2018 Senatorial Elections

[jamestroll]

I know its controversial opinion I have here but I do think think certain office holders will automatically lose just because I dislike them.

That being said MO-SEN 2018 is Lean R until proven other wise. Likely or Toss Up are not good ratings right now.

[jamestroll]

Yes I agree with the above post in that the Midwest is very elastic.

Also God has told me that Claire McCaskill will win re-election.

[jamestroll]

my wild guess is that Democrats will hold on to all their seats  and will pick up NV (because hillary won nevada last year).. arizona (because hillary almost won AZ last year) and Texas (because cruz is hated).

#analysis

[jamestroll]

Okay I have not been posting as much lately because there really is not a whole lot to post right now.

The only real confident prediction that I can make at this time is that Democrats will gains seats in the House of Representatives. I can not really put a number on it but it could be as low as eight if there is not a huge backlash to Trump or as high as like 40 to 50 if voters are not feeling partisan in 2018, Trump is very unpopular and a bunch of R PVI +5 to +10 districts fall.

As far as the US Senate elections a lot of these Democratic incumbents are remnants of the past. We saw how they all fell very quickly in 2010 and 2014. Mark Pryor was a popular remnant of the past but fell by a surprisingly large margin. 2012 was a bit different for Senate Democrats even remnants of the past because of luck and the fact that a Democrat president was not assured in the minds of many people. Many voters were quite convinced Romney would win and the polls were oversampling Democrats. We saw how that went.

If anything polls underestimated Democrats that year. That is something to consider before assuming polling in 2018 will underestimate Republicans.

Now we saw how these remnants of the past went during a Democratic administration, it will be interesting to see how it goes under Donald Trump. Donald Trump is too unpopular at this present time for a repeat of 2002 to occur.  Even in 2002, Democrats did not do that bad locally and House and Senate gains were limited even with favorable redistricting for the GOP and that was the first cycle that the redistricting took place.

Also even if Trump is popular in certain states it is no guarantee that the Democratic incumbents will fall down.  Obama was popular in Illinois in 2010 and 2014 and Republicans won two major offices those years. We saw Kirk go down in a year with entirely different circumstances and it is too early to see if Rauner is DOA in the Governor's contest next year but a state's lean does not dictate how a state will vote during midterms even if the President is popular in that specific state.


Manchin thrived in West Virginia during the tea party wave and won by a large margin in 2012. His polling has shown him as popular and West Virginia Democrats to have some success statewide to this day. Even if Jenkins is from the key part of the state for Democrats to win West Virginia we can not assume that he will going to defeat Manchin. Manchin has the clear cross over appeal but he could be taken down if 2018 becomes quite a Republican year.

Heitkamp was elected while her state was very hostile to the Democratic party and has become quite popular. Only thing that could defeat her is sheer partisan.

Sherrod Brown is quite the progressive but if his opponent is Mandel I can argue that Brown would be favored to win re-election as rematches can often Falter. I have seen this happen too many times. Not sure why the gop is set on Mandel for their nominee. They probably have a dozen other candidates who could be stronger.

We argue about McCaskill a lot but I argue that I do not think it is in the cards for her to lose by more than single digits in the current climate for 2018. I could even see her winning. She seems to be doing the right things.. she is exiting the liberal base but she is not bashing Trump voters. She only criticizes GOP policies. There is a difference. Despite assertions on this site her progressive punch score is a "D".

Donnelly is very anonymous. Most voters in Indiana probably do not actively remember his name. His path to victory could be managing to create a positive image to voters now as he is so unknown to many voters. Unlike McCaskill he has that option. On the other hand if Donnelly does not invent a positive image to voters and reintroduces himself to voters he could end up losing by a 19 point margin. What would kill him is if voters go to the polls and are like "Who is this guy?" and vote Republican by default.

The rest of the races I am not very familiar with enough to comment.

[jamestroll]

you people are little school yard children.

[jamestroll]

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.

Two of those incumbents won solely because their opponents were wackos who imploded after making incredibly dumb comments. And that's probably not going to happen twice.

Also, we really don't know if Trump's approvals will stay like this on election day.

McCaskill has a tendency to out perform expectations and she did not win solely because of legitimate rape.

Donnelly is anonymous which could be a blessing or curse. The curse would be that he would be killed at the ballot box because so many voters have no clue who he is or the blessing could be that he could have a chance to define himself in a positive light. McCaskill can not really redefine herself. People have rigid opinions of her.

[jamestroll]

Wow, I knew this was going to happen, lol. Anyway, I don't want to argue about my prediction anymore. I'll probably make some changes to it before election day anyway, but right now I think it's not that far-fetched (though I know FL is bold). You could argue about the margins, but all of MT/IN/MO/WV/OH(/maybe FL) and maybe one or two other states like WI could flip.

