Predict the 2014 Senate result

[JerryArkansas]

+9 Rep's

two would only come if incumbent retires and popular gop person runs in iowa and mt.  If not it would be this map

[Mehmentum]

+8 Rep's

[badgate]

^Hey, there have been some zealously optimistic Dem maps posted too. Lol

[Miles]

+8 Rep's

9, as SD wasn't counted.

[CountryRoads]

If the Republicans want to win in NC, they need a women to face Hagan.

I heard Liddy Dole hasn't had a job for 4 years...

Absolutely not. She threw away a seat more spectacularly than Allen but not quite Akin-territory.

Yea, she would not win. I'm not sure who it will be, but if Republicans want this seat back, IMO, it is going to be with a woman Republican, not a male.

Renee Ellmers is the only female option I can think of.

Ellmers is kind of crazy, so that cancels out.

Thom Tillis is the most likely Republican Candidate, although he'd have some substantial baggage from the General Assembly.

Tillis would get DEMOLISHED by Hagan. I think Ellmers is a better candidate.

[Sol]

Tillis has too much baggage, and Ellmers is near Akin territory. NC Republicans could do a lot better than either of those, although they might not have the name recognition.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

I think it's too early since there are too many announcements to be made of who is and isn't running, but here are a few scenarios:

No change:

The likeliest scenario at this point in time:

Extremely unlikely, but the most Republicans can gain (assuming that Durbin, Harkin, Levin, Baucus, Lautenberg, Johnson, and Rockefeller retire, and Kerry is appointed to the cabinet; I could see Scott Brown coming back in such an instance.)

The most Democrats can gain (including the special election in South Carolina not included here, if the appointee is too far-right for the voters):

[Donerail]

Republicans aren't picking up Minnesota. With who? This?

[Talleyrand]

The likeliest scenario at this point in time:

This is a map based in fantasy, not reality.

The only state where you match the consensus is Alaska, yet somehow you think Oregon, Colorado, New Hampshire, and Minnesota are favored for GOP wins, while West Virginia and  South Dakota are favored D holds? Plus Hagan is probably favored in NC.

[RogueBeaver]

Yeah, that's a Winfield/Politico map.

As I've said before, I think the GOP picks up AK/LA/SD/WV. Dems keep AR and NC because of weak Pub benches in those states. And I really hope Sununu doesn't go for Round 3 in NH and embarrass everyone except his immediate family.

[Talleyrand]

Yeah, that's a Winfield/Politico map.

As I've said before, I think the GOP picks up AK/LA/SD/WV. Dems keep AR and NC because of weak Pub benches in those states. And I really hope Sununu doesn't go for Round 3 in NH and embarrass everyone except his immediate family.

I agree with you on this completely. The current likely scenario is that the Democrats lose LA, AK, SD, and WV, and the GOP retains all its seats. I think AR is lost if the GOP puts up Griffin, Darr, or Cotton, but it doesn't look like that will happen.

And yeah, MT and NC are Lean D holds now, not because of incumbent strength (though Baucus has an excellent organization and Hagan will be strongly backed, I'm guessing), but because of the awful GOP candidates in the states (I think Tim Fox/Steve Daines in MT could defeat Baucus and McCrory could defeat Hagan, but they'd have to start a campaign less than a year before election to their new positions, and McCrory obviously won't run).

[RogueBeaver]

I think Baucus would have a good shot even without the crappy GOP bench if only because he's been there so long, has a decent profile at home and has the "don't shoot Santa Claus" thing that works so well for McConnell and Reid.

AR: Darr hasn't closed the door but is apparently more interested in governor. Cotton seems to be leaning no to any sort of upgrade this cycle. IMO he'd be more useful as governor than in the Senate.  

As for the Dems, no pickups unless Collins retires unexpectedly.

CO: Now that's Winfield territory. Not unless Udall retired and it was Gardner against a middling-to-weak Dem opponent in a middling-to-strong Pub cycle.

MA: Even if Kerry gets the nod Brown should leave that alone, I don't think the GOP can hold those seats in a presidential cycle unless it's strongly GOP to begin with plus a weakish Dem opponent. He should run for governor instead, which is eminently winnable and not up in presidential years.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Ha.

