A couple of points:
1) The national mood certainly favors the GOP going into the midterms. Obama's approval rating
sits at around 43% in the most recent polls,
his ratings are actually worse than George W. Bush's were at a similar point in 2006 before Republicans lost both the House and Senate that year. Moreover, Obama's brand remains particularly detrimental to Democrats' chances in states like Alaska, Iowa and North Carolina where he often sports disapproval ratings of over 50%. Arkansas, Louisiana and West Virginia are actually among some of the worst states for Obama in terms of approval polling. Some people would say that 2014 doesn't look a lot like 2006 in terms of political composition, but the President's approval ratings, continued economic woes and trouble on the horizon overseas seem to indicate otherwise.
2) Moreover, Republicans will be looking at a much friendlier electorate voting for a much more palatable slate of candidates in 2014 than they were in 2010 or 2012. 2014 has been the year that the Tea Party withered, and no Tea Party candidates seemed poised to deny Republicans victories in contested Senate elections. The enthusiasm gap is an issue that cannot be ignored this cycle, and so far
the GOP holds a 47-40 advantage among those who are "more enthusiastic than usual" about voting.3) How can I be criticized for calling Cotton and Cassidy "favored" by a poster who then contends that Braley should be "favored" in Iowa in the very next sentence? Democratic hacks on this site argue that undue what is given to "fundamentals" in states like Louisiana and Arkansas, yet jump over to another post on another thread (or maybe even the same thread) and you'll see the same posters arguing about how fundamentals in the form of "changing demographics" or "traditional Democratic strength" will save the Democrats in states like Colorado and Iowa even when polling doesn't indicate either candidate in those races as favorites.
