Nightmare Senate Scenario for Dems

[JRP1994]

Current = 54R, 46D

2016:
• Hillary wins narrowly (<5%)
• Dems pick up IL and either WI or PA
• GOP picks up WV (Manchin retires for Gov run) and NV

After 2016 = 54R, 46D

2018:
• GOP picks up IN, MO, ND, MT, WI, and one of FL, OH, VA

After 2018 = 60R, 40D

How likely is this?

[Free Bird]

Seems very plausible actually

[Frodo]

I can actually see that happening quite easily. 

[ElectionsGuy]

Current = 54R, 46D

2016:
• Hillary wins narrowly (<5%)
• Dems pick up IL and either WI or PA
• GOP picks up WV (Manchin retires for Gov run) and NV

After 2016 = 54R, 46D

2018:
• GOP picks up IN, MO, ND, MT, WI, and one of FL, OH, VA

After 2018 = 60R, 40D

How likely is this?

Would that be a special election?

Anyway, its plausible but not likely. The D's will pick up a net gain of seats in 2016.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

2018 with Hillary will be ugly, but I don't see any way there wouldn't be a net gain for the Democrats in 2016.

[KCDem]

Seems very plausible actually

How did I know you would say that

[IceSpear]

Extremely unlikely, particularly the GOP breaking even in 2016.

[Mr.Phips]

If Hillary is winning I don't see Dems losing Nevada unless Sandoval runs.  I think at minimum dems pick up Illinois and Wisconsin and probably PA with Hillary winning.  The days where one party can lose the White House, but do well in the Congressional races(like in 1956, 1972, 1988 and 1996) are probably well past due to increased polarization.

[free my dawg]

Frighteningly plausible. Hell, Toomey and Johnson could pull it out.

[Skill and Chance]

That's not really the nightmare scenario because Hillary would be president during the GOP supermajority.  The real Dem nightmare looks something like this:

Current: 54R/46D

2016:
-Republican wins by 4-5%, carries every Bush/Obama state but NM, also carries WI and PA
-Dems pick up IL, GOP picks up NV and CO

After 2016: 55R/45D

2018:
-Republican president has ~50/50 approval
-Dems pick up NV, GOP picks up WV, IN, and MO

After 2018: 57R/43D

2020:
-Republican president wins reelection by 7-10%, carries every state Obama got <56% in
-GOP picks up VA, MN, NH, NM (with Martinez), Dems pick up ME when Collins retires

After 2020: 60R/40D and 6+ years of GOP-controlled federal government

[KCDem]

That's not really the nightmare scenario because Hillary would be president during the GOP supermajority.  The real Dem nightmare looks something like this:

Current: 54R/46D

2016:
-Republican wins by 4-5%, carries every Bush/Obama state but NM, also carries WI and PA
-Dems pick up IL, GOP picks up NV and CO

After 2016: 55R/45D

2018:
-Republican president has ~50/50 approval
-Dems pick up NV, GOP picks up WV, IN, and MO

After 2018: 57R/43D

2020:
-Republican president wins reelection by 7-10%, carries every state Obama got <56% in
-GOP picks up VA, MN, NH, NM (with Martinez), Dems pick up ME when Collins retires

After 2020: 60R/40D and 6+ years of GOP-controlled federal government

Never going to happen.

[Mr.Phips]

Frighteningly plausible. Hell, Toomey and Johnson could pull it out.

I'd like to see what a Johnson/Hillary Clinton voter looks like.

[Nichlemn]

That's not really the nightmare scenario because Hillary would be president during the GOP supermajority.  The real Dem nightmare looks something like this:

Current: 54R/46D

2016:
-Republican wins by 4-5%, carries every Bush/Obama state but NM, also carries WI and PA
-Dems pick up IL, GOP picks up NV and CO

After 2016: 55R/45D

2018:
-Republican president has ~50/50 approval
-Dems pick up NV, GOP picks up WV, IN, and MO

After 2018: 57R/43D

2020:
-Republican president wins reelection by 7-10%, carries every state Obama got <56% in
-GOP picks up VA, MN, NH, NM (with Martinez), Dems pick up ME when Collins retires

After 2020: 60R/40D and 6+ years of GOP-controlled federal government

Never going to happen.

It wouldn't be that hard for the GOP to win some light-blue states. It's even spotting the Dems a few pick-ups that are in no way guaranteed.

[Skill and Chance]

That's not really the nightmare scenario because Hillary would be president during the GOP supermajority.  The real Dem nightmare looks something like this:

Current: 54R/46D

2016:
-Republican wins by 4-5%, carries every Bush/Obama state but NM, also carries WI and PA
-Dems pick up IL, GOP picks up NV and CO

After 2016: 55R/45D

2018:
-Republican president has ~50/50 approval
-Dems pick up NV, GOP picks up WV, IN, and MO

After 2018: 57R/43D

2020:
-Republican president wins reelection by 7-10%, carries every state Obama got <56% in
-GOP picks up VA, MN, NH, NM (with Martinez), Dems pick up ME when Collins retires

After 2020: 60R/40D and 6+ years of GOP-controlled federal government

Never going to happen.

It wouldn't be that hard for the GOP to win some light-blue states. It's even spotting the Dems a few pick-ups that are in no way guaranteed.

People underestimate the senate problem Dems will have in the medium term with the Obama coalition.  If they can't win back the senate next year, it's hard to see them doing it before 2022.

