2016 Senate Matchups and Coattails

[henster]

With Christie and Clinton at the top of the ticket and these following match ups who wins more seats?

FL: Marco Rubio vs. Kathy Castor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathy_Castor)
WI: Ron Johnson vs. Ron Kind
IL: Mark Kirk vs. Lisa Madigan
OH: Rob Portman vs. Tim Ryan
NC: Richard Burr vs. Janet Cowell (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Cowell)
MO: Roy Blunt vs. Jay Nixon
PA: Pat Toomey vs. Kathleen Kane (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathleen_Kane)
NH: Kelly Ayotte vs. Maggie Hassan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maggie_Hassan)
IA: Chuck Grassley vs. Tom Vilsack
NV: Harry Reid vs. Brian Sandoval
CO: Michael Bennett vs. Jane Norton?

AZ: OPEN (McCain retires)
KY: OPEN (Rand Paul retires)

[IceSpear]

Dems win FL, WI, IL, MO, PA, NH, CO (6 pickups)
GOP wins OH, NC, IA, NV, AZ, KY (1 pickup)

D+5

[henster]

Worst case scenario for Dems: Rs hold all their seats they won in 2010 and pickup NV and CO which is a net gain of 2 for Rs.

Likely scenario: Dems pickup WI, IL, PA, and come close in FL, NH, and MO.

Best case scenario: Dems sweep WI, IL, PA, FL, NH, NC, MO, IA and maybe the open seat in AZ but this happens if someone like Cruz is at the top of the ticket.

All in all this 2016 is a very good map for the Dems and they have more pickup opportunities than the Rs have in 2014.

[Mister Mets]

It depends largely on the political environment. If it's a wave election against Democrats, Mark Kirk will have a good shot of keeping his seat and Republicans would have excellent shots at pick-ups in Colorado, Nevada and Washington.

In a more neutral year, Democrats would have strong pick-up opportunities in Wisconsin, New Hampshire and Illinois. Although Reid would be in serious trouble against Sandoval.

If you have more tea party Republicans saying stupid things, open seats in Arizona could go to the Democrats.

[henster]

It depends largely on the political environment. If it's a wave election against Democrats, Mark Kirk will have a good shot of keeping his seat and Republicans would have excellent shots at pick-ups in Colorado, Nevada and Washington.

In a more neutral year, Democrats would have strong pick-up opportunities in Wisconsin, New Hampshire and Illinois. Although Reid would be in serious trouble against Sandoval.

If you have more tea party Republicans saying stupid things, open seats in Arizona could go to the Democrats.

Yea I think Sandoval could give Reid the race of his life I don't he could survive even  in a good year for Dems. That seems to be the only viable Republican pickup in 2016, I don't see any viable challengers taking out Bennett or Murray if they survived 2010 don't see them going down in 2016.

[NewYorkExpress]

Castor
Kind
Madigan'
Ryan
Burr
Nixon
Ayotte
Toomey
No way Vilsack runs for Senate... I'll say Iowa (OPEN) with a Latham vs Culver matchup instead... Culver winning.
Sandoval
Bennett

AZ; GOP (what's the Dem Bench like in three years?)
KY; depends on 2014; McConnell could try a comeback if he loses... if not I would expect Andy Barr to be the favorite.

[henster]

Castor
Kind
Madigan'
Ryan
Burr
Nixon
Ayotte
Toomey
No way Vilsack runs for Senate... I'll say Iowa (OPEN) with a Latham vs Culver matchup instead... Culver winning.
Sandoval
Bennett

AZ; GOP (what's the Dem Bench like in three years?)
KY; depends on 2014; McConnell could try a comeback if he loses... if not I would expect Andy Barr to be the favorite.

Grassley has already said he's running for reelection.

The AZ bench is pretty weak and that's why the race is probably Lean R.
The only viable I see are Richard Carmona or Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton.

[I Will Not Be Wrong]

It depends largely on the political environment. If it's a wave election against Democrats, Mark Kirk will have a good shot of keeping his seat and Republicans would have excellent shots at pick-ups in Colorado, Nevada and Washington.

In a more neutral year, Democrats would have strong pick-up opportunities in Wisconsin, New Hampshire and Illinois. Although Reid would be in serious trouble against Sandoval.

