Trende: Democrats to lose up to 14 Senate seats

[Miles]

The analysis, which I won't try to summarize.



This is just my opinion, but Trende is bordering on hackiness with this.

[IceSpear]

Once again, the pundits rely far too heavily on Obama's approval rating in races that have nothing to do with him. This is why they all got egg on their face with the Heitkamp and Donnelly races.

[publicunofficial]

So Obama could have 55% approval and still lose the Senate? Believable.


Every analysis Trende posts is either fairly smart or the dumbest thing ever.

[Orser67]

Yeah, I was a little disappointed Sabato hired him.

[RedSLC]

Yeah, I could see the situation in the races in SD, MT, and WV as disadvantages, but there's no possible way the dems would lose that many seats. Put this with that other prediction set from a couple weeks ago.

[Miles]

By these numbers, Obama could rebound back up to 50% and still get this map:

[RogueBeaver]

Biggest Pub problem is C-listers in IA/CO IMO. Otherwise agreed that this model is too limited.

[morgieb]

Biggest Pub problem is C-listers in IA/CO IMO.

You also got duds in North Carolina and possibly New Hampshire. OTOH, you probably got a stronger than expected candidate in Michigan.

[free my dawg]

[RogueBeaver]

Brown's overrated and there's no one better to recruit in NC/NH. There were possibilities in CO/IA.

[free my dawg]

Brown's overrated and there's no one better to recruit in NC/NH. There were possibilities in CO/IA.

Brown isn't even running. I'd bet everything on it. His Senate candidacy was, is, and always will be irrelevant.

[RogueBeaver]

I didn't say he'd run, and have never believed he will.

[publicunofficial]

Gallup has Obama's approval at 46% by the way, which means Trende is expecting the Republicans to win South Dakota, West Virginia, Montana, Arkansas, Louisiana, Alaska, North Carolina, and Michigan.

Total BS

[free my dawg]

I didn't say he'd run, and have never believed he will.

I know that. Just saying.

[ElectionsGuy]

That's way too dependent on Obama approval, and republicans have no chance of picking up anything beyond 10 seats (Colorado would be the last one), and that's very, very unlikely itself.

[Sbane]

Most of you either have horrible reading comprehension skills or are just lazy. And I am very disappointed in you, Miles. Nowhere does Trende say democrats could lose 14 seats. There is a slight probability, but nowhere does he imply anything close to that being likely. He says the most likely scenario is somewhere between 7-8 losses. That seems fairly reasonable when one looks at the map.

[free my dawg]

Yeah, but there's literally no possible scenario where Democrats lose 14 seats.  Bar a top candidate (Bass/Gardner) changing their mind, Shaheen and Mark Udall are safe. VA probably would fall if Warner pulled a Snowe, but as long as he stays in, he's safe. NM could fall if they got a top-tier candidate (don't know about John Sanchez), but that's very unlikely.

That leaves 13. Franken would be the next to fall, but if Minnesota has the next Ron Johnson on its hands, there's no way in hell that he goes down. As for the rest, fuhgeddaboutit.

[windjammer]

How can they lose 14 seats?

[ElectionsGuy]

How can they lose 14 seats?

According to me, it would probably be something like this:

1. South Dakota
2. West Virginia
3. Montana
4. Arkansas
5. Alaska
6. Louisiana
7. North Carolina
8. Michigan
9. Iowa
10. Colorado
11. Minnesota
12. New Hampshire
13. Virginia
14. Oregon

.... lol. I would draw the line of possibilities at Iowa or Colorado.

[windjammer]

How can they lose 14 seats?

According to me, it would probably be something like this:

1. South Dakota
2. West Virginia
3. Montana
4. Arkansas
5. Alaska
6. Louisiana
7. North Carolina
8. Michigan
9. Iowa
10. Colorado
11. Minnesota
12. New Hampshire
13. Virginia
14. Oregon

.... lol. I would draw the line of possibilities at Iowa or Colorado.

Well, I don't see Colorado, Minnesota, NH, Virginia and Oregon flipping. Losing 9 seats might be possible.

[Nichlemn]

14 seats doesn't seem super implausible. It's not 2010 where they quickly got into California territory if they were to get double-digit gains. All they need are Romney states and lean Dem states.

[Sbane]

14 may be really pushing it but he admits the model does not take into account candidate quality. So Virginia will seem much more vulnerable than it is.

[7,052,770]

If we're talking about Iowa and Michigan, we should bring Kentucky and Georgia into the conversation too.  If we're talking and Oregon and Minnesota, we should bring Mississippi and Texas into the conversation.

[Sbane]

If we're talking about Iowa and Michigan, we should bring Kentucky and Georgia into the conversation too.  If we're talking and Oregon and Minnesota, we should bring Mississippi and Texas into the conversation.

Actually if you look at the chart in the article, there is basically the same probability of Democrats losing none or even gaining a seat as they do of losing 14 seats. I really hate when partisan hacks try to take on statistics.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Take into account, 2006, where Dubya's approval was and compare it to Obama's when we were on offense possibly taking control of senate. Gallup says Dubya stood at 38 percent when we won MO, OH, RI, PA, VA, Mnt, equals Six. Obama's is 46 percent. Not enough for six seat switch.