Unless we start getting like McCaskill +10 polls, my rating for this race will stay at Lean R through the summer. I'm still feeling that this race will be GA 2014 - Nunn/McCaskill has a notable lead for a while, but loses it by the end of the campaign.
So even though polls are everything for other races (like Florida), polls don't count in Missouri because it *reminds* you of a race from a completely different state with completely different fundamentals? What's the parallel here? Nunn did not "have a notable lead for a while". Polls were all over the place early on, with the average being a modest Perdue lead. Then she moved *slightly* ahead in October. Several polls this year have all shown anything from Hawley up by 1 to McCaskill up by 4.
Are you sure it's not, dare I say, bias, that's preventing you from rating this a Toss-Up?
Well, if the reality that Missouri was 22 points to the nation's right in 2016 is "bias", so be it.
Funny that you would only bring up the presidential race in Missouri, and not, you know, the
Senate race, which was quite close despite 2016 being a year in which many things broke in favor for the Republicans. The gubernatorial race was also significantly closer than the presidential race, and Democrats have been improving on their 2016 numbers pretty much across the board, but especially in the Midwest. By your logic, ND and WV should be at least Likely R, if not Safe R. Dislike McCaskill as much as you want, but underestimate her at your own peril.
McCaskill will win re-election. End of story.
She will not. End of story.
Third option: Everyone puts on their adult pants and stops acting like their predictions are the be-all-end-all, instead choosing to examine the race as it develops.
End of story.
Surely you know how Atlas works by now.
