2016 Senate Ratings and Predictions
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 06:53:12 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)
  2016 Senate Ratings and Predictions
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15
Author Topic: 2016 Senate Ratings and Predictions  (Read 52077 times)
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 #200 on: October 04, 2015, 05:10:04 PM »

Georgia will turn purple at some point during the next few cycles. It could be 2016 if Cruz is the GOP Nominee.

How do you know?

The GA Senate race won't go to a runoff, 99% sure of that.

It wasn't likely to. But the likely option is when a race is almost assured but there's 1 or more outside circumstances that could turn the race the other way. For Georgia, it was the small possibility that the presidential and senate race becoming so close together (and the presidential race being very close in Georgia) that it would take down Isakson. Well, in the case of of having a runoff, it saves him from a situation like 2008.
Logged
Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,577
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #201 on: October 05, 2015, 01:19:25 AM »

Georgia will turn purple at some point during the next few cycles. It could be 2016 if Cruz is the GOP Nominee.

How do you know?

The GA Senate race won't go to a runoff, 99% sure of that.

It wasn't likely to. But the likely option is when a race is almost assured but there's 1 or more outside circumstances that could turn the race the other way. For Georgia, it was the small possibility that the presidential and senate race becoming so close together (and the presidential race being very close in Georgia) that it would take down Isakson. Well, in the case of of having a runoff, it saves him from a situation like 2008.

It's a matter of demographics. The state is becoming more racially diverse. Georgia will be a full-blown battleground in 2024, possibly even in 2020. If 2016/18 is a big democratic wave, democrats could snatch success then.
Logged
/
darthebearnc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,367
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #202 on: October 05, 2015, 12:34:19 PM »

Updated map with some big changes:



>60%: Safe
>40%: Likely
>30%: Lean
Green: Toss-up

Why is NH more likely to flip than IL/OH/FL?
Logged
The Other Castro
Castro2020
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,230
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #203 on: October 05, 2015, 12:41:56 PM »

Updated map with some big changes:



>60%: Safe
>40%: Likely
>30%: Lean
Green: Toss-up

Why is NH more likely to flip than IL/OH/FL?

Let's just say A Yot has changed.
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,759
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #204 on: October 05, 2015, 03:47:01 PM »

Tossup NH,OH, FL; NV
LD IL, WI &:CO
LR Pa
Logged
Miles
MilesC56
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,324
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #205 on: October 06, 2015, 02:12:43 AM »

^ As much as I would love to see NH flip, I think you're being a bit too pessimistic for the Republicans. Presidential years haven't been kind to Republicans there, but it's hardly lost yet.
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,759
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #206 on: October 06, 2015, 03:17:45 AM »

I think Hassan having built up a resume as gov has an equal chance of besting Ayotte. Ayotte isnt Olympia Snowe or Susan Collins. But, Collins may be the last of her kind along with SMC of WVa.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #207 on: October 15, 2015, 12:46:08 PM »
« Edited: October 15, 2015, 12:51:08 PM by pbrower2a »

PPP, Senator Pat Toomey, Pennsylvania.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2015/10/toomey-leads-narrowly-for-reelection-presidential-matches-split.html#more

 

Approval ratings involving at Toomey show wide swings between pollsters. I believe neither the 28% that  shows nor the 51% that the most recent pollster showed. I'd guess  that his approval is somewhere about halfway between those, around 40%. Such is still awful for an incumbent, and such indicates that Senator Toomey is vulnerable.  Barely elected in a Republican wave year, he has his work cut out for him to remain in the Senate in a year unlikely to offer a Republican wave.

If PPP is right about the match-ups, then Senator Toomey is behind where he needs to be at the start of his campaign.

Quinnipiac, Connecticut:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/connecticut/release-detail?ReleaseID=2290

Super-safe. Need I say more?



Approval polls only.


White -- retiring incumbent or (should it happen) an incumbent defeated in a primary, with "D" or "R" for the party in question.
Yellow -- incumbent under indictment or with a terminal diagnosis short of the completion of his term, with "D" or "R" for the party in question.

Light green -- Republican incumbent apparently running for re-election, no polls.
Light orange --  Democratic incumbent apparently running for re-election, no polls.

Blue  -- Republican running for re-election with current polls available.
Red --  Republican running for re-election with current polls available.


Intensity percentage shows the first digit of the approval of the incumbent Senator --

"2" for approval between 20% and 30%, "3" for approval between 30% and 39%... "7" for approval between 70% and 79%.

Numbers are recent approval ratings for incumbent Senators if their approvals are below 55%. I'm not showing any number for any incumbent whose approval is 55% or higher because even this early that looks very safe.

An asterisk (*) is for an appointed incumbent (there are none now) because appointed pols have never shown their electability.

Approval only (although I might accept A/B/C/D/F) -- not favorability. I do not use any Excellent-Good-Fair-Poor ratings because "fair" is ambiguous. A fair performance by a 7-year-old violinist might impress you. A 'fair' performance by an adult violinist indicates something for which you would not want to buy a ticket.

