Sabato: Initial 2016 Senate ratings
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 02:36:15 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Congressional Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  Sabato: Initial 2016 Senate ratings
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Sabato: Initial 2016 Senate ratings  (Read 4799 times)
Miles
MilesC56
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,324
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: December 11, 2014, 12:41:43 AM »

Article.

Logged
Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,580
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: December 11, 2014, 12:48:36 AM »

So, Grassley has a 0% chance of retiring? LA can flip in a democratic wave, but GA/KY/AR can't? WA/CT/OR should be at only likely D due to the possibility of retirements/strong candidates. And I think he's optimistic on NV (for the dems).
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,876


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: December 11, 2014, 12:55:40 AM »

This is more reasonable than the governor predictions, but there are way too many safe states IMO.
Logged
Miles
MilesC56
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,324
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: December 11, 2014, 12:56:03 AM »
« Edited: December 11, 2014, 12:59:26 AM by Miles »

So, Grassley has a 0% chance of retiring? LA can flip in a democratic wave, but GA/KY/AR can't? WA/CT/OR should be at only likely D due to the possibility of retirements/strong candidates. And I think he's optimistic on NV (for the dems).

I think LA has more to do with the uncertainty about Vitter. Boozman should have a pretty ironclad hold on that seat, though Safe R for KY may be a bit bullish.

Grassley said he's running as of earlier this year, IIRC. Being Judiciary Chairman should be extra motivation to stick around, even if he's just a farmer from Iowa with no law degree.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,615


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: December 11, 2014, 01:19:49 AM »

LOL, Illinois is not a tossup. Maybe only likely D.
Logged
Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,580
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: December 11, 2014, 01:34:53 AM »

Uh, there's a republican incumbent there. He's fairly popular too. Democrats have a strong bench, but they need someone to actually RUN.
Logged
Landslide Lyndon
px75
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,624
Greece


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: December 11, 2014, 01:41:54 AM »

Uh, there's a republican incumbent there. He's fairly popular too. Democrats have a strong bench, but they need someone to actually RUN.

Since when being anonymous means you're popular?
Logged
Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,580
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: December 11, 2014, 01:46:36 AM »

Uh, there's a republican incumbent there. He's fairly popular too. Democrats have a strong bench, but they need someone to actually RUN.

Since when being anonymous means you're popular?

He's at +10 in favorability. Yes, +10. That's very good for an Illinois Republican. Furthermore, the suggestion that you can argue two years out that ANY incumbent has a 100% chance of losing as ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ (he said 'maybe only likely D' hinting that he thinks Safe D is arguably a correct rating) says in relation to Kirk is just ludricious. We don't know who's going to challenge Kirk yet. Sure, Madigan will defeat him, but Kirk has a solid shot at surviving against one of the democratic U.S. house members, and probably starts out with a slight advantage against outgoing Lt. Gov. Shelia Simon.
Logged
Landslide Lyndon
px75
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,624
Greece


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: December 11, 2014, 01:48:39 AM »

Uh, there's a republican incumbent there. He's fairly popular too. Democrats have a strong bench, but they need someone to actually RUN.

Since when being anonymous means you're popular?

He's at +10 in favorability. Yes, +10. That's very good for an Illinois Republican. Furthermore, the suggestion that you can argue two years out that ANY incumbent has a 100% chance of losing as ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ (he said 'maybe only likely D' hinting that he thinks Safe D is arguably a correct rating) says in relation to Kirk is just ludricious. We don't know who's going to challenge Kirk yet. Sure, Madigan will defeat him, but Kirk has a solid shot at surviving against one of the democratic U.S. house members, and probably starts out with a slight advantage against outgoing Lt. Gov. Shelia Simon.

In which poll is he at +10?
And even so, tell that to Lincoln Chafee and Scott Brown.
Logged
Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,580
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: December 11, 2014, 01:50:44 AM »

Uh, there's a republican incumbent there. He's fairly popular too. Democrats have a strong bench, but they need someone to actually RUN.

Since when being anonymous means you're popular?

He's at +10 in favorability. Yes, +10. That's very good for an Illinois Republican. Furthermore, the suggestion that you can argue two years out that ANY incumbent has a 100% chance of losing as ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ (he said 'maybe only likely D' hinting that he thinks Safe D is arguably a correct rating) says in relation to Kirk is just ludricious. We don't know who's going to challenge Kirk yet. Sure, Madigan will defeat him, but Kirk has a solid shot at surviving against one of the democratic U.S. house members, and probably starts out with a slight advantage against outgoing Lt. Gov. Shelia Simon.

In which poll is he at +10?
And even so, tell that to Lincoln Chafee and Scott Brown.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2014/11/2016-senator-approvals.html

Neither Chafee nor Brown had a 100% chance of losing two years before the election. In fact, Brown didn't lose his lead in the polls until the last few months of the campaign.
Logged
morgieb
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,625
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -8.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: December 11, 2014, 01:52:39 AM »

Uh, there's a republican incumbent there. He's fairly popular too. Democrats have a strong bench, but they need someone to actually RUN.

Since when being anonymous means you're popular?

He's at +10 in favorability. Yes, +10. That's very good for an Illinois Republican. Furthermore, the suggestion that you can argue two years out that ANY incumbent has a 100% chance of losing as ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ (he said 'maybe only likely D' hinting that he thinks Safe D is arguably a correct rating) says in relation to Kirk is just ludricious. We don't know who's going to challenge Kirk yet. Sure, Madigan will defeat him, but Kirk has a solid shot at surviving against one of the democratic U.S. house members, and probably starts out with a slight advantage against outgoing Lt. Gov. Shelia Simon.

