The ‘Core Four’ Senate Races, and Beyond

Nearly a month out from Election Day, Democrats are growing more confident about holding the Senate — but are sweating a coming flood of advertising spending from Republican groups aligned with Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the would-be majority leader.

The picture looks dire for the G.O.P. across what Democrats call their “Core Four” races. McConnell’s public fretting during the primaries about “candidate quality” appears apt in a year that otherwise might be Republicans’ to lose.

The G.O.P. candidate in Georgia, Herschel Walker, is facing a new allegation that he paid for an ex-girlfriend’s abortion despite his opposition to the procedure. Public polls since mid-September have shown Senator Raphael Warnock inching away from Walker as Democratic groups ramp up their negative advertising. Warnock is raking in money; his campaign raised $26 million over the last three months. But if neither candidate can reach 50 percent, Georgia will be headed for another runoff election.

In New Hampshire, McConnell’s allies spent heavily to stop Don Bolduc, a retired Army general who limped into the Republican primary with just $84,000 in his campaign account and had raised less than $600,000 since the start of 2021. Gov. Chris Sununu, the big dog in New Hampshire politics, warned in August that Bolduc could not defeat Senator Maggie Hassan, who has bet heavily that Republicans’ support for banning abortion will be the decisive factor in a blue-tinged state whose motto is “Live Free or Die.”

Senator Mark Kelly, the incumbent Democrat in Arizona, has raised such an astronomical sum — $54 million since the start of the cycle, according to his latest report to the Federal Election Commission — that Republican outside groups have all but written off his opponent, the venture capital executive Blake Masters.

A major bright spot for Republicans is Nevada, where Senator Catherine Cortez Masto, unique among the Core Four, is polling behind Adam Laxalt, the attorney general. As my colleagues Jennifer Medina and Jonathan Weisman wrote this week, “Democrats in Nevada are facing potential losses up and down the ballot in November and bracing for a seismic shift that could help Republicans win control of both houses of Congress.”

Republicans also argue that national trends — and the laws of midterm political gravity — are working in their favor.

As Election Day approaches and as voters begin to concentrate on the choices in front of them, Republican operatives expect the races to center more on inflation, the slowing economy, crime and President Biden’s unpopularity than they have thus far. To focus on anything else, the Republican consultant Jeff Roe said recently, would amount to “political malpractice.” Roe’s firm, Axiom Strategies, represents Laxalt in Nevada.

“You only need to look at the past 24 hours to see why candidate quality matters and why Republicans have been so concerned about the flaws that their roster of recruits bring to these Senate races,” said David Bergstein, the communications director for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

A CBS News poll published on Wednesday, which showed Kelly up just three percentage points over Masters in Arizona among likely voters, seemed to underscore Republicans’ argument about where the midterms might be headed: When the network pushed undecided voters to make a choice, the result was a closer race than other polls. The CBS survey also found that while Kelly is popular, 61 percent of likely voters disapproved of the job Biden is doing as president — a pretty gnarly number for Democrats to overcome.

The money picture

Across all of the big races, Democratic candidates enjoy a significant edge in campaign cash.

According to a New York Times analysis of campaign finance reports, Republican candidates in the seven big battleground Senate races had raised less than a third of what their opponents had brought in by the end of June, the most recent federal deadline for campaigns to report their fund-raising totals.

It’s fallen to McConnell and groups such as the Senate Leadership Fund, run by a top former deputy, to close the gap. In New Hampshire, for instance, the super PAC announced $23 million in TV ads aimed at defeating Hassan. And in Pennsylvania, the leadership fund has already spent nearly $34 million, primarily on TV ads.

Money is only one part of the picture. Political operatives closely track “gross ratings points,” a measure of the reach of an advertising campaign. Democrats say they have been able to match or exceed Republicans on the airwaves in most weeks since the general election began, thanks in large part to their candidates’ cash advantages. A dollar spent by a candidate on TV ads typically goes further than a dollar spent by a super PAC because stations are required by law to sell them time at discounted rates.

And while TV isn’t everything — digital ads and old-fashioned retail campaigns still matter — it’s one factor that campaigns and outside groups monitor obsessively, and it’s where they typically devote a bulk of their money. For that reason, it’s probably the best single measure we have of the relative balance of power between the two parties.

