Updated Senate rankings

[Gass3268]

Uh, Iowa and Pennsylvania are two completely different races. Where states stand presidentally /=/ where states stand senatorially. Grassley has been viewed as much safer than Toomey for this whole cycle and that continues to be the case. And in case you weren't aware, the Garland thing is now either a distant memory or an asset to all but highly-informed liberal voters, which are a clear minority in America, so don't try using that.

Nope, he only had easy until he decided on go hardball on Garland. Need to see new polling since he went off the rails before labeling this anything other than a tossup.

Uh, what evidence do you have that Iowa voters care about Garland enough that they're going to go from loving Grassley to hating Grassley based on a single-issue reasoning despite the fact that even known liberal outpost huffington post has stopped talking about the issue? Heck, I even saw an article while searching around the other day where some liberal columnist was whining over a significant number of paragraphs about the media's ignorance of the issue. No, all that's happening here is your use of your known liberal bias to apply the most optimist scenario possible, when everything that exists points to the race still being Likely or Safe R.

I don't agree with the obstruction and would vote to confirm Garland, but the fact is the issue is dead and conservatives have won. All the national democrats got out of it was getting Patty Judge into the race, who worked for the unpopular Culver administration and might not even win the D primary anyways (the state party is in the tank for State Sen. Robb Hogg). Maybe it comes up again if TRUMP appears to be losing in a landslide in September, but odds are that's not happening since we are a highly polarized electorate. The right approach, used by every major predictor out there, is to never assume a senate race has suddenly plunged from Safe R to Toss-Up unless you have indisputable evidence. What you're doing is assuming such a plunge has happened for as long as possible, and it makes your predictions look worse, not better.

All I'm saying is that it will be close, probably the closest election of his life. The last approval rating poll only had him at +3. I guarantee the Supreme Court will become a huge issue during both his Senate campaign and the Presidential campaign. "Do you want Trump picking a Supreme Court Justice?" will be played in ads later this year. If Clinton wins Iowa by about the same % as Obama did, watch out!

[windjammer]

Lol at people who believe Toomey is favored, he will go down as every other blue state senators (except Grassley maybe) when Clinton will (likely) carry their states by big margins.

Regarding the issue of SC, it's not going to matter at all. The only positif effect was to put Iowa in play. He's the only one who has been hurt by this issue because he lost a lot of his crossover appeal (Ayotte, Toomey,.. were never going to have this crossover appeal and their fate was going to be decided by who would win their state in a presidential election), although I would be surprised if he loses in the end.

Regarding AZ, Mccain will likely survive, but with all the new hispanics who are registering and with the fact he's deeply hated, I think Lean Rep should be the correct answer.

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

The polls taken before the primary pretty clearly showed that McGinty was a weaker opponent than Sestak. Toomey can survive a Clinton win of a few points. PA will probably swing R due to TRUMP's rust belt appeal.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

I don't think Dems will win more than 51/49 seats but IL & WI flips obviously and Clinton can win OH or Pa and win FL to cross 50 thresehold .

[Heisenberg]

I don't think Dems will win more than 51/49 seats but IL & WI flips obviously and Clinton can win OH or Pa and win FL to cross 50 thresehold .

NH flips long before PA, OH, and FL.

[pbrower2a]

Iowa is not a Tossup. Grassley isn't losing.

We do not know. The most recent poll showed him slipping. We have simply seen few polls of Iowa. Obstruction of the President's choice for a seat on the Supreme Court is a bad idea in most states. Iowa leans too far D for a statewide election to support such.

Not long ago I had Iowa as Solid R. That is over.

[windjammer]

The polls taken before the primary pretty clearly showed that McGinty was a weaker opponent than Sestak. Toomey can survive a Clinton win of a few points. PA will probably swing R due to TRUMP's rust belt appeal.

You seemed to forget the PA suburbs where he will get annihilated.
Regarding Mcginty, sestak was doing slightly better than her simply because of name recognition

[windjammer]

I doubt Trump will do much worse than Romney in the Philly suburbs, assuming the election is competitive.

