Sam Spade's 2008 Senate/House Election Prediction Thread (FINALIZED - SEE P.18)

[MarkWarner08]

Sam Spade, I read Baker of Louisiana is retiring, which might create some play.

Possibly.  I hear the Dems have a good conservative Dem candidate down there and I don't know whether we still have any idea the composition of the CD after Katrina.  Of course, Louisiana is one of the few states in the Union right now that I suspect has no anti-GOP trend at present and I suspect will have little in 2008.

I've only really gotten a chance to get to Illinois and Texas House seats for the moment (because the filing deadlines are past) - but the rest of it will be up soon, probably after February 5.

I added this race to my "Potentially Competitive" category.

[Sam Spade]

updated...

Come on josh22 and Harry, you know you want to post something...

[Josh/Devilman88]

updated...

Come on josh22 and Harry, you know you want to post something...

Right now, I would say NC is Lean Republican, Hagan has stayed close but not that close to put it as toss-up. But I do see it becoming toss-up.

[7,052,770]

updated...

Come on josh22 and Harry, you know you want to post something...

I appreciate that you can look at the race objectively, unlike most of the Republicans on this board who remain certain of a Wicker double-digit victory.

[Sam Spade]

updated...

Come on josh22 and Harry, you know you want to post something...

I appreciate that you can look at the race objectively, unlike most of the Republicans on this board who remain certain of a Wicker double-digit victory.

I didn't say that a double-digit victory wouldn't occur - rather this is an observation of a race as it stands right now.  Naturally, you know what I expect to happen.

[© tweed]

I might put Minnesota closer to tossup than lean R but that's about all...  when I did these things I made two categories entitled "Tossup D" and "Tossup R" to differentiate.  Minnesota this year seems made for the "Tossup R" category, at least for now.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Considering the GOP got the best possible match-up in terms of winning the election, I think NJ should be moved to Likely D rather than Safe D.  I'd say Zimmer winds up losing by less than 5%

[Sam Spade]

I might put Minnesota closer to tossup than lean R but that's about all...  when I did these things I made two categories entitled "Tossup D" and "Tossup R" to differentiate.  Minnesota this year seems made for the "Tossup R" category, at least for now.

No.  Not with Franken.

[Sam Spade]

Considering the GOP got the best possible match-up in terms of winning the election, I think NJ should be moved to Likely D rather than Safe D.  I'd say Zimmer winds up losing by less than 5%

So, in other words, Zimmer will lose by double-digits.  Thanks.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Considering the GOP got the best possible match-up in terms of winning the election, I think NJ should be moved to Likely D rather than Safe D.  I'd say Zimmer winds up losing by less than 5%

So, in other words, Zimmer will lose by double-digits.  Thanks.

NJ Repubs never lose by double digits, right around 10 pts is really the max.  I think Zimmer could definitely pull this one off, but it would take a good campaign.

[Sam Spade]

Considering the GOP got the best possible match-up in terms of winning the election, I think NJ should be moved to Likely D rather than Safe D.  I'd say Zimmer winds up losing by less than 5%

So, in other words, Zimmer will lose by double-digits.  Thanks.

NJ Repubs never lose by double digits, right around 10 pts is really the max.  I think Zimmer could definitely pull this one off, but it would take a good campaign.

It's a joke, considering your penchant for overestimating Republican chances.

I suspect Zimmer will probably run closer the worse his campaign is, so...

[DownWithTheLeft]

Considering the GOP got the best possible match-up in terms of winning the election, I think NJ should be moved to Likely D rather than Safe D.  I'd say Zimmer winds up losing by less than 5%

So, in other words, Zimmer will lose by double-digits.  Thanks.

NJ Repubs never lose by double digits, right around 10 pts is really the max.  I think Zimmer could definitely pull this one off, but it would take a good campaign.

