Don't f-ck this up, Joe Donnelly

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

Also there is another poll showing Menendez only up by two.

[BudgieForce]

Also there is another poll showing Menendez only up by two.

There was a Fairleigh Dickinson poll in May that had Menendez up +4 with 46% undecided.

But we had this poll in April.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=289506.0

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

He’s arguably the most vulnerable Democrat right now, and if the Republicans can’t win here, the Senate will almost certainly flip. Tossup.

Donnelly isn't the most vulnerable Heidi is, that's why the ratings got ND, not IN Lean R.

[Nathan Towne]

O'Rourke beating Senator Cruz would be an upset for the ages. I would characterize that race as being similar to the race for Elizabeth Warren's seat in my State. I believe that Kingston will win the primary, but for him to beat her in the general election would be a truly massive upset.

In Indiana, Mike Braun is a strong candidate, so it is going to take quite a bit for Joe Donnelly to hang on to his seat. I classify the Indiana Senate race as leaning Republican. Much can still happen between now and November, of course, but I am hopeful that Donnelly will be defeated.

[Gass3268]

I am saying the same thing to whoever the Dem is running in WA-03. If the Democrats pick up that seat plus CA-48 and CA-49, they will represent the entire continental Pacific Coast.

[Zaybay]

Im going to be honest with you guys, I have no idea how this race will shape up. I have it as pure tossup. Mike is an unidentifiable quantity, Indiana is elastic but R, and, the biggest reason for this,there are no polls for this race. Only two polls have been released.1, by Gravis, after the primary and the other by Surveymonkey(eww) using the crappy 50 state methodology that got them +14 for Blackburn. Thats not enough information to make a call.

I would love a beautiful Blue Map as much as the next Dem, but we all cant be sure about how this race leans.

[Nathan Towne]

Im going to be honest with you guys, I have no idea how this race will shape up. I have it as pure tossup. Mike is an unidentifiable quantity, Indiana is elastic but R, and, the biggest reason for this,there are no polls for this race. Only two polls have been released.1, by Gravis, after the primary and the other by Surveymonkey(eww) using the crappy 50 state methodology that got them +14 for Blackburn. Thats not enough information to make a call.

I would love a beautiful Blue Map as much as the next Dem, but we all cant be sure about how this race leans.

This is all true, but even so, remember that in 2016 Ron Johnson was losing in every official poll except for one and ended up being reelected by 3.4 points in Wisconsin. This is not to say that polling is not valuable, but we always have to be extremely careful in terms of what we are getting.

I have to lean Republican here, just by looking at Indiana's trends through this year and the fact that I think that Braun is going to demonstrate himself to be a strong candidate in this contest. It will be interesting to see how it plays out though as we head into the Autumn.

[Zaybay]

Im going to be honest with you guys, I have no idea how this race will shape up. I have it as pure tossup. Mike is an unidentifiable quantity, Indiana is elastic but R, and, the biggest reason for this,there are no polls for this race. Only two polls have been released.1, by Gravis, after the primary and the other by Surveymonkey(eww) using the crappy 50 state methodology that got them +14 for Blackburn. Thats not enough information to make a call.

I would love a beautiful Blue Map as much as the next Dem, but we all cant be sure about how this race leans.

This is all true, but even so, remember that in 2016 Ron Johnson was losing in every official poll except for one and ended up being reelected by 3.4 points in Wisconsin. This is not to say that polling is not valuable, but we always have to be extremely careful in terms of what we are getting.

I have to lean Republican here, just by looking at Indiana's trends through this year and the fact that I think that Braun is going to demonstrate himself to be a strong candidate in this contest. It will be interesting to see how it plays out though as we head into the Autumn.

I dont think thats a fair comparison. Ron Johnson won because Trump won the state. Sure, Fiengold lost by more than Clinton lost, but the fact that Trump was able to win the state gave him the win. The WOW suburbs, which showed a bit of a crack for Hillary, and the cities which gave her the vote, just didnt give Feingold the same power, while Trump's rural performance was able to carry over.

