2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumNate Silver : "Senate Control in 2014 Increasingly Looks Like a Tossup"
Granted this analysis is from July, 2013 but Nate Silver's race-by-race look at the 2014 senate elections shows a sobering picture. Democrats are probably giving up three seats due to retirement.
Holding the senate IS NOT a given in 2014.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/07/15/senate-control-in-2014-increasingly-looks-like-a-tossup/?_r=2#more-40702
Mass
(27,315 posts)In 2011 and 2009, people were saying the same thing.
This said, we can only hope the administration will find their pace with Obamacare and will start doing things.
Cirque du So-What
(25,973 posts)but when that person is Nate Silver, I prick up my ears. It also goes without saying that Democrats must never become complacent or take victory for granted.
Mass
(27,315 posts)Things change, as we have seen in the second part of the year. So, any report is to take with caution. This is what Nate Silver said a few months ago. We have no idea what the situation is today and what it will be in 10 months. There is no way to know.
lancer78
(1,495 posts)on senate races is not perfect. His error rate is 10%. A local senate candidate like Heidi heitkamp can make his analysis wrong.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)they then get cover for passing the right-wing agenda that their donors want.
Turbineguy
(37,365 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)By shutting down the government again next year at least once or twice before the elections.
F' in idiots.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)Then we'll have a better idea which races are the ones we need.
karynnj
(59,504 posts)2016 has all the seats that we lost in 2010 up again - many in states we should not have lost.
I agree that given the number of Democratic seats up vs Republican ones in 2014, this could be a tough year. The same was said for 2012 - where we actually - unexpectedly gained. The reason we won was that the Republicans threw away safe seats by their inhospitably to non tea party nuts - like Snowe and Lugar. Both of them could have held the seat.
One thing that could actually hurt us is that the tea party has reached a low in their approval. This could mean that the Republicans might stop shooting themselves in the foot. However, it might be that with ACA working reasonable well, we will keep the seats with strong incumbents in purple states. (I do think it entirely likely that we lose seats -- which is why I really do not get the Schumer story that he was willing to withhold money from MA (to protect Brown) in exchange for a vote that would mean nothing - as it would not pass the House. While true that this would not risk control in 2012, 2014 was easily already seen as a possible problem. )
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)with majorities and the WH. You need to face the facts - The Repukes give their voters what they want. The Dems do not.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)The Democrats have a majority (singular) in the senate. Of course, if you're talking about a filibuster proof majority in the senate, there was only a short period in 2009 between the seating of Al Franken (after his opponent finally gave up challenging the vote) and the seating of Scott Brown when he won the election to replace Ted Kennedy.
blue14u
(575 posts)[b
want because we are seating centrist third way candidates.
( I call them Republicans hiding behind the (D)....
If democrats would vote to eliminate them from our party, we could see some real
change. A progressive change. I'm tired of the scam we have been dealt
by our party with these elected, fake democrats.
As for Nate Silver, I do pay attention to him, but I still vote and never take
it for granted I can vote.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)TeamPooka
(24,254 posts)tabbycat31
(6,336 posts)However, I don't disagree that it's a wakeup call
bigdarryl
(13,190 posts)cheapdate
(3,811 posts)about the prospects for Democrats based primarily on a self-reinforcing feeling that things are moving our way. It's another thing to look at the actual contests that will be decided next November.
Nate's rundown from five months ago was the best concise and complete summary of the 2014 senate races that I ran across. I was very surprised by what I found.
What's changed in five months? There are still 35 races to be decided.
The GOP still enjoys a higher number of "Safe Republican" seats. There are critical races in NC, LA, and AR. There are important races in MI, IA, AK.
Forewarned is forearmed. If you have better information, please share it.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)cheapdate
(3,811 posts)35 senate races for 2014.
8 "Safe Democrat" and 13 "Safe Republican" races. Critical "Toss Ups" in NC, LA, and AR. Important races in MI, IA, AK.
mgcgulfcoast
(1,127 posts)not enough stupid people to vote republican.
calguy
(5,325 posts)and I can assure you that there more than enough crazy people here to put repuke in the senate. At this would not bet a penny that the senate seat AR stays blue.
mgcgulfcoast
(1,127 posts)2014 will be good for us.