Posted on 07/02/2012 7:02:48 AM PDT by military cop
Wondering what the current races in the Senate look like nationwide.
Are we close?
RLTW
Check rothenbergpoliticalreport.com for some analysis.
Thanks.
Based on Rothenberg, it appears to be a reasonable hope the R’s will pick up 5, after the expected loss in Maine.
Forgot to mention, realclearpolitics.com usually has the latest polls and poll averages. But it’s early in the process, so there may not be polls for every race and the polls may not be that recent. The primary process is not even complete in some states.
And there is always the hope that Lieberman will help to . . . oh, never mind . . .
They say control of the senate will come down to results in eight toss-up states which I, in turn, are ranking in order of likelihood of a GOP win as follows:
Personally, I think the GOP wins everything from Virginia and above for a 52-48 split. I also think the GOP would loose Massachusetts and probably even Wisconsin if the Jackass Party didn't have laughably bad candidates.
Further, I also predict the GOP loses Hawaii even with a great candidate in former governor Linda Lingle, given the abject stupidity of that electorate. Frankly, I think we have a better chance to flip Pennsylvania.
People also may think I am ranking Montana too low, given the conservative nature of the state. However, the incumbent Tester, has taken great pains to distance himself from the national party and is outspokenly pro-gun. The only reason the race is even competitive is because he is running against a high profile Republican.
Note that while the New York Times has updated their state-by-state presidential analysis quite recently, the U.S. Senate analysis hasn't been updated since April.
Why are you so confident about Missouri and Wisconsin?
Thank you sir. Is that 47 count for the Dims including the Independents caucusing with them?
I want to see the differences in poll numbers before and after the atrocity of Obama Care was up held.
I am thinking the back lash will be monumental in Nov.
Credit is even due to The New York Times for seeing through the charade.
Since most political analysts don’t see the House changing hands, sounds like it would be a better use of money to donate to Senate candidates in tough races or PAC’s like DeMints.
I would like to get Missouri and Wisconsin freepers to weigh in further.
But based on what I've heard from them, Claire McCaskill is as dumb as a box of rocks and squeaked in in 2006 only because of a heavy Democrat win that year.
Tammy Baldwin in Wisconsin has never won a statewide race and is a batsh*t crazy Madison liberal. Even Milwaukee liberals may be crazy, but they are not batsh*t crazy. Bottom line is that she is going to be hard-pressed to outpoll the Milwaukee mayor in the unsuccessful Scott Walker recall election.
Thanks for some good, concrete information. Not enough action online, and too much self important, snarky, trying to sound smart commentary.
We don’t have a nominee till August in Michigan so the race won’t really tighten till then. Personally I think Debbie Stabenow may be done. Pete Hoekstra is already beating her up over her support of Obamatax.
I dunno. McCaskill seems more formidable that that. Missouri is always tricky. Wisconsin, on the other hand, may give Romney the opportunity to ride the coattails of the Senate candidate and take the state. Hope so.
honestly, I believe the best predictor is intrade.
Intrade had the mandate going down by 70% too remember?
McCaskill (d-mo) is a goner.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.