In which poll is he at +10?
And even so, tell that to Lincoln Chafee and Scott Brown.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2014/11/2016-senator-approvals.html

Neither Chafee nor Brown had a 100% chance of losing two years before the election. In fact, Brown didn't lose his lead in the polls until the last few months of the campaign.
Only 2/3rds of the Illinois population have an opinion of him? Odd.
Logged
Landslide Lyndon
px75
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,624
Greece


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: December 11, 2014, 01:53:59 AM »

He is at 38/28. He is more anonymous and unknown than well-liked.
And nobody said anything about a 100% possibility of losing. That's a strawman you created.
Logged
Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,580
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: December 11, 2014, 01:55:36 AM »

He is at 38/28. He is more anonymous and unknown than well-liked.
And nobody said anything about a 100% possibility of losing. That's a strawman you created.

He is hinting that Safe D, which means an (effectively) 100% chance of a democratic victory, is an arguable rating two years out.

And I said fairly popular for a reason.
Logged
morgieb
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,625
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -8.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: December 11, 2014, 02:06:42 AM »

He is at 38/28. He is more anonymous and unknown than well-liked.
And nobody said anything about a 100% possibility of losing. That's a strawman you created.

He is hinting that Safe D, which means an (effectively) 100% chance of a democratic victory, is an arguable rating two years out.

And I said fairly popular for a reason.
Well if Safe D = 100% chance of victory then no seats should be Safe D/R.
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,841
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: December 11, 2014, 02:29:18 AM »

Just for context, these were Sabato's ratings in April 2013.

Logged
windjammer
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,512
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: December 11, 2014, 02:25:08 PM »

A good map.

I agree with most of them.
Logged
Citizen (The) Doctor
ArchangelZero
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,391
United States


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -4.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: December 11, 2014, 02:34:15 PM »

Just for context, these were Sabato's ratings in April 2013.



With 2012-style turnout that was probably true.
Logged
Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,580
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: December 11, 2014, 04:02:24 PM »

Just for context, these were Sabato's ratings in April 2013.



With 2012-style turnout that was probably true.
Cotton, Daines, Cassidy and Ernst would have won even in a presidential year. Begich, Hagan, and M. Udall may have held on though.
Logged
Vega
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,253
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: December 11, 2014, 04:32:40 PM »

I think Nevada should be a toss-up, especially if Sandoval runs. Overall, though, I agree with this map.
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,841
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: December 11, 2014, 04:37:33 PM »

Just for context, these were Sabato's ratings in April 2013.



With 2012-style turnout that was probably true.

But 2014 wasn't a presidential year. Just like 2016 is not a midterm year. And even with presidential year turnout, Pryor would've lost by double digits. The fact that Arkansas was "lean D" just shows how fragile these early ratings are.
Logged
ElectionsGuy
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,107
United States


Political Matrix
E: 7.10, S: -7.65

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: December 11, 2014, 05:04:28 PM »

Just for context, these were Sabato's ratings in April 2013.



Oh goodness, to think that Arkansas was at one point as likely to go Democratic as Michigan and Minnesota. Mind blown!

As well, I like how they kept KY Likely R the whole cycle (which sparked criticism) and ended up being right.

I largely agree with Sabato on 2016, I think AZ is Lean R and Georgia is Likely R, but those are my only real disagreements.
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,801
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: December 11, 2014, 05:07:55 PM »

Good map but in a Democratic year, I definitely see NV switching sides and Portman and Ayotte in a Democratic year or Rubio are ripe for picking, but good map otherwise.
Logged
NewYorkExpress
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,823
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: December 11, 2014, 05:19:20 PM »

I'd switch Nevada and New Hampshire,  both Florida and Ohio should be tossups, Missouri should be Safe R, and Kentucky should be Likely R.
Logged
Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,580
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: December 11, 2014, 05:36:55 PM »

I'd switch Nevada and New Hampshire,  both Florida and Ohio should be tossups, Missouri should be Safe R, and Kentucky should be Likely R.
Portman won by a landslide last time. Sure, it was a midterm, but still. He deserves the early advantage. And it's too early to rule out anything with MO - Blunt is not some ultra-popular person. And no, New Hampshire is not Lean D. Wait for Hassan to actually jump in (right now she's saying "maybe, but maybe not") before you think about underestimating Ayotte, who won by an even bigger landslide than Portman did.
Logged
PAK Man
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 752


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: December 11, 2014, 05:55:20 PM »

I agree with most of these. Here are the only changes I'd make:

Georgia - Likely R (I have a feeling Democrats are going to target Georgia in 2016 and are probably going to recruit at least a decent candidate)

Iowa - Likely R (Until Grassley makes an official statement saying he's running, and not some one or two-second sound byte, I'm not considering him safe)

Kentucky - Likely R (Similarly to Iowa, until Rand decides what he actually wants to do, this race is not safe)

North Carolina - Tossup (Burr is still to anonymous to have an advantage, plus the possibility of Hagan running again makes this interesting)

Ohio - Likely R (It's no secret that Ohio's Democratic bench is terrible, and I personally doubt that either Strickland or Ryan will end up running. Portman also seems fairly non-controversial)

Everything else I agree with.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.053 seconds with 11 queries.