It’s time to get the lay of the land when it comes to the races for control of the General Assembly this fall. Currently, the Democrats have an 11-10 majority in the Senate, and a 25-16 majority in the House. Thus, the Senate is up for grabs, and could end up either as an 11-10 GOP majority to a 12-9 Democratic majority, as you will find from my ratings below. Over in the House, if the Dems sweep all the target toss up and lean GOP races and hold some of their own vulnerable, their majority could increase to as much as 29-12, a supermajority. Or, in the more unlikely event that the GOP sweeps all the toss ups and Lean Dem seats as well as defending their vulnerable seats, the Democratic Majority could be reduced to 23-18, putting the House on the table in 2020 or 2022.
A word of explanation about my rating system: it’s subjective. It is how I view the races right now. The variables affecting how I see a race are: 1) the district’s demographics and voting history; 2) whether there is an incumbent; 3) quality of the candidate’s campaigns in terms of organization and effort; 4) the expectation that this will be a Dem Wave year, and thus the Dems will be more enthused and the GOP will be less.
Some ratings are self explanatory: Stephanie Hansen is rated safe right now because she has no GOP opponent. The minute she gets one, I will likely downgrade her race to Likely Dem, due to the nature of her district. If this were a Republican year like 2014 where the GOP had all the enthusiasm and the Dems were dispirited, I would likely downgrade her race again to Lean Dem or Toss up depending on the quality of her and her opponent’s campaign effort and organization. The counterpart for Hansen on the GOP side is Senator Ernie Lopez. When he did not have an opponent, I rated him safe. Now that Dave Baker has jumped into the race, I have downgraded Lopez to Likely GOP. Baker has impressed me so far with his campaign organization. I may upgrade his chances eventually, due to the fact that the 6th Senate District can be a competitive district in the right circumstances, and given that this is a wave year, even in Sussex County.
Incumbents are highlighted in bold.
SAFE DEM
SENATOR 2 – OPEN – SAM GUY | DARIUS BROWN | BOBBY CUMMINGS
SENATOR 3 – ELIZABETH “TIZZY” LOCKMAN | JORDAN HINES | ROBERT MARSHALL
SENATOR 10 – STEPHANIE HANSEN
SENATOR 11 – BRYAN TOWNSEND
REPRESENTATIVE 1 – CHARLES POTTER
REPRESENTATIVE 2 – STEPHANIE BOLDEN
REPRESENTATIVE 3 – HELENE KEELEY
REPRESENTATIVE 4 – GERALD BRADY
REPRESENTATIVE 5 – OPEN – DENEICE BERRY | KENDRA JOHNSON | AJAWAVI AJAVON
REPRESENTATIVE 6 – DEBRA HEFFERNAN
REPRESENTATIVE 13 – LARRY MITCHELL
REPRESENTATIVE 15 – VALERIE LONGHURST
REPRESENTATIVE 16 – OPEN – JAKIM MOHAMMED | LINWOOD JACKSON | FRANKLIN COOKE
REPRESENTATIVE 17 – MICHAEL MULROONEY
REPRESENTATIVE 18 – DAVID BENTZ
REPRESENTATIVE 19 – KIMBERLY WILLIAMS | MEGAN O’DONNELL
REPRESENTATIVE 23 – PAUL BAUMBACH
REPRESENTATIVE 25 – JOHN KOWALKO
REPRESENTATIVE 26 – JOHN VIOLA
REPRESENTATIVE 27 – EARL JAQUES
REPRESENTATIVE 28 – BILL CARSON
LIKELY DEM
US SENATOR – TOM CARPER | KERRI EVELYN HARRIS | EUGENE TRUONO | ROB ARLETT | DEMITRI THEODOROPOULOS | NADINE FROST
CONGRESS – LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER | ED BRANDT
AUDITOR – OPEN – DENNIS E. WILLIAMS | KATHY MCGUINESS | JASON HORTIZ | KATHLEEN DAVIES
ATTORNEY GENERAL – OPEN – CHRIS JOHNSON | TIM MULLANY | KATHLEEN JENNINGS | LAKRESHA ROBERTS
REPRESENTATIVE 7 – OPEN – JOE DAIGLE | RAYMOND SEIGFRIED
REPRESENTATIVE 8 – QUINN JOHNSON | DANIEL ZITOFSKY
REPRESENTATIVE 10 – SEAN MATTHEWS | ERIN WIENNER
REPRESENTATIVE 24 – ED OSIENSKI | BILL DILKS
REPRESENTATIVE 31 – SEAN LYNN | DAVID ANDERSON | JEAN DOWDING
REPRESENTATIVE 32 – ANDRIA BENNETT | CHERYL PRECOURT
LEAN DEM
SENATOR 17 – OPEN – TREY PARADEE | JUSTIN KING | DONYALE HALL
REPRESENTATIVE 14 – PETE SCHWARTZKOPF | JAMES DEMARTINO
TOSSUP
SENATOR 4 – GREG LAVELLE | LAURA STURGEON
REPRESENTATIVE 12 – DEBORAH HUDSON | RACHEL BLUMENFELD | KRISTA GRIFFITH
REPRESENTATIVE 22 – OPEN – GUILLERMINA GONZALEZ | RENEE TASCHNER | MICHAEL SMITH | KATHERINE BEARD
REPRESENTATIVE 29 – OPEN – WILLIAM BUSH | ROBIN HAYES
REPRESENTATIVE 36 – OPEN – BRYAN SHUPE | DON ALLAN JR.
