FiveThirtyEight: When Should Democrats Panic?

[JRP1994]

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/senate-update-when-should-democrats-panic/

"So what conditions would merit outright panic from Democrats?

1) North Carolina: "The Democratic incumbent in North Carolina, Kay Hagan, is pretty clearly ahead in the polls today (including in a CNN survey that was released on Sunday). However, two other states with vulnerable Democratic incumbents, Colorado and Alaska, have shifted toward Republicans. Perhaps if the Republican challenger Thom Tillis can equalize the ad spending in the Tar Heel State, the polls will show a more even race there as well."

2) Kansas: "No one has yet polled the race after the Democratic candidate, Chad Taylor, was officially allowed to remove his name from the ballot on Sept. 18. Since then, the ad spending has become more even after nearly a month in which Orman had a pronounced advantage over Roberts. In about 7 percent of our forecast model’s simulations, Democrats held the Senate solely because they won Kansas and Orman elected to caucus with them; without it, Republicans would already be 2-to-1 favorites to take the Senate.

3) Louisiana, Arkansas, and Alaska: "If these go from being probable GOP pickups to near-certain ones, it will make a lot of difference in the model."

4) Macro-Level:
     A: "Nor is Iowa their only option. Polls have also moved toward Republicans in Colorado, where their candidate Cory Gardner is now a slight favorite. This is an awfully flexible set of outcomes for Republicans. Win the six “path of least resistance” states that I mentioned before, avoid surprises in races like Kentucky, and all Republicans need to do is win either Iowa or Colorado to guarantee a Senate majority. Or they could have Roberts hold on in Kansas. Or Orman could win that race, but the GOP could persuade him to caucus with them."

     B: "Concern for Democrats is that some of the highest-quality polls, like the Des Moines Register poll, tend to show the worst results for them. Quinnipiac University polls, which also have a good track record, have recently shown clear Republican leads in Iowa and Colorado. And the highest-rated polls of the generic Congressional ballot tend to show a Republican lead. This pattern is the reverse of 2012, when Democrats tended to do better in more highly-rated surveys. It may be that some of the mediocre polls will converge toward the stronger polls in states like Iowa and Colorado; a Public Policy Polling survey of Iowa to be released later this week is also likely to show Ernst ahead, for instance."

[Miles]

Perhaps if the Republican challenger Thom Tillis can equalize the ad spending in the Tar Heel State, the polls will show a more even race there as well."

Not likely. Rove has plunked down $6M for Tillis this month and Democrats are still going to massively outspend him.

[IceSpear]

Never? I don't really see what good "panicking" would do. Look what it got Elizabeth Dole and Jack Conway.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Right now. At least I am.

[Skill and Chance]

Perhaps if the Republican challenger Thom Tillis can equalize the ad spending in the Tar Heel State, the polls will show a more even race there as well."

Not likely. Rove has plunked down $6M for Tillis this month and Democrats are still going to massively outspend him.

Saving Hagan should be a top priority even if the Senate as a whole is gone.  She would be ideal on a future national ticket and it would reinforce that a competitive NC is here to stay.

[Torie]

Perhaps if the Republican challenger Thom Tillis can equalize the ad spending in the Tar Heel State, the polls will show a more even race there as well."

Not likely. Rove has plunked down $6M for Tillis this month and Democrats are still going to massively outspend him.

At some point, the marginal utility of yet more campaign spending reduces down to next to nothing. Just a thought to bear in mind perhaps.

[The Mikado]

Right now. At least I am.

GOP Senate control isn't something anyone here with a red avatar is relishing, but it's not the end of the world, given that everyone's given up the illusion that any legislation will be passed in Obama's second term anyway.  The only real negative difference is that Obama will likely be unable to confirm any judges whatsoever for the last two years of his tenure because the GOP wants to stockpile up vacancies in case they get the White House in 2016.

[Torie]

Right now. At least I am.

GOP Senate control isn't something anyone here with a red avatar is relishing, but it's not the end of the world, given that everyone's given up the illusion that any legislation will be passed in Obama's second term anyway.  The only real negative difference is that Obama will likely be unable to confirm any judges whatsoever for the last two years of his tenure because the GOP wants to stockpile up vacancies in case they get the White House in 2016.

That about sums it up as to the consequences of a Pub takeover of the Senate, when it comes to anything meaningful that will change anyone's lives materially. Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional, harsh as that may sound.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Right now. At least I am.

GOP Senate control isn't something anyone here with a red avatar is relishing, but it's not the end of the world, given that everyone's given up the illusion that any legislation will be passed in Obama's second term anyway.  The only real negative difference is that Obama will likely be unable to confirm any judges whatsoever for the last two years of his tenure because the GOP wants to stockpile up vacancies in case they get the White House in 2016.

Judges may be an issue even if the Democrats keep the majority. Manchin voted for keeping the judicial filibuster. So did Pyror, although there's a good chance he loses even if the Democrats retain the Senate. And we don't know how Orman, Grimes, or Nunn would vote there.

[Zanas]

Meanwhile, 538's model just crossed the 60%-probability-threshold of Republicans taking control of the Senate... And 53-47 is nearing 52-48 as the most probable specific outcome too...

It doesn't smell good. Of course, I am a True Leftist who cannot even be bothered to weep for the French PS's loss of the French Senate, but I wanted to follow this US Senate race, because US elections are clearly the most covered and the best to follow as a psephology fan, and I had to pick a side, so Dems it is.

[Brittain33]

The question is more like, when do we give up on hopes of holding the Senate in the next session and instead place our hopes in how much a decent Republican showing on a very favorable Senate map empowers the Ted Cruz/Ted Yoho contingent to turn the next presidential nomination into a high-stakes test of conservative purity that leads to another 2012 victory for Dems.

Looking at the polls in Colorado and Iowa, I'm already there.