Which Congressional races in 2018 are you most optimistic/pessimistic about?

[MT Treasurer]

Not making confident predictions at this point, but speculating and guessing can be fun.

I'm only optimistic about 2 races, really. I think Republicans will pick up IN and MO relatively easily. Watching Crazy Claire self destruct will be glorious (and even if she somehow wins, she will get the Roy Blunt treatment for sure).

WI and OH should be good pickup opportunities on paper, but my gut feeling tells me that Duffy and Mandel will have a really hard time winning.

I'm not sure about ND, MT, NV, FL and PA at this point.

[DavidB.]

I'm very reluctant in predicting any of WV/MT/IN/MO, though at least a few of them should go GOP. I'm very pessimistic about the GOP's chances of retaining NV or winning OH, and it's even more unlikely they pick up WI or MI. But the Senate should stay Republican so at least there's that.

But of course I'm always a pessimist: until early November I thought Dems would win 53 or 54 seats this year and all competitive seats.

[Mr. Smith]

Optimistic about D chances in North Dakota, Montana, Nevada, and Arizona.

Like DavidB. I'm rather pessimistic about the rest, especially given the super ability to grasp defeat from the jaws of victory that Democrats have had in recent times.

[brucejoel99]

Well, midterms usually go against the party holding the Presidency; however, just as this year's Senate field offered ample opportunity for Democrats to pick up seats, 2018 is stacked for the GOP. Democrats have 5 red state seats to defend along w/ a few swing state seats. Meanwhile, they only have 1 really good target in NV, & 1 decent target in AZ.

MO & IN look like likely GOP pickups. ND, MT, & WV are solid Trump states but have popular incumbents, so who knows. The rest looks like a stretch to me. I see 2-5 GOP pickups, assuming the GOP can hold NV & AZ. That may increase if DEM incumbents in states such as WI or MI decide not to run for re-election.

So, as a DEM:

• Optimistic: NV + AZ
  

• So-so: ND + MT + WV

• Pessimistic: MO + IN

[Heisenberg]

I'm optimistic about IN and ND.

Very pessimistic about MO, I worry that Wagner may not get the nomination, and in Missouri, intraparty fights are pretty common with Republicans (see MO-Gov, Lt Gov, AG 2016, MO-Sen 2012, MO-Gov 2008, etc.) which is not good.
In 2022, Blunt needs to retire so one of Jason Smith, Eric Greitens, or Eric Schmitt can take the seat.
Also pessimistic in OH and WI. I really want both incumbents out so bad, but they will be harder to knock off than they appear to be on paper.

[Figueira]

Optimistic: VT
Pessimistic: WY

Seriously though, compared to what "conventional wisdom" on Atlas seems to be:

Optimistic: WV--I don't think Manchin is safe obviously, but I think he has a lot going for him.
Pessimistic: ND--not ruling this one out, but there are a lot of factors going against Heitkamp here.

[Bigby]

Kind of generally pessimistic. I expect Trump to be a satisfactory President, but midterms generally disfavor the incumbent party, and I always considered Class 1 in the Senate to generally tilt to the Democrats thanks to which seats are mostly up. I feel that the GOP retains the Senate no matter what, though.

[Hindsight was 2020]

I wouldn't say optimistic but more "intrigued" in is Utah. You have a slightly unpopular incumbent whose been around forever, both Huntsman and Evan talking third party runs, and a likely Dem nom in Jim Matheson who has a history of winning upset races an you got a perfect storm for an upset pick up

[jamestroll]

When I am off mobile ill talk more of Utah Senate but I will say McAdams is better candidate than Matheson.

[Del Tachi]

Optimistic - MO.  I despise Claire McCaskill and it looks like Ann Wagner, who I like very much, is angling for a run.  And MO's 2016 results seem to indicate that the state might be gone for the Democrats, especially in a midterm environment.

Pessimistic - MT.  Doesn't look like we'll be fielding a strong challenge to Tester if Zinke goes to the cabinet and Tim Fox sits out to run for Governor in 2020.

[hopper]

Optimistic: VT
Pessimistic: WY

Seriously though, compared to what "conventional wisdom" on Atlas seems to be:

Optimistic: WV--I don't think Manchin is safe obviously, but I think he has a lot going for him.
Pessimistic: ND--not ruling this one out, but there are a lot of factors going against Heitkamp here.

WV-I think Manchin is pretty safe because he was a Governor in the State and he is an incumbent.
ND-I think Heitkamp is actually pretty safe. The state had elected Conrad and Dorgan so the state has a recent history of electing Democrat US Senators. Heitkamp is a good campaigner and she is very likeable.