Anyway, I dont want to get into the 2016 WI senate race, but I would like to point out that that race had a lot of polling, sure, it got the result wrong, but there was polling. We only have two polls for this race, one from Surveymonkey, widely viewed as garbage and inept, and Gravis, which gives hilariously bad numbers(NJ, anyone?), so much so that it is disparaged across this site. And its not like these polls give Mike a large lead, hes only +1 and +3, respectively.

I also am not sure if Braun is a powerful opponent. Sure, he won the primary and was unexpected, but that was only because the other two had spent the last year attacking each other, and had an incredible amount of issues. Braun hasnt really been campaigning, from what Ive seen, and the only ad released by him so far is "Mexico Joe", which, I guess works well, but not as well as his primary ads. I would also be careful with his past, he has no vetting, and could easily fall for a pitfall like other unexpected winners in primaries(Roy Moore, Todd Akin, Donald Trump). There is just too many unknown factors to make a prognosis of this race, and thats why I give it a pure tossup rating. With Claire, we have polling, with Manchin, we have polling, with Nelson, we have polling. We have nothing for IN(and ND, now that I think about it), and so its foolish to draw an immediate conclusion.

But this is Atlas, so...

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Menendez can certainly lose.

Nothing would make me happier than having that corrupt POS lose while Dems sweep all other competitive races. A 51-49 Dem Senate with Bribery Bob gone is a frequent dream of mine.

[Nathan Towne]

Im going to be honest with you guys, I have no idea how this race will shape up. I have it as pure tossup. Mike is an unidentifiable quantity, Indiana is elastic but R, and, the biggest reason for this,there are no polls for this race. Only two polls have been released.1, by Gravis, after the primary and the other by Surveymonkey(eww) using the crappy 50 state methodology that got them +14 for Blackburn. Thats not enough information to make a call.

I would love a beautiful Blue Map as much as the next Dem, but we all cant be sure about how this race leans.

This is all true, but even so, remember that in 2016 Ron Johnson was losing in every official poll except for one and ended up being reelected by 3.4 points in Wisconsin. This is not to say that polling is not valuable, but we always have to be extremely careful in terms of what we are getting.

I have to lean Republican here, just by looking at Indiana's trends through this year and the fact that I think that Braun is going to demonstrate himself to be a strong candidate in this contest. It will be interesting to see how it plays out though as we head into the Autumn.

I dont think thats a fair comparison. Ron Johnson won because Trump won the state. Sure, Fiengold lost by more than Clinton lost, but the fact that Trump was able to win the state gave him the win. The WOW suburbs, which showed a bit of a crack for Hillary, and the cities which gave her the vote, just didnt give Feingold the same power, while Trump's rural performance was able to carry over.

Anyway, I dont want to get into the 2016 WI senate race, but I would like to point out that that race had a lot of polling, sure, it got the result wrong, but there was polling. We only have two polls for this race, one from Surveymonkey, widely viewed as garbage and inept, and Gravis, which gives hilariously bad numbers(NJ, anyone?), so much so that it is disparaged across this site. And its not like these polls give Mike a large lead, hes only +1 and +3, respectively.

I also am not sure if Braun is a powerful opponent. Sure, he won the primary and was unexpected, but that was only because the other two had spent the last year attacking each other, and had an incredible amount of issues. Braun hasnt really been campaigning, from what Ive seen, and the only ad released by him so far is "Mexico Joe", which, I guess works well, but not as well as his primary ads. I would also be careful with his past, he has no vetting, and could easily fall for a pitfall like other unexpected winners in primaries(Roy Moore, Todd Akin, Donald Trump). There is just too many unknown factors to make a prognosis of this race, and thats why I give it a pure tossup rating. With Claire, we have polling, with Manchin, we have polling, with Nelson, we have polling. We have nothing for IN(and ND, now that I think about it), and so its foolish to draw an immediate conclusion.

But this is Atlas, so...

