan

Rating: Likely Democratic hold 

Democrat: Congresswoman Elissa Slotkin? Debbie Stabenow (incumbent Debbie Stabenow retiring)

Republican: Former Detroit Chief of Police James Craig?
Overview (6/20/23): This one's probably simple. Biden beat Trump by 3% in Michigan in 2020, and the Democrats are likely to field a stronger candidate than the Republicans.
(12/3/23): James Craig is the black former Detroit Chief of Police. The idea that he could cobble together a victory by uniting Michigan Republicans and some of the urban black vote is an intriguing one, but I'll believe it when I see it. Craig tried to run for Governor in 2022, and it went pretty badly. Democrat Elissa Slotkin is running a strong campaign.

Montana

Rating: Toss Up

Democrat: Jon Tester (incumbent)
Republican: Businessman Tim Sheehy
Overview (6/20/23): Republicans are more likely to win this seat than incumbent Jon Tester, but he's defied expectations in the past. In 2012, Tester won 48.6% to Republican Denny Rehberg's 44.9% with the Libertarian candidate taking 6.6%. This happened while Mitt Romney beat Obama by 14% in Montana. Tester pulled off an impressive 50.3% to 46.8% victory in 2018. But I think his luck might be about to run out. Democrats have preformed abysmally in the past couple of elections in the northern plains.
(12/3/23): It looks like Republicans are going with racist, misogynist homophobe and political novice Tim Sheehy. Tester is polling well against Sheehy, but he will need every possible break to win.

Nevada
Rating: Likely Democratic hold
Democrat: Jacky Rosen (incumbent)
Republican: ?
Overview (6/20/23): Rosen is vulnerable in light-blue Nevada, but so far the Republicans haven't been able to find a top-tier candidate.
(12/3/23) Rosen is benefiting from the fact that big-name Nevada Republicans have declined to join this race. She's likely to face a political novice with little fundraising ability as her opponent.

Nevada
Rating: Likely Democratic hold
Democrat: Jacky Rosen (incumbent)
Republican: ?
Overview (6/20/23): Rosen is vulnerable in light-blue Nevada, but so far the Republicans haven't been able to find a top-tier candidate.
(12/3/23) Rosen is benefiting from the fact that big-name Nevada Republicans have declined to join this race. She's likely to face a political novice with little fundraising ability as her opponent.

New Jersey
Rating: Likely Democratic hold

Democrat: Congressman Andy Kim (likely)
Republican: ?
Overview (12/3/23): Incumbent Bob Menendez is going to jail. Although he hasn't said he's for sure not running for another term, it doesn't matter. The New Jersey Republican party is in bad shape and Democrats have little to fear in this race.

Texas
Rating: Toss up
Republican: Ted Cruz (incumbent)
Democrat: Congressman Colin Allred (likely)
Overview (6/20/23): So Trump only carried Texas by 5 points in 2020. If the GOP ticket proves a total disaster in 2024 (Trump running from prison or something), Texas might actually go blue. That could spell trouble for Ted Cruz who only won by 3 points in 2018.
12/3/23: The $13 million Allred has raised sounds impressive until you realize that Cruz has raised $40 million. Democrats should not kid themselves about this one; it will take a miracle to win.

Utah
Rating: Guaranteed Republican hold
Republican: State House Speaker Brad Wilson? (incumbent Mitt Romney retiring)
Democrat: ?
Overview 12/3/23: This race is competitive in name only. The Republican will win.

West Virginia
Rating: Guaranteed Republican pickup
Democrat: ? (incumbent Joe Manchin retiring)
Republican: Governor Jim Justice (likely)
Overview (12/3/23): This race is competitive in name only. Republican Jim Justice will win.

Wisconsin

Rating: Likely Democratic hold 

Democrat: Tammy Baldwin (incumbent)
Republican: ?
Overview (6/20/23): So far no Republican has announced to run against Tammy Baldwin. She's looking like a pretty good bet in Wisconsin, which, after trending red for years has started swinging back a bit towards blue. Janet Protasiewicz's 11 point win in this year's Wisconsin Supreme Court race is a good sign.
Overview (12/3/23): It's still the sound of silence on the Republican side. That's good - the less interested Wisconsin Republicans are in voting in 2024, the more likely Joe Biden wins.

