PPP - Burr leads by double digits (!) against everyone

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Burr 45 Miller 34
Burr 46 Cowell 35
Burr 47 Blue 36
Burr 50 Hagan 38
Burr 46 Martin 32
Burr 46 Jackson 30
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2015/04/nc-governors-race-close.html

[MT Treasurer]

NC probably won't even be competitive in 2016. It IS no "swing state" after all and this Senate race should be rated Likely Republican. However, Burr is by no means safe, he could still end up like Dole or Hagan.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

NC probably won't even be competitive in 2016. It IS no "swing state" after all and this Senate race should be rated Likely Republican. However, Burr is by no means safe, he could still end up like Dole or Hagan.

Yep. In 2008, what everyone thought was NC becoming purple was just really part of the purple-atlas blue pattern it has had since the election of John Edwards in 1998 - the margins aren't that big and dems get a lucky break sometimes, but a clear republican leaning does exist.

[Ebsy]

It's tilt Republican but Democrats would be stupid to not try to knock off Burr. I think his horrific relations with veterans groups will hurt him in a state that has a lot of military bases.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

It's tilt Republican but Democrats would be stupid to not try to knock off Burr. I think his horrific relations with veterans groups will hurt him in a state that has a lot of military bases.

They shouldn't give up on the race, but Burr is no longer a prime target.

Republican Seats up in 2016 (from most to least vulnerable):

1. IL
2. WI
3. PA
4. FL (Majority with Dem. President)
5. NH (Majority with Rep. President)
6. OH
7. NC
8. AZ
9. IN
10. MO
11. GA
12. KY
13. AK
14. LA (Filibuster-Proof Majority)
15. IA
16. UT
17. AR
18. SD
19. ND
20. SC
21. KS (Veto-Proof Majority)
22. AL
23. ID
24. OK

[Nyvin]

NC probably won't even be competitive in 2016. It IS no "swing state" after all and this Senate race should be rated Likely Republican. However, Burr is by no means safe, he could still end up like Dole or Hagan.

Yep. In 2008, what everyone thought was NC becoming purple was just really part of the purple-atlas blue pattern it has had since the election of John Edwards in 1998 - the margins aren't that big and dems get a lucky break sometimes, but a clear republican leaning does exist.

I don't know, it's one of the fastest growing states in the country.   All those new voters have to affect the state in some way or another.   They did have more Democratic votes for House reps in 2012 than GOP ones.   

[MT Treasurer]

NC probably won't even be competitive in 2016. It IS no "swing state" after all and this Senate race should be rated Likely Republican. However, Burr is by no means safe, he could still end up like Dole or Hagan.

Yep. In 2008, what everyone thought was NC becoming purple was just really part of the purple-atlas blue pattern it has had since the election of John Edwards in 1998 - the margins aren't that big and dems get a lucky break sometimes, but a clear republican leaning does exist.

I don't know, it's one of the fastest growing states in the country.   All those new voters have to affect the state in some way or another.   They did have more Democratic votes for House reps in 2012 than GOP ones.   

NC is really strange. When it flipped to Obama in 2008, everyone thought that it would become the next Virginia (in terms of its competitiveness). Then, Republicans won big in 2010, 2012 and even 2014 (The fact that such a terrible candidate like Tillis won is quite telling. I was one of the few people who predicted a Tillis win because I didn't believe that "Democratic trend "stuff. If Obama couldn't carry it, Hagan couldn't either). 2016 will tell us whether NC will be competitive in future elections or whether it is trending Republican again. Would be interesting to see if a similar pattern applies to Georgia, but I think Georgia is indeed trending Democratic and also trending faster than NC - for whatever reason.

[Ebsy]

Good. I like Sen. Burr.

Why?

[Landslide Lyndon]

NC probably won't even be competitive in 2016. It IS no "swing state" after all and this Senate race should be rated Likely Republican. However, Burr is by no means safe, he could still end up like Dole or Hagan.

Yep. In 2008, what everyone thought was NC becoming purple was just really part of the purple-atlas blue pattern it has had since the election of John Edwards in 1998 - the margins aren't that big and dems get a lucky break sometimes, but a clear republican leaning does exist.

What the heck are you talking about? North Carolina has been trending Democratic for years now.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

NC probably won't even be competitive in 2016. It IS no "swing state" after all and this Senate race should be rated Likely Republican. However, Burr is by no means safe, he could still end up like Dole or Hagan.

Yep. In 2008, what everyone thought was NC becoming purple was just really part of the purple-atlas blue pattern it has had since the election of John Edwards in 1998 - the margins aren't that big and dems get a lucky break sometimes, but a clear republican leaning does exist.

What the heck are you talking about? North Carolina has been trending Democratic for years now.

Maybe slightly, but it is not a purple state. It has been purple-atlas blue since 98, and that remains true today.

[Landslide Lyndon]

NC probably won't even be competitive in 2016. It IS no "swing state" after all and this Senate race should be rated Likely Republican. However, Burr is by no means safe, he could still end up like Dole or Hagan.

