Any Strong opinions on who will win FL & Missouri Senate races?

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Both races are Likely D

[MT Treasurer]

McCaskill will lose unless Hawley loses the primary or has an Akin moment. Missouri has gone from a state that voted 5 points to the left of the nation in 1992, to voting 22 points to the right of the nation in 2016. In that time frame, it trended republican in every presidential election. In 2016, democrats were soundly defeated in all statewide races as the state decided that the time for downballot Dems had passed. It is clear that in 2018, all that is needed is a competent opponent to take down McCaskill and the state Auditor. The political climate holds no relevance as the state trended republican even in '08.

What? Anyway, Kander came within 3 points of unseating Blunt in 2016, so MO is hardly "gone" for Ds in statewide/Senate races. It's just that McCaskill is a poor cultural fit for her state, if the Dems replaced her with a stronger candidate the race would probably be a Tossup (I mean, even with McCaskill running it is way too close for comfort!). Also, using your logic WV would be Safe R as well, but it obviously isn't.   

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

McCaskill will lose unless Hawley loses the primary or has an Akin moment. Missouri has gone from a state that voted 5 points to the left of the nation in 1992, to voting 22 points to the right of the nation in 2016. In that time frame, it trended republican in every presidential election. In 2016, democrats were soundly defeated in all statewide races as the state decided that the time for downballot Dems had passed. It is clear that in 2018, all that is needed is a competent opponent to take down McCaskill and the state Auditor. The political climate holds no relevance as the state trended republican even in '08.

What? Anyway, Kander came within 3 points of unseating Blunt in 2016, so MO is hardly "gone" for Ds in statewide/Senate races. It's just that McCaskill is a poor cultural fit for her state, if the Dems replaced her with a stronger candidate the race would probably be a Tossup (I mean, even with McCaskill running it is way too close for comfort!). Also, using your logic WV would be Safe R as well, but it obviously isn't.   

Missouri voted four points to the nation's right in 2004 and seven points to the nation's right in 2008. That's how Dave defines trending R, so it's the definition I use too. Also, Manchin being an actual moderate in a state that has yet to elect an R over an incumbent D for the Senate is why his race is a Toss-Up. Also notice I rate neither race Safe.

[Young Conservative]

Likely R in Missouri, Tossup/Tilt D in Florida

[Dr. MB]

I think Nelson will win and McCaskill will narrowly lose. Actually, I think she's likelier than Heitkamp to go.

[IceSpear]

McCaskill will lose unless Hawley loses the primary or has an Akin moment. Missouri has gone from a state that voted 5 points to the left of the nation in 1992, to voting 22 points to the right of the nation in 2016. In that time frame, it trended republican in every presidential election. In 2016, democrats were soundly defeated in all statewide races as the state decided that the time for downballot Dems had passed. It is clear that in 2018, all that is needed is a competent opponent to take down McCaskill and the state Auditor. The political climate holds no relevance as the state trended republican even in '08.

What? Anyway, Kander came within 3 points of unseating Blunt in 2016, so MO is hardly "gone" for Ds in statewide/Senate races. It's just that McCaskill is a poor cultural fit for her state, if the Dems replaced her with a stronger candidate the race would probably be a Tossup (I mean, even with McCaskill running it is way too close for comfort!). Also, using your logic WV would be Safe R as well, but it obviously isn't.  

WV IS safe R though.

McCaskill will probably lose, but she still has a chance, especially in a good year for Dems. I'm waiting to see where the Florida polling lands once The Criminal's hurricane bounce is over before I make a final judgment there, but I see Nelson as the favorite. Manchin, of course, is finished.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

Both McCaskill and Nelson win reelection. McCaskill wins in a very close contest.

[fluffypanther19]

I think Scott is the republican's best bet for the seat and nelson would be in serious trouble in a Clinton presidency but with trump...nelson should hold comfortably. McCaskill is in for the fight of her political career because Missouri is trending red hard and fast, but I think that the fundamentals of the race and her political savvy could save her. she will have to work hard for it though.

[jamestroll]

Alright guys. Right now I am busy but at the latest by Saturday I will have the astrological progressions and transits for the Florida Senate contest.

Please note that caveat of lacking birth times for both candidates and birth times tend to be extremely important.

