UPDATE: On the morning of September 26 the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee announced “a new multi-million dollar investment in television advertising for the Texas and Florida Senate races.”
The Senate races in Florida and Texas are close. The Senate race in Montana is not.
When averaging nonpartisan polls sampled in September, the Democratic challenger, Representative Colin Allred, the Texas Democrat, is trailing incumbent U.S. Senator Ted Cruz by just two points. Allred’s counterpart in Florida, Representative Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, is behind Rick Scott, the incumbent U.S. Senator, by 2.8 points.
Only one pollster, RMG Research, has surveyed Montana’s U.S. Senate race this month. The firm finds Democrat Jon Tester, seeking a fourth term, losing to his Republican challenger, Tim Sheehy, a first-time candidate by 7 points. Last month, RMG was the only pollster with Tester ahead. Four other August polls gave Sheehy a 5.3-point average lead.
For Democrats to keep control of the Senate with 50 seats alongside Vice President Tim Walz as the tiebreaker vote, they probably need to win one of these red state races along with the fiercely fought battle for Ohio. Incumbent Democrat Sherrod Brown is clinging to a narrow 0.3-point average lead in September polling amidst a deluge of cryptocurrency industry spending on behalf of his Republican opponent, Bernie Moreno.
Other Democrats running in purple states hold firmer average leads in September polling. Wisconsin’s Tammy Baldwin is up 5.2 points among incumbents, Pennsylvania’s Bob Casey 6.1, and Nevada’s Jacky Rosen 9.2. In open-seat races, two House members, Michigan’s Elissa Slotkin and Arizona’s Reuben Gallego, are ahead by 6.3 and 7.8 points, respectively. Maryland is not purple, though the Republican candidate Larry Hogan is a popular former governor who gives the GOP a fighting chance. Still, Democrat Angela Alsobrooks is leading by 12.
Those numbers indicate Democrats are close to pulling off the inside straight needed to keep control of the Senate, but not close enough to ensure victory.
If the presidential and Senate polls today reflect the final result, Kamala Harris would eke out a narrow Electoral College majority, but Democrats would lose the Senate. Currently holding 49 Senate seats, Republicans need a net gain of two. They would get it from flipping Montana and West Virginia, where Republican Governor Jim Justice is a near-lock.
September polls do not preordain November results. And the stakes of Senate control could not be higher. In a Harris administration, a Republican Senate could roadblock judicial nominees, severely complicate cabinet confirmations and ambassadorial picks, plus deny consideration of any number of legislative proposals. Even if the odds of senatorial success are low, Democrats have every reason to spend every possible dime.
But where?
Pulling the plug on Jon Tester would be unwise, as the seven-fingered pea-farming Senator has repeatedly defied political gravity in a state that hasn’t supported a Democrat for president since 1992. The ticket-splitting voter may be an endangered species. In the last two presidential elections, voters only once supported candidates from different parties for president and senator: Susan Collins of Maine.
The Collins case reminds us that Tester can still win. Collins was behind in every poll yet won by nearly nine points over the Democrat Sara Gideon. (The margin is likely inflated. Maine used ranked-choice voting, and five percent went to a left-wing independent.)
How did Collins do it? She had a decades-long reputation as an independent moderate with strong local roots, and she ran a vicious attack campaign against her opponent, which insinuated Gideon—a woman of color serving as Speaker of the state House but a transplant from Rhode Island—wasn’t a true Mainer.
In theory, Tester could survive in a similar fashion. Sheehy moved to Montana 10 years ago and hasn’t run for office. And he has vulnerabilities. For example, he was caught on tape talking about ranching with “all the Indians while they’re drunk at 8:00 A.M.” He has told different, inconsistent stories about being wounded in Afghanistan. Last week, he was accused of plagiarism in his recently published memoir.
But Montana may have become redder in recent years—thanks partly to wealthy conservative transplants like Sheehy—making it impossible for Tester to pull out one more close election. Betting control of the Senate solely on Montana would be foolish, especially when the polls in Florida and Texas show more promise.
