Rate Montana for Senate

[ElectionsGuy]

I think it'll end up Daines +5-10. Of course anybody who doesn't believe it's a pure toss-up is laughed at or mocked. It's going to be very delicious to see if that actually ends up the case. I could be wrong and revise if we get closer to election day, but given history I don't think it makes sense for Daines to lose unless it's a blue tidal wave.

There's an obligatory "Bullock =/ Bredesen" comment but it's actually going to be interesting to see how much Bullock can overperform relative to Bredesen. Contra to the narrative spun after the election, Bredesen was a very strong candidate. He just couldn't pull it off in staunchly Republican Tennesee. Bullock will need to overperform Biden by a 15 point margin to match Bredesen's overperformance of Clinton (9 point margin to match the R house vote in 2018), which may mean outright winning.

[Brittain33]

I think it'll end up Daines +5-10. Of course anybody who doesn't believe it's a pure toss-up is laughed at or mocked. It's going to be very delicious to see if that actually ends up the case. I could be wrong and revise if we get closer to election day, but given history I don't think it makes sense for Daines to lose unless it's a blue tidal wave.

There's an obligatory "Bullock =/ Bredesen" comment but it's actually going to be interesting to see how much Bullock can overperform relative to Bredesen. Contra to the narrative spun after the election, Bredesen was a very strong candidate. He just couldn't pull it off in staunchly Republican Tennesee. Bullock will need to overperform Biden by a 15 point margin to match Bredesen's overperformance of Clinton (9 point margin to match the R house vote in 2018), which may mean outright winning.

Democrats haven’t won a senate race in TN for about 30 years.

What’s the track record in Montana in that time period?

[Del Tachi]

Daines +8

Both campaigns' internal polling shows Bullock up by single digits, you know. It's not a coincidence that Bullock declared for the race immediately after it was clear Biden and not Sanders had the nomination.

This election is in November and Donald Trump will win Montana by at least 15 points, you know.  

Evan Bayh was also leading the Indiana Senate polls for awhile too.  Bullock won’t be able to campaign behind his fake moderate shield when he’s having to run against  Donald Trump.

[Continential]

Daines +8

Both campaigns' internal polling shows Bullock up by single digits, you know. It's not a coincidence that Bullock declared for the race immediately after it was clear Biden and not Sanders had the nomination.

This election is in November and Donald Trump will win Montana will win by at least 15 points, you know. 

Evan Bayh was also leading the Indiana Senate polls for awhile too.  Bullock won’t be able to campaign behind his fake moderate shield when he’s having to run against  Donald Trump.

Evan Bayh never had to campaign seriously in two senate terms, Bullock had to campaign to be elected Governor/re-election, and Montana 2018 proves that even though Tester voted against Kavanaugh, he won by the highest margin of his career in the Senate.

[Del Tachi]

Daines +8

Both campaigns' internal polling shows Bullock up by single digits, you know. It's not a coincidence that Bullock declared for the race immediately after it was clear Biden and not Sanders had the nomination.

This election is in November and Donald Trump will win Montana will win by at least 15 points, you know. 

Evan Bayh was also leading the Indiana Senate polls for awhile too.  Bullock won’t be able to campaign behind his fake moderate shield when he’s having to run against  Donald Trump.

Evan Bayh never had to campaign seriously in two senate terms, Bullock had to campaign to be elected Governor/re-election, and Montana 2018 proves that even though Tester voted against Kavanaugh, he won by the highest margin of his career in the Senate.

Yeah, at least Bayh had a great record of statewide success (winning 3/4 statewide races by >20pts).  Bullock won his reelection campaign by only 30k votes in 2016 (3.9pp) and only won with a plurality in 2012. 

An electoral juggernaut Bullock is not.

[Roll Roons]

Daines +8

Both campaigns' internal polling shows Bullock up by single digits, you know. It's not a coincidence that Bullock declared for the race immediately after it was clear Biden and not Sanders had the nomination.

This election is in November and Donald Trump will win Montana will win by at least 15 points, you know. 

Evan Bayh was also leading the Indiana Senate polls for awhile too.  Bullock won’t be able to campaign behind his fake moderate shield when he’s having to run against  Donald Trump.

Bayh also had weaknesses that Bullock doesn't. After leaving the Senate, he cashed out as a lobbyist and barely visited Indiana while owning multimillion dollar houses in DC and Florida. Bullock is the popular incumbent governor (like Maggie Hassan or Rick Scott) in a state that flattened the curve very effectively.

