IA-SEN 2020: Ernst megathread

[VAR]

My only confident prediction is that this thread will be a complete mess on/after election night.

Agreed. Both the presidential and Senate races in Iowa have been very divisive on this forum. I think this will be the final showdown between the “2016 trends” and “WWC will snap back” groups.

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

My only confident prediction is that this thread will be a complete mess on/after election night.

Agreed. Both the presidential and Senate races in Iowa have been very divisive on this forum. I think this will be the final showdown between the “2016 trends” and “WWC will snap back” groups.

It'll be especially nasty if Iowa gives us a split verdict on Pres/Senate, lol.

I'm not changing my prediction maps in my profile, fwiw. MT and both GA seats flip before IA.

[MT Treasurer]

Agreed. Both the presidential and Senate races in Iowa have been very divisive on this forum. I think this will be the final showdown between the “2016 trends” and “WWC will snap back” groups.

The only thing that would make it more entertaining is if Claire McCaskill was somehow the Democratic candidate for Senate. MO-SEN 2018 was a truly hilarious episode in the history of Talk Elections Dot Org.

[Mr.Phips]

My only confident prediction is that this thread will be a complete mess on/after election night.

Agreed. Both the presidential and Senate races in Iowa have been very divisive on this forum. I think this will be the final showdown between the “2016 trends” and “WWC will snap back” groups.

It'll be especially nasty if Iowa gives us a split verdict on Pres/Senate, lol.

I'm not changing my prediction maps in my profile, fwiw. MT and both GA seats flip before IA.

I’m really gonna flip out if Biden wins Iowa but Greenfield doesn’t.  Same with North Carolina (if Biden wins while Cunningham doesn’t).  A Senate seat is so much more valuable than a few extra electoral votes (which really have no value on their own if you are already at or above 270).

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

My only confident prediction is that this thread will be a complete mess on/after election night.

Agreed. Both the presidential and Senate races in Iowa have been very divisive on this forum. I think this will be the final showdown between the “2016 trends” and “WWC will snap back” groups.

It'll be especially nasty if Iowa gives us a split verdict on Pres/Senate, lol.

I'm not changing my prediction maps in my profile, fwiw. MT and both GA seats flip before IA.

I’m really gonna flip out if Biden wins Iowa but Greenfield doesn’t.  Same with North Carolina (if Biden wins while Cunningham doesn’t).  A Senate seat is so much more valuable than a few extra electoral votes (which really have no value on their own if you are already at or above 270).

We live in hell world, so that's pretty much what I would expect if we were to win an Iowa race, lol. The race that doesn't matter.

[OSR stands with Israel]

My only confident prediction is that this thread will be a complete mess on/after election night.

Agreed. Both the presidential and Senate races in Iowa have been very divisive on this forum. I think this will be the final showdown between the “2016 trends” and “WWC will snap back” groups.

It'll be especially nasty if Iowa gives us a split verdict on Pres/Senate, lol.

I'm not changing my prediction maps in my profile, fwiw. MT and both GA seats flip before IA.

I absolutely dont get it how is MT more likely to flip than IA now, like Bullock is a great candidate but I dont see him outperforming Biden by 8 points , probably 5 or 6 which wont be enough.

As for IA it probably will be +3.5 Trump - +1 Biden at this point which makes winning the IA seat easier.

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

My only confident prediction is that this thread will be a complete mess on/after election night.

Agreed. Both the presidential and Senate races in Iowa have been very divisive on this forum. I think this will be the final showdown between the “2016 trends” and “WWC will snap back” groups.

It'll be especially nasty if Iowa gives us a split verdict on Pres/Senate, lol.

I'm not changing my prediction maps in my profile, fwiw. MT and both GA seats flip before IA.

I absolutely dont get it how is MT more likely to flip than IA now, like Bullock is a great candidate but I dont see him outperforming Biden by 8 points , probably 5 or 6 which wont be enough.

As for IA it probably will be +3.5 Trump - +1 Biden at this point which makes winning the IA seat easier.

Your grammar just makes everything you write so cringy to read. If there was a question in there anywhere that you'd like me to respond to, kindly reword it.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

We haven't seen any ME polls and it's already assumed both Collins and Ernst are doomed

[jamestroll]

I don't think it's a far more likely flip than KS or TX, but I do think it's somewhat more likely. GA-R and MT probably flip before IA, so I think it's probably seat 52 or 53. I don't think IA is a Toss-Up state in general, since we can't ignore that the national environment is (or at least seems to be) very good for Democrats. I think Ernst is very slightly favored (thanks to IA becoming increasing Republican-leaning compared to the rest of the country), but the idea that she would massively overperform Trump or become "the next Grassley" was always far-fetched, in my opinion. We'll see what happens, but if Biden wins by 8 or more nationally, I doubt Ernst wins by more than a narrow margin, and she could lose.

