Let's say that Hillary wins in 2016...

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

She has helped Obama passed health care reform in 2010 in senate, Clinton needs her again.

But, as I said earlier, if Dems repeat performance in a dismal midterm, they are looking at regaining power in 2020, when redistricting will favor us, as Dems regain strong govs in IL, MI and WI and FL govs😍

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

Serious answer:

I think Clinton (and Democrats in general) will be extremely unpopular in 2018. My prediction:

Republicans pick up 9 Senate seats, with WV, VA, MI, PA and ND being very close.
--> 61R, 39D

In the senate...

Republicans will have better than even odds of picking up IN, MO, and ND. MT and OH will be toss-ups, while FL, PA, VA, WV, and WI will all be somewhat competitive. Democrats will have a change of picking up NV, and a smaller chance of picking up AZ.

Nelson is no Bob Graham. FL will not be "somewhat" competitive if Hillary wins in 2016, Atwater, Lopez-Cantera or maybe even Rubio could certainly beat Nelson. Also, if Feingold can lose in WI, so can Baldwin. WI seems to be a completely different state in midterms.

Kaine and Casey will lose before Manchin and Stabenow.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

^Honestly, it depends. I know that MI is always a tough nut to crack for Republicans, but they have nowhere to go but up. If they can finally put up a candidate that doesn't implode, Stabenow can be beaten. She is a worse campaigner than Casey and not a particularly good candidate. Like I said, I expect both races to be close. And regarding Manchin: I get that he's liked in the state, but that can change pretty fast. Just ask Mark Pryor. It would be easy to portray him as "just another vote for Hillary Clinton", a "liberal in WV clothing", etc.  and in a state that Clinton is probably going to lose 64-34 that would be the final nail in the coffin for Manchin. In 2012, WV voters had the chance to split their ticket, in 2018 they won't be able to do that. Manchin would be favored to hold on if a Republican won the WH in 2016, but with a Hillary presidency I assume McKinley beats Manchin 51-47 or so. And Kaine? Well, again, I think it will be close (perhaps a 2014 redux), but VA is getting more Democratic every day. I expect him to narrowly hold on.

I wonder if Manchin would, in any situation, consider switching parties before his run for reelection.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I think if there's anything 2010 taught us, predicting mid-terms is a crap-shoot.

But the reality is, the GOP is becoming more and more the party of Congress and the Democrats the party of the Presidency. Assuming the Democrat (regardless of who it is) wins 2016, picking up a few Senate seats (WI, IL... etc), but it's pretty clear the Democrats have a TON of vulnerable seats in 2018 and will likely cop a walloping.

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

^Honestly, it depends. I know that MI is always a tough nut to crack for Republicans, but they have nowhere to go but up. If they can finally put up a candidate that doesn't implode, Stabenow can be beaten. She is a worse campaigner than Casey and not a particularly good candidate. Like I said, I expect both races to be close. And regarding Manchin: I get that he's liked in the state, but that can change pretty fast. Just ask Mark Pryor. It would be easy to portray him as "just another vote for Hillary Clinton", a "liberal in WV clothing", etc.  and in a state that Clinton is probably going to lose 64-34 that would be the final nail in the coffin for Manchin. In 2012, WV voters had the chance to split their ticket, in 2018 they won't be able to do that. Manchin would be favored to hold on if a Republican won the WH in 2016, but with a Hillary presidency I assume McKinley beats Manchin 51-47 or so. And Kaine? Well, again, I think it will be close (perhaps a 2014 redux), but VA is getting more Democratic every day. I expect him to narrowly hold on.

I wonder if Manchin would, in any situation, consider switching parties before his run for reelection.

No.

[Mr.Phips]

Serious answer:

I think Clinton (and Democrats in general) will be extremely unpopular in 2018. My prediction:

Republicans pick up 9 Senate seats, with WV, VA, MI, PA and ND being very close.
--> 61R, 39D

In the senate...

Republicans will have better than even odds of picking up IN, MO, and ND. MT and OH will be toss-ups, while FL, PA, VA, WV, and WI will all be somewhat competitive. Democrats will have a change of picking up NV, and a smaller chance of picking up AZ.

Nelson is no Bob Graham. FL will not be "somewhat" competitive if Hillary wins in 2016, Atwater, Lopez-Cantera or maybe even Rubio could certainly beat Nelson. Also, if Feingold can lose in WI, so can Baldwin. WI seems to be a completely different state in midterms.

Republicans are not picking up Michigan in Senate race unless it's an open seat and they get a stellar candidate.

