Approval of incumbent US Senators up for re-election

[pbrower2a]

Starting over. I made a serious mistake in interpreting Nate Silver's "Myth of 50%". I apologize for deleting the old thread and losing some of the interesting writing... but that is the only way to correct errors that I made.

The current map of US Senate seats up for grabs

Red -- Democratic incumbent
Blue - Republican incumbent

Independents are placed as they caucus.

A lighter shade involves an open seat due to a retiring incumbent.

An asterisk indicates an appointed incumbent. (We have none of those as of January 22, 2015).

This is exclusively for US Senators able and choosing to run for re-election. So far only two polls have shown approval ratings for incumbent (Toomey at 28%, Burr at 31%, both by PPP; Schumer at 62% by Quinnipiac) since the 2014 elections.

Because this is of incumbent Senators running for re-election, I can promptly drop Barbara Boxer in California. Use white for open seats.  I am also shading red to orange and blue to green, all in pastel shades -- except where there is a poll -- in which the shade is shown in Atlas colors with intensity reflecting the approval rating with the number suggesting the percentage.  

A critical zone for approvals is in the 40-49% range. I intend to put ratings between 40 and 49, inclusively -- but not others -- in the box. Remember -- the typical elected incumbent on the average gains 6 to 7%  from approval rating early in the campaign season to a vote share.  

To show how that would work I am showing a favorability poll for Kelly Ayotte in New Hampshire at 47%. (I do not use favorability polls -- but I use this one as an illustration in part because this one would have the worst visual effect -- a double-digit number in a tiny state in New England)

Because appointed pols usually lose, I am going to show percentages for 40 to 55 for them -- should there be any.

[pbrower2a]

Here's how I rate them from a complete Republican takeover to a 51-49 Democratic majority

R .......  D

64  VT  36
63  NY  37
62  HI  38
61  MD 39
60 WA  40
59 OR  41
58  CT  42
57  PA  43
56  CA  44
55  IL   45
54  WI  46
53  NV  47
52  CO 48
51  NC 49
50  FL  50 (the Veep decides)
49  NH  51

In this range I need not discuss the subtlety of the different chances of John Thune and Mike Crapo.


Iowa goes way up the list if Grassley retires. Alaska might join the list if the lunatic fringe knocks Murkowski out in a primary. California becomes a prohibitive favorite for the Democrat if any Democrat gets on the general ballot as the result of the jungle primary but drops into the Solid R category if the two Senate nominees on the general ballot are Republicans.  

My early guesses will surely become more scientific as polls come in on Senate races. A hint:  Late polls of likely voters in IL and WI showed approvals for Kirk and Johnson in the thirties, Ayotte (NH) at 49, and Rubio (FL) at 40.

[pbrower2a]

Although we have only three states polled, we must recognize that Chuck Schumer at an approval rating of 62% will be difficult to beat even if we don't have match-ups at the ready. A first-rate opponent is unlikely to risk his career in a quixotic effort to replace him in the Senate. He represents New York State, which is strong-R under normal situations.

So far Pat Toomey can't yet break 44% in a vote share against unknown pols, non-pols, and a recent loser against him -- and they all come close. Although he is likely to win almost all Republican voters, that will not be enough. The 28% approval rating is not going to help him raise his vote share much beyond 44%. Were his approvals in the 40's I would think otherwise. After four years in the Senate he should be better known in Pennsylvania.

   

[pbrower2a]

So what happens if there is an appointed Senator? Let us suppose that one of the Senators of both Michigan and Minnesota both leave office for some reason, and State legislators appoint Senators to complete the terms of office of the Senators who leave. Michigan appoints a Republican (the State legislature is majority-Republican) and Minnesota appoints a Democrat. Until one sees whether those legislators choose to do run for election, color the state appropriately and put an asterisk in the blank spot for electoral votes.    (I am not saying that this will happen).

Red -- Democratic incumbent
Blue - Republican incumbent


Now let us suppose that the new Senator from Michigan chooses to run for electoral ratification in 2016 and the new Senator from Minnesota chooses not to. Michigan appears in green with the asterisk intact until polls come in. Minnesota goes white and its asterisk goes. Any depiction of the approval of the new Senator from Michigan remains even after polls start appearing. 

Because appointed pols usually lose, I am going to show percentages for 40 to 55 for them -- should there be any. Let us suppose that the new Senator from Michigan has an approval rating of 44...

The maps in this post exist to illustrate a very contrived scenario.

[pbrower2a]

PPP did a national poll this week and Quinnipiac did a New Jersey poll this week (no Senator relevant to this map). Next week PPP does a poll on North Carolina.

[pbrower2a]

PPIC, California:

In the wake of Senator Barbara Boxer’s decision not to seek reelection, her job approval rating is 53 percent among adults and 51 percent among likely voters. This is higher than in September 2014 (41% adults, 45% likely voters).

http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/survey/S_115MBS.pdf

Diane Feinstein is in the same general area. California is not low-hanging fruit for a Republican takeover of a Senate seat. A freakish situation in which a Republican could win the seat is possible, but unlikely. So long as a Democrat has a hold of one of the two top places for the Senate, California is an easy Democratic hold.