I agree that this thread will be a mess regardless of the result. Then again, so will the threads for MT-SEN, NC-SEN, and probably several more.

I agree with this, actually. I’d say it’s seat 52 (after MT) or 53 (after MT/GA-R), I just don’t see seats 54-57 (KS, TX, SC) not being very close if IA actually flips. Guess I should have put it that way. I get that the idea of Ernst outperforming Trump by 5+ points was foolish (although several people who mock others for this prediction said the same about Peters in MI, so pot and kettle or something...), but I also don’t think she’ll significantly underperform him (maybe 1-2 points or so, but not more than that).

I will definitely move IA-SEN 2022 from Likely to Tilt/Lean R if Ernst loses while other Republicans in competitive races survive. If it was solely due to the environment, she wouldn’t be in a worse position than someone like Cornyn (and I’m still not entirely convinced that she is, even if it’s hard to ignore some of the polling).

I do not believe IA Sen 2022 will even have much discussion lol.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

I'm very confident in Biden overall and I think the floor for the Dems in the Senate is 50-51, but this election is going to be a very good bellwether for whether we're looking at a good Dem cycle or a Blue Wave.

[ProgressiveModerate]

I'm very confident in Biden overall and I think the floor for the Dems in the Senate is 50-51, but this election is going to be a very good bellwether for whether we're looking at a good Dem cycle or a Blue Wave.

TBF, there is a possibility IA votes something like 15% to the right of the country. My bellwether is just weather Ds win the Senate overall and if Biden wins TX.

[Xing]

My only confident prediction is that this thread will be a complete mess on/after election night.

Agreed. Both the presidential and Senate races in Iowa have been very divisive on this forum. I think this will be the final showdown between the “2016 trends” and “WWC will snap back” groups.

It'll be especially nasty if Iowa gives us a split verdict on Pres/Senate, lol.

I'm not changing my prediction maps in my profile, fwiw. MT and both GA seats flip before IA.

I’m really gonna flip out if Biden wins Iowa but Greenfield doesn’t.  Same with North Carolina (if Biden wins while Cunningham doesn’t).  A Senate seat is so much more valuable than a few extra electoral votes (which really have no value on their own if you are already at or above 270).

Hence my signature. This is why the "check on Biden" talking point (even when it's made with positive intentions) is potentially so dangerous for Democrats. Things aren't going to get any better if Republicans keep the Senate, no matter how much Biden wins by.

[Progressive Pessimist]

My only confident prediction is that this thread will be a complete mess on/after election night.

Agreed. Both the presidential and Senate races in Iowa have been very divisive on this forum. I think this will be the final showdown between the “2016 trends” and “WWC will snap back” groups.

It'll be especially nasty if Iowa gives us a split verdict on Pres/Senate, lol.

I'm not changing my prediction maps in my profile, fwiw. MT and both GA seats flip before IA.

I’m really gonna flip out if Biden wins Iowa but Greenfield doesn’t.  Same with North Carolina (if Biden wins while Cunningham doesn’t).  A Senate seat is so much more valuable than a few extra electoral votes (which really have no value on their own if you are already at or above 270).

Hence my signature. This is why the "check on Biden" talking point (even when it's made with positive intentions) is potentially so dangerous for Democrats. Things aren't going to get any better if Republicans keep the Senate, no matter how much Biden wins by.

Quite frankly, any Republicans who subscribes to this mentality ought to be satisfied enough that there is going to be a 6-3 conservative majority on the Superme Court to "hold Biden in check."

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

My only confident prediction is that this thread will be a complete mess on/after election night.

Agreed. Both the presidential and Senate races in Iowa have been very divisive on this forum. I think this will be the final showdown between the “2016 trends” and “WWC will snap back” groups.

It'll be especially nasty if Iowa gives us a split verdict on Pres/Senate, lol.

I'm not changing my prediction maps in my profile, fwiw. MT and both GA seats flip before IA.

I’m really gonna flip out if Biden wins Iowa but Greenfield doesn’t.  Same with North Carolina (if Biden wins while Cunningham doesn’t).  A Senate seat is so much more valuable than a few extra electoral votes (which really have no value on their own if you are already at or above 270).

