2018 Senatorial Elections

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Using ranks because calling races at this point seems premature.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

My early prediction.

Unsurprisingly, I agree with you 100%. I know this looks like a really Republican-friendly prediction, but it's not that far-fetched. The only "bold" prediction on this map is FL.

My early prediction, including the obvious comments and #hottakes:

Democratic gains

NV (Lean D): Heller is a weak incumbent in a state trending away from his party. He only barely eked out a win in 2012 because the Democrats nominated Shelley Berkley. Heller won't get that lucky this time, and blue states really don't split their tickets anymore or care whether the Republican candidate is an incumbent or not.  D+1, Heller loses by 4 or 5 points. (If he actually distances himself from Trump like Kirk and Ayotte, expect something like a 8- to 10-point loss here.)

Republican gains

IN (Likely R): I don't see how Donnelly wins. The Republicans running here are probably a bit overrated, but given this astonishingly high level of polarization even someone like Messer should be able to win fairly easily. R+1, Donnelly loses by 12 points to Messer or something like 8-10 points to Rokita.

MO (Likely R): This race has been discussed ad nauseam, so any further comments are probably unnecessary. The only thing worth pointing out is that I believe Wagner would do much better in MO-02 and the more suburban areas in the general than Hawley, but maybe she'd do slightly worse than Hawley in the rural areas. Anyway, R+1, Wagner wins by 13 points, Hawley by 10 points. FTR, right now I believe Hawley will be the nominee.

MT (Tossup): While most Democrats think that Tester is heavily favored, I think the GOP can definitely win here. Both Rosendale and Olszewski would be fairly good candidates IMO, and I could also see Troy Downing doing well if he actually wins the nomination (doubtful, but he's kind of a wildcard). Democrats creating an aura of inevitability around Tester doesn't help them either, honestly. MT also has a fairly high Republican floor, and Eastern MT likely won't be as friendly to Tester next year as it was in 2012.  R+1, Rosendale wins by 6 and Olszewski by 4 or 5.

WV (Tossup): This race is tough to predict, and Jenkins might be a bit overrated. I think WV is a Tossup, but if Trump can get his supporters out in record numbers on election day (and I assume he'll be campaigning for Rs here), I think this seat will flip. R+1, Jenkins wins by 8 or 9 or so. (I could totally see Manchin winning as well, though)

OH (Tilt R): Brown is in big trouble, obviously. OH has an incredibly high Republican floor, especially in midterm years. Brown can win if he plays his cards right, but in the end I think some combination of Mandel doing better than expected in the Republican suburbs, crushing it in the traditionally Republican rural areas and outperforming his 2012 showing in the WWC areas by quite a bit should put him over the top. R+1, Mandel wins by 6 or 7.

FL (Tossup): Scott winning here is my bold prediction. Jimmie hinted at this already, I think Nelson is a remnant of the past and might be out of step with the times and his electorate, if you know what I mean. I know polls are showing a Nelson landslide right now, but I wouldn't underestimate Scott (especially if polling underestimates Republican support among White suburbanites and Working-class "Trumpist" voters again). R+1, Scott barely ekes it out by 1 or less. If Morgan is the Democratic nominee for governor, Scott might actually do better than if Graham wins the D primary.

Democratic holds

WI (Lean D): Baldwin is a good fit for swingy WI and isn't dumb enough to move to the center to win reelection. If she loses, it will be a sign that WI is moving away from the Democrats at a very fast pace. Unless someone like Hovde runs, I think she'll do very well in WI-03 and WI-07, and that should be enough, even if Walker wins reelection. D Hold, Baldwin wins by 4 or 5 points.

MI (Lean D): Stabenow should be fine, but like I've said several times before... 85% chance this race is a blowout and 15% chance it goes down to the wire. No in between. Right now, I assume the former will happen, but the race could get interesting if the GOP nominates the right candidate (and not just a generic conservative Republican).D Hold, Stabenow wins by 12 points.

ND (Lean D): I moved this from Likely to Lean D today. I still think Heitkamp is heavily favored to win, but you never know. Pretty sure that this seat only flips after IN, MO, MT, WV, FL, OH and maybe WI or MI, though. D Hold, Heitkamp beats Cramer by 5, Campbell by 12, Becker by 16 and Berg by 22. If she can win in 2018, this seat is hers for as long as she wants it.

PA (Likely D): Casey underperformed in 2012, but he should be fine in 2018. Pennsylvania is still fairly Democratic downballot. I agree that the GOP should put up a good wave insurance candidate, though. D Hold, Casey wins by 8 points.

ME (Likely D): King should be fine, but he will probably lose a few counties in ME-02 this time around. D Hold, King wins by 9.

Republican holds

AZ (Likely R): Flake is a bit underestimated IMO. I think he wins the primary much easier than expected and then goes on to win the general by 7 or so. Synema is - just like Kirkpatrick - way overrated (I actually think Carmona might be the strongest Democrat). R Hold.

TX (Likely R): O'Rourke will make it closer than it should be, but I think Cruz wins by 9 on election day, give or take 1 or 2 points. Things could get really ugly for Cruz in 2024, though. R Hold.

UT (Likely R): I am a bit worried about this race, but Hatch will probably be fine in the end. R Hold.

Wow this is hackish.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Here's a hot take. The democratic incumbents in red states who won election/reelection in 2012 in an environment that was only slightly less polarized then 2016 aren't heavy underdogs in a year that will almost certainly be at least a decent D wave. Even bigger hot take. Republicans aren't going to knock out popular swing state incumbents in a midterm under a Republican president whos 20 points underwater nationwide.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

@TheSaint: He could take the Ron Johnson route to victory if he runs as an outsider businessman type (and he'd definitely do better than a generic R in these areas), but I'm not sure whether he could win. Baldwin is favored right now, obviously.

@Alice Scarlet: Yeah, we've heard it before. Everyone who doesn't predict a massive Democratic wave everywhere is "hackish" (How did that turn out for you so far in these special elections, btw?). Also, someone who makes these predictions...

Using ranks because calling races at this point seems premature.

... has no right to call other people hacks.

Anyway, not going to reply to you anymore, as it would just derail this thread. Can we just agree to disagree and not comment on each other's prediction?

Hackish is suggesting that its ridiculous to assume that the party of a president consistently facing a -20 net approval will probably be the victim of a wave. It took impeachment over a blowjob and 9/11 to get the last 2 positive midterms for the in party.(fun fact: also the last two midterms where the outparty didn't get a serious wave). The thing about these midterms is that the presidents involved had excellent approval ratings. Considering that the current trump approval ratings are under a good economy, I highly doubt that will happen.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Here's my prediction. I know its pretty hackish in favor of democrats, but whatever.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

No West Viriginia is likely to solid Democrat. And North Dakota is likely dem.

I'm comfortable with my ratings, but everyone's entitled to their opinion.

Thank you for putting mo as toss up! If i were straight and mccaskill was not an old she would be my type of white girl.

I love her!!!!!

Wat?