MO-SEN 2018: The Megathread

[jamestroll]

With the exception of one poll, she outperformed in 2012.. Akin was leading in random polls as late as mid-October.

I would not count McCaskill out yet. She won 55% of the despite, despite a decent libertarian candidate on the ballot also.

I know its controversial on Atlas, but we should not bother predicting elections past the upcoming cycle.

[jamestroll]

With the exception of one poll, she outperformed in 2012.. Akin was leading in random polls as late as mid-October.

I would not count McCaskill out yet. She won 55% of the despite, despite a decent libertarian candidate on the ballot also.

I know its controversial on Atlas, but we should not bother predicting elections past the upcoming cycle.

Agreed. We also have no jdea what the 2018 climate is like. Midterms don't go against the President's party 100% of the time.

Yes exactly. For all we know Republicans in Congress could over reach and turn off voters, or there is a  disaster and Hillary Clinton was at least perceived as a strong leader during the crisis.. either of which could lead to a modestly Democratic midterm.

See 1998 and 2002 midterms..

During the Bush years, I remember people saying, "This Democrat can not win [insert red state here] because it is a presidential  year! Now people are saying "Democrats can not win anything outside of inner cities in midterm elections".

Circumstances and climate changes. I feel like Atlas predicts all future elections based on the most recent general election result.

[jamestroll]

Of course she can win if Clinton is president - just like Ron Johnson "can" win reelection this year.

People predicted that after Roy Blunt won by a enormous margin in 2010, that McCaskill was Dead on Arrival in 2012 due to Obama being president. That did not happen.

I do believe Claire would have won even without the Akin gaffe.

[jamestroll]

She is a tough campaigner, but I would think Kander would be stronger.

Koster I would like the best ideologically. But he was too weak of a campaigner last year. I am furious he did not run a smear campaign, that is how MO dems win!!!

I do think the two statewide races in MO in 2018 will split. But if Democrats can't win either in a Trump Midterm, you may as well give up and possibly prepare for a big battle to keep MO-05 in the future.

[jamestroll]

She is a tough campaigner, but I would think Kander would be stronger.

Koster I would like the best ideologically. But he was too weak of a campaigner last year. I am furious he did not run a smear campaign, that is how MO dems win!!!

I do think the two statewide races in MO in 2018 will split. But if Democrats can't win either in a Trump Midterm, you may as well give up and possibly prepare for a big battle to keep MO-05 in the future.

Democrats would easily hold MO-05 if Russ or Robin Carnahan was the Representative. Unfortunately, someone much farther to their left is the Representative.

Nope. If Democrats can not win either statewide office in 2018, MO-05 probably goes down in the next several elections. And I want no more Carnahan's in office. They are WEAK.

The GOP did a clever gerrymandering around MO-05.. Basically split Jackson County and other D friendly counties to make sure no DEM could pull an upset in MO-04  in a DEM wave.

[jamestroll]

With the exception of Jay Nixon 2008 and 2012, what Missouri race has gone by conventional wisdom lately? Lol

So too early to count Claire out. I will predict that McCaskill will win if she receives more voters then the gop candidate. Fortunately, there is no "electoral college" on the state level.

[jamestroll]

Of course she can win if Clinton is president - just like Ron Johnson "can" win reelection this year.

Congratulations, Senator McCaskill!

How can you predict that right now? It is almost 24 months before the election occurs?

Also McCaskill is not far left despite what Republicans think. However, facts and statistics do not sway the far right. Look at her voting record.

[jamestroll]

I would like to note that even if McCaskill is liberal, I do respect that she will often vote the wishes of her state. The only vote I strongly disagreed with her on is on ObamaCare. All else, I think she is perfect.

Missouri is really a upper single digit GOP state. I think 2012 Romney v Obama was the accurate partisan make up.

2008 was just a perfect storm that almost allowed Obama to carry the state:

1) Obama already had positive name recognition in much of the state.

