2018 senate with President Sanders

[charlie6497]

If Bernie beat Hillary in the primary and then won the general election, how would the 2018 senate have turned out?

I think there would have been major losses across the board. In addition to the 4 seats they already lost, they would not have picked up NV and AZ, and would have lost in MT, WV, and could have very well lost in Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania. There would even have been the chance of a Menendez loss.

[Orwell]

Like, I'd agree with you in terms of losing AZ I do still believe they would pick up NV. I think West Virginia flips, along with Montana as well. I don't think it's likely Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania flip though.

[Kuumo]

It would be ugly for Democrats. If Sanders's approvals were similar to Obama's in 2010 or 2014, they would not pick up NV or AZ and also lose WV, MT, OH, WI, and MI. Pennsylvania and New Jersey would likely be <5% Democratic wins.

[NewYorkExpress]

Probably worse than having Clinton as President.

Democrats hold California, New York and Massachusetts (if Warren is not elected VP). Republicans win everything else.

[Roll Roons]

Republicans gain Florida, Indiana, Missouri and North Dakota as in real life, plus Michigan, Montana, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Wisconsin and the Minnesota special if it happens. They don't pick up Arizona or Nevada or come close in Texas.

Bernie's open seat in Vermont plays out a bit like Tennessee, as Phil appoints Jim Douglas and it's more competitive than usual, but he loses by around 10 anyway.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Probably worse than having Clinton as President.

Democrats hold California, New York and Massachusetts (if Warren is not elected VP). Republicans win everything else.

Um Republicans wouldn’t win WA, CT , MD, RI , DE, VT either.



The Republicans have a better chance at probably CA than they do at VT in President Bernie

[NewYorkExpress]

Probably worse than having Clinton as President.

Democrats hold California, New York and Massachusetts (if Warren is not elected VP). Republicans win everything else.

Um Republicans wouldn’t win WA, CT , MD, RI , DE, VT either.



The Republicans have a better chance at probably CA than they do at VT in President Bernie

I think the Progressive Party (or an Independent closely aligned with Sanders) wins in Vermont, and probably caucuses with the Democrats.

[GM Team Member and Senator WB]

assuming the nominees remain the same:

Green are races that I believe could go either way depending on what Bernie has done.

Hear me out on FL: The expectations in 2018 under president Bernie are much different. Some races are triaged early (ND, WV, IN) and Nelson actually campaigns. Millions aren't pumped into TX because Dems are more focused on defending what they have.

Whether that's enough to counteract the R pushback, I have no idea. That's why it's either way.

I say WI stays D simply because Vukmir was just not really a good candidate and Baldwin is well liked.

Still, this means a likely deadlocked government for 2 years.

[President Biden Democrat]

This would have been a complete disaster for Democrats. In 2016, Dems would likely take the senate by gaining a total of 4 seats (NH, IL, WI, PA), which would land them with 50 seats, including the independents who caucus with them. They'd lose their majority once VT Gov. Scott picks an interm appointment but would regain the seat in a special election sometime in 2017. In 2018, Democrats would lose 7-10 seats. This below would be my 2018 Senate map under a President Sanders. It would be fairly similar under a President Hillary Clinton, but maybe a little bit worse than this.

Republicans: 57 (+7)
Democrats: 43 (-7) - Includes 1 Independent (Angus King from Maine)

Notes:
Jeff Sessions would never become Attorney General and therefore, stays in the Senate. Democrat Jones never becomes senator.

[Left Wing]

I think R+10 or R+9 is the net gain depending on whether Franken resigned or not. The exact composition depends on what states Bernie flipped in 2016.