I think that we are largely in agreement here in saying that it is still quite early and it would be wrong to jump too quickly to conclusions. All I am saying though is that Indiana is an R+9 State on the Cook Partisan Voting Index and the trend in the country, at least in national elections, has been towards more uniformity along party lines by jurisdiction, not less. That does not bode especially well for Donnelly and I do think that Braun is going to end up demonstrating himself to be a strong candidate. I have more confidence in that being the case Braun for instance than I do with Matt Rosendale in Montana, who has not indicated to me yet that he is going to be a formidable candidate. Hopefully Rosendale will prove me wrong on this, but that is my admittedly limited take on him at this point.

So, I think that a lean (arguably a slight lean) for Braun at this point seems fair to me.

P.S. I would make one small correction to my post above. Now that I have looked a bit deeper I have found several other polls which gave Senator Johnson a lead in Wisconsin in his reelection bid in 2016, but the point still stands. Feingold was obviously a significant favorite in that race. FiveThirtyEight had the election at an 81.7% chance for Feingold and 18.3% for Johnson heading into the election.

[Zaybay]

Im going to be honest with you guys, I have no idea how this race will shape up. I have it as pure tossup. Mike is an unidentifiable quantity, Indiana is elastic but R, and, the biggest reason for this,there are no polls for this race. Only two polls have been released.1, by Gravis, after the primary and the other by Surveymonkey(eww) using the crappy 50 state methodology that got them +14 for Blackburn. Thats not enough information to make a call.

I would love a beautiful Blue Map as much as the next Dem, but we all cant be sure about how this race leans.

This is all true, but even so, remember that in 2016 Ron Johnson was losing in every official poll except for one and ended up being reelected by 3.4 points in Wisconsin. This is not to say that polling is not valuable, but we always have to be extremely careful in terms of what we are getting.

I have to lean Republican here, just by looking at Indiana's trends through this year and the fact that I think that Braun is going to demonstrate himself to be a strong candidate in this contest. It will be interesting to see how it plays out though as we head into the Autumn.

I dont think thats a fair comparison. Ron Johnson won because Trump won the state. Sure, Fiengold lost by more than Clinton lost, but the fact that Trump was able to win the state gave him the win. The WOW suburbs, which showed a bit of a crack for Hillary, and the cities which gave her the vote, just didnt give Feingold the same power, while Trump's rural performance was able to carry over.

Anyway, I dont want to get into the 2016 WI senate race, but I would like to point out that that race had a lot of polling, sure, it got the result wrong, but there was polling. We only have two polls for this race, one from Surveymonkey, widely viewed as garbage and inept, and Gravis, which gives hilariously bad numbers(NJ, anyone?), so much so that it is disparaged across this site. And its not like these polls give Mike a large lead, hes only +1 and +3, respectively.

I also am not sure if Braun is a powerful opponent. Sure, he won the primary and was unexpected, but that was only because the other two had spent the last year attacking each other, and had an incredible amount of issues. Braun hasnt really been campaigning, from what Ive seen, and the only ad released by him so far is "Mexico Joe", which, I guess works well, but not as well as his primary ads. I would also be careful with his past, he has no vetting, and could easily fall for a pitfall like other unexpected winners in primaries(Roy Moore, Todd Akin, Donald Trump). There is just too many unknown factors to make a prognosis of this race, and thats why I give it a pure tossup rating. With Claire, we have polling, with Manchin, we have polling, with Nelson, we have polling. We have nothing for IN(and ND, now that I think about it), and so its foolish to draw an immediate conclusion.

But this is Atlas, so...

I think that we are largely in agreement here in saying that it is still quite early and it would be wrong to jump too quickly to conclusions. All I am saying though is that Indiana is an R+9 State on the Cook Partisan Voting Index and the trend in the country, at least in national elections, has been towards more uniformity along party lines by jurisdiction, not less. That does not bode especially well for Donnelly and I do think that Braun is going to end up demonstrating himself to be a strong candidate. I have more confidence in that being the case Braun for instance than I do with Matt Rosendale in Montana, who has not indicated to me yet that he is going to be a formidable candidate. Hopefully Rosendale will prove me wrong on this, but that is my admittedly limited take on him at this point.

So, I think that a lean (arguably a slight lean) for Braun at this point seems fair to me.

