Who'll win in Kansas?

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Is the GOP's control of the state House or Senate; or any of Kansas's federal Reps in any danger from the unpopular top ticket duo?

Republicans will have small losses in the House and Senate but will still have a commanding majority.

As for the Congressional races, none are in trouble. Jenkins will probably win by 10 points or so and that'll be the closest race.

Not Yoder?  I could see him only winning by 5-7 (probably closer to 7) points.

[IceSpear]

From Orman's website

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So this math confuses me. Correct me if I am wrong. If Orman wins, Republicans would need to win 7 seats for him to commit GOP? 6 would then be a tie, and goes into wheel and deal territory, and 5 Dems would be in control, so he commits to Democrats?

So how serious do we think Orman is about not voting for either Reid or McConnell for Majority leader? If one party or the other wins a majority without him, that's an easy promise to keep since his protest vote for Heitkamp/ Murkowski (lol) wouldn't effect the outcome. But if it's D-49, R-50, Orman-1? Conventional wisdom says he probably caucuses with democrats in that scenario, and Biden's tie-breaker gives Dems control of the Senate. But that doesn't work if Orman votes for Heitkamp or some other Democrat besides Reid. Then it's McConnel- 50, Reid-49, Heitkamp- 1, and no one has a majority for majority leader, and Biden no longer gets to cast a tie-breaking vote because there's not a tie either.

It's a rather silly thing to say in the same breath as acknowledging that you might be the tie-breaking vote.

I have to say, it would be pretty amazing to watch a some dude from Kansas nobody cared about a month ago depose both Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell and install Heidi Heitkamp or Lisa Murkowski as majority leader.

[Flake]

From Orman's website

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So this math confuses me. Correct me if I am wrong. If Orman wins, Republicans would need to win 7 seats for him to commit GOP? 6 would then be a tie, and goes into wheel and deal territory, and 5 Dems would be in control, so he commits to Democrats?

So how serious do we think Orman is about not voting for either Reid or McConnell for Majority leader? If one party or the other wins a majority without him, that's an easy promise to keep since his protest vote for Heitkamp/ Murkowski (lol) wouldn't effect the outcome. But if it's D-49, R-50, Orman-1? Conventional wisdom says he probably caucuses with democrats in that scenario, and Biden's tie-breaker gives Dems control of the Senate. But that doesn't work if Orman votes for Heitkamp or some other Democrat besides Reid. Then it's McConnel- 50, Reid-49, Heitkamp- 1, and no one has a majority for majority leader, and Biden no longer gets to cast a tie-breaking vote because there's not a tie either.

It's a rather silly thing to say in the same breath as acknowledging that you might be the tie-breaking vote.

I have to say, it would be pretty amazing to watch a some dude from Kansas nobody cared about a month ago depose both Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell and install Heidi Heitkamp or Lisa Murkowski as majority leader.

I'd be fine with Heidi Heitkamp being majority leader, because, well, she isn't a complete assface.

[SteveRogers]

From Orman's website

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So this math confuses me. Correct me if I am wrong. If Orman wins, Republicans would need to win 7 seats for him to commit GOP? 6 would then be a tie, and goes into wheel and deal territory, and 5 Dems would be in control, so he commits to Democrats?

So how serious do we think Orman is about not voting for either Reid or McConnell for Majority leader? If one party or the other wins a majority without him, that's an easy promise to keep since his protest vote for Heitkamp/ Murkowski (lol) wouldn't effect the outcome. But if it's D-49, R-50, Orman-1? Conventional wisdom says he probably caucuses with democrats in that scenario, and Biden's tie-breaker gives Dems control of the Senate. But that doesn't work if Orman votes for Heitkamp or some other Democrat besides Reid. Then it's McConnel- 50, Reid-49, Heitkamp- 1, and no one has a majority for majority leader, and Biden no longer gets to cast a tie-breaking vote because there's not a tie either.

It's a rather silly thing to say in the same breath as acknowledging that you might be the tie-breaking vote.

I have to say, it would be pretty amazing to watch a some dude from Kansas nobody cared about a month ago depose both Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell and install Heidi Heitkamp or Lisa Murkowski as majority leader.

Probably he'd just cast his protest vote for Heitkamp on the first ballot, and then Democrats would be like, "No, but seriously, if you wan't to caucus with us you have to vote for our guy." And then he'd vote for Reid on the second ballot.

[IceSpear]

From Orman's website

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So this math confuses me. Correct me if I am wrong. If Orman wins, Republicans would need to win 7 seats for him to commit GOP? 6 would then be a tie, and goes into wheel and deal territory, and 5 Dems would be in control, so he commits to Democrats?

So how serious do we think Orman is about not voting for either Reid or McConnell for Majority leader? If one party or the other wins a majority without him, that's an easy promise to keep since his protest vote for Heitkamp/ Murkowski (lol) wouldn't effect the outcome. But if it's D-49, R-50, Orman-1? Conventional wisdom says he probably caucuses with democrats in that scenario, and Biden's tie-breaker gives Dems control of the Senate. But that doesn't work if Orman votes for Heitkamp or some other Democrat besides Reid. Then it's McConnel- 50, Reid-49, Heitkamp- 1, and no one has a majority for majority leader, and Biden no longer gets to cast a tie-breaking vote because there's not a tie either.