Haha.

Hahahaha.

Hahahahahaha.

[Franzl]

Imagine how racist that result would make Democrats look. Arkansas as the only large DEM victory.

[Mr.Phips]

+9 Rep's

two would only come if incumbent retires and popular gop person runs in iowa and mt.  If not it would be this map

Yeah, Republicans are going to win Colorado in 2014 when they couldnt even win there in 2010 in a GOP wave against a much weaker opponent than Udall. 

[Antonio the Sixth]

OK, I'll try mine, even though it will probably look ridiculous come 2014:

Tossup/Lean/Likely/Safe

The Dems' main problem is that they have a very low floor, but I doubt any of the GOP's longshot possibilities (stuff like IA, CO, NJ, MI) have much chance to materialize. The same is true for GA and KY, of course. Maine hinges on Collins' decision.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

The likeliest scenario at this point in time:

This is a map based in fantasy, not reality.

The only state where you match the consensus is Alaska, yet somehow you think Oregon, Colorado, New Hampshire, and Minnesota are favored for GOP wins, while West Virginia and  South Dakota are favored D holds? Plus Hagan is probably favored in NC.

They're freshman Senators who replaced Republicans; how would that not make them vulnerable?

The GOP bench is West Virginia is one of the weakest in the nation.  It may be a strong Republican-leaning state in national elections, but it's about as heavily a Democratic-leaning, blue-leaning state as you get in state-level contests.  I don't see Tim Johnson retiring any time soon, since he didn't after his stroke.  And people there will probably vote for him as long as he wants his seat out of sympathy from that (although I don't wish him ill, it's just a fact.) 
New Hampshire and Colorado are still swing states, and a strong Republcan could win either seat.  (Although personally, I would rather see NH Republicans go more after beating Hassan in 2014.)  And Al Franken was never elected to the Senate anyway; he's such a nut that I don't see why the GOP wouldn't be foaming at the mouth from the prospect of beating him.  Although it's unlikely, I would love to see Tim Pawlenty run against him.  And in Colorado, I could easily see Jane Norton beating Mark Udall if she chooses to run. 

Granted, I think it's WAY too early to make any predictions, especially since ae don't know which incumbents (especially well-entrenches ones like Durbin, Levin, and Lautenberg) are running agan.

[Maxwell]

Yeah, Republicans are going to win Colorado in 2014 when they couldnt even win there in 2010 in a GOP wave against a much weaker opponent than Udall. 

Well, Udall wasn't elected by that big of a margin in a Dem wave, so I'm sure he's very beatable, but the Colorado Republican bench is garbage, so its probably safe.

[Mr.Phips]

Yeah, Republicans are going to win Colorado in 2014 when they couldnt even win there in 2010 in a GOP wave against a much weaker opponent than Udall. 

Well, Udall wasn't elected by that big of a margin in a Dem wave, so I'm sure he's very beatable, but the Colorado Republican bench is garbage, so its probably safe.

He won by ten points. 

[Talleyrand]

The likeliest scenario at this point in time:

This is a map based in fantasy, not reality.

The only state where you match the consensus is Alaska, yet somehow you think Oregon, Colorado, New Hampshire, and Minnesota are favored for GOP wins, while West Virginia and  South Dakota are favored D holds? Plus Hagan is probably favored in NC.

They're freshman Senators who replaced Republicans; how would that not make them vulnerable?

The GOP bench is West Virginia is one of the weakest in the nation.  It may be a strong Republican-leaning state in national elections, but it's about as heavily a Democratic-leaning, blue-leaning state as you get in state-level contests.  I don't see Tim Johnson retiring any time soon, since he didn't after his stroke.  And people there will probably vote for him as long as he wants his seat out of sympathy from that (although I don't wish him ill, it's just a fact.)  
New Hampshire and Colorado are still swing states, and a strong Republcan could win either seat.  (Although personally, I would rather see NH Republicans go more after beating Hassan in 2014.)  And Al Franken was never elected to the Senate anyway; he's such a nut that I don't see why the GOP wouldn't be foaming at the mouth from the prospect of beating him.  Although it's unlikely, I would love to see Tim Pawlenty run against him.  And in Colorado, I could easily see Jane Norton beating Mark Udall if she chooses to run.  