Fair.
Also, just a question, why do you think Kingston will be senator, Warren hasnt retired, and im pretty sure it would be someone like Capuano, Kennedy or Seth that would take her place?

[Nathan Towne]

Those are my endorsements for the 2018 Senate elections, not my predictions. I did not realize that I had not made that clear in my signature until you pointed it out just now.

I believe that Senator Warren will be reelected this year. I will do what I can, at least within reason, in order to benefit her opponent in the general election, whether in be Mr. Kingston or not (although I do believe that he will win the primary), but I recognize that it will be very difficult. Massachusetts voters are far more likely to elect a Republican as Governor due to the fact that doing so provides some otherwise absent balance with the overwhelmingly Democratic State legislature. At the national level, especially in a year like this one, it will be very difficult to defeat her. With that said though, Mr. Kingston is quite well connected and should be able to garner significant monetary support in the election campaign, as well as endorsements from very prominent individuals such as former Governors Weld, Swift and Romney and former Senator Brown, but it will probably be too difficult to beat Senator Warren. She is beloved by many people in the State, as I am sure that you know and as one of the national leaders now of the Democratic Party, I cannot imagine them not responding accordingly if the elections actually ends up tightening to a point where she could be in real danger. She may only win by single digits, but I am pretty confident that she will win nonetheless.

[Nathan Towne]

Im going to be honest with you guys, I have no idea how this race will shape up. I have it as pure tossup. Mike is an unidentifiable quantity, Indiana is elastic but R, and, the biggest reason for this,there are no polls for this race. Only two polls have been released.1, by Gravis, after the primary and the other by Surveymonkey(eww) using the crappy 50 state methodology that got them +14 for Blackburn. Thats not enough information to make a call.

I would love a beautiful Blue Map as much as the next Dem, but we all cant be sure about how this race leans.

This is all true, but even so, remember that in 2016 Ron Johnson was losing in every official poll except for one and ended up being reelected by 3.4 points in Wisconsin. This is not to say that polling is not valuable, but we always have to be extremely careful in terms of what we are getting.

I have to lean Republican here, just by looking at Indiana's trends through this year and the fact that I think that Braun is going to demonstrate himself to be a strong candidate in this contest. It will be interesting to see how it plays out though as we head into the Autumn.

I dont think thats a fair comparison. Ron Johnson won because Trump won the state. Sure, Fiengold lost by more than Clinton lost, but the fact that Trump was able to win the state gave him the win. The WOW suburbs, which showed a bit of a crack for Hillary, and the cities which gave her the vote, just didnt give Feingold the same power, while Trump's rural performance was able to carry over.

Anyway, I dont want to get into the 2016 WI senate race, but I would like to point out that that race had a lot of polling, sure, it got the result wrong, but there was polling. We only have two polls for this race, one from Surveymonkey, widely viewed as garbage and inept, and Gravis, which gives hilariously bad numbers(NJ, anyone?), so much so that it is disparaged across this site. And its not like these polls give Mike a large lead, hes only +1 and +3, respectively.

I also am not sure if Braun is a powerful opponent. Sure, he won the primary and was unexpected, but that was only because the other two had spent the last year attacking each other, and had an incredible amount of issues. Braun hasnt really been campaigning, from what Ive seen, and the only ad released by him so far is "Mexico Joe", which, I guess works well, but not as well as his primary ads. I would also be careful with his past, he has no vetting, and could easily fall for a pitfall like other unexpected winners in primaries(Roy Moore, Todd Akin, Donald Trump). There is just too many unknown factors to make a prognosis of this race, and thats why I give it a pure tossup rating. With Claire, we have polling, with Manchin, we have polling, with Nelson, we have polling. We have nothing for IN(and ND, now that I think about it), and so its foolish to draw an immediate conclusion.

But this is Atlas, so...

I think that we are largely in agreement here in saying that it is still quite early and it would be wrong to jump too quickly to conclusions. All I am saying though is that Indiana is an R+9 State on the Cook Partisan Voting Index and the trend in the country, at least in national elections, has been towards more uniformity along party lines by jurisdiction, not less. That does not bode especially well for Donnelly and I do think that Braun is going to end up demonstrating himself to be a strong candidate. I have more confidence in that being the case Braun for instance than I do with Matt Rosendale in Montana, who has not indicated to me yet that he is going to be a formidable candidate. Hopefully Rosendale will prove me wrong on this, but that is my admittedly limited take on him at this point.

