2010 senate prediction

[OC]

In order for the Congressional republicans to win states like PA, ND, and NV they will have to win the congressional ballot test, and so far they have come even with the Dems, not ahead.

I don't prefer Reid, as majority leader, I think he is more of negotiator rather than a leader, a boring one at that.  But Sardova, I don't believe will have the coattails to bring the Congressional republicans along to defeat Reid as of yet.

I think the Republicans have a much better chance of picking up NV-02 than anything else.

[nkpatel1279]

Safe Republican.
AL- Shelby-R
AK- Murkowski-R
AZ- McCain-R
FL-OPEN-(Martinez-R)- Crist-R
GA- Isakson-R
ID- Crapo-R
IA- Grassley-R
KS-OPEN-(Brownback-R)- Moran-R
OK- Coburn-R
SC- DeMint-R
SD- Thune-R
UT- Bennett-R
Safe Democratic.
AR- Lincoln-D- will end up facing weak GOP opposition.
CA- Boxer-D ends up winning by landslide margin- despite opposition from Carly Fiorina.
DE- (OPEN-Kaufman-D)-Biden-D- Mike Castle is not going to run.
HI- Inouye-D
IN- Bayh-D
MD- Mikulski-D
NY- Schumer-D
NY- Gillibrand-D- Gillibrand will get a free pass plus- Schumer's coattails will help Gillibrand win.
ND- Dorgan-D- Hoeven is less likely to run.
OR- Wyden-D
VT- Leahy-D
Vulnerable/Republican Favored Seats.
KY-(OPEN-Bunning-R)- KY will be close/Tossup- through out the campaign. Grayson will end up winning.
LA-(Vitter-R)-
NC-(Burr-R)- A potential upset for Democrats.
Vulnerable/Democratic Favored Seats.
CO-(Bennett-D)- Appointee with 0 electoral experience. GOP opposition is weak.
IL-(OPEN-Burris-D)- Both sides have top tier candidates- Giannoulias(D)vs Kirk(R). Dems will win in the end by a wide margin.
NV-(Reid-D)- A potential upset for Republicans.
DEM Pickup seats
MO(OPEN-Bond-R)- Carnahan-D
NH(OPEN-Gregg-R)-Hodes-D
OH(OPEN-Voinovich-R)- Fisher-D
Too Close to Call.
CT-(Dodd-D)
PA-(Specter-D)

[Senator Ben]

Hoeven will not beat Dorgan.  I'd just like to make that clear.

[You kip if you want to...]

R net +2 (42 seats)
D net -2 (58 seats)

Democrats hold both seats in New York, Schumer's with >70% and Gillibrand's with >50%.

I imagine all the big Democratic party figures will be staying put campaigning in Connecticut, Pennsylvania and certainly Nevada so they could still easily be held onto. If Illinois looks to be close this time next year, President Obama will certainly be there quite alot considering Giannoulias was part of Obama's "inner circle" in Illinois. If Deleware looks close, Biden'll be there campaigning alot of Beau aswell.

[nhmagic]

R net +2 (42 seats)
D net -2 (58 seats)

Democrats hold both seats in New York, Schumer's with >70% and Gillibrand's with >50%.

I imagine all the big Democratic party figures will be staying put campaigning in Connecticut, Pennsylvania and certainly Nevada so they could still easily be held onto. If Illinois looks to be close this time next year, President Obama will certainly be there quite alot considering Giannoulias was part of Obama's "inner circle" in Illinois. If Deleware looks close, Biden'll be there campaigning alot of Beau aswell.

I don't disagree with you having us picking up seats, but why do you think that we will not keep Florida?

[War on Want]

[Proud Lieberal from Northeast]

Some thoughts:
Deleware- Depends on whether or not Castle runs. A close election, though

Unless Castle runs, Republicans are fu**ed there

Nevada- Republicans will pull it together and nominate someone to defeat the unpopular Reid
North Dakota- Hoeven will end up running, and the results will be similar to SD in `04

Yep, but I'll believe in Dorgan narrow victory

Arkanas- Could potentially become competitive, if the Republicans find a good candidate

I can't see a candidate now

Illinois- Polls will show this close for a while, but it will come home to the Democrats in the end
New York- Pataki could beat Gillibrand, he really could. That will be a fun race to watch

Gillibrand was Patterson biggest stupidity

Pennyslvania- There will be a bitter Democratic primary, but in the end, Specter will go on to barely defeat Toomey, in another close race.

Toomey would not come close to either Specter or Sestak

Overall, Democrats really lucked out that they don't have as many seats to defend as the Republicans. If Senate elections were every 4 years instead of 2, and the `06 class was up for re-election, Republicans would probably come close to taking a majority in the Senate.

[nkpatel1279]

Republican Favored.
AL
AK
AZ
FL
GA
ID
IA
KS
OK
SC
SD
UT
Leans Republican-
LA
NC
Tossup
AR
CO
CT
DE-if Castle runs.
KY
NV
NH
OH
PA
Leans DEM
IL
MO
NY-B
Democratic Favored
CA
DE-if Castle does not run.
HI
IN
MD
NY
ND
OR
VT
WA
WI


Dems will pick up MO and hold on to IL,NY-B,and DE-assuming Castle does not run.
AR,CO,CT,KY,NV,NH,OH,and PA will depend on how things turn out nationally.
IF 2010 is a bad year for DEMS- expect DEMs to lose couple of those seats.