[ON Progressive]

Daines +8

Both campaigns' internal polling shows Bullock up by single digits, you know. It's not a coincidence that Bullock declared for the race immediately after it was clear Biden and not Sanders had the nomination.

This election is in November and Donald Trump will win Montana by at least 15 points, you know.  

Evan Bayh was also leading the Indiana Senate polls for awhile too.  Bullock won’t be able to campaign behind his fake moderate shield when he’s having to run against  Donald Trump.

You do realize Bayh had the whole residency controversy that Bullock will not have, right?

I’m going to trust MT Treasurer’s and Heir of Camelot’s word on this race (since they are, you know, Montanans)  and call it a tossup.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Daines +8

Both campaigns' internal polling shows Bullock up by single digits, you know. It's not a coincidence that Bullock declared for the race immediately after it was clear Biden and not Sanders had the nomination.

This election is in November and Donald Trump will win Montana by at least 15 points, you know.  

Evan Bayh was also leading the Indiana Senate polls for awhile too.  Bullock won’t be able to campaign behind his fake moderate shield when he’s having to run against  Donald Trump.

Ducey won by  the AZ Gov race by 10 points prts or more and Sinema won.  Split voting can happen.  Daines doesn't appear in front of cameras and is afraid to show himself in public, Bullock has been seen.

Same with Kris Kobach and Marshall, they dont get in front of cameras while Bollier has.

Bullock and Bollier are outraising Marshall, Kobach and Daines, Bullock and Bollier win win even if Trump carry MT and KS

[Continential]

Daines +8

Both campaigns' internal polling shows Bullock up by single digits, you know. It's not a coincidence that Bullock declared for the race immediately after it was clear Biden and not Sanders had the nomination.

This election is in November and Donald Trump will win Montana will win by at least 15 points, you know. 

Evan Bayh was also leading the Indiana Senate polls for awhile too.  Bullock won’t be able to campaign behind his fake moderate shield when he’s having to run against  Donald Trump.

Evan Bayh never had to campaign seriously in two senate terms, Bullock had to campaign to be elected Governor/re-election, and Montana 2018 proves that even though Tester voted against Kavanaugh, he won by the highest margin of his career in the Senate.

Yeah, at least Bayh had a great record of statewide success (winning 3/4 statewide races by >20pts).  Bullock won his reelection campaign by only 30k votes in 2016 (3.9pp) and only won with a plurality in 2012. 

An electoral juggernaut Bullock is not.

Bayh only won because of his name and he retired because he was sure that he would lose reelection in 2010.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

I think it'll end up Daines +5-10. Of course anybody who doesn't believe it's a pure toss-up is laughed at or mocked. It's going to be very delicious to see if that actually ends up the case. I could be wrong and revise if we get closer to election day, but given history I don't think it makes sense for Daines to lose unless it's a blue tidal wave.

There's an obligatory "Bullock =/ Bredesen" comment but it's actually going to be interesting to see how much Bullock can overperform relative to Bredesen. Contra to the narrative spun after the election, Bredesen was a very strong candidate. He just couldn't pull it off in staunchly Republican Tennesee. Bullock will need to overperform Biden by a 15 point margin to match Bredesen's overperformance of Clinton (9 point margin to match the R house vote in 2018), which may mean outright winning.

Election Guy did you see the last polls on MT and KS senate race? MT, two polls had Bullock up by 3 pts and the other had Bullock up by 7 and two polls came out on KS Senate, Bollier up by 2. I know you are cherry picking Sabato and Cook ratings, but they predicted a Hilary slide last tims.

It wont be a Biden slide this time either but enough for MT and KS to flip

[Del Tachi]

Daines +8

Both campaigns' internal polling shows Bullock up by single digits, you know. It's not a coincidence that Bullock declared for the race immediately after it was clear Biden and not Sanders had the nomination.

This election is in November and Donald Trump will win Montana by at least 15 points, you know. 

Evan Bayh was also leading the Indiana Senate polls for awhile too.  Bullock won’t be able to campaign behind his fake moderate shield when he’s having to run against  Donald Trump.

You do realize Bayh had the whole residency controversy that Bullock will not have, right?

I’m going to trust MT Treasurer’s and Heir of Camelot’s word on this race (since they are, you know, Montanans)  and call it a tossup.

The point is that polls in April and May have very little predictive value, or else we’d have Senator Bayh and Senator Bredesen. 