Granted, I think it's WAY too early to make any predictions, especially since ae don't know which incumbents (especially well-entrenches ones like Durbin, Levin, and Lautenberg) are running agan.

Now you're just putting words in my mouth. I never said they weren't vulnerable and they well could be. But it's just ridiculous to say they're favored to lose. Norton won't "easily beat" Udall and would be much likelier to lose. She was down ten points in the most recent poll and her performance in 2010 was pathetic, especially her loss to Ken Buck. Of course a strong Republican could conceivably win, but it would a huge uphill fight.

Same goes for New Hampshire. Shaheen's approval stands at +15, and she's leading her predecessor, her most credible challenger, by double digits already. If the best the GOP can come up with her is someone like Guinta, she should be even happier about her chances. New Hampshire definitely has a tendency to magnify national swings, but popular politicians with weak opponents can still defy them (see Lynch, John in 2010). The GOP's best chance here is a retirement, and even then, it would probably Tilt Democratic.

It doesn't matter if the GOP bench in West Virginia is terrible, because they got their best candidate in the race already, Shelley Moore Capito. She's the state's most popular politician besides Manchin and is already leading an entrenched five term incumbent in the polls. Once he retires, she'll easily dispatch whoever Dems send her way. And no, she's not going to be tea-bagged. The main opposition to her candidacy is from out of state and there is no credible challenger to beat her in a primary besides David McKinley (and I don't think he'll run), and he'd also win the general pretty easily.

Just because Johnson ran after his stroke in 2008 doesn't mean he'll run again. You've managed to totally omit the fact that he faced a joke opponent in the best year for the Democratic Party since Watergate. By 2014, he will be 68 years old and have three terms under his belt. He didn't seem too enthusiastic about running and was noncommittal in a recent statement. Mike Rounds, the state's decently popular former Governor, is already in, and both parties alike think he'll be tough to beat.

As for Minnesota, you're just letting your personal hatred of Franken get in the way of objective analysis. He has strong approvals, and has been a low-profile, hardworking, constituent-oriented Senator. The Minnesota GOP's best hope here is Paulsen, and I bet he doesn't give up his safe house seat. If the GOP's strategy is actually foaming at the prospect of beating him and intends to go after him for being such a crazy nut, they'll get thrashed.

As for NC and Oregon, you didn't reply, so I'm guessing you don't disagree with me.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

The likeliest scenario at this point in time:

This is a map based in fantasy, not reality.

The only state where you match the consensus is Alaska, yet somehow you think Oregon, Colorado, New Hampshire, and Minnesota are favored for GOP wins, while West Virginia and  South Dakota are favored D holds? Plus Hagan is probably favored in NC.

They're freshman Senators who replaced Republicans; how would that not make them vulnerable?

The GOP bench is West Virginia is one of the weakest in the nation.  It may be a strong Republican-leaning state in national elections, but it's about as heavily a Democratic-leaning, blue-leaning state as you get in state-level contests.  I don't see Tim Johnson retiring any time soon, since he didn't after his stroke.  And people there will probably vote for him as long as he wants his seat out of sympathy from that (although I don't wish him ill, it's just a fact.)  
New Hampshire and Colorado are still swing states, and a strong Republcan could win either seat.  (Although personally, I would rather see NH Republicans go more after beating Hassan in 2014.)  And Al Franken was never elected to the Senate anyway; he's such a nut that I don't see why the GOP wouldn't be foaming at the mouth from the prospect of beating him.  Although it's unlikely, I would love to see Tim Pawlenty run against him.  And in Colorado, I could easily see Jane Norton beating Mark Udall if she chooses to run.  

Granted, I think it's WAY too early to make any predictions, especially since ae don't know which incumbents (especially well-entrenches ones like Durbin, Levin, and Lautenberg) are running agan.

Now you're just putting words in my mouth. I never said they weren't vulnerable and they well could be. But it's just ridiculous to say they're favored to lose. Norton won't "easily beat" Udall and would be much likelier to lose. She was down ten points in the most recent poll and her performance in 2010 was pathetic, especially her loss to Ken Buck. Of course a strong Republican could conceivably win, but it would a huge uphill fight.

