Most likely 2020 Senate upsets

[Orser67]

Which of the races listed above do you think is most likely to be flipped? I only included races rated as Likely or Safe by both Cook and Sabato (except for MT, which I decided to exclude because I felt like it would be by far the most popular choice, though I could be wrong).

[lfromnj]

Minnesota Kansas and Texas.

[MAINEiac4434]

Write-in: Maine

[lfromnj]

GOD NO
I ACCIDENTALLY CLICKED KENTUCKY INSTEAD OF KANSAS.

[Orser67]

Write-in: Maine

To clarify: the poll purposely excludes states like Maine that are widely regarded as being in play (even if the incumbent is generally seen as the favorite).

[Woody]

Massachusetts with Baker.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Kansas if Kobach is the Republican nominee.

[ElectionsGuy]

1. Texas (only if Trump wins here by less than 5)
2. Minnesota (only if Trump wins here by at least 3 points)
3. Alaska

[AudmanOut]

Texas And Kansas.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Pat Roberts could theoretically lose a primary, but that's about it.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

KS

[Peanut]

TX, AK, KS were the ones that came to mind

[ltomlinson31]

Minnesota, Texas and Kansas (accidentally voted Kentucky).

[IceSpear]

Minnesota Kansas and Texas.

[SnowLabrador]

Speaking as someone who lives in Massachusetts, I think that Charlie Baker would defeat Ed Markey if he chose to run. Nobody knows who Markey is, but everyone loves Baker.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Speaking as someone who lives in Massachusetts, I think that Charlie Baker would defeat Ed Markey if he chose to run. Nobody knows who Markey is, but everyone loves Baker.

Markey has a D next to his name. That's all they need to know.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

Speaking as someone who lives in Massachusetts, I think that Charlie Baker would defeat Ed Markey if he chose to run. Nobody knows who Markey is, but everyone loves Baker.

Parties running popular former governors for the senate in states that are extremely partisan against them don't work as well as you'd think.

Ex: Phil Bredesen, Linda Lingle, Mitt Romney 1994.

[Skye]

Speaking as someone who lives in Massachusetts, I think that Charlie Baker would defeat Ed Markey if he chose to run. Nobody knows who Markey is, but everyone loves Baker.

Parties running popular former governors for the senate in states that are extremely partisan against them don't work as well as you'd think.

Ex: Phil Bredesen, Linda Lingle, Mitt Romney 1994.

Romney wasn't a former governor back then? He was elected in 2002.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Speaking as someone who lives in Massachusetts, I think that Charlie Baker would defeat Ed Markey if he chose to run. Nobody knows who Markey is, but everyone loves Baker.

Parties running popular former governors for the senate in states that are extremely partisan against them don't work as well as you'd think.

Ex: Phil Bredesen, Linda Lingle, Mitt Romney 1994.

Romney wasn't a former governor back then? He was elected in 2002.

Probably he mixed him up with Bill Weld.

[Roll Roons]

Speaking as someone who lives in Massachusetts, I think that Charlie Baker would defeat Ed Markey if he chose to run. Nobody knows who Markey is, but everyone loves Baker.

Parties running popular former governors for the senate in states that are extremely partisan against them don't work as well as you'd think.

Ex: Phil Bredesen, Linda Lingle, Mitt Romney 1994.

Baker will still be the sitting governor in 2020, though I agree that he won't win if he runs for Senate, especially with Trump at the top of the ballot.

[Skunk]

Speaking as someone who lives in Massachusetts, I think that Charlie Baker would defeat Ed Markey if he chose to run. Nobody knows who Markey is, but everyone loves Baker.

Parties running popular former governors for the senate in states that are extremely partisan against them don't work as well as you'd think.

Ex: Phil Bredesen, Linda Lingle, Mitt Romney 1994.

Tbf, Baker will still be the incumbent governor in 2020, but yeah, obviously it would be Safe D even if he ran. If this were a red state, however, the popular incumbent Democratic governor would almost certainly win.

No they wouldn't lmao, John Bel Edwards would get destroyed if he tried running for Senate.

[Kyle Rittenhouse is a Political Prisoner]

TX, KS, and SC (the real hot take).

[MT Treasurer]

Tbf, Baker will still be the incumbent governor in 2020, but yeah, obviously it would be Safe D even if he ran. If this were a red state, however, the popular incumbent Democratic governor would almost certainly win.

No they wouldn't lmao, John Bel Edwards would get destroyed if he tried running for Senate.

There’s no way he’d get "destroyed". I doubt he’d be able to beat Kennedy (possible in a Democratic wave year, but unlikely), but I could definitely see him beating Cassidy or winning an open seat.

[Skunk]

Tbf, Baker will still be the incumbent governor in 2020, but yeah, obviously it would be Safe D even if he ran. If this were a red state, however, the popular incumbent Democratic governor would almost certainly win.

No they wouldn't lmao, John Bel Edwards would get destroyed if he tried running for Senate.

There’s no way he’d get "destroyed". I doubt he’d be able to beat Kennedy (possible in a Democratic wave year, but unlikely), but I could definitely see him beating Cassidy or winning an open seat.

There's no chance he'd beat Cassidy. Red state Democrats like McCaskill, Donnelly, and Heitkamp all lost by over 5 point margins in a D+8 environment, so why would Edwards do better than all of them as a challenger and in a (probably) less favorable national environment? I know Bullock certainly has a chance of defeating Daines should he run for Senate, but just because it's true in Montana doesn't mean it's true in other red states.

[MT Treasurer]

There's no chance he'd beat Cassidy. Red state Democrats like McCaskill, Donnelly, and Heitkamp all lost by over 5 point margins in a D+8 environment, so why would Edwards do better than all of them as a challenger and in a (probably) less favorable national environment? I know Bullock certainly has a chance of defeating Daines should he run for Senate, but just because it's true in Montana doesn't mean it's true in other red states.

It’s pretty obvious that McCaskill and Heitkamp ran godawful campaigns and were completely out of touch with their respective states. If anything, they should have lost by a lot more than they did on election day. Heitkamp actually outperformed Clinton by 25 points(!), and Bredesen did like 15 points better than Clinton in an "inelastic" Southern state even though "polarization" in red states is supposedly at an all-time high. JBE wouldn’t be a shoo-in by any means, but there’s no doubt in my mind that he’d make the race legitimately competitive, especially against a mediocre incumbent like Cassidy.