It's California, of course.

I see no match-ups of potential Senate candidates. 

This is what the map would look like if Senator Boxer were running for re-election:

But rules are rules, and this is the map:

[pbrower2a]

Quinnipiac shows a 36% favorability rating for Rubio in Florida. I can't use it... but it is awful.

 

[pbrower2a]

With polls from before Election 2014 added in (from PPP)....

Bennett (D-CO) begins vulnerable. In a political climate like that of 2014, then he is gone and Colorado is back to the "Sagebrush Rebellion" of the Reagan era. States go like that.  On the other side, Rubio (R-FL) overexposed himself and showed his deficiencies as a politician. Bad idea. One gets re-elected before one even considers the Presidency unless one is Barack Obama.

Boozman (R-AR) looks vulnerable to a strong Democrat -- but the Democratic Party has become basically the Black People's Party between the Appalachians and the southern Rockies aside from the heavily-Hispanic parts of Texas. Texas will elect a Democratic Senator before Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, or Tennessee... and probably not before 2030.

These go back some -- Ron Johnson (September) looks like one-and-done with a 38% approval. He could win in an R wave, but only an R wave. He will need a political climate like that of 2010 or 2014 to get re-elected, which is asking for way too much.  

Two octogenarian Republican Senators could hardly be in different shape for re-election. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) gets re-elected unless his health fails badly. A poll from March shows John McCain in deep trouble with approval around 30%. It would not be amazing to see one of the two Republican Senators going down -- but the one going down being the one from Arizona.

The rest? I don't see much.

I still have good cause to go back only to the 2014 election, and I will work with no polls from before then. This is just to show.

But rules are rules, and this is the map:

[pbrower2a]

Arkansas. Does Arkansas turn on incumbents of both Parties quickly?

(Talk Business/Hendrix College)

Do you approve or disapprove of the job President Barack Obama is doing?

26% – Approve
70% – Disapprove

Do you approve or disapprove of the job Gov. Asa Hutchinson is doing?

52% – Approve
12% – Disapprove

Do you approve or disapprove of the job Sen. Tom Cotton is doing?

50% – Approve
30% – Disapprove

Do you approve or disapprove of the job Sen. John Boozman is doing?

40% – Approve
22% – Disapprove

1,079 registered Arkansas voters were polled of which 86% were landline phones reached by automated calls and 14% were surveyed via the Internet. The poll, which was conducted from Jan. 29 to Feb. 1, 2015, has a margin of error of +/-2.98%.

http://talkbusiness.net/2015/02/poll-hutchinson-cotton-break-50-with-early-job-approval-ratings

Boozman is up for re-election in 2016. Not a flattering approval rate. It would be interesting to see a matchup of Pryor or Lincoln against him. 

[Maxwell]

+18 Net Favorables? Yeah, Boozman's fine.

[pbrower2a]

+18 Net Favorables? Yeah, Boozman's fine.

Much lower than the new guy.  If 40% is his floor and he is able to bring home the pork, he will do fine. He has had 4+ years in which to do so.

I'm just suggesting why Boozman might be doing so much worse than Cotton or Hutchinson -- and why approval of President Obama has gone into the range characteristic of a President vulnerable to toppling in a military coup in a country in which military coups are possible.  I suspect that Arkansas voters steadily sour on any incumbents rather quickly.

[Vosem]

You missed North Dakota, though it doesn't really matter since your whole concept here is flawed.

[pbrower2a]

You missed North Dakota, though it doesn't really matter since your whole concept here is flawed.

All predictive models have flaws. I claim no talent as a prophet.

(I knew that I was off by one state in my count -- and an easy State to ignore. Thank you for that correction).

...This model might show who is having problems (or more problems) at the moment -- when there is a poll. It is no better than the poll, of course. 

You cannot deny that Pat Toomey is in far worse shape than Chuck Schumer -- right?   

[pbrower2a]

North Dakota included, thank you.

PPP will poll South Carolina this coming weekend, and I predict that we will see what a Republican runaway looks like in contrast to Burr, Rubio, Portman, or Toomey.

I have yet to show any Democrat in trouble yet... after all, the only poll involving a Democratic incumbent involves Chuck Schumer in New York.

[pbrower2a]

Senate approval polls, three key states for any possible hold of the Senate by the GOP.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Weak. Vulnerable to a strong challenger.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Weak, but much better than the 28% approval that PPP had. He will be running in Pennsylvania, the clear lean-D state of this trio. Getting the other 7% of the vote needed from his approval rating will be more difficult than is usual in a state more evenly split R-D.  


http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/2016-presidential-swing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=2133

All three incumbent Senators have their problems. Any one of them loses to a strong challenger -- but Democrats need the strong challengers which nobody can yet say is going to happen. At least we have the same pollster in the same week.  

[Maxwell]

You missed North Dakota, though it doesn't really matter since your whole concept here is flawed.