AR- anti Obama state- hurt Lincoln ie Anti Bush in 2006 hurting Chaffee.
CO- Tough primary challenge against Bennett-
CT- Dodd's scandal- national Republicans are going target him.
KY- Tossup GOP held seat.
NV- National Republicans are going to target Reid to embarrass DEMS.
NH- Hodes is a boring candidate- Ayotte- is doing better than expected. DEMS need to define Ayotte- portray her as a Conservative nutjob.
OH- Divisive Dem Primary may help Portman-R- Need to remind OH voters how close Portman was with Bush-43 economic policies.
PA- Divisive DEM Primary. Need to remind PA voters how conservative Toomey is.

[nhmagic]

I think its silly for the liberals on the board to assume that a conservative republican cannot win a senate race in tossup or any other territory in a bad year for democrats.

In 2006 -
Ohio got Sherrod Brown, the most raging and vile liberal in the senate
Montana got, Jon Tester, a liberal with a crew cut
New Hampshire got Jeanne Shaheen, a full blown liberal
The only somewhat moderate senator from that class was Claire McCaskill
   
In 2008 -
North Carolina got Kay Hagan, a liberal in a lean republican state
Colorado got one of the Udall brothers

Each of these states are tossup, lean republican or lean democrat in national elections - If they can elect socialists like Brown - they can elect conservatives.  The reason I bring this up is that people continue to say Toomey will not win in Pennsylvania.  If it can happen in other tossup/lean states for liberals, it can surely happen for conservatives in PA and NH (if Ayotte even is conservative - we dont know yet).

Now if you are looking at states like NY or CA - then yeah, a full blown conservative might lose in a rout, but in the swing states they can still win big. 

[OC]

I think its silly for the liberals on the board to assume that a conservative republican cannot win a senate race in tossup or any other territory in a bad year for democrats.

In 2006 -
Ohio got Sherrod Brown, the most raging and vile liberal in the senate
Montana got, Jon Tester, a liberal with a crew cut
New Hampshire got Jeanne Shaheen, a full blown liberal
The only somewhat moderate senator from that class was Claire McCaskill
   
In 2008 -
North Carolina got Kay Hagan, a liberal in a lean republican state
Colorado got one of the Udall brothers

Each of these states are tossup, lean republican or lean democrat in national elections - If they can elect socialists like Brown - they can elect conservatives.  The reason I bring this up is that people continue to say Toomey will not win in Pennsylvania.  If it can happen in other tossup/lean states for liberals, it can surely happen for conservatives in PA and NH (if Ayotte even is conservative - we dont know yet).

Now if you are looking at states like NY or CA - then yeah, a full blown conservative might lose in a rout, but in the swing states they can still win big. 

Except all of those raging liberals in the swing states tend to vote pro homeland security or has not opposed funding of the war Webb, Tester, and Hagen.

With the right security message, pro homeland security, not pro war, those raging liberals, can blunt the republican message, like Carnahan or Fisher.

[nhmagic]

I think its silly for the liberals on the board to assume that a conservative republican cannot win a senate race in tossup or any other territory in a bad year for democrats.

In 2006 -
Ohio got Sherrod Brown, the most raging and vile liberal in the senate
Montana got, Jon Tester, a liberal with a crew cut
New Hampshire got Jeanne Shaheen, a full blown liberal
The only somewhat moderate senator from that class was Claire McCaskill
   
In 2008 -
North Carolina got Kay Hagan, a liberal in a lean republican state
Colorado got one of the Udall brothers

Each of these states are tossup, lean republican or lean democrat in national elections - If they can elect socialists like Brown - they can elect conservatives.  The reason I bring this up is that people continue to say Toomey will not win in Pennsylvania.  If it can happen in other tossup/lean states for liberals, it can surely happen for conservatives in PA and NH (if Ayotte even is conservative - we dont know yet).

Now if you are looking at states like NY or CA - then yeah, a full blown conservative might lose in a rout, but in the swing states they can still win big. 

Except all of those raging liberals in the swing states tend to vote pro homeland security or has not opposed funding of the war Webb, Tester, and Hagen.

With the right security message, pro homeland security, not pro war, those raging liberals, can blunt the republican message, like Carnahan or Fisher.

Liberals only oppose funding things (spending money) when a Republican is doing the spending.  Otherwise, they are all for it because using government money means more regulation and rules attached to that money for whatever group they are giving it to - it doesn't matter if it is military or not. 

A conservative message can certainly "blunt" the message of a liberal democrat when it advocates pro-growth, non spending policies.  Additionally, a pro-homeland security message only works when the country is focused on security, which it is not right now.

[Smash255]

I think its silly for the liberals on the board to assume that a conservative republican cannot win a senate race in tossup or any other territory in a bad year for democrats.

