Official Post your 2006 Senate Election Prediction Maps

[Joe Republic]

Here's my prediction

I have areally good feeling that the Republicans will pull it out in MD and NJ. With MI I feel Stabenow is vunerable because 1. she is not a strong canidate at all 2. She was listed as one of the most incompentent Senators in the Senate 3. The Republicans picked a good canidate.     

I take it that as well as Michigan, you also haven't been paying much attention to West Virginia, Florida, North Dakota, Nebraska or New Mexico?

[Kevin]

Those are my mistake, I forgot to make all of those excluding MI red which they will deflintley go.

[nini2287]

Here's my prediction

I have areally good feeling that the Republicans will pull it out in MD and NJ. With MI I feel Stabenow is vunerable because 1. she is not a strong canidate at all 2. She was listed as one of the most incompentent Senators in the Senate 3. The Republicans picked a good canidate.     

I take it that as well as Michigan, you also haven't been paying much attention to West Virginia, Florida, North Dakota, Nebraska or New Mexico?

Let alone about 10 or 15 states decide to randomly hold Senate elections in their off year and all vote Republican?

(And Bernie Sanders loses in Vermont).

[Kevin]

I just got tired of coloring the off year election ones gray, and VT I included Democratic because doesn't Sanders caucus with the Democrats.   

[© tweed]

Why the hell do you think Byrd will lose?

[jerusalemcar5]

Here's my prediction

I have areally good feeling that the Republicans will pull it out in MD and NJ. With MI I feel Stabenow is vunerable because 1. she is not a strong canidate at all 2. She was listed as one of the most incompentent Senators in the Senate 3. The Republicans picked a good canidate.  You explanation for a Republican victory seems very odd.

OK now that I updated your map are you serious about Michigan?  Weak candidate does not mean defeat.  Polls show her doing quite well and Granholm isn;t doing that badly so she can't drag her down.

[Kevin]

Here's my prediction

I have areally good feeling that the Republicans will pull it out in MD and NJ. With MI I feel Stabenow is vunerable because 1. she is not a strong canidate at all 2. She was listed as one of the most incompentent Senators in the Senate 3. The Republicans picked a good canidate.  You explanation for a Republican victory seems very odd.

OK now that I updated your map are you serious about Michigan?  Weak candidate does not mean defeat.  Polls show her doing quite well and Granholm isn;t doing that badly so she can't drag her down.

Yes I am because I have a feeling that this election is closer then it looks also it looks like Dick DeVos could very well when and maybe by a confortable margin too, if this where to happen I think DeVos victory would carry over to the Senate race and ensure a narrow Bouchard victory.   /quote]

[© tweed]

2007 Senate Lineup: 51 R/47 D/2 I

[Frodo]

2007 Senate Lineup: 51 R/47 D/2 I

You apparently don't have much confidence in Lamont's chances of winning the general election vis-a-vis Lieberman, do you?

[© tweed]

2007 Senate Lineup: 51 R/47 D/2 I

You apparently don't have much confidence in Lamont's chances of winning the general election vis-a-vis Lieberman, do you?

Lieberman is clearly the favorite to win.  That's not to say Lamont can't win; Lieberman was a favorite to win the primary too.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Funny, I used to give Tweed so much crap for being so overtly pessimistic (good thing that he's gotten over that though, maybe it was seeing that Bush's numbers are not going up) and now he has an identical map to mine (except with some percentage differences)

oh and re: Indiana, as Lugar doesn't even have a Dem opponent there's no way he's getting below 70% and even below 80% is very unlikely.

[jerusalemcar5]

Lieberman has said he won't be "I-CT" he will be "D-CT".  It'll be red and leave it at that.

[they don't love you like i love you]

We still need to distinguish between him and Lamont winning in some way.

[jerusalemcar5]

We still need to distinguish between him and Lamont winning in some way.

Maybe.  I was more commenting on Tweed's senate breakdown saying there would be 2 Independents.

Also, Lieberman is going to continue his current fall in the polls.  i just can't see him winning.

