What must Republicans do to get 60+ seats in the Senate in 2012?

[redcommander]

?

[RogueBeaver]

Double-dip global recession happens. Otherwise, not happening.

Besides the eight flippables (ND/NE/OH/FL/VA/WI/MO/MT), you'd need a mixture of NM/HI/MI. Even then, you'd have the Maine ladies and Lingle who might not be amenable to certain items on the agenda.

[nkpatel1279]

Brown(R-MA) and Heller(R-NV) need to get re-elected.
Republicans need to win 13 vulnerable Democratic US Senate Seats up for grabs in 2012.
Berg(R-ND)
Bruning(R-NE)
Rehberg(R-MT)
Akin or Steelman(R-MO)
Allen(R-VA)
Thompson or Neumann (R-WI)
Mack(R-FL)
Wilson or Sanchez (R-NM)
Mandel(R-OH)
Lingle(R-HI)
Hoekstra(R-MI)
That is only 11 vulnerable Dem seats. Need to win 2 more seats.
VT,DE,RI,MD,NY,CA,WA,MN,PA,NJ,WV,and CT are in safe or likely Democratic favored column.

[tmthforu94]

First, Romney would have to be the nominee.

If things got really bad, Washington, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Connecticut could come into play. California too depending on how good our nominee is. Not saying these states will, but if it looks like we're going into a Depression and Obama get's into the 20's, they very well could.

[BigSkyBob]

Pick up a net of thirteen seats, or more.

[smoltchanov]

Nothing. They will not get it whatever they do.

[morgieb]

An electoral environment like the last 3 elections.

[Teddy (IDS Legislator)]

Normally when you say "A _ seat majority" it means _ seats over a majority. IE a "60 seat majority" would mean the GOP with 80 seats.

[Mechaman]

Two words:

Big.  Tent.

[bore]

A second great depression.

[Miles]

Double-dip global recession happens. Otherwise, not happening.

Besides the eight flippables (ND/NE/OH/FL/VA/WI/MO/MT), you'd need a mixture of NM/HI/MI. Even then, you'd have the Maine ladies and Lingle who might not be amenable to certain items on the agenda.

Basically this. Plus, Heller and Brown would have to hold on.

All the states RougeBeaver mentioned would put the GOP at 58 seats. Beyond those states, I don't see any other realistic wins for them. Maybe they could pick up CT with Shays and somehow knock of Menendez for 60.

[redcommander]

Normally when you say "A _ seat majority" it means _ seats over a majority. IE a "60 seat majority" would mean the GOP with 80 seats.

Thanks for the correction. I'll edit it.

[redcommander]

Double-dip global recession happens. Otherwise, not happening.

Besides the eight flippables (ND/NE/OH/FL/VA/WI/MO/MT), you'd need a mixture of NM/HI/MI. Even then, you'd have the Maine ladies and Lingle who might not be amenable to certain items on the agenda.

Basically this. Plus, Heller and Brown would have to hold on.

All the states RougeBeaver mentioned would put the GOP at 58 seats. Beyond those states, I don't see any other realistic wins for them. Maybe they could pick up CT with Shays and somehow knock of Menendez for 60.

You don't see Cantwell's seat or DiFi's becoming competitive too?

[RogueBeaver]

Cantwell wouldn't go down. As I said, any Republican Senator elected from those states will be more liberal than some Blue Dogs. Gordon Smith and Lincoln Chafee are prime examples.

[smoltchanov]

You don't see Cantwell's seat or DiFi's becoming competitive too?

Me - no. Even Tom Campbell couldn't come close in California. And Republicans would need a very well known and "extremely moderate" candidate in Washington to be even remotely competitive in Washington. They have neither

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

They can't as the GO Pdoes not stand to gain from anything worse than a mild double dip recession.  If the economy goes way bad way fast then it'll be because of foreign events clearly not under any Administration's ability to influence.  Indeed, a catastrophic European collapse could actually prove beneficial to the Democrats if the collapse is seen as being due to business policies that the GOP supports, not that will help the Dems much in the Senate since they picked the cupboard so clean in 2006, but it could give the Dems a chance to regain the House.

The absolute best I can see the GOP getting to in the Senate after the 2012 elections is 59, with 52 being probable, and falling to 45 being the worst possible.

[smoltchanov]

Under more or less "normal" situation my prediction will be between 49 Democrats and 51 Republicans and 51 Democrats/49 Republicans

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

Two words:

Big.  Tent.

Ron Paul

[smoltchanov]

Two words:

Big.  Tent.

Ron Paul

No)) Ron Paul appeals to very devouted, but relatively small part of electorate. Surely - "big tent".  To get 60 or more Senators Republicans must be able to compete not only in the South, Plains and Mountain West (they almost "maxed out" there), but in North-East (including New England) and Pacific West too. And for this they must run not only a far-right candidates (as they almost invariably do now), but moderate, and somewhere - even relatively liberal ones...

[Torie]

Well a Constitutional amendment making it illegal for persons of color to vote should probably do the trick.   Other than that ... well, I do remember 1980 when Dem Senators fell like bowling pins.

[Oakvale]

Two words:

Big.  Tent.

Ron Paul

You should probably just copy and paste this in place of all your other posts so that anyone reading them doesn't have to wade through the rambling sentences and awkward syntax to get exactly the same message.