I am inclined to think McCaskill will lose. She has transit saturn squared her progressed sun. That is not always and often indicates upset but difficult victories. My main concern is her  moon square sun transit on election night. That almost ALWAYS results in a disappointment.

So my guess is McCaskill will narrowly lose.

[Pennsylvania Deplorable]

I'd call FL tilt D at this point and MO tilt R. MO has had one of the largest swings of any state over the last decade from a statistical tie in 2008 to Trump winning by almost 20%. She would have lost in 2012 if it wasn't for Todd "legitimate rape" Akin.

[Keep cool-idge]

Alright guys. Right now I am busy but at the latest by Saturday I will have the astrological progressions and transits for the Florida Senate contest.

Please note that caveat of lacking birth times for both candidates and birth times tend to be extremely important.

I am inclined to think McCaskill will lose. She has transit saturn squared her progressed sun. That is not always and often indicates upset but difficult victories. My main concern is her  moon square sun transit on election night. That almost ALWAYS results in a disappointment.

So my guess is McCaskill will narrowly lose.

I hope you understand that astrology is BullSh*t.
It’s either they win or lose and the stars and the month they were born will not change it.

[jamestroll]

Alright guys. Right now I am busy but at the latest by Saturday I will have the astrological progressions and transits for the Florida Senate contest.

Please note that caveat of lacking birth times for both candidates and birth times tend to be extremely important.

I am inclined to think McCaskill will lose. She has transit saturn squared her progressed sun. That is not always and often indicates upset but difficult victories. My main concern is her  moon square sun transit on election night. That almost ALWAYS results in a disappointment.

So my guess is McCaskill will narrowly lose.

I hope you understand that astrology is BullSh*t.
It’s either they win or lose and the stars and the month they were born will not change it.

We still have free will. Someone encountering a poor astrological transits can stil be successful and the vice versa is true.

But birth times are extremely important. And without accurate birth times its hard to predict congressional elections based on astrology.

I was thinking Gillespie would win until I looked at the stars for that night.

[Keep cool-idge]

Alright guys. Right now I am busy but at the latest by Saturday I will have the astrological progressions and transits for the Florida Senate contest.

Please note that caveat of lacking birth times for both candidates and birth times tend to be extremely important.

I am inclined to think McCaskill will lose. She has transit saturn squared her progressed sun. That is not always and often indicates upset but difficult victories. My main concern is her  moon square sun transit on election night. That almost ALWAYS results in a disappointment.

So my guess is McCaskill will narrowly lose.

I hope you understand that astrology is BullSh*t.
It’s either they win or lose and the stars and the month they were born will not change it.

We still have free will. Someone encountering a poor astrological transits can stil be successful and the vice versa is true.

But birth times are extremely important. And without accurate birth times its hard to predict congressional elections based on astrology.

I was thinking Gillespie would win until I looked at the stars for that night.

Oh my the stars do NOT decide anything about who wins or when someone dies or none of that crap.
The only thing that can elect and unelect someone is the voters.and only god knows when you die not the stars or anything.

[jamestroll]

Alright guys. Right now I am busy but at the latest by Saturday I will have the astrological progressions and transits for the Florida Senate contest.

Please note that caveat of lacking birth times for both candidates and birth times tend to be extremely important.

I am inclined to think McCaskill will lose. She has transit saturn squared her progressed sun. That is not always and often indicates upset but difficult victories. My main concern is her  moon square sun transit on election night. That almost ALWAYS results in a disappointment.

So my guess is McCaskill will narrowly lose.

I hope you understand that astrology is BullSh*t.
It’s either they win or lose and the stars and the month they were born will not change it.

We still have free will. Someone encountering a poor astrological transits can stil be successful and the vice versa is true.

But birth times are extremely important. And without accurate birth times its hard to predict congressional elections based on astrology.

I was thinking Gillespie would win until I looked at the stars for that night.

Oh my the stars do NOT decide anything about who wins or when someone dies or none of that crap.
The only thing that can elect and unelect someone is the voters.and only god knows when you die not the stars or anything.

I just explained people have free will. And astrologers will never look into when someone will die. It is highly unethical.

It can be fun to look into and sometimes the people with the best success are the people who work the hardest against poor transits and progressions.

Transits are poor for McCaskill which is why I predict she will lose.

