Would Orman's caucus decision be influenced by a 50-49 Senate having more Rs?

[Nichlemn]

If Orman holds the balance of power, it wouldn't be in a Senate evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats (unless Angus King suddenly declared himself up for grabs). It'd be a Senate with 50 Republicans, 49 Democrats and 1 Orman. It'd be Joe Biden, not Orman, who would formally decide the balance of power if Orman were to caucus with Democrats.

Obviously this is just a matter of optics. But might it push Orman slightly towards the Republicans, given that they had "the most seats" in such a scenario?

 

[International Brotherhood of Bernard]

Given how viciously Republicans are going after Orman I wouldn't be surprised if he goes with Dems out of pure spite

[eric82oslo]

It's a hard nut to crack and I think he'd find himself in an extremely uncomfortable position in such a scenario, due to Kansas' relatively strong Republican tilt. Or maybe not, as he could use it for what it's worth. He could use such an awkward situation to negotiate with both parties, demand stuff such as major benefits for the people of Kansas (like pork of some kind, maybe location of new industry or something) or at the very least demand a moderate Majority Leader. In the end, it might end up as his lucky day, as the best thing he could seriously hope for. If it would place Kansas at the very center and heart of the deal, and the deal turning out to be anything but a small one, it would place him in an almost insurmountable position for reelection.

[Torie]

I still think he won't get elected in the end, so the question is moot. He's too clever by half, and there seems little behind the 20 million dollar facade when it comes to anything remotely resembling an adequate grasp, and some wisdom as to how to deal with, the pressing problems in the public square at the moment. That is my tentative take anyway - all hat and no cattle.

[Vega]

I still think he won't get elected in the end, so the question is moot. He's too clever by half, and there seems little behind the 20 million dollar facade when it comes to anything remotely resembling an adequate grasp, and some wisdom as to how to deal with, the pressing problems in the public square at the moment. That is my tentative take anyway - all hat and no cattle.

He has substance; it's just that revealing said substance would also reveal he's more liberal that the Democratic candidate who was in the race.

[7,052,770]

I still think he won't get elected in the end, so the question is moot. He's too clever by half, and there seems little behind the 20 million dollar facade when it comes to anything remotely resembling an adequate grasp, and some wisdom as to how to deal with, the pressing problems in the public square at the moment. That is my tentative take anyway - all hat and no cattle.

When has that ever prevented anyone from being elected?

[Lief 🗽]

 Compared to Pat "There isn't a single industry Obama has not tried to nationalize" Roberts, Orman is clearly more than qualified to be a Senator.

[IceSpear]

I still think he won't get elected in the end, so the question is moot. He's too clever by half, and there seems little behind the 20 million dollar facade when it comes to anything remotely resembling an adequate grasp, and some wisdom as to how to deal with, the pressing problems in the public square at the moment. That is my tentative take anyway - all hat and no cattle.

Are you implying the senile old coot Pat Roberts has any substance? Besides his affinity for DC, that is.

[Chilltown]

Another scenario I thought of -

Mitch McConnell loses to Grimes, but the GOP gains enough to make the split 50 R - 49 D - 1 Greg Orman. The reflex would be to make Cornyn the leader, but what if Orman demands a less 'partisan' leader from the Republicans in order for him to caucus with them?

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

1. Democrats are almost sure to take the Senate in 2016 in such a scenario. Not sure why he'd flip-flop.

2. Hey, one less person to compete with for a committee assignment that he desires.