In 2006 -
Ohio got Sherrod Brown, the most raging and vile liberal in the senate
Montana got, Jon Tester, a liberal with a crew cut
New Hampshire got Jeanne Shaheen, a full blown liberal
The only somewhat moderate senator from that class was Claire McCaskill
   
In 2008 -
North Carolina got Kay Hagan, a liberal in a lean republican state
Colorado got one of the Udall brothers

Each of these states are tossup, lean republican or lean democrat in national elections - If they can elect socialists like Brown - they can elect conservatives.  The reason I bring this up is that people continue to say Toomey will not win in Pennsylvania.  If it can happen in other tossup/lean states for liberals, it can surely happen for conservatives in PA and NH (if Ayotte even is conservative - we dont know yet).

Now if you are looking at states like NY or CA - then yeah, a full blown conservative might lose in a rout, but in the swing states they can still win big. 

1.  It will be very unlikely for 2010 to be as strong for the GOP as 06 was for the Dems.  Bush's approvals were averaging in th3 37% range with his disapprovals around 57%,  around a -20 net.  In comparison right now Obama's approvals are in the mid 50's with disapprovals in the upper 30's with around a +17 net

2  All of the states you mentioned with the exception of Montana are less Republican than PA is Democratic and in Montana's case Tester ran a very strong campaign and Burns was involved in numerous scandals.  You could make the argument that NC is about as GOP ad PA is Democratic, but its trending rather strongly to the Dems and Obama did win the state.  Also Dole is a brutal campaigner.

[Smash255]

Republican Favored.
AL
AK
AZ
FL
GA
ID
IA
KS
OK
SC
SD
UT
Leans Republican-
LA
NC
Tossup
AR
CO
CT
DE-if Castle runs.
KY
NV
NH
OH
PA
Leans DEM
IL
MO
NY-B
Democratic Favored
CA
DE-if Castle does not run.
HI
IN
MD
NY
ND
OR
VT
WA
WI


Dems will pick up MO and hold on to IL,NY-B,and DE-assuming Castle does not run.
AR,CO,CT,KY,NV,NH,OH,and PA will depend on how things turn out nationally.
IF 2010 is a bad year for DEMS- expect DEMs to lose couple of those seats.

AR- anti Obama state- hurt Lincoln ie Anti Bush in 2006 hurting Chaffee.
CO- Tough primary challenge against Bennett-
CT- Dodd's scandal- national Republicans are going target him.
KY- Tossup GOP held seat.
NV- National Republicans are going to target Reid to embarrass DEMS.
NH- Hodes is a boring candidate- Ayotte- is doing better than expected. DEMS need to define Ayotte- portray her as a Conservative nutjob.
OH- Divisive Dem Primary may help Portman-R- Need to remind OH voters how close Portman was with Bush-43 economic policies.
PA- Divisive DEM Primary. Need to remind PA voters how conservative Toomey is.

I would put CO at lean Dem.  Bennet might be unknown and he might not even be the nominee after the Primary, but the shape of the GOP in the state is abysmal, I would say that is a lean.  Similar reason why I think Gillibrand is safe, the state GOP is a complete and utter joke.

I don't see Arkansas as being a toss up either.  While I agree that Bush hurt Chafee in RI and you could see Obama hurt Lincoln as well, few major differences.  First i think it will be very unlikely that Obama's numbers in Arkansas in 2010 will be as low as Bush's were in RI in 06 (25% approve, 74% disapprove).  Also at the state level Arkansas is still a very Democratic state.  On the state level Rhode Island is perhaps even more Democratic than it is on the national level (yes I know they have a GOP Gov, one of which who would have been toast if Chafee lost the Primary, but the State House and Senate are Democratic Supermajorites. 

In PA,  I just think the numbers in the Philly metro area will be too much for Toomey to overcome no matter if its Specter or Sestak

[nhmagic]

I think its silly for the liberals on the board to assume that a conservative republican cannot win a senate race in tossup or any other territory in a bad year for democrats.

In 2006 -
Ohio got Sherrod Brown, the most raging and vile liberal in the senate
Montana got, Jon Tester, a liberal with a crew cut
New Hampshire got Jeanne Shaheen, a full blown liberal
The only somewhat moderate senator from that class was Claire McCaskill
   
In 2008 -
North Carolina got Kay Hagan, a liberal in a lean republican state
Colorado got one of the Udall brothers

Each of these states are tossup, lean republican or lean democrat in national elections - If they can elect socialists like Brown - they can elect conservatives.  The reason I bring this up is that people continue to say Toomey will not win in Pennsylvania.  If it can happen in other tossup/lean states for liberals, it can surely happen for conservatives in PA and NH (if Ayotte even is conservative - we dont know yet).

Now if you are looking at states like NY or CA - then yeah, a full blown conservative might lose in a rout, but in the swing states they can still win big. 