If you have more tea party Republicans saying stupid things, open seats in Arizona could go to the Democrats.

Yea I think Sandoval could give Reid the race of his life I don't he could survive even  in a good year for Dems. That seems to be the only viable Republican pickup in 2016, I don't see any viable challengers taking out Bennett or Murray if they survived 2010 don't see them going down in 2016.

Really??? Is Reid unliked now? I like him, he is moderate enough for me to vote for him.

[IceSpear]

It depends largely on the political environment. If it's a wave election against Democrats, Mark Kirk will have a good shot of keeping his seat and Republicans would have excellent shots at pick-ups in Colorado, Nevada and Washington.

In a more neutral year, Democrats would have strong pick-up opportunities in Wisconsin, New Hampshire and Illinois. Although Reid would be in serious trouble against Sandoval.

If you have more tea party Republicans saying stupid things, open seats in Arizona could go to the Democrats.

Yea I think Sandoval could give Reid the race of his life I don't he could survive even  in a good year for Dems. That seems to be the only viable Republican pickup in 2016, I don't see any viable challengers taking out Bennett or Murray if they survived 2010 don't see them going down in 2016.

Really??? Is Reid unliked now? I like him, he is moderate enough for me to vote for him.

You're probably the only Republican in the world who thinks that.

Reid has horrible approvals in NV while Sandoval is very popular. Nevada being blue in the presidential probably wouldn't be enough to save him. The hypothetical Nixon/Blunt race in Missouri is a parallel of this in the other direction.

[henster]

I feel like Reid should just retire in 2016 his race will probably be the most expensive of the year and the Dems are gonna have to devote a lot of money and resources just to try and save him. It's better to sacrifice one seat if it means we can use those resources and money on other races like MO or AZ.

[Mister Mets]

It depends largely on the political environment. If it's a wave election against Democrats, Mark Kirk will have a good shot of keeping his seat and Republicans would have excellent shots at pick-ups in Colorado, Nevada and Washington.

In a more neutral year, Democrats would have strong pick-up opportunities in Wisconsin, New Hampshire and Illinois. Although Reid would be in serious trouble against Sandoval.

If you have more tea party Republicans saying stupid things, open seats in Arizona could go to the Democrats.

Yea I think Sandoval could give Reid the race of his life I don't he could survive even  in a good year for Dems. That seems to be the only viable Republican pickup in 2016, I don't see any viable challengers taking out Bennett or Murray if they survived 2010 don't see them going down in 2016.

Really??? Is Reid unliked now? I like him, he is moderate enough for me to vote for him.

He won a close enough election against a moron.

I also get the impression of a backlash against older politicians.

I don't deny Reid's political talents, which mitigated the party's Senate losses in 2010 and helped them gain in 2012. But I'm not sure that translates to Reid's popularity in the state.

Sandoval also seems to be a gifted candidate as a popular governor.

Regarding Henster's point, I don't know if Reid retiring would be preferable for the Democrats. It turns the race into an open seat in which Republicans have nominated the most popular political figure in the state.

[henster]

It depends largely on the political environment. If it's a wave election against Democrats, Mark Kirk will have a good shot of keeping his seat and Republicans would have excellent shots at pick-ups in Colorado, Nevada and Washington.

In a more neutral year, Democrats would have strong pick-up opportunities in Wisconsin, New Hampshire and Illinois. Although Reid would be in serious trouble against Sandoval.

If you have more tea party Republicans saying stupid things, open seats in Arizona could go to the Democrats.

Yea I think Sandoval could give Reid the race of his life I don't he could survive even  in a good year for Dems. That seems to be the only viable Republican pickup in 2016, I don't see any viable challengers taking out Bennett or Murray if they survived 2010 don't see them going down in 2016.

Really??? Is Reid unliked now? I like him, he is moderate enough for me to vote for him.

He won a close enough election against a moron.

I also get the impression of a backlash against older politicians.

I don't deny Reid's political talents, which mitigated the party's Senate losses in 2010 and helped them gain in 2012. But I'm not sure that translates to Reid's popularity in the state.

Sandoval also seems to be a gifted candidate as a popular governor.