Hence my signature. This is why the "check on Biden" talking point (even when it's made with positive intentions) is potentially so dangerous for Democrats. Things aren't going to get any better if Republicans keep the Senate, no matter how much Biden wins by.

Quite frankly, any Republicans who subscribes to this mentality ought to be satisfied enough that there is going to be a 6-3 conservative majority on the Superme Court to "hold Biden in check."

The level of satisfaction for Republicans regarding the Court as a means to check Biden iis mitigated by the realization that with a Trifecta, they can pack the court. The Senate thus acts as buffer to prevent that.

[Mr.Phips]

My only confident prediction is that this thread will be a complete mess on/after election night.

Agreed. Both the presidential and Senate races in Iowa have been very divisive on this forum. I think this will be the final showdown between the “2016 trends” and “WWC will snap back” groups.

It'll be especially nasty if Iowa gives us a split verdict on Pres/Senate, lol.

I'm not changing my prediction maps in my profile, fwiw. MT and both GA seats flip before IA.

I’m really gonna flip out if Biden wins Iowa but Greenfield doesn’t.  Same with North Carolina (if Biden wins while Cunningham doesn’t).  A Senate seat is so much more valuable than a few extra electoral votes (which really have no value on their own if you are already at or above 270).

Hence my signature. This is why the "check on Biden" talking point (even when it's made with positive intentions) is potentially so dangerous for Democrats. Things aren't going to get any better if Republicans keep the Senate, no matter how much Biden wins by.

Quite frankly, any Republicans who subscribes to this mentality ought to be satisfied enough that there is going to be a 6-3 conservative majority on the Superme Court to "hold Biden in check."

The level of satisfaction for Republicans regarding the Court as a means to check Biden iis mitigated by the realization that with a Trifecta, they can pack the court. The Senate thus acts as buffer to prevent that.

A 6-3 court could just find the packing unconstitutional if they wanted.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

My only confident prediction is that this thread will be a complete mess on/after election night.

Agreed. Both the presidential and Senate races in Iowa have been very divisive on this forum. I think this will be the final showdown between the “2016 trends” and “WWC will snap back” groups.

It'll be especially nasty if Iowa gives us a split verdict on Pres/Senate, lol.

I'm not changing my prediction maps in my profile, fwiw. MT and both GA seats flip before IA.

I’m really gonna flip out if Biden wins Iowa but Greenfield doesn’t.  Same with North Carolina (if Biden wins while Cunningham doesn’t).  A Senate seat is so much more valuable than a few extra electoral votes (which really have no value on their own if you are already at or above 270).

Hence my signature. This is why the "check on Biden" talking point (even when it's made with positive intentions) is potentially so dangerous for Democrats. Things aren't going to get any better if Republicans keep the Senate, no matter how much Biden wins by.

Quite frankly, any Republicans who subscribes to this mentality ought to be satisfied enough that there is going to be a 6-3 conservative majority on the Superme Court to "hold Biden in check."

The level of satisfaction for Republicans regarding the Court as a means to check Biden iis mitigated by the realization that with a Trifecta, they can pack the court. The Senate thus acts as buffer to prevent that.

A 6-3 court could just find the packing unconstitutional if they wanted.

Not if the new justices participated in the vote (why would they recuse themselves?) and even then, they’d have no way to enforce the ruling.  Once we have four more Justices and a 7-6 majority, said ruling could simply be overturned.

[Progressive Pessimist]

My only confident prediction is that this thread will be a complete mess on/after election night.

Agreed. Both the presidential and Senate races in Iowa have been very divisive on this forum. I think this will be the final showdown between the “2016 trends” and “WWC will snap back” groups.

It'll be especially nasty if Iowa gives us a split verdict on Pres/Senate, lol.

I'm not changing my prediction maps in my profile, fwiw. MT and both GA seats flip before IA.

I’m really gonna flip out if Biden wins Iowa but Greenfield doesn’t.  Same with North Carolina (if Biden wins while Cunningham doesn’t).  A Senate seat is so much more valuable than a few extra electoral votes (which really have no value on their own if you are already at or above 270).

Hence my signature. This is why the "check on Biden" talking point (even when it's made with positive intentions) is potentially so dangerous for Democrats. Things aren't going to get any better if Republicans keep the Senate, no matter how much Biden wins by.