1.  It will be very unlikely for 2010 to be as strong for the GOP as 06 was for the Dems.  Bush's approvals were averaging in th3 37% range with his disapprovals around 57%,  around a -20 net.  In comparison right now Obama's approvals are in the mid 50's with disapprovals in the upper 30's with around a +17 net

2  All of the states you mentioned with the exception of Montana are less Republican than PA is Democratic and in Montana's case Tester ran a very strong campaign and Burns was involved in numerous scandals.  You could make the argument that NC is about as GOP ad PA is Democratic, but its trending rather strongly to the Dems and Obama did win the state.  Also Dole is a brutal campaigner.

1-Your Obama approval ratings are way off.  Obama is at majority dissaprove in some polls (Rasmussen is at 53 disapproval) and only the crazy polls are keeping that average above 50%.  His disapprovals are in the 40s.

2-But what you are saying is that raging liberal democrats (Sherrod Brown and Jeanne Shaheen) can win in tossup states.  My contention is that hard-line right wingers can too.  You cant say that one can and the other cant.  Thats the problem with the analysis.  The liberals are all saying that the republicans have to be more moderate in those states, but you cannot account for the same on your side.

[War on Want]

I think its silly for the liberals on the board to assume that a conservative republican cannot win a senate race in tossup or any other territory in a bad year for democrats.

In 2006 -
Ohio got Sherrod Brown, the most raging and vile liberal in the senate
Montana got, Jon Tester, a liberal with a crew cut
New Hampshire got Jeanne Shaheen, a full blown liberal
The only somewhat moderate senator from that class was Claire McCaskill
   
In 2008 -
North Carolina got Kay Hagan, a liberal in a lean republican state
Colorado got one of the Udall brothers

Each of these states are tossup, lean republican or lean democrat in national elections - If they can elect socialists like Brown - they can elect conservatives.  The reason I bring this up is that people continue to say Toomey will not win in Pennsylvania.  If it can happen in other tossup/lean states for liberals, it can surely happen for conservatives in PA and NH (if Ayotte even is conservative - we dont know yet).

Now if you are looking at states like NY or CA - then yeah, a full blown conservative might lose in a rout, but in the swing states they can still win big. 

1.  It will be very unlikely for 2010 to be as strong for the GOP as 06 was for the Dems.  Bush's approvals were averaging in th3 37% range with his disapprovals around 57%,  around a -20 net.  In comparison right now Obama's approvals are in the mid 50's with disapprovals in the upper 30's with around a +17 net

2  All of the states you mentioned with the exception of Montana are less Republican than PA is Democratic and in Montana's case Tester ran a very strong campaign and Burns was involved in numerous scandals.  You could make the argument that NC is about as GOP ad PA is Democratic, but its trending rather strongly to the Dems and Obama did win the state.  Also Dole is a brutal campaigner.

1-Your Obama approval ratings are way off.  Obama is at majority dissaprove in some polls (Rasmussen is at 53 disapproval) and only the crazy polls are keeping that average above 50%.  His disapprovals are in the 40s.

2-But what you are saying is that raging liberal democrats (Sherrod Brown and Jeanne Shaheen) can win in tossup states.  My contention is that hard-line right wingers can too.  You cant say that one can and the other cant.  Thats the problem with the analysis.  The liberals are all saying that the republicans have to be more moderate in those states, but you cannot account for the same on your side.

They can't in this sort of a scenario with a very strong moderate liberal in Sestak and a painfully terrible candidate in Toomey.

[nhmagic]

I think its silly for the liberals on the board to assume that a conservative republican cannot win a senate race in tossup or any other territory in a bad year for democrats.

In 2006 -
Ohio got Sherrod Brown, the most raging and vile liberal in the senate
Montana got, Jon Tester, a liberal with a crew cut
New Hampshire got Jeanne Shaheen, a full blown liberal
The only somewhat moderate senator from that class was Claire McCaskill
   
In 2008 -
North Carolina got Kay Hagan, a liberal in a lean republican state
Colorado got one of the Udall brothers

Each of these states are tossup, lean republican or lean democrat in national elections - If they can elect socialists like Brown - they can elect conservatives.  The reason I bring this up is that people continue to say Toomey will not win in Pennsylvania.  If it can happen in other tossup/lean states for liberals, it can surely happen for conservatives in PA and NH (if Ayotte even is conservative - we dont know yet).

Now if you are looking at states like NY or CA - then yeah, a full blown conservative might lose in a rout, but in the swing states they can still win big. 

1.  It will be very unlikely for 2010 to be as strong for the GOP as 06 was for the Dems.  Bush's approvals were averaging in th3 37% range with his disapprovals around 57%,  around a -20 net.  In comparison right now Obama's approvals are in the mid 50's with disapprovals in the upper 30's with around a +17 net

2  All of the states you mentioned with the exception of Montana are less Republican than PA is Democratic and in Montana's case Tester ran a very strong campaign and Burns was involved in numerous scandals.  You could make the argument that NC is about as GOP ad PA is Democratic, but its trending rather strongly to the Dems and Obama did win the state.  Also Dole is a brutal campaigner.

1-Your Obama approval ratings are way off.  Obama is at majority dissaprove in some polls (Rasmussen is at 53 disapproval) and only the crazy polls are keeping that average above 50%.  His disapprovals are in the 40s.