All predictive models have flaws. I claim no talent as a prophet.

(I knew that I was off by one state in my count -- and an easy State to ignore. Thank you for that correction).

...This model might show who is having problems (or more problems) at the moment -- when there is a poll. It is no better than the poll, of course. 

You cannot deny that Pat Toomey is in far worse shape than Chuck Schumer -- right?   

Bold analysis.

[pbrower2a]

Polling found that a plurality of 47 percent approve of the job Republican Lamar Alexander is doing, while 32 percent disapprove of his performance. The rest said they didn't know or refused to answer.

Tennesseans gave Republican Sen. Bob Corker a 44 percent approval rating. The poll found that 27 percent disapproved of Corker's performance and 29 percent said they didn't know or wouldn't answer.

Read more: Poll: 79 percent approve of Tennessee's free tuition plan | Johnson City Press http://www.johnsoncitypress.com/article/124142/poll-79-percent-approve-of-tennessees-free-tuition-plan#ixzz3RS4i6RmP
Follow us: @JCPress on Twitter | JohnsonCityPress on Facebook

http://www.johnsoncitypress.com/article/124142/poll-79-percent-approve-of-tennessees-free-tuition-plan

Nothing that will show on the map because neither Tennessee Senator is up for re-election, but we may get some hits to what is thought in some other states.

[IceSpear]

You missed North Dakota, though it doesn't really matter since your whole concept here is flawed.

All predictive models have flaws. I claim no talent as a prophet.

(I knew that I was off by one state in my count -- and an easy State to ignore. Thank you for that correction).

...This model might show who is having problems (or more problems) at the moment -- when there is a poll. It is no better than the poll, of course. 

You cannot deny that Pat Toomey is in far worse shape than Chuck Schumer -- right?   

Bold analysis.

It's very bold actually. Schumer is not inevitable, Anything Can Happen In Politics™, and the election is still 21 months away!

[Maxwell]

You missed North Dakota, though it doesn't really matter since your whole concept here is flawed.

All predictive models have flaws. I claim no talent as a prophet.

(I knew that I was off by one state in my count -- and an easy State to ignore. Thank you for that correction).

...This model might show who is having problems (or more problems) at the moment -- when there is a poll. It is no better than the poll, of course. 

You cannot deny that Pat Toomey is in far worse shape than Chuck Schumer -- right?   

Bold analysis.

It's very bold actually. Schumer is not inevitable, Anything Can Happen In Politics™, and the election is still 21 months away!

Totes. Rising Star Rob Astorino is looking for his next big oppurtunity!

[pbrower2a]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2015/02/north-carolina-odds-and-ends.html#more

Tillis just won, so North Carolinians will be stuck with him if they dislike him. Could this make Richard Burr vulnerable?

I'm not changing anything on the map, because it is Burr and not Tillis who is up for re-election. This is pure conjecture on my part: if in a given State, both Senators are from the same Party and both are unpopular, with Senator A not up for re-election for another four years but Senator B (in this case "B" for "Burr" is pure coincidence)  is up for re-election, is Senator B more vulnerable than he otherwise would be, given approval ratings well below 50%?

Remember -- this is conjecture, and not theory. I'm not Newton (gravitation), Boyle (gas laws), Darwin (evolution), Einstein (relativity), or Wegener (continental drift). Those people did theory.    

[pbrower2a]

Marist just polled New Hampshire for NBC News and set up a binary match between Senator Kelly Ayotte and Governor Maggie Hassan. Hassan would win 48-44.

To be sure, Governor Hassan has an approval rating of 70% as Governor, which is extremely high. But that would be a strong challenger.

An approval rating is not shown for Kelly Ayotte, but I would guess that it is in the middle-to-high 40s. But that is only a guess. 

http://newscms.nbcnews.com/sites/newscms/files/new_hampshire_february_2015_annotated_questionnaire_nbc_news-marist_poll.pdf

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

With Strickland already raising money and Kelly Ayotte already appearing vulnerable and Tammy Duckworth intending on running Dems almost all set with their recruitment for Senate 2016.

[pbrower2a]

February 12-15, 2015
Survey of 525 Republican primary voters

information@publicpolicypolling.com / 888 621-6988
3020 Highwoods Blvd.
Raleigh, NC 27604

South Carolina Survey Results
Q1
Do you approve or disapprove of Senator
Lindsey Graham’s job performance?

54% Approve
..........................................................
29% Disapprove
......................................................
16% Not sure

This is among  primary voters... so I can't use it.  there will likely be a more generalized poll tomorrow -- and that will be on the Republican Senator who really will be up for re-election, Senator Tim Scott.

[pbrower2a]

This is what a non-vulnerable Republican looks like -- statistically.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2015/02/south-carolinians-on-guns-road-repairs-the-flag-etc.html#more

[pbrower2a]

Missouri:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://fox4kc.com/2015/02/20/blunt-beats-kander-in-early-political-poll/

These polls are of approval and not favorability. But 39% favorability is undeniably awful. I cannot translate that to approval.

Blunt looks vulnerable.