Sam Spade's 2010 Predictions

[Sam Spade]

a few changes to the Governor's race pile b/c enough recent polling has presented itself.

House changes probably upcoming fairly soon.

[Sam Spade]

Just bumping this up so I don't lose it when I want to update.  Couple of points...

House should really be bumped up to a 30-35 seat call now. 

In the Senate, I'm really only sensing cosmetic changes right now.  Nothing big.

Governor's races are still wide-open in some sense, but in general I'm seeing a potential Dem massacre really setting up here, perhaps moreso than in other places.  Go figure.

[Sam Spade]

Just bumping this up so I don't lose it when I want to update.  Couple of points...

House should really be bumped up to a 30-35 seat call now. 

In the Senate, I'm really only sensing cosmetic changes right now.  Nothing big.

Governor's races are still wide-open in some sense, but in general I'm seeing a potential Dem massacre really setting up here, perhaps moreso than in other places.  Go figure.

That is because states are in fiscal extremis, and it is time for more hard ass daddy rule, don't you think, is what is in play here, on the gubernatorial level?

It's certainly a good reason. 

I wasn't really going into the reasons why, just what the polls are saying.

[Sam Spade]

Strickland is looking safer since his impressive fundraising totals, his NRA endorsement, and a series of missteps by Kasich -- making fun of Strickland's rural roots and publicly saying that you're not engaged in keeping Lebron James in Ohio?  He's in damage controlmode

Oh, I definitely agree Strickland's position looks better than in December or January and Kasich has done a number of stupid things lately, but looking safer is perhaps a bit too much - looking stronger maybe...  (I don't usually say safer until I see the 10-point lead or something).

Let me say my above comment this way - right now there's really only two Dem governorships that I would call safe or anywhere close to safe (Ark and NY).  Hawaii and NH are the closest to being there otherwise, but honestly NH is much closer to lean D than likely D at this point.  And with the exception of MA, I really can't put together that good of an argument for the other 4 in Lean D not being in toss-up (and Oregon should clearly be in toss-up, based on the polling, which will be changed soon).

What does all this mean?  That there is the real danger Dems could be 15 or under in terms of governorship post-2010.  Not likely yet, at all, but it is a very real danger.

[Sam Spade]

I updated Senate and Governor today.

Expect House once we get the full slate of fundraising numbers.

Notes are below the line.
AR-Sen:  Yes, I know.  Only one Rasmussen poll post-primary.  Just a gut feeling.
AZ-Sen:  What Obama is doing is destined to do the Dems tons of damage in Arizona this year.  Once Hayworth is dead, this one goes in Safe, though honestly I suspect even Hayworth would be a pretty clear favorite.
IA-Sen:  Since the R2K flareup, we should put this one where it belongs for now.  Though I was probably going to do it anyways.
OR-Sen:  Wyden is just on the edge of going to Likely R, scary as it might sound to Dems.  An argument can certainly be made for it, fyi.
WA-Sen:  Honestly, I am about this close to putting this race in toss-up, seeing SUSA's primary poll.  Not yet, of course.
WI-Sen:  The polls say this change must be made.

AZ-Gov:  Another gut feeling call - see AZ-Sen for why.
CO-Gov:  Very close to being in Lean R after the iterations from SUSA, PPP and Ras.  One more outside poll saying the same thing will probably push me.
FL-Gov:  Honestly, I suspect Florida's a toss-up (with a slight R lean).  But since no poll has ever put a Dem ahead...
HI-Gov:  Another gut feeling call.  Though I never trust Hawaii polling.
MD-Gov:  Am about this close to putting this one in Toss-up.
ME-Gov:  Another poll showing a tight race and toss-up this goes too.
NH-Gov:  We get a poll showing a 10% or less margin, it goes in Lean D.  Though I'm halfway towards doing that anyways.
NV-Gov:  I'm moving to Likely R.  Sandoval has never polled under 50% against Reid and Nevada always has a perceptible GOP lean at the state level so...
OR-Gov:  When all the polls say tie or small R lead, Lean D is not longer the place.
PA-Gov:  I can make a good case for Corbett being in Likely R.  Get another independent poll with a 10%+ lead, then...
WI-Gov:  Moving to Lean R - PPP and Rasmussen confirm here too.  Though don't trust Wisconsin polling much, it's a strange state.