2-But what you are saying is that raging liberal democrats (Sherrod Brown and Jeanne Shaheen) can win in tossup states.  My contention is that hard-line right wingers can too.  You cant say that one can and the other cant.  Thats the problem with the analysis.  The liberals are all saying that the republicans have to be more moderate in those states, but you cannot account for the same on your side.

They can't in this sort of a scenario with a very strong moderate liberal in Sestak and a painfully terrible candidate in Toomey.

Toomey is not a terrible candidate.  Please explain how he continued to win in his congressional district where there were more democrats than republicans.

[Smash255]

I think its silly for the liberals on the board to assume that a conservative republican cannot win a senate race in tossup or any other territory in a bad year for democrats.

In 2006 -
Ohio got Sherrod Brown, the most raging and vile liberal in the senate
Montana got, Jon Tester, a liberal with a crew cut
New Hampshire got Jeanne Shaheen, a full blown liberal
The only somewhat moderate senator from that class was Claire McCaskill
   
In 2008 -
North Carolina got Kay Hagan, a liberal in a lean republican state
Colorado got one of the Udall brothers

Each of these states are tossup, lean republican or lean democrat in national elections - If they can elect socialists like Brown - they can elect conservatives.  The reason I bring this up is that people continue to say Toomey will not win in Pennsylvania.  If it can happen in other tossup/lean states for liberals, it can surely happen for conservatives in PA and NH (if Ayotte even is conservative - we dont know yet).

Now if you are looking at states like NY or CA - then yeah, a full blown conservative might lose in a rout, but in the swing states they can still win big. 

1.  It will be very unlikely for 2010 to be as strong for the GOP as 06 was for the Dems.  Bush's approvals were averaging in th3 37% range with his disapprovals around 57%,  around a -20 net.  In comparison right now Obama's approvals are in the mid 50's with disapprovals in the upper 30's with around a +17 net

2  All of the states you mentioned with the exception of Montana are less Republican than PA is Democratic and in Montana's case Tester ran a very strong campaign and Burns was involved in numerous scandals.  You could make the argument that NC is about as GOP ad PA is Democratic, but its trending rather strongly to the Dems and Obama did win the state.  Also Dole is a brutal campaigner.

1-Your Obama approval ratings are way off.  Obama is at majority dissaprove in some polls (Rasmussen is at 53 disapproval) and only the crazy polls are keeping that average above 50%.  His disapprovals are in the 40s.

2-But what you are saying is that raging liberal democrats (Sherrod Brown and Jeanne Shaheen) can win in tossup states.  My contention is that hard-line right wingers can too.  You cant say that one can and the other cant.  Thats the problem with the analysis.  The liberals are all saying that the republicans have to be more moderate in those states, but you cannot account for the same on your side.

1  Rasmussen is the ONLY poll to have Obama's numbers around there, everyone else has him higher,

CNN   53-45
CBS   56-35
Ipsos 56-40
Pew    52-37
Gallup 55-38
Rasmussen 49-51

Which one doesn't fit?

2.  I also don't see Obama's approvals being as low as Bush's were in 06. 

3.  Also someone like Toomey is a bit further right than Brown is to the left.  Even if you disagree with that, Ohio is not as Republican as Pennsylvania is Democratic.  Ohio is a true toss up state, Pennsylvania is a lean Democratic state.    On top of that the dynamics of the two states make it a  bit more possible in Ohio than in Pennsylvania.  First off 2006 was a BRUTAL year for the GOP in Ohio.  As bad as it was nationwide Ohio was one of the hardest states.  Even if it winds up being a bad year for Obama, what are the chances PA becomes on of the worst hit states of the year much like Ohio was in 06?  You also have the suburban Philly factor.  For a Republican to win statewide they might not exactly need to win the Philly suburbs (though no one from either party has won without them), but they need to be at least competitive there.  Toomey simply won't be able to do that period, he is just too conservative to be competitive there.  Even if it winds up being a rough year for the Dems, the margins he will lose by in the SE will just be too much to overcome

[nhmagic]

I think its silly for the liberals on the board to assume that a conservative republican cannot win a senate race in tossup or any other territory in a bad year for democrats.

In 2006 -
Ohio got Sherrod Brown, the most raging and vile liberal in the senate
Montana got, Jon Tester, a liberal with a crew cut
New Hampshire got Jeanne Shaheen, a full blown liberal
The only somewhat moderate senator from that class was Claire McCaskill
   
In 2008 -
North Carolina got Kay Hagan, a liberal in a lean republican state
Colorado got one of the Udall brothers

Each of these states are tossup, lean republican or lean democrat in national elections - If they can elect socialists like Brown - they can elect conservatives.  The reason I bring this up is that people continue to say Toomey will not win in Pennsylvania.  If it can happen in other tossup/lean states for liberals, it can surely happen for conservatives in PA and NH (if Ayotte even is conservative - we dont know yet).

Now if you are looking at states like NY or CA - then yeah, a full blown conservative might lose in a rout, but in the swing states they can still win big. 