2) The dixiecrat/yellow dog force was still large enough, and combined with the anti-Republican national climate, it almost carried the state.

I think 2016 was just a perfect storm in which the Democratic Presidential candidate basically called the entire state deplorables, and Trump was 100% tailor made for the state.

So the Republicans who are claiming McCaskill won't even reach 30 or 40% of the vote should wait until at least next summer before making any judgement.

[jamestroll]

2018 is obviously not going to be a "Democratic wave year". The issue in 2010 or 2014 was not that people massively turned out against an unpopular Democratic administration, the issue was that Democrats simply didn't turn out at all and Republicans did. That's not likely to change in 2018. McCaskill is still in deep trouble, and so are Tester, Heitkamp, Donnelly, etc...

Look, I want to tell you something.

All these "rules" about elections that Atlas has are often based solely on the last general election. This election we already broke a rule. The rule being that Democrats have a lock on the presidency.

They do not. Trump won. And yet, Democrats are not "dead", they still won the popular vote. Even if I admit that is meaningless under the constitution.

Democratic turnout was lower in this election compared to 2012 and 2008. There is no hard rule or evidence in November 2016 that Democratic turnout will be low in November 2018.

For 2010, I do think it was a combination of low turn out and voters voting against the Obama Administration. For 2014, I think low turn out caused the doom.

Sure, a midterm can be in favor of a person's party. Like in 2002, George W Bush had a good midterm. That was probably the only midterm he has ever done well on. It took a terrorist attack, and a president with huge popularity at that time for the incumbent White House party to make a massive gain of eight house seats and net gain one senate seat in 2002.

Oh lets not forget that 2006 was a Democratic wave midterm..

It is too premature to call 2018 a wave of any kind. I would guess, at the early stage, that Democrats will gain seats in the house. My question is how many? It could be six, it could be 60.

So, David, please explain to me why you believe 2018 will be a carbon copy of 2014 and 2010.

[jamestroll]

Midterms usually go against the incumbent party; this has been true for a long time with the only recent exceptions being 1998 and 2002.

Yup, it took a terrorist attack and a President with huge popularity for the incumbent white house party to have their landslide in 2002. I mean, wow, gaining eight seats!! w00t! That was a huge landslide.

[jamestroll]

Midterms usually go against the incumbent party; this has been true for a long time with the only recent exceptions being 1998 and 2002.

Yup, it took a terrorist attack and a President with huge popularity for the incumbent white house party to have their landslide in 2002. I mean, wow, gaining eight seats!! w00t! That was a huge landslide.

1998 was a democratic year under a democratic president without a terrorist attack. 1990 was a neutral year.

1998 was more of as backlash to the Monica Lewinsky fiasco. The Republicans held the country hostage over it.

I am not a fan of Bill Clinton.

[jamestroll]

Every state that voted for Trump elected a Republican Senator this year. Something to keep in mind when you're predicting a Democratic wave in 2018.

2016 was a neutral year.

Lol, 2016 was far worse for Democrats than 2014.

With all due respect, are you really predicting the GOP will also pick up PA, MI, WI and FL easily just because they voted for Trump this year?

And no 2016 was a neutral year, better for Democrats compared to 2014. Hillary did win the popular vote, and Democrats make weak gains in House and Senate.

Nobody pointed out that Democrats won five Senate seats that Romney also won in 2012, and claimed 2014 would be a solid DEM year.

And no, I am not predicting the Senate flips in 2018 as I believe in math.

[jamestroll]

We only lost the Presidency due to the electoral college. Which I admit, popular vote is meaningless under the constitution and I strongly oppose any efforts for electors to change their votes now.

Democrats lost this election by relying solely on demographics. Hopefully this teaches them that they can not do that. They lost their chance at the Senate due to relying solely on demographics and thinking the Midwest was in the bag for them. There has to be some consequence to that.

