At this point, which senate outcome do you think is more likely?

[Technocracy Timmy]

This’ll be fun to see.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Clearly the Republicans are gonna gain all seats this year.

[Terry the Fat Shark]

the 2nd one is way more likely

[ON Progressive]

Neither of these outcomes are likely, but the second one is more likely.

[wesmoorenerd]

I went with the second one because other than IN and TX that seems like the most likely scenario, it's super unlikely that the GOP keeps both AZ and NV, not to mention picking up ND and WV.

[Xing]

Obviously option 1, because no way is UTDH losing in NV.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

MS is more likely than TX.  Since,  Trump is a polarized president,  like 2nd term W Bush, option 2

[wesmoorenerd]

MS is more likely than TX.  Since,  Trump is a polarized president,  like 2nd term W Bush, option 2

Absolutely not. MS is even less elastic and more R-leaning than TX for starters. Espy has virtually no chance against Hyde-Smith and he's barely a favorite against McDaniel, who has no chance of making the runoff anyway.

[Skill and Chance]

Really, really don't see Sinema losing in AZ, so Option 2.  More likely is Dems flip NV and AZ but lose 2-4 of their Romney state incumbents at the same time.

[Pragmatic Conservative]

With the generic ballot narrowing and Trumps approvals going up option 1 looks like a remote but plausible scenario while option 2 doesn’t really even look realistic.

So probably
~15% for option 1
~1% for option 2

[Virginiá]

Democrats only have so many incumbents because of how they performed in what will probably be a considerably less favorable year - 2012. To hold them all is a big lift, but definitely not impossible. Arizona and Nevada are not too difficult for Democrats, given the candidates. Tennessee seems plausible given that Bredesen has posted good numbers so far. My biggest issue is Texas. Even with some close polls, it's just hard to see Beto getting those last ~few points. TX just doesn't seem ready yet, and with its partisan lean and unusually strong Republican statewide winning streak is good enough reason to believe Beto winning is unlikely, if not impossible.

But, still, I went with option #2. Incumbent reelection rates for the party that doesn't control the White House in midterms is exceptionally strong, and usually at or above 90%, on average. It's just not easy to topple incumbent Senators when you are getting hit with a wave, so I'm not sure how Republicans are going to get 4 of them and somehow not lose AZ/NV.

[Dr. MB]

No doubt option 2.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Texas is just too much to vote option 2.

[Shameless Lefty Hack]

Option two but both are very unlikely. I still think the prognosis looks bad for Donnelly, but honestly Indiana Democratic pessimism might just be a contagious disease.

[Politician]

Option 2, of course. It has a legitimate chance of happening. Option 1 is not going to happen, as holding NV and AZ will be extremely difficult.

[mcmikk]

Voted Option 2, but I have major reservations about Texas.  I think those last few points to get over the finish line is just too much for Beto to do at this point. I'm also a little skeptical of Tennessee, though it's much more plausible than Texas, and I also can't really see the GOP holding AZ or NV, nor picking up the other 4 Dem seats if it's a D wave.

[Free Bird]

You made this poll on a Democrat-hack dominated forum. Which do you expect to win lol

[NewYorkExpress]

Option 2 is closer, though I don't think we as Democrats will win West Virginia or Indiana.

[Sestak]

Hot take: Option 1. It is still theoretically possible that McSally wins and Heller just barely hangs on, and all of Manchin, McCaskill, Donnelly, and Heitkamp could lose.

But Beto's not winning. The others could quite easily happen, but not TX.

[Doimper]

But Beto's not winning. The others could quite easily happen, but not TX.

lol

[john cage bubblegum]

For the first one to happen, you'd have to have a totally different political environment.  Like Trump at 55%+ approval, etc.  Just don't see that happening.  The second one is basically the best case scenario for Dems in a wave election, which is extremely unlikely, but possible  .

I mean, you're talking about like 2% chance vs. 5% chance, so it doesn't really matter that much.

[President Johnson]

Democrats sweeping, but neither scenario isn't very likely I guess.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

We won't know until October, a govt shutdown is looming. Which will negatively impact GOP chances.

[MarkD]

Both are very unlikely to happen, but I went with option #1. I can more easily see GOP holding on to AZ and NV than losing both of them and TN and TX too, especially not TX.

[nerd73]

Option #1 by about the same percentage margin as FL-Pres 2000.