Regarding Henster's point, I don't know if Reid retiring would be preferable for the Democrats. It turns the race into an open seat in which Republicans have nominated the most popular political figure in the state.

Reid has a lot of baggage and is a polarizing figure in the state I think we would fairer chance if the race is between AG Catherine Cortez Masto and Sandoval because it'd be between two Hispanics with Masto having the advantage of being a female. I think that would be a much more easier race for us than running Reid and defending his record.

[Indy Texas]

Republican Holds: FL, OH, NC, MO, PA, IA, AZ, KY
Republican Pickups: none
Democratic Holds: NV, CO
Democratic Pickups: WI, IL, NH
Net: D+3

[Brewer]

GOP Holds: IA, OH, AZ,
GOP Pickups: NV
Dem Holds: CO
Dem Pickups: FL, WI, IL, PA, NH, MO, KY (depending on who's running. I'm basing this on a run made by Lundergan-Grimes if she loses 2014, Jack Conway, or the longshot of Steve Beshear.)

[Orser67]

In this scenario, I'd say the Dems take Wisconsin, Illinois, Missouri, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, and Colorado, while the Republicans take the rest.

I'd say absolute best case scenario for Democrats is that Dems take all of the seats listed above along with a few of Indiana, Georgia, Arkansas, South Dakota, North Dakota, Alaska, and Lousiana (obviously all of these seats are fully dependent on retirements, messy primaries, and/or great candidate recruiting). That'd be a pickup of 18 seats if the Dems swept them all (which, to be clear, I think is extremely unlikely).

Absolute best case scenario for Republicans is a sweep of all the states listed above and picking up seats in Oregon, Washington, and Connecticut. That'd be a max gain of five seats.

[Brewer]

Castor
Kind
Madigan'
Ryan
Burr
Nixon
Ayotte
Toomey
No way Vilsack runs for Senate... I'll say Iowa (OPEN) with a Latham vs Culver matchup instead... Culver winning.
Sandoval
Bennett

AZ; GOP (what's the Dem Bench like in three years?)
KY; depends on 2014; McConnell could try a comeback if he loses... if not I would expect Andy Barr to be the favorite.

Grassley has already said he's running for reelection.

The AZ bench is pretty weak and that's why the race is probably Lean R.
The only viable I see are Richard Carmona or Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton.

Krysten Sinema?

[DS0816]

Since 1972, every presidential election in which North Carolina also had a scheduled U.S. Senate election resulted in the same party having carried in the state at both the presidential and senatorial levels.

1972: Richard Nixon (R, re-elected) and Jesse Helms (R, pickup, Open)
1976: Jimmy Carter (D, pickup, who unseated Gerald Ford) and NOT APPLICABLE
1980: Ronald Reagan (R, pickup, who unseated Jimmy Carter) and John Porter East (R, pickup, who unseated Robert Burren Morgan)
1984: Ronald Reagan (R, re-elected) and Jesse Helms (R, re-elected)
1988: George Bush (R, hold of Open) and NOT APPLICABLE
1992: George Bush (R, state hold but was unseated by Bill Clinton) and Lauch Faircloth (R, pickup, who unseated Terry Sanford)
1996: Bob Dole (R) and Jesse Helms (R, re-elected)
2000: George W. Bush (R, pickup of Open, in a state hold) and NOT APPLICABLE
2004: George W. Bush (R, re-elected) and Richard Burr (R, pickup of Open)
2008: Barack Obama (D, pickup of Open) and Kay Hagan (D, pickup, who unseated Elizabeth Dole)
2012: Mitt Romney (R, pickup) and NOT APPLICABLE


Since 1976, every presidential election in which Wisconsin also had a scheduled U.S. Senate election resulted in the same party having carried in the state at both the presidential and senatorial levels.