1.  It will be very unlikely for 2010 to be as strong for the GOP as 06 was for the Dems.  Bush's approvals were averaging in th3 37% range with his disapprovals around 57%,  around a -20 net.  In comparison right now Obama's approvals are in the mid 50's with disapprovals in the upper 30's with around a +17 net

2  All of the states you mentioned with the exception of Montana are less Republican than PA is Democratic and in Montana's case Tester ran a very strong campaign and Burns was involved in numerous scandals.  You could make the argument that NC is about as GOP ad PA is Democratic, but its trending rather strongly to the Dems and Obama did win the state.  Also Dole is a brutal campaigner.

1-Your Obama approval ratings are way off.  Obama is at majority dissaprove in some polls (Rasmussen is at 53 disapproval) and only the crazy polls are keeping that average above 50%.  His disapprovals are in the 40s.

2-But what you are saying is that raging liberal democrats (Sherrod Brown and Jeanne Shaheen) can win in tossup states.  My contention is that hard-line right wingers can too.  You cant say that one can and the other cant.  Thats the problem with the analysis.  The liberals are all saying that the republicans have to be more moderate in those states, but you cannot account for the same on your side.

1  Rasmussen is the ONLY poll to have Obama's numbers around there, everyone else has him higher,

CNN   53-45
CBS   56-35
Ipsos 56-40
Pew    52-37
Gallup 55-38
Rasmussen 49-51

Which one doesn't fit?

2.  I also don't see Obama's approvals being as low as Bush's were in 06. 

3.  Also someone like Toomey is a bit further right than Brown is to the left.  Even if you disagree with that, Ohio is not as Republican as Pennsylvania is Democratic.  Ohio is a true toss up state, Pennsylvania is a lean Democratic state.    On top of that the dynamics of the two states make it a  bit more possible in Ohio than in Pennsylvania.  First off 2006 was a BRUTAL year for the GOP in Ohio.  As bad as it was nationwide Ohio was one of the hardest states.  Even if it winds up being a bad year for Obama, what are the chances PA becomes on of the worst hit states of the year much like Ohio was in 06?  You also have the suburban Philly factor.  For a Republican to win statewide they might not exactly need to win the Philly suburbs (though no one from either party has won without them), but they need to be at least competitive there.  Toomey simply won't be able to do that period, he is just too conservative to be competitive there.  Even if it winds up being a rough year for the Dems, the margins he will lose by in the SE will just be too much to overcome

And Rasmussen is the only one weighting correctly - he was also weighting correctly during the presidential election.  All of the others give democrats 11pt+ party identification advantages in their polls when at max it is at 6pts.  For example in the pew poll, of the 2003 people polled, 23% identified as republican, 34% as democrat, and 37% as independent.  And the CBS poll is a joke.  Most of the others all show his disapproval in the range of high-low forties.

Pennsylvania is also getting hard hit by Obama's policies and I guarantee that if Cap n' Trade passes, Toomey will win.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Rasmussen may be a decent election pollster, but his approval polls are complete BS. He consistently had Bush 10 points higher than every other pollster, and it looks to be the reverse for Obama.

[nkpatel1279]

Republican Favored.
AL
AK
AZ
FL
GA
ID
IA
KS
OK
SC
SD
UT
Leans Republican-
LA
NC
Tossup
AR
CO
CT
DE-if Castle runs.
KY
NV
NH
OH
PA
Leans DEM
IL
MO
NY-B
Democratic Favored
CA
DE-if Castle does not run.
HI
IN
MD
NY
ND
OR
VT
WA
WI


Dems will pick up MO and hold on to IL,NY-B,and DE-assuming Castle does not run.
AR,CO,CT,KY,NV,NH,OH,and PA will depend on how things turn out nationally.
IF 2010 is a bad year for DEMS- expect DEMs to lose couple of those seats.

AR- anti Obama state- hurt Lincoln ie Anti Bush in 2006 hurting Chaffee.
CO- Tough primary challenge against Bennett-
CT- Dodd's scandal- national Republicans are going target him.
KY- Tossup GOP held seat.
NV- National Republicans are going to target Reid to embarrass DEMS.
NH- Hodes is a boring candidate- Ayotte- is doing better than expected. DEMS need to define Ayotte- portray her as a Conservative nutjob.
OH- Divisive Dem Primary may help Portman-R- Need to remind OH voters how close Portman was with Bush-43 economic policies.
PA- Divisive DEM Primary. Need to remind PA voters how conservative Toomey is.

I would put CO at lean Dem.  Bennet might be unknown and he might not even be the nominee after the Primary, but the shape of the GOP in the state is abysmal, I would say that is a lean.  Similar reason why I think Gillibrand is safe, the state GOP is a complete and utter joke.

I don't see Arkansas as being a toss up either.  While I agree that Bush hurt Chafee in RI and you could see Obama hurt Lincoln as well, few major differences.  First i think it will be very unlikely that Obama's numbers in Arkansas in 2010 will be as low as Bush's were in RI in 06 (25% approve, 74% disapprove).  Also at the state level Arkansas is still a very Democratic state.  On the state level Rhode Island is perhaps even more Democratic than it is on the national level (yes I know they have a GOP Gov, one of which who would have been toast if Chafee lost the Primary, but the State House and Senate are Democratic Supermajorites. 

