Safe RAlabama - hopefully this time the Democrats actually run a candidate
Arkansas - may have been competitive in the right circumstances, but the Democratic bench here has been decimated. Don't see Boozman losing.
Georgia - two strong candidates ran in 2014 and couldn't even make a runoff. Yes 2016 should be better than 2014, but unless Barrow was to somehow run, I can't see the Dems making a dent here.
Iowa - if Grassley retired would be a toss-up. He's running again though and at this stage it's very unlikely that he'll change his mind.
Idaho - Crapo's drink driving scandal might lead to a primary, but it doesn't matter.
Kansas - was hyped up in 2014. Instead the Dems (well techincally he was an Indie but still...) bombed. Will be a long time before another competitive race pops up here.
Louisiana - 5 years ago this might have gotten some attention as the seat is open and the bench was solid, but these days the Dems have no-one.
North Dakota - will Hoeven even get a candidate?
Oklahoma - lol. Maybe ODF could run, not like we have anyone better.
South Carolina - back in the day democracy in South Carolina was a foreign concept. The parties may have changed, but the theory in some ways still applies today.
South Dakota - let's hope the Dems can run a candidate against Thune this time. Even if they do, a loss isn't happening.
Likely RAlaska - Murkowski is probably the most moderate Republican these days and will struggle to win a primary. Accordingly there's some potential for a Miller-level candidate hurting the Republicans here. Despite this it's hard to see the Dems winning here, unless Begich was to run.
Indiana - Coats has retired, and Hill is a reasonably attractive candidate. But he's not Evan Bayh, and as long as the Republicans don't nominate a complete disaster (which they shouldn't), this won't be particularly interesting.
Kentucky - pretty much every Dem candidate here looks attractive on paper but busts significantly in practice. Paul's potential retirement the only opportunity for the Dems here, and even then I'd expect whoever the Republicans put up to win, unless by some miracle the return of the Blue Dog actually does happen.
Utah - if Matheson was to run, this might actually be interesting given that Mike Lee isn't that popular in Utah. A primary challenge is also a risk, but unlike most this one comes from the establishment so I'd probably expect Lee to survive. Even so, Utah is Utah, and if the Dems don't get Matheson this won't be competitive. Even with him it'll be an uphill battle for Team D.
Lean RArizona - McCain is not well liked, and Kirkpatrick is a strong recruit. There's also a risk of a really right wing candidate getting the nomination and blowing it. That said, Arizona hasn't been very elastic lately so the Republicans should still be the favourites.
Missouri - Kander's a decent recruit and Blunt (IIRC) traditionally hasn't been super well liked. Plus the Dems have pretty good infrastructure in Missouri. I'm a bit more optimistic than most about this race, but that might be down to a lack of polling.
North Carolina - Burr leads the field by large margins and I don't know who the Dems will actually run here. That said, he's vunerable to the right candidate, he's still rather anonymous after 11 years in the Senate, and North Carolina is traditionally flaky at the Senate level. It's less competitive than some may have hoped, but there are parallels between Burr now and Dole around 2007-08.
Pennsylvania - more of a Tilt R than the rest of my Lean R's, but Toomey has been leading by robust margins and Sestak seems a bit of a dud recruit. He's also moderated pretty well. That said, I'd expect Hillary to win here by a comfortable margin, which forces Toomey to run a fair bit ahead of the ticket and also opens up the possibility of Sestak being swept in by her coattails.
TossupFlorida - on paper you'd expect Floridan Senate races to be Lean R. Traditionally the Republican base here has been rather strong, whereas the FDP is notorious for being terrible. This time however the Dems got their best candidate in Pat Murphy, whereas the Republicans' best candidates pulled out. Definitely very winnable for Team D, though Alan Grayson will go negative on Murphy and potentially harm his positives, and he's still slightly raw and therefore may be not quite what he was cracked up to be in a statewide race.
Nevada - Harry Reid is retiring. That's probably not bad news for the Democrats as he was far from popular. His infrastructure in the state however is world-class so he'll help his chosen successor in Masto. Sandoval, the one Republican with enough appeal to make the race non-competitive is unlikely to run. The rest of the field is a bit mixed and it's hard to predict what sort of candidate the Nevadan Republican Party - which has a dodgy reputation but can find good statewide candidates - throws up. This is one race where it's hard to tell exactly what is going on, at least until the Republican field simmers down.
Ohio - Ted Strickland on the other hand is very tested statewide, and he's in a good position with the polls. The bad news however is that Portman is a strong incumbent with lots of money and a willingness to fight, and Strickland does have his negatives. He also is getting on and may not execute a strong campaign - think Tommy Thompson back in 2012. I doubt Sittenfield has much effect.
Lean DColorado - Bennett only just knocked off a terrible Republican candidate last time around, but it was in 2010. If the Republicans found an excellent candidate, he would be vunerable, but the best one is already in the Senate and won his race by a narrow margin anyway. In this climate he should be OK.
Illinois - although Tammy Duckworth isn't a terrific candidate, she's running in a very blue state that I struggle to see electing a Republican in a Presidential electorate. Kirk is a very good politican but he's running an uphill battle...and he's made a few gaffes along the way.
Wisconsin - Johnson isn't very popular here, and Russ Feingold is running again. Already Feingold is leading by huge margins. I expect Johnson to run a better campaign than Feingold, but I doubt it'll be enough, especially in a state where the Democrats should win Presidentially.
Likely DN/A
Safe DCalifornia - the top two primary I think will bite the Democrats on the ass eventually, but the Dems sucessfully cleared the field for Kamala Harris, whereas the Republican field seems to be a bunch of nobodies. Harris won't have any issues unless Sanchez breaks into the Top 2 - which won't matter for these purposes as she's a Democrat anyway.
Connecticut - in an open seat this might be interesting, but as it is? Nup.
Hawaii - Schatz had his one competitive race last year in the primary. He'll be safe for life.
Maryland - yes Hogan won a governor's race here last year, and yes an Edwards/Van Hollen primary will be interesting. But the state is still very blue, and the Republicans don't really have a bench here anyway.
New York - remember when this state was competitive? I don't.
Oregon - a Wyden retirement may make this interesting. But he's still young enough that I don't see why he would, and as it stands he's uber safe.
Vermont - Leahy's an institution in Vermont politics. Any Republicans worth their salt here will challenge Shumlin for governor.
Washington - Washington always seems quasi-competitive due to the strong Republican nature of the East. But rarely do Republicans win here. Murray won't have any problems here, the Republicans have some attractive candidates that could be good statewide candidates in the right circumstances, but most of them won't give up their House seat for a kamikaze misson like this.
