Rothenberg Senate Rankings
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 03:54:02 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Congressional Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  Rothenberg Senate Rankings
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8
Author Topic: Rothenberg Senate Rankings  (Read 37197 times)
Nym90
nym90
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,260
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -2.96

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: January 14, 2009, 01:11:27 PM »

I'm sure this will be bump worthy for humorous purposes in 22 months, but here goes:

2010 Senate Ratings

Here are our latest Senate ratings.

Lean Takeover (0 R, 0 D)

Toss-Up (4 R, 0 D)

    * Bunning (R-KY)
    * FL Open (Martinez, R)
    * MO Open (Bond, R)
    * OH Open (Voinovich, R)

Narrow Advantage for Incumbent Party (4 R, 2 D)

    * Burr (R-NC)
    * Gregg (R-NH)
    * Specter (R-PA)
    * Vitter (R-LA)
    * Bennet (D-CO)
    * Reid (D-NV)

Clear Advantage for Incumbent Party (2 R, 2 D)

    * Grassley (R-IA)
    * KS Open (Brownback, R)
    * Dorgan (D-ND)
    * Feingold (D-WI)

Currently Safe (9 R, 13 D)

    * Bennett (R-UT)
    * Coburn (R-OK)
    * Crapo (R-ID)
    * DeMint (R-SC)
    * Isakson (R-GA)
    * McCain (R-AZ)
    * Murkowski (R-AK)
    * Shelby (R-AL)
    * Thune (R-SD)
    * Bayh (D-IN)
    * Boxer (D-CA)
    * Burris (D-IL)
    * Dodd (D-CT)
    * Inouye (D-HI)
    * Kaufman (D-DE)
    * Leahy (D-VT)
    * Lincoln (D-AR)
    * Mikulski (D-MD)
    * Murray (D-WA)
    * Schumer (D-NY)
    * Wyden (D-OR)
    * NY Open (Clinton, D)
Logged
Josh/Devilman88
josh4bush
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,079
Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -1.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: January 14, 2009, 02:20:37 PM »

I would move KS closer toward Battleground Stauts, but besides that it look right.
Logged
Verily
Cuivienen
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,663


Political Matrix
E: 1.81, S: -6.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: January 14, 2009, 02:26:02 PM »

I think he overstates Vitter's vulnerability. Otherwise, it's not bad at all, although Dorgan and Grassley seem a bit arbitrary (maybe there because of retirement watch?).
Logged
RIP Robert H Bork
officepark
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,030
Czech Republic


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: January 14, 2009, 03:21:49 PM »

Currently it looks OK.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,876


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: January 14, 2009, 04:06:57 PM »

NY and IL definitely aren't 100% safe. KS should also be moved up, though I guess it's fair to leave it there until we know what Sebelius is doing.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: January 14, 2009, 05:54:02 PM »

I think he overstates Vitter's vulnerability. Otherwise, it's not bad at all, although Dorgan and Grassley seem a bit arbitrary (maybe there because of retirement watch?).

Agreed on Vitter, and I'd have to imagine that all the "clear advantage" seats rely heavily on speculation and possibility.

If I had to edit further, I'd push Illinois into the Clear Advantage category, along with McCain.  I'd otherwise put an asterisk next to New York's open seat and Delaware—both are almost guaranteed to go Democrat, but there is at least a scenario where either could wind up in competitive territory.
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderator
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: January 14, 2009, 09:05:48 PM »

If I had to edit further, I'd push Illinois into the Clear Advantage category, along with McCain.  I'd otherwise put an asterisk next to New York's open seat and Delaware—both are almost guaranteed to go Democrat, but there is at least a scenario where either could wind up in competitive territory.

I don't think there are any potential viable candidates for the Rs in Delaware. In New York, I could see a viable Republican running and a Democrat completely imploding, even if it's unlikely.
Logged
Bacon King
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,822
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.63, S: -9.49

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: January 14, 2009, 10:36:24 PM »

I'd move Dodd up a notch.
Logged
MaxQue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,600
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: January 15, 2009, 01:17:07 AM »

If I had to edit further, I'd push Illinois into the Clear Advantage category, along with McCain.  I'd otherwise put an asterisk next to New York's open seat and Delaware—both are almost guaranteed to go Democrat, but there is at least a scenario where either could wind up in competitive territory.

I don't think there are any potential viable candidates for the Rs in Delaware.

Castle.
Logged
Lunar
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,404
Ireland, Republic of
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: January 15, 2009, 11:41:16 AM »

If I had to edit further, I'd push Illinois into the Clear Advantage category, along with McCain.  I'd otherwise put an asterisk next to New York's open seat and Delaware—both are almost guaranteed to go Democrat, but there is at least a scenario where either could wind up in competitive territory.

I don't think there are any potential viable candidates for the Rs in Delaware.

