2010 senate prediction

[Smash255]

I think its silly for the liberals on the board to assume that a conservative republican cannot win a senate race in tossup or any other territory in a bad year for democrats.

In 2006 -
Ohio got Sherrod Brown, the most raging and vile liberal in the senate
Montana got, Jon Tester, a liberal with a crew cut
New Hampshire got Jeanne Shaheen, a full blown liberal
The only somewhat moderate senator from that class was Claire McCaskill
   
In 2008 -
North Carolina got Kay Hagan, a liberal in a lean republican state
Colorado got one of the Udall brothers

Each of these states are tossup, lean republican or lean democrat in national elections - If they can elect socialists like Brown - they can elect conservatives.  The reason I bring this up is that people continue to say Toomey will not win in Pennsylvania.  If it can happen in other tossup/lean states for liberals, it can surely happen for conservatives in PA and NH (if Ayotte even is conservative - we dont know yet).

Now if you are looking at states like NY or CA - then yeah, a full blown conservative might lose in a rout, but in the swing states they can still win big. 

1.  It will be very unlikely for 2010 to be as strong for the GOP as 06 was for the Dems.  Bush's approvals were averaging in th3 37% range with his disapprovals around 57%,  around a -20 net.  In comparison right now Obama's approvals are in the mid 50's with disapprovals in the upper 30's with around a +17 net

2  All of the states you mentioned with the exception of Montana are less Republican than PA is Democratic and in Montana's case Tester ran a very strong campaign and Burns was involved in numerous scandals.  You could make the argument that NC is about as GOP ad PA is Democratic, but its trending rather strongly to the Dems and Obama did win the state.  Also Dole is a brutal campaigner.

[Smash255]

Republican Favored.
AL
AK
AZ
FL
GA
ID
IA
KS
OK
SC
SD
UT
Leans Republican-
LA
NC
Tossup
AR
CO
CT
DE-if Castle runs.
KY
NV
NH
OH
PA
Leans DEM
IL
MO
NY-B
Democratic Favored
CA
DE-if Castle does not run.
HI
IN
MD
NY
ND
OR
VT
WA
WI


Dems will pick up MO and hold on to IL,NY-B,and DE-assuming Castle does not run.
AR,CO,CT,KY,NV,NH,OH,and PA will depend on how things turn out nationally.
IF 2010 is a bad year for DEMS- expect DEMs to lose couple of those seats.

AR- anti Obama state- hurt Lincoln ie Anti Bush in 2006 hurting Chaffee.
CO- Tough primary challenge against Bennett-
CT- Dodd's scandal- national Republicans are going target him.
KY- Tossup GOP held seat.
NV- National Republicans are going to target Reid to embarrass DEMS.
NH- Hodes is a boring candidate- Ayotte- is doing better than expected. DEMS need to define Ayotte- portray her as a Conservative nutjob.
OH- Divisive Dem Primary may help Portman-R- Need to remind OH voters how close Portman was with Bush-43 economic policies.
PA- Divisive DEM Primary. Need to remind PA voters how conservative Toomey is.

I would put CO at lean Dem.  Bennet might be unknown and he might not even be the nominee after the Primary, but the shape of the GOP in the state is abysmal, I would say that is a lean.  Similar reason why I think Gillibrand is safe, the state GOP is a complete and utter joke.

I don't see Arkansas as being a toss up either.  While I agree that Bush hurt Chafee in RI and you could see Obama hurt Lincoln as well, few major differences.  First i think it will be very unlikely that Obama's numbers in Arkansas in 2010 will be as low as Bush's were in RI in 06 (25% approve, 74% disapprove).  Also at the state level Arkansas is still a very Democratic state.  On the state level Rhode Island is perhaps even more Democratic than it is on the national level (yes I know they have a GOP Gov, one of which who would have been toast if Chafee lost the Primary, but the State House and Senate are Democratic Supermajorites. 

In PA,  I just think the numbers in the Philly metro area will be too much for Toomey to overcome no matter if its Specter or Sestak

[Smash255]

I think its silly for the liberals on the board to assume that a conservative republican cannot win a senate race in tossup or any other territory in a bad year for democrats.

In 2006 -
Ohio got Sherrod Brown, the most raging and vile liberal in the senate
Montana got, Jon Tester, a liberal with a crew cut
New Hampshire got Jeanne Shaheen, a full blown liberal
The only somewhat moderate senator from that class was Claire McCaskill
   
In 2008 -
North Carolina got Kay Hagan, a liberal in a lean republican state
Colorado got one of the Udall brothers

Each of these states are tossup, lean republican or lean democrat in national elections - If they can elect socialists like Brown - they can elect conservatives.  The reason I bring this up is that people continue to say Toomey will not win in Pennsylvania.  If it can happen in other tossup/lean states for liberals, it can surely happen for conservatives in PA and NH (if Ayotte even is conservative - we dont know yet).

Now if you are looking at states like NY or CA - then yeah, a full blown conservative might lose in a rout, but in the swing states they can still win big. 

1.  It will be very unlikely for 2010 to be as strong for the GOP as 06 was for the Dems.  Bush's approvals were averaging in th3 37% range with his disapprovals around 57%,  around a -20 net.  In comparison right now Obama's approvals are in the mid 50's with disapprovals in the upper 30's with around a +17 net

2  All of the states you mentioned with the exception of Montana are less Republican than PA is Democratic and in Montana's case Tester ran a very strong campaign and Burns was involved in numerous scandals.  You could make the argument that NC is about as GOP ad PA is Democratic, but its trending rather strongly to the Dems and Obama did win the state.  Also Dole is a brutal campaigner.

