2016 Senate Ratings and Predictions

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

I won't issue official ratings with full reasoning until July or so, but here's a rough idea:

Toss-Up:

NV
WI
PA

Lean D:

IL
CO (I personally feel that this will become a Toss-Up, but I'm giving Bennett the benefit of the doubt until Republicans prove they are willing to nominate a strong, electable candidate.)

Likely D:

WA
CA (Due to Top-Two Crap)

Lean R:

NH (Toss-Up if Hassan runs)
OH
NC
FL (as long as Rubio or Bondi is the nominee, Toss-Up otherwise)

Likely R:

AK (primary crap)
AZ (Lean R if McCain loses nomination or Dems nominate Sinema/Kirkpatrick)
MO
LA (Safe R if Vitter loses governorship and still runs for senate reelection)
GA
KY (Safe R if Rand Paul is the nominee)
IN

Safe D (* means that while retirement is highly unlikely, such an event would make the state more competitive):

OR *
MD
NY
VT
CT
HI

Safe R (* means that while retirement is highly unlikely, such an event would make the state more competitive):

UT
ID
ND
SD
IA *
AR *
KS
AL
SC
OK

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

FWIW, most of the maps here are leaving out Oklahoma.

adding OK to mine, with a rating of safe R.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Toss-Up:

NV (Likely R if Sandoval runs, Lean R if it's Dina Titus vs. Heck/Krolicki, Likely D if Angle runs. Toss-up otherwise.)
FL

Lean D:

IL
WI
CO (Lean R if Mike Coffman runs, Toss-Up if Cynthia Coffman runs, Likely D if Buck runs. Lean D otherwise.)

Likely D:

WA
CA (Due to Top-Two Crap)

Lean R:

NH (Toss-Up if Hassan runs)
OH (Toss-Up if Sittenfeld drops out)
NC
PA

Likely R:

AK (primary crap)
AZ (Lean R if McCain loses nomination or Dems nominate Sinema/Kirkpatrick)
MO
LA (Safe R if Vitter loses governorship and still runs for senate reelection)
GA
KY (Safe R if Rand Paul is the senate nominee)
IN

Safe D (* means that while retirement is highly unlikely, such an event would make the state more competitive):

OR *
MD
NY
VT
CT
HI

Safe R (* means that while retirement is highly unlikely, such an event would make the state more competitive):

UT
ID
ND
SD
IA *
AR *
KS
AL
SC
OK

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

CO (Lean R if Mike Coffman runs, Toss-Up if Cynthia Coffman runs, Likely D if Buck runs. Lean D otherwise.)

Why do you think that the race will be Lean R if Coffman is the Republican candidate?

Because I think the fact that he won in 2012 despite Obama winning his district 52-47, and the fact that he ran well ahead of Gardner in his district in 2014 against a very strong challenger shows a proven ability to win over swing voters, more of one than Gardner ever had.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

CO-6 2012 Results:

President: Obama +5
U.S. House: Coffman +2

CO-6 2014 Results:

Governor: Hickenlooper +3.5
U.S. Senate: Gardner +3.5
U.S. House (against an excellent democratic nominee): Coffman +9

If that doesn't demonstrate great ability to win over swing voters, I don't know what does.

For all the praise that Gardner still gets in terms of his strength as a candidate, he was effectively generic R. His narrow statewide margin showed that he didn't win because he was "republican jesus", he won because of:

1) The wave
2) Udall's terrible campaign
3) Local media being in the tank for him

You take any of those away, and Udall wins. Seriously.

If the CO GOP wants a gardner-like candidate who needs a lot of luck to win, Scott Tipton is the one. But if they want a candidate that not even the 2012 climate could take out, Mike Coffman is the guy to choose, and the only reason the atlas dem mentality says he isn't a great candidate is because they know he's a great candidate and think not admitting it will make him less great.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

CO-6 2012 Results:

President: Obama +5
U.S. House: Coffman +2

CO-6 2014 Results:

Governor: Hickenlooper +3.5
U.S. Senate: Gardner +3.5
U.S. House (against an excellent democratic nominee): Coffman +9

If that doesn't demonstrate great ability to win over swing voters, I don't know what does.

For all the praise that Gardner still gets in terms of his strength as a candidate, he was effectively generic R. His narrow statewide margin showed that he didn't win because he was "republican jesus", he won because of:

1) The wave
2) Udall's terrible campaign
3) Local media being in the tank for him

You take any of those away, and Udall wins. Seriously.

If the CO GOP wants a gardner-like candidate who needs a lot of luck to win, Scott Tipton is the one. But if they want a candidate that not even the 2012 climate could take out, Mike Coffman is the guy to choose, and the only reason the atlas dem mentality says he isn't a great candidate is because they know he's a great candidate and think not admitting it will make him less great.

