How Likely Are Democrats to Lose the Senate?

Real Clear Politics ^ | February 20, 2014 | Sean Trende

[neverdem]

A few weeks ago, I produced two Senate analyses. One focused on the relationship between the president’s job approval, the fate of Senate Democrats during the 2010 and 2012 elections, and what that would mean if this relationship continues through 2014. The second looked at Republican vulnerability in 2016 using a similar standard.

The first piece concluded that, based on President Obama’s job approval rating, Democrats have substantial vulnerability in 2014. This vulnerability is deeper than many analysts are willing to consider right now. Over the past two cycles, the president’s job approval has explained 58 percent of the variance in competitive Senate races in any given state. Given Obama’s current weak numbers, this seemingly bodes poorly for Democrats. Remember, the midterm map is the “reddest” Senate map Democrats have had to defend while Obama has been president. Their overexposure makes it something of a perfect storm scenario if things do not improve. This doesn’t mean that the problems are insuperable for Democrats. It simply means that the playing field is stacked heavily against them.

The second piece took a somewhat different tack. Instead of just looking at the playing field for 2016, it used that playing field as the basis for a simulation run in a neutral year to help better quantify Republican exposure. It concluded that unless 2016 turned out to be a good Republican year overall, that Republicans would probably have to win 53 or 54 seats in 2014 to feel good about their chances of holding the Senate two years later.

The present article takes the technique used in the second piece and applies it to the playing field described in the first. In other words, this is a “Monte Carlo simulation” to try to better quantify the amount of exposure Democrats are under this time...

[fortheDeclaration]

The point was the cheating won't matter if the vote isn't close, and it won't be.

Historically, all Presidents do very poorly in their 6th year elections.

The only question is how poorly are the Democrats going to do.

[hosepipe]

You do remember we won the House in 2010?

---

Do you remember what happened in the 2012 republican primary’s?..
Even the republican primary vote was tainted.. i.e. CORRUPT..

How could a known in your face democrat sympathizer get chosen?.. after the 2010 elections..

Obviously 2010 was a mistake(by democrats) remedied by 2012..
The selection of Myth Romney was a “TELL” of the voting system..
Even in the republican primary’s..

AND.............. do you think the success of 2012 by democrats will NOT be capitalized on in 2014 and 2016?..
There will NOT be anymore 150% of the vote in certain precincts anymore..
That’s no doubt been remedied as well..

I realize YOU(most) republicans refuse to face this.. BUT
THAT is WHY? they will be successful..

[fortheDeclaration]

Yes, that is a problem with the Republican primary system, which will have to be dealt with in 2016.

That won't be an issue in 2014, with Obama having low poll numbers and the American People angry at the way the nation is headed.

So, no, they aren't going to be successful, they will lose the Senate and will not regain the House.

Even in 2012 the Democrats did very poorly at the State level.

Obama had no coattails.

So, stop acting like the Democrats are unbeatable. they aren't, and they know it, even if you don't.

[Political Junkie Too]

Not very, if McConnell leads that as well as he did last time.

-PJ

[hosepipe]

So, stop acting like the Democrats are unbeatable. they aren’t, and they know it, even if you don’t.

---

Hanging on to the very end........... eh!...
Even when they come to your door you will be shouting about your rights..

Deadly optimism.. until they threaten your family and you comply..
You know cave.. tail between legs, give in, punk out..

[ExSoldier]

If the GOP quit playing Russian Roulette with itself...

It's actually worse than that. In true Russian Roulette, there is a revolver present, with one in six chambers being loaded. Therefore, there is a large percentage that the hammer is going to fall on an empty chamber and the shooter saved from death by acute lead poisoning. But the GOP seems to be using a semiauto for their suicides and that's a guaranteed result lacking some sort of firearms defect.