Senate Projection: Current

[djAdvocate]

so, i have been watching the senate stuff pretty intently for six months, now.

in january, i thought that Nate Silver's projection for the Senate was premature.  Obama's approval was rising, as was approval of the healthcare law.  this continued until May, but since then, both the presidents approval, and that of the ACA have fallen off sharply.

Obama now has a -12 rating, and the ACA has lost some of it's approval (but curiously, not gained much disapproval) since May.  unless Obama and the Democrats can find a new issue to ride on, they are going to lose the Senate.

three races have gone from Dem to GOP in this time: Kentucky, NC, and IA.  if the Democrats can't get at least two of those back, they are going to lose control of the Senate, and be left with ONLY veto power in the last 2 years of Obama's presidency.

five months to go.  a lot can still happen, but the odds are appreciably better for the GOP at this point than in April, and are trending better still by the day.

[djAdvocate]

current rating: GOP 65% chance to take over the Senate.  House will probably stay about the same.

[djAdvocate]

two quick notes....

i just noticed that Nate Silver did an update for 538:

fivethirtyeight.com/features/fivethirtyeight-senate-forecast-toss-up-or-tilt-gop/

he actually rates this as slightly closer to toss-up than back in March.

additionally, i did some research on the Kentucky race.

if you aggregate the polls there, and delete Rasmussen (which has proved to be very unreliable since FOX took them over), you will find that Grimes is within 1% of McConnell with "moderate" smoothing of the trend:

elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2014-kentucky-senate-mcconnell-vs-grimes

with either more or less smoothing, however, you get GRIMES in the lead.  edit: additionally, the 49% that Grimes got in the recently released Magellan Survey is the best number put up by EITHER candidate in this race.

i find it quite difficult to predict the outcome in Alaska and Kentucky- but it seems like the GOP still has the upper hand.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Jun 16, 2014 11:04:35 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

so, i have been watching the senate stuff pretty intently for six months, now.

in january, i thought that Nate Silver's projection for the Senate was premature.  Obama's approval was rising, as was approval of the healthcare law.  this continued until May, but since then, both the presidents approval, and that of the ACA have fallen off sharply.

Obama now has a -12 rating, and the ACA has lost some of it's approval (but curiously, not gained much disapproval) since May.  unless Obama and the Democrats can find a new issue to ride on, they are going to lose the Senate.

three races have gone from Dem to GOP in this time: Kentucky, NC, and IA.  if the Democrats can't get at least two of those back, they are going to lose control of the Senate, and be left with ONLY veto power in the last 2 years of Obama's presidency.

five months to go.  a lot can still happen, but the odds are appreciably better for the GOP at this point than in April, and are trending better still by the day.

The Dems never had KY.  That would be a pickup- and I think that the Dems know it's going to be a defense election.  I don't think even the most optimistic projections have the Democrats picking up Senate Seats. 

When was this latest?  I'm sure the "lost" IRS emails are not factored in.  Was the VA scandal underway?  How about the Bergdahl debacle?  Or the deteriorating situation in Iraq?

[djAdvocate]

Jun 16, 2014 15:00:15 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Jun 16, 2014 11:04:35 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

so, i have been watching the senate stuff pretty intently for six months, now.

in january, i thought that Nate Silver's projection for the Senate was premature.  Obama's approval was rising, as was approval of the healthcare law.  this continued until May, but since then, both the presidents approval, and that of the ACA have fallen off sharply.

Obama now has a -12 rating, and the ACA has lost some of it's approval (but curiously, not gained much disapproval) since May.  unless Obama and the Democrats can find a new issue to ride on, they are going to lose the Senate.

three races have gone from Dem to GOP in this time: Kentucky, NC, and IA.  if the Democrats can't get at least two of those back, they are going to lose control of the Senate, and be left with ONLY veto power in the last 2 years of Obama's presidency.

five months to go.  a lot can still happen, but the odds are appreciably better for the GOP at this point than in April, and are trending better still by the day.

The Dems never had KY.  That would be a pickup- and I think that the Dems know it's going to be a defense election.  I don't think even the most optimistic projections have the Democrats picking up Senate Seats.

McConnell has a higher disapproval rating than Obama in KY, and well above that of Grimes.  given what recently happened to Cantor, i would not nearly be so confident about that seat.

When was this latest?  I'm sure the "lost" IRS emails are not factored in.  Was the VA scandal underway?  How about the Bergdahl debacle?  Or the deteriorating situation in Iraq?

the latest poll was June 7th through 14th.  i don't think that picks up Iraq, but i think it picks up the other two.  edit: oh, and it should be noted that Magellan is a Republican polling firm, for those of you who automatically assume poll bias.