[hopper]

Optimistic - MO.  I despise Claire McCaskill and it looks like Ann Wagner, who I like very much, is angling for a run.  And MO's 2016 results seem to indicate that the state might be gone for the Democrats, especially in a midterm environment.

Pessimistic - MT.  Doesn't look like we'll be fielding a strong challenge to Tester if Zinke goes to the cabinet and Tim Fox sits out to run for Governor in 2020.

MO-The Democrats can still be competitive in terms of state offices and maybe 1 of the US Senate Seats. As far as US House Seats go they have been not good in that area for the past decade or maybe more. I think the last time a Missouri Democrat "picked up" a House Seat from a Missouri Republican was somewhere in the late 80's/early 90's period.

MT-Nah I don't think Republicans will beat Tester since he is a good fit for the state as a Democrat.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

I'm really bullish on our odds in 2018.  There are 10 Trump state Democrats running for re-election, and we only need eight for a filibuster-proof majority.

[brucejoel99]

I'm really bullish on our odds in 2018.  There are 10 Trump state Democrats running for re-election, and we only need eight for a filibuster-proof majority.

Well, I'll give you that MO & IN are likely GOP pickups, but ND, MT, & WV are solid Trump states that have popular Democratic incumbents, so who knows. The rest (MI, WI, PA, OH, & FL) look like a stretch to me. I see 2-5 GOP pickups, assuming the GOP can hold NV & AZ. That may increase if the popular DEM incumbents in WI or MI decide not to run for re-election (as opposed to the (popular) DEM incumbents in PA, OH, & FL, who've already decided to run for re-election).

[Heisenberg]

I'm really bullish on our odds in 2018.  There are 10 Trump state Democrats running for re-election, and we only need eight for a filibuster-proof majority.

Well, I'll give you that MO & IN are likely GOP pickups, but ND, MT, & WV are solid Trump states that have popular Democratic incumbents, so who knows. The rest (MI, WI, PA, OH, & FL) look like a stretch to me. I see 2-5 GOP pickups, assuming the GOP can hold NV & AZ. That may increase if the popular DEM incumbents in WI or MI decide not to run for re-election (as opposed to the (popular) DEM incumbents in PA, OH, & FL, who've already decided to run for re-election).

Lol, in Ohio and Wisconsin, Brown and Baldwin, two die-hard fire breathing liberals, can't be too too popular. I already plan to donate at least a little to their opponents.

[progressive85]

I am optimistic about all of them... I think Jon Tester, Heidi Heitkamp, and Joe Manchin are going to be fine.  Forget about Brown and Casey- OH and PA are going to hold in a Trump midterm.  McCaskill may lose and Donnelly looks like he'll certainly lose.

Arizona and Nevada look very competitive.

[brucejoel99]

I'm really bullish on our odds in 2018.  There are 10 Trump state Democrats running for re-election, and we only need eight for a filibuster-proof majority.

Well, I'll give you that MO & IN are likely GOP pickups, but ND, MT, & WV are solid Trump states that have popular Democratic incumbents, so who knows. The rest (MI, WI, PA, OH, & FL) look like a stretch to me. I see 2-5 GOP pickups, assuming the GOP can hold NV & AZ. That may increase if the popular DEM incumbents in WI or MI decide not to run for re-election (as opposed to the (popular) DEM incumbents in PA, OH, & FL, who've already decided to run for re-election).

Lol, in Ohio and Wisconsin, Brown and Baldwin, two die-hard fire breathing liberals, can't be too too popular. I already plan to donate at least a little to their opponents.

Well, according to Morning Consult (morningconsult.com/senator-approval-rankings-september-2016/), as of Sept., Sherrod Brown's at 49% approve & 29% disapprove (w/ 22% who don't know). And though Baldwin's a little lower on the list of most popular Senators (42% approve, 36% disapprove, 21% don't know), she still has a positive approval rating nonetheless.

[Figueira]

I'm really bullish on our odds in 2018.  There are 10 Trump state Democrats running for re-election, and we only need eight for a filibuster-proof majority.

Well, I'll give you that MO & IN are likely GOP pickups, but ND, MT, & WV are solid Trump states that have popular Democratic incumbents, so who knows. The rest (MI, WI, PA, OH, & FL) look like a stretch to me. I see 2-5 GOP pickups, assuming the GOP can hold NV & AZ. That may increase if the popular DEM incumbents in WI or MI decide not to run for re-election (as opposed to the (popular) DEM incumbents in PA, OH, & FL, who've already decided to run for re-election).