However, it is easy for me to say that Democrats could compete harder in Florida and Texas because I don’t sign the checks. The two mega-states are notorious money sinks, with 30 combined media markets, that have given Democrats nothing but heartbreak in the past ten years. Beto O’Rourke raised $80 million in 2018, more than double Cruz’s haul in his losing effort six years ago. Scott won his Florida seat the same year, spending $85 million, $64 million of which was out of his pocket, outspending the Democratic incumbent, Bill Nelson, the former astronaut, by about $30 million.
Through July, Allred’s fundraising kept pace with Cruz’s, each collecting about $40 million, including the hauls from their affiliated political action committees. (Third-quarter fundraising reports must be filed by October 15.) However, diligent money tracker Rob Pyers reported last week that Cruz had received about $8 million in support from outside groups and that Allred had received nearly nothing. According to an AdImpact social media post last week, Allred has outspent Cruz on the airwaves by about $38 million to $13 million. Still, Cruz has far more future ad time booked: $22.1 million versus $1.5 million.
Murcasel-Powell, who won her primary only four weeks ago, is farther behind in the ad race, with only $5 million spent or reserved for future slots. The Associated Press reported this month that “Republicans have outspent Democrats on Florida’s U.S. Senate race by roughly a 4-to-1 margin through [September 11]$12.7 million to $3.2 million. Based on ad spots reserved through the general election, that margin is expected to grow.”
Neither Allred nor Murcasel-Powell has received much support from the main national party operations, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, and the Chuck Schumer-aligned Senate Majority PAC. That may soon change.
Axios quoted DSCC Chair Senator Gary Peters on Tuesday, saying Florida and Texas “are real, and we hope to get resources into those states.” The report also noted, “Democrats are contemplating a late blitz in the Florida Senate race … While air time hasn’t been officially booked, Democratic sources tell us they expect the DSCC to make a splash in Florida in the coming weeks.”
Ok. But “hope to”? “Coming weeks”? We are less than six weeks from Election Day!
The hesitation is somewhat understandable. Peters, according to the Washington Post, “felt abandoned in his [2020] reelection bid in notoriously purple Michigan, as national Democrats poured tens of millions into ultimately hopeless places such as South Carolina and Iowa. As those races turned into mirages, Peters barely hung on, winning by less than two percentage points. So when Peters took over the DSCC the following year, he kept his focus on the states that seemed most winnable.”
Siphoning significant money from other races, even those where polling looks good, is probably wise. Any Democratic money spent in Florida and Texas will probably be met with more Republican money, especially from the free-spending multimillionaire Scott. Getting into a money race could quickly deplete Democratic coffers.
Democrats cannot expect to win either race by outspending Republicans. But Allred and Murcasel-Powell could use a public signal that the national Democratic Party sees their races as genuinely competitive right now. This will generate news coverage and stimulate small donor giving. As soon as possible, one good-sized check to each campaign would do the trick.
“What about Nebraska?” some of you might be asking. The Cornhusker State race features left-leaning independent Dan Osborn against Republican incumbent Deb Fischer. Osborn is a Navy veteran and labor union leader with a gruff, regular guy vibe. The state Democratic Party eschewed nominating its own candidate to ease Osborn’s path. What little polling we’ve seen shows a surprisingly close race, with Osborn behind one or two points. But his level of support is only in the low 40s. Getting to 50 percent will be a stiff challenge in a red state. An internal poll from the Osborn campaign released this week has him up one point, but internal polls should always be treated with suspicion.
Whatever Osborn’s chances are, they can’t be helped with national Democratic money. His campaign is premised on complete separation from Democrats. He even says he wants to form an “independent caucus” in the Senate. A Democratic cash drop would taint his brand.
Democrats must be clear-eyed. The Senate map does not look good. They can only keep control by winning at least one state where they are behind. Money will have to be spent in longshot races. Worrying about “wasting” money does not make sense when Senate control is on the line.