1976: Jimmy Carter (D, pickup, who unseated Gerald Ford) and William Proxmire (D, re-elected)
1980: Ronald Reagan (R, pickup, who unseated Jimmy Carter) and Bob Kasten (R, pickup, who unseated Gaylord Nelson)
1984: Ronald Reagan (R, re-elected) and NOT APPLICABLE
1988: Michael Dukakis (D, pickup) and Herb Kohl (D, hold of seat of retiring William Proxmire)
1992: Bill Clinton (D, elected with having unseated George Bush) and Russ Feingold (D, pickup, who unseated Bob Kasten)
1996: Bill Clinton (D, re-elected) and NOT APPLICABLE
2000: Al Gore (D) and Herb Kohl (D, re-elected)
2004: John Kerry (D) and Russ Feingold (D, re-elected)
2008: Barack Obama (D, pickup, Open) and NOT APPLICABLE
2012: Barack Obama (D, re-elected) and Tammy Baldwin (D, hold of seat of retiring Herb Kohl)


Since 1992, every presidential election in which Ohio also had a scheduled U.S. Senate election resulted in the same party having carried in the state at both the presidential and senatorial levels.

1992: Bill Clinton (D, pickup, who unseated George Bush) and John Glenn (D, re-elected)
1996: Bill Clinton (D, re-elected) and NOT APPLICABLE
2000: George W. Bush (R, pickup, Open) and Mike DeWine (R, re-elected)
2004: George W. Bush (R, re-elected) and George Voinovich (R, re-elected)
2008: Barack Obama (D, pickup, Open) and NOT APPLICABLE
2012: Barack Obama (D-re-elected) and Sherrod Brown (D, re-elected)




I will be keeping this in mind for Election 2016.

[DS0816]

I will also add the following: In 2004, 2008, and 2012, for the states in those presidential elections which also had scheduled U.S. Senate races … around 80 percent of them carried at both the presidential and senatorial levels for the same party.

[Indy Texas]

Since 1972, every presidential election in which North Carolina also had a scheduled U.S. Senate election resulted in the same party having carried in the state at both the presidential and senatorial levels.

1972: Richard Nixon (R, re-elected) and Jesse Helms (R, pickup, Open)
1976: Jimmy Carter (D, pickup, who unseated Gerald Ford) and NOT APPLICABLE
1980: Ronald Reagan (R, pickup, who unseated Jimmy Carter) and John Porter East (R, pickup, who unseated Robert Burren Morgan)
1984: Ronald Reagan (R, re-elected) and Jesse Helms (R, re-elected)
1988: George Bush (R, hold of Open) and NOT APPLICABLE
1992: George Bush (R, state hold but was unseated by Bill Clinton) and Lauch Faircloth (R, pickup, who unseated Terry Sanford)
1996: Bob Dole (R) and Jesse Helms (R, re-elected)
2000: George W. Bush (R, pickup of Open, in a state hold) and NOT APPLICABLE
2004: George W. Bush (R, re-elected) and Richard Burr (R, pickup of Open)
2008: Barack Obama (D, pickup of Open) and Kay Hagan (D, pickup, who unseated Elizabeth Dole)
2012: Mitt Romney (R, pickup) and NOT APPLICABLE

North Carolina went through a phase from the 1970s to 2010 where no one held their Class 3 Senate seat for more than one term. Robert Burren Morgan got defeated for reelection in 1980. John Porter East committed suicide in the middle of his term and was replaced with James Broyhill, who lost his election attempt in 1986. Terry Sanford then got defeated for reelection in 1992 by Lauch Faircloth, who himself got defeated for reelection in 1998 by John Edwards. Edwards couldn't seek reelection due to running for VP but the seat flipped parties and went to Richard Burr, who managed to break this curse by getting reelected in 2010.

Were these people victims of coattails or of the partisan climates in their reelection attempts? Were they all just really mediocre senators?

[DS0816]

Since 1972, every presidential election in which North Carolina also had a scheduled U.S. Senate election resulted in the same party having carried in the state at both the presidential and senatorial levels.…

North Carolina went through a phase from the 1970s to 2010 where no one held their Class 3 Senate seat for more than one term. Robert Burren Morgan got defeated for reelection in 1980. John Porter East committed suicide in the middle of his term and was replaced with James Broyhill, who lost his election attempt in 1986. Terry Sanford then got defeated for reelection in 1992 by Lauch Faircloth, who himself got defeated for reelection in 1998 by John Edwards. Edwards couldn't seek reelection due to running for VP but the seat flipped parties and went to Richard Burr, who managed to break this curse by getting reelected in 2010.

Were these people victims of coattails or of the partisan climates in their reelection attempts? Were they all just really mediocre senators?