In PA,  I just think the numbers in the Philly metro area will be too much for Toomey to overcome no matter if its Specter or Sestak

Lets just say that it will be impossible for any Democratic seat to flip Republican in 2010.

Since getting elected in 1992- Boxer(CA),Murray(WA) and Fiengold(WI) have been target by the Republicans in their 1998 and 2004 re-election cycle. yet the Democratic incumbents win handily over their GOP challengers. This election cycle Republicans have third tier candidates making Boxer(CA),Murray(WA),and Feingold(WI) safe in their re-election bids.

Blanche Lincoln (AR) is the only red state Southern US Senator facing re-election in 2010. Lincoln may not be likeable as Dale Bumpers or the Pryors(David or Mark) but she is hell alot better that her potential GOP opponents- who are a bunch of nutjobs.

Other US Senators facing re-election in 2010.
Chris Dodd(CT) is facing a tough re-election campaign the first time in his 30 year US Senate Career. The DSCC,DNC,Obama,Biden,Lieberman,the Clintons, will do everything to protect Dodd. Keeping Dodd in the US Senate will be the number 1 priority.

Dan Inouye(HI) is safe. probally running unopposed.
Evan Bayh(IN) is safe.
Barbara Mikulski (MD) is safe.
Harry Reid(NV) will face a tough race this election cycle. The DSCC, DNC, Obama,Biden,Clintons, will do everything to protect Reid.
Chuck Schumer(NY) is safe. running unopposed.
Byron Dorgan (ND) is safe. very popular in ND.
Ron Wyden (OR) is safe. running unopposed.
Patrick Leahy (VT) is safe. running unopposed.

Other Democratic US Senate seats.
Mike Bennett(CO) is lucky that a top tier GOP candidate like Bill Owens, Scott McInnis, is not challenging him otherwise- he would be in a similar situation as Jean Carnahan-MO- another appointed US Senator who lost in their bid for re-election.

Beau Biden(DE) is safe unless Mike Castle runs. in that case. VP Biden will do everything to make sure his former constituents in DE elect his son Beau.

Alexi Giannoulias (IL) is favored in General Election. President Obama will do everything to help his friend his his old US Senate Seat.

Kirsten Gillibrand(NY) is a shoe in due to weak GOP opposition and Schumer(NY's) coattails.

The Democrats will hold on to PA due to strong support in the Philadelphia Burbs region.

Democrats will pick up MO,NH,and OH. The Democrats have top tier candidates and GOP candidates in MO,and OH are unpopular.

KY open is going to be a tossup.
NC will be a possible upset for us.
LA will be competitive.

[Smash255]

I think its silly for the liberals on the board to assume that a conservative republican cannot win a senate race in tossup or any other territory in a bad year for democrats.

In 2006 -
Ohio got Sherrod Brown, the most raging and vile liberal in the senate
Montana got, Jon Tester, a liberal with a crew cut
New Hampshire got Jeanne Shaheen, a full blown liberal
The only somewhat moderate senator from that class was Claire McCaskill
   
In 2008 -
North Carolina got Kay Hagan, a liberal in a lean republican state
Colorado got one of the Udall brothers

Each of these states are tossup, lean republican or lean democrat in national elections - If they can elect socialists like Brown - they can elect conservatives.  The reason I bring this up is that people continue to say Toomey will not win in Pennsylvania.  If it can happen in other tossup/lean states for liberals, it can surely happen for conservatives in PA and NH (if Ayotte even is conservative - we dont know yet).

Now if you are looking at states like NY or CA - then yeah, a full blown conservative might lose in a rout, but in the swing states they can still win big. 

1.  It will be very unlikely for 2010 to be as strong for the GOP as 06 was for the Dems.  Bush's approvals were averaging in th3 37% range with his disapprovals around 57%,  around a -20 net.  In comparison right now Obama's approvals are in the mid 50's with disapprovals in the upper 30's with around a +17 net

2  All of the states you mentioned with the exception of Montana are less Republican than PA is Democratic and in Montana's case Tester ran a very strong campaign and Burns was involved in numerous scandals.  You could make the argument that NC is about as GOP ad PA is Democratic, but its trending rather strongly to the Dems and Obama did win the state.  Also Dole is a brutal campaigner.

1-Your Obama approval ratings are way off.  Obama is at majority dissaprove in some polls (Rasmussen is at 53 disapproval) and only the crazy polls are keeping that average above 50%.  His disapprovals are in the 40s.

2-But what you are saying is that raging liberal democrats (Sherrod Brown and Jeanne Shaheen) can win in tossup states.  My contention is that hard-line right wingers can too.  You cant say that one can and the other cant.  Thats the problem with the analysis.  The liberals are all saying that the republicans have to be more moderate in those states, but you cannot account for the same on your side.

1  Rasmussen is the ONLY poll to have Obama's numbers around there, everyone else has him higher,

CNN   53-45
CBS   56-35
Ipsos 56-40
Pew    52-37
Gallup 55-38
Rasmussen 49-51

Which one doesn't fit?