[Value Buy]

I would be estatic if Republicans take the Senate after November, if for no other reason than Harry Reid loses the podium for the next two years.

It would also be interesting to see if the President would actually call, talk, and negotiate with Republican leadership in both Houses rather than just veto everything.

Possibly after six years of frustration could actually lead to some Governance

[djAdvocate]

Jun 16, 2014 16:55:26 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

I would be estatic if Republicans take the Senate after November, if for no other reason than Harry Reid loses the podium for the next two years.

It would also be interesting to see if the President would actually call, talk, and negotiate with Republican leadership in both Houses rather than just veto everything.

Possibly after six years of frustration could actually lead to some Governance

i'm confused.  why would he do that?

[Value Buy]

Jun 16, 2014 17:00:48 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Jun 16, 2014 16:55:26 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

I would be estatic if Republicans take the Senate after November, if for no other reason than Harry Reid loses the podium for the next two years.

It would also be interesting to see if the President would actually call, talk, and negotiate with Republican leadership in both Houses rather than just veto everything.

Possibly after six years of frustration could actually lead to some Governance

i'm confused.  why would he do that?

The President would no longer have Harry carrying his water for him, and he would have less than two years to galvanize his place in Presidential history. He might start actually negotiating with the Republicans with some give and take.

It would be in the Republican's best interest to actually negotiate with him as to be seen concillatory towards the President garnering points with the Independent voters in America rather than pushing Independents further to the left.

Outside of really pissing off the really far right Tea Party members, they would gain across the board better percentages in the next Presidential elections, looking a little more favorable to females and Independents.

As you well know it is a numbers game, and the Republicans are the ones who have to turn it around.

Of course, Hillary might throw a wrench in that plan if she runs and wins the nomination, but that is not guaranteed at this time.

[djAdvocate]

Jun 16, 2014 19:27:26 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Jun 16, 2014 17:00:48 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i'm confused.  why would he do that?

The President would no longer have Harry carrying his water for him, and he would have less than two years to galvanize his place in Presidential history. He might start actually negotiating with the Republicans with some give and take.

It would be in the Republican's best interest to actually negotiate with him as to be seen concillatory towards the President garnering points with the Independent voters in America rather than pushing Independents further to the left.

Outside of really pissing off the really far right Tea Party members, they would gain across the board better percentages in the next Presidential elections, looking a little more favorable to females and Independents.

As you well know it is a numbers game, and the Republicans are the ones who have to turn it around.

Of course, Hillary might throw a wrench in that plan if she runs and wins the nomination, but that is not guaranteed at this time.

you are presuming he is more of an antagonistic backstabber than a partisan cheerleader.  i can't fathom how you arrived at that position.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

For the record, I wouldn't be terribly upset with the loss of McConnell. I could be making the deadly "Romney Assumption" again- which is that KY voters will hold their nose and vote for him. Maybe they'll Romney him out?

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Caveat is of course if Rand Paul will continue to loan McConnell his political capital in the GE that he so generously loaned him in the primary?

[djAdvocate]

Jun 16, 2014 19:33:43 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

For the record, I wouldn't be terribly upset with the loss of McConnell. I could be making the deadly "Romney Assumption" again- which is that KY voters will hold their nose and vote for him. Maybe they'll Romney him out?

me neither.  i loathe that guy tho.  i think it would be funny if Reid, McConnel, Boehner followed Cantor within the next 12 months.  that would be really awesome.  PURGE!!!!!!

[djAdvocate]

Jun 16, 2014 19:34:40 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Caveat is of course if Rand Paul will continue to loan McConnell his political capital in the GE that he so generously loaned him in the primary?

Rand Paul hates McConnell more than i do.

[happyhoix]

It would be in the Republican's best interest to actually negotiate with him as to be seen concillatory towards the President garnering points with the Independent voters in America rather than pushing Independents further to the left

It's been in the Republican's best interest ever since Obama got elected to actually negotiate with him, but they have consistently pushed further and further to the right, because the TEA party candidates insist that the only way to deal with the Dems and the president is to obstruct, obstruct, obstruct.  The least sign of a willingness to negotiation with the dems is viewed as weakness.

They'll have to stand up to the TEA party and show a willingness to do something other than obstruct the process if they want to capture more middle ground independents like me.

[djAdvocate]

this race is back to "too close to call" for me.  i really don't know why, either.  it must be individual races, because both of my indicators (Obama and ACA approval) are down.  McConnel is in a dead heat in KY.  i would not count on him winning that one.  and, although it is counter-intuitive, i think Begich might hold on in Alaska.  that, and the races that are heading the Democrats way, makes me think they might get at least an even split in the Senate at this point........4.5 months to go......