Realistic ceiling for Senate Democrats?

[Figueira]

Here's my map, although admittedly Iowa, Indiana, and Georgia are kind of pushing it.

[MT Treasurer]

D+10. But that's not going to happen.

[smoltchanov]

If realistic - then about D+7-8.... (in case of real wave)

[Orser67]

D+11. Maybe D+12 if Democrats get lucky in one of the states in light blue (e.g. via scandal or death of the incumbent).

[Xing]

Pick-ups in (in order of most likely to least likely): WI, IL, FL, NH, OH, PA, NC, AZ, MO, and IN. Absolute ceiling is D+10. I think D+7 or 8 is more realistic, though.

[Kingpoleon]

D pickups in AZ, WI, IL, PA, FL, and MO, while holding IN, NV, and CO. D+8. Maybe OH and NC in a wave, alongside LA should a really far-right Republican get to the runoff. Alaska only flips if Murkowski loses her primary again and can't get nominated by a third party.

[This account no longer in use.]

D+10. But that's not going to happen.

Louisiana before Indiana and Iowa?

[ElectionsGuy]

D+10. But that's not going to happen.

This without Louisiana. D+9.

[ElectionsGuy]

Louisiana before Indiana and Iowa?

We don't know who the candidates will be in LA. Just like the governorship in 2015, Republicans may very well throw this seat away.

Senate /= Governorship. The Democrat who survives the runoff is dead on arrival.

[Heisenberg]

Louisiana before Indiana and Iowa?

We don't know who the candidates will be in LA. Just like the governorship in 2015, Republicans may very well throw this seat away.

Senate /= Governorship. The Democrat who survives the runoff is dead on arrival.

Exactly.  Governors can distance themselves from the national party, and campaign as a check on the legislature.  Senators, on the other hand, can NOT do either.

[windjammer]

While Grassley is a favorite, I think it's still possible he loses. I mean, Warner almost lost and he was a moderate. Grassley is extremely conservative and 2016 might be even tougher for the Pubs than was 2014 for the democrats.
Regarding Louisiana, the ballot system is just weird, so there is an outside chance of a run off between  2 democrats.
Regarding MO, Roy Blunt is a terrible candidate and will likely underperform Trump.
Regarding IN, Todd Young isn't particularly a good candidate, he seriously underperformed Romney in 2012 while he was an incumbent, he's basically a generic republican, whoever wins IN in the presidential election will make his party win the senate seat.

[windjammer]

^Kathy Szeliga will win in Maryland before Johnny Isakson loses in Georgia.

Well this is a ceiling, I'm not saying he will win.

[IceSpear]

Isakson will win even if Hillary carries Georgia, because Dems have only some dudes/some chicks running.

[windjammer]

Isakson will win even if Hillary carries Georgia, because Dems have only some dudes/some chicks running.

Apparently, he's wealthy, so I guess he could self fund.
But yes, he will likely  lose.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Dems are gonna max out their Senate gains and possibly 53 seats is realistic.  I think its the beginning of the end for Leader McConnell.

[Heisenberg]

Todd Young will beat Baron Hill.  He's beat Baron Hill before, and he will beat him again.

[Orser67]

Isakson will win even if Hillary carries Georgia, because Dems have only some dudes/some chicks running.

The more fundamental issue is that Georgia has a run-off if no candidate gets a majority, and any Democrat would have a tough time winning 50% of the vote in a Senate race

[Mr. Smith]

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Dems are focused on Iowa, MO and AZ as 2nd tier battlegrounds. Haven't heard much about Deb Ross lately. But Baron Hill can win an upset.

[Heisenberg]

Dems are focused on Iowa, MO and AZ as 2nd tier battlegrounds. Haven't heard much about Deb Ross lately. But Baron Hill can win an upset.

Todd Young has beat Baron Hill before, and he will do it again.

[BuckeyeNut]

Dems are focused on Iowa, MO and AZ as 2nd tier battlegrounds. Haven't heard much about Deb Ross lately. But Baron Hill can win an upset.

Todd Young has beat Baron Hill before, and he will do it again.

Heisenberg is correct, unfortunately. Young would have to pull a Mourdock, and that's not happening.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

That's why I said Grassley, McCain and Blunt would go down and Dems are looking at those. Kander is a sleeper race.

[bballrox4717]

D+10 is probably the best case scenario.

Indiana doesn't seem like it's going to vote for Hillary over Trump, and even then I don't think she would be able to pull Hill over the top against Young. They needed Stutzman to be the nominee to even have a prayer.

Louisiana isn't happening.

Iowa reeks of a Virginia 2014 repeat. Republicans were calling it for months that Warner was vulnerable despite mockery on this forum, nominated a good candidate and nearly won it. Democrats seem to think they have a real shot against Grassley because of the Garland nomination and are on track to nominate a serious candidate. His approvals have been dramatically tending south and Iowa is probably going reject Trump by a big margin in a decisive Hillary victory scenario.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

D+9 with Grassley, McCain& Blunt losing and Dems net 218 in House which is a real possibility with Trump.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

No.