Given that Trump will almost assuredly win MT by double digits and Bullock still hasn’t felt the heat of a national campaign yet, I know whose shoes I’d want to be in at this point. 

[Del Tachi]

Daines +8

Both campaigns' internal polling shows Bullock up by single digits, you know. It's not a coincidence that Bullock declared for the race immediately after it was clear Biden and not Sanders had the nomination.

This election is in November and Donald Trump will win Montana will win by at least 15 points, you know. 

Evan Bayh was also leading the Indiana Senate polls for awhile too.  Bullock won’t be able to campaign behind his fake moderate shield when he’s having to run against  Donald Trump.

Bayh also had weaknesses that Bullock doesn't. After leaving the Senate, he cashed out as a lobbyist and barely visited Indiana while owning multimillion dollar houses in DC and Florida. Bullock is the popular incumbent governor (like Maggie Hassan or Rick Scott) in a state that flattened the curve very effectively.

Hassan and Scott had the obvious benefit of running in states aligned with their respective parties, which is really what explains 98 percent of their performance.  Bullock will be running against partisan headwinds in a state Trump is almost certain to win (probably by double digits).

[ElectionsGuy]

I think it'll end up Daines +5-10. Of course anybody who doesn't believe it's a pure toss-up is laughed at or mocked. It's going to be very delicious to see if that actually ends up the case. I could be wrong and revise if we get closer to election day, but given history I don't think it makes sense for Daines to lose unless it's a blue tidal wave.

There's an obligatory "Bullock =/ Bredesen" comment but it's actually going to be interesting to see how much Bullock can overperform relative to Bredesen. Contra to the narrative spun after the election, Bredesen was a very strong candidate. He just couldn't pull it off in staunchly Republican Tennesee. Bullock will need to overperform Biden by a 15 point margin to match Bredesen's overperformance of Clinton (9 point margin to match the R house vote in 2018), which may mean outright winning.

Democrats haven’t won a senate race in TN for about 30 years.

What’s the track record in Montana in that time period?

Completely irrelevant. There were loads of people on here convinced Bredesen was going to win, many polls that had him up even outside the margin of error. I was one of very few people along with IceSpear stressing that it was a tease and it was always at least Lean R (I had it at Likely R). It won't matter with this one though, people will be convinced until the very end that Montana is "different" and therefore any comparisons or contrasts are not valid. We'll just have to wait until after the election.

I can play at this game too though When was the last time a Republican incumbent lost re-election in a state as red as Montana? It hasn't happened since 2008, when Ted Stevens lost his seat for obvious reasons. Daines is not even unpopular he's just unremarkable.

[ProgressiveModerate]

I think it'll end up Daines +5-10. Of course anybody who doesn't believe it's a pure toss-up is laughed at or mocked. It's going to be very delicious to see if that actually ends up the case. I could be wrong and revise if we get closer to election day, but given history I don't think it makes sense for Daines to lose unless it's a blue tidal wave.

There's an obligatory "Bullock =/ Bredesen" comment but it's actually going to be interesting to see how much Bullock can overperform relative to Bredesen. Contra to the narrative spun after the election, Bredesen was a very strong candidate. He just couldn't pull it off in staunchly Republican Tennesee. Bullock will need to overperform Biden by a 15 point margin to match Bredesen's overperformance of Clinton (9 point margin to match the R house vote in 2018), which may mean outright winning.

Democrats haven’t won a senate race in TN for about 30 years.

What’s the track record in Montana in that time period?

Completely irrelevant. There were loads of people on here convinced Bredesen was going to win, many polls that had him up even outside the margin of error. I was one of very few people along with IceSpear stressing that it was a tease and it was always at least Lean R (I had it at Likely R). It won't matter with this one though, people will be convinced until the very end that Montana is "different" and therefore any comparisons or contrasts are not valid. We'll just have to wait until after the election.

I can play at this game too though When was the last time a Republican incumbent lost re-election in a state as red as Montana? It hasn't happened since 2008, when Ted Stevens lost his seat for obvious reasons. Daines is not even unpopular he's just unremarkable.

