Republicans still hold a majority in the Senate, and regardless of who wins the presidential race, it’s a majority they want to keep. At present, elections analysts give even odds of either party holding onto Congress’ upper chamber come November; significantly better than the odds facing Trump amidst a [re]surging pandemic and flaring protests, which hover around 20% in most analyses.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has boasted about being the “grim reaper” of the legislation passed by the Democratic-led House, illustrating that the party which controls the Senate has almost total control over which bills are passed and which are never given a vote, much less sent to the president’s desk—and Republicans no doubt remember the benefits between 2014 and 2016 of having a majority even if a Democratic president is elected (Voters are much more critical of the president and the president’s party for perceived failures to pass legislation, meaning that an opposition Senate—or House—reaps the political spoils of holding legislation back).
So what makes the Republican odds so much better than Trump’s?
The Senate has always favored smaller, more rural states—and has since Congress was divided into two chambers. Benefiting smaller states was the entire reason the Senate was created: to offset the proportional (based on population) representation that the House afforded, which gave power to the larger and more populous states. However, this means that control of the Senate tends to skew towards whichever party is most dominant in those small, rural states. In the early 20th century, when direct election of Senators began, that meant that the average Senate seat was biased towards Democrats—but now, control of the Senate is biased towards Republicans:
(The reason the House is skewed as well is largely due to gerrymandering, and is beyond the scope of this article)
Yet despite this bias, Republicans are on the defensive in 2020. They’re facing much the same situation as Democrats did in 2018, where the party had to defend almost half of their delegation, much of it on unfavorable territory such as West Virginia (voted for Trump by 42 points), Montana (Trump by 20 points), Indiana (Trump by 19 points), and North Dakota (Trump by 35 points). But Republicans also lack a favorable national environment for their candidates, which is why they’re facing tight races even in red states.
What Seats Could Republicans Gain?
Despite being largely on the defensive, Republicans still have a chance to pick up a few seats. Out of the 12 Democrats are defending, Republicans believe that two incumbents look particularly vulnerable:
Senator Doug Jones won an upset victory in Alabama in 2017 over scandal-plagued Roy Moore, but he may not be able to repeat it. The state is deeply red, and Jones only managed to eke out a margin of 1.6 points against Moore, becoming the first Democratic senator elected since 1992. The problem he faces is that both the Republican frontrunners to replace him are much more popular in the state—Jeff Sessions used to hold the senate seat before becoming Trump’s Attorney General, and Tommy Tuberville is a well-known football coach who worked for nearly a decade at Alabama’s University of Auburn.
While recent polls predict that Jones will do much better than a typical Democrat in the state—which has seen presidential margins of ~30 points towards Republicans in the last three elections—recent polls have him tied or slightly behind against both front-running Republican candidates.
And in Michigan, many Republicans see John James—who ran unsuccessfully against Senator Stabenow in 2018—as having a good chance against first-term Democratic Senator Gary Peters (who is the only other Democratic Senator, besides Jones, who is up for re-election in a state Trump won in 2016). James is an African-American army veteran who many see as a ‘rising star’ in the Republican Party—but he may be fighting the trends within the state.
In 2018, Michigan moved away from Trump’s narrow victory: Democrats swept all the statewide races, ousting many Republican incumbents, and James lost to Stabenow by 6.5 points. While James is a strong challenger, it’s unclear if he can do better his second time around: he’s outraised Peters in the last few quarters, but recent polls show Peters still with a double-digit lead over James.
Once again, polls can be found here.
