Which party will have more surprises/upsets this cycle?

[ProgressiveModerate]

In 2018, Democrats won a lot of upsets in the House, whereas in the senate the big surprises were Scott winning FL and how close Beto came in TX. In 2016, most surprises broke in Republican's favor up and down the ballot. Same was true in 2014. From 2008-2012, I would argue that almost all surprises broke in Democrats favor. (IN, NC in 2008, CO and NV in 2010, FL president and MT and ND senate in 2012). Who do you think will win more upsets?

[ChrisMcDanielWasRobbed]

Republicans. They will hold on to all their senate seats except Colorado and Pick up in Alabama, Minnesota, and Michigan.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Republicans. They will hold on to all their senate seats except Colorado and Pick up in Alabama, Minnesota, and Michigan.

Why do you say this? Is this just a gut feeling, or is there any rhyme or reason to this?

[ChrisMcDanielWasRobbed]

Republicans. They will hold on to all their senate seats except Colorado and Pick up in Alabama, Minnesota, and Michigan.

Why do you say this? Is this just a gut feeling , or is there any rhyme or reason to this?

John James has outraised Gary Peters and Jason Lewis is getting a lot more attention and there is a huge hidden GOP support in Minnesota. Susan Collins won by over 40% last time and will win by just as much again, and a bunch of Mark Kelly voters will flip to Mcsally when they vote the Full R Ticket for TRUMP.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Republicans. They will hold on to all their senate seats except Colorado and Pick up in Alabama, Minnesota, and Michigan.

Why do you say this? Is this just a gut feeling , or is there any rhyme or reason to this?

John James has outraised Gary Peters and Jason Lewis is getting a lot more attention and there is a huge hidden GOP support in Minnesota. Susan Collins won by over 40% last time and will win by just as much again, and a bunch of Mark Kelly voters will flip to Mcsally when they vote the Full R Ticket for TRUMP.

Isn't that kind of cherry picking data just so that you can say the slate of canidates you want to win will win. Democrats are outraising Republicans in basically every single other competative race, including ME and MN, so by your logic, fundraising would help Democrats in those races. Also, what do you mean by there is a secret Republican vote in MN. Also; if partisanship is winning out in AZ-Sen, wouldn't it also win out in ME (maybe not enough to put Gideon over the edge but enough to keep the race close)?

[LimoLiberal]

I feel like the "under the hood" changes we're seeing in the national polls - Hispanics and Asians shifting right, whites (esp. college educated) shifting left - could have an underrated impact on the House. I could easily see CA-21 and FL-26 flipping to the GOP while Democrats pick up some of the reach Texas suburban seats and IN-05.
 

[ChrisMcDanielWasRobbed]

Republicans. They will hold on to all their senate seats except Colorado and Pick up in Alabama, Minnesota, and Michigan.

Why do you say this? Is this just a gut feeling , or is there any rhyme or reason to this?

John James has outraised Gary Peters and Jason Lewis is getting a lot more attention and there is a huge hidden GOP support in Minnesota. Susan Collins won by over 40% last time and will win by just as much again, and a bunch of Mark Kelly voters will flip to Mcsally when they vote the Full R Ticket for TRUMP.

Isn't that kind of cherry picking data just so that you can say the slate of canidates you want to win will win. Democrats are outraising Republicans in basically every single other competative race, including ME and MN, so by your logic, fundraising would help Democrats in those races. Also, what do you mean by there is a secret Republican vote in MN. Also; if partisanship is winning out in AZ-Sen, wouldn't it also win out in ME (maybe not enough to put Gideon over the edge but enough to keep the race close)?

Susan collins is a moderate who outran Obama by 35 points in 2008. She will do it again.

[Rand]

Donald Trump is killing the Republican party. As long as he is president, Democrats will continue to gain ground. 2018/2020 is 2006/2008 all over again.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Republicans. They will hold on to all their senate seats except Colorado and Pick up in Alabama, Minnesota, and Michigan.

Why do you say this? Is this just a gut feeling , or is there any rhyme or reason to this?

John James has outraised Gary Peters and Jason Lewis is getting a lot more attention and there is a huge hidden GOP support in Minnesota. Susan Collins won by over 40% last time and will win by just as much again, and a bunch of Mark Kelly voters will flip to Mcsally when they vote the Full R Ticket for TRUMP.

Isn't that kind of cherry picking data just so that you can say the slate of canidates you want to win will win. Democrats are outraising Republicans in basically every single other competative race, including ME and MN, so by your logic, fundraising would help Democrats in those races. Also, what do you mean by there is a secret Republican vote in MN. Also; if partisanship is winning out in AZ-Sen, wouldn't it also win out in ME (maybe not enough to put Gideon over the edge but enough to keep the race close)?

Susan collins is a moderate who outran Obama by 35 points in 2008. She will do it again.

Things are far more polarized now, so while I do agree that she'll likely outrun Trump, maybe even by low double digits, she's not outrunning him by 35%, especially when polling suggests this race is a dead heat, and that if anything, Gideon is favored. This is also the first time her race has seriously been this contested and nationalized, so by default, she'll likely do worse than he did in 2008. Also; by that logic, shouldn't someone like Peters, who outperformed his state's PVI by nearly 20 points, be favored to win in a cycle where the national environment is already more favorable to Democrats than it was in 2014?