LEAN GOP
REPRESENTATIVE 9 – KEVIN HENSLEY | DEBBIE HARRINGTON | MONIQUE JOHNS | JIM RYAN
LIKELY GOP
SENATOR 6 – ERNIE LOPEZ | DAVE BAKER
REPRESENTATIVE 20 – STEPHEN SMYK | JACK BUCCHIONI
REPRESENTATIVE 21 – MICHAEL RAMONE
REPRESENTATIVE 38 – RONALD GRAY | MEGHAN KELLY
REPRESENTATIVE 30 – OPEN – SHANNON MORRIS | CHARLES GROCE
SAFE GOP
TREASURER – KEN SIMPLER | DAVID CHANDLER
SENATOR 16 – COLIN BONINI
SENATOR 18 – OPEN – DAVID WILSON
SENATOR 21 – BRYANT RICHARDSON
REPRESENTATIVE 11 – JEFF SPIEGELMAN
REPRESENTATIVE 33 – CHARLES POSTLES
REPRESENTATIVE 34 – LYNDON YEARICK | ADEWUNMI KUFORIJI
REPRESENTATIVE 35 – OPEN – JESSE VANDERWENDE
REPRESENTATIVE 37 – RUTH BRIGGS KING
REPRESENTATIVE 39 – DANIEL SHORT
REPRESENTATIVE 40 – TIM DUKES
REPRESENTATIVE 41 – RICHARD COLLINS
This is a travesty:
SAFE GOP
TREASURER – KEN SIMPLER | DAVID CHANDLER
I’m curious as to why the AG race, the Auditor race, and the RD7 race are deemed only “Likely Dem” despite their being no Republican in any of those races.
Technically you are right, they should be safe Dem as there is no announced candidate in any of those races. I put those down in Likely Dem because I expect there will be.
For the AG and Auditor race I’d agree, but I think RD7 is pretty safe. I doubt a republican candidate will even jump in.
Why do you rate Debbie Hudson a toss-up? Seems safe R to me, lean R at most.
No, Hudson is only a Safe R when she runs unopposed. The district has been trending Democratic since 2008. Hillary won it in 2016 by 2,000 votes. Obama barely lost it in 2012 by 227 votes. Both Democrats running (Rachel Blumenfeld and Krista Griffith) are great candidates, better than anything that Hudson has faced in a decade if not ever. I can see the argument for rating the race Lean R, given Hudson’s longtime incumbency. But it’s not likely R, and definitely not safe. This is going to be a close race in the 12th.
OK, give me an over/under wagering line and I’ll see if we need to bet a beer on this.
My thinking is that a male candidate like Lavelle is a lot more likely to lose votes among well-off women than a female candidate like Hudson will. Also, as high-quality as Hudson’s opponents might be, neither has name recognition. D votes will be anti-R votes more than pro-D votes.
It’s hard to understand this district if you go by voting totals, because they’re Markell Republicans. A bunch of them never switched back after the 2008 primary. They don’t like most of what the downstate and national GOP stand for, but they consider Hudson one of their own; unlike Lavelle, she doesn’t have to say things that will keep the downstate rubbish in line.
So you are betting that Lavelle will lose and that Hudson will win?
I think Hudson will do better than Lavelle, whether either, neither or both win. I think white men are the most vulnerable people running, especially those up against a woman. Lavelle says things that potentially alienate moderates. Hudson hardly says anything.
It’s “Hortiz”, not “Horitz”… But other than that! 😉
God damn it. I always make that mistake.
Pete Schwartzkopf garnered 63.5% of the vote in 2016-against the same opponent. The 14th will benefit from the anti-Trump Democratic surge. This is a safe seat.
The 36th is far from a toss-up. Though the Democrat, Don Allan, is a great candidate, this is a largely rural district with no Democratic base and the Republican presents himself well. It is Lean Republican
The 38th is the most Republican RD in the State now and the Democrat lacks support and organization. This is Solid Republican
Mitch – why isn’t anyone running against Simpler? Never-mind ….I already know. He is a made man in the Schwartzkopf mafia.
