The 2022 map is worse for Republicans than 2018 was for Democrats

[Virginiá]

I'm with you on that.

I'm glad you agree about needing to go back to our 2008-2012 coalition, though. I remember you didn't always think so.

I'd rather we go back to that while keeping some of our other gains, which is a greedy take, but we can't hemorrhage working class whites under the current electoral system. Like it's just not built to represent voters as much as land. Most of my arguing about suburban/upper class whites is me rationalizing why they aren't too bad, and why there are benefits, such as better midterm reliability, but also because we have little short-term control over this stuff, so I try to find the good in what's going to happen rather than worry about what I can't control. Educated voter trends has been going on for too long and it won't stop anytime soon. At any rate, my recent posts in General Discussion over Democrats stupidly trying to restore SALT deductions does put into perspective how these highly educated districts could impede actual policy.

But in all honesty, what I truly want is whatever coalition gets us closer to things like single payer, free higher education, major crackdowns on greedy, ethically bankrupt corporations and otherwise building an actual sustainable future with as little bloodsucking capitalist pilot fish as possible.

[Skill and Chance]

I don’t think the map is nearly as bad for them as the 2018 map was for Dems. All of their R-held seats are in states that voted for Trump and have a Republican PVI. Of course if there’s a recession or a war, things could get really ugly for the GOP, but Democrats aren’t going to win 60 Senate seats even if Trump wins reelection in 2020 (in which case the Senate would probably be 51R/49D or something like that in 2022, meaning the Democrats would have to pick up 11 seats (!) for a supermajority, which just isn’t going to happen). If a Democrat is president in 2022, I could still see them flipping PA, GA, and maybe NC, but that’s about it (I’m assuming AZ flips in 2020). They’re not winning states like IA, MO, or OH in a Biden/Warren/whoever midterm.

This.  The important part is that pretty much all of the vulnerable R seats in this class are getting better for them with the Trump coalition.  There's enough there for the Senate to flip in 2022 if Trump is president, but I wouldn't expect anything overly impressive.  The next Senate realignment will be when Class II gives out on Republicans.  2020 is likely too soon for that, but e.g. a 2026 Pence midterm would be a wipeout.

[uti2]

Dems will probably flip AZ (assuming McSally wins in 2020), WI, IA (if Grassley retires), PA, and NC. Outside of that most pickup opportunities are longshots.

If the map is even in 2020 (very real possibility) and Dems flip those 5 seats, they'll have a slim majority. Honestly not worth ruling out GOP Senate control until at least 2024 though.

Rubio and the GA seat*(I think Isakson will call it quits) are both more likely to flip then the open IA seat(it could flip too, but it would take a super big tsunami)

I'm not sure Rubio is beatable barring a Trump-endorsed conservative challenger. Maybe the GA seat, but the question is who? Abrams will probably run in 2020 and if she loses it would be ill advised to run again that soon.

Nelson has much higher approval ratings than Rubio & he lost with a GOP WH.

[Technocracy Timmy]

Dems if they don’t makeup ground with rural whites/suburban evangelicals/conservative voters in these states will have to pray that generational turnover shuts out the GOP in states like GA/NC/TX/AZ down the road.

When GA goes blue it will most likely stay blue. It's giving me Virginia vibes

Agreed; Georgia falls first. It’ll be fairly close in its margins but will probably be stubbornly Dem once it flips in consecutive cycles just like Virginia has.