NO PARTISAN POLLS.

This shows less than many would like to see. I'm not rating the strength of the opponent or the likelihood of the incumbent seeing himself in good-enough health to last into the election.


What I see so far with incumbents:

App      Rep  Dem

<40       6     0
40-44    1      0
45-49    1      2
50-54    2    0
55-59    0      0
>60       0      2
retire    1       3  
indict     0      1
oth off  2      0
no poll  9      2
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #208 on: October 15, 2015, 01:37:03 PM »
« Edited: October 17, 2015, 07:47:33 PM by pbrower2a »

My projection:



*flip, so far all R to D
N  new Senator, same Party

Logged
Xing
xingkerui
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,303
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.52, S: -3.91

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #209 on: October 17, 2015, 03:30:04 PM »

It's been a while since I've updated my predictions.

Likely D
None

Lean D
Colorado
Illinois
Wisconsin

Toss-up
Florida (Tilt R, thanks to Grayson)
Nevada (Tilt D)
New Hampshire (Pure toss-up)

Lean R
North Carolina
Ohio
Pennsylvania

Likely R
Arizona
Indiana
Louisiana (If Vitter loses this year's gubernatorial race to a Democrat, he can't be considered completely safe in this race)
Missouri
Logged
Nyvin
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,623
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #210 on: October 17, 2015, 03:59:31 PM »
« Edited: October 17, 2015, 05:03:09 PM by Nyvin »

Likely D:
Illinois

Lean D:
Wisconsin
Colorado
Nevada

Tossup:
Florida
New Hampshire
Ohio
Pennsylvania

Lean R:
North Carolina
Missouri
Indiana
Arizona

Likely R:
Kentucky
Louisiana
Alaska

As a side note...it looks like California will be choosing between two Democrats (Harris and Sanchez) in the General election.   The Republican vote is too divided while the Democrats have largely unified behind those two.
Logged
Kingpoleon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,144
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #211 on: October 18, 2015, 04:59:57 AM »


Green is a Democrat retiring, Yellow is a Republican retiring.

My Senate Ratings:

I'm putting Illinois at toss-up because Duckworth is an awful campaigner and Mark Kirk, though gaffe-prone, is rather lovable.
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,759
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #212 on: October 18, 2015, 06:33:10 AM »

I agree with Nyvin ratings but FL and may go GOP and OH will eventually be a tossup.
Logged
Kingpoleon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,144
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #213 on: October 18, 2015, 07:48:55 AM »

I agree with Nyvin ratings but FL and may go GOP and OH will eventually be a tossup.
Oh my.

GOP landslide in the Senate. +2 R.
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,759
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #214 on: October 18, 2015, 08:13:43 AM »

No, just going with my instinct of Ds net 5 seats and have 50/51 senators
Logged
Xing
xingkerui
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,303
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.52, S: -3.91

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #215 on: October 18, 2015, 12:25:49 PM »

I agree with Nyvin ratings but FL and may go GOP and OH will eventually be a tossup.

Eventually? I thought it already was? Isn't Strickland the greatest Demojuggernaut in the world who will surely beat Portman?
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #216 on: October 21, 2015, 01:39:45 PM »

Wisconsin Public Radio, Wisconsin

1.
In the race for the Wisconsin Senate seat, if the election were held today, for whom would you vote? 
(ROTATE NAMES):
Republican Ron Johnson 40%


Democrat Russ Feingold 51%

Other (vol) <1%


Neither, will not vote (vol)  1%

Not Sure 7%

http://www.wpr.org/sites/default/files/2015%20Fall%20WI%20Survey%20Release.pdf

This is a turnover.

Approval rates:

President Barack Obama approval 51%, disapproval 47%.
Governor  Scott Walker approval 39%, disapproval 60%. 
Senator Ron Johnson approval 38%, disapproval 39%.
Senator Tammy Baldwin approval 48%, disapproval 35%. 
US Congress approval 13%, disapproval 79%.



Approval polls only.


White -- retiring incumbent or (should it happen) an incumbent defeated in a primary, with "D" or "R" for the party in question.
Yellow -- incumbent under indictment or with a terminal diagnosis short of the completion of his term, with "D" or "R" for the party in question.

Light green -- Republican incumbent apparently running for re-election, no polls.
Light orange --  Democratic incumbent apparently running for re-election, no polls.

Blue  -- Republican running for re-election with current polls available.
Red --  Republican running for re-election with current polls available.


Intensity percentage shows the first digit of the approval of the incumbent Senator --

"2" for approval between 20% and 30%, "3" for approval between 30% and 39%... "7" for approval between 70% and 79%.

Numbers are recent approval ratings for incumbent Senators if their approvals are below 55%. I'm not showing any number for any incumbent whose approval is 55% or higher because even this early that looks very safe.

An asterisk (*) is for an appointed incumbent (there are none now) because appointed pols have never shown their electability.