Basically, they either need a breakthrough in the rural North or they are stuck waiting it out until a few more Southern/Western states diversify enough to go the way of CO/VA.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

It's possible, but I don't think it's likely.  If 2016 is a good year for the GOP, then they'll probably hold most of their seats.  Hillary would probably win by a much wider margin than that.  And if a Republican is elected president in 2016, then 2018 will probably be a strong year for the Democrats.

[Vosem]

2018 with Hillary will be ugly, but I don't see any way there wouldn't be a net gain for the Democrats in 2016.

Not that difficult -- NV is a 50/50 proposition at best, and CO is definitely vulnerable. None of the Republican seats look like they will be gimmes, like MT/WV were this year. Democrats are definitely heavily favored to take seats in 2016, but it's the way Republicans were heavily favored to gain seats in 2012 -- the chance of it not occurring exists.

And under a Republican Presidency, 2018 could be a net loss of seats too. Only MO looks like a really certain GOP pickup, and in a good Democratic year it's plausible y'all could gain AZ and NV and hold your vulnerable Northern seats.

[KCDem]

Concern trolls gonna concern troll I see

[JRP1994]

Frighteningly plausible. Hell, Toomey and Johnson could pull it out.

I'd like to see what a Johnson/Hillary Clinton voter looks like.

Maybe similar to a Gore/Santorum voter in 2000?

[Miles]

Frighteningly plausible. Hell, Toomey and Johnson could pull it out.

I'd like to see what a Johnson/Hillary Clinton voter looks like.

FWIW, here's Baldwin vs Obama.

[Keystone Phil]

Frighteningly plausible. Hell, Toomey and Johnson could pull it out.

I'd like to see what a Johnson/Hillary Clinton voter looks like.

Maybe similar to a Gore/Santorum voter in 2000?

Exactly and Hillary, sadly, has more crossover appeal than Gore so a Johnson/Hillary voter isn't that bizarre of an idea.

[Mr.Phips]

2018 with Hillary will be ugly, but I don't see any way there wouldn't be a net gain for the Democrats in 2016.

Not that difficult -- NV is a 50/50 proposition at best, and CO is definitely vulnerable. None of the Republican seats look like they will be gimmes, like MT/WV were this year. Democrats are definitely heavily favored to take seats in 2016, but it's the way Republicans were heavily favored to gain seats in 2012 -- the chance of it not occurring exists.

And under a Republican Presidency, 2018 could be a net loss of seats too. Only MO looks like a really certain GOP pickup, and in a good Democratic year it's plausible y'all could gain AZ and NV and hold your vulnerable Northern seats.

Bennet ain't losing if Hillary is winning the state.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Frighteningly plausible. Hell, Toomey and Johnson could pull it out.

I'd like to see what a Johnson/Hillary Clinton voter looks like.

Maybe similar to a Gore/Santorum voter in 2000?

Santorum was a populist and friendly with the unions.
Johnson is a hardcore tea-partier that has nothing to show during his first 4 years as a senator other that partisan attacks and gridlock.

[Holmes]

And under a Republican Presidency, 2018 could be a net loss of seats too. Only MO looks like a really certain GOP pickup, and in a good Democratic year it's plausible y'all could gain AZ and NV and hold your vulnerable Northern seats.

I dunno, a lot of states in 2010 went Republican when they logically should have went Democratic after 2008, so...

[Vosem]

2018 with Hillary will be ugly, but I don't see any way there wouldn't be a net gain for the Democrats in 2016.

Not that difficult -- NV is a 50/50 proposition at best, and CO is definitely vulnerable. None of the Republican seats look like they will be gimmes, like MT/WV were this year. Democrats are definitely heavily favored to take seats in 2016, but it's the way Republicans were heavily favored to gain seats in 2012 -- the chance of it not occurring exists.

And under a Republican Presidency, 2018 could be a net loss of seats too. Only MO looks like a really certain GOP pickup, and in a good Democratic year it's plausible y'all could gain AZ and NV and hold your vulnerable Northern seats.

Bennet ain't losing if Hillary is winning the state.

Hasn't PPP shown Hillary barely leading Ted Cruz in Colorado? That's by no means guaranteed. Hillary is significantly weaker in CO than Obama.

Frighteningly plausible. Hell, Toomey and Johnson could pull it out.

I'd like to see what a Johnson/Hillary Clinton voter looks like.

Maybe similar to a Gore/Santorum voter in 2000?

Santorum was a populist and friendly with the unions.
Johnson is a hardcore tea-partier that has nothing to show during his first 4 years as a senator other that partisan attacks and gridlock.

That's what a bit more than half the typical Wisconsin electorate is looking for, so I don't know why you expect them to hold it against Johnson.

And under a Republican Presidency, 2018 could be a net loss of seats too. Only MO looks like a really certain GOP pickup, and in a good Democratic year it's plausible y'all could gain AZ and NV and hold your vulnerable Northern seats.

I dunno, a lot of states in 2010 went Republican when they logically should have went Democratic after 2008, so...

Why? 2010 was a midterm under a Democratic Presidency. Losses were to be expected, even if the size might not have been anticipated prior to Scott Brown's victory. If 2018 is also a midterm under a Democratic presidency, it'll probably look like 2010/2014. If it is a Republican midterm, Democrats might enjoy a small pickup.

[Mr.Phips]

Frighteningly plausible. Hell, Toomey and Johnson could pull it out.

I'd like to see what a Johnson/Hillary Clinton voter looks like.

Maybe similar to a Gore/Santorum voter in 2000?

Santorum was a populist and friendly with the unions.
Johnson is a hardcore tea-partier that has nothing to show during his first 4 years as a senator other that partisan attacks and gridlock.

Yeah.  He hasn't even tried to be constructive on anything.