What would be a hypothetical path for the GOP to get 60 seats

[OSR stands with Israel]

Yes I know it is extremely unlikely and the chances of it happening is basically 0 but what would be the path. This is what I would say

48: WV
49: FL
50: TX
51: OH
52: MT
53: NV
54: AZ
55: WI
56: MI
57: PA
58: VA
59: NM
60: MD

[Roll Roons]

Pretty much this, though for the last three you could potentially sub in ME, MN or NJ.

[Ragnaroni]

I'd put VA at 59. Take out NM and put MN in 58 and leave MD in 60

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

They won't get 60

[Steve from Lambeth]

Guaranteed
1-38: not up for election in 2024

Safe
39: WY
40: MS (racially polarised voting)
41: WV (pickup!)
42: UT
43: ND
44: NE-Regular
45: TN
46: NE-Special (Ricketts is distrusted by Republicans more than Fischer; cronyism and all that)
47: IN
48: MO
49: FL
50: TX (Allred has more of a shot than Mucarsel-Powell, but not by a lot)

Objectively competitive
51: MT
52: OH
53: MI
54: AZ
55: NV
56: WI (51-54 are obvious but I think Baldwin is a tougher nut to crack than Rosen)
57+: dependent on NJ primary outcome

Tammy Murphyverse
57: NJ
58: MN
59: PA
60: VA

Andy Kimverse
57: MN
58: PA (sorry, but McCormick is just not a good candidate)
59: VA
60: CT (if I had to say, NJ with Kim is somewhere around Republican seat #63)

----------

Other things I'd like to note about the unlikelier Republican challenges:

• It's not guaranteed that Hogan makes the general election in November. I'm tentatively placing MD as Republican Seat #61 due to this, potential variables in the VA/CT nomination races, and whether Alsobrooks or Trone is proven to be the stronger Democratic candidate (he has more of a chance against Alsobrooks for reasons I hope should be obvious).
• In my mind, the other potentially-but-not-really-competitive Senate seat is WA. As much as I'd like WA to turn blue again... nope. Republican seat #62.
• CA is not on the list at all for obvious reasons. Schiff will win the primary and go to the general election. If Porter comes second, the seat is unreachable for Republicans but they should support her anyway. If Garvey comes second, Cali goes in around #63. If Early comes second, maybe a couple of slots lower. (All numbers below here are approximate due to this and the Kim effect.)
• Heinrich is the least controversial Senator ever to Senate. King is popular and a beneficiary of RCV. Whitehouse just doesn't strike me as vulnerable. Hence NM, ME and RI go in at 64, 65 and 67.
• Lisa Blunt Rochester strikes me as a nice enough person; not the safest candidate in the world, but more than a good fit for this Senate seat. DE is Republican seat 66.
• Mike Sapraicone has lost the trust of the MAGA wing in NY. It isn't a large cohort of the state party, but I have to ask serious questions about his electability if he can't even keep the NY GOP united behind his candidacy. Republican seat 68.
• MA, HI, and VT are write-offs. Put them down as Republican seats 69, 70 and 71.
• There is no Republican seat 72. The Democrats have 28 seats not up for re-election.

[Unbeatable Titan Susan Collins]

OSR agree with the states you listed but not the order.
WV might honestly be the last state the GOP would lose.

49: FL
50: TX
51: MT
52: OH
53: NV (gave edge over AZ due to candidate quality on GOP side)
54: AZ
55: MI (No Dem incumbent)
56: WI
57: PA ( appears to be Biden's best state of the Midwest Trio and Casey's strength)
58: VA
59: MD
60: NM (may move ahead of MD)

Other states in consideration for the path to 60
MN- would definitely be on it if it was open, would probably be without Hogan running and if Smith was up
ME- KIng's strength +RCV  GOP would need 47%+ in round 1 to have a chance
MA- Warren is a consistent underperformer but Trump is probably the worst possible fit for the state, so Warren's underperformance will not matter
CA- does not look like a lock out is happening. I don't see angry progressives not voting for Schiff
CT- relatively high floor for GOP but Dem floor is over 50%, Murphy popular.
NJ- Only if Menendez is the nominee (he won't be)

[oldtimer]

49: WV
50: ?
60: "Victory"

Realistically, maybe:

50:OH
51:NV
52:MI

Unrealistically:

53:AZ
54:WI
55:NJ (if Murphy is the D candidate)
56:MT
57:NM
58:MD
59:VA or PA (Murphy)
60:PA or NY  (That's how unrealistic 60 is in 2024)

Even if the current lineup of R candidates wins, Conservatives would still fall short of 50.