Castle.


key word is "viable" - Castle is not.  Health issues + age + 40 year personal relationship with the Biden family mean he's not going to run

Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderator
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: January 15, 2009, 04:09:48 PM »

If I had to edit further, I'd push Illinois into the Clear Advantage category, along with McCain.  I'd otherwise put an asterisk next to New York's open seat and Delaware—both are almost guaranteed to go Democrat, but there is at least a scenario where either could wind up in competitive territory.

I don't think there are any potential viable candidates for the Rs in Delaware.

Castle.


key word is "viable" - Castle is not.  Health issues + age + 40 year personal relationship with the Biden family mean he's not going to run



This. Thanks.
Logged
rob in cal
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,978
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: January 16, 2009, 01:37:14 AM »

Also to be remembered is the Democrats have been winning all or most of the really close Senate elections over the last two cycles.  So, what does that mean for the toss up categories.
Logged
Nym90
nym90
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,260
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -2.96

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: January 24, 2009, 09:54:49 AM »

Here are our latest Senate ratings.

Lean Takeover (0 R, 0 D)

Toss-Up (4 R, 0 D)

    * Bunning (R-KY)
    * FL Open (Martinez, R)
    * MO Open (Bond, R)
    * OH Open (Voinovich, R)

Narrow Advantage for Incumbent Party (4 R, 2 D)

    * Burr (R-NC)
    * Gregg (R-NH)
    * Specter (R-PA)
    * Vitter (R-LA)
    * Bennet (D-CO)
    * Reid (D-NV)

Clear Advantage for Incumbent Party (2 R, 2 D)

    * Grassley (R-IA)
    * KS Open (Brownback, R)
    * Dorgan (D-ND)
    * Feingold (D-WI)

Currently Safe (9 R, 13 D)

    * Bennett (R-UT)
    * Coburn (R-OK)
    * Crapo (R-ID)
    * DeMint (R-SC)
    * Isakson (R-GA)
    * McCain (R-AZ)
    * Murkowski (R-AK)
    * Shelby (R-AL)
    * Thune (R-SD)
    * Bayh (D-IN)
    * Boxer (D-CA)
    * Burris (D-IL)
    * Dodd (D-CT)
    * Gillibrand (D-NY)
    * Inouye (D-HI)
    * Kaufman (D-DE)
    * Leahy (D-VT)
    * Lincoln (D-AR)
    * Mikulski (D-MD)
    * Murray (D-WA)
    * Schumer (D-NY)
    * Wyden (D-OR)
Logged
muon2
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: January 24, 2009, 04:14:15 PM »

Given the continued uproar and taint of Blago, I have no clue how Burris could be considered safe.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: January 24, 2009, 04:18:00 PM »

Given the continued uproar and taint of Blago, I have no clue how Burris could be considered safe.

Safe for the Democratic party, not safe for Burris.
Logged
muon2
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: January 24, 2009, 05:44:32 PM »

Given the continued uproar and taint of Blago, I have no clue how Burris could be considered safe.

Safe for the Democratic party, not safe for Burris.

If Burris wins the primary, it is not safe. There is a lot of anger about his willingness to take the appointment, even by many Dems. If the criminal trial of Blago takes place in 2010, the appointment will be the issue.
Logged
Lunar
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,404
Ireland, Republic of
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: January 24, 2009, 05:48:47 PM »

I'm not so sure.  The IL GOP has this problem where a moderate can't win without being completely bloodied in a stellar primary -- and even then is easily accused of being a right-winger (Topinka).

Logged
Lunar
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,404
Ireland, Republic of
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: January 24, 2009, 05:51:40 PM »

I'm not so sure.  The IL GOP has this problem where a moderate can't win without being completely bloodied in a stellar primary -- and even then is easily accused of being a right-winger (Topinka).

I think perhaps Illinois could be included in the same rank & file as Kansas where, if the right candidate runs (Kirk) it becomes competitive, but as of now, it's safe.   But since there is that diminished potential that Burris will be the actual Democratic candidate, it's somehow more safe than that category.

It's sort of a nuanced set of circumstances where the GOP wins, yaddamean?
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: January 24, 2009, 06:05:35 PM »

Given the continued uproar and taint of Blago, I have no clue how Burris could be considered safe.

Safe for the Democratic party, not safe for Burris.

If Burris wins the primary, it is not safe. There is a lot of anger about his willingness to take the appointment, even by many Dems. If the criminal trial of Blago takes place in 2010, the appointment will be the issue.

I'm sure you Illinois Republicans would rather Burris win the primary, but who says that's going to happen? Presumably if he runs in the primary Obama will endorse one of his opponents.
Logged
Holmes
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,719
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -5.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: January 24, 2009, 06:16:10 PM »

I'm hoping Obama doesn't endorse anyone while he's president. I don't want him playing the partisan president.
Logged
Lunar
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,404
Ireland, Republic of
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: January 24, 2009, 10:54:37 PM »

Given the continued uproar and taint of Blago, I have no clue how Burris could be considered safe.

