Sabato/Kyle Kondik: 2020 Senate landscape

[MT Treasurer]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

They also think AL is the most vulnerable 2020 seat, even more so than CO.

http://crystalball.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/the-senate-how-2018-sets-up-2020/

Thoughts?

[IceSpear]

Clearly Doug Jones has 50/50 odds to outperform the Democratic presidential nominee by 20-30 points against a non pedophile Republican.

And Kentucky is not a potentially vulnerable seat for Republicans, LMFAO. Nor is Virginia for Democrats.

[Politician]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Are they trolling god forbid?

[Kyle Rittenhouse is a Political Prisoner]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Are they trolling god forbid?

They will literally never learn this lesson.

[MT Treasurer]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Are they trolling god forbid?

Some people never learn.

[IceSpear]

I don't see what's absurd about the idea of Tina Smith and Gary Peters being potentially vulnerable if 2020 is a good year for Republicans.

[Tintrlvr]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

They also think AL is the most vulnerable 2020 seat, even more so than CO.

http://crystalball.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/the-senate-how-2018-sets-up-2020/

Thoughts?

I think it's mostly fair if they're trying to be inclusive on potentially competitive seats.

Honestly, I would start Alabama out at Lean or even Likely R; it's difficult to imagine Ford winning reelection in a Presidential turnout environment even if Trump or another Republican candidate is getting trounced in the Presidential election, especially when his opponent will almost certainly be literally anyone other than Roy Moore (but, TBH, even if his opponent ends up being Roy Moore).

Colorado should also probably start out at Lean D.

Alaska seems like a glaring omission from the potentially competitive list. Surely it is more competitive than Kentucky. Michigan, Minnesota and Virginia seem unlikely to be competitive, but you never know, I suppose, and they do seem to be intentionally being inclusive. Despite everything, Maine will only be competitive if Collins retires, but I do think there is a real chance she does. Kentucky being potentially competitive seems generous to the Democrats, but oh well. I would also think Montana is more likely to be competitive than Kentucky.

In order of likelihood to flip, in my opinion:

Alabama
Colorado
Maine (if Collins retires)
Arizona
North Carolina
--- (If I had to draw a line on what flips, it would be here.)
Iowa
Georgia
Alaska*
New Hampshire
Montana*
Michigan
Minnesota
Virginia
Kentucky
South Carolina*
Maine (if Collins doesn't retire)
Everything else

*Not on their list.

[2016]

Here is the Sabato 2020 Map:



While it looks it favours Democrats keep in mind that they won't win back Seats they lost in 2014 like Alaska (Sullivan), Arkansas (Cotton), South Dakota (Rounds), Louisiana (Cassidy), Montana (Daines) or West Virginia (Moore-Capito). Those 6 Seats will stay Republican...BOOK IT.

Democrats have IMO only 3 Pick Up Opportunities

Iowa
Colorado
North Carolina

Republicans have IMO 2

Alabama
New Hampshire

[Zaybay]

Sabato 2016: "Well as you can see here, the Democrats have too many endangered seats, like MN, PA, and OH for them to even gain seats. Really, this is a question of whether the Republicans get a Supermajority or close to one."

[2016]

Sabato 2016: "Well as you can see here, the Democrats have too many in dangered seats, like MN, PA, and OH for them to even gain seats. Really, this is a question of whether the Republicans get a Supermajority or close to one."

LOL,
Sabato said this before Trump won the Presidency. Sabato proclaimed on CNN on Air that Hillary would win over 300+ EV so his Senate Calls on 2018 were based on Hillary winning the Presidency.

Clown Donald changed everything.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

It really depends on the senate and what its like after 2018, and it will determine the landscape.

[Zaybay]

Here is the Sabato 2020 Map:



While it looks it favours Democrats keep in mind that they won't win back Seats they lost in 2014 like Alaska (Sullivan), Arkansas (Cotton), South Dakota (Rounds), Louisiana (Cassidy), Montana (Daines) or West Virginia (Moore-Capito). Those 6 Seats will stay Republican...BOOK IT.

Democrats have IMO only 3 Pick Up Opportunities

Iowa
Colorado
North Carolina

Republicans have IMO 2

Alabama
New Hampshire

I would like to point out that, while you are correct that the map isnt that large, its not as small as you make it out to be.

You are correct that there are only really two opportunities for R pickups, due to the fact that most of the tossup seats were lost in the wave of 2014.

But there are other seats that can be won.

