Why do people think this will be a Republican year?

[GaussLaw]

So many people I hear think that the GOP is going to do well in 2014, but I just don't see it.

In the Senate, the GOP does have 3 pretty clear pick ups:  SD, MT, and WV.  Past that, it's very dicey.  In KY, McConnell has horrible approvals and, on average, is trailing grimes.  In GA, Perdue's gaffe makes it significantly more likely that Broun will get the nomination.  Michelle Nunn also has a golden last name, and Governor Deal's corruption is sinking him.  Those two are more likely than not pickups for Democrats.  Arkansas looked like trouble for the Dems but the last two polls had Pryor at +3 and +10.  The race definitely looks like Lean Pryor now.  In NC, insane candidate Greg Brannon has a good chance of getting the nomination and would torpedo any chance at the seat.  Tillis's approval ratings are horrible and is trailing Hagan in most polls.  Thus, that state should be safe for Dems.  Landrieu generally leads against Cassidy in the runoff and if she can win in 2002, she should be able to win in 2014.  In Alaska, there's a decent chance Miller gets nominated or runs as an independent.  Even if it doesn't happen, Alaska has a pro-incumbent bias and Begich is a very good campaigner.  In Michigan, Gary Peters is now up 5 and the Obamacare/GOP momentum seems to be dying.  In IA/CO, both Braley and Udall have marginal opponents(Cory Gardner represents the very conservative Eastern portion of the state; Joni Ernst has little experience and Mark Jacobs works for Goldman Sachs). 

If I were to project today, I would have GOP +1.  They would pick up MT, WV, and SD, but they would lose GA and KY. 



Dems lead the generic ballot, appear poised to knock out Scott/Corbett/Lepage as well as possibly Schauer(40/48 approval = likely dead), Deal, and Brownback. 

Healthcare reform is becoming more popular after its freefall late in last November.       

Bottom line is, I just don't see the GOP doing that well.  A 4 seat pickup seems to be about the best they can do.  The Dems lead by 1-2 points in the generic ballot, the Senate polls are backsliding for them, and their governors are not doing very well against little-known challengers.

[Miles]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A few points on this. 2002 was more favorable to her because:

- No unpopular Obama/ACA
- A lot of the parishes she needs to compete in (especially in Acadiana) were still voting less than 60% R in Presidential elections, instead of 70-75% R today.
- The Senate would have been R regardless of the runoff.  If the runoff is for Senate control, that's very, very risky and leads to nationalization out the wazoo.
- AFP wasn't around then.

That said, she now has a few more advantages:

- She's more entrenched/has more seniority.
- Though it tarnished Blanco, politically, Katrina helped Landrieu's reputation as one who tends to the state's local needs.
- Energy Chairmanship.
- Cassidy is a good but not great challenger.

On AR, I wouldn't call the race Lean D based on a few polls (as promising as they may look).

Agree on NC that it would be Lean/Likely D with Brannon. I guess its also good for Hagan that, though he numbers are low now, the more people know about Tillis, the worse he polls against her.

[7,052,770]

It's mainly because of the map. Every contested seat is in a Romney state, unless you extend that classification out to states like Iowa and Colorado that are probably pipe dreams. It's plausible that Obama and Obamacare could be above 50% in approval and Republicans still pick up 4-5 seats.

It's too early for any real predictions though. Republicans can do themselves a lot of favors if they pick the right candidates in North Carolina, Georgia, or Mississippi, or they could potentially squander all 3 seats.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

There are Romney states and there are duo senate and gubernatorial elections. The Dems do have the advantage of keeping AR, CO, and MI based purely on the duo contest going on. I think as it seems now, with Ross having a Hutchinson on the ticket is an advantage to Pryor having defeated brother Tim, who have terrible approvals. So, AR,La with the McAllister reminding people of Vitter,and AK are winnable.

[moderatevoter]

There are Romney states and there are duo senate and gubernatorial elections. The Dems do have the advantage of keeping AR, CO, and MI based purely on the duo contest going on. I think as it seems now, with Ross having a Hutchinson on the ticket is an advantage to Pryor having defeated brother Tim, who have terrible approvals. So, AR,La with the McAllister reminding people of Vitter,and AK are winnable.

How does "McAllister reminding people of Vitter" matter here? Last I checked, Vitter was comfortably elected Senator for the state, he had fairly decent approvals, and he's the favorite to take the Governorship in 2015. That argument is such a stretch, and I don't even see how it makes sense.

