Article on Political Climate in Senate Races by Larry Sabato

[Never]

Yesterday, Larry Sabato wrote a Politico article titled "How Big a Wave?" discussing the various scenarios that could play out in November's Senate races by literally comparing them to the severity of ocean waves.

I felt this was an excellent article that gives a very good idea of what to expect in this year's Senate elections. It seems that almost everyone will find something to like about this regardless of political leaning. I think that the Republicans will perform somewhere between a "Sea Wall Breached" gain of 6 seats or a "Republican Tidal Wave" gain of 11 seats, and that the most likely outcome is "Gale Force White Caps" in which the Republicans gain all 7 seats currently held by Democrats from Romney 2012 states.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

The story before Obamacare roll out was House has a chance to flip. Now, it is all about the inevitability of GOP taking control of Senate. Pundits don't like status quo elections, even though 2012 produced one, and we should take it as that.

[Never]

The story before Obamacare roll out was House has a chance to flip. Now, it is all about the inevitability of GOP taking control of Senate. Pundits don't like status quo elections, even though 2012 produced one, and we should take it as that.

Indeed, "no news" is bad news for people in the media.

Nevertheless, it does appear that Republicans have a chance at taking the Senate, but it is difficult to determine whether they will barely control the body with 51 senators or if they will have a few seats to spare in their majority.

[Senate Minority Leader Lord Voldemort]

I don't think it told anyone anything new that we didn't already know. The only thing that was new here was the ocean/wave/storm surge/whatever analogy.

As many say on here over and over again, it is still way too early to determine anything. Things can easily worsen for Democrats or worsen for Republicans. This article is only really relevant if the election was next week.

[International Brotherhood of Bernard]

The story before Obamacare roll out was House has a chance to flip. Now, it is all about the inevitability of GOP taking control of Senate. Pundits don't like status quo elections, even though 2012 produced one, and we should take it as that.

Indeed, "no news" is bad news for people in the media.

Nevertheless, it does appear that Republicans have a chance at taking the Senate, but it is difficult to determine whether they will barely control the body with 51 senators or if they will have a few seats to spare in their majority.

Or if, you know, Democrats hold on to the majority (which is what I predict right now)

[Never]

The story before Obamacare roll out was House has a chance to flip. Now, it is all about the inevitability of GOP taking control of Senate. Pundits don't like status quo elections, even though 2012 produced one, and we should take it as that.

Indeed, "no news" is bad news for people in the media.

Nevertheless, it does appear that Republicans have a chance at taking the Senate, but it is difficult to determine whether they will barely control the body with 51 senators or if they will have a few seats to spare in their majority.

Or if, you know, Democrats hold on to the majority (which is what I predict right now)

That could happen, but I wouldn't bet the baby's milk money on it.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Hopefully, we can win in ARK and win KY or GA and keep NC and we will keep our 51 seat majority, regardless what happens in LA or AK.

[illegaloperation]

Hopefully, we can win in ARK and win KY or GA and keep NC and we will keep our 51 seat majority, regardless what happens in LA or AK.

Arkansas is AR not ARK

[windjammer]

Yeah, the Republicans becoming the majority party is definitely a possibility.

[windjammer]

Yeah, the Republicans becoming the majority party is definitely a possibility.

And it is possible it would stay that way in 2016. Vulnerable Dem seats up in 2016 include Nevada and Colorado and Washington state. There could well be some surprises even in New York or Vermont or California and I do not think Democrats will do as well in 2016 Senate as is popular belief. If a Bush financial director won clearly in Ohio in 2010 folks should not be too quick to say someone of his caliber will go down in 2016. I understand that it is necessary for Republicans to pick up at least 7 or 8 seats to have a better chance of holding the Senate two years from now.

In New York, Vermont, and  California, how?
And Washington, even if it will probably be slightly contested (after all, they wouldn't have many targets), Democrats are favored to hold this state.