ME- She has been shown to be weak with the GOP electorate, and could easily lose her primary, or just retire

AZ- Considering it will be an open seat, since Kyl isnt running again, this could very much become a race

MT- Bullock, and the fact that MT is rather willing to elect Ds statewide

TX- Cornyn is (somehow) more unpopular than Cruz

GA- D trend, presidential, and he almost lost in 2008

AK- needs the right candidate. AK is wierd as it has D rurals, D urbans and R suburbs, but if you win the Anchorage area, you are set. The Ds currently have the mayorship of Anchorage, and he could actually win.

Some of these will leave the table, perhaps others will join, I dunno, I would rather focus on 2018.

Funny enough, I dont think IA will be that competitive.

[junior chįmp]

If Beto loses against Cruz...I think Cornyn would be easier to knock off in 202p.

I get the feeling that the 2020 Senate elections will be similar to the 1980 Senate elections. No way 2020 ends up being a good year for the GOP

[IceSpear]

It's So Atlas to think that Alaska, Texas, Georgia, and Montana could be competitive in an election 2 years away, but that Minnesota and Michigan are rock solid safe D no matter what.

[Perlen vor den Schweinen]

If Beto loses against Cruz...I think Cornyn would be easier to knock off in 202p.

I get the feeling that the 2020 Senate elections will be similar to the 1980 Senate elections. No way 2020 ends up being a good year for the GOP

Does the phrase "through Trump, all things are possible" only work in favor of Democrats?

I sure as hell hope so.

[MT Treasurer]

I wonder who’s going to be the Dean Heller/Jon Tester of 2020?

[Tintrlvr]

It's So Atlas to think that Alaska, Texas, Georgia, and Montana could be competitive in an election 2 years away, but that Minnesota and Michigan are rock solid safe D no matter what.

I assume you're talking about me. I think it is totally fair to assume at this stage that 2020 will overall be a favorable environment for the Democrats. Trump is deeply unpopular nationally and there seems to be little that could change that underlying fundamental in the next two years given how little opinion on Trump has moved over the past two years. It is possible, of course, that the Democrats nominate a dud of a Presidential candidate, but none of the present contenders seem like they're at risk of being duds, and they're all reasonably high profile.

[IceSpear]

I wonder who’s going to be the Dean Heller/Jon Tester of 2020?

Cory Gardner will be the Dean Heller, in that the pundits stubbornly refuse to move it from toss up in a Western D trending state even if he's clearly the underdog because of MUH incumbency. But Gardner has a much better chance at hanging on than Heller does (not saying much) simply because the election is 2 years away and we have no idea what the political environment will be in 2020. Whereas we already know 2018 will be at least a decent year for the Democrats, yet the pundits inexplicably call NV a pure toss up anyway.

I don't think there will be a Jon Tester. Maybe Tina Smith? People assume she's some Unbeatable Titan for most of the cycle but the race ends up being closeish?

[IceSpear]

It's So Atlas to think that Alaska, Texas, Georgia, and Montana could be competitive in an election 2 years away, but that Minnesota and Michigan are rock solid safe D no matter what.

I assume you're talking about me. I think it is totally fair to assume at this stage that 2020 will overall be a favorable environment for the Democrats. Trump is deeply unpopular nationally and there seems to be little that could change that underlying fundamental in the next two years given how little opinion on Trump has moved over the past two years. It is possible, of course, that the Democrats nominate a dud of a Presidential candidate, but none of the present contenders seem like they're at risk of being duds, and they're all reasonably high profile.

Literally the exact same paragraph could've (and was!) written in late 2010 about Obama/Democrats being doomed in 2012.

[Kyle Rittenhouse is a Political Prisoner]

It's So Atlas to think that Alaska, Texas, Georgia, and Montana could be competitive in an election 2 years away, but that Minnesota and Michigan are rock solid safe D no matter what.

I assume you're talking about me. I think it is totally fair to assume at this stage that 2020 will overall be a favorable environment for the Democrats. Trump is deeply unpopular nationally and there seems to be little that could change that underlying fundamental in the next two years given how little opinion on Trump has moved over the past two years. It is possible, of course, that the Democrats nominate a dud of a Presidential candidate, but none of the present contenders seem like they're at risk of being duds, and they're all reasonably high profile.

Literally the exact same paragraph could've (and was!) written in late 2010 about Obama/Democrats being doomed in 2012.

The economy notably improved from 2010 to 2012. You're insane if you think that will happen this time.

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

It's So Atlas to think that Alaska, Texas, Georgia, and Montana could be competitive in an election 2 years away, but that Minnesota and Michigan are rock solid safe D no matter what.

