Will Republicans lose any Senate seats?

[Padfoot]

Nate Silver pointed out a couple days ago that despite having the general national momentum at their backs, Republicans are still defending some competitive seats.  If Republicans manage to sweep the Democrats it would be a completely unprecedented event in modern politics; the first "triple sweep."  Seeing two shutouts in a row, like the Democratic victories in 2006 and 2008, is relatively common.  Back in 1946 and 1948 the parties traded shutouts; Republicans took 12 seats in '46 only to lose nine to the Democrats in '48.  But never before have there been three "perfect victories" in a row.  So unless we really have become completely nationally partisan, a Republican sweep seems unlikely.  The question then becomes, where will the GOP lose a seat?

[Bo]

MO seems most likely.

[Franzl]

New Hampshire is the correct answer.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

The only seat I see the Republicans losing is Missouri.

[Franzl]

The only seat I see the Republicans losing is Missouri.

I don't think Republicans will lose any seat....but Missouri is not even a toss-up anymore in my mind.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

The only seat I see the Republicans losing is Missouri.

I don't think Republicans will lose any seat....but Missouri is not even a toss-up anymore in my mind.

And yet you say "New Hampshire is the correct answer"...?

In my mind New Hampshire is not any more Democratic than Missouri so far.

[Guderian]

New Hampshire could be picked off if Ayotte loses the primary. However, I fully expect her to win the primary and beat Hodes 55-45 in general.

Roy Blunt has been the most problematic GOP recruitment in this cycle, given how prominent he was in a sleazy Republican House leadership and how turbulent was his son's term as Governor. However, recent polling from Missouri has been solid and he has to be at least a slight favorite over Carnahan, especially given national trends.

Ohio is another race where not the most inspiring Republican is enjoying a small lead over the Democrats. Again, I consider Portman a slight favorite, but this one will probably go down the wire.

Richard Burr from NC is a guy who would probably be easily dispatched in 2006 or 2008 but he's lucky to be up for re-election this year. His approval rating is terrible and he is under 50% in polls, but he's still maintaining distance from potential challengers. He could still be weak if some Democrat manages to capture the voter imagination.

Kentucky and Florida are extremely long shots for Democrats, they can't win those without some sex scandal destroying the Republican candidate or something.

[nhmagic]

Re: New Hampshire

Again I ask the question, why do all liberals assume cart blanche that a conservative republican cannot get elected in a swing or a lean dem state.  Jon Tester is one of the most liberal members of the senate and he was elected from Montana.  Ditto for Sherrod Brown, a pure tossup state.

In a year as bad as this one will be for democrats, there is no reason to assume that Hodes will beat an Ayotte or a Lamontaigne (sp?).

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I chose NONE - though I don't rule it out.  I think the GOP has about 60% of retaining all their seats.

[CultureKing]

I thought 2006 was a "complete sweep" by the democrats. We didn't lose a single house or senate seat did we?

[Eraserhead]

I thought 2006 was a "complete sweep" by the democrats. We didn't lose a single house or senate seat did we?

Correct. Anyway, I have a feeling about New Hampshire... but I don't think they'll lose any of the others as of right now. We shall see where things go.

[SvenssonRS]

Missouri is the best shot in my mind. Roy Blunt has, effectively, everything going against him except the national atmosphere. He's an unpopular wingnut slimeball going against a respectable Democrat. It'll be close, but I'm predicting that Carnahan pulls it off.

I'd've added North Carolina, but so far that looks to be a vain hope. I'll wait and see.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

No.

[Smash255]

I think they pick up Missouri,while it favors the GOP New Hampshire is a possibility (and likely if Ayotte loses the Primary), Ohio & North Carolina are chances as well.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Re: New Hampshire

Again I ask the question, why do all liberals assume cart blanche that a conservative republican cannot get elected in a swing or a lean dem state.  Jon Tester is one of the most liberal members of the senate and he was elected from Montana.  Ditto for Sherrod Brown, a pure tossup state.

In a year as bad as this one will be for democrats, there is no reason to assume that Hodes will beat an Ayotte or a Lamontaigne (sp?).

Source? That is to say, unbiased source? Tester has a pretty middle-of-the-road voting record for a Democratic Senator.

[Conservative frontier]

Missouri, if Blunt is the GOP Nominee.

