2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWe need the Senate, 538 is showing NOT good news.
Gridlock, gridlock, gridlock. http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/senate/?ex_cid=2016-forecast
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)a kennedy
(29,672 posts)Silent3
(15,220 posts)Thrill
(19,178 posts)was not very good. Jeesh. Really Wisconsin Johnson?
moonscape
(4,673 posts)BumRushDaShow
(129,084 posts)Silent3
(15,220 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)(more accurate than 538, btw)
Democrats need to win 5 of the following:
Illinois
Wisconsin
Pennsylvania
Nevada
New Hampshire
North Carolina
Missouri
Indiana
Florida
Three of those are looking very good (PA, IL, WI) and a fourth is also looking good due to GOTV (NV).
That means if they win IN, or NC, or NH, or MO, they retake the Senate.
JHan
(10,173 posts)asiliveandbreathe
(8,203 posts)unblock
(52,252 posts)at a minimum, the house will remain republican.
which means, they'll pass nothing except absolutely essential stuff -- any even that they'll hold hostage.
a democratic senate will be nice for nominations, particularly judges, but republicans can still filibuster supreme court justices.
in theory we can change the rules with a simple majority but in practice blue dogs are reluctant to support this, so it's unlikely unless we get *at least* 52 seats; that might not even be enough.
point is, legislative gridlock is all bug guaranteed. the only question is if we'll have nomination/appointment gridlock as well.
vdogg
(1,384 posts)kevin881
(465 posts)smorkingapple
(827 posts)Once that came out any coattails she may have had were eliminated.
still has Dem control prob over 70%
http://election.princeton.edu/
Guy Whitey Corngood
(26,501 posts)radius777
(3,635 posts)Bayh losing there, he's lead there consistently aside from the few polls, and is a guy who is liked there, even if it is a red state.
I guess it all comes down to the margin Trump gets there, and the degree of cross ticket voting.
Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)yet has been accusing Evan of being dishonest in his work.
Rstrstx
(1,399 posts)And they were one of the slowest models to come around, insisting until about 10 days ago that Rs had about a 2/3 chance of holding the senate
Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)Nate Silver is but a Republican whore.
FormerDittoHead
(5,155 posts)The Senate was their fallback position.
And things are going to get worse:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/even-if-democrats-win-the-senate-in-2016-their-majority-is-unlikely-to-endure/2016/10/23/443b9bec-9930-11e6-b4c9-391055ea9259_story.html
But a look inside the numbers makes the Democrats challenge in 2018 all the more daunting. Fully 20 percent of the 25 Democratic seats are in states that then-Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney carried in 2012 (and even Trump is likely to carry on Nov. 8): Indiana, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota and West Virginia.
All five Democratic incumbents in those states are expected to run for reelection, a prospect that gives Democrats a chance in each. But with 2018 looking almost certain to be the first midterm election of a Hillary Clinton presidency, its hard to see how her party avoids major losses in red states.