As for the general post - the point is the map and fundamentals of a 2nd term midterm favor the GOP. I think we all agree they're favored in SD, WV, and MT.

Saying Arkansas is Lean D because of two polls, one of which was completely garbage (42% of the electorate will be 65+? please) is ridiculous. As many have said, the fundamentals in Arkansas are moving in the GOP's favor too. I'm not saying Pryor is gone. I've long been one to state that he will not be as an easy out like people think, and that he's no Blanche Lincoln. However, he is in a weak position nevertheless.

Landrieu is a good campaigner in Louisiana, but as we've established on this forum: her strength is being able to run these races as if they were Gubernatorial ones, with a greater focus on local issues. I am not going to count her out, because you can never count her out, but if the run-off is nationalized, she's in some serious trouble. This is particularly the case if the GOP wins a net of four or five seats on election day in November.

In Georgia, how does Perdue's gaffe coincide with the rise of Broun? Perdue supporters are unlikely to jump ship for Broun. If they desert Perdue, they'll go for Kingston or Handel. Handel has actually had a fairly good month and is gaining momentum with endorsements and some of her fundraising. Kingston has raised a boatload of money, and is constantly on the airwaves across the state. There are already ads attacking Gingrey (and Nunn and Broun for that matter), whereas Broun and Gingrey have struggling campaigns. I believe Gingrey had staff shakeup, and Broun is struggling with fundraising. If Broun or Gingrey aren't the nominees, I'm pretty sure Nunn will not win. Even then, she needs to win on election day, because I doubt her chances at winning a run-off.

I think Harry said it best. It's too early for any real predictions, other than maybe WV, SD, and MT. The map is very advantageous to Republicans, so there is potential for a great year. As long as they keep the map broad, then they at least have a shot at Senate control. Things can change quickly with primaries and a single gaffe, but at the moment, the chances are still there for them.

[Miles]

There are Romney states and there are duo senate and gubernatorial elections. The Dems do have the advantage of keeping AR, CO, and MI based purely on the duo contest going on. I think as it seems now, with Ross having a Hutchinson on the ticket is an advantage to Pryor having defeated brother Tim, who have terrible approvals. So, AR,La with the McAllister reminding people of Vitter,and AK are winnable.

How does "McAllister reminding people of Vitter" matter here? Last I checked, Vitter was comfortably elected Senator for the state, he had fairly decent approvals, and he's the favorite to take the Governorship in 2015. That argument is such a stretch, and I don't even see how it makes sense.

To many down here, it actually makes a lot of sense. Its still bad for the Republicans. The longer McAllister drags this out, the worse it looks for the party. At minimum, its a distraction that they don't need when the focus needs to be on the Senate race.

Yes, it will hurt Vitter. The CW was that his scandal was in the rear view mirror. McAllister's affair instantly brought comparisons Vitter. Melancon didn't really press Vitter on his scandal, but there was gossip that his opponents were ready to revive it going into 2015; now, they don't even have to overtly mention it, as its already crept back into news articles. Vitter is now having to deal with headlines like this.

[moderatevoter]

When you put it that way, it makes more sense. Otherwise it seemed like a bizarre correlation.

[Senate Minority Leader Lord Voldemort]

It's too early for any real predictions though. Republicans can do themselves a lot of favors if they pick the right candidates in North Carolina, Georgia, or Mississippi, or they could potentially squander all 3 seats.

I think it's especially difficult to predict this year because there are so many factors like republican party's approval rating lower than Democrats, nearly all competitive races in red states, Obamacare extremely unpopular, etc etc.

Of all the senate cycles in the past decade, one party has usually swept most competitive races (LOL @ 2010 CO/NV). And I just don't see either doing that if the election were held today.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

When you put it that way, it makes more sense. Otherwise it seemed like a bizarre correlation.

Landrieu also been in office longer and Pryor, so that they aren't as vulnerable as Begich or Hagen, who are freshman Senatprs. The GOP are bound to have a new female senator and that is SMC, and defeat a female Senator, and Hagen, not Shaheen or Landrieu, as it seems is the weakest link

We need Landrieu for the runoff if Senate control depends on it, event bough the GOP may have the edge.

[TX Conservative Dem]

Longtime incumbent United States Senators sometimes aren't guaranteed reelection as we've seen happen in recent years like Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas in 2010, Dick Lugar in 2012, Rick Santorum and Conrad Burns in 2006.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Most of who you were referring to, have been discredited by their own party, Lincoln and Lugar were primaried. Burns had ethics. I think Pryor or Landrieu will be reelected.

[Miles]

Going back to the OP.