2006 Midterm Election Predictions

Over the past few weeks and months many people have been trying to make predictions of today’s election. I am not going to bother with this silly exercise. I don’t think that there are many people who truly have the pulse on enough races nationally to really have much insight into what is going to happen.

Instead, I am going to make some predictions as to how each party is going to spin the results, no matter what they are.

In the case that the Republicans hold the House and the Senate

Republicans: The Republicans will of course use these results as proof that they are leading the country in the right direction and that Iraq is going swimmingly.

Democrats: Expect the Democrats to quickly bring charges of voter irregularities as most people believe that there is no way that Democrats won’t gain at least the House in this election.

Reality: The Republicans have done little if anything to inspire confidence yet Democrats have campaigned on little more than “we aren’t them”. A loss for Democrats here is absolutely devastating and should lead to talks of re-inventing the party. Won’t happen though. The likely reaction will more of the same “this election was stolen” rhetoric and mass hysteria in New York and San Francisco. A loss today would hopefully lead the Democrats to dumping albatrosses like Howard Dean and Markos Moulitsas Zuniga.

A Republican win would embolden them to continue on their current course, which would pretty much guarantee a Democrat president in ’08.

In the case that the Democrats win the House but lose the Senate

Republicans: The Republicans will claim that these results were better than all the prognosticators were predicting. They will also start taking up the “bi-partisanship” mantra.

Democrats: Democrats will claim that these results prove that Republicans have been a disaster and that this is also proof that the American people want the troops out of Iraq. Expect the same mantra of bipartisanship, especially on Democratic-sponsored bills.

Reality: I see this as the most likely result today and think that it most closely represents the mood of the country. Republicans have little to show for their control of the House and really deserve a beat-down. Unfortunately, Republicans will most likely start the demogoguery and fear-mongering about how the country is now doomed that we have Speaker Pelosi and her gang in control of House committees.

Democrats will use a House takeover as proof of their ideas and will push harder against Bush and the Republicans. I fully expect them to overplay their hand and start talking “mandate”.

In the case that the Democrats win the House and the Senate

Republicans: Republicans will say that they expected this, that their are casualties in war, and that we need to “stay the course”. 🙂

Democrats: Mandate, mandate, mandate!!!

Reality:First silence from Republicans. Then the demogoguery and fear-mongering will hit the airwaves of conservative talk-radio and the conservative blogs. This will be the beginning of Culture War II.

This is the most likely scenario to lead to a Republican president in ’08.


  1. If Democrats get a good share of the Congressional popular vote (say around 4% higher than the Republicans) but still don’t win the House, you can blame gerrymandering and little else. That’s my prediction.

  2. IndyInjun says:

    Irrespective of the outcome, the GOP needs reform in the worst possible way.

    Alas, the voters are likely to reward their perfidy, so nothing will change short of a national economic disaster.

    The worst possible scenario for we conservatives is for the GOP to hold onto both houses. With the repercussions from Iraq and a high likelihood of an economic melt-down, both directly attributable to their rule, they could be swept out of the White House and Congress in 2008. That would be simply horrible beyond imagination.

    EITHER corrupt national party in control of the federal government is a disaster for we, the people of the US.

  3. Eddie T says:

    Honest question: If either A. The Republicans hold onto both houses and continue their fiscal irresponsibility that they’ve established over the past six years or B. The Dems take one or both houses and start passing balanced budgets, then..

    How long do the Republicans get to/try to hold onto the mantle of “fiscal responsibility”? How many years of deficits will it take before they are no longer the party of “fiscal conservatism” and how many more budget busting new social programs like the prescription drug bill will they get to pass before they are no longer the party of “small government”?

  4. heroV says:

    yeah, but gerrymandering is completely legal. to the victor goes the spoils. democrats need to overcome gerrymandering just the same as republicans do in democratic gerrymandered districts.

  5. There really aren’t Democratic gerrymandered districts in the same way that Republicans have done it.

    We stupidly resort to “incumbent protection” instead of using gerrymandering to go on the attack to pick up more seats. Republicans haven’t won a single Congressional seat since 2002 outside of Texas and Indiana. So it looks like the Democratic gerrymanders are working about as well as the Republican ones, but there are more Republican gerrymanders in more competitive states.

    Ask yourself this, how do Michigan, Pennsylvania, Florida and Ohio consistently split their votes for President between the two parties, but more than 2/3 of the seats in Congress in these four states go to Republicans?

  6. rightofcenter says:

    No doubt about it, the Repubs have done a lousy job of controlling spending. But it is laughable that a Democratic House will all of a sudden start balancing the budget. When’s the last time a Democratic House balanced a budget? Boy, that would require some research.

  7. Clint Austin says:


    I know you’re a Dem operative and all, but how can you claim (with presumably a straight face) that “there really aren’t Democratic gerrymandered districts in the same way that Republicans have done it.”

    Were you living in Georgia in the summer of 2001?

  8. DougieFresh says:


    The national vote for congress is meaningless, as there are 30 more unopposed democrats than there are unopposed republicans. Assuming a 50-50 split in races that are contested on average and a 100-0 split in uncontested races, the dems have about a built in 7 percent lead. If the dems do not outscore the republicans in the nationwide congressional vote by more than 7 percent, then in reality the republicans had the better night.

  9. Bill Arp says:

    I gotta agree with Clint. Gerrymandering is a right of a majority. But Chris, how can you blame the national republician party when the states control reapportionment. Obviously your Democratic grass roots efforts are not working at the local level or the candidates you recruit are clones of Bobby Kahn.

    What is important is that many governors assert control their states reapportionment process. There looks to be a strong majority of Democratic Governors that will be elected this year.

    For those who have not put this together with the recent decsion that allows reapportionment at the legislatures will (and considering that every state follows this process) ,the Democrats could make a real grab at solidifying their newfound majority in Congress.,IF, they can get the state legislature to approve Congressional maps.

    So – Chris – what are you complaining about? You can probably pack some more minority districts across the USA…..ever think about moving there? You could probably get a great congresswoman like McKinney to represent you!!

  10. Eddie T says:


    1. You didn’t answer my question. You’re still defaulting the Republicans now…I think it’s even more laughable that a Republican house would balance the budget at this point. I’ll ask again. Republicans have had six years to do it and haven’t made an effort. How long will it take before you look at the Republicans and say “wow, they really aren’t going to do it”

    2. The last time Democrats controlled one of the three branches of government, we had a balanced budget. Hm.

  11. JP says:

    The Pelosi fear mongering started weeks ago–months ago if you listen to Hannity. Time to start ignoring the blowhards.

Comments are closed.