It's a rather silly thing to say in the same breath as acknowledging that you might be the tie-breaking vote.

I have to say, it would be pretty amazing to watch a some dude from Kansas nobody cared about a month ago depose both Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell and install Heidi Heitkamp or Lisa Murkowski as majority leader.

Probably he'd just cast his protest vote for Heitkamp on the first ballot, and then Democrats would be like, "No, but seriously, if you wan't to caucus with us you have to vote for our guy." And then he'd vote for Reid on the second ballot.

Wouldn't that make the first ballot 50-49-1 in favor of McConnell?

[SteveRogers]

From Orman's website

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So this math confuses me. Correct me if I am wrong. If Orman wins, Republicans would need to win 7 seats for him to commit GOP? 6 would then be a tie, and goes into wheel and deal territory, and 5 Dems would be in control, so he commits to Democrats?

So how serious do we think Orman is about not voting for either Reid or McConnell for Majority leader? If one party or the other wins a majority without him, that's an easy promise to keep since his protest vote for Heitkamp/ Murkowski (lol) wouldn't effect the outcome. But if it's D-49, R-50, Orman-1? Conventional wisdom says he probably caucuses with democrats in that scenario, and Biden's tie-breaker gives Dems control of the Senate. But that doesn't work if Orman votes for Heitkamp or some other Democrat besides Reid. Then it's McConnel- 50, Reid-49, Heitkamp- 1, and no one has a majority for majority leader, and Biden no longer gets to cast a tie-breaking vote because there's not a tie either.

It's a rather silly thing to say in the same breath as acknowledging that you might be the tie-breaking vote.

I have to say, it would be pretty amazing to watch a some dude from Kansas nobody cared about a month ago depose both Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell and install Heidi Heitkamp or Lisa Murkowski as majority leader.

Probably he'd just cast his protest vote for Heitkamp on the first ballot, and then Democrats would be like, "No, but seriously, if you wan't to caucus with us you have to vote for our guy." And then he'd vote for Reid on the second ballot.

Wouldn't that make the first ballot 50-49-1 in favor of McConnell?

Which is not a majority.

[VPH]

Living in Kansas and being quite politically involved here, I'm thinking Orman will pull off an upset win. Head to head, PPP has him 10% up on Roberts, but with Taylor still on the ballot I worry. It depends how the ballot name challenge goes. If Taylor's name is removed or if Dems do well at GOTV for Orman and NOT Taylor, Orman will win. He still has pretty low name recognition, but he has resources like crazy. In the debate yesterday, he came out of the gate a bit cautious but then proceeded to hammer Roberts, who said "Harry Reid" 22 times and had to ask the moderator to calm the crowd. Roberts' residency issues will harm him in the end. Even Republicans here think he's out of touch.

How exactly does one support Collins over Bellows but Teachout over Cuomo?

I like the NSA and don't want to legalize pot. Those are Bellows' two major issues it seems. The fact that Bellows calls herself "Libertarian" makes me mad. Also, I believe Collins is a key liaison between Repubs and Democrats. With Teachout, part of it came from Cuomo's blatant corruption, and part of it because of Teachout's campaign focus. I'm a weird person, politically.

Obvious troll position is obvious.

One doesn't like the NSA. One may find it necessary or useful, but you can't just "like" it.

Wrong word choice. In comparison to Bellows, I'd be seen as liking it, which is what I meant but my wording was all messed up. I think it's a necessary function of security.

[solarstorm]

Why do most Atlas users think (on the prediction section) that the GOP will hold both the governorship and the Senate seat in Kansas?

[IceSpear]

Why do most Atlas users think (on the prediction section) that the GOP will hold both the governorship and the Senate seat in Kansas?

Atlas predictions are a lagging indicator since a lot of people don't update them often (or never update them). MT-Sen was a toss up on the Atlas predictions long after it obviously wasn't, for instance.

[KCDem]

Why do most Atlas users think (on the prediction section) that the GOP will hold both the governorship and the Senate seat in Kansas?

Because this website is full of GOP hacks.

[Maxwell]

Why do most Atlas users think (on the prediction section) that the GOP will hold both the governorship and the Senate seat in Kansas?

Because this website is full of GOP hacks.

You're one funny man.

[GaussLaw]

Why do most Atlas users think (on the prediction section) that the GOP will hold both the governorship and the Senate seat in Kansas?

Because this website is full of GOP hacks.

The real answer is because most predictions are outdated.........looking at the "Recent Predictions" entry tells you what the forum really thinks now.  2013 Predictions are utterly irrelevant yet are counted as equals to the more recent ones.

[7,052,770]

I'd be fine with Heidi Heitkamp being majority leader, because, well, she isn't a complete assface.

Of course she is. She voted against Manchin-Toomey. She should be happy she wasn't expelled from the caucus.

[Flake]

I'd be fine with Heidi Heitkamp being majority leader, because, well, she isn't a complete assface.

Of course she is. She voted against Manchin-Toomey. She should be happy she wasn't expelled from the caucus.

Maybe Nelson or Landrieu  if she survives this year?