 

Unlikely to be competitive:

Connecticut: Chris Murphy (D). Republicans have had high hopes for Connecticut some years ago. Those hopes wnet nowhere.

Hawai'i: Mazie Hirono (D). Even in Republican-leaning years, the GOP has gotten nowhere in Hawai'i congressional races.

Maine: Angus King (I-Democratic caucus). King is quite popular, and Maine seems to like incumbents. 

Massachusetts (D). The only way Elizabeth Warren is not still a U.S. Senator years from now is if she runs for higher office.

Minnesota: Amy Klobuchar (D). Strong approval ratings protect Klobuchar from vulnerability. Minnesota has bucked the trend in the northern prairie and trended blue.

Mississippi: Roger Wicker (R). As I noted in a post in 2008, here's how voting works in Mississippi in statewide races: white people vote Republican, black people vote Democratic. The population demographics needed for a serious challenge to Wicker just aren't there.

Missouri: Josh Hawley (R) is a contemptible human being; Missouri doesn't care.

Nebraska: Deb Fischer (R) is running for another full term and Pete Ricketts (R) is running in a special to complete the term to which he was appointed. Democrats hope in Nebraska to continue to carry the single electoral vote of the Omaha area (NE-2) and maybe some day win a House seat. But a Senate seat ain't happening.

 

New Mexico: Martin Heinrich (D) can expect an easy win as New Mexico trends blue.

New York: Kirsten Gillibrand (D). Extremely unlikely any Republican will win a statewide race in New York.

North Dakota. Kevin Cramer (R). Does this state even still have a Democratic party?

Pennsylvania: Bob Casey Jr. (D). Could become competitive but I'll believe it when I see it.

Rhode Island: Sheldon Whitehouse (D). Republicans have made serious inroads in a lot of what were considered blue states in the past few years. But not in Rhode Island.

Tennessee: Marsha Blackburn (R) is the perfect representative of the ultra-right-wing politics that have gripped Tennessee.

Vermont: Bernie Sanders (I, Democratic caucus). There is no more popular Senator among his constituents than Bernie.

Virginia: Tim Caine (D). Democrats sometimes receive nasty shocks in Virginia, but with Biden likely to carry the state by double-digits this race is unlikely to be competitive.

Washington: Maria Cantwell (D). Republicans have become far less competitive in statewide races in Washington in recent years, and the blue team did great in 2022. The GOP nominee for this seat doesn't have a prayer.

Wyoming: John Barrasso (R). Watching paint dry will be more interesting than this race.

 

Tweet

The Eclipse of American Democracy, Part Ten: Republican Autocracy in Michigan and the Poisoned People of Flint

"In a glorious way that makes it easier to cram ALL of the Dem garbage in Wayne, Washtenaw, Oakland and Macomb counties into only four districts. Is there anyone on our side who doesn’t recognize that dynamic?" - Michigan Republican congressional aide Jack Daly, in a 2011 email describing the Republican strategy to solidify control of most of Michigan's congressional seats.

When the Republican state legislature redrew the state's 14 US House seats in 2011, it gave the work of drawing new borders to the Michigan Chamber of Commerce and other consultants. Publicly, the Chamber says it only seeks fairness and doesn’t support gerrymandering. Privately of course, it cheerfully assures Republicans, "We’ve spent a lot of time providing options to ensure we have a solid 9-5 delegation in 2012 and beyond." And the Republican party's State Leadership Committee isn't at all shy about boasting of their ability to gerrymander, noting, "Michiganders cast over 240,000 more votes for Democratic congressional candidates than Republicans, but still elected a 9-5 Republican delegation to Congress." It should also be noted that the state legislature itself is heavily gerrymandered, with large Republican majorities elected in 2012 despite despite the fact that voters preferred  Democratic state legislative candidates over Republicans by an 8-point spread that year.

This is nothing we haven't seen in other Republican-led states. In Michigan however, stealing control of the state legislature and the state's congressional majority was not nearly enough for Republicans. In recent years Michigan Republicans have gone a long way towards concentrating unprecedented power in the hands of the state's Governor. And they've done so in a way that is deeply racist (surprise, surprise).  From staff blogger Stephen Wolf of Daily Kos,

"Republicans therefore concocted a scheme to circumvent elected local governments by having the state appoint so-called "emergency managers" to take control of local financial decisions. It was a perfect display of cynicism: Republicans in the state capital have spent years starving Detroit and other cities financially, thus paving the way for these emergency managers to swoop in and undermine pensions, promote education privatization, and dismantle public services.