Ah, yes, but therein lies a differences of the midterm elections and presidential elections. The Democrats won those mentioned U.S. Senate elections in congressional midterm years (1974, 1986, 1998). Prior to Kay Hagan having unseated Elizabeth Dole in a Democratic pickup, while Barack Obama won over the state in a Democratic pickup, with Election 2008, you have to go back to 1960 for the last time the Democrats carried North Carolina at both levels (obviously in a presidential election cycle).

This is why, given this thread is about 2016, I address this. It's speaking in large part to presidential elections with scheduled U.S. senate election [in select states] … and how many of them end up nowadays producing outcomes where the same party carries [a given state] at both levels. (I did mention Wisconsin and reigning bellwether Ohio with the pattern.)

Addressing North Carolina in the Senate Class No. 3 is fine. But the results are still there. They back the history I stated going back to 1972.

The senate is up every six years; not every four or every eight. So every state, with Senate Class Nos. 1, 2, and 3 have to go through both presidential and congressional midterm election cycles.

Your question, "Were these people victims of coattails or of the partisan climates in their reelection attempts?" can be answered as follows: While you may want to go over all them by case-by-case, it doesn't negate that many voters carry for the same party at both levels. They essentially rubber-stamp their preferred party with both the presidency and the senate. It has become more and more apparent the last three presidential election cycles (2004, 2008, 2012), because with each there was around 25 to 27 senate outcomes (near or reaching 80 percent) which resulted in carriage for the same party. So, that is deliberate. That's how much of the electorate is choosing to handle their votes.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

My picks are dem leader Reid loses and Dems pickup Oh, PA, Wi and IL and Schumer with a new Clinton prez is Dem Leader in senate. We should do well.

[ElectionsGuy]

Some of you guys are waaaay too optimistic. You think incumbent republicans in battleground states will just go down in a flash? When democrats in actual red states in 2014 will pull it off? Really? Anyway, here's mine.

Republican Holds: FL, OH, NC, MO, PA, IA, KY, AZ
Republican Pickups: NV
Democratic Holds: CO
Democratic Pickups: WI, IL, NH

Net D+2.

[Mister Mets]

Since 1972, every presidential election in which North Carolina also had a scheduled U.S. Senate election resulted in the same party having carried in the state at both the presidential and senatorial levels.

1972: Richard Nixon (R, re-elected) and Jesse Helms (R, pickup, Open)
1976: Jimmy Carter (D, pickup, who unseated Gerald Ford) and NOT APPLICABLE
1980: Ronald Reagan (R, pickup, who unseated Jimmy Carter) and John Porter East (R, pickup, who unseated Robert Burren Morgan)
1984: Ronald Reagan (R, re-elected) and Jesse Helms (R, re-elected)
1988: George Bush (R, hold of Open) and NOT APPLICABLE
1992: George Bush (R, state hold but was unseated by Bill Clinton) and Lauch Faircloth (R, pickup, who unseated Terry Sanford)
1996: Bob Dole (R) and Jesse Helms (R, re-elected)
2000: George W. Bush (R, pickup of Open, in a state hold) and NOT APPLICABLE
2004: George W. Bush (R, re-elected) and Richard Burr (R, pickup of Open)
2008: Barack Obama (D, pickup of Open) and Kay Hagan (D, pickup, who unseated Elizabeth Dole)
2012: Mitt Romney (R, pickup) and NOT APPLICABLE


Since 1976, every presidential election in which Wisconsin also had a scheduled U.S. Senate election resulted in the same party having carried in the state at both the presidential and senatorial levels.

1976: Jimmy Carter (D, pickup, who unseated Gerald Ford) and William Proxmire (D, re-elected)
1980: Ronald Reagan (R, pickup, who unseated Jimmy Carter) and Bob Kasten (R, pickup, who unseated Gaylord Nelson)
1984: Ronald Reagan (R, re-elected) and NOT APPLICABLE
1988: Michael Dukakis (D, pickup) and Herb Kohl (D, hold of seat of retiring William Proxmire)
1992: Bill Clinton (D, elected with having unseated George Bush) and Russ Feingold (D, pickup, who unseated Bob Kasten)
1996: Bill Clinton (D, re-elected) and NOT APPLICABLE
2000: Al Gore (D) and Herb Kohl (D, re-elected)
2004: John Kerry (D) and Russ Feingold (D, re-elected)
2008: Barack Obama (D, pickup, Open) and NOT APPLICABLE
2012: Barack Obama (D, re-elected) and Tammy Baldwin (D, hold of seat of retiring Herb Kohl)


Since 1992, every presidential election in which Ohio also had a scheduled U.S. Senate election resulted in the same party having carried in the state at both the presidential and senatorial levels.