2.  I also don't see Obama's approvals being as low as Bush's were in 06. 

3.  Also someone like Toomey is a bit further right than Brown is to the left.  Even if you disagree with that, Ohio is not as Republican as Pennsylvania is Democratic.  Ohio is a true toss up state, Pennsylvania is a lean Democratic state.    On top of that the dynamics of the two states make it a  bit more possible in Ohio than in Pennsylvania.  First off 2006 was a BRUTAL year for the GOP in Ohio.  As bad as it was nationwide Ohio was one of the hardest states.  Even if it winds up being a bad year for Obama, what are the chances PA becomes on of the worst hit states of the year much like Ohio was in 06?  You also have the suburban Philly factor.  For a Republican to win statewide they might not exactly need to win the Philly suburbs (though no one from either party has won without them), but they need to be at least competitive there.  Toomey simply won't be able to do that period, he is just too conservative to be competitive there.  Even if it winds up being a rough year for the Dems, the margins he will lose by in the SE will just be too much to overcome

And Rasmussen is the only one weighting correctly - he was also weighting correctly during the presidential election.  All of the others give democrats 11pt+ party identification advantages in their polls when at max it is at 6pts.  For example in the pew poll, of the 2003 people polled, 23% identified as republican, 34% as democrat, and 37% as independent.  And the CBS poll is a joke.  Most of the others all show his disapproval in the range of high-low forties.

Pennsylvania is also getting hard hit by Obama's policies and I guarantee that if Cap n' Trade passes, Toomey will win.

As Johnny stated Rasmussen is a decent election pollster (close to the election) but his approvals have always been off.

[Mr.Phips]

I think its silly for the liberals on the board to assume that a conservative republican cannot win a senate race in tossup or any other territory in a bad year for democrats.

In 2006 -
Ohio got Sherrod Brown, the most raging and vile liberal in the senate
Montana got, Jon Tester, a liberal with a crew cut
New Hampshire got Jeanne Shaheen, a full blown liberal
The only somewhat moderate senator from that class was Claire McCaskill
   
In 2008 -
North Carolina got Kay Hagan, a liberal in a lean republican state
Colorado got one of the Udall brothers

Each of these states are tossup, lean republican or lean democrat in national elections - If they can elect socialists like Brown - they can elect conservatives.  The reason I bring this up is that people continue to say Toomey will not win in Pennsylvania.  If it can happen in other tossup/lean states for liberals, it can surely happen for conservatives in PA and NH (if Ayotte even is conservative - we dont know yet).

Now if you are looking at states like NY or CA - then yeah, a full blown conservative might lose in a rout, but in the swing states they can still win big. 

1.  It will be very unlikely for 2010 to be as strong for the GOP as 06 was for the Dems.  Bush's approvals were averaging in th3 37% range with his disapprovals around 57%,  around a -20 net.  In comparison right now Obama's approvals are in the mid 50's with disapprovals in the upper 30's with around a +17 net

2  All of the states you mentioned with the exception of Montana are less Republican than PA is Democratic and in Montana's case Tester ran a very strong campaign and Burns was involved in numerous scandals.  You could make the argument that NC is about as GOP ad PA is Democratic, but its trending rather strongly to the Dems and Obama did win the state.  Also Dole is a brutal campaigner.

1-Your Obama approval ratings are way off.  Obama is at majority dissaprove in some polls (Rasmussen is at 53 disapproval) and only the crazy polls are keeping that average above 50%.  His disapprovals are in the 40s.

Rasmussen is a partisan Republican pollster.  Just look at the slanted questions he asks. 

[nkpatel1279]

2010 US Senate Prediction.
AL-Shelby-R 70-30
AK-Murkowski-R 60-40
AZ-McCain-R 55-45
AR-Lincoln-D 55-45
CA-Boxer-D 60-40
CO-Bennett-D 52-47
CT- Dodd-D 50-50 race.
DE(Special)-Biden-D 50-50 against Castle-R 60-40 against generic R.
FL- Crist-R- 55-45
GA- Isakson-R 60-40
HI- Inouye-D 70-30
ID- Crapo-R 70-30
IL- Giannoulias-D 55-45
IN- Bayh-D 65-35
IA- Grassley-R 60-40
KS- Moran-R 60-40
KY- Grayson-R 52-47
LA- Vitter-R 55-45
MD- Mikulski-D 65-35
MA-Special (Coakley-D) 60-40
MO-Carnahan-D 55-45
NV- Reid-D 52-47
NH- Hodes-D 52-47
NY- Schumer-D 70-30
NY(Special)- Gillibrand-D 60-40
NC- Burr-R 52-47
ND- Dorgan-D 65-35
OH- Fisher-D 52-47
OK- Coburn-R 60-40
OR- Wyden-D 65-35
PA- Specter-D 55-45
SC- DeMint-R 60-40
SD- Thune-R 60-40
UT- Bennett-R 70-30
VT- Leahy-D 70-30
WA- Murray-D 60-40
WI- Feingold-D 60-40

[The Arizonan]

Is John Hoeven going to run in 2010? He was supposed to make a final decision back in September of this year.

[Devilman88]