So which Senate races are actually going to be competitive in 2024?

| 9:09 am EST November 10, 2023
Dear Palmer Report readers, we all understand the difficult era we're heading into. Major media outlets are caving to Trump already. Even the internet itself and publishing platforms may be at risk. But Palmer Report is nonetheless going to lead the fight. We're funding our 2025 operating expenses now, so we can keep publishing no matter what happens. I'm asking you to contribute if you can, because the stakes are just so high. You can donate here.

I keep getting asked which 2024 Senate races are actually going to be competitive. The answer is fairly simple: the races that are listed as Toss up, Lean D, and Lean R by the ratings experts. Nothing else is realistic.

There’s a solid explanation for why this is the case, but it’s longer. First, these ratings prove correct almost without exception. Even when they’re occasionally off, they’re off by one column (for instance Lean D instead of Toss up). They’re never off by three columns (Lean D instead of Likely R).

These race ratings are calculated (not by me but by people who know what they’re doing) by using things like demographics and voting trends – the things that polls would tell us if polls were still being conducted in a serious and reliable way.

If a race is rated Toss up, it means it’s likely to be decided by less than three points. Lean D or Lean R races mean that one party has a definite advantage, but the race could still easily be decided by less than three points.

Likely D and Likely R races are going to end up being 5-10 wins for the favored party. Solid D and Solid R races are going to end up being double digit wins for the favored party.

When we decide to get involved (me, you, and everyone who focuses on winnable races), we can potentially move the needle by one to three points. That’s all. That’s actually a lot, if you think about it. How many Senate and House races were decided by three points in 2022? What would things look like if those races had each gone the other way? That’s full control of Congress, all based on moving the needle by a point or three in the closest of races.

So it’s obvious that we can change the outcome in the Toss Up, Lean D, and Lean R races but not anything else. Three points or less. Otherwise all we’re doing is turning a big loss into a slightly less big loss. And the stakes are too high for moral victories.

That’s why I refuse to look at any other races. I don’t have a magic wand. And all the early money in the world won’t turn a seven point race into a three point race. If it were that easy we’d just find the money. Our side is far better at individual fundraising these days than the other side is. But money won’t make a non competitive race into a competitive race.

So when it comes to the 2024 Senate races in places like Texas, Florida, and Tennessee, the Democratic candidates are currently on track to lose by probably ten points. No amount of early outside money can change that. It can only be changed on the ground, by the candidates themselves. Retail politics. Unique ability to appeal to people who don’t normally vote for your party. And that’s up to the candidates themselves. They have to prove to me that their race is viable, by getting it within three points on their own. THEN there’s something I can do for them.

When I say three points I don’t mean polling. Every Democratic candidate in a hopeless lost cause race can find at least one wacky poll that says they’re within three points. And then they fundraise off that one wacky poll, without admitting that every other recent poll in their race says they’re down by 10-12 points (drives me crazy). No, when I say a three point race, I’m talking about their race getting moved into the Toss up, Lean D, Lean R columns by the proven experts.

So what does three points look like? In House races the math is easy, because districts are all roughly the same size: about 761,000 people. If you assume an overly simplistic 50% turnout in House races, one point is about 4,000 votes and three points is about 12,000 votes.

Can our donations, phone banking, and retweets get a House candidate 4,000 votes and thus change the outcome by one point? Sure. Can we get a candidate 12,000 votes and change the outcome by three points? Maybe, but you see how this is getting less easy.

Senate races are harder because they’re statewide. In most states that means we’re talking about a whole lot more voters. Moving the needle by one point in the Senate race in Ohio – a highly populated state – would require about 60,000 votes. Moving the needle by three points in Ohio would require about 180,000 votes. And this is just to change the outcome in a close race that’s going to come down to one to three points to begin with.

Fortunately Ohio is indeed going to be that closely competitive. Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown is much more popular than his party is in Ohio, so that’s a 50-50 toss up race. Our job is to dive in and get him an extra one percent if we can, because there’s a good chance he’ll win or lose by less than one point.

Now imagine trying to change the outcome of a Senate race in Texas, where we’re probably realistically going to be behind by seven points. That’s a million votes! Sorry, but I don’t have a magic wand that allows me to steer a million votes in the direction of a candidate.

But again, if the Texas candidate catches fire on the ground and builds a coalition far broader than the Democratic base and makes it a competitive three point race (again based on race ratings not polls), then at that point I’d be all in to try to help them make up the final one to three percent. Because that is something you and I can do.

We won the 2022 Nevada senate race by 8,000 votes, after we all jumped in at the end and made the difference. It’s why we now have the majority. We lost the 2022 Wisconsin senate race by 27,000 votes, after we failed to put enough attention on this race. It’s why we don’t have a larger majority, and didn’t get a larger infrastructure bill.

Eight thousand votes. 27 thousand votes. These are realistic numbers. These are outcomes we can change. Not a million votes.

There are seven Senate races in 2024 that are likely to come down to something like eight thousand votes or 27 thousand votes. Fortunately the Democrats are at least slightly favored in all of them. Which is good because we have to win all seven to keep the majority. So that’s where 100% of my senate focus will be.

There will be seven very close and highly winnable Senate races, and we need all seven of them. In five of them we’re favored to narrowly win, and two of them will be 50-50. I intend to help win all seven and keep the senate majority so Biden can appoint the next three Supreme Court justices.

Seven close races for all the marbles. Why would any of you even consider putting your resources elsewhere?

Ohio. Arizona. Montana. Nevada. Pennsylvania. Wisconsin. Michigan. Those are the seven close races that will decide the Senate majority. Period. Full stop.

I don’t even want to hear about any other senate races, unless a major site such as Cook Political Report reclassifies them into the Toss up, Lean D, or Lean R categories. I will not allow anyone’s desire to tilt at windmills to take vital resources away from the seven competitive races that will actually decide things. There really isn’t anything else to it.