[Sam Spade]

Sam, for the governors' races, you seem to have listed Illinois twice, in toss-up and lean R.

Should be Lean R.  Will correct.

[Sam Spade]

I've updated Senate and Governor.  House will come this weekend.

I'm very close to making a few changes that I note below.
Senate
NY-Sen (Gillibrand): Am very close to putting this one in Safe.  Probably will next time.
CT-Sen:  I want to see what happens post-primary, but so long as Blumenthal stays safely above 50%, you can expect it in Safe soon enough.
WA-Sen:  We need more polls, though I am pretty close to putting into Toss-up.
WI-Sen:  I put it into toss-up because enough evidence (for me) has been provided that the race is probably within MOE (even though Wisconsin polls and summer polls suck!)
AR-Sen:  Lincoln is not going to put into Safe anytime soon because of the amount of money she has.  Polling-wise, it would fit of course.
DE-Sen:  Another poll like the Rasmussen iteration and it'll go into Lean R.  I wonder how much effect the primary is having here that will resolve itself prior to the election.
LA-Sen:  Part of me wants to put this into Lean R and part doesn't.  I really need more polling.
ND-Sen:  I decided to put Hoeven in Safe b/c nothing has been presented to me that says otherwise, even for an open seat.
Governor
AR-Gov:  Beebe's numbers are likely having to do with a bad Dem year.  He's not in any danger unless he falls below 50% consistently, of course.
NY-Gov:  I'm putting Cuomo in safe - though don't be surprised if the numbers being produced are both a top and bottom.
CO-Gov:  I want to see how the McInnis thing plays out before making a change.  Right now, Dems should be reaping benefits.  We'll see.
ME-Gov:  Just where I believe the race is although I'd love to have more polling.
MD-Gov:  Am close to putting in toss-up.
CA-Gov:  Moving to toss-up because the polling says so.
FL-Gov:  We'll see what happens - but moving to toss-up seems reasonable for now.
GA-Gov:  Moving to toss-up and reevaluating after the runoff.
IL-Gov:  Closer to going into tossup, but not there yet - need another tied poll or poll showing Quinn ahead.
TX-Gov:  See above.

[Sam Spade]

House updated (finally)

As an overview, my thoughts are that the GOP chances of taking the House are presently somewhere between a 1 in 3 chance (33%) to a 2 in 5 (40%) chance.  An argument can be made for a 50-50 chance, but I'm not making it yet.

I didn't note this earlier, but the GOP chance of taking the Senate is probably at 1 in 10 right now.