Yep. In 2008, what everyone thought was NC becoming purple was just really part of the purple-atlas blue pattern it has had since the election of John Edwards in 1998 - the margins aren't that big and dems get a lucky break sometimes, but a clear republican leaning does exist.

What the heck are you talking about? North Carolina has been trending Democratic for years now.

Maybe slightly, but it is not a purple state. It has been purple-atlas blue since 98, and that remains true today.

Obviously you're confused. North Carolina was not competitive in 2000 and 2004, hence it was not a purple state.
But it was in 2008 and 2012, hence it was.

Also, following your logic Illinois is a purple state since it elected Mark Kirk.

[Nyvin]

Even in a GOP wave year Tillis only beat Hagan by 1.5%,  if it were a climate more favorable to democrats it's easy to say Hagan could've won.

[Gass3268]

NC probably won't even be competitive in 2016. It IS no "swing state" after all and this Senate race should be rated Likely Republican. However, Burr is by no means safe, he could still end up like Dole or Hagan.

Yep. In 2008, what everyone thought was NC becoming purple was just really part of the purple-atlas blue pattern it has had since the election of John Edwards in 1998 - the margins aren't that big and dems get a lucky break sometimes, but a clear republican leaning does exist.

What the heck are you talking about? North Carolina has been trending Democratic for years now.

Maybe slightly, but it is not a purple state. It has been purple-atlas blue since 98, and that remains true today.

NC probably won't even be competitive in 2016. It IS no "swing state" after all and this Senate race should be rated Likely Republican. However, Burr is by no means safe, he could still end up like Dole or Hagan.

Yep. In 2008, what everyone thought was NC becoming purple was just really part of the purple-atlas blue pattern it has had since the election of John Edwards in 1998 - the margins aren't that big and dems get a lucky break sometimes, but a clear republican leaning does exist.

What the heck are you talking about? North Carolina has been trending Democratic for years now.

Don't you know that if a Republican wins by 1.5% in a huge Republican wave year, its obviously trending Republican!!!

Seriously though, its a swing state just as much as Pennsylvania is.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

NC probably won't even be competitive in 2016. It IS no "swing state" after all and this Senate race should be rated Likely Republican. However, Burr is by no means safe, he could still end up like Dole or Hagan.

Yep. In 2008, what everyone thought was NC becoming purple was just really part of the purple-atlas blue pattern it has had since the election of John Edwards in 1998 - the margins aren't that big and dems get a lucky break sometimes, but a clear republican leaning does exist.

What the heck are you talking about? North Carolina has been trending Democratic for years now.

Maybe slightly, but it is not a purple state. It has been purple-atlas blue since 98, and that remains true today.

Obviously you're confused. North Carolina was not competitive in 2000 and 2004, hence it was not a purple state.
But it was in 2008 and 2012, hence it was.

Also, following your logic Illinois is a purple state since it elected Mark Kirk.

Again, purple-blue/red, not purple. Neither NC nor IL are purple states, but looking at presidential and senate combined, it is unfair to categorize them as solid red/blue, so the purple-blue/red state defintion is used. The only state that is solid one way or the other despite a recent counterexample in presidential/senate races is MA, to which I grant a special exception because Coakley was a beyond horrible nominee.

[Nyvin]

NC probably won't even be competitive in 2016. It IS no "swing state" after all and this Senate race should be rated Likely Republican. However, Burr is by no means safe, he could still end up like Dole or Hagan.

Yep. In 2008, what everyone thought was NC becoming purple was just really part of the purple-atlas blue pattern it has had since the election of John Edwards in 1998 - the margins aren't that big and dems get a lucky break sometimes, but a clear republican leaning does exist.

What the heck are you talking about? North Carolina has been trending Democratic for years now.

Maybe slightly, but it is not a purple state. It has been purple-atlas blue since 98, and that remains true today.

Obviously you're confused. North Carolina was not competitive in 2000 and 2004, hence it was not a purple state.
But it was in 2008 and 2012, hence it was.

Also, following your logic Illinois is a purple state since it elected Mark Kirk.

Again, purple-blue/red, not purple. Neither NC nor IL are purple states, but looking at presidential and senate combined, it is unfair to categorize them as solid red/blue, so the purple-blue/red state defintion is used. The only state that is solid one way or the other despite a recent counterexample in presidential/senate races is MA, to which I grant a special exception because Coakley was a beyond horrible nominee.

I don't really buy that either though, back in the 2006-2009 period a plethora of GOP states had Democratic governors and a number of GOP states had Democratic Senators,  that didn't change whether or not they were known as solid red/blue.

Governors and to a lesser extent Senators are elected largely on the national/state mood, especially governors since they aren't as attached to the national party.    

[Ebsy]

I always assume that when we're talking about purple states that we are talking about presidential elections. The Senate is a whole different discussion.

[Holmes]

Yeah. And Democrats won the Senate races in North Dakota and Indiana in 2012 because those states are just very Democratic.

If Democrats put some effort in North Carolina, it'll be a prime target in future cycles. They need to get the bloc that voted for Obama and Hagan in 2008 to keep coming out.

[MT Treasurer]

Yeah. And Democrats won the Senate races in North Dakota and Indiana in 2012 because those states are just very Democratic.