[Ferguson97]

congressional races with big college towns might see a reduced vote share for the Democrat but other than that I generally think there won’t be many surprises.

[ChrisMcDanielWasRobbed]

Burgess Owens wins UT-04. Collin Peterson loses. Kendra Horn loses. Joe Cunningham loses. Jeanne Ives wins. Jim Oberweiss wins. TX-23 stays R. Antonio Delgado loses. Jeff Van Drew wins. FL-26 goes R. Ds lose at least 2 seats in California. Karen Handel wins. GA-07 stays R. Don Bacon wins. Max Rose loses.

[Stuart98]

Okay I'll counter our Kentucky Republican's fantasy with my own:

Biden wins by over 400 electoral votes, winning every Obama '12 state plus North Carolina, Georgia, Texas, Arizona, and Alaska. Democrats take a 56-44 senate majority by winning upset races in South Carolina, Kansas, Alaska, and Montana in addition to the races they were seen as favored or toss-ups in. In the house, Democrats expand their majority, picking up 3 seats in North Carolina, KY06, VA05, MO02, IL13, IN05, CO03, MI03, AK-AL, GA07, PA10, KS02, AZ06, MT-AL, NE02, NY02, and OH01. In California the GOP lose the 25th and the 50th, and barely stem additional losses after closer than expected races in CA01 and CA08. Democrats have a great but not quite amazing night in Texas, winning TX23, TX21, TX24, and TX22 but failing to pick up other house races or the Texas senate race. Democrats lose only three democratic-held congressional seats in Doug Jones' senate seat, FL26, and MN07.

[有爭議嘅領土 of The Figgis Agency]

I feel like the "under the hood" changes we're seeing in the national polls - Hispanics and Asians shifting right, whites (esp. college educated) shifting left - could have an underrated impact on the House. I could easily see CA-21 and FL-26 flipping to the GOP while Democrats pick up some of the reach Texas suburban seats and IN-05.

Aside from more foreign policy-oriented immigrants who approve of Trump’s aggression towards China, I’m not convinced Asian voters are shifting significantly to the right, at least not on domestic policy. The long-term trends with Asian voters over the last 20-30 years have clearly favored Dems, although in himdsight Obama may have a better “fit” for Asians than Biden and Sanders.

Both House districts you mentioned have very large Latino populations, but relatively few Asians. I think there will be “surprises” for both parties.
 

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

Democrats have a great but not quite amazing night in Texas, winning TX03, TX21, TX24, and TX22 but failing to pick up other house races or the Texas senate race.

Is this cause of the TX-3 internal poll? Because if Biden is winning Texas & Dems get TX-3, I see Dems also getting TX-10/TX-23 & maybe TX-6/TX-31

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

AK, IN Gov IA, KS, MT Gov, OH  and SC

TX probably is a bridge too far and stays R

R complained about FDR packing the Crts and McConnell is CRT packing with Activist R judges instead of voting on 1200 stimulus

[Pericles]

Not sure which party will have more upsets if you go by a polling-based model. However, given conventional wisdom, Democrats are very likely to have more upsets. Conventional wisdom struggles to resist defaulting to seeing it as a tossup race, so if it actually stays at being a D+8% race (or Biden's lead ends up being even bigger) this won't have been fully accounted for in pre-election expectations.

[Kuumo]

Not sure which party will have more upsets if you go by a polling-based model. However, given conventional wisdom, Democrats are very likely to have more upsets. Conventional wisdom struggles to resist defaulting to seeing it as a tossup race, so if it actually stays at being a D+8% race (or Biden's lead ends up being even bigger) this won't have been fully accounted for in pre-election expectations.

This question has a different answer depending on whether the races are upsets from the perspective of the mainstream media or from the median Atlas poster's perspective. Example: Biden winning Georgia would be a huge upset according to the conventional wisdom, but the average Atlas poster would be less surprised. From the mainstream media/conventional wisdom perspective, Democrats will have more upsets, especially in the House. From the Atlas poster/political junkie perspective, both parties will have roughly equal numbers of upsets.

[Stuart98]

Democrats have a great but not quite amazing night in Texas, winning TX03, TX21, TX24, and TX22 but failing to pick up other house races or the Texas senate race.

Is this cause of the TX-3 internal poll? Because if Biden is winning Texas & Dems get TX-3, I see Dems also getting TX-10/TX-23 & maybe TX-6/TX-31

That was actually a typo, I meant TX-23. Maybe I had the TX03 poll on my mind?

[Alben Barkley]

Since everyone seems to expect it to be at least very close if not a Trump win despite practically all data pointing to it being a comfortable Biden win, when that happens it will be the "surprise" even if it's not at all surprising to rational, evidence-based people.

Similarly, if Biden ends up winning states like Texas or Georgia, that will be seen as a "surprise" even though it really shouldn't be since polls have shown those states are pure toss-ups for months now.

Note I'm mostly going by betting markets to gauge what people's expectations going into the election will be. (Along with polls showing people still expect Trump to win or that it's about 50/50, and to a lesser extent my experiences here and talking to other people online and off.) They were wrong in 2016 and now they will be wrong again in 2020 by overcompensating for it. In neither case would they have been too surprised if they only followed the data instead of letting subjective biases cloud their judgment.