[Keep cool-idge]

Alright guys. Right now I am busy but at the latest by Saturday I will have the astrological progressions and transits for the Florida Senate contest.

Please note that caveat of lacking birth times for both candidates and birth times tend to be extremely important.

I am inclined to think McCaskill will lose. She has transit saturn squared her progressed sun. That is not always and often indicates upset but difficult victories. My main concern is her  moon square sun transit on election night. That almost ALWAYS results in a disappointment.

So my guess is McCaskill will narrowly lose.

I hope you understand that astrology is BullSh*t.
It’s either they win or lose and the stars and the month they were born will not change it.

We still have free will. Someone encountering a poor astrological transits can stil be successful and the vice versa is true.

But birth times are extremely important. And without accurate birth times its hard to predict congressional elections based on astrology.

I was thinking Gillespie would win until I looked at the stars for that night.

Oh my the stars do NOT decide anything about who wins or when someone dies or none of that crap.
The only thing that can elect and unelect someone is the voters.and only god knows when you die not the stars or anything.

I just explained people have free will. And astrologers will never look into when someone will die. It is highly unethical.

It can be fun to look into and sometimes the people with the best success are the people who work the hardest against poor transits and progressions.

Transits are poor for McCaskill which is why I predict she will lose.

Again that doesn’t mean jack crap astrology is very dangerous spiritually as a Christian it says to not go to fortune tellers or astrologers.

[Kamala]

Jimmie is an Atlas treasure and I will not stand for the slandering of his good name.

[Keep cool-idge]

Jimmie is an Atlas treasure and I will not stand for the slandering of his good name.

Oh my please stop!
Everything I do you always criticize. I thought this site was for debate talk and news about politics and history not just liberal speech but all speech.

[Wells]

Jimmie is an Atlas treasure and I will not stand for the slandering of his good name.

Oh my please stop!
Everything I do you always criticize. I thought this site was for debate talk and news about politics and history not just liberal speech but all speech.

And astrology speech is included in that.

[Kamala]

Jimmie is an Atlas treasure and I will not stand for the slandering of his good name.

Oh my please stop!
Everything I do you always criticize. I thought this site was for debate talk and news about politics and history not just liberal speech but all speech.

I didn’t even mention you, I was giving a generic statement of my position. 

Face it, Greedo, you’re absolutely obsessed with me.

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

Greedo x Kamala is my favorite atlas couple

Edit: For my post to be relevant to this thread, I think Ben Nelson easily wins FL and Claire has a very tough fight ahead of her.

[Kamala]

Greedo x Kamala is my favorite atlas couple

I can’t help but try to save the bad boys

[Keep cool-idge]

Jimmie is an Atlas treasure and I will not stand for the slandering of his good name.

Oh my please stop!
Everything I do you always criticize. I thought this site was for debate talk and news about politics and history not just liberal speech but all speech.

And astrology speech is included in that.

Astrology has nothing to do with anything I mentioned it’s super annoying astrology has no place on the atlas forums.

 Frequent moderated posts that tend to derail threads.

[jamestroll]

Jimmie is an Atlas treasure and I will not stand for the slandering of his good name.

Oh my please stop!
Everything I do you always criticize. I thought this site was for debate talk and news about politics and history not just liberal speech but all speech.

And astrology speech is included in that.

Astrology has nothing to do with anything I mentioned it’s super annoying astrology has no place on the atlas forums.

It still is a method of predicting elections. And I am one of the most cordial posters here.

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

I'm pretty annoyed at the smear campaign from pollsters against astrology. Astrology predicted the Trump win in 2016, but Big Pollsters have been saying Astrology is "quack science" because they want to cover their ass for getting the 2016 election wrong.

[jamestroll]

I'm pretty annoyed at the smear campaign from pollsters against astrology. Astrology predicted the Trump win in 2016, but Big Pollsters have been saying Astrology is "quack science" because they want to cover their ass for getting the 2016 election wrong.

astrologers were mixed. I think the electoral college versus popular vote can cause confusion. Also Hillary Clinton has multiple possible birth times.

Paul Ryan's transits look quite good next election day but I think its more of a case in which he wins re-election easily over a supposedly competitive district.

My guess from all transit analysis is a gain of 30 seats for democrats in the house but I could be wrong.