Same goes for New Hampshire. Shaheen's approval stands at +15, and she's leading her predecessor, her most credible challenger, by double digits already. If the best the GOP can come up with her is someone like Guinta, she should be even happier about her chances. New Hampshire definitely has a tendency to magnify national swings, but popular politicians with weak opponents can still defy them (see Lynch, John in 2010). The GOP's best chance here is a retirement, and even then, it would probably Tilt Democratic.

It doesn't matter if the GOP bench in West Virginia is terrible, because they got their best candidate in the race already, Shelley Moore Capito. She's the state's most popular politician besides Manchin and is already leading an entrenched five term incumbent in the polls. Once he retires, she'll easily dispatch whoever Dems send her way. And no, she's not going to be tea-bagged. The main opposition to her candidacy is from out of state and there is no credible challenger to beat her in a primary besides David McKinley (and I don't think he'll run), and he'd also win the general pretty easily.

Just because Johnson ran after his stroke in 2008 doesn't mean he'll run again. You've managed to totally omit the fact that he faced a joke opponent in the best year for the Democratic Party since Watergate. By 2014, he will be 68 years old and have three terms under his belt. He didn't seem too enthusiastic about running and was noncommittal in a recent statement. Mike Rounds, the state's decently popular former Governor, is already in, and both parties alike think he'll be tough to beat.

As for Minnesota, you're just letting your personal hatred of Franken get in the way of objective analysis. He has strong approvals, and has been a low-profile, hardworking, constituent-oriented Senator. The Minnesota GOP's best hope here is Paulsen, and I bet he doesn't give up his safe house seat. If the GOP's strategy is actually foaming at the prospect of beating him and intends to go after him for being such a crazy nut, they'll get thrashed.

As for NC and Oregon, you didn't reply, so I'm guessing you don't disagree with me.

These are the likeliest pickups for Republicans.  As for Oregon and North Carolina, there may not be any strong Republicans who may run at this point, but the party could find some.  Jane Norton would have easily beaten Michael Bennet if she had won the primary in 2010.  As for the Election Thief Franken, I have no idea why Minnesota would elect him (or rather, why the state Supreme Court would select him.)  I also have no idea why he would be popular.  I can already see the perfect bumper sticker: "Re-Defeat Franken 2014."  But then again, they did elect Jesse Ventura as their governor in 1998, so I guess it's not that surprising.  But that proves just how pathetic Minnesota voters (and their state Supreme Court) are.  And Norm Coleman was a hardworking, constituent-oriented Senator too.  (Then again, he was reelected, but the convicted felons and the Minnesota Supreme Court stole it from him.)  That being said, I probably did a poor job of choosing the likeliest scenario.  They may not be favored to lose, but they're probably the most vulnerable right now.

[Talleyrand]

Norton was performing worse against Bennet than Buck was in polls at the time of the primary election. I bet she would have lost by a similar margin. She would have certainly not won easily, as Bennet's campaign was widely touted as excellent.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

...

I'm glad you acknowledged your scenario is still unlikely, but it's still silly to suggest Merkley, Udall, Franken, and Shaheen are among the most vulnerable Senators, especially so when there are people like Landrieu, Rockefeller, and Johnson in far more precarious positions.

[RogueBeaver]

Norton's campaign was crap, and I say that as someone who supported her back then. Why would it miraculously improve in the GE?

As for MN, it's Minnesota, home of HHH and Wellstone, and Ron Johnsons don't grow on trees. Even if they found one he'd be a decoy at best. Maybe a close run decoy like Graves against Bachmann, but decoy nonetheless. Don't get me started on OR.

NC: Weak field. Yes Hagan could face a tough fight against a first-tier opponent, but none exist.

[RogueBeaver]

I wonder whether Darr or Womack could be induced to run in AR, since Griffin is firmly out and Cotton seems disinclined to hopscotch this early. My feeling is that Darr runs for governor, dunno about Womack.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Oldiesfreak, are you aware that the 2009 Minnesota Supreme Court had a Republican appointed majority and the final decision on that Senate race was unanimous? And that the recount was overseen by a panel of two Democrats, two Republicans and one independent?