AdImpact, which tracks ad spending, reckons that 2022 is on pace to smash previous records. The firm estimates that campaigns will spend $9.7 billion on political ads this year, which it calls “a historic sum.”

The wild cards

Here’s the thing: Republicans need to pick up only one seat to regain control of the Senate.

But in this year’s other competitive Senate races — North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — Democrats have opportunities to cancel out any gains Republicans make elsewhere.

In that second group of contests, the polls have tightened in recent weeks. It’s hard to know exactly why, but operatives in both parties noted that Republicans have been dogging their Democratic rivals by linking them to rising incidents of violent crime. Others said they always expected wayward Republicans to come home after Labor Day, which is when ad spending ramped up and most voters began tuning in.

Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes, a progressive who knocked off two more centrist rivals in the Wisconsin Democratic primary, has struggled to parry those attacks. Wisconsin Democrats have gone after Senator Ron Johnson not by highlighting his penchant for foot-in-mouth comments on the coronavirus and the Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol, but by accusing him of doing little to help the people of his state.

They have linked him tightly to a plan by Senator Rick Scott of Florida that they say would cut Social Security and Medicare. But Johnson has opened up a narrow lead in the polls, aided by heavy spending from a super PAC bankrolled by Richard Uihlein, a Republican construction magnate.

To the surprise of some Democrats, Cheri Beasley, a retired state Supreme Court judge running in North Carolina, has fared better than Barnes. Polls show her staying close to even with Representative Ted Budd, the Republican nominee. Beasley has relied heavily on “air cover” from groups like Emily’s List, an abortion-rights group that almost exclusively backs Democrats, and Senate Majority PAC, an outside group close to Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the majority leader.

And in Pennsylvania, Mehmet Oz has been closing the gap with Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, thanks in part to a $7 million loan from his personal bank account. Fetterman had a serious stroke on the eve of the Democratic primary and has slowly been ramping up his campaign activities as he recovers.

Fetterman remains ahead, for now, but mainstream Republicans like Tom Ridge and Senator Pat Toomey have endorsed Oz — a signal that, despite concerns about his high negative ratings from voters and accusations about his medical practices, they see him as very much in the game.

The hunt for a Red October

There could be surprises, though — especially if the election turns out to be a red wave.

Several Democratic incumbents look wobbly. An Emerson College poll out Wednesday found that Senator Patty Murray of Washington State was up by nine percentage points over her Republican challenger, Tiffany Smiley. But the poll, Republicans said, may have overestimated the percentage of Democrats likely to turn out in the fall. And in Colorado, Senator Michael Bennet raised just over $5 million in the most recent fund-raising quarter — hardly a juggernaut.

In both states, the G.O.P. candidates have sought to defuse the abortion issue. Joe O’Dea, a blue-collar businessman running in Colorado as a political outsider, favors abortion rights and has been critical of Donald Trump, while Smiley has aired ads distancing herself from other Republicans on the abortion issue. George W. Bush, the former president, recently endorsed O’Dea and agreed to raise money on his behalf, while McConnell called him “the perfect candidate” for Colorado.

If Republicans start throwing real money at long-shot candidates like O’Dea and Smiley, pay attention. It would suggest that despite many of McConnell’s nightmares about poor-quality candidates, this could be the G.O.P.’s year after all.

What to read

• More than a century and a half after the actual Civil War, references to a new “civil war” are flaring up in right-wing online circles, Ken Bensinger and Sheera Frenkel report.

• Elon Musk might be buying Twitter after all. It would be a wild ride, according to our tech columnist, Kevin Roose.

• When Biden met DeSantis. Katie Rogers was on the scene as the Florida governor met the president to tour hurricane-ravaged areas of the state, with the specter of 2024 hanging over their encounter.

• J. David Goodman writes about Patriot Mobile, a Christian cellphone company that has become a rising force in Texas politics.

• Annie Karni explores the toxic relationship between House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Kevin McCarthy, her chief antagonist and a possible successor.

Thank you for reading On Politics, and for being a subscriber to The New York Times. — Blake

Read past editions of the newsletter here.

If you’re enjoying what you’re reading, please consider recommending it to others. They can sign up here. Browse all of our subscriber-only newsletters here.

Have feedback? Ideas for coverage? We’d love to hear from you. Email us at onpolitics@nytimes.com.