If the election is competitive , indeed because that would mean PA would be in play and he couldnt put PA in play by being annihilated in the suburbs.

But right now, I honestly how he can win FL and PA (needed to win). But who knows, this is a srrange election after all.

[Miles]

Uh, Iowa and Pennsylvania are two completely different races. Where states stand presidentally /=/ where states stand senatorially. Grassley has been viewed as much safer than Toomey for this whole cycle and that continues to be the case. And in case you weren't aware, the Garland thing is now either a distant memory or an asset to all but highly-informed liberal voters, which are a clear minority in America, so don't try using that.

Nope, he only had easy until he decided on go hardball on Garland. Need to see new polling since he went off the rails before labeling this anything other than a tossup.

Uh, what evidence do you have that Iowa voters care about Garland enough that they're going to go from loving Grassley to hating Grassley based on a single-issue reasoning despite the fact that even known liberal outpost huffington post has stopped talking about the issue? Heck, I even saw an article while searching around the other day where some liberal columnist was whining over a significant number of paragraphs about the media's ignorance of the issue. No, all that's happening here is your use of your known liberal bias to apply the most optimist scenario possible, when everything that exists points to the race still being Likely or Safe R.

I don't agree with the obstruction and would vote to confirm Garland, but the fact is the issue is dead and conservatives have won. All the national democrats got out of it was getting Patty Judge into the race, who worked for the unpopular Culver administration and might not even win the D primary anyways (the state party is in the tank for State Sen. Robb Hogg). Maybe it comes up again if TRUMP appears to be losing in a landslide in September, but odds are that's not happening since we are a highly polarized electorate. The right approach, used by every major predictor out there, is to never assume a senate race has suddenly plunged from Safe R to Toss-Up unless you have indisputable evidence. What you're doing is assuming such a plunge has happened for as long as possible, and it makes your predictions look worse, not better.

All I'm saying is that it will be close, probably the closest election of his life. The last approval rating poll only had him at +3. I guarantee the Supreme Court will become a huge issue during both his Senate campaign and the Presidential campaign. "Do you want Trump picking a Supreme Court Justice?" will be played in ads later this year. If Clinton wins Iowa by about the same % as Obama did, watch out!

Yeah, Grassley has really gone off the deep end with Judge Garland. Wouldn't be surprised that he has a competitive race on his hands.

[Kingpoleon]

Ohio is a tossup and Pa is lean R I agree Toomey & Grassley are relatively safe. 

I think Trump would win a state like Nevada as well as CO, two states that liked Perot just as much.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

His performance among Latinos in States with 1/3 of them aren't good.

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

Update

1. New Hampshire
2. Wisconsin
3. Illinois
4. Nevada
5. North Carolina
6. Ohio
7. Missouri
8. Florida
9. Pennsylvania
10. Colorado
11. Arizona
12. Iowa

Florida below Missouri?

[Xing]

Update

1. New Hampshire
2. Wisconsin
3. Illinois
4. Nevada
5. North Carolina
6. Ohio
7. Missouri
8. Florida
9. Pennsylvania
10. Colorado
11. Arizona
12. Iowa

Florida below Missouri?

Because Marco

[MT Treasurer]

Florida below Missouri?

Because Marco

No, but unlike Rubio, Blunt is actually facing a very strong challenger. If he wins, it will only be because MO has trended so far to the right.

[Xing]

Florida below Missouri?

Because Marco

No, but unlike Rubio, Blunt is actually facing a very strong challenger. If he wins, it will only be because MO has trended so far to the right.

Well, it really has trended R. I don't see Blunt significantly underperforming Trump there, since he's relatively inoffensive.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

UPDATE:

Likely D: Oregon
Strongly Leans D: Colorado
Leans D: Wisconsin, Illinois
Tilts D: None
Pure Tossup: Nevada
Tilts R: Ohio, New Hampshire
Leans R: Florida, North Carolina, Arizona, Pennsylvania
Likely R: Indiana, Missouri, Iowa

All other seats are safe holds.

