ITT:2018 Senate Elections

The current U.S. Senate has 52 Republicans and 48 Democrats (including two independents). The 2018 Senate election takes place on November 6, 2018. There are 34 seats up in 2018, of which 25 are held by Democrats.

Other urls found in this thread:

270towin.com/2018-senate-election/
270towin.com/2018-senate-election/aovZdl
mercurynews.com/2017/01/18/will-sen-dianne-feinstein-run-for-re-election-in-2018/
morningconsult.com/senator-approval-rankings-september-2016/
poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2431
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_California,_2016
numbersusa.com/content/my/congress/913/gradescoresheet/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

270towin.com/2018-senate-election/

Look at the maps in '06, '08, and '12 and tell me the Democrats can't compete in red states. Then look at the map in '10, '14, and '16 and tell me the GOP can't compete in blue states. American politics is actually pretty dynamic.

It is impossible for the Democrats to pick up any seats this cycle.
The best they can hope for is losing 2 seats.

I'll post my own predictions and hopefully this thread won't die.
270towin.com/2018-senate-election/aovZdl

BUMP

Why would we lose in MI?

>Missouri
>Montana
>W. Virginia
>Indiana

They are all red states won in by Democrats in the years I mentioned. The last several cycles should demonstrate that the dynamics of Presidential elections don't necessarily hold true in midterms.

I can see Tim Kaine losing as well, just because of his association with Hillary in the campaign.

I don't think this is likely especially NV is very liberal and will rally for him.
It's one of the main reasons Hillary won Virginia.

>Missouri
>Indiana
These are all very unpopular incumbents in their respective states.
I never implied that Manchin would win in WV especially he is anti-gun control.

That's a shame. I saw him in the VP debate, and I'm shocked that he holds an office. Also:

>Diane Feinstein

When is she gonna die, user?

I think you will see something happen that hasn't happened for many many years, a 60 seat Senate supermajority.

Elizabeth Warren is going to lose to any Republican who runs against her as long as they aren't a neocon.

She's 83 and still kicking.
mercurynews.com/2017/01/18/will-sen-dianne-feinstein-run-for-re-election-in-2018/
It seems like she will run and a Republican winning in California is really unlikely.
If she doesn't get primaried then she'll get another term.
It's a real shame but North Virginia and the suburbs around Washington D.C always skew the vote toward the Democrats.

Bump

Donnelly is relatively popular, if unknown. McCaskill has work to do I'll grant you. But w'eve seen from Bush and Obama the ability of a president to poison his party's brand at every level. Recent polling shows that Trump isn't doing so well, albeit this is very very early.

>senate polling from late last year
morningconsult.com/senator-approval-rankings-september-2016/
>Trump polling
poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2431

I'd agree with you but it seems like the liberals have made comeback under her banner and her opponent will need to be a liberal republican sorta like Scott Brown.
The Republicans haven't held a majority for more then 80 years user and it'll be a major boost if they do good this cycle.

God I'm not gonna be able to fucking stand when Cory Booker wins re-election and everyone praises him. I will relish in voting for fucking anyone but him.

A Day in the Life of Cory Booker:

>Go to gay pride rally.
>Go to pro immigrant rally.
>Everybody violently praises you.
>Quickly sell the nation out to multinational corporations and pharma companies, ensuring healthcare, drug prices, income inequality and workers rights remain fucked up for years to come.
>Make sure nobody noticed.
>Go to Feminist rally.
>Everybody violently praises you.
>Repeat.

Go look at her increasingly dropping approval ratings. Warren is finished. If the Republicans in MA get Tom Brady to run against like they want she is good as done.

Cory Booker weirds me out. Doesn't he come across as a little too thirsty? Also, ambition is fine. After all this is politics we're talking about. But he's got a weird look in his eye.

At this point, something massive needs to happen in California to make it competitive for ANY party, I believe. I'm talking about something ideological, something that completely demolishes the foundation of California politics and beliefs. Something that tells people over there "we don't want Democrats anymore."

Same could be said for DC and North Virginia, and the Northeast in general.

He won by around 13% in the last election cycle and it seems like he'll continue winning especially because his heritage will entice liberals to go out and vote.
It really will depend on how the people get out and vote and if they can rally like they did in 2016.
I just saw that and it doesn't look good and it seems people don't like how she keeps throwing tamper tantrums but the Republicans won't win Massachusetts unless they run a moderate/liberal Republican.

I can't wait

I have no idea what it looks like, but California Republicans can absolutely begin marketing the notion of a "California Conservative."

For decades after the civil war the South was solidly Democratic. This hides an important distinction. For decades there were 3 parties in America...the GOP, the Democrats, and the southern Democrats. The southern Dems always distinguished themselves from their northern counterparts and were careful to style themselves as "southern." I don't know what a "California Conservative" looks like but I think there's an opportunity there. California is so unique and practically a country unto itself with it's unique identity.