I agree with this. In a lot of races, the seemingly "best canidate" jumps into the race, and people get way too exited and call teh race a tossup, or even lean in the "best canidate's" favor, with a few polls showing them ahead, and then partisanship wins out. Now, to be fair, Montana is very different from Tennessee, and Democrats proved in 2018 that winning a senate race there was still possible. The Bresden - Bullock comparison isn't a great one since Bresden was not the current governor, and had been removed from state politics for quite a bit, and plus, Tennessee is a larger state with more people to appeal to. Bullock is the incumbent governor and is much more politically relavant in MT, and there's fewer people to appeal to in MT, and MT has much more split ticket voting than TN. I'm considering this race lean R for now, beacuse Daines is still the incumbent who's not super unpopular, and unlike 2018, Rs will actually take this race very seriously. I do think people are being overhyped about Bullock because of 2 iffy polls that showed him ahead. Most likely partisanship will win out in a presidential year. I can think of very few Trump supporters at this point who would split ticket for Bullock, considering part of Trump's message is all about winning, even if it goes against your interests. I'll consider MT likely R on the presidential level for now, and Lean R on the senate level

[Calthrina950]

Previously, I said that Daines would easily win reelection if Bullock did not run for his seat. Obviously, the situation has changed. As of right now, my opinions about this race are torn. On the one hand, Montana has remained much more Democratic at the downballot level than it has at the presidential (or "national") level. Bullock's gubernatorial re-election in 2016, even as Trump was beating Hillary Clinton in the state by 20%, and Tester's re-election in 2018, which came after he had compiled one of the most anti-Trump records of any of the red state Democratic Senators, are both examples of this. And there are demographic trends at work in Montana (i.e. with the growth in Gallatin and Missoula Counties) that could work in the Democrats' favor.

On the other hand, this is a presidential year, and ticket-splitting has become much less common than before. Trump is virtually guaranteed to win Montana by double digits again, Daines has been a relatively uncontroversial (and unremarkable) incumbent, and Bullock took positions during his abortive presidential campaign (i.e. over gun control) that could potentially be used against him. Moreover, both of Bullock's previous victories were by narrow margins, and Senatorial races are of a different caliber than gubernatorial races.

Weighing everything together, I would consider Montana to be a Tossup at this stage, but if I were forced to choose who would win, it would be Daines. Bullock, however, will give him a run for his money, and I think he has a much better chance at victory than Phil Bredesen did in 2018. Montana is less Republican than Tennessee and is more elastic; moreover, Bullock is an incumbent, not a former Governor, and that gives him a more tangible position with the present electorate.

[Mr. Smith]

Daines +8

Both campaigns' internal polling shows Bullock up by single digits, you know. It's not a coincidence that Bullock declared for the race immediately after it was clear Biden and not Sanders had the nomination.

This election is in November and Donald Trump will win Montana by at least 15 points, you know. 

Evan Bayh was also leading the Indiana Senate polls for awhile too.  Bullock won’t be able to campaign behind his fake moderate shield when he’s having to run against  Donald Trump.

You do realize Bayh had the whole residency controversy that Bullock will not have, right?

I’m going to trust MT Treasurer’s and Heir of Camelot’s word on this race (since they are, you know, Montanans)  and call it a tossup.

The point is that polls in April and May have very little predictive value, or else we’d have Senator Bayh and Senator Bredesen. 

Given that Trump will almost assuredly win MT by double digits and Bullock still hasn’t felt the heat of a national campaign yet, I know whose shoes I’d want to be in at this point. 

Bayh wasn't even in until July though...and Baron Hill was set to lose anyway...likely by the same amount.

[Arizona Iced Tea]

MT likes ticket-splitting but still prefers Republicans, which is why Trump and Daines won by double digits, compared to Tester and Bullock's 3-4 point wins in the state.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

MT likes ticket-splitting but still prefers Republicans, which is why Trump and Daines won by double digits, compared to Tester and Bullock's 3-4 point wins in the state.

Daines won in 2014 in a R wave year and against a flawed incumbent Walsh, you cant compare Bullick to Walsh.

Anyway, MT and KS are the backup option to NC and ME, Collins can win ME 2 and may sit in the middle of a D 51/49 Senate..

As I said earlier Bollier is a Dr and Bullock have both had media exposure, and Kobach, Marshall and Daines have been absent.

[Arizona Iced Tea]

MT likes ticket-splitting but still prefers Republicans, which is why Trump and Daines won by double digits, compared to Tester and Bullock's 3-4 point wins in the state.

Daines won in 2014 in a R wave year and against a flawed incumbent Walsh, you cant compare Bullick to Walsh.

Anyway, MT and KS are the backup option to NC and ME, Collins can win ME 2 and may sit in the middle of a D 51/49 Senate..

As I said earlier Bollier is a Dr and Bullock have both had media exposure, and Kobach, Marshall and Daines have been absent.

