After months of partisan mudslinging in what Political Science Lecturer Michael Goldman described as "one of the ugliest elections we've seen," Election Day has arrived with Republican control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate in question.
While political forecasts are cautiously predicting heavy Democratic victories nationwide, control is still up for grabs in both houses. According to a survey released Sunday by the Pew Research Center, Democrats hold a "modest" 47 percent to 43 percent lead among likely voters - a difference much smaller than many had anticipated.
In order to gain majority control from the Republican Party, Democrats would need a net gain of 15 seats in the House of Representatives and six seats in the Senate.
According to Professor of Political Science Jeffrey Berry, it is likely that the Democrats will win control of the House of Representatives, while the Senate may go either way.
"There [are] 50 House seats that are in play, which is much more than is typically the case," Berry said. "All the Democrats need to do is get 15 seats - it doesn't matter where they come from - and the polling data shows that's probably going to happen.
"The Senate is down to one or two races," Berry said. "Right now, it could easily end up being a tie, or [with] the Democrats one vote short of a tie, or one vote on the other end."
Professor of Political Science Deborah Schildkraut agreed but was hesitant to put too much weight on the numbers.
"The polling at the district level is so sketchy that I haven't paid much attention to it, because I don't trust it that well," Schildkraut said.
With the outcome in question, the election's results will hinge on several factors.
"The traditional wisdom is that, for midterm elections, [people who vote are] usually people who really are committed, and people who are paying attention to politics, and people who are partisans," said Schildkraut. "This is a time, though, where there seems like there's more of an opportunity for getting people who might not have traditionally voted for you, so I think candidates are spending more of their resources in that area than they typically do."
The Pew survey indicated that 19 percent of potential voters (an unusually high number) are undecided or simply "lean" towards one candidate or the other. According to Schildkraut, this surge of voters who are not typically motivated to vote in midterms could sway the tide of the election.
Schildkraut said that Democrats have tried to "pick off" new voters who "may not be tried and true Republicans," but have voted Republican in the past as a reaction to Sept. 11 or the Iraq invasion. This approach, she said, differed from the Democrats' normal election strategy.
"Traditionally, in midterm elections you really want to go after people who already like you and just try to make sure they show up," she said. For Michael Goldman, the election's results will depend more on which voters actually make it to the booths.
"Really, more than anything, it's going to come down to who has the most motivated base," Goldman said. According to the Pew survey, that edge goes to Republicans: 64 percent of Republicans polled had "given quite a lot of thought to the election" as opposed to 62 percent of Democrats and 57 percent of independents.
In contrast, however, a Nov. 5 Time Magazine poll suggested the motivation advantage would go to Democrats, as "52 percent say they're more enthusiastic about voting than usual, compared with 39 percent of Republicans."
Berry said that, regardless of which side is more motivated, the influence of independent and undecided voters may be the deciding factor.
"Most voters always vote Republican or always vote Democrat, and it's those that are independent or weak partisans that move back and forth," Berry said. Since voters in this demographic have been influenced heavily by the Iraq war - 48 percent saw the war as the most important issue, according to the Pew survey - Berry said this group may tip the scale in favor of Democrats.
"The polls show that people who are concerned about Iraq are much, much more likely to vote Democratic this time around," he said. "Many Americans have largely given up on the idea that we can win a military victory there, and they sense that we're trapped."
Goldman agreed, saying that some elections for individual representatives had become referendums on the war, which has lost popularity as the number of casualties has increased.
"It appears as though the issue that has mattered is Iraq and whether we should stay the course or change the way we're approaching the situation there," Goldman said.
Ironically, Berry said, the two parties have used "opposite strategies" in this election, swapping campaign approaches from the 2004 election. "The Republicans have tried ... to focus on local issues, to keep people from seeing an election for an individual representative or senator as a referendum on Iraq," Berry said. "Democrats are now much more prone to talk about Iraq and criticize the president."
In addition to Iraq, Goldman said there are several key issues on which campaign strategists have focused.
"Stem cell research has been huge in Missouri, and in Indiana, believe it or not, the big issue was daylight-savings time," he said. "In Michigan, it's employment."
Schildkraut agreed, citing gay marriage, which typically energizes Republican voters, and minimum wage reform, which typically energizes Democrats, as major issues of discussion for candidates.
"Those are other secondary issues," Schildkraut said, "but they're things people are hoping will animate voters who might otherwise be disenchanted with their party or might not vote in a midterm election, since turnout is usually much lower in midterm elections."
Berry said the Senate majority will depend on the outcome of three races: Virginia, Missouri and Tennessee. In Missouri, Democrat Claire McCaskill was leading Republican Jim Talent on Monday by a marginal 48 to 46 percent according to Pollster.com. Democrat Jim Webb led Republican George Allen by 1 percent (47 to 46 percent) in Virginia, and Republican Bob Corker had pulled ahead of Democrat Harold Ford with 51 percent to Ford's 44 percent in Tennessee.
"The Democrats will need to win two of those three, plus the other four that are expected to turn over," said Berry. "That would give them a gain of six, which puts them in the majority."
If the Democrats are able to win control of one or both houses, Berry said it could significantly alter the political direction of the country.
"It will make things very difficult for the Bush presidency. There will be a lot of investigations in the House," he said. "More broadly, it would limit what the administration could propose, because if it can't go through the House, then it won't really want to propose it."
Schildkraut agreed, saying a Democratic takeover of the House or Senate could lead Congress to block passage of bills and the President to veto bills proposed by Congress.
"Some legislation Bush hasn't been able to pass with having majorities - social security reform, for example - so, on certain things, there'll be gridlock," Shildkraut said. "You hear talk about investigations into the White House. There certainly would be a lot more investigations; whether anything comes of them, who knows?"
While the numbers suggest that a Democratic takeover of at least one chamber of Congress is likely, both Schildkraut and Berry stressed that nothing is definite. In the fast-moving world of Internet news and 24-hour networks, voters have been influenced in both directions by news items such as Mark Foley's Congressional page sex scandal and John Kerry's botched joke about the military during a recent speech.
"What you had [with the Kerry incident] was a Democrat taking a gun out and shooting themselves in the foot," Berry said. "Democrats are furious with him and even angrier at him for not just immediately apologizing, which would have shortened the news cycle for this story."
Luckily for Democrats, Berry said, Kerry's remarks have not had nearly as large of an effect on voters as the Foley scandal.
"The bottom dropped out of the Republican Party during that scandal, and they've come back a little bit," Berry said. "But I think it happened [at] a time when people were starting to focus on the Congressional race, and I think they will still lose some votes because of that. How many, I can't say."
Berry joked that the only thing that could turn things around for Republicans would be "if Osama Bin Laden walks into an American army base and gives himself up." Schildkraut was less skeptical. "It would have to be something pretty severe to make it a clear-cut Republican victory," she said. "Everyone's always afraid of the October surprise - there's also the first week of November surprise."
That surprise may have come on Sunday, when it was announced that Saddam Hussein's trial had reached a verdict and that the former Iraqi dictator would be sentenced to death. With polling data inconclusive and predictions up in the air, Schildkraut made one thing clear: nothing is certain.
"For the past several elections ... every election has been the Democrats' to lose, and they have done so spectacularly," Schildkraut said with a laugh. "Given that they've been able to screw up so much over the past several years, I have every confidence that they could still screw up again."