Approval only (although I might accept A/B/C/D/F) -- not favorability. I do not use any Excellent-Good-Fair-Poor ratings because "fair" is ambiguous. A fair performance by a 7-year-old violinist might impress you. A 'fair' performance by an adult violinist indicates something for which you would not want to buy a ticket.

NO PARTISAN POLLS.

This shows less than many would like to see. I'm not rating the strength of the opponent or the likelihood of the incumbent seeing himself in good-enough health to last into the election.


What I see so far with incumbents:

App      Rep  Dem

<40       6     0
40-44    1      0
45-49    1      2
50-54    2    0
55-59    0      0
>60       0      2
retire    1       3  
indict     0      1
oth off  2      0
no poll  9      2
Logged
NewYorkExpress
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,823
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #217 on: October 21, 2015, 01:41:42 PM »

My Ratings;

Likely D;

Illinois (Kirk is a horrible fit for the state, and Duckworth is one of the stronger D candidates

Lean D

Wisconsin (Feingold isn't the strongest candidate-that's probably Ron Kind, but he should be enough to beat an unpopular incumbent in a purple state)

California (Until after the jungle primary)

Colorado (Bennett appears to be a slightly stronger incumbent, though this could be a tossup soon)

Tossups

Florida (Should be obvious why)

Ohio (I think Portman holds the seat, but this will be close all the through in a Presidential race)

Nevada (The GOP's best chance to gain a seat)

New Hampshire (Hassan's entry changed the dynamics enough to make this a tossup -and conversely put the Governor's race at Lean R)

Lean R

Pennsylvania (Toomey is a stronger incumbent than Portman)

Arizona (McCain isn't unbeatable, he's got a real Democrat facing him)

Likely R

Alaska (See 2010)

Indiana (Baron Hill isn't that weak a candidate....)

Missouri (Blunt is unpopular, but he likely will be saved by how far right his state is).

Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,759
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #218 on: October 21, 2015, 01:52:03 PM »
« Edited: October 21, 2015, 02:16:39 PM by OC »

Lean D
NH, CO, WI& IL

Tossup
OH, Pa & NV, FL

Lean R
AZ, MO & IN
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 #219 on: October 21, 2015, 02:29:09 PM »

I'm curious as to why Indiana is always on the Lean R list. Even Missouri I can understand, but I don't see much of an explanation of why the Republican presidential nominee would perform so much better than the Senate nominee.
Logged
smoltchanov
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,376
Russian Federation


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #220 on: October 21, 2015, 03:18:26 PM »

I'm curious as to why Indiana is always on the Lean R list. Even Missouri I can understand, but I don't see much of an explanation of why the Republican presidential nominee would perform so much better than the Senate nominee.

One word - Stutzman. Who may be next Akin or Mourdock...
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #221 on: October 21, 2015, 06:25:22 PM »

I'm curious as to why Indiana is always on the Lean R list. Even Missouri I can understand, but I don't see much of an explanation of why the Republican presidential nominee would perform so much better than the Senate nominee.

Lean R because it is Indiana. But only Lean R unless the Republican is a popular incumbent. Indiana is not extremely partisan, and a Republican who goes too far can lose. This time the incumbent Republican Governor is struggling in polling.

Indiana has been slow to follow Illinois, Michigan, and Ohio in the Democratic trend because it is more rural than those other three states.
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 #222 on: October 21, 2015, 11:53:17 PM »

I'm curious as to why Indiana is always on the Lean R list. Even Missouri I can understand, but I don't see much of an explanation of why the Republican presidential nominee would perform so much better than the Senate nominee.

One word - Stutzman. Who may be next Akin or Mourdock...

Why would Stutzman be an Akin or Mourdock?
Logged
smoltchanov
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,376
Russian Federation


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #223 on: October 22, 2015, 12:22:19 AM »

I'm curious as to why Indiana is always on the Lean R list. Even Missouri I can understand, but I don't see much of an explanation of why the Republican presidential nominee would perform so much better than the Senate nominee.

One word - Stutzman. Who may be next Akin or Mourdock...

Why would Stutzman be an Akin or Mourdock?

Because he is a "tea-party darling" (the type of politician i hate most). And they are prone of Akin-style gaffes..
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 #224 on: October 22, 2015, 12:26:16 AM »

I'm curious as to why Indiana is always on the Lean R list. Even Missouri I can understand, but I don't see much of an explanation of why the Republican presidential nominee would perform so much better than the Senate nominee.

One word - Stutzman. Who may be next Akin or Mourdock...

Why would Stutzman be an Akin or Mourdock?

Because he is a "tea-party darling" (the type of politician i hate most). And they are prone of Akin-style gaffes..

OK. I doubt that it will happen again, I think Stutzman is smarter than that. But the main problem here is we're presuming something will happen that hasn't happened yet. Unless there's something objectively less electable about that person, we shouldn't change the ratings just because we think something will happen.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15  
« 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 0.075 seconds with 11 queries.