So, I think that a lean (arguably a slight lean) for Braun at this point seems fair to me.

Fair.
Also, just a question, why do you think Kingston will be senator, Warren hasnt retired, and im pretty sure it would be someone like Capuano, Kennedy or Seth that would take her place?

Per your profile, I am assuming that you are supporting Elizabeth Warren's reelection.

[Zaybay]

Im going to be honest with you guys, I have no idea how this race will shape up. I have it as pure tossup. Mike is an unidentifiable quantity, Indiana is elastic but R, and, the biggest reason for this,there are no polls for this race. Only two polls have been released.1, by Gravis, after the primary and the other by Surveymonkey(eww) using the crappy 50 state methodology that got them +14 for Blackburn. Thats not enough information to make a call.

I would love a beautiful Blue Map as much as the next Dem, but we all cant be sure about how this race leans.

This is all true, but even so, remember that in 2016 Ron Johnson was losing in every official poll except for one and ended up being reelected by 3.4 points in Wisconsin. This is not to say that polling is not valuable, but we always have to be extremely careful in terms of what we are getting.

I have to lean Republican here, just by looking at Indiana's trends through this year and the fact that I think that Braun is going to demonstrate himself to be a strong candidate in this contest. It will be interesting to see how it plays out though as we head into the Autumn.

I dont think thats a fair comparison. Ron Johnson won because Trump won the state. Sure, Fiengold lost by more than Clinton lost, but the fact that Trump was able to win the state gave him the win. The WOW suburbs, which showed a bit of a crack for Hillary, and the cities which gave her the vote, just didnt give Feingold the same power, while Trump's rural performance was able to carry over.

Anyway, I dont want to get into the 2016 WI senate race, but I would like to point out that that race had a lot of polling, sure, it got the result wrong, but there was polling. We only have two polls for this race, one from Surveymonkey, widely viewed as garbage and inept, and Gravis, which gives hilariously bad numbers(NJ, anyone?), so much so that it is disparaged across this site. And its not like these polls give Mike a large lead, hes only +1 and +3, respectively.

I also am not sure if Braun is a powerful opponent. Sure, he won the primary and was unexpected, but that was only because the other two had spent the last year attacking each other, and had an incredible amount of issues. Braun hasnt really been campaigning, from what Ive seen, and the only ad released by him so far is "Mexico Joe", which, I guess works well, but not as well as his primary ads. I would also be careful with his past, he has no vetting, and could easily fall for a pitfall like other unexpected winners in primaries(Roy Moore, Todd Akin, Donald Trump). There is just too many unknown factors to make a prognosis of this race, and thats why I give it a pure tossup rating. With Claire, we have polling, with Manchin, we have polling, with Nelson, we have polling. We have nothing for IN(and ND, now that I think about it), and so its foolish to draw an immediate conclusion.

But this is Atlas, so...

I think that we are largely in agreement here in saying that it is still quite early and it would be wrong to jump too quickly to conclusions. All I am saying though is that Indiana is an R+9 State on the Cook Partisan Voting Index and the trend in the country, at least in national elections, has been towards more uniformity along party lines by jurisdiction, not less. That does not bode especially well for Donnelly and I do think that Braun is going to end up demonstrating himself to be a strong candidate. I have more confidence in that being the case Braun for instance than I do with Matt Rosendale in Montana, who has not indicated to me yet that he is going to be a formidable candidate. Hopefully Rosendale will prove me wrong on this, but that is my admittedly limited take on him at this point.

So, I think that a lean (arguably a slight lean) for Braun at this point seems fair to me.

Fair.
Also, just a question, why do you think Kingston will be senator, Warren hasnt retired, and im pretty sure it would be someone like Capuano, Kennedy or Seth that would take her place?

Per your profile, I am assuming that you are supporting Elizabeth Warren's reelection.