[Bernie Derangement Syndrome Haver]

49: WV
50: ?
60: "Victory"

Realistically, maybe:

50:OH
51:NV
52:MI

Unrealistically:

53:AZ
54:WI
55:NJ (if Murphy is the D candidate)
56:MT
57:NM
58:MD
59:VA or PA (Murphy)
60:PA or NY  (That's how unrealistic 60 is in 2024)

Even if the current lineup of R candidates wins, Conservatives would still fall short of 50.

Did you reverse Michigan and Montana?

[Bernie Derangement Syndrome Haver]

48. West Virgina
49. Florida
50. Texas
51. Arizona (Gallego is too progressive)
52. Ohio
53. Montana
54. Michigan
55. Nevada
56. Wisconsin
57. Pennsylvania
58. New Jersey
59. Maryland
60. Massachusetts (Warren always underperforms by a lot)

61. Virginia
62. Minnesota
63. Rhode Island
64. New York
65. New Mexico
66. Maine
67. Washington
68. Delaware
69. Connecticut
70. Hawaii
71. California
72. Vermont

[oldtimer]

49: WV
50: ?
60: "Victory"

Realistically, maybe:

50:OH
51:NV
52:MI

Unrealistically:

53:AZ
54:WI
55:NJ (if Murphy is the D candidate)
56:MT
57:NM
58:MD
59:VA or PA (Murphy)
60:PA or NY  (That's how unrealistic 60 is in 2024)

Even if the current lineup of R candidates wins, Conservatives would still fall short of 50.

Did you reverse Michigan and Montana?

No

I'm banging for ages that Montana's rural populist tilt is a really bad fit for Sheehy against Tester.

Michigan and Nevada have not shown any particular love for incumbents lately, so if Trump wins them they ought to win the Senate seats too.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Split Texas into five states.

[Lambsbread]

Chaos the likes of which we haven't seen in decades?

[Steve from Lambeth]

With Garvey and Kim in, my official reassessment of the Seat Power Ranking is:

Guaranteed Republican
1-38: not up for election in 2024

Safe
39: WY
40: MS (racially polarised voting)
41: WV (pickup!)
42: UT
43: ND
44: NE-Regular
45: TN
46: NE-Special (Ricketts is distrusted by Republicans more than Fischer; cronyism and all that)
47: IN
48: MO
49: FL
50: TX (Allred has more of a shot than Mucarsel-Powell, and by more than earlier)

Objectively competitive
51: MT
52: OH
53: MI
54: AZ
55: NV
56: WI (51-54 are obvious but I think Baldwin is a tougher nut to crack than Rosen)

...I suppose?
57: MN
58: PA (McCormick is still not a good candidate)
59: VA
60: CT

The rest of the world
61: MD (for the aforestated reasons)
62: WA
63: NJ (with Kim; Menendez not in sight yet)
64: CA (Republicans categorically underwhelmed in the primary - although Garvey did fine for himself)
65: NM
66: ME
67: DE
68: RI
69: NY (Sapraicone issues)
70: MA
71: HI
72: VT

Guaranteed Democratic
73-100: not up for election in 2024

[Compuzled_One]

50: WV
51: MT (Tester can't get to Biden)
52: OH (Bernie overperforms)
53: NV (Rightward shift)
54: MI (Turnout Depression and lack of incumbent)
55: AZ (Lake Pulls Ahead and lack of indcumbent)
56: WI (Trump runs up margins)
57: PA (I don't know, down ballot effect)
58: MD (Hogan does as well as polling suggests)
59: NJ (Menendez is exonorated and somehow pulls enough to give it to the Republicans)
60: VA (I don't know, Vitiello is nominated and Youngkin campaigns for him or something?)

[wnwnwn]

The only posibility that this happens is of the Democrat Platform somehow support a Palestine only solution or the recession that riverwalk "predicted" actually happens.

50: WV
51: MT
52: OH
53-57: The swing states
58: VA
59: MN
60: NJ