By this logic, Florida should be leans D right now since Patrick Murphy won 60-40 in 2014 in a R-3 district.

As if Domino (Murphy's 2014 challenger) is even in the same galaxy in terms of candidate strength when compared to Andrew Romanoff. Also, unlike Bennet, the republican nominee in Florida will not be someone who nearly lost to about the worst possible person the republicans possibly could have nominated.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Colorado Tilt R Michael Bennett will almost certainly be facing a stronger candidate than Jane Norton or Ken Buck, especially if the GOP nominates Cynthia Coffman, Walker Stapleton, or Mark Scheffel.

Now, on the other hand, there are a few possibilities for strong GOP candidates, but they might not be palatable to the COGOP's far-right primary electorate. If they want to move the needle and make this a toss up in a presidential year they need: A. a woman, B. or a Latino, C. or both Clarice Navarro-Ratzlaff. They need someone who cuts a moderate profile and keeps their mouth shut about abortion and gay rights. And they need someone who is as camera ready as Conman Cory. These people exist, but I doubt they get nominated.

Who are you thinking of in particular?

The CW is that the field consists of the below (listed in no particular order), so if you know people beyond this list, defintely interested to hear the names:

Mike Coffman
Ken Buck
Cynthia Coffman
Scott Tipton
Scott Gessler
Walker Stapleton
Mark Scheffel

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

With Kirkpatrick in, AZ moves from Likely R to Lean R.

Toss-Up:

NV (Likely R if Sandoval runs, Lean R if it's Dina Titus vs. Heck/Krolicki, Likely D if Angle runs. Toss-up otherwise.)
FL

Lean D:

IL
WI
CO (Lean R if Mike Coffman runs, Toss-Up if Cynthia Coffman runs, Likely D if Buck runs. Lean D otherwise.)

Likely D:

WA
CA (Due to Top-Two Crap)

Lean R:

NH (Toss-Up if Hassan runs)
OH (Toss-Up if Sittenfeld drops out)
NC
PA
AZ

Likely R:

AK (primary crap)
MO
LA (Safe R if Vitter loses governorship and still runs for senate reelection)
GA
KY (Safe R if Rand Paul is the senate nominee)
IN

Safe D (* means that while retirement is highly unlikely, such an event would make the state more competitive):

OR *
MD
NY
VT
CT
HI

Safe R (* means that while retirement is highly unlikely, such an event would make the state more competitive):

UT
ID
ND
SD
IA *
AR *
KS
AL
SC
OK

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

LD
WI and IL

Pure tossup
OH, NV, FL

Tilt GOP
Pa, NH, IN



3-5 net gain for D

LOL at your belief that IN is more competitive than CO  or NC.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

IND is solid GOP

OC: rather than defending my ratings, I simply edit then whenever they're criticized.

And PA/NH are not solid gop, WI/IL are not solid dem.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Moving NC to Likely R:

Toss-Up:

NV (Likely R if Sandoval runs, Likely D if Angle runs. Toss-up otherwise.)
FL

Lean D:

IL
WI
CO (Toss-Up if Cynthia Coffman runs, Likely D if Buck runs. Lean D otherwise.)

Likely D:

WA
CA (Due to Top-Two Crap)

Lean R:

NH (Toss-Up if Hassan runs)
OH (Toss-Up if Sittenfeld drops out)
PA
AZ

Likely R:

AK (primary crap)
MO
LA (Safe R if Vitter loses governorship and still runs for senate reelection)
GA
KY (Safe R if Rand Paul is the senate nominee)
IN
NC

Safe D (* means that while retirement is highly unlikely, such an event would make the state more competitive):

OR *
MD
NY
VT
CT
HI

Safe R (* means that while retirement is highly unlikely, such an event would make the state more competitive):

UT
ID
ND
SD
IA *
AR *
KS
AL
SC
OK

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Keep watching. Knowing how Parkinson's works, do not be surprised of a retirement.

How exactly would that impact the race? "Likely R" instead of "Safe R", but still far from being a Toss-up.

It's Likely R with or without Isakson. People forget that he could be primaried by someone like Jody Hice or Karen Handel.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Post-reevaluation:

Toss-Up:

NV
FL
NH

Lean D:

IL
WI
CO

Likely D:

WA

Lean R:

OH
PA
AZ

Likely R:

AK (primary crap)
MO
LA
GA
IN
NC

Safe D (* means that while retirement is highly unlikely, such an event would make the state more competitive):

CA
OR *
MD
NY
VT
CT
HI

Safe R (* means that while retirement is highly unlikely, such an event would make the state more competitive):

UT
ID
ND
SD
IA *
AR
KS
KY *
AL
SC
OK

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

NV; FL or Pa you cant put a Lean Rating on it, the States are too important for Hillary's campaign

Hillary doesn't need FL to win.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Why do so many of you still rate the GA Senate race "Likely Republican"?