Notes on individual races after the line:
AR-02:  Congrats Dems on nominating a black liberal from Little Rock.  Say goodbye to this seat.
AZ-01:  I've said a lot about what Obama is doing to AZ Dems before.
CA-18:  Berryhill raised enough money and can self-fund enough to make this watchable.
CA-44:  Gave up on Hedrick.  No fundraising.
CT-04:  Good fundraising by Debicella.  He's obviously going to need a lot more, but I suspect places like this may be the most surprising in the upcoming election (as will be certain other areas in the opposite direction).
FL-02:  Boyd has a lot of dough.  But he's been acting like someone who's in a lot of trouble, not just from his primary.  DCCC putting him on the list made me finally make this move (and no, I haven't forgotten about the released internal earlier).
FL-12:  Dropped from the list b/c Edwards fundraising continues to be awful in a bad Dem year.
FL-22:  West has a lot of money is this polarized seat.  'nough said.
IA-01:  Not that I believe Braley's in any danger, but this rounds out the watch list among the other seats I could have listed.
IA-02:  I expect to get a certain amount of laughs on this.  But I have a couple of reasons for watching here (even moreso than IA-01) - what do you think they are?
ID-01:  Everything says 'push this race down a level.'  So I have.
IL-11:  Kinzinger is fundraising quite well.
IL-17:  Even before the R poll, this one was going into the Watch List b/c Schilling has fundraised pretty well and Hare has no mountain of dough to back him up.
IN-02:  Walorski had better fundraising than Donnelly this past quarter.  More importantly, if there's any place in the world that's susceptible to waves, it's Indiana.
KS-04:  Lost in the hustle and bustle a bit was SUSA's poll that the non-fundraising black preacher Tillman was beating Raj Goyle in the primary.  Which answers why Raj is spending money already.  Raj can raise money, of course, but I just don't see it happening in a R+13 seat in this year.  Especially when he might get Greened.
KY-03:  Maybe a bit of a surprise from not on Watch List to Likely D.  A few things:  Kelly outraised Yarmuth last quarter and Yarmuth doesn't have a mound of cash.  More importantly, I keep reading rumors from decent sources that the blacks are not particularly happy with Yarmuth.
KY-06:  There's actually a decent case this should go to Lean D as Cook and Rothenberg have it.  As Chandler still has a mound of cash, I disagree, for now.
MA-10:  I tend to agree with the general analysis on this race posted on the forum and have moved accordingly.
MI-03:  Pat Miles is still outraising the Republicans here, fyi.
MS-01:  Both Childers and Nunnelee have raised a good bit of money.  And Childers is quite talented.  But I've been reexamining the demographic makeup of this CD, and with someone from Tupelo running, things just become very difficult for the Dem.  Add to that the fact that there are no top-ballot races, and well, I just think this is the better call, for now...
MN-01:  Good fundraising quarter from Hemmer.
NC-02:  I tend to think this ship has sailed, but we'll give it a month to see.
NC-07:  Pantano had a very good fundraising quarter.
NC-08:  Kissell has no money and no D'Annuzio to run against.
NE-02:  Poor fundraising quarter from White.
NJ-03:  If you have MAS117 utilizing political tactics for your campaign...
NY-19:  Hall continues to get outraised by Hayworth (even if personal money is being partially used).  Considering the makeup of this CD in this year (and where it's located), I think tossup is the appropriate call.
NY-20:  Excellent fundraising quarter by Gibson.
NY-23:  Lots of Republican infighting here makes me downgrade this race.
NY-24:  Arcuri got outraised and has been generally looking like a disaster in everything he does.
NY-29*:  Reed has not been a great fundraiser, but his opponent has raised nothing and this seat always has had a fairly strong GOP tilt anyway.
OH-02:  Schmidt can't raise money but neither can her opponent with the foreign-sounding name.  In this CD, both of these facts = curtains.
OH-13:  As I've mentioned before, this seat is not *that* Democratic and Sutton's given me no reason to think she's not going to get completely drowned out by ads in the upcoming months.
OH-16:  Renacci fundraised the socks off of Boccieri the past quarter.
OR-01:  JLT's feelings kinda sum up mine here.
PA-03:  Yes, I know - Kelly's fundraising was terrible.  And I don't trust internals very much (though they're always at the back of my mind when they show the incumbent down double-digits and I see no incumbent response).  Two things - both Cook and Rothenberg recently moved Dahlkemper to tossup and Dems are still setting up ad time regardless of the clear fundraising disparity.
PA-11:  I don't really trust polling from this area of the world.  That being said, Kanjorski's done nothing to show me that he is anything but the underdog here, IMO.
PA-12:  Burns raised no money this quarter.  He does have personal wealth, but...
SC-05:  Given the environment, this movement feels right.
VA-02:  Both candidates are fundraising well.  Gut feel is really behind this move.
VA-05:  Out of all the Dem wins in 2008, this one was perhaps most due to turnout.  SUSA's recent poll in comparison with 2006 and 2008 makes this crystal clear.
WI-08:  Once again, more of a national/state movement call than anything else.

[Sam Spade]

Arizona at Safe R b/c Hayworth has no chance - I could buy that interpretation (and may be close to doing so).

[Sam Spade]

So which seats have received DCCC independent ad time buys for the fall?  It's early, of course, and this will change as circumstances do...

DEMS (GOP Targets) (78 seats/25 Watch List)

Likely R 4 seats
AR-02*
LA-03*
NY-29*
TN-06*

Lean R 13 seats
CO-04
IN-08*
KS-03*
MD-01
MS-01
NH-02*
NM-02
NY-24
OH-01
OH-15
PA-11
VA-02
VA-05

Toss-up 24 seats
AL-02
AR-01*
FL-02
FL-08
FL-24
IL-14
IN-09
MI-01*
MI-07
NC-08
ND-AL
NH-01
NV-03
NY-19
OH-16
PA-03
PA-07*
SC-05
SD-AL
TN-08*
TX-17
WA-03*
WI-07*
WV-01*