The emergency manager law proved so unpopular that Michigan voters repealed it at the ballot in 2012. In response, Republicans, with their gerrymander-protected majorities, simply passed the law a second time, and added a small fiscal appropriation that rendered it immune from a ballot-box veto. (Spending laws can’t be overturned by voters via referendum.) And that’s not the only case where Republicans have over-ridden the the public’s will: They recently passed—again, with a fig-leaf appropriation—a repeal of straight-ticket voting that would likely lengthen voting lines in urban, heavily minority precincts. Guess what? Voters had previously rejected precisely such an effort at the ballot box, just as they did with emergency managers.

So what do these anti-democratic measures have to do with Flint’s current crisis, where lead has poisoned children and made tap water unusable for 100,000 people? It turns out that (Republican Governor) Snyder’s government had installed an emergency manager to usurp Flint’s fiscal policy authority. At the state’s direction, that emergency manager made the decision to switch from Detroit’s water system to contaminated Flint River water, even though the move would not save money. Instead, it would help undermine Detroit’s water system and pave the way toward its eventual privatization."

The Michigan Civil Rights Commission concluded in 2017 that the emergency manager law is intrinsically discriminatory, and that it deepens the disparity between poor urban and affluent suburban communities. The Commission said, "If you live in Michigan, there is a 10 percent chance that you have lived under emergency management since 2009. But if you are a black Michigander, the odds are 50/50," "In short, the EM law as applied far too often addresses the problems of already financially stricken governments in second-class communities, segregated based on race, wealth and opportunity, by appointing an emergency manager whose toolbox is filled with short term solutions that are contrary to the long term interests of the people living there."

Despite all this, there's hope for a better future. Merrit Kennedy of NPR noted in late 2016, "Michigan's attorney general has announced felony charges against two former emergency managers of Flint, Mich., and two other former city officials. The charges are linked to the city's disastrous decision to switch water sources, ultimately resulting in widespread and dangerous lead contamination." Current polls also show that Democrat Gretchen Whitmer has a strong chance of being elected Governor this year. I wonder how Republican-dominated areas in Michigan feel about a new Governor abolishing home rule in their towns in favor of "emergency managers"?

Tweet

The Eclipse of American Democracy, Part Four: Gerrymandering and Modern Technology

To begin, a lesson from history. In 1948 the Union of South Africa held a national election in which the conservative Reunited National Party won a majority of seats in Parliament despite losing the popular vote to the more liberal United Party. South Africa at that time had a constitution that located many parliamentary seats in thinly-populated rural areas that favored conservatives at the disadvantage to more heavily populated (and more liberal) urban areas; thus the conservative victory despite losing the popular vote 37.7% to 49.2%. In power for the first time, the openly white-supremacist RNP proceeded to institute the apartheid system that completely disenfranchised non-whites and otherwise put the country on a path to becoming a dictatorship that allowed no civil liberties at all.

The parallels between 1940s South Africa and the United States in the 21st century are striking. In parts one and three of this series, I discussed how the bigotry of today's Republican party is damaging to democracy in our multi-cultural society. In this and future posts, I'll cover how Republicans are using and abusing the law to make sure they stay in power in spite of, and not because of, the fact that the United States is a representative democracy.

Gerrymandering, the practice of establishing a political advantage for a particular party or group by manipulating district boundaries, has been around for centuries. But leave it to 21st-century Republicans to take it to extremes; everywhere they can use gerrymandering to maximize their advantage, they do so. Modern technology makes it possible to do this with great precision. Consider the case of the gerrymandering of the Wisconsin state legislature, now the subject of a case before the US Supreme Court.

From a 2017 article by Jordan Ellenberg of the New York Times:

"About as many Democrats live in Wisconsin as Republicans do. But you wouldn’t know it from the Wisconsin State Assembly, where Republicans hold 65 percent of the seats, a bigger majority than Republican legislators enjoy in conservative states like Texas and Kentucky."