Safe for the Democratic party, not safe for Burris.

I'm sure you Illinois Republicans would rather Burris win the primary, but who says that's going to happen? Presumably if he runs in the primary Obama will endorse one of his opponents.


It'll be a MAJOR upset in the news if Obama endorses one of Burris's opponents.  I made a thread about this (With Alexi G., the definition of an Obama protege, someone he's backed against his own state party, if there ever was one), but it's a major *IF* if Obama is willing to endorse a white opponent to the one black Senator during the primaries.

Presidents don't normally endorse candidates until after the primary, no?  Especially not against sitting Senators (Remember Bush & Santorum endorsing Spectar and Obama campaignign for Lieberman during their primaries?).

Anyway, I call BS on that post.  It's possible (and HOPEFUL) absolutely insane to assume.


as I said in the other thread.  Part of Alexi's advantage is his close relationship with Obama legtimizing his primarying efforts.  He's the #1 opponent to Burris but he'll only run with Obama's blessing, which I give a 50/50 chance at best.
Logged
Nym90
nym90
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,260
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -2.96

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: February 04, 2009, 03:00:07 PM »

Lean Takeover (0 R, 0 D)

Toss-Up (5 R, 0 D)

    * Bunning (R-KY)
    * FL Open (Martinez, R)
    * MO Open (Bond, R)
    * NH Open (Newman, R)
    * OH Open (Voinovich, R)

Narrow Advantage for Incumbent Party (3 R, 2 D)

    * Burr (R-NC)
    * Specter (R-PA)
    * Vitter (R-LA)
    * Bennet (D-CO)
    * Reid (D-NV)

Clear Advantage for Incumbent Party (2 R, 2 D)

    * Grassley (R-IA)
    * KS Open (Brownback, R)
    * Dorgan (D-ND)
    * Feingold (D-WI)

Currently Safe (9 R, 13 D)

    * Bennett (R-UT)
    * Coburn (R-OK)
    * Crapo (R-ID)
    * DeMint (R-SC)
    * Isakson (R-GA)
    * McCain (R-AZ)
    * Murkowski (R-AK)
    * Shelby (R-AL)
    * Thune (R-SD)
    * Bayh (D-IN)
    * Boxer (D-CA)
    * Burris (D-IL)
    * Dodd (D-CT)
    * Gillibrand (D-NY)
    * Inouye (D-HI)
    * Kaufman (D-DE)
    * Leahy (D-VT)
    * Lincoln (D-AR)
    * Mikulski (D-MD)
    * Murray (D-WA)
    * Schumer (D-NY)
    * Wyden (D-OR)
Logged
cinyc
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,721


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: February 06, 2009, 06:54:03 PM »

No way Gillibrand should be considered safe, even in New York.   She's not well known enough yet and may face a brutal primary challenge from someone downstate.  Couple that with the possibility of a prominent Republican other than Peter King getting into the race if things get ugly enough, and I think that seat belongs in the Clear Advantage for Incumbent Party pile instead.

Chuck Schumer (unfortunately) is safe.

Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderator
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: February 06, 2009, 10:24:25 PM »

No way Gillibrand should be considered safe, even in New York.   She's not well known enough yet and may face a brutal primary challenge from someone downstate.  Couple that with the possibility of a prominent Republican other than Peter King getting into the race if things get ugly enough, and I think that seat belongs in the Clear Advantage for Incumbent Party pile instead.

Rothenberg rates "safe" according to party control, so he's factoring in a Gillibrand primary defeat by any viable Democrat as "safe."

In that sense, she is, because betting against a Democratic senator in N.Y. is like betting against a Republican senator in Utah. When was the last time one lost a race? The 1800s?
Logged
cinyc
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,721


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: February 06, 2009, 11:38:15 PM »

No way Gillibrand should be considered safe, even in New York.   She's not well known enough yet and may face a brutal primary challenge from someone downstate.  Couple that with the possibility of a prominent Republican other than Peter King getting into the race if things get ugly enough, and I think that seat belongs in the Clear Advantage for Incumbent Party pile instead.

Rothenberg rates "safe" according to party control, so he's factoring in a Gillibrand primary defeat by any viable Democrat as "safe."

In that sense, she is, because betting against a Democratic senator in N.Y. is like betting against a Republican senator in Utah. When was the last time one lost a race? The 1800s?

New York had one or more Republican Senators from 1947 until 1998.  Utah hasn't been represented by a Democrat Senator since 1976.

Most incumbents haven't lost a race, but the last appointed temporary Senator from New York, Republican Charles Goodell, lost a three-way race to Conservative James Buckley in 1970.  That's right - New York elected a Conservative Senator within the past 40 years. 
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.068 seconds with 12 queries.