Lean D 24 seats
AZ-01
AZ-05
AZ-08
CA-11
FL-22
GA-08
IA-03
ID-01
IL-11
IN-02
MA-10*
MO-04
NJ-03
NM-01
NY-01
NY-20
NY-23
OH-13
OH-18
PA-08
TN-04
VA-09
VA-11
WI-08

Likely D 13 seats
CO-03
CT-04
CT-05
IL-17
KY-03
KY-06
NY-13
OR-05
PA-04
PA-10
PA-12
PA-17
TX-23

Watch List 25 seats
AR-04
CA-18
CA-47
CO-07
GA-02
GA-12
IA-01
IA-02
IL-08
MI-09
MN-01
MS-04
MO-03
NC-02
NC-07
NC-11
NJ-12
NY-25
OH-06
OK-02
OR-01
UT-02
WA-02
WV-03
WI-03

GOP (DEM Targets) (10 seats/6 Watch List)

Likely D (1 seat)
LA-02

Lean D (1 seat)
DE-AL*

Toss-up (2 seats)
HI-01
IL-10*

Lean R (5 seats)
CA-03
FL-25*
PA-06
PA-15
WA-08

Likely R (1 seat)
NE-02

Watch List (6 seats)
AZ-03*
CA-45
MI-03*
MN-06
OH-12
SC-02

[Sam Spade]

Per Sam's latest list, I come up with a projected 30 seat GOP gain.

(4*1)+(13*0.67)+(24*0.5)+(24*0.33)+(13*0.1)=33.93
                                       (-1*1)+(-2*.5)+(-5*.33)=-3.65
                                                                                30.28

                                                                                 

Isn't that what the list says at top?

[Sam Spade]

Just noting that Charlie Cook's guys changed their prediction a couple of days ago to this:

House:  GOP +32 to 42
Senate:  GOP +5 to 7
Governors:  GOP +3 to 5

In the House, Stu Rothenberg's map and his present prediction is 28-33 seats, so that's less bullish for the GOP than Cook, but not too far off, and roughly about where I see it.

In addition, Rothenberg recently said that his present prediction is GOP +5 to 8 in the Senate, so we're all in agreement there too.

Governors ratings are where I think Cook's people are off.  Rothenberg's map would translate into a 6-10 seat gain for the GOP, and right now I'm calling for 6-8, so it's obvious who I side with for now.

[Sam Spade]

I generally hate making changes in summer (July 4 - Labor Day is summer), when polling really sucks, but a couple must be made based on overwhelming evidence in my mind.  I've also added a little note as to whether I consider to Tossup pure or Tilt D or R.

Senate

AZ Sen:  Since Hayworth is definitely now dead - to safe this goes.
CO Sen:  I consider it pure Tossup, regardless of what Ras says.
DE Sen:  Castle is still on the edge of Likely R, but my own formula says keep him there and I really want to see what happens primary and post-primary before doing anything.
FL-Sen:  Consider it a pure Tossup.
IL-Sen:  I consider this a pure Tossup b/c self-destruction is a beautiful thing.
LA-Sen:  Really in the same boat as DE Sen.
MO-Sen:  The polling says Tossup/Tilt R.  Maybe even close to Lean R (the closest of any of these, btw), given Missouri history, but I'm not there yet.
NC-Sen:  Given the contours of this race and of North Carolina generally...
NH-Sen:  Not gonna move this one until I start seeing tied polls or leads for the D with rest of polls saying 5 or under (mostly).
NV-Sen:  I consider this pure Tossup, for obvious reasons.
OH-Sen:  I consider this Tossup/Tilt R b/c Fisher has no money at all.
PA-Sen:  Note that I consider it a Pure Tossup.
WA Sen:  I really toyed around with putting this in tossup last time and I'm going to do it this time b/c I really see a distinction between WA and WI vs. CA.  To be fair, I'm putting in the fact that you should consider it Tossup/Tilt D in the Rothenberg lexicon, as it is the better fit, but I'm not really creating those categories yet.  
WI Sen:  Same - Tossup/Tilt D.
WV Sen:  Added as Likely D.

