Not Sending Their Best
Bad candidates may cost Republicans the Senate
Republicans have nominated some poor quality candidates for Senate this year. That might not matter in a wave year, but this is no longer shaping up to be a wave year. This year, the Republican choice of candidates could cost them the Senate.
Republicans have nominated some bad candidates for Senate this year. I don’t mean “bad” in the sense that they’re not qualified for office—although I don’t think they are—but in the sense that they’re not good at running for office. They weren’t nominated on the strength of their skill at campaigning, but for their willingness to maintain the lie that the 2020 election was stolen—making a clearly untrue claim is now almost a requirement for winning a Republican primary—and for their fawning devotion to Donald Trump. The result is that this year’s slate of Republican candidates—many of whom have never run for office before—is a clown car of charlatans, wackadoos, near-fascists, and rank political amateurs.
Candidate quality particularly matters in the Senate, which hinges on the outcome of a few contested races. Just 35 Senate seats are up for election in November, with maybe 10—in Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin—plausibly in play. With the Senate divided 50-50, neither party can afford to lose a winnable race. While many people will vote for their party’s nominee regardless of who it is, a bad candidate can cost their party a race it otherwise would have won. Republicans may remenber Todd Akin, who lost a senate race he was favored to win after claiming victims of “legitimate rape” don’t get pregnant, or Christine O’Donnell, who lost her senate race badly after running an ad denying she was a witch. If there is a red wave in November—with Republicans fed up with President Biden turning out in much larger numbers than Democrats—then the quality of Republican candidates might not matter. But if no red wave materializes, Dr. Oz’s ability to inspire Pennsylvania voters could be the difference between Democratic and Republican control of the Senate.
It doesn’t look now like there will be a red wave this year. Historically, the party that controls the presidency loses seats in the midterms, because voters tend to be more motivated to vote against than for whoever is in power. Two months ago I wrote—more confidently than I should have—that Democrats were probably in trouble. But the political climate in the US changed dramatically at the end of June when the Supreme Court overturned fifty years of precedent by ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health that the US Constitution does not protect the right to obtain an abortion. Since then—and thanks also to a string of landmark Democratic legislative victories—the generic congressional ballot has swung nearly three points in the Democrats’ favor. More people now say they prefer to vote for a Democrat than for a Republican. In four special elections since the Dobbs decision, Democratic candidates significantly outperformed Biden’s 2020 margin. If the Democrats win more votes in November than Biden did in 2020, Republicans will be the ones in trouble.
Republicans are probably still favorites to retake the House. Because congressional maps favor Republicans, Democrats would probably need to win the popular vote by a couple of points to hold on to the House. But Democrats now seem likely to hold onto or even pick up seats in the Senate. Republicans trail in the polling averages in almost all of the battleground states. In Pennsylvania—a state Biden barely won—celebrity doctor Dr. Oz is running a half-hearted campaign and polling well behind Democrat John Fetterman. According to Rolling Stone, Trump has told associates that, unless something changes, Oz is going to “fucking lose”. In Arizona, venture capitalist Blake Masters, who is polling well behind Democrat Mark Kelly, has quietly scrubbed his website of text saying he is “100% pro-life” and supports a “federal personhood law”. The National Republican Senatorial Committee recently cancelled millions of dollars of advertising in both states. And in Ohio—a state Trump won by 8 points—venture capitalist and author J.D. Vance has struggled to raise money for his campaign and appears to be trailing Democrat Tim Ryan.
Republicans will probably make up some ground between now and November. The current polling is consistent with a small advantage for Democrats, but the election is likely to be a close one. Democrats need to win 5 of the 10 seats in play to hold on to their effective majority in the Senate. They need to win 7 of those 10 seats to secure a majority that doesn’t depend on the unreliable votes of Senators Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema. Right now, 538 gives Democrats a 65% chance of holding onto the Senate; PredictIt gives Democrats about a 65% chance; Decision Desk gives Democrats about a 62% chance; and Metaculus gives Democrats a 56% chance. My view is that the poor quality of Republican candidates for Senate means Republicans will probably lose a couple of races they should have won—and as a result Democrats will probably hold onto the Senate and may even pick up a seat or two.
My Forecast
Democrats have a 70% chance of holding onto the Senate
Democrats have a 33% chance of winning a 52-48 majority in the Senate
Sam Atis did a fascinating interview with Swift Centre for Applied Forecasting Director Michael Story about how to make forecasting more useful in practice. Dr. Oz’s campaign recently said that “if John Fetterman had ever eaten a vegetable in his life, then maybe he wouldn’t have had a major stroke.” Like Fetterman, I had a stroke at a relatively young age because I have a condition that makes me prone to strokes even if I eat plenty of vegetables. But maybe it’s our fault for not trying green coffee bean extract. If you enjoy my work, you can support it by sharing it with others.
Great indepth analysis as always, Robert! I enjoyed reading it.