onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
I saw this discussion elsewhere.
That last one is big, given that everyone acknowledges polling bias covered Republican strength.
J
USA Mid-term Elections--Off to the Races
- Thread starter onejayhawk
- Start date
I saw this discussion elsewhere.
That last one is big, given that everyone acknowledges polling bias covered Republican strength.
J
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
It is now less than a week to the Louisiana runoff elections. One Senate seat and three congressional seats will be resolved. At one point, the Senate seat was considered potentially pivotal. In the aftermath of the Nov 3 voting, a lot of wind has gone from the sails. Still there was a heated debate last night.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/01/politics/mary-landrieu-bill-cassidy-louisiana-senate-runoff/index.html
Polls show Cassidy with a double digit lead, as well as more available money. The national Democrat machine has largely written Landrieu off.
More difficult to call are the Congressional seats, since there no recent polls. If anyone knows anything, please post it.
In the aftermath, there have been a lot of analytical articles on why the election turned into a wave. Indeed, several article discussed why the results were in fact a wave, since a Republican win was expected. This one by 538 is particularly interesting. Note that four of the last five national electios were waves. The exception is 2012.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-election-map-alone-doesnt-explain-the-2014-republican-wave/
J
http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/01/politics/mary-landrieu-bill-cassidy-louisiana-senate-runoff/index.html
Polls show Cassidy with a double digit lead, as well as more available money. The national Democrat machine has largely written Landrieu off.
More difficult to call are the Congressional seats, since there no recent polls. If anyone knows anything, please post it.
In the aftermath, there have been a lot of analytical articles on why the election turned into a wave. Indeed, several article discussed why the results were in fact a wave, since a Republican win was expected. This one by 538 is particularly interesting. Note that four of the last five national electios were waves. The exception is 2012.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-election-map-alone-doesnt-explain-the-2014-republican-wave/
J
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
There is voting today for one Senate and two House seat, all in Louisiana. The Senate race has turned farcical. Incumbent Mary Landrieu (D) appears doomed and is bitter about it. This is not without reason. Her defeat may be of historic proportions. Polling has Landrieu double digits behind Bill Cassidy (R) and early voting has run very to the GOP.
The top 10 incumbent Senator defeats ince 1900.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/...d-toward-historic-defeat-in-louisiana-runoff/
J
The top 10 incumbent Senator defeats ince 1900.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/...d-toward-historic-defeat-in-louisiana-runoff/
J
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
Polls have been closed an hour and all three races are called, with a Republican sweep. The question is how badly Landrieu gets crushed.
With 96% of the precincts reporting, the spread is down to 14%.
J
With 96% of the precincts reporting, the spread is down to 14%.
J
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
With the 2014 election in the books, here is something to cheer up the Democrats--2016. The map is much friendlier, with the Republicans defending 24 seats to the Democrats' 10. Here is the map.
That said, it is no gimme to retake the Senate. Democrats will likely not lose any of their seats, but the Republicans are not fighting on hostile ground like the Democrats in 2014. Except Illinois, every one of the GOP seats is in a state that is at least purple. Picking up six is a tall order.
Politico has an article on the ten state it considers pivotal.
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/2016-elections-key-states-112801.html#ixzz3IrIQvZNy
Illinois would be my first pick as the state most likely to flip to D. I would consider it likely. Not only is the state increasingly blue, the Republican incumbent has had a stroke. Even if he runs, his health will be an issue, both literally and politically.
After that there are several candidates--PA, WI, NH, NC--but none that are more likely than not. For the Republicans, the only shots seem to be Colorado and Nevada (Harry Reid). Neither is likely.
J
Note: John McCain is 80, but likely to run again in Arizona
That said, it is no gimme to retake the Senate. Democrats will likely not lose any of their seats, but the Republicans are not fighting on hostile ground like the Democrats in 2014. Except Illinois, every one of the GOP seats is in a state that is at least purple. Picking up six is a tall order.
Politico has an article on the ten state it considers pivotal.
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/2016-elections-key-states-112801.html#ixzz3IrIQvZNy
Illinois would be my first pick as the state most likely to flip to D. I would consider it likely. Not only is the state increasingly blue, the Republican incumbent has had a stroke. Even if he runs, his health will be an issue, both literally and politically.
After that there are several candidates--PA, WI, NH, NC--but none that are more likely than not. For the Republicans, the only shots seem to be Colorado and Nevada (Harry Reid). Neither is likely.
J
Note: John McCain is 80, but likely to run again in Arizona
If the Dems have a good presidential year, then a couple of those seats might go D in the presidential coattails (especially with the increasing national aspect of elections). On the flip side, if the GOP wins the presidential election, then they're likely to hold both houses as well.
Similar threads
- Locked