Governors

AL Gov:  Ron Sparks is the wrong candidate for a state like Alabama and I can't ignore the rural/suburban split in the GOP primary, which is usually the way Dems win here.
CA Gov:  I consider this Tossup/Tilt D.
CO Gov:  Moved to Lean D after the Tancredo entrance and polling for obvious reasons.  Let's see how the CO GOP plays this one now and how the Tancredo support moves.
CT Gov:  Q continues to have this a different race than Rasmussen.  For now, until something plays out for sure - Tossup/Tilt D, but could well be Lean D.
FL Gov:  Pure tossup for now.
GA Gov:  Dittos Florida, until I the primary is done - this one will likely be a real urban/rural split, so watch out...
KS-Gov:  Post-primary, and given Brownback's status, I see no reason to not put in Safe now.
IA Gov:  With Vander Platts announcing no 3rd party bid and every poll (sans R2K) having had Branstad above 50%, Likely R is where it goes for now.
IL Gov:  Show me a tied poll and I'll change the ranking...  
MD Gov:  I really should have moved this to Tossup (Tilt D) last time after a tied poll appeared and rest of polls continue to show margin under 5 - doing so now.
ME Gov: Rasmussen says should be Tossup (Tilt R) perhaps Lean R.  In general, LePage has been making a number of gaffes recently, so I'm keeping Tossup (Pure) for now.
MN Gov: Moved to Lean D, given the polling.
NM Gov:  Pure tossup for now.
OH Gov:  Pure tossup for now.  I never think highly of incumbents in Strickland's position, but Kasich's campaign so far..., well, but less said about it.
OR Gov:  Pure tossup because of Oregon's predilections.  That being said, the polling really leans toward Tossup/Tilt R.
RI Gov:  Pure tossup for now.
SC Gov:  I'm thinking this is probably Likely R, but I want another non-Rasmussen poll to do anything.
SD Gov:  Post-primary, I see no reason to not put this in safe now.  Democrats haven't controlled this since the late 1970s anyway.
VT Gov:  I have it in Tossup/Tilt R for no other reason than Rothenberg agrees.  Tell me otherwise.

[Sam Spade]

Made some changes to Governor and Senate today.  House probably not until Labor Day and I doubt many more changes until then.

[Sam Spade]

Apparently some mickey mouse outfit has Skelton in trouble.

Ya, I saw that crap. 

Basically I suspect the story with Skelton is the same as the story with Boucher in the SUSA poll a few months ago (and I suspect the same with a lot of old-time Dem incumbents in these types of seats).  Both are getting 25-30% of Republicans and splitting Independents.  So long as this continues, they'll be fine, but with narrower margins in the past.  If that breaks down, well then...

[Sam Spade]

updated

[Sam Spade]

I note a lot of '!' symbols.

Kinda been that way all year.

[Sam Spade]

Yeah. Situation now totally out of control?

Almost, in my mind.

I've always thought that you can get a grip around where an election is headed sometime around Labor Day though the Washington insiders never will act on this until early October (maybe late September).

Basically, I am close to thinking 5 Senate seats and 25-30 House seats are pretty much gone right now.  Republicans are hyperenthused and Independents (in my best judgment) have turned away from Dems.  The latter I am sure of, the former, probably only about 90% sure, henceforth the caveat.  Dems are also non-enthused, which can be affected.

In the Senate, I still think Dems can focus in on a couple of the open Senate seats (KY, OH, maybe FL), though I am starting to think more and more that MO and NH are lost.  Otherwise, they need to focus on WA, WI and CO (maybe PA - though Toomey is quite strong in an excellent GOP environment).  NV and IL, are in a certain sense, out of their control, even though clearly winnable.  You know my opinion on CA.

In the House, looking at the Likely R/Lean R list, these seats (with one exception) are either filled with young incumbents or are open, and more importantly, Dems in these seats are going to require more than just "getting the Dem base out" in order to win.  If Indys have turned away, they're dead.  And it's highly unlikely that Republicans have developed any fondness to these incumbents to provide any replacement.

To me, this means that the Dems should be preparing a firewall strategy at my tossup/Lean D level in the House where the incumbents are stronger/older or the demographics are more favorable in order to save it - now!  This is the type of election where a loss of 60-70 seats is certainly within the realm of possibilities and must be taken seriously IMHO (in other words, greater than a 10% chance).  Even losing 40-50 would be better than that end result.

Just FYI, Republicans actually did a halfway-reasonable (i.e. mediocre) firewall strategy in 2006 early enough which saved them about ten seats (most of which they lost in 2008 anyway).  A better firewall could save more, possibly.