Oops, my mistake. Never knew he was running. Thought the indian guy was the R nominee, but it looks like hes going indie now.

[Nathan Towne]

Im going to be honest with you guys, I have no idea how this race will shape up. I have it as pure tossup. Mike is an unidentifiable quantity, Indiana is elastic but R, and, the biggest reason for this,there are no polls for this race. Only two polls have been released.1, by Gravis, after the primary and the other by Surveymonkey(eww) using the crappy 50 state methodology that got them +14 for Blackburn. Thats not enough information to make a call.

I would love a beautiful Blue Map as much as the next Dem, but we all cant be sure about how this race leans.

This is all true, but even so, remember that in 2016 Ron Johnson was losing in every official poll except for one and ended up being reelected by 3.4 points in Wisconsin. This is not to say that polling is not valuable, but we always have to be extremely careful in terms of what we are getting.

I have to lean Republican here, just by looking at Indiana's trends through this year and the fact that I think that Braun is going to demonstrate himself to be a strong candidate in this contest. It will be interesting to see how it plays out though as we head into the Autumn.

I dont think thats a fair comparison. Ron Johnson won because Trump won the state. Sure, Fiengold lost by more than Clinton lost, but the fact that Trump was able to win the state gave him the win. The WOW suburbs, which showed a bit of a crack for Hillary, and the cities which gave her the vote, just didnt give Feingold the same power, while Trump's rural performance was able to carry over.

Anyway, I dont want to get into the 2016 WI senate race, but I would like to point out that that race had a lot of polling, sure, it got the result wrong, but there was polling. We only have two polls for this race, one from Surveymonkey, widely viewed as garbage and inept, and Gravis, which gives hilariously bad numbers(NJ, anyone?), so much so that it is disparaged across this site. And its not like these polls give Mike a large lead, hes only +1 and +3, respectively.

I also am not sure if Braun is a powerful opponent. Sure, he won the primary and was unexpected, but that was only because the other two had spent the last year attacking each other, and had an incredible amount of issues. Braun hasnt really been campaigning, from what Ive seen, and the only ad released by him so far is "Mexico Joe", which, I guess works well, but not as well as his primary ads. I would also be careful with his past, he has no vetting, and could easily fall for a pitfall like other unexpected winners in primaries(Roy Moore, Todd Akin, Donald Trump). There is just too many unknown factors to make a prognosis of this race, and thats why I give it a pure tossup rating. With Claire, we have polling, with Manchin, we have polling, with Nelson, we have polling. We have nothing for IN(and ND, now that I think about it), and so its foolish to draw an immediate conclusion.

But this is Atlas, so...

I think that we are largely in agreement here in saying that it is still quite early and it would be wrong to jump too quickly to conclusions. All I am saying though is that Indiana is an R+9 State on the Cook Partisan Voting Index and the trend in the country, at least in national elections, has been towards more uniformity along party lines by jurisdiction, not less. That does not bode especially well for Donnelly and I do think that Braun is going to end up demonstrating himself to be a strong candidate. I have more confidence in that being the case Braun for instance than I do with Matt Rosendale in Montana, who has not indicated to me yet that he is going to be a formidable candidate. Hopefully Rosendale will prove me wrong on this, but that is my admittedly limited take on him at this point.

So, I think that a lean (arguably a slight lean) for Braun at this point seems fair to me.

Fair.
Also, just a question, why do you think Kingston will be senator, Warren hasnt retired, and im pretty sure it would be someone like Capuano, Kennedy or Seth that would take her place?

Per your profile, I am assuming that you are supporting Elizabeth Warren's reelection.

Oops, my mistake. Never knew he was running. Thought the indian guy was the R nominee, but it looks like hes going indie now.

The Republican primary has not occurred yet. I just looked it up and both primaries will be held on September 4th. Kingston should be considered the favorite to win the Republican primary against Diehl and Lindstrom.

[lfromnj]

If Bredesen and O'Rourke win, then Heitkamp and Donnelly will certainly win as well, barring some severe scandal on their part.

oof bad take  with O rourke.
The fact he came so close is impressive.