Sabato: Initial 2016 Senate ratings

[morgieb]

LOL, Illinois is not a tossup. Maybe only likely D.

Uh, there's a republican incumbent there. He's fairly popular too. Democrats have a strong bench, but they need someone to actually RUN.

Since when being anonymous means you're popular?

He's at +10 in favorability. Yes, +10. That's very good for an Illinois Republican. Furthermore, the suggestion that you can argue two years out that ANY incumbent has a 100% chance of losing as ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ (he said 'maybe only likely D' hinting that he thinks Safe D is arguably a correct rating) says in relation to Kirk is just ludricious. We don't know who's going to challenge Kirk yet. Sure, Madigan will defeat him, but Kirk has a solid shot at surviving against one of the democratic U.S. house members, and probably starts out with a slight advantage against outgoing Lt. Gov. Shelia Simon.

In which poll is he at +10?
And even so, tell that to Lincoln Chafee and Scott Brown.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2014/11/2016-senator-approvals.html

Neither Chafee nor Brown had a 100% chance of losing two years before the election. In fact, Brown didn't lose his lead in the polls until the last few months of the campaign.

Only 2/3rds of the Illinois population have an opinion of him? Odd.

[morgieb]

He is at 38/28. He is more anonymous and unknown than well-liked.
And nobody said anything about a 100% possibility of losing. That's a strawman you created.

LOL, Illinois is not a tossup. Maybe only likely D.

He is hinting that Safe D, which means an (effectively) 100% chance of a democratic victory, is an arguable rating two years out.

And I said fairly popular for a reason.

Well if Safe D = 100% chance of victory then no seats should be Safe D/R.