I agree but Hillary won California by 4.2 million votes and in the 2016 elections it was a centrist Democrat vs a Liberal Democrat.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_California,_2016

>if they can rally
Keep in mind that Trump won a lot of traditional Democrats throughout the upper midwest and rust belt. Their loyalty may not translate into senate races in two years. Hell their loyalty to Trump may not even hold past this summer. Let's at least be clear that in WI, MI, OH, and PA we're dealing with Democratic turnout as the primary factor in both their loyalty and opposition to Trump.

I agree that the loyalties of voters tend to differ and especially as we've seen in this election some voters will vote for the President but won't vote downballot.
The Rust Belt is also held by powerful Democrat incumbents.

Tom will be too busy winning Superbowls through 2020

>He won by around 13% in the last election cycle and it seems like he'll continue winning especially because his heritage will entice liberals to go out and vote.
egh. That annoys me so much. Doesn't matter that he's a neoliberal - the farthest thing from an actual progressive. Ignorant liberals will vote for any dark man so they can say their state has a black representative and they're so liberal and open minded cause they voted for a nigger who loves gays and mexicans. They don't pay attention when he votes as far right economically as you can get. When he sells out the poor helps international corporations get more powerful. Laissez faire pig. I miss when New Jersey was a copperhead state. Most southern state of the North, they used to say. What the fuck happened to us,

senpai, Manchin is GONE

WV went for Trump by about 40 goddamn points, there's no chance in hell any Democrat is going to win there at all

Exactly. The voters that voted for Trump, possibly very reluctantly, may like Brown, Casey, Baldwyn, and Peters.

The margin was similar in '08 and Manchin still won in 2010.

Bridgegate and the damage to Christie really didn't help the cause of the Republican GOP there and it's pretty shitty that liberals will vote for anyone because of the color of their skin.It's also because Newark and New York tilt your votes to the Democrats/

Manchin is a moderate and he seems to be liked very well by the West Virginians so long as he votes on some republican bills.

I am running to replace Feinstein in CA.
I'm a college kid studying Business Finance with no experience but I can pull the autism card at any time, so I've got this in the bag.

The thing that makes this Senate Election so great is that the Democrats have 23 seats up for grabs and the Republicans have to defend 8 seats in places like Utah and Texas.

I'm from the deep south. We don't count W. Virginia as "southern" but we do acknowledge some similarities. W. Virginia is relatively conservative but it's also oddly still relatively Democratic. A lot of politicians at the local level are Democrats. This is something we have in common. I think for Manchin it comes down to independence from everyone including the Democratic leadership and even Trump to a large extent.

She's 83 years old and the shitty Californian laws mean that a Democrat can face another Democrat.
The best way to win in California would be to appeal to voters as a liberal republican who is conservative on issues that will net you voters.
The major problem is that minorities will vote for that big blue (D) next to Feinstein's name.

The margin wasn't that similar, it was about 10 points difference in 2008. Hillary got 26.5% of the vote, Obama got 42%

And the person who took on Manchin was some nutjob who national Republicans were pretty sure wasn't going to make a dent on Manchin. Now there's this big backlash against Trump which Trump loving WVers will take out on Manchin, not to mention his daughter is recently involved in some massive pharmaceutical scandal (Mylan) and WV has big problems with prescription drug abuse

I stand corrected. Manchin certainly has a tight rope to walk but he was a popular governor for years and is a relatively popular senator.

>implying we'll have any minorities left in 2018

holy fucking shit

are you actually still believing any fucking poll done on trump?

Are you actually fucking retarded?

California Republicans should move north and petition for their own state.

Not retarded at all. The polls were wrong in 2012. The polls were wrong in 2016. That's because the sample make up in those polls was distorted. The samples in polls done in Feb 2017 are reflective of the reality of the last presidential election 4 months ago.

There's no conspiracy, user. Mistakes happen. The polling firms correct.

Kek agrees...
is retarded.

Jefferson would probably be Republican but the coastal counties would make the races there kinda competitive.

Yeah, NJ Republicans are corrupt shitheads too. We produce greasy politicians. Always have, unfortunately. I've got Chris Smith, at least. Central and South Jersey can stand against the hordes of the North when SHTF, I think.

>retarded
Goddamn. You truly belong on the internet.

not true, while it is unlikely the dems can absolutely pick up a few seats and retain the ones they already have, it's an uphill battle but there's still a reasonable chance of it happening

That's been proven multiple times and if the Republicans run someone effective and well-known they might be able to throw NJ into the competitive races book.

Some guy on plebbit said the dems would undoubtedly 100% gain seats

It would be better than the choice Republicans have now in the general elections.

If Jefferson ever happened, you couldn't build houses up there fast enough for all the Califugees.

I should have said realistically speaking the Democrats can't hope to lose less then two seats.

the % approval changes drastically if its registered/likely voters compared to everyone

I'd imagine that 2 million Republicans refugees would be more then enough to make Jefferson a secure red state.

Stabenow not peters

There's no way to get an accurate view of what "likely" voter samples look like 18 months before the election even really begins. The only cue the polling firms have of "likely" voters at this time is historical precedent and it's ability inform potential future electorates.

Debbie Stabenow seems likely to win.
I don't know that much about her.
Could some Michigananon fill me in?