[Xing]

1. Wisconsin (Likely D)
2. Illinois (Lean D)
3. New Hampshire (Tilt D)
4. Florida (Pure Toss-Up)
5. Ohio (Tilt R)
6. Nevada (Lean D)
7. Pennsylvania (Lean R)
8. North Carolina (Lean R)
9. Arizona (Lean R)
10. Missouri (Likely R)
11. Colorado (Likely D)
12. Iowa (Likely R)
13. Indiana (Likely R)

[BuckeyeNut]

Update

1. New Hampshire
2. Wisconsin
3. Illinois
4. Nevada
5. North Carolina
6. Ohio
7. Missouri
8. Florida
9. Pennsylvania
10. Colorado
11. Arizona
12. Iowa

North Carolina before Ohio?

[MT Treasurer]

North Carolina before Ohio?

Yes. Burr is much more vulnerable than people here seem to think. A new YouGov poll released today shows his approval rating at -20 (40/60). Democrats are guaranteed to win 95% of the Black vote and they don't even need to find that many White voters in a state like NC to win this race.

Portman, meanwhile, is running a very strong campaign, from what I've heard.

[pbrower2a]

Senate approvals, from CBS/YouGov:


But they also polled the approval ratings of the Senators:

Michael Bennet (CO): +20 (60/40)
Ron Johnson: (WI) +2 (51/49)
Marco Rubio (FL): -12 (44/56)
Richard Burr (NC): -20 (40/60)

Johnson has been shown to be going down in most polls. I can't see what he is doing right all of a sudden. The approval rating for Bennett may be overstated, too. 

Bennet is apparently out of danger. Rubio and Burr -- in trouble. 

[Heisenberg]

Senate approvals, from CBS/YouGov:


But they also polled the approval ratings of the Senators:

Michael Bennet (CO): +20 (60/40)
Ron Johnson: (WI) +2 (51/49)
Marco Rubio (FL): -12 (44/56)
Richard Burr (NC): -20 (40/60)

Johnson has been shown to be going down in most polls. I can't see what he is doing right all of a sudden. The approval rating for Bennett may be overstated, too. 

Bennet is apparently out of danger. Rubio and Burr -- in trouble. 

I can't imagine the Bennet and Johnson approvals being accurate. But Bennet should be safe. Literally, he Republicans keep blowing the Colorado Class 3 seat so hard it's not even funny. It's like they secretly don't want he seat. I also wasn't expecting Burr's ratings to be that low, either. I guess North Carolina doesn't Feel the Burr so much after all.

[Xing]

I can't fathom Johnson having a +2 approval rating, and Burr being at -20. Burr isn't totally safe, but since he's relatively inoffensive, and NC leans Republican, it's very unlikely that this seat will be near the tipping point. If Democrats win it, it's probably their 53rd seat or so.

[Xing]

I can't fathom Johnson having a +2 approval rating, and Burr being at -20. Burr isn't totally safe, but since he's relatively inoffensive, and NC leans Republican, it's very unlikely that this seat will be near the tipping point. If Democrats win it, it's probably their 53rd seat or so.

What about 2008, though? Elizabeth Dole was pretty inoffensive as well and lost by the largest margin of any Republican incumbent Senator running for reelection that year.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lf2vDk-4Ag

Also, Obama won NC, thanks to a massive ground game. If Trump does lose NC, Burr could go down with him, but that would mean that conditions are better for Democrats than they were in 2012, which means Democrats have surely won WI/IL/NH and at least two of OH/PA/FL, plus maybe AZ.

[Mehmentum]

Updating from my May rankings:

[Xing]

1. Wisconsin (Likely D)
2. Illinois (Lean D)
3. New Hampshire (Tilt D)
4. Florida (Pure Toss-Up)
5. Ohio (Tilt R)
6. Pennsylvania (Tilt R)
7. Nevada (Lean D)
8. North Carolina (Lean R)
9. Indiana (Lean R)
10. Arizona (Lean R)
11. Missouri (Likely R)
12. Colorado (Likely D)
13. Iowa (Likely R)