"The United States Supreme Court is trying to understand how that happened. On Tuesday, the justices heard oral arguments in Gill v. Whitford, reviewing a three-judge panel’s determination that Wisconsin’s Republican-drawn district map is so flagrantly gerrymandered that it denies Wisconsinites their full right to vote. A long list of elected officials, representing both parties, have filed briefs asking the justices to uphold the panel’s ruling."

"Gerrymandering used to be an art, but advanced computation has made it a science. Wisconsin’s Republican legislators, after their victory in the census year of 2010, tried out map after map, tweak after tweak. They ran each potential map through computer algorithms that tested its performance in a wide range of political climates. The map they adopted is precisely engineered to assure Republican control in all but the most extreme circumstances."

The model for today's Republican gerrymandering strategy was established by Texas in 2002, and was quickly copied by other Republican-controlled states. I wrote about this in a 2013 post; here are some highlights:

"The redistricting of Congressional seats is traditionally done once every ten years, soon after the national census. In the 2000 election, Texas elected 17 Democrats and 15 Republicans to the US House, and did so again two years later after the decennial redistricting. However, in the 2002 election the Republicans also gained control of both houses of the state legislature for the first time since the 19th century. The newly elected Republican legislature then engaged in an unprecedented mid-decade redistricting plan.  After a protracted partisan struggle, the legislature enacted a new congressional districting map, as a result of which Republicans won 21 seats to the Democrats' 11 in the 2004 election. The plan was personally shepherded through the Texas legislature by US House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. Texas Senator John Cornyn was quick to congratulate DeLay and to brag about the success of the redistricting plan, saying, "Everybody who knows Tom knows that he's a fighter and a competitor, and he saw an opportunity to help the Republicans stay in power in Washington.""

Republicans won very big in the 2010 mid-term elections, gaining control of legislatures and Governor's offices in many states in the south and the rust-belt. The result of course was the re-drawing of both Congressional districts and state legislative districts to maximum advantage. The Republican party's State Leadership Committee is quite proud of the way in which they manipulated the results of the 2012 U.S. House election, and has written an analysis for me. Boasting about the success of their "REDMAP" plan, the Committee reported:

"After REDMAP’s success on Election Day 2010, Republicans held majorities in 10 of the 15 states that gained or lost U.S. House seats and where the legislature played a role in redrawing the state legislative and congressional district map.  In the 70 congressional districts that were labeled by National Public Radio as "competitive" in 2010, Republicans controlled the redrawing of at least 47 of those districts; Democrats were responsible for 15, and a non-partisan process determined eight."

"REDMAP’s effect on the 2012 election is plain when analyzing the results: Pennsylvanians cast 83,000 more votes for Democratic U.S. House candidates than their Republican opponents, but elected a 13-5 Republican majority to represent them in Washington; Michiganders cast over 240,000 more votes for Democratic congressional candidates than Republicans, but still elected a 9-5 Republican delegation to Congress.  Nationwide, Republicans won 54 percent of the U.S. House seats, along with 58 of 99 state legislative chambers, while winning only 8 of 33 U.S. Senate races and carrying only 47.8 percent of the national presidential vote."

The Report also brags that gerrymandering also helped Republicans win in 2012 at the state level: "In Ohio, for instance, Republicans actually expanded their state House and state Senate majorities in 2012, to 60-39 in the House and 23-10 in the Senate, even as Obama carried the state by three points." "Another good example is the Virginia House. Republicans retained a 67-31 edge there, despite Obama having carried the state by four points."

But hey, don't Democrats also gerrymander when they get the chance? Actually they do so quite rarely. True, the Supreme Court has taken up the case of Benisek v. Lamone, in which the plaintiffs claim that Maryland Democrats deliberately redrew the state's 6th Congressional district with partisan intent. (Maryland Democrats have admitted that they did draw the district with partisan intent, the question before the Court is whether they did so illegally).

The frustrating thing here is false equivalence. The Hill notes that, "Legal analysts say the court likely took the Maryland case in addition to the Wisconsin case to settle the issue in a neutral way without siding with one political party over another". So on the one hand, Republicans have gerrymandered virtually all congressional seats and state legislative seats across all of the south, most of the plains states and much of the rust-belt, while Democrats are accused of gerrymandering a single congressional seat in Maryland. So of course we get headlines such as (from the Washington Post), "Maryland’s redistricting case reminds us: Both parties gerrymander. A lot."