Also - commentary - Obama, over the last few months, has been the most clueless and out-of-touch president I've ever seen.  Definitely moreso than Bush at his worst and maybe even worse than Carter.  He's emphasizing issues that he can never win (i.e. he's on the side of Michael Bloomberg) and these issues are the type which galvanize people against him horribly.  Moreover, and I must make this comment for all those who think otherwise, if he wants people to think he's a Muslim, he's done a better job of it in his actions than I could have ever thought possible.

Add this to the bad economy - which btw Republicans being in power will change nothing on that front, as I've said for a couple of years now - and you get this.

[Sam Spade]

I've certainly been giving thought to pushing MN-01 up to Likely D, most certainly.

With MN-08, I've got about 5-10 CDs I'd put on the watch list before it in my view, though I agree the candidate is presentable.

Though I agree with Al too - if MN-08 falls, 100 seats are falling, and probably every one in Iowa, just to get my drift.  We're not there, at all, imo.

[Sam Spade]

I've certainly been giving thought to pushing MN-01 up to Likely D, most certainly.

With MN-08, I've got about 5-10 CDs I'd put on the watch list before it in my view, though I agree the candidate is presentable.

Though I agree with Al too - if MN-08 falls, 100 seats are falling, and probably every one in Iowa, just to get my drift.  We're not there, at all, imo.

Even the Iowa City CD? 

Yes - I have my reasons actually.  Though don't read too much into this - it might make my top 100 seats to flip (barely), which means it's not that much further from MN-08, but whatever.

The GOP candidate is actually a good bit better than the one in IA-1 and the Dem is a good bit worse (Loesback ran weakly in 2008 imo).  Besides, it's not like this district hasn't voted for GOPers for Congress - and in wave elections that is often an important factor for me.  I also see a lot of ugliness for Dems in Iowa this year, generically, the polls pretty much say this.

[Sam Spade]

I've certainly been giving thought to pushing MN-01 up to Likely D, most certainly.

With MN-08, I've got about 5-10 CDs I'd put on the watch list before it in my view, though I agree the candidate is presentable.

Though I agree with Al too - if MN-08 falls, 100 seats are falling, and probably every one in Iowa, just to get my drift.  We're not there, at all, imo.

Even the Iowa City CD? 

Yes - I have my reasons actually.  Though don't read too much into this - it might make my top 100 seats to flip (barely), which means it's not that much further from MN-08, but whatever.

The GOP candidate is actually a good bit better than the one in IA-1 and the Dem is a good bit worse (Loesback ran weakly in 2008 imo).  Besides, it's not like this district hasn't voted for GOPers for Congress - and in wave elections that is often an important factor for me.  I also see a lot of ugliness for Dems in Iowa this year, generically, the polls pretty much say this.

Why are Iowans particularly mad?  They like balanced budgets?

I don't know.  My one time in Iowa I didn't particularly like the place, so I wouldn't call myself an expert at all... 

[Sam Spade]

So why's CO-03 been knocked down to more vulnerable than CO-07? Yes, it's more Republican, but I don't see Tipton to be nearly as strong as Frazier.

Seat strength is viewed by me as a stronger factor than candidate strength right now when I compare these two seats.  Especially since CO-07 can potentially be saved by Dem turnout if things really go awry.  CO-03 can't.

don't get me wrong though - as a candidate, Frazier looks a good bit stronger than Tipton imo.

[Sam Spade]

Updated Senate and Governor.  Most of the movement is towards Republicans as the environment continues to get better for them. 

[Sam Spade]

I had the House update on Sunday evening, but I'm just posting it today and will update tomorrow based on primary results.

I could have added about 10-15 seats on the GOP side and 3-5 on the Dem side to both Watch Lists, but I decided against it.

[Sam Spade]

You should move NY-19 to tilt R or lean R. The new PPP poll is brutal and it looks like your predictions about suburban/exurban areas turning the hardest against the Democrats/Obama are true. Obama only has a 39% approval rating for the district and Schumer has 40/50 favorables.

Want to see the primaries here - but I think replacing NY-19 and NV-03 is a reasonable call. 

Torie:  Yes, I did factor that in on GA-02 - which is why it got moved all the way up to Lean D.  Keown is also a good candidate, from what I've seen. 

Right now, just so it is clear, I consider all those seats up to Lean D on the Dem side to be considerably in play, with those in Likely D fairly close to coming in.  I think the Likely R seats are gone and the Lean R seats are in definite bad shape (and probably gone too).