1-Your Obama approval ratings are way off.  Obama is at majority dissaprove in some polls (Rasmussen is at 53 disapproval) and only the crazy polls are keeping that average above 50%.  His disapprovals are in the 40s.

2-But what you are saying is that raging liberal democrats (Sherrod Brown and Jeanne Shaheen) can win in tossup states.  My contention is that hard-line right wingers can too.  You cant say that one can and the other cant.  Thats the problem with the analysis.  The liberals are all saying that the republicans have to be more moderate in those states, but you cannot account for the same on your side.

1  Rasmussen is the ONLY poll to have Obama's numbers around there, everyone else has him higher,

CNN   53-45
CBS   56-35
Ipsos 56-40
Pew    52-37
Gallup 55-38
Rasmussen 49-51

Which one doesn't fit?

2.  I also don't see Obama's approvals being as low as Bush's were in 06. 

3.  Also someone like Toomey is a bit further right than Brown is to the left.  Even if you disagree with that, Ohio is not as Republican as Pennsylvania is Democratic.  Ohio is a true toss up state, Pennsylvania is a lean Democratic state.    On top of that the dynamics of the two states make it a  bit more possible in Ohio than in Pennsylvania.  First off 2006 was a BRUTAL year for the GOP in Ohio.  As bad as it was nationwide Ohio was one of the hardest states.  Even if it winds up being a bad year for Obama, what are the chances PA becomes on of the worst hit states of the year much like Ohio was in 06?  You also have the suburban Philly factor.  For a Republican to win statewide they might not exactly need to win the Philly suburbs (though no one from either party has won without them), but they need to be at least competitive there.  Toomey simply won't be able to do that period, he is just too conservative to be competitive there.  Even if it winds up being a rough year for the Dems, the margins he will lose by in the SE will just be too much to overcome

[Smash255]

I think its silly for the liberals on the board to assume that a conservative republican cannot win a senate race in tossup or any other territory in a bad year for democrats.

In 2006 -
Ohio got Sherrod Brown, the most raging and vile liberal in the senate
Montana got, Jon Tester, a liberal with a crew cut
New Hampshire got Jeanne Shaheen, a full blown liberal
The only somewhat moderate senator from that class was Claire McCaskill
   
In 2008 -
North Carolina got Kay Hagan, a liberal in a lean republican state
Colorado got one of the Udall brothers

Each of these states are tossup, lean republican or lean democrat in national elections - If they can elect socialists like Brown - they can elect conservatives.  The reason I bring this up is that people continue to say Toomey will not win in Pennsylvania.  If it can happen in other tossup/lean states for liberals, it can surely happen for conservatives in PA and NH (if Ayotte even is conservative - we dont know yet).

Now if you are looking at states like NY or CA - then yeah, a full blown conservative might lose in a rout, but in the swing states they can still win big. 

1.  It will be very unlikely for 2010 to be as strong for the GOP as 06 was for the Dems.  Bush's approvals were averaging in th3 37% range with his disapprovals around 57%,  around a -20 net.  In comparison right now Obama's approvals are in the mid 50's with disapprovals in the upper 30's with around a +17 net

2  All of the states you mentioned with the exception of Montana are less Republican than PA is Democratic and in Montana's case Tester ran a very strong campaign and Burns was involved in numerous scandals.  You could make the argument that NC is about as GOP ad PA is Democratic, but its trending rather strongly to the Dems and Obama did win the state.  Also Dole is a brutal campaigner.

1-Your Obama approval ratings are way off.  Obama is at majority dissaprove in some polls (Rasmussen is at 53 disapproval) and only the crazy polls are keeping that average above 50%.  His disapprovals are in the 40s.

2-But what you are saying is that raging liberal democrats (Sherrod Brown and Jeanne Shaheen) can win in tossup states.  My contention is that hard-line right wingers can too.  You cant say that one can and the other cant.  Thats the problem with the analysis.  The liberals are all saying that the republicans have to be more moderate in those states, but you cannot account for the same on your side.

1  Rasmussen is the ONLY poll to have Obama's numbers around there, everyone else has him higher,

CNN   53-45
CBS   56-35
Ipsos 56-40
Pew    52-37
Gallup 55-38
Rasmussen 49-51

Which one doesn't fit?

2.  I also don't see Obama's approvals being as low as Bush's were in 06. 

3.  Also someone like Toomey is a bit further right than Brown is to the left.  Even if you disagree with that, Ohio is not as Republican as Pennsylvania is Democratic.  Ohio is a true toss up state, Pennsylvania is a lean Democratic state.    On top of that the dynamics of the two states make it a  bit more possible in Ohio than in Pennsylvania.  First off 2006 was a BRUTAL year for the GOP in Ohio.  As bad as it was nationwide Ohio was one of the hardest states.  Even if it winds up being a bad year for Obama, what are the chances PA becomes on of the worst hit states of the year much like Ohio was in 06?  You also have the suburban Philly factor.  For a Republican to win statewide they might not exactly need to win the Philly suburbs (though no one from either party has won without them), but they need to be at least competitive there.  Toomey simply won't be able to do that period, he is just too conservative to be competitive there.  Even if it winds up being a rough year for the Dems, the margins he will lose by in the SE will just be too much to overcome

And Rasmussen is the only one weighting correctly - he was also weighting correctly during the presidential election.  All of the others give democrats 11pt+ party identification advantages in their polls when at max it is at 6pts.  For example in the pew poll, of the 2003 people polled, 23% identified as republican, 34% as democrat, and 37% as independent.  And the CBS poll is a joke.  Most of the others all show his disapproval in the range of high-low forties.

Pennsylvania is also getting hard hit by Obama's policies and I guarantee that if Cap n' Trade passes, Toomey will win.

As Johnny stated Rasmussen is a decent election pollster (close to the election) but his approvals have always been off.