[Sam Spade]

August 15 changes to my list:

The odd one:

I see CT as a Toss-up between D and I/D.  R has no chance.

Rest:

Michigan: Likely D to Lean D
Nevada: Likely R to Safe R
Pennsylvania: Likely D to Lean D (ya, I expect to get some laughs about this.  I still Santorum's going to lose, just perhaps by not as much)
Ohio: Toss-up to Lean D

Comments:
I might move Minnesota to Likely D if I see another poll (independent and not Star-Tribune) validate Rasmussen's last number.

I am suspicious about Montana.  The only poll that has showed the race outside MOE is the poll one month ago from Raz that is quite different than his most recent one.  Rest assured, the next M-D poll will determine whether I can the race Toss-up or Lean D.

I am unsure about Rhode Island.  Only Rasmussen has polled there recently, and I am leery to make moves on Senate races based on one poll.

[Sam Spade]

I'm putting Connecticut in Lean I/D.  If Lieberman keeps pulling this number of Republicans, he's going to be hard to beat.

[Sam Spade]

Moving Virginia to Lean R.

[°Leprechaun]

Tell me if you think I'm nuts.
 



https://uselectionatlas.org/PRED/SENATE/2006/pred.php?action=indpred&id=1358


Comments (from prediction page)

I predicted New Jersey and Nevada switching because there is always the possibilty for surprises.

Most of all these predictions are really guesses, but based on the rasmussmen polls.

[Gustaf]

Yeah, I think you're nuts. Nevada ain't gonna switch, Ensign is leading by a lot in most polls.

[°Leprechaun]

Since Lieberman says that he is a Democrat I will take him at his word.
Connecticut therefore will be Democrat whoever wins. For the purposes of this prediction Connecticut is 'red' and who wins is irrelevant (but only as far as the predicting the outcome).

[°Leprechaun]

Yeah, I think you're nuts. Nevada ain't gonna switch, Ensign is leading by a lot in most polls.

I was going by rasmussen which had Ensign at 46% back on 8/7 which is of course a very old poll. If there is a more recent one I would be interested to know. I admit that it is a long shot, but as I said, expect some surprises. If there are no surprises, than in itself would be a surprise.
The poll had Ensign's opponent at 39%, a 7% difference.

[Gustaf]

Yeah, I think you're nuts. Nevada ain't gonna switch, Ensign is leading by a lot in most polls.

I was going by rasmussen which had Ensign at 46% back on 8/7 which is of course a very old poll. If there is a more recent one I would be interested to know. I admit that it is a long shot, but as I said, expect some surprises. If there are no surprises, than in itself would be a surprise.
The poll had Ensign's opponent at 39%, a 7% difference.

Two most recent polls: Mason-Dixon at 10th of August giving ENsign a 21%lead, 54 to 33 and Survery USA a couple of weeks ago ,also saying a 21% lead (56 to 35). Ensign has constantly been ahead by double digits in all polls save for that one Rasmussen poll.

[°Leprechaun]

Yeah, I think you're nuts. Nevada ain't gonna switch, Ensign is leading by a lot in most polls.

I was going by rasmussen which had Ensign at 46% back on 8/7 which is of course a very old poll. If there is a more recent one I would be interested to know. I admit that it is a long shot, but as I said, expect some surprises. If there are no surprises, than in itself would be a surprise.
The poll had Ensign's opponent at 39%, a 7% difference.

Two most recent polls: Mason-Dixon at 10th of August giving ENsign a 21%lead, 54 to 33 and Survery USA a couple of weeks ago ,also saying a 21% lead (56 to 35). Ensign has constantly been ahead by double digits in all polls save for that one Rasmussen poll.

OK, but I think I'll stay with my predictions as is.  Although in my confidence map I pretty much conceded that anything can happen. If I start changing my predictions now I will risk even greater failure.
Call me nuts, but then I am what I eat.

[??????????]

Check out mine.

[Gustaf]

Check out mine.

Also crazy.