So, it turns out the Democrat's path to majority was...

[Maxwell]

We lost Colorado solely because Udall ran such a poor campaign, had he ran a campaign like Begich did in AK we would've won I have no doubt about that. That's the only race that I think was salvageable.

Cory Gardner was an excellent candidate. Is there any circumstance where credit can ever be given to Republicans for doing a good job? lol

No, because he only won by 2%. An excellent candidate in Colorado would be able to win by at least high single digits in a wave election.

Not against an established incumbent like Mark Udall. For a guy who ran an incompetent campaign, he had a lot of advantages.

[Maxwell]

I feel like NJ-2 would be more vulnerable than most of these districts should Lobiondo ever retire.

[Maxwell]

I feel like NJ-2 would be more vulnerable than most of these districts should Lobiondo ever retire.

True, and FL-13 and CA-25 would be more vulnerable if the Democrats actually ran candidates there. The list is just what seats the Democrats came closest to winning in 2014.

As it stands, LoBiondo defeated his challenger by 25 points.

Yes, I realized that as I wrote the post, but decided to make the comment anyways

[Maxwell]

The Democrats totally blew IA, and AK, CO, and NC would've held in a slightly better year, so that would've been their path to a majority.

You do realize Alaska is an R+12, right? Do you mean Arkansas?

[Maxwell]

True, but Begich lost by barely two percent (roughly eight thousand votes), whereas Pryor got Blanched.

See, but my confusion is he is using the lettering for Alaska as opposed to Arkansas, so I assume he is making the case that Democrats blew Alaska, which is a ridiculous statement.