Lol, in Ohio and Wisconsin, Brown and Baldwin, two die-hard fire breathing liberals, can't be too too popular. I already plan to donate at least a little to their opponents.

Politics doesn't operate on a one-dimensional spectrum like that.

[hopper]

I'm really bullish on our odds in 2018.  There are 10 Trump state Democrats running for re-election, and we only need eight for a filibuster-proof majority.

Well, I'll give you that MO & IN are likely GOP pickups, but ND, MT, & WV are solid Trump states that have popular Democratic incumbents, so who knows. The rest (MI, WI, PA, OH, & FL) look like a stretch to me. I see 2-5 GOP pickups, assuming the GOP can hold NV & AZ. That may increase if the popular DEM incumbents in WI or MI decide not to run for re-election (as opposed to the (popular) DEM incumbents in PA, OH, & FL, who've already decided to run for re-election).

Lol, in Ohio and Wisconsin, Brown and Baldwin, two die-hard fire breathing liberals, can't be too too popular. I already plan to donate at least a little to their opponents.

Politics doesn't operate on a one-dimensional spectrum like that.

True and Ron Johnson is more conservative than Baldwin is liberal although I like Ron Johnson.

[MT Treasurer]

@hopper: It's true that ND elected Byron Dorgan, but don't forget that there's a reason he retired in 2010. Polling showed him trailing Hoeven by as much as 23 points. I know that Cramer is no Hoeven and that 2018 will be no 2010, but I wouldn't say that Heitkamp is "safe" because of how well Dorgan and Conrad did in the past.

And regarding Tester... yeah, the man is a good fit for his progressive base in the state, but he isn't as moderate or popular as as many people here seem to believe. Montana Senate races are almost never complete blowouts, and neither will the one in 2018 be. Any Republican will start out with a poll deficit, but it should tighten significantly, unless someone like O'Neill is the nominee. Just because Zinke is no longer an option, doesn't mean Tester is safe. See also CO-SEN 2014. Montana is way too polarized for Tester to win decisively, even Bullock (who is much more popular than Tester) only managed to win by 4.

[hopper]

@hopper: It's true that ND elected Byron Dorgan, but don't forget that there's a reason he retired in 2010. Polling showed him trailing Hoeven by as much as 23 points. I know that Cramer is no Hoeven and that 2018 will be no 2010, but I wouldn't say that Heitkamp is "safe" because of how well Dorgan and Conrad did in the past.

And regarding Tester... yeah, the man is a good fit for his progressive base in the state, but he isn't as moderate or popular as as many people here seem to believe. Montana Senate races are almost never complete blowouts, and neither will the one in 2018 be. Any Republican will start out with a poll deficit, but it should tighten significantly, unless someone like O'Neill is the nominee. Just because Zinke is no longer an option, doesn't mean Tester is safe. See also CO-SEN 2014. Montana is way too polarized for Tester to win decisively, even Bullock (who is much more popular than Tester) only managed to win by 4.

Well regarding ND Hoeven had an 85% Approval Rating as Governor of ND in 2010. Also, had Dorgan faced Duane Sand(R) he would have beaten him in 2010 despite the Republican Wave that year.

As far as 2018 MT Senate Race goes yeah the US Senate Races are pretty close like 1988(Burns defeated the incumbent John Melcher), 1996(Baucus defeated Rehberg) 2000: (Burns defeated Schweitzer), 2006:( Tester defeated the incumbent Burns) and 2012: Tester defeated Rehberg.

Tester is pretty popular at a 61% approval rating(a stat I dug up from Morning Consult.) I looked up at some DW-Nominate Ratings and Tester seems to be at the 35 yard line left of center so he is more Moderate than Liberal.

The 2016 MT Governors Race: Gianforti(R) was a highly regrarded opponent.

[Xing]

I'm the most pessimistic about ND, though I wouldn't be heartbroken to see Heitkamp lose. MO and IN are definitely going to be tough for Democrats as well, but I think a lot of Republicans are counting their eggs before they've hatched here. McCaskill and Donnelly aren't going to be pushovers. I'm also worried about OH, especially since I like Brown, and I think he's someone to watch for 2020 (though any chance he might have will obviously be gone if he loses.) Also, Democrats can't seem to catch a break in AZ, so I have a hard time seeing them pick up that seat, even in favorable conditions.