Quite frankly, any Republicans who subscribes to this mentality ought to be satisfied enough that there is going to be a 6-3 conservative majority on the Superme Court to "hold Biden in check."

The level of satisfaction for Republicans regarding the Court as a means to check Biden iis mitigated by the realization that with a Trifecta, they can pack the court. The Senate thus acts as buffer to prevent that.

I'm still honestly not convinced that a Democratic Senate would go through with court-packing, even if Biden and Schumer want to. Democratic Senate caucuses are much more ideologically diverse than Republican ones. I really can't see Manchin or Sinema signing onto the idea.

[Kalimantan]

My only confident prediction is that this thread will be a complete mess on/after election night.

Agreed. Both the presidential and Senate races in Iowa have been very divisive on this forum. I think this will be the final showdown between the “2016 trends” and “WWC will snap back” groups.

It'll be especially nasty if Iowa gives us a split verdict on Pres/Senate, lol.

I'm not changing my prediction maps in my profile, fwiw. MT and both GA seats flip before IA.

I’m really gonna flip out if Biden wins Iowa but Greenfield doesn’t.  Same with North Carolina (if Biden wins while Cunningham doesn’t).  A Senate seat is so much more valuable than a few extra electoral votes (which really have no value on their own if you are already at or above 270).

Hence my signature. This is why the "check on Biden" talking point (even when it's made with positive intentions) is potentially so dangerous for Democrats. Things aren't going to get any better if Republicans keep the Senate, no matter how much Biden wins by.

Quite frankly, any Republicans who subscribes to this mentality ought to be satisfied enough that there is going to be a 6-3 conservative majority on the Superme Court to "hold Biden in check."

The level of satisfaction for Republicans regarding the Court as a means to check Biden iis mitigated by the realization that with a Trifecta, they can pack the court. The Senate thus acts as buffer to prevent that.

I'm still honestly not convinced that a Democratic Senate would go through with court-packing, even if Biden and Schumer want to. Democratic Senate caucuses are much more ideologically diverse than Republican ones. I really can't see Manchin or Sinema signing onto the idea.

Yeah, at this point it feels like court pecking is being used as a prop by Republicans to keep wavering voters in senate races and by Democrats to keep their base motivated in the presidential race. I would be astonished if this actually got anywhere near happening in real life.

[GALeftist]

Y'all, idk if court packing will happen either (I've been disappointed by fence sitting dems too much thus far), but Biden and Schumer aren't clowns. They've clearly talked to Manchin, Sinema, and whoever else about this, that's why everyone is dodging questions on it and saying stuff about how they're "not a fan" or "apprehensive" and whatnot. Every dodge is more political capital they're sinking into this, so either it's all one big bluff (which would be just astoundingly incompetent even for the Democratic Party) or they are at least seriously considering it.

[Pericles]

Y'all, idk if court packing will happen either (I've been disappointed by fence sitting dems too much thus far), but Biden and Schumer aren't clowns. They've clearly talked to Manchin, Sinema, and whoever else about this, that's why everyone is dodging questions on it and saying stuff about how they're "not a fan" or "apprehensive" and whatnot. Every dodge is more political capital they're sinking into this, so either it's all one big bluff (which would be just astoundingly incompetent even for the Democratic Party) or they are at least seriously considering it.

It could have been a gamble to make Republicans think the Dems will court-pack if the RBG seat is filled, but Republicans either don't believe it will happen or don't care. So it probably has gotten beyond that stage by now.

[VAR]

Now she’s unskewing the polls? Her campaign is a dumpster fire.

  Sane and principled suburban Des Moines conservatives for Greenfield 

[Ljube]

Why would any conservative, or even a moderate vote for Greenfield?

[DrScholl]

Why would any conservative, or even a moderate vote for Greenfield?

Ernst doesn't even know the price of soybeans. That's a good enough reason for voters to vote for Greenfield.

[VAR]

Why would any conservative, or even a moderate vote for Greenfield?

Because she pushed a debunked COVID conspiracy theory which infuriated pro-science Trump supporters. Also, she doesn’t know the price of soybeans, and Trump supporters care about that too. She underperforms Trump by 4-5% imo.

/s

[WD]

Why would any conservative, or even a moderate vote for Greenfield?

Because she pushed a debunked COVID conspiracy theory which infuriated pro-science Trump supporters. Also, she doesn’t know the price of soybeans, and Trump supporters care about that too. She underperforms Trump by 4-5% imo.

/s

imo Greenfield is more likely to win than Hickenlooper tbh imho