Well actually, what helps Zimmer is negative ads work well in NJ.  You see, elections in NJ have to do with selecting which one is more awful, the nastier you get the better chance you have.  You also must prove that you can carry on at least a sizable level of corruption.

It's a joke, considering your penchant for overestimating Republican chances.

I suspect Zimmer will probably run closer the worse his campaign is, so...

[minionofmidas]

Considering the GOP got the best possible match-up in terms of winning the election, I think NJ should be moved to Likely D rather than Safe D.  I'd say Zimmer winds up losing by less than 5%

You must know something I don't. Like, Camden County finding a million absentee votes for Andrews yesterday.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Considering the GOP got the best possible match-up in terms of winning the election, I think NJ should be moved to Likely D rather than Safe D.  I'd say Zimmer winds up losing by less than 5%

You must know something I don't. Like, Camden County finding a million absentee votes for Andrews yesterday.

I don't agree with you there, I think Andrews would have been much, much harder to defeat.  The main argument for NJ GOP is to say, "hey Democrats are old and trite and let's give us some new breath."  If Andrews had been in there, I doubt the GOP would have spent a lot of time on the election.  Lautenberg is old, incompentent, and not as good at winning the independents.

[Brittain33]

I don't agree with you there, I think Andrews would have been much, much harder to defeat.  The main argument for NJ GOP is to say, "hey Democrats are old and trite and let's give us some new breath."  If Andrews had been in there, I doubt the GOP would have spent a lot of time on the election.  Lautenberg is old, incompentent, and not as good at winning the independents.

Ok, but a 60-something retread who ran and lost a statewide race 12 years ago and hasn't been heard from since is not the embodiment of change.

[minionofmidas]

Considering the GOP got the best possible match-up in terms of winning the election, I think NJ should be moved to Likely D rather than Safe D.  I'd say Zimmer winds up losing by less than 5%

You must know something I don't. Like, Camden County finding a million absentee votes for Andrews yesterday.

I don't agree with you there, I think Andrews would have been much, much harder to defeat.  The main argument for NJ GOP is to say, "hey Democrats are old and trite and let's give us some new breath."  If Andrews had been in there, I doubt the GOP would have spent a lot of time on the election.  Lautenberg is old, incompentent, and not as good at winning the independents.

Machines, machines, machines, and sectional rivalries. Reps want to win a Senate race in NJ? Run a Rino from North Jersey (not "Central Jersey". Real North Jersey.) and get the Dems to run someone from the South of the State who's made his career in part by attacking the corrupt North Jersey machines while glossing over the fact that the south is no different. Ie, Andrews.

[Sam Spade]

Alright, I finally put up a preliminary house list... ugh.

[Mr.Phips]

Pretty good list.  The only thing I would change would be VA-11 and NY-25.  I just dont see anyway Republicans hold those increasingly Dem seats without incumbents.  I would move them to lean dem pickup. 

[Sam Spade]

Pretty good list.  The only thing I would change would be VA-11 and NY-25.  I just dont see anyway Republicans hold those increasingly Dem seats without incumbents.  I would move them to lean dem pickup. 

1. NY-25:  You can certainly make a good case on that one.  Here, I am just being a tad conservative, but it could well be moved and probably will be long-term.

2. VA-11:  Have to disagree.  I know about the "trend" and let's face it, Dems selected the right candidate in Connelly over Byrne, but the fact is that this CD is still quite marginal in my book (even with the trend) and more importantly, I am not going to seriously think about moving it when the GOP candidate has $1 million in the bank.  Especially not at this early point.  You know, if the Dems would have nominated Byrne, the money factor and her weakness as a candidate probably would have had me place it on the other side of the tossup line.  Let's see, time will tell...

[Spaghetti Cat]

Good predictions, just a few changes I had in mind.
I would move CO-4 to leans R and then switch MN-1 with NH-2.

[Mr.Phips]

Pretty good list.  The only thing I would change would be VA-11 and NY-25.  I just dont see anyway Republicans hold those increasingly Dem seats without incumbents.  I would move them to lean dem pickup. 