The thing about Kansas is that Trump is probably gonna win it by at least 15 points and will likely win it by more than that. Can Boiler really run more than 16 points ahead of Biden in the state?

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

MT likes ticket-splitting but still prefers Republicans, which is why Trump and Daines won by double digits, compared to Tester and Bullock's 3-4 point wins in the state.

Daines won in 2014 in a R wave year and against a flawed incumbent Walsh, you cant compare Bullick to Walsh.

Anyway, MT and KS are the backup option to NC and ME, Collins can win ME 2 and may sit in the middle of a D 51/49 Senate..

As I said earlier Bollier is a Dr and Bullock have both had media exposure, and Kobach, Marshall and Daines have been absent.

The thing about Kansas is that Trump is probably gonna win it by at least 15 points and will likely win it by more than that. Can Boiler really run more than 16 points ahead of Biden in the state?

Chuck Todd meet the Press, not Sabato Crystal Ball or Cook has classified: AZ, CO, KS, MT and NC as tossups.  Until we can get some sound polling from ME, I am classifying it as Lean R and GA as Lean R due to runoffs. If Sununu and Phil Scott can will in a neutral yr  where Ds take the WH, Collins can to.

[Xing]

While I'd give Daines a slight edge right now, I don't think this can really be compared to TN-SEN 2018 or IN-SEN 2016. Democrats have a far better track record in MT than IN and TN (even in presidential years, with the Republican Presidential Candidate winning by double digits), and Bullock is far more popular in his state than Bayh or Bredesen were when they were running. Bullock could run a lackluster campaign and do worse than expected, sure, but I wouldn't start out with that assumption. I'm sticking with my Daines +3 prediction, though I'd probably sooner modify his margin down rather than up.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Again, the three females Collins can hang onto ME2 and Ernst hanging into IA 4 and SMC are in better position than in AZ, CO, GA, KS, MT and NC, due to fact they are Barry Goldwater conservatives, and Collins supported Planned Parenthood, Ernst support Social Security Reform, whom will vote for Biden's programs.

Last two polls had Bullick D+3 and D+7 and Bollier +2 and Cunningham D+9 and D+2

[Brittain33]

Given that Trump will almost assuredly win MT by double digits and Bullock still hasn’t felt the heat of a national campaign yet, I know whose shoes I’d want to be in at this point. 

And yet, Bullock decided to jump in the race when he could have stayed as Governor, and did it immediately when Biden grabbed the nomination after months of denying any interest. Bayh and Bredesen had nothing to lose by trying for a comeback from retirement.

Of course circumstances can change, but would you say that between now and November things are likely to get better for Republicans, or worse? I don't see how the former is possible barring some revelations about the nature of coronavirus or our current 20% unemployment that aren't borne out by actual evidence and observations. Meanwhile, governors around the country not named Kemp have gotten a huge boost in popularity.

I'm sorry, but "hurr durr, Montana so Republican" isn't a winning argument against the half-dozen or so why Bullock is slightly favored.

[Brittain33]

I think it'll end up Daines +5-10. Of course anybody who doesn't believe it's a pure toss-up is laughed at or mocked. It's going to be very delicious to see if that actually ends up the case. I could be wrong and revise if we get closer to election day, but given history I don't think it makes sense for Daines to lose unless it's a blue tidal wave.

There's an obligatory "Bullock =/ Bredesen" comment but it's actually going to be interesting to see how much Bullock can overperform relative to Bredesen. Contra to the narrative spun after the election, Bredesen was a very strong candidate. He just couldn't pull it off in staunchly Republican Tennesee. Bullock will need to overperform Biden by a 15 point margin to match Bredesen's overperformance of Clinton (9 point margin to match the R house vote in 2018), which may mean outright winning.

Democrats haven’t won a senate race in TN for about 30 years.

What’s the track record in Montana in that time period?

Completely irrelevant. There were loads of people on here convinced Bredesen was going to win, many polls that had him up even outside the margin of error.

That's not how I remember it... I remember loads of people excited by the possibility he could win, but not able to believe it would happen in Tennessee in the end. Besides, they were wrong, so what? My argument is on the fundamentals of the race.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Marsha Blackburn, as well as Portman and Thommy Thompson werent afraid to show themselves in front of the media, they are always in front of cameras.

There is a reason why Bollier is leading by 2 in Red Kansas and Bullock is leading by 3 to 7 points against Daines, I have only saw Daines 1 time in front of cameras,  during impeachment