If Democrats put some effort in North Carolina, it'll be a prime target in future cycles. They need to get the bloc that voted for Obama and Hagan in 2008 to keep coming out.

Uh, North Dakota (very elastic at the Senate level) ≠ Deep South (quite inelastic)
Tillis (no crazy rape comments) ≠ Mourdock (crazy rape comments)

[Nyvin]

NC probably won't even be competitive in 2016. It IS no "swing state" after all and this Senate race should be rated Likely Republican. However, Burr is by no means safe, he could still end up like Dole or Hagan.

Yep. In 2008, what everyone thought was NC becoming purple was just really part of the purple-atlas blue pattern it has had since the election of John Edwards in 1998 - the margins aren't that big and dems get a lucky break sometimes, but a clear republican leaning does exist.

What the heck are you talking about? North Carolina has been trending Democratic for years now.

Maybe slightly, but it is not a purple state. It has been purple-atlas blue since 98, and that remains true today.

NC probably won't even be competitive in 2016. It IS no "swing state" after all and this Senate race should be rated Likely Republican. However, Burr is by no means safe, he could still end up like Dole or Hagan.

Yep. In 2008, what everyone thought was NC becoming purple was just really part of the purple-atlas blue pattern it has had since the election of John Edwards in 1998 - the margins aren't that big and dems get a lucky break sometimes, but a clear republican leaning does exist.

What the heck are you talking about? North Carolina has been trending Democratic for years now.

Don't you know that if a Republican wins by 1.5% in a huge Republican wave year, its obviously trending Republican!!!

Seriously though, its a swing state just as much as Pennsylvania is.

Dude, we are talking about Thom freaking Thillis. He is an ABSOLUTELY terrible candidate and ran against a well-organized Hagan campaign with a great ground game. Black turnout was high, too. She still lost. Why? Because the state is just very Republican.

He won because it was a low turnout midterm in a GOP wave year during the sixth year of a democrat president.

The national environment favored him heavily.   North Carolina isn't very Republican or he would've won by a lot more than 1.5%.

Even in 2012 for president Romney only won by around 2%,  that's a lot less than states like Wisconsin or Pennsylvania and those two states are always called swing states.

[Vern]

North Carolina isn't very republican at all. At the state level it very democratic, and have been for years. Obama messed up the democratics these past few years. And NC had bltr need more democratic on the presidential level since 2000

[Torie]

It's tilt Republican but Democrats would be stupid to not try to knock off Burr. I think his horrific relations with veterans groups will hurt him in a state that has a lot of military bases.

They shouldn't give up on the race, but Burr is no longer a prime target.

Republican Seats up in 2016 (from most to least vulnerable):

1. IL
2. WI
3. PA
4. FL (Majority with Dem. President)
5. NH (Majority with Rep. President)
6. OH
7. NC
8. AZ
9. IN
10. MO
11. GA
12. KY
13. AK
14. LA (Filibuster-Proof Majority)
15. IA
16. UT
17. AR
18. SD
19. ND
20. SC
21. KS (Veto-Proof Majority)
22. AL
23. ID
24. OK

I know the Dems will try, but in the end, my guess is they are favored to pick up only IL and WI. So odds are, the Dems will pick up one or two seats, depending on whether the governor of Nevada chooses to run for the Senate, in which case the Dems are likely to lose the NV seat. I don't care what the current polls say too much. It's about candidate depth and quality. Portman and Ayotte have it. The polls already show Toomey in good shape, but him too. And no, it's quite unlikely that Bennet ( a possible distant relative of mine, but I digress) will lose for the Dems in Colorado, either, to spike that Pub fantasy. He too is a solid Senator. That matters. Udahl of Colorado was not. Yes, Florida is a possibility for the Dems, if Murphy gets the nomination, and the Pub makes a mistake or two, and Walker, rather than Rubio or Bush, gets the nomination (nobody else will - sorry about that Rand, and laughing at you, Cruz). The Dems have maybe a 1 out of 3 chance of bagging that, probably a bit less.

Laugh at me after the next election. Hey, I tend to be parsimonious a bit with Pub prospects. Last time, I underestimated the Pub take by one Senate seat (it was almost two), and one House seat.

[Phony Moderate]

Democrats make up a sizeable chunk of the undecideds, as you would expect at this stage. So it'll likely tighten.

[Xing]

North Carolina is sort of like the opposite of Wisconsin: Democrats are obsessed with the idea of winning it, and in a favorable enough environment, it can go Democratic. In a neutral year or worse, though, it's probably just fool's gold. I think Burr could go down in a good enough year for Democrats. In a neutral year, though, he probably hangs on by single digits. McCrory is in more danger.

[Maxwell]

North Carolina is sort of like the opposite of Wisconsin: Democrats are obsessed with the idea of winning it, and in a favorable enough environment, it can go Democratic. In a neutral year or worse, though, it's probably just fool's gold. I think Burr could go down in a good enough year for Democrats. In a neutral year, though, he probably hangs on by single digits. McCrory is in more danger.

If it weren't for McCrory's race, I'd guess Burr would easily skate again.