The US Senate - control at stake

[NorthSideSox72]

With all the attention on the s*** show that is the Presidential campaign, what's barely been noted back here is the race for control of the Senate. The GOP has control, and that's huge for SCOTUS nominations and other factors. But now, the Dems seem to have a good chance to take it back.

 

Silver's 538 shows the Dems with a 71.6% chance of taking back the Senate. Dems would need to take +4 seats to win control assuming Clinton wins the Presidency (because it would then be 50-50), or +5 if Trump wins the Presidency.

 

The key races seem to be:

--Missouri (Kander vs Blunt, which 538 puts at about 52% chance of winning for Blunt-R)

--North Carolina (Ross vs Burr, which 538 puts at virtual tie)

--New Hampshire (Hassan vs Ayotte, which 538 puts at about 59% chance for Hassan-D)

--Nevada (Masto vs Heck, which 538 puts at about 61% for Masto-D)

--Pennsylvania (McGinty vs Toomey, which 538 puts at about 63% for McGinty-D)

--Indiana (Bayh vs Young, which 538 puts at about 68% for Bayh-D)

 

The Dems would need to take 3 (or 4 with Trump) of those to take control.

 

Anyone want to place a bet?

 

As far as the House goes, I can't even find any decent models, so who knows. The GOP still has such an enormous districting advantage due to the 2010 gerrymandering that I find it hard to believe they will turn blue.

 

[StrangeSox]

Masto's had some pretty strong polls recently in Nevada, showing her with a comfortable lead. NV is notoriously hard to poll, but if the Democrats can hold that seat (it's Reid's current seat), that will go a long, long way. Bayh is also polling strongly in Indiana. I'd say that 538's chances for the Dem Senate 'feel' about right.

 

For the House, IIRC the Democrats really need something like D+12 on a generic ballot poll in order to have a shot at taking that back, and they're not quite there. Most likely what will happen is we get millions of more votes collectively for Democrats, but Republicans manage to hold the House at a much tighter margin because of the gerrymandering you mention. The more interesting question there, potentially, is what will happen in the race for Speaker. Portions of the GOP are waging open war on Ryan right now.

[lostfan]

I don't think the House is in play. The GOP will definitely lose a double-digit number of seats, but they've also partially insulated themselves from Trump somehow, and Democrats need to outdo Republicans by something like 7-8 million on the generic ballot to actually get a majority (which they can't hold).

[iamshack]

Masto's had some pretty strong polls recently in Nevada, showing her with a comfortable lead. NV is notoriously hard to poll, but if the Democrats can hold that seat (it's Reid's current seat), that will go a long, long way. Bayh is also polling strongly in Indiana. I'd say that 538's chances for the Dem Senate 'feel' about right.

 

For the House, IIRC the Democrats really need something like D+12 on a generic ballot poll in order to have a shot at taking that back, and they're not quite there. Most likely what will happen is we get millions of more votes collectively for Democrats, but Republicans manage to hold the House at a much tighter margin because of the gerrymandering you mention. The more interesting question there, potentially, is what will happen in the race for Speaker. Portions of the GOP are waging open war on Ryan right now.

I heard that she recently did very poorly in a debate against Heck.

 

I will say though, they are both spending a lot of $ right now. Every other commercial is about one of them.

[Quin]

I think Democrats are gonna take the Senate, much to Paul Ryan's chagrin. He's afraid of Bernie Sanders on any budget committees.

 

House won't happen - thanks gerrymandering. That's a practice that needs to get taken out quickly.