[nhmagic]

Re: New Hampshire

Again I ask the question, why do all liberals assume cart blanche that a conservative republican cannot get elected in a swing or a lean dem state.  Jon Tester is one of the most liberal members of the senate and he was elected from Montana.  Ditto for Sherrod Brown, a pure tossup state.

In a year as bad as this one will be for democrats, there is no reason to assume that Hodes will beat an Ayotte or a Lamontaigne (sp?).

Source? That is to say, unbiased source? Tester has a pretty middle-of-the-road voting record for a Democratic Senator.

Not for Montana he doesn't according to Nate Silver (who is biased towards you guys).  Second, why do you always ask me for sources and never anyone else.  It gets annoying.  I'm not sourcing anything else unless every single member gets the same treatment.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

MO is the most vulnerable unless that French Canadian guy wins the primary in NH, then that becomes the most vulnerable seat. I still think we will win all three if Ayotte wins the primary.

[pragmatic liberal]

If it's a really strong wave like '94, '06, or '08 then yeah, they'll probably not lose any.

If the GOP wave - quite big at the moment - moderates a bit, then Democrats could pick up 1-2. Like everyone else said, probably Missouri. If there's a second it'll be 1 out of NH, Ohio or maybe NC. I think the Republican trend is probably too strong this year for even Rand Paul to lose (despite KY not being a particularly libertarian-friendly state). There's a very outside chance in FL.

Democrats could get lucky if Hayworth in AZ and/or Lamontagne in NH win their respective primaries.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Let's see how ridiculous this sounds in eight months...

Missouri - The only one that seems to have any chance of flipping at this point, because Blunt is personally unpopular, the Carnahan name still carires some weight, and Missouri likes to play it close to the vest with regard to Senate races. Despite this, the national mood is bad enough that all that doesn't matter. Blunt by 4-5.

Ohio - Portman is riding high with a ridiculous amount of money. He has the absolute wrong profile to win in Ohio, being an ex-Bush administration free trade cheerleader, but nobody cares about that now that Bush has been out of office for a whole year. In addition, the Dem primary is proving to be contentious, with a bunch of the left-wing blogger types inexplicably adamant in their support of Jennifer Brunner and her epic fail of a campaign. Fisher will emerge drained of money and with a divided base. Strickland's declining popularity doesn't help either. Portman by 6-8.

New Hampshire - Hodes is Generic Democrat in all but name, which is a shame because Generic Democrat would probably be polling better. If Ayotte can manage to hold together her substanceless, "good things are good" campaign through the primary, she'll probably be fine. Ayotte by 7-8.

Kentucky - The heart of anti-Obama country. Conway is pretty much the best candidate the Dems could have (barring Ben Chandler, of course), but he's screwed because a black man is in the White House. Whoever wins the Republican primary wins the general by 10-12 points.

Florida - If Crist wins the primary, he crushes Meek by 15-20 points. If Rubio wins the primary, he crushes Meek by 12-15 points.

North Carolina - Burr is incredibly lucky to be running in 2010. If this were 2006 or 2008, he'd be dead meat. But being a completely-faceless freshman Republican Senator in 2010 is a damn good place to be in, especially since Marshall and Cunningham are third-tier challengers, and they're barely raising any money. Burr by 8-10 points.

Other - Just thought I'd give a shout-out to Louisiana, where Charlie Melancon is ending his political career. Sorry, Charlie, only the best johns are picked. Vitter by 15-20.

[Sam Spade]

Frankly, I think MO and NH are the best shots of the lot, and out of the two, I'd tend to say NH because Blunt is nowhere near as weak of a candidate as most here would like to think.

[Bo]

Didn't Rob Portman resign as Bush's Trade Representative in 2008 in an attempt to trick voters into thinking that he was disgusted by Bush's economic policies? Ironically, the deficit rose in 2008 for the first time in four years.

[Joe Biden 2020]

Missouri and possibly New Hampshire.

[Padfoot]

I thought 2006 was a "complete sweep" by the democrats. We didn't lose a single house or senate seat did we?

What I'm saying, though is that it seems highly improbable that we would see three Senate sweeps in a row; in this case two Democratic sweeps in 2006 & 2008 and one GOP sweep in 2010.

Also, I voted for NC because I think the environment has enough of an anti-incumbent edge to oust him.

[J. J.]

None, they hold and gain 7-9 seats.