I feel pretty good about Wisconsin. Baldwin's a better candidate than many give her credit for, and WI really didn't magically become a Lean R state last year. It's a polarized swing state that pretty much comes down to turnout, which can be influenced by many things, including the sitting president's approval rating. Oops, meant to say WI is Titanium R.

Anyway, I actually feel pretty bullish about Tester, especially since Democrats have generally done better in statewide races there than other "red" states, and also because his opponent won't be Zinke. I think Nelson and Casey will be tough to take down as well. Yes, Nelson got very lucky in 2006 and 2012, but double digit victories are impressive in a state like Florida, and especially if Scott is his opponent, I like his chances. Nevada looks like a good pick-up opportunity for Democrats, and I'm not that worried about Michigan.

Not sure about West Virginia yet.

[hopper]

I'm the most pessimistic about ND, though I wouldn't be heartbroken to see Heitkamp lose. MO and IN are definitely going to be tough for Democrats as well, but I think a lot of Republicans are counting their eggs before they've hatched here. McCaskill and Donnelly aren't going to be pushovers. I'm also worried about OH, especially since I like Brown, and I think he's someone to watch for 2020 (though any chance he might have will obviously be gone if he loses.) Also, Democrats can't seem to catch a break in AZ, so I have a hard time seeing them pick up that seat, even in favorable conditions.

I feel pretty good about Wisconsin. Baldwin's a better candidate than many give her credit for, and WI really didn't magically become a Lean R state last year. It's a polarized swing state that pretty much comes down to turnout, which can be influenced by many things, including the sitting president's approval rating. Oops, meant to say WI is Titanium R.

Anyway, I actually feel pretty bullish about Tester, especially since Democrats have generally done better in statewide races there than other "red" states, and also because his opponent won't be Zinke. I think Nelson and Casey will be tough to take down as well. Yes, Nelson got very lucky in 2006 and 2012, but double digit victories are impressive in a state like Florida, and especially if Scott is his opponent, I like his chances. Nevada looks like a good pick-up opportunity for Democrats, and I'm not that worried about Michigan.

Not sure about West Virginia yet.

I do think Nelson will win again in a purple state since a Republican will be President in 2018. Michigan-I think somewhere down the line a Republican has a good chance to win a US Senate Seat there but not in 2018. Nevada is a wild card at this point. I like Heller but the demography of the state is what would keep me up at night if I was a National Republican Official.

[MT Treasurer]

I'm aware of that Morning Consult poll, but I highly doubt it is accurate. It also shows Senators like Reid, Menendez, McCaskill and Blunt being very popular, which is simply not believable. Morning Consult has always found most Senators with very good approval ratings.

As for IN and MO... I don't think I'm overconfident about those races at all. Obviously Republicans need to nominate strong candidates here to avoid a 2006 or 2012 redux, but "Likely R" seems like a good rating at this point in time. Donnelly really strikes me as a Mark Kirk waiting to happen: Someone who we're told shouldn't be underestimated, is battle-tested, a good fit for his state, moderate, etc. but loses by double digits in the end anyway, maybe even in a good year for Democrats.

McCaskill's only chance of getting reelected is rigging the Republican primary again and praying for Billy Long or Sam Graves to be her opponent. And even then it would only be a Tossup at best for Democrats. She's simply the worst possible Democrat for a state like Missouri. Yes, Jason Kander came close to winning in 2016, but that was only because Roy Blunt ran a godawful campaign that was hardly better than the one Todd Akin ran. Blunt was seen as the ultimate corrupt unlikeable Washington insider, but he STILL won despite facing a tough opponent who ran as an outsider and his terrible campaign. McCaskill has none of the advantages or strengths that Jason Kander had, but rather even more weaknesses than Roy Blunt. If she wins reelection, the MO GOP will have screwed up big time, even more so than in 2012.

IN and MO are the only states where I think Republicans have a big advantage. All the other red (and purple) states won't be as easy for the GOP to win.

[MT Treasurer]

Also not working in Donnelly's favor is the fact that Mike Pence is VP. Pence was mad as hell when the GOP lost that race in 2012, he will pull out all the stops to help his friend Messer, like Obama did for Duckworth this year.

Same thing is true in MO. McCaskill and the Missouri Republican Party are basically at war with each other. While the MO GOP is usually very incompetent, it shouldn't be underestimated either. No doubt that McCaskill will try to rig the Republican primary again, but I don't think this strategy will work for her this time, especially since she already did it in 2012. Again, Mitch McConnell and the Missouri GOP will pull out all the stops to defeat her. They will seek revenge for what happened in 2012.