Could the Democrats increase their Senate majority?

[BushKenya]

By most accounts, the House will pick up half or less of the needed 25 seats to take back the House of Representatives.  Could it be, though, that the Democrats increase their majority in the Senate by a seat or two?  Right now, they have a 6 seat majority.  Is there a viable path to get them to a 7 or 8 seat majority?

[I left.]

By most accounts, the House will pick up half or less of the needed 25 seats to take back the House of Representatives.  Could it be, though, that the Democrats increase their majority in the Senate by a seat or two?  Right now, they have a 6 seat majority.  Is there a viable path to get them to a 7 or 8 seat majority?

Are we cutting Senators in half?

[Californian Tony]

The best conceivable outcome I can see for Democrats is them holding all their seats except Nebraska, while picking up MA, IN, AZ and NV (plus have King caucus with them). That would mean a net gain of 4 seats and a 57/43 Senate.

Of course, that would mean every close race breaking in favor of Democrats. That seems very unlikely to happen.

I think the best realistic result we can hope for is 55/45. This should be enough to survive in 2014, barring a 2010-like wave.

[Ogre Mage]

The most likely outcome is Senate Democrats holding at 53 seats or going down to 52.  But there is a fair chance they could tick up to 54.

The simplest way I could see this happening is -- Democrats hold all their contested seats except Nebraska but pick up Maine and Mass.

Another possibility -- the Democrats lose Nebraska and North Dakota (or Montana), but pickup Maine, Mass. and Nevada.

If the Democrats lose Nebraska, North Dakota and Montana, then it starts to get pretty difficult.  It would require adding either Indiana or Arizona to the list of pickups and that doesn't seem likely.

The fact we can plausibly talk about this outcome is pretty amazing given how bad the senate map looked at the beginning of the year.

[Wolfentoad]

Possibly. RCP has Dems losing one seat, but I believe we will win Indiana, so there would be no net gain. Dems could win NV, AZ, and ND. Of course, Mass, Virginia, and others RCP shows us winning we could lose, so you never know. I believe the ceiling for Dems is +3, while the Republican ceiling is +5.

[BushKenya]

The best conceivable outcome I can see for Democrats is them holding all their seats except Nebraska, while picking up MA, IN, AZ and NV (plus have King caucus with them). That would mean a net gain of 4 seats and a 57/43 Senate.

Of course, that would mean every close race breaking in favor of Democrats. That seems very unlikely to happen.

I think the best realistic result we can hope for is 55/45. This should be enough to survive in 2014, barring a 2010-like wave.

2014 should be another Republican wave, but 2016 should be a Democratic wave with the Senators who were election 2010 coming up for re-election.  Of course, 2014 and 2016 all depend on how the next Administration is doing.  If Obama wins this year and is doing poorly, 2014 and 2016 could be disaster for the Democrats.  If Romney wins and is doing poorly, 2014 and 2016 could be disaster for the Republicans.  Right now, I see Obama winning in 2012 and losing seats in the House and possibly the Senate in 2014 and 2016 being a wash with the Republicans gaining control of the White House, but with significant Democratic gains in the House and the Senate.  The increase in the House may be enough to put Steny Hoyer or Nancy Pelosi back in the Speakers chair come January 2017.  I see the Republicans holding the House at least for Obama's entire second term.