1. NY-25:  You can certainly make a good case on that one.  Here, I am just being a tad conservative, but it could well be moved and probably will be long-term.

2. VA-11:  Have to disagree.  I know about the "trend" and let's face it, Dems selected the right candidate in Connelly over Byrne, but the fact is that this CD is still quite marginal in my book (even with the trend) and more importantly, I am not going to seriously think about moving it when the GOP candidate has $1 million in the bank.  Especially not at this early point.  You know, if the Dems would have nominated Byrne, the money factor and her weakness as a candidate probably would have had me place it on the other side of the tossup line.  Let's see, time will tell...

If Obama comes anywhere even close to winning Virginia, he will carry VA-11 by at least 10 points, which will make it almost impossible for the Republican to win. 

[Sam Spade]

Pretty good list.  The only thing I would change would be VA-11 and NY-25.  I just dont see anyway Republicans hold those increasingly Dem seats without incumbents.  I would move them to lean dem pickup. 

1. NY-25:  You can certainly make a good case on that one.  Here, I am just being a tad conservative, but it could well be moved and probably will be long-term.

2. VA-11:  Have to disagree.  I know about the "trend" and let's face it, Dems selected the right candidate in Connelly over Byrne, but the fact is that this CD is still quite marginal in my book (even with the trend) and more importantly, I am not going to seriously think about moving it when the GOP candidate has $1 million in the bank.  Especially not at this early point.  You know, if the Dems would have nominated Byrne, the money factor and her weakness as a candidate probably would have had me place it on the other side of the tossup line.  Let's see, time will tell...

If Obama comes anywhere even close to winning Virginia, he will carry VA-11 by at least 10 points, which will make it almost impossible for the Republican to win. 

When that happens, I'll change it. 

[Sam Spade]

Good predictions, just a few changes I had in mind.
I would move CO-4 to leans R and then switch MN-1 with NH-2.

In CO-04, when your own internal poll only shows you up seven, under 50%, that means you belong in toss-up.  Especially someone with a record like Musgrave - you see, McConnell in KY showing me something similar would mean Lean R, but Musgrave - no.

I feel very good about OH-15 being the top of the toss-up (or NY-25, whichever) because Kilroy's internal placed her at 47-37 over Stivers.  That should be stronger for someone who's been running for the past two years.  Whereas Musgrave at the bottom of the toss-up, fits nicely.

MN-1 vs. NH-2 has to with the PVI of the two CDs, plain and simple.

[Spaghetti Cat]

Good predictions, just a few changes I had in mind.
I would move CO-4 to leans R and then switch MN-1 with NH-2.

In CO-04, when your own internal poll only shows you up seven, under 50%, that means you belong in toss-up.  Especially someone with a record like Musgrave - you see, McConnell in KY showing me something similar would mean Lean R, but Musgrave - no.

I feel very good about OH-15 being the top of the toss-up (or NY-25, whichever) because Kilroy's internal placed her at 47-37 over Stivers.  That should be stronger for someone who's been running for the past two years.  Whereas Musgrave at the bottom of the toss-up, fits nicely.

MN-1 vs. NH-2 has to with the PVI of the two CDs, plain and simple.

I was just looking at the candidates.  In MN-1, the GOP isn't going to have anyone worth while (Dick Day won't be Tim Walz).  But in NH-2, I see both Clegg and Horn capable of beating Hodes if things pan out right.  Also, watch LA-06.  Bill Anderson, who would be a great GOP candidate, is considering entering the race.  Combine that with the fact that Michael Jackson, who Cazouxou (however the hell his name is spelled) beat in the primary, might run as an independent, where he would pick up much of the black vote (Jackson's black), and things aren't looking good for Cazouxou.

[Sam Spade]

Casayoux would be lower than he is if it weren't for the facts you mention (and his CD is more problematic, frankly).