Also, it's not as if we have people like Heitkamp, Casey and King losing.

This being the key distinction. I agree all those could flip. But is it likely because of polarization? I guess we'll have to see

I obviously have my doubts that all those red state Democrats will go down that consistently under a Republican president versus under a Democratic president.

I am particularly perplexed as to why everyone thinks Manchin is DOA.

[jamestroll]

A R+5 state, a state with a possibly ineffective nominee, and a state which had a democrat senator 5 years ago. All obviously impossible to win even in a landslide.

Lol, I swear this will be the pre-election consensus on this site:

stop this is not helping

[jamestroll]

since this site believes all elections will be like 2016 forever and democrats lose points due to MIDTERM!!! these are my predictions for 2018

Basically it is 2016 + a five point gop add on since we live in a world in which formulas dictate elections:

Arizona: Flake wins by 9

Nevada: Heller wins by 2 to 3

Texas: Cruz wins by 14

Montana: Tester loses by 25

Missouri: McCaskill loses to the currently unnamed Republican candidate 81 to 15 because atlas told me so!

Wisconsin: Baldwin loses by 6 to 7.

Michigan: Stabenow loses to unnamed Republican candidate by 5 to 6 points

Ohio: Sherrod Brown loses by 13 to 15 points.

Pennsylvania: Casey loses by 5 to 6 points.

Florida: Nelson loses by 4 to 6 points.

West Virginia: Manchin loses  like 46 points because all results from 2016 are set in stone forever!!

North Dakota: Heitkamp loses by 41 points!

I know I will still be told that I am being biased towards the Democrats

[jamestroll]

At some point the GOP will not have a good night. Should be noted that polling in 2012 underestimated Democratic support.

Of course a good way to lose an election is to act like you can not possibly lose it.

[jamestroll]

Of course a good way to lose an election is to act like you can not possibly lose it.

Okay, please show me where exactly I said that.

Hold on, I may have not been referring to you.

Right now we are not in a position to make any confident predictions. Too many contradictory factors.

We saw in 2010 and 2014 midterms how many Democratic Senators were just tossed out. Even if they were entrenched and popular and often by landslide margins. In 2012 they had very good luck and many had no problem winning re-election.  So it is easy right there to say that it was because of "midterms!!". But presidential years were supposedly always supposed to be good for Democrats because the last two presidential cycles and we all see how that went.

I have a hunch that all these deep Trump state Democrats may not necessarily lose in the upcoming midterm despite results of 2010 and 2014. The variables are different.

Special elections do not dictate or even predict what will happen the next cycle but they can give clues. KS-04 shows that the midwest is indeed quite elastic. That may give some hope for McCaskill and Heitkamp. GA-06 showed that the sun belt suburbs are indeed trending to the Democrats but we are not there yet and it also showed overconfidence can destroy election chances. Should be noted that GA-05, which neighbors GA-06, is D+34.  What does it say about the Republican Party that they have to depend on structure to win?

[jamestroll]

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

[jamestroll]

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!!!!!

[jamestroll]

No. West Virignia and North Dakota are likely Democratic.

[jamestroll]

No. West Virginia and North Dakota are likely Democratic.

[jamestroll]

No.

Missouri is a toss up and West Virginia and North Dakota are likely D.

[jamestroll]

Nope.

West Virginia and North Dakota are likely Dem.

Missouri is a toss up.

[jamestroll]

Nope Jalawest2.  Missouri is a toss up. Texas is likely R, Alabama is solid R, Montana is toss up to Lean D, Arizona is toss up, Michigan is lean to likely D, Ohio is toss up but Brown wins in the end, Florida is lean D not solid, Wisconsin is Likely D.

Everything else looks right though.

[jamestroll]

Dear god this is ridiculous.

STOP FIGHTING AND JUST MAKE A PREDICTION!!

People will continue to fight non stop until the election results next year all come in.

It ultimately comes down to whether midterms favor the out of power party or the GOP.

[jamestroll]

Dear god this is ridiculous.

STOP FIGHTING AND JUST MAKE A PREDICTION!!

People will continue to fight non stop until the election results next year all come in.

It ultimately comes down to whether midterms favor the out of power party or the GOP.

I mean, I'm absolutely struggling to think of a time where the party out of power didn't make massive gains when the incumbent President was below 50% approval, let alone 40%. But MUH Trump states

I mean 2016 did break a lot of rules also and Trumps approvals are solid in rural America and our election system has a biased towards rural America and add in the factor that midterms have a gop boost even when thwy favor the out power party I can kind of see why some users here think 2018 will be great gop year in Senate and the house seeing minimal gop losses.

I do not agree obviously.

[jamestroll]

No toss up map. Based on gut feelings, current polling, astrological transits around election night 2018 and early January 2019.