I use a very strict definition of Safe. Essentially, only the races that would not be competitive in a wave election for either side go there. This is why I have Washington State at only Strong Lean (Likely) D - I believe it would be competitive if 2016 is a republican wave election. Similarly, Georgia is at only Strong Lean R - I believe it would be competitive if 2016 is a democratic wave election.

Basically, the races in the "Up for Grabs" or "Lean" categories of my document make up the current map of what I feel are genuinely competitive seats. The "Strong Lean/Likely" category is what I believe to be realistic targets in a wave election for one side, while the "Safe" seats are those seats that would be Safe even in a huge wave for one side, barring a completely unexpected set of events.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Parkinsonism kills. It also gives one the appearance of erratic behavior due to involuntary twitches of muscles.

Retirement watch. 

It can take a LONG time to kill. My Grandmother has had it for 13 years and is still alive (yeah, she's pretty frail, but still).

My prediction: Isakson remains committed to reelection and wins (fairly) comfortably. He retires due to his disease in 2018 or 2020, and a special election is held to replace him.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Rubio is retiring, so no sense in listing his approval. Also you should have 'Democratic' instead of 'Republican' in the light orange and red parts of the key.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

So, I realized something today that I probably should've known for a while and feel stupid for: Georgia has a runoff. I've said it was likely R for a while now because despite Isakson being somebody who nobody cares about but always wins re-election, its Georgia and the presidential race would be closely correlated to it, and the presidential race is Likely R. Well, Georgia has a runoff for non-presidential races. So Safe R, because the D's will not be able to get >50%.

And I decided to move North Carolina back to Lean R, I think it was foolish to move it to Likely R actually. Ohio is a toss-up but its a tilt R toss-up.

Democratic Path to the Senate

Defending seats:

CO
NV

They need to pickup:

IL
WI

2-5 (depends on defending Senate seats and the presidential race, assumes they pickup IL and WI) of these 6:

AZ
FL
NH
NC
OH
PA

Extra pickups (big wave situation)?

IN
MO

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

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

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.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Post-reevaluation:

Toss-Up:

NV
FL
NH

Lean D:

IL
WI
CO

Likely D:

WA

Lean R:

OH
PA
AZ

Likely R:

AK (primary crap)
MO
LA
GA
IN
NC

Safe D (* means that while retirement is highly unlikely, such an event would make the state more competitive):

CA
OR *
MD
NY
VT
CT
HI

Safe R (* means that while retirement is highly unlikely, such an event would make the state more competitive):

UT
ID
ND
SD
IA *
AR
KS
KY *
AL
SC
OK

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

There you go again. The Pubs have a better chance of holding Wisconsin and Illinois than NH. Where is that laugh track you just linked to?  

Yes, IL and WI are much more Republican-friendly states than NH. Ayotte's at 42% right now, that's not good for an incumbent Republican in a blue state where most undecideds are Democrats. Also keep in mind that Carol Shea-Porter is going to Blanche Frank Guinta in the 1st district while Hillary Clinton is going to crush the Republican nominee, that won't help Ayotte in her reelection bid. I just don't think that enough women will split their ticket and support Clinton/Kuster or Shea-Porter/Ayotte. Hassan is quite beloved in NH, more so than Ayotte - especially among female voters. This would have been Leans/Likely R with Pappas, no doubt about it, but Hassan will be the nominee, so...

Guinta is going to be primaried by Dan Innis, who will easily defeat Shea-Porter.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Iowa -- Senator Grassley is at 53% approval, according to PPP.

What happened to the map?

Go through your posts and find it......

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Assuming Killary is nominated:

All R-held seats but IL: Safe R
Likely R: IL, NV
Lean R: CO, MD, OR
Toss-Up: WA
Lean D: CT, VT
Likely D: HI, NY, CA

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Safe R - Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, Kansas, Alabama, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Utah, Arkansas, Kentucky, Georgia, Alaska
Safe D - Maryland, New York, Vermont, Connecticut, Hawaii, Oregon, California, Washington
Strong Lean R - Missouri, Louisiana, Indiana, Pennsylvania, Iowa
Strong Lean D - Colorado
Lean R - Arizona, North Carolina
Lean D - Illinois (pickup), Wisconsin (pickup)

Seats at least leaning toward Republicans: 49
Seats at least leaning toward Democrats: 47

Toss-Ups (republicans need 1-2, Democrats need 3-4): Nevada, New Hampshire, Florida, Ohio

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

In light of the Patrick Murphy story currently breaking,  FL Senate:  TOSSUP--LIKELY R