I assume you're talking about me. I think it is totally fair to assume at this stage that 2020 will overall be a favorable environment for the Democrats. Trump is deeply unpopular nationally and there seems to be little that could change that underlying fundamental in the next two years given how little opinion on Trump has moved over the past two years. It is possible, of course, that the Democrats nominate a dud of a Presidential candidate, but none of the present contenders seem like they're at risk of being duds, and they're all reasonably high profile.

Literally the exact same paragraph could've (and was!) written in late 2010 about Obama/Democrats being doomed in 2012.

I think it'll be different because a lot of Obama's problems were the economy. I foresee a recession around late 2019 or so (mostly unrelated to Trump's policies, just a cyclical recession) which would put him in a really weak situation given he seems to be flailing around even with a strong economy.

Granted, this is all speculation. Pence could be president in 2020, or somehow the economy is strong even on Nov 2020.

[IceSpear]

It's So Atlas to think that Alaska, Texas, Georgia, and Montana could be competitive in an election 2 years away, but that Minnesota and Michigan are rock solid safe D no matter what.

I assume you're talking about me. I think it is totally fair to assume at this stage that 2020 will overall be a favorable environment for the Democrats. Trump is deeply unpopular nationally and there seems to be little that could change that underlying fundamental in the next two years given how little opinion on Trump has moved over the past two years. It is possible, of course, that the Democrats nominate a dud of a Presidential candidate, but none of the present contenders seem like they're at risk of being duds, and they're all reasonably high profile.

Literally the exact same paragraph could've (and was!) written in late 2010 about Obama/Democrats being doomed in 2012.

The economy notably improved from 2010 to 2012. You're insane if you think that will happen this time.

There are a million different factors that could change between now and 2020. Anyone predicting a political environment two years in advance based off the previous election almost always ends up looking incredibly foolish later down the line. People here should learn from this. Remember when Democrats would pick up Senate seats in 2010 and there was no way they'd lose the House?  Remember when Obama was "destined to lose re-election?" Remember when Democrats were guaranteed to at least gain in the gubernatorial races in 2014?  Remember when Republicans were going to get a filibuster proof majority in 2018?

[Tintrlvr]

It's So Atlas to think that Alaska, Texas, Georgia, and Montana could be competitive in an election 2 years away, but that Minnesota and Michigan are rock solid safe D no matter what.

I assume you're talking about me. I think it is totally fair to assume at this stage that 2020 will overall be a favorable environment for the Democrats. Trump is deeply unpopular nationally and there seems to be little that could change that underlying fundamental in the next two years given how little opinion on Trump has moved over the past two years. It is possible, of course, that the Democrats nominate a dud of a Presidential candidate, but none of the present contenders seem like they're at risk of being duds, and they're all reasonably high profile.

Literally the exact same paragraph could've (and was!) written in late 2010 about Obama/Democrats being doomed in 2012.

I think it'll be different because a lot of Obama's problems were the economy. I foresee a recession around late 2019 or so (mostly unrelated to Trump's policies, just a cyclical recession) which would put him in a really weak situation given he seems to be flailing around even with a strong economy.

Granted, this is all speculation. Pence could be president in 2020, or somehow the economy is strong even on Nov 2020.

I agree with the first point. I'm not forecasting a recession, but the economy certainly isn't going to significantly improve from here, either. More generally, it was always clear that Obama had some ability to bounce back in 2012 -- and, as well, Obama was given a significant favor by the Republicans when they nominated Romney, who was really quite a weak candidate, all told.

We're speculating about potential future elections! We have to make some assumptions about what the circumstances will be at the time. Not doing so is foolish. The fact that some commentators have been wrong about their speculations in the past means very little.

[junior chįmp]

If Beto loses against Cruz...I think Cornyn would be easier to knock off in 202p.

I get the feeling that the 2020 Senate elections will be similar to the 1980 Senate elections. No way 2020 ends up being a good year for the GOP

Does the phrase "through Trump, all things are possible" only work in favor of Democrats?

I sure as hell hope so.

Honestly, if it wasnt for the SCOTUS....Trump winning re election is a more preferable outcome in the long run. Imagine the state legislature gains, House gains, and Senate gains under 8 years of Trump.

[jamestroll]

ya!! Come on everyone! Say it! Say It! Say it!

DOUG JONES IS DOA!!
 
Say it non stop!  PLEASE!!

Because that is the only way he will win in 2020!

these attitudes are basically asking him to win