Jason, I am not a member of the State Executive Committee anymore, so I don’t have first hand knowledge. I am told that leadership has been speaking to many people, including some interested in other offices. I do believe that in a wave election Simpler could be beaten, but people are being scared away by his campaign war chest. It is hard to run for this office with serious issues. The major investment responsibilities were taken away during Chip Flowers’ term. What do you run on- “ I will have a nicer and cheaper signature stamp”?
I am more than concerned that 7 months away from our General Election, I do not see messaging selling DelDem values aggressively, or really in any form of intensity. We seem as usual to rely on a plethora of candidates to do that for us; there is no messaging overlay. And to our DNC reps, same is very true at the national level; I see ain’t it awful, but I don’t see what the DNC will do to make our lives better in values based policy statements; thus it appears our anti-trump lead is shrinking. Locally I see lots of piggybacking on other peoples messaging by our DelDems post on our web site, F.B., twitter. This is sending messages, but it is not messaging.
“I do not see messaging selling DelDem values aggressively, or really in any form of intensity. ”
And what do you see as the values that Delaware Democrats adhere to? I see none worth running on, because most Delaware Democrats are not liberal or progressive.
“thus it appears our anti-trump lead is shrinking”
Check with your eye doctor. It’s not shrinking, because it’s anti-Trump, not pro-Democrat. Believe me, the last thing you want is the people who run the Democratic Party in Delaware lying to people about how much good they’ll do for them, because they won’t.
“…most Delaware Democrats are not liberal or progressive.” – alby
“…the last thing you want is the people who run the Democratic Party in Delaware lying to people about how much good they’ll do for them,” – alby
If those are your opinions of the Delaware Democratic Party and Delaware Democrats in general, what are you doing on a blog that describes itself as “we are liberal, progressive and Democratic,”
I have no idea what “it” describes “itself” as. I believe that might have been written by someone who’s here now.
What are you doing on a liberal blog is the better question. Did they kick you out of troll school?
If you weren’t a troll, you would actually discuss the subjects under discussion. I’ve never seen you do so. There’s no extant evidence that you’re a real person at all. Someone who visits a web site solely to sow discord is a troll, and at well-managed web sites they’re banned.
That’s why you no longer post at our site.
Nah, just ‘fess up and admit that I’m banned b/c you can dish it, but can’t take it.
You don’t have anything to say. You just want to take shots at people. Just fess up, you’re a piece of shit.
Typical childish statements, calling people names.
You’re another one. Next idea you have will be the first.
You crack me up, Al! Now, Mommy is calling you at the top of the basement steps, It’s time for bed and drink your mapo!
You could start discussing ideas any time. As I said, the next time you do it will be the first time.
I have often responded to you on the content of posts. You never have anything to say other than “Democrats bad!”
Are Mrs. Anono and the kids just as stupid as you?
And your record is intact. You still have never discussed an issue. Can’t do it, can you? All talk.
“I see none worth running on, because most Delaware Democrats are not liberal or progressive.”
So, You don’t support Delaware Democrats?
“how much good they’ll do for them, because they won’t.”
So, You don’t believe in Delaware Democrats, because they won’t do anything for you???
Then why are you always flapping your gums????
Oh, your retired from the real media….forgot.
“You don’t support Delaware Democrats?”
In general, no.
“You don’t believe in Delaware Democrats, because they won’t do anything for you.”
I don’t need them to do anything for me. Stop projecting.
“Then why are you always flapping your gums”
To counteract the stupidity you bring to every forum you enter.
Gonna push back on this DNC messaging thing. The current DNC operation is focused on building — mostly out in the field. Other than the occasional missive from Perez or Ellison and some broad branding from the DNC, the messages come from candidates. Which seems right in a non-Presidential year. It lets candidates meet their voters where they are and target to issues that are important to them. The real lack of any messaging (IMO) is from Congressional elected Ds. They should be the ones routinely discussing D values at every venue they have the opportunity for and they do not. There are House and Senate messaging shops and they are either not doing their job or they are serving people who won’t listen to them. There are local candidates who are discussing D values in terms of solutions for the people they are asking for votes from. Others with a much larger platform — not so much. But the DNC has enough issues to have to be responsible for candidates they have no influence over messaging.
Don’t buy the premise that the DNC can handle on task at a time. It takes years not months to establish in the mind of voters the key values you stand for and your plan to implement them in policy under the best of communications environments both at the local and national levels. There is no such umbrella messaging inititiative going here or nationally. Success requires both targeted and umbrella messaging.
Someday you’ll understand how elections in America work. Today is not that day.
In the main Democrats don’t do much umbrella messaging. But this isn’t about what the DNC can handle, it is about that their job is and setting the tone for messaging isn’t really one of them. Howard Dean famously got into plenty of trouble (and it is why he wasn’t going to be viable for DNC Chair again) because he was routinely way out in front of other messaging shops.
We can’t even get the Democrats in Delaware to espouse Democratic values consistently, but we’re suddenly going to do so nationwide? Not bloody likely.