Senate seats, while wildly uneven in representation, are at least ungerrymanderable. So far we have Russ Feingold well ahead in the Wisconsin polls to take back his old seat, Strickland ahead in Ohio, Murphy in Florida. Now Gov. Maggie Hassan is challenging Kelly Ayotte in New Hampshire, and is a good bet to win that too. What other seat-changing races look good to you folks?
Update: This guy in Florida (where else?) might actually have a chance - if he can put down that cup of goat’s blood.
I think the only correct answer to the title question is “maybe.”
Well, 2010 was a good off year election for the GOP, so just from that one would expect the Repubs to have more vulnerable seats to defend, and have the disadvantage of doing so in a Presidential election year.
Googling, the Dems have 10 seats up while the GOP has 24. Dems need a four seat net gain for a tied Senate. Also the map seems to favour Dems, with the GOP defending in a lot of purplish blue states (OH, FL, NH, WI) and one very blue state (Ill). I don’t think the Dems are defending any redstate seats, are they?
Obviously it’ll depend on how the Presidential campaign goes, but given the map its hard to see a Dem Prez winning while her party didn’t also carry the Senate. And even a close GOP Presidential win might go with a reversal in the Senate.
ETA: Also, one wonders if McCain might retire, opening a race in AZ. I seem to recall him musing publically he was on his last term back in 2010.
I think Leahy (D - VT) has already said he’ll retire in 2016, but its pretty unlikely that will lead to a change in seat, except maybe to a Dem-alligned 3rd party, as Vermonters are wont to do.
(fun fact, despite it’s status as one of the Unions most liberal states, VT has sent exactly one Democrat to the Senate in its entire history).
I’d be very surprised if the Dems took any red state seats in 2010.
Here are the 2016 senate races sorted by Cook Partisan Voting Index.
State PVI
Hawaii D+20
Vermont D+16
New York D+11
Maryland D+10
California D+9
Illinois D+8
Connecticut D+7
Oregon D+5
Washington D+5
Nevada D+2
Wisconsin D+2
Colorado D+1
Iowa D+1
New Hampshire D+1
Pennsylvania D+1
Ohio R+1
Florida R+2
North Carolina R+3
Indiana R+5
Missouri R+5
Georgia R+6
Arizona R+7
South Carolina R+8
North Dakota R+10
South Dakota R+10
Alaska R+12
Kansas R+12
Louisiana R+12
Kentucky R+13
Alabama R+14
Arkansas R+14
Idaho R+18
Oklahoma R+19
Utah R+22
A rough cut (+5) which ignores candidates, incumbency, etc. puts it at 9 Dem, 16 Rep, 9 toss up.
The Democrats can take the Senate, I’d rate the chances right now as 60%. But I’m not too concerned, it’s pretty meaningless. 2018 is the worst map ever for Democrats, even worse than 2014, due to Republicans’ severe underachieving in 2012. Of course, then comes 2020, which is a general election year and another favorable map for Democrats.
So what matters here isn’t so much control, but whether Democrats win more seats than Republicans in the two successive elections. Democrats have a shot at more stable control in 2020, but that means doing well in 2016 and limiting the damage in 2018.
Yeah, if they take back the Senate, then the Dems really need to run up the score in 2016 because the 2018 map is friggin’ terrible.
The only one on the Dem side that might prove difficult to retain in '16 is the Nevada seat, especially if Brian Sandoval jumps in.
You have to reelect Michael Bennett too in Colorado. Sabato has it rated “Leans D”.
THe Democrats recruited almost everyone they wanted for the senate races. That’s usually a good sign.