He'd be in worse shape than Scott Brown was. MA is a relatively elastic state according to 538, whereas Alabama is the second-least elastic state (and very inelastic in an absolute sense).
There just aren't very many swing voters or plausible ticket-splitters left in Alabama. Even if he voted like the most conservative Blue Dog ever (and it doesn't seem like he will, being pro-choice for one) and benefited from an incredibly Democratic national environment, it still probably wouldn't be enough. He'd need another opponent as radioactive as Moore to have a shot.
Ridiculous. (I suppose if you think Dems are assured of winning 2020 by double digits, this might be true, but that's a dumb prediction in and of itself).
A couple of things:
1. If AL is so inelastic that Jones would basically have zero chance of winning reelection, why is he leading in so many polls right now? Sure, it's mostly because of those bombshells (though I love how most of you are ignoring or dismissing the poll which showed that Jones would have beaten Strange easily as well), but if what you just said is true and AL voters are so partisan and the state so inelastic, then they would simply refuse to believe the allegations and/or wouldn't care about them. But apparently private polling is showing that the race is not as “competitive” as most people here think (with Jones leading Moore).
2. One election in MA does not prove that the state is very elastic
in federal races. I'm really not sure how Coakley managed to lose that race, but let's not forget that it was a special election with high Republican turnout and Brown was always destined to lose reelection in 2012. MA in 2010 was an outlier, and no Republican has been able to replicate Scott Brown's success in a federal race in a blue state since then. In fact, GOP candidates have fared poorly in Senate races in most blue and Democratic-leaning states since 2012, and even in swing states Republican Senators haven't really been able to outperform the presidential ticket by a lot (think of Toomey vs. McGinty). Obviously there are a few exceptions like Grassley and Portman, but the trend (which spells trouble for Heller and Gardner) is pretty clear IMO.
3. Cory Gardner is quite conservative and to the right of his state, so there's virtually no reason to believe that he will outperform Trump (by a lot) in 2020. He barely won in a big GOP year against a Democrat who ran a terrible campaign, it's quite unlikely that he will have the same luxury in 2020 again (the state has trended way to the left since then, Democrats will nominate someone more competent, 2020 will almost certainly not be as friendly to Republicans as 2014, etc.).
4. The CO Democratic Party is extremely well-organized and obviously more competent than the AL Republican Party. I'm not sure if you have noticed it, but Republicans are on track to lose a federal race in a state that went Republican by 28 percentage points in 2016. That alone is embarrassing enough and should tell you all you need to know about the Republicans' incompetence.
5. It's no secret that CO is a significantly more educated state than AL, so it won't be as easy for Republicans to sway Democratic-leaning Independents to reelect Gardner to the Senate as it will be for Democrats to do the same in AL. This probably sounds “elitist”, but many voters in red states care more about the “personality” of their Senator than his voting record (including my own state, btw). Jones doesn't really need a conservative voting record in order to be reelected, it matters more how voters perceive him and whether the Democrats can win the defining game or not. And btw, CO is not as elastic as you claim, Bennet barely outperformed Clinton even though he was supposed to beat Darryl Glenn in a landslide.
6. 538 isn't the gospel truth, they've been wrong several times before.
Poll