1992: Bill Clinton (D, pickup, who unseated George Bush) and John Glenn (D, re-elected)
1996: Bill Clinton (D, re-elected) and NOT APPLICABLE
2000: George W. Bush (R, pickup, Open) and Mike DeWine (R, re-elected)
2004: George W. Bush (R, re-elected) and George Voinovich (R, re-elected)
2008: Barack Obama (D, pickup, Open) and NOT APPLICABLE
2012: Barack Obama (D-re-elected) and Sherrod Brown (D, re-elected)




I will be keeping this in mind for Election 2016.

Interesting. While I do get obsessed with trends, there may be a case of selection bias here, although it is obvious that it's better for candidates from a party if the presidential election goes their way.

The sample sizes are kinda small. There are four applicable elections in Ohio. North Carolina had one election with a Democratic victory, while Wisconsin had one election with a Republican victory.

Presumably you picked the swing states that delivered certain results, which can also result in skewed results if you pick the handful of states that best fit a particular pattern. Things were a bit different in Pennsylvania, with Arlen Specter winning reelection in 1992 and 2004, John Heinz winning reelection in 1976 and Rick Santorum winning reelection in 2000, four years Democrats won the state in the presidential cycle.

Democrats in Michigan won elections in 1976, 1984 and 1988 despite Republicans carrying the state in presidential elections.

To be fair, Florida matched the president and senator in 1976, 1980, 1988, 1992, 2004 and 2012. A Democrat won narrowly in 2000.

[pbrower2a]

AZ and IA have very old Republican Senators whose health could easily fail. NV has a very old Democratic Senator. Time is running out on those three. Just think of Levin in Michigan. If he were to die during his term the Republicans might put in someone like Pete Hoekstra. Remember him? He had the ad with the fake scene with a "Chinese" girl riding a bicycle in a rice paddy and using an unreal form of broken English saying that the incumbent Democratic Senator from Michigan "Debbie Spend-It-Now" was making her country rich.  

You tell me -- can the Democrats establish a political machine in the sixth-largest city in America in three years? If so, then Arizona flips. Is Phoenix that different from the giant cities of Texas? Texas Republicans can neutralize Austin, Dallas, El Paso, Houston, and San Antonio politically -- but Arizona Republicans can't neutralize Phoenix if Phoenix 'goes blue'. Arizona doesn't have much of a rural population.

Iowa looks very iffy for the Democrats for the Presidency, so it is shaky even for a Democrat in an open-seat race that a Republican now holds. Grassley is old enough to be a question mark for health alone.

Some of the others --

2016 is going to show how weak some of the 2010 Senate winners were. Some could win only with depressed turnout, and with a hotly-contested Presidential election, a low turnout will not happen. 2010 pickups by the Republicans except in Arkansas, Indiana, and North Dakota look shaky. Any Democratic hold in 2010 looks stronger than it was in 2014 unless there is some question of health. Republican holds in Florida, Missouri, and North Carolina of 2010 look shaky in their own right.

  

[Flake]

FL: Marco Rubio vs. Buddy Dyer
WI: Ron Johnson vs. Ron Kind
IL: Mark Kirk vs. Lisa Madigan
OH: Rob Portman vs. Tim Ryan
NC: Richard Burr vs. Janet Cowell
MO: Roy Blunt vs. Jay Nixon
PA: Pat Toomey vs. Kathleen Kane
NH: Kelly Ayotte vs. Maggie Hassan
IA: Chuck Grassley vs. Tom Vilsack
NV: Harry Reid vs. Brian Sandoval
CO: Michael Bennett vs. Mike Coffman
AZ: Matt Salmon vs. Gabrielle Giffords
KY: Hal Rogers vs. Steve Beshear


D+6