[windjammer]

Manchin probably won't switch parties. But let me just add that predicting the individual races is indeed difficult. Every race has its own dynamics. I for example think that Heitkamp could prove to be less vulnerable than Bill Nelson. She's in a state where a strong grassroots campaign can make the difference. Stabenow won't lose against a mediocre Republican candidate. She is beatable, but she must be beaten. I'm assuming that MI Republicans will finally find their Cory Gardner and PA Republicans will blow it. That's nothing but speculation of course. The only race I'm pretty confident about is Missouri. McCaskill is DOA, she is one of Clinton's biggest supporters in the Senate and unlike Donnelly or Manchin has shown no signs of moderation. The MO GOP is already preparing for this race and working hard to recruite establishment candidates like Ann Wagner. And no, the dirty tricks McCaskill used last time won't work again this time.

^^^^

Here is the map of the states that will be targeted by both parties:
https://uselectionatlas.org/TOOLS/evcalc.php
If Hillary wins, I expect republicans to hold the 2 seats and pick up most of the states represented by democrats incumbents.There will obviously be 1-2 state where republicans will f*** up: and to be honest, if this is a republican wave, that will likely be the case, a state like Ohio will likely have more chances to be picked up by republicans than a state like WV, ND or MT. (but just to be clear, I do believe the rural democrats will lose, but would have a better chance to survive than Brown).

[Mr.Phips]

Manchin probably won't switch parties. But let me just add that predicting the individual races is indeed difficult. Every race has its own dynamics. I for example think that Heitkamp could prove to be less vulnerable than Bill Nelson. She's in a state where a strong grassroots campaign can make the difference. Stabenow won't lose against a mediocre Republican candidate. She is beatable, but she must be beaten. I'm assuming that MI Republicans will finally find their Cory Gardner and PA Republicans will blow it. That's nothing but speculation of course. The only race I'm pretty confident about is Missouri. McCaskill is DOA, she is one of Clinton's biggest supporters in the Senate and unlike Donnelly or Manchin has shown no signs of moderation. The MO GOP is already preparing for this race and working hard to recruite establishment candidates like Ann Wagner. And no, the dirty tricks McCaskill used last time won't work again this time.

Who is Michigan Republicans' Cory Gardner?  I'm not even sure Cory Gardner would be able to win in Michigan anyway.  It's a substantially more Dem state than Colorado.

[windjammer]

Okay, fine, I'm sorry. Mega-popular moderate bipartisan Independent Senator Stabenow is inevitable and will win because Michigan is as blue as Rhode Island and the Republican bench in the state is non-existent. Who cares how popular the Dems and Clinton will be on election day? Gary Peters won here in 2014, that tells you all you need to know, right? Also, Detroit will be too much for the Republican to overcome, obviously. Safe D. /s
(For the last time: Stabenow losing is a very bold prediction, I know that, but it's just a prediction.)

Here is the map of the states that will be targeted by both parties:
https://uselectionatlas.org/TOOLS/evcalc.php
If Hillary wins, I expect republicans to hold the 2 seats and pick up most of the states represented by democrats incumbents.There will obviously be 1-2 state where republicans will f***k up

That's the wrong link. But I agree with you that there will be at least one winnable race the Republicans will blow (like Michigan in 2014) and I'm assuming it will PA. Could be MI or any other race as well, I don't know. Like I said before: Predicting the individual races is pretty much impossible at this point in time.

MI won't be targeted I believe.

[windjammer]

For Michigan, I just made a quick search, and the last time an incumbent democrat lost his reelection campaign (who wasn't appointed by a governor) was Prentiss M. Brown who served from 1937 to 1942. So Stabenow will likely be fine.

[Senate Minority Leader Lord Voldemort]

Bold prediction from me: Tim Kaine more likely to lose than Bill Nelson, even factoring in the FL vs VA partisan lean. Tim Kaine won by an underwhelming margin in 2012, and after the Mark Warner disaster in 2014 I'm not convinced Kaine (who is weaker IMO) can pull it out in a similar fashion if the electoral climate is the same.

[Maxwell]

Bold prediction from me: Tim Kaine more likely to lose than Bill Nelson, even factoring in the FL vs VA partisan lean. Tim Kaine won by an underwhelming margin in 2012, and after the Mark Warner disaster in 2014 I'm not convinced Kaine (who is weaker IMO) can pull it out in a similar fashion if the electoral climate is the same.

I could definitely both see them as at risk - Nelson really lucked out as Connie Mack was a really underwhelming campaigner and a bad candidate overall.