Note finally that drawing districts through computer modeling of voter demographics is only one way that Republicans cheat to win through gerrymandering. Next time I'll cover how Republicans manipulate laws designed to protect minority voters so that the intent of those laws is turned upside down for most folks.

Tweet

The Eclipse of American Democracy, Part One: Bigotry as a Winning Strategy

Democracy is not dying in America. But that's not for lack of effort by leading Republicans and conservative billionaires. Those folks are attacking democratic institutions with everything they've got, because their interests and the interests of the American people are very much at odds. The driving force of American politics in the current decade has been conservative leadership attempting to cement their long-term goals as public policy before changing population demographics overwhelm them and their old, white hegemony at the ballot box. This is the first in a series of articles that will focus on how conservatives are attempting to transform America into an oligarchy where elections are held only to determine which Republican will have the job of making sure corporations and billionaires get everything they want.

Republicans expected to win the 2012 election. In the immediate aftermath of that loss, conservatives noted that the tide of changing population demographics and growing minority vote not only contributed to Romney's loss (given that few non-whites voted Republican) but also that these same trends would prove even bigger challenges in the future, given that American minority populations are growing faster than the white, Christian conservative base of the Republican party.

Here's what conservative pundit Sean Trende had to say:
"For Republicans, that despair now comes from an electorate that seems to have undergone a sea change. In the 2008 final exit polls (unavailable online), the electorate was 75 percent white, 12.2 percent African-American, 8.4 percent Latino, with 4.5 percent distributed to other ethnicities. We’ll have to wait for this year’s absolute final exit polls to come in to know the exact estimate of the composition this time, but right now it appears to be pegged at about 72 percent white, 13 percent black, 10 percent Latino and 5 percent “other.”

Obviously, this surge in the non-white vote is troubling to Republicans, who are increasingly almost as reliant upon the white vote to win as Democrats are on the non-white vote. With the white vote decreasing as a share of the electorate over time, it becomes harder and harder for Republicans to prevail.

This supposed surge in minority voting has sparked discussions about the GOP’s renewed need to draw in minority voters, especially Latinos, usually by agreeing to comprehensive immigration reform."

Republican party leadership was quick to pick up on the theme of expanding minority outreach. Here's a quote from the Republican National Committee "Growth and Opportunity Project", issued in 2013: "We need to campaign among Hispanic, black, Asian, and gay Americans and demonstrate we care about them, too. We must recruit more candidates who come from minority communities. But it is not just tone that counts. Policy always matters."

That was the strategy the Republican establishment recommended, but it wasn't the one they got in 2016. Here are some quotes from Donald Trump:
March, 2016: "I think Islam hates us... And we can't allow people coming into this country who have this hatred of the United States."
From Time magazine, August, 2016: "Donald Trump kicked off his presidential bid more than a year ago with harsh words for Mexico. "They are not our friend, believe me," he said, before disparaging Mexican immigrants: "They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.""
November 2017: Regarding the suggestion from Greg Sargent of the Washington Post on Twitter that, "Trump regularly attacks high-profile African Americans to feed his supporters' belief that the system is rigged for minorities", Trump responded, "MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!"

As it turns out, there was another, completely opposite strategy to the more-inclusive campaign the Republican leadership had suggested: go full-on white supremacist. During the 2016 campaign, Sean Trende described the Trump strategy in terms of numbers: In 2012, the electorate that went to the polls had been 59% white, but, "If we do see Donald Trump push the white vote up into 63-64%, it suggests that as whites move towards minority status that they become more aware of their whiteness, and it plays into politics. It is a disheartening and dangerous trend, but it might be something we don't have any control over."

Trende was exactly right: the "forgotten" white voter who ignored Mitt Romney found a home in Donald Trump's whites-only Republican party, helping Trump carry rust-belt states that nearly everyone thought were safely in the Democratic column. Trende, to his credit, noted after the election that, "my observation was expressly limited to the idea that missing whites could help the GOP win. People interpreted this as advocating for a "whites-only" GOP, which I expressly disclaimed."

Final point: I said this is a series about how Republicans are attacking democracy. Successful appeals to white-supremacy are repugnant, but it takes more than an assault on inclusiveness and on America as the great melting pot to destroy democratic institutions. Next time, I'll talk about how Republicans have translated their attacks on minorities into policies that keep minority voices from being heard.

Tweet