I would think by next summer, we will have a better idea. We knew by summer 2015 that Blunt was not exactly a lock for instance, but it is going to take until October 2018 to make any fully confident predictions. Like I said, I strongly believe in math. So I do not think Democrats will retake the Senate in 2018.

[jamestroll]

There will certainly be competition and there will be an argument against her that people like Graves and Hartzler stuck with Trump when Wagner did not. Some are encouraging Peter Kinder to come in also in 2018.

No clue who will win the primary. Wagner, on paper, would be tough to beat. But very few Missouri races have gone by early conventional wisdom. So who knows.

[jamestroll]

I have said that I think Democrats will suffer a net loss in the Senate due to sheer math and the map, but I doubt it will  be a blood bath.

[jamestroll]

Back to normal posts,

I will not count McCaskill out yet just because it is so early, but we will know by next summer if the race is worth the Democrats contesting or not, IMO.

She is a strong savvy campaigner, and could face a favorable national environment, and seems willing to work with Trump on many issues.

Wagner would be tough to beat in theory, but Koster was supposed to be tough in theory to beat also.

[jamestroll]

McCaskill could well lose but likely won't be blanched.

I am encouraging Austin Peterson to run as a libertarian to split the anti McCaskill vote.

I do think MO Dems will win future statewide contests. 2008 showed the state as too Democratic but I think 2016 was a bit inflated Republicabn.

[jamestroll]

I would be forced to vote for McCaskill in such a matchup. Good God.

Thank you for your support!

[jamestroll]

He could run if McCaskill's polling looks dreadful during this summer. But I am disappointed he is not running. Yes, I would vote for him in a primary.

Of the GOP candidates I would think Wagner has an early advantage over McCaskill. The rest would either be even shots or slight underdogs.

I do not think McCaskill is going to be blanched at this point.

Of course it is extraordinarily difficult to gauge how the elections will turn out in March 2017. Gut feelings, past election results, astrology, tarot cards, wishful thinking are all unreliable.

I will be voting for the Democratic nominee barring very unforeseen circumstances.

[jamestroll]

Kander, quashing speculation, sends fundraising appeal for McCaskill

Doesn't look like he's running, but who knows. Anyway, here's also an interesting list and discussion of potential Republican candidates.

Link.

He was never going to run against her in a primary in the first place--that was always a pipe dream among some R's jizzing themselves about a nasty D primary. Though I'm still not ruling out her retiring in the summer or fall and Kander taking her place. Him as the nominee is one of the few places where D's would hold a better chance of retaining a seat than if the incumbent ran again.

McCaskill probably won't get blanched but I can not see Kander getting blanched at all.

Still I think he would be hesitant because two back to back loses could damage his political career forever. But if McCaskill decides to retire Kander is obviously the natural choice.

I may be a bit biased towards McCaskill as I have a similar (annoying-ish) personality to her.

[jamestroll]

The above posters endorsement makes all the difference in the world.

To those of you who are under estimating McCaskill, remember Wulfric has endorsed McCaskill.

[jamestroll]

Air Claire is DOA. It would take a worse candidate then Akin to save her

Lmao.

[jamestroll]

Why is this thread so long?

Because it is fun to argue.

[jamestroll]

Wagner would be favored against McCaskill for sure but politics can often work counter intuitively. Remember that Robin Carnahan was considered a top tier recruit early on, few saw Roy Blunt having a tight race early on, and Chris Koster was favored early on. So we will have to see where the race goes.

I am hoping that state Democrats make same effort in the open MO-02 (assuming Wagner actually runs). It is a GOP leaning district but its not overwhelmingly Republican and Kander and Blunt were virtually tied there despite Kander losing statewide.

[jamestroll]

McCaskill is favored against most of the Republican nominees save Wagner. But not DOA against Wagner

Important to note that with Trump governing as more of a conservative than a populist that Missouri will likely be less GOP in 2018 and 2020 though still will lean GOP overall.

Hawley is a douchebag. My least favorite of the MO GOP.