Official Post your 2006 Senate Election Prediction Maps

[??????????]

Check out mine.

Also crazy.

Mine is a possibilty the way the polls have been running as of late.

[Buddha]

check out how this site's analysis has changed over time

from 8-12:

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2006/Maps/Aug12.html

to the present

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

[Downwinder]

October 2, 2006:

Montana:  Tester 56%, Burns 43%.

Minnesota:  Klobuchar 55% Kennedy 43%.

Pennsylvania:  Casey 54% Santorum 45%.

Ohio:  Brown 54% DeWine 44%

Maryland:  Cardin 54% Steele 44%

Washington:  Cantwell 54% McGavick 43%

Rhode Island:  Whitehouse 53% Chafee 46%.

Tennessee:  Ford 53% Corker 45%

New Jersey:  Kean 52% Menendez 47%

Virginia:  Webb 50% Allen 49%

Missouri:  McCaskill 49% Talent 48%

Connecticut: Lamont 48% Lieberman 46%


R 50
D 49
I 1

[Smash255]

[DownWithTheLeft]

I miss Ultra Liberal's predictions!

[Soaring Eagle]

My official October prediction. Victory percentages might be a teensy bit off. Pretend that Vermont is green.



DEM + 7

[© Tweed the Younger]

D 49 R 49 I 1 Likud 1

[poughies]

Can we leave the Lukid stuff out?  I'm sorry i just don't see it as approriate or to be revelant.... For one thing, Democratic nominee Lamont is very much pro-israel. Second, there is a reason that Lieberman will be re-elected..... and it isn't because he is a politician from Israel....

[nini2287]

Arizona:  Kyl 55, Pederson 45
Connecticut:  Lieberman 49, Lamont 44
Maryland:  Cardin 54, Steele 46
Michigan:  Stabenow 56, Bouchard 44
Minnesota:  Klobuchar 54, Kennedy 46
Missouri:  Talent 50, McCaskill 50 (GOP win)
Montana:  Tester 52, Burns 43
New Jersey:  Menendez 51, Kean 48
Ohio:  Brown 53, DeWine 47
Pennsylvania:  Casey 53, Santorum 46
Rhode Island:  Whitehouse 52, Chafee 48
Tennessee:  Ford 52, Corker 48
Virginia:  Allen 51, Webb 47
Washington:  Cantwell 55, McGavick 45

[Mr. Paleoconservative]

My updated predictions...

[© Tweed the Younger]

50 R 48 D 1 Friend of the Workers 1 Likud

[So the Heroes Fall]

New Jersey is the Republicans' best chance for a pickup, and even that doesn't look very likely. Minnesota is swinging back to the Democrats, and they already have one Bushbot Republican in Norm Coleman. I highly doubt they'll elect another.

My over/under for Democratic pickups is +3. Anything less than 3 net pickups would be a disappointment in my eyes.

Wow. You are NOT going to be happy Election Night 2006, that's pretty much for sure.

good one!

[Boris]

I love how Harry was like the only person to accurately predict the outcome of Virginia before October. But then again, he also had Democrats taking Mississippi and Texas, so I guess his prediction can be attributed to luck

[Harry]

I love how Harry was like the only person to accurately predict the outcome of Virginia before October. But then again, he also had Democrats taking Mississippi and Texas, so I guess his prediction can be attribute to luck :p

well, I'm taking credit.  I knew James Webb would win.  And Erik Fleming was robbed.  And I was just dicking around about Texas.

I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   I WIN   

[Rob]

Republicans: 56 (+1, Minnesota)
Democrats: 43 (-1)
Independents: 1

Kean will win New Jersey.

No

Oh...but he will.

No

I hope we remember this disagreement com election time.  It'll be interesting to see who actually wins.

Boss Tweed.

[Rob]

And, just for laughs, more Brown-bashing from Ben:

That sounds about right, but I think OH and TN will be closer. I didn't know Goodman was running, though.

Maybe TN, but Brown is going to get crushed in OH.

Remind me to completely disregard anything this guy says about Ohio Senate races in the future, thanks.

[WMS]

And, just for laughs, more Brown-bashing from Ben:

That sounds about right, but I think OH and TN will be closer. I didn't know Goodman was running, though.

Maybe TN, but Brown is going to get crushed in OH.

Remind me to completely disregard anything this guy says about Ohio Senate races in the future, thanks.

Brown is still an asshole.