That doesn't prove anything about 18. It would be extremely inaccurate to think that. all people is less reliable than registered voters which is less reliable than likely voters. This is coming from someone who think R senators will have an extremely hard time winning the rust belt. They should run protectionists their tbqh.

Stabenow is popular and has been historically hard to beat. Supposedly the new MI gop is a lot more competent w/ Ron Weiser now, but it doesn't matter if they don't run a protectionist. It's a hard uphill battle.

I agree. But I think polling is fairly accurate considering that both parties are going to rely heavily on it to strategize going forward. If their private polling differs significantly from the public polling we'll hear about it. It will be in the news for all the political junkies to know about.

Also, she is a classic working class dem, but her immigration record leaves me unimpressed.

She's pro-immigration?
She can't do much against a Republican Senate Majority but how does the Michigan State Legislature look like?

Well we won't know that until mid 2018, but the rasmussan has a somewhat reliable poll too even if it is not the best. I don't personally trust 20 point gaps between the best and worst polls with many somewhere in the middle.

MI state legislator is red
numbersusa.com/content/my/congress/913/gradescoresheet/
They updated this last time I checked. It got even worse.

team red is in charge of both the MI house and senate

20 points? Really? I've seen several that put him with an approval in the low 40's and disapproval in mid to high 50's. This is a President that everyone has an opinion on.

I don't really see the problem but that immigration record looks shitty.

38 to 58 % difference is a joke. That was between gallup and Rasmussen I think.

What problem don't you see?

I meant it doesn't really seem like a bad problem there especially compared to other states.
As long as Republicans hold the Senate then Michigan will be fine but I heard Dearborn is the muslim capitol of North America.

Of course every media outlet has a narrative and worldview they're trying to push. Often times polling is similar. From what I remember just a couple of years ago Rasmussen was viewed as a Republican pollster that even refused to release it's sample methodology. I can vaguely remember suspicion that Ras would release a bullshit poll to try to affect the narrative of our political discourse and adjust their mysterious methodology as the election got closer so that they could claim to be accurate.

This was a few years ago so I may be totally out of date.

yeah, but it still is pretty small all things considered. We need a 60 seat majority so every seat counts. So we need to try for MI. We refused Syrian refugees so that is good I think.
Yeah, I notice how sometimes both sides build their candidates lead before making it a close race at the end. I don't trust it. I just wait for it. If it's wrong then it's wrong, if it's right it's right. I could be hilariously wrong at this point but I just don't care.

Manchin is a DINO

Okay. They can't. You're a retard and politics aren't as dynamic as you seem to believe. At least 3 of the elections you mentioned were presidential elections where the candidates in question clearly benefited from their presidential candidate winning.

yeah, the only time that is not a pres elec was 06 and they did good because they had a competent 50 state strategy. They threw that out the window and aren't competent anymore.

That's how he won elections in West Virginia but there are some scandals popping out.

No. The GOP won in blue states where the Obama won and the Dems won in red states where McCain and Romney won. This also applies to gubernatorial races.

Is it really that complicated for you?

The reason VA got turned purple and NOVA got flooded with Democrats is because that faggot Bush spent 8 years spending despite having a Republican House for 6 of them and then Obama spent another 8 years spending.

Trump wants to slash not only the spending but the size of the government, which means shitty businesses run by hippies as well as public sector workers in general will have to find work somewhere else. An exodus of liberals from Virginia will shift politics in favor of Republicans especially if the lolbergtarian voting hipsters in VA come back to the Republican party and western Virginia continues becoming deeper and deeper red.

Also niggers don't vote in midterms, Kaine nearly lost in 2012 despite Obama winning in VA. He only won because of Libertarians and presumably nigger turnout.

>hurr durr I'm so fucking retarded I don't understand how incumbency and coattail effects work

So you're a first term PSCI major, congrats. But you're still a dumbass and wrong because your dumbfuck premise is that in an election where Democrats overwhelmingly have more seats up for grabs and where the only possible seat they're competitive in is Nevada "hurr durr but politicks is dynamic mebbe they pick up texas ????"

Just fuck off

>What is ticket splitting?

I think I"ll stay right here. What are you going to do about i?

Soon. She'll die within the year.

We need to fix voter fraud to take Cuckifornia.

Double. Then Quads. Kek checks.

Laugh at you because you're still retarded. There are only a limited number of states which can swing in a given election and the momentum is on the side of the republicans in that factor in 2014, 16 and 18. The Democrats are losing in that field buoyed only by the fact that midterms tend to bring out disaffected voters from the opposition party to whine about the president's agenda. But in 2018 only Nevada could possibly be considered "dynamic"- all other red states up for grabs are too solidly red for any kind of fantasy of a blue texas to ever happen.

Oh internet creature. You are a delight.

Really though. I've pointed out specific senate and gubernatorial races that went against the presidential contests in their respective states. BTW there's no such thing as political science. It's a huge fucking fallacy/misnomer. Historical precedent is all there is. I've given you that. I don't know what else there is.

how the fuck is this only starting to dawn on the left? I was aware of this reality a year ago and had a massive boner the entire time. the instant trump started going after the rust belt it was obvious he would win.