Talk Elections

Link coming.

Daines (R)- 51%
Walsh (D)- 37%

Seems consistent with other polls, but obviously I want to see another source.

The election is gonna come down to where the Keystone pipeline matters, oil rich states. Our 50th seat is gonna be in addition to CO and NC, either AK or ARK, where runoffs in LA and Ga aren't paramount.

sh**t

If Rassy got you down 14 pts then he probably won't win. Boehlinger should drop out and let Walsh have a clear path in primary. Only way to save seat.

Bohlingers more electable though.

New Poll: Montana Senator by Rasmussen on 2014-03-18 (https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/SENATE/2014/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=30220140318016)

Summary: D: 37%, R: 51%, U: 9%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2014/montana/election_2014_montana_senate)

Most polls showed Walsh doing better than Bohlinger, even before Walsh's appointment.

That's genuinely wrong. The only two polls I've seen are PPP (Walsh trails 35-52, Bohlinger trails by a similar but smaller 36-51) and Harper (Walsh trails 29-43, Bohlinger by a smaller 32-43).

Either way, both candidates are not doing great, and it seems like a Blanche Lincoln v. Bill Halter. But either way, a continuing primary probably won't hurt too badly, so the whiners can stop.

That's barely a difference at all though and the only reason Bohlinger has that type of advantage is because of name ID and his crossover support. Walsh is a lot stronger among Democrats and PPP had him leading Bohlinger 39-31 which was before anyone knew that Baucus would be appointed Ambassador to China and Walsh appointed to the Senate seat. Assuming Walsh wins the primary from benefiting as the incumbent and having the backing of National Democratic support, the only thing this Bohlinger run will do is increase Daines' chances of winning the seat for the Republicans.

Because Hillary v. Obama caused President McCain, right? Come on that is a weak arguement that you guys keep throwing around. You guys argue that Walsh is such a stronger candidate, but Bohlinger is about as strong if not stronger than him in a general, and do you think Montana Democrats win because of a backing from the National organization? I doubt it. They win because they distance themselves from National Democrats (think: Brian Schweitzer)

It never goes well for Democrats in states like these though to avoid the President and the national party. Look at Pryor, Lincoln, Begich, and other vulnerable Senate Dems who could lose because they think their best strategy is to avoid outside support and run on these moderate voting records to keep themselves in office. Welp, Lincoln's out for being too independent of the Dems, Pryor is going down the same route and is angering liberals to, Landrieu is losing support for her support for the XL pipeline, Begich is refusing DSCC money and voted against background checks, and Bohlinger won't do any better as a former Republican in a state where Democrats tend to do surprisingly well in Senate elections.

Let's keep in mind to, the last Senate election Democrats lost was in 2000 when Brian Schweitzer himself lost. I guess he just didn't have faith in himself that he could win and he's relying on his right-hand man this time only to fail, as well. We got Tester to hold on twice in very tight elections and we could do the same with Walsh if Bohlinger wasn't in this. I mean, if Tester had faced a primary challenger in 2012 from say, Schweitzer, Tester could have survived the primary possibly by the skin of his teeth, but Rehberg right there would have increased his chances of winning.

Really? It never goes well? Landrieu has survived for so long because she has stayed away from the national party line. How can you even argue this point? Max Baucus, Senator for a long time, was an independent voice, who lost sway when he became the national voice for centrism and obnoxiousness. Pryor is losing now because of pure political incompetence.

Democrats have the hallmark example of when primaries do very little damage, and yet they are so eager to avoid any sort of primary challenge against their established candidate. It makes so little sense to me.

It's about time we stop calling this a damn toss-up.

This race has never been a toss up.

But seriously guys, remember the problem of "name recognition".

Lean Republican, if only because we don't have a firm grasp on Walsh's name ID. Basically he's generic D at this point. I expect the polling to tighten as Walsh defines himself. Daines obviously favored but the Dems putting up a fight in the house race is probably beneficial to Walsh.

I thought it was pretty much agreed upon this was a lean R race once Schweitzer declined/Daines jumped in, though it's starting to look more like likely R at this point.

Well the only reason I said that is because we have (or had) plenty of democrats saying Walsh would win. And in the predictions section, the average confidence rating is a toss-up.

It's lean R for now, but it still has toss-up potential.

Likely R. Daines would have to screw up big time to give Dems a real chance here

Not at all. Walsh needs to increase his name ID. When he does, this race will tighten.

No.

A constructive answer, knowledgeable Jerryarkansas.

Jerry has a point: this is the same margin, almost exact same number, that PPP found 6 months ago.

Safe R

The Sun would need to go supernova before Walsh or Bohlinger could win this seat (Same with Weilnand/Pressler and South Dakota, Pryor and Arkansas)

I only did that because I really don't like him.  Walsh is going to lose.  Give the race up now, and move on to a race which you still can win, like LA, AK, or NC.  Cut the four unwinnable now and focus on the ones which still are in your corner.

Sorry for the second post.  The second one that I have quoted wouldn't show up at all.

I honestly believe Daines is favored. But it will be closer with recognition, something like a 6-8 margin in the end. That's why I believe this race is still "lean rep", instead "likely rep".

I think the margin won't be that close, maybe closer to 8 to 10 points by election day.

Yeah no.