[Rob]

Senator-elect Brown is a great man.

I never understood why so many "populists" supported Hackett over Brown, when there really wasn't much difference between the two on policy (gun control is the only one I can think of, off the top of my head).

It must be style over substance- Hackett was an Iraq War veteran with rural roots, but Brown was an evil liberal from a big city. Oh, well. Brown thrashed Mikey anyway, so I'm happy.

[WMS]

Senator-elect Brown is a great man.

I never understood why so many "populists" supported Hackett over Brown, when there really wasn't much difference between the two on policy (gun control is the only one I can think of, off the top of my head).

It must be style over substance- Hackett was an Iraq War veteran with rural roots, but Brown was an evil liberal from a big city. Oh, well. Brown thrashed Mikey anyway, so I'm happy.

Brown encouraged Hackett to run against DeWine, promising not to run and then, when he realized how vulnerable DeWine was, broke his word and backstabbed Hackett by running anyway. A "great man" my ass.

[Rob]

I'm sure he'll do just as well in the Senate as he did in the election. He's a smart guy.

But, still, we face the question: why do "populists"/communitarians seem to be the only ones outraged at Brown's "betrayal" of Hackett? The Kossacks were, at first, but they came around. Now it's only a few with positive social scores and negative economic scores.

[WMS]

I'm sure he'll do just as well in the Senate as he did in the election. He's a smart guy.

But, still, we face the question: why do "populists"/communitarians seem to be the only ones outraged at Brown's "betrayal" of Hackett? The Kossacks were, at first, but they came around. Now it's only a few with positive social scores and negative economic scores.

You avoided my point, that personally Brown is a prick. I could answer you by saying that it's because my quadrant has ethics and yours doesn't, but that would be as silly as the points you keep making.

[Rob]

You avoided my point, that personally Brown is a prick.

I know you think that, and I know why you think that. I was asking a different question entirely: why are populists the only ones who still hold it against Brown? This has been amazingly consistent on Atlas- the only ones still attacking Brown over the Hackett affair are communitarians. Not liberals, not libertarians, not conservatives. Only populists.

I could answer you by saying that it's because my quadrant has ethics and yours doesn't but that would be as silly as the points you keep making.

I'm not trying to make any "point", and I'm not arguing over the Hackett affair itself. Still, for the record...

To be completely honest, I don't care about it one way or the other. I may disagree with his tactics in that instance, but I think he'll be an awesome Senator regardless. Apparently, communitarians are so holy that they can never forgive him that, and no longer care about his positions on the issues.

[WMS]

You avoided my point, that personally Brown is a prick.

I know you think that, and I know why you think that. I was asking a different question entirely: why are populists the only ones who still hold it against Brown? This has been amazingly consistent on Atlas- the only ones still attacking Brown over the Hackett affair are communitarians. Not liberals, not libertarians, not conservatives. Only populists.

I can only speak for myself, not any others. Certain actions tend to taint my view of people. I think poorly of Brown, yes, and Menendez and Lautenberg, but I also think poorly of Chambliss and Burns and Bunning. I can be quite bipartisan in who I dislike.

Here's my guess as to your question: it is perceived that Brown backstabbing Hackett was a liberal backstab of a communitarian, and feeds into the argument that liberals only tolerate communitarians in the Democratic Party and will seek to get rid of them the second they don't need them. And those of you on the left certainly act that way. Liberals are thus ecstatic that a liberal won out instead of a communitarian, while conservatives and libertarians alike would've supported DeWine over a Democrat from any quadrant.

I could answer you by saying that it's because my quadrant has ethics and yours doesn't but that would be as silly as the points you keep making.

I'm not trying to make any "point", and I'm not arguing over the Hackett affair itself. Still, for the record...

To be completely honest, I don't care about it one way or the other. I may disagree with his tactics in that instance, but I think he'll be an awesome Senator regardless. Apparently, communitarians are so holy that they can never forgive him that, and no longer care about his positions on the issues.

In my case, I admit I prefer candidates closer to the center than to the extremes. However, that is not enough to get me to dislike a politician - I don't dislike Whitehouse in RI, for example. It takes other factors for that to happen. And yes, communitarians are the Holy Ones. You may bow and give us homage.

[Gustaf]

I don't like Brown at all, and I'm not a communitarian.

[WMS]

I don't like Brown at all, and I'm not a communitarian.

Well there you have it.