US Midterm Election 2018 Megathread- It's Kavanaugh

[Liriena]

Hmm I wasn’t aware of her praise of strongmen... I would still vote for her in a general election, but idk if she’s clearly better than Kamala Harris, Sherrod Brown, or Jeff Merkley.

Harris has the charisma, we'll see if that can translate into votes if she decides to run (voters may be turned off by any perceived lack of experience or perceptions of fakeness and little substance).

Policy wise, Brown and Merkley bring a lot to the table, but in terms of personality, they are unfortunately very, very bland.

One problem Harris may face is that her record is not exactly stellar if she aims to cast herself as a progressive.

[Liriena]

The 50-state strategy is back, baby!

The 50-state strategy was an ill conceived idea overall. That's why Dean is no longer working hand in hand with the DNC. (Not cause of his scream).

My concern is that, even if Democrats make big gains next year, unless there's a lasting change it will all probably dwindle in the next cycle.

[Major-Tom]

Harris has the charisma, we'll see if that can translate into votes if she decides to run (voters may be turned off by any perceived lack of experience or perceptions of fakeness and little substance).

Policy wise, Brown and Merkley bring a lot to the table, but in terms of personality, they are unfortunately very, very bland.

One problem Harris may face is that her record is not exactly stellar if she aims to cast herself as a progressive.

That's why she is going much more left than most of her colleagues as a Freshman Senator. But she needs to shake her past records from when she wasn't a Senator more if she wants to cast herself in that light.

[Ngelmish]

Hmm I wasn’t aware of her praise of strongmen... I would still vote for her in a general election, but idk if she’s clearly better than Kamala Harris, Sherrod Brown, or Jeff Merkley.

Harris has the charisma, we'll see if that can translate into votes if she decides to run (voters may be turned off by any perceived lack of experience or perceptions of fakeness and little substance).

Policy wise, Brown and Merkley bring a lot to the table, but in terms of personality, they are unfortunately very, very bland.

Charisma is, at best, an inconclusive metric for picking candidates and has lead to a series of (mostly) bad presidents in recent decades stretching back to Carter. Charisma is also generally an artificial narrative frame boosted by media incentivized to look for the most exciting coverage, regardless of actual personality traits.

[Jerzylvania]

I can absolutely see the GOP gaining seats in the Senate, really not sure about the House because I don't pay a whole ton of attention to them but I'd probably have that lean R as well.

There is no Gerrymander effect statewide. GOP could very well lose a lot of seats in statewide races.

[Thermodolia]

Looked into it - you're actually not wrong on much of this. Definitely not seeing the hype as much now.

Hmm I wasn’t aware of her praise of strongmen... I would still vote for her in a general election, but idk if she’s clearly better than Kamala Harris, Sherrod Brown, or Jeff Merkley.

She's better than Kamala Harris by not being Kamala Harris

[San Lumen]

I can absolutely see the GOP gaining seats in the Senate, really not sure about the House because I don't pay a whole ton of attention to them but I'd probably have that lean R as well.

There is no Gerrymander effect statewide. GOP could very well lose a lot of seats in statewide races.

and then Republicans will likely refuse to get anything done or work with them

[Insaeldor]

Dems will deffinetly pick up seats in the house, I can't say it'll flip the house but it'll narrow the GOO's majority. I can't see democrats pickup seats in the senate, if anything will see republicans increase their share in the senate given the political geography of the senate elections this year.

The thing about the Senate elections is that, if the swings we've seen in special elections this year carry onto those, I don't think it's all that unlikely that the Democrats will keep or even increase their number of seats in the Senate. Even in the special elections they lost, there was a substantial shift in the Democrats' favor.

Virginia was a clear win for democrats given how Virginia looked on Election Day, Alabama wasn't an election where the ideas of the Democratic Party triumphed over those of the ideas of the republicans it was simply the fact that our candidate wasn't an accused pedophile.

We have Dems in Missouri, North Dakota, Montana, and Indiana that I'd say are going to go to the Republicans. We might pickup in Nevada and Arizona but it still means the republicans will get 2 more seats in the senate.

[Jerzylvania]

There is no Gerrymander effect statewide. GOP could very well lose a lot of seats in statewide races.

and then Republicans will likely refuse to get anything done or work with them

With Trump as POTUS, that's a big win. Then there are the committee chairs and control. There might be a few worthy investigations that will occur. Can't wait for that!

[Major-Tom]

Harris has the charisma, we'll see if that can translate into votes if she decides to run (voters may be turned off by any perceived lack of experience or perceptions of fakeness and little substance).

Policy wise, Brown and Merkley bring a lot to the table, but in terms of personality, they are unfortunately very, very bland.

Charisma is, at best, an inconclusive metric for picking candidates and has lead to a series of (mostly) bad presidents in recent decades stretching back to Carter. Charisma is also generally an artificial narrative frame boosted by media incentivized to look for the most exciting coverage, regardless of actual personality traits.

I agree for the most part, but voters look for charisma. If we want to lock up some former blue states and maybe some red states in 2020, some charisma may be necessary. But I'll still personally go for policy over charisma 100%.

[Major-Tom]

The thing about the Senate elections is that, if the swings we've seen in special elections this year carry onto those, I don't think it's all that unlikely that the Democrats will keep or even increase their number of seats in the Senate. Even in the special elections they lost, there was a substantial shift in the Democrats' favor.

Virginia was a clear win for democrats given how Virginia looked on Election Day, Alabama wasn't an election where the ideas of the Democratic Party triumphed over those of the ideas of the republicans it was simply the fact that our candidate wasn't an accused pedophile.

We have Dems in Missouri, North Dakota, Montana, and Indiana that I'd say are going to go to the Republicans. We might pickup in Nevada and Arizona but it still means the republicans will get 2 more seats in the senate.

ND and Montana may not be shoe ins for Republicans. Heitkamp and Tester can both put up an effective fight and it wouldn't surprise me if both of them won.

Missouri and Indiana, I may just have to give you that.

[Morgantown West Virginia]

My current Senate ratings
CA- Solid D
MT- Likely D
NJ- Lean D
PA- Lean D
VT- Solid D
MN (Klobucher)- Likely D
MN (Special)- Toss-up
CT- Likely D
DE- Solid D
HI- Solid D
MD- Solid D
MA- Solid D
NM- Solid D
NY- Solid D
RI- Solid D
VA- Likely D
WA- Solid D
MI- Lean D
WI- Likely D
FL- Toss-up
ME- Lean I
ND- Toss-up
OH- Toss-up
IN- Lean R
MO- Lean R
WV- Toss-up
AZ- Toss-up
NV- Toss-up
TN- Lean R
TX- Solid R
MS- Solid R
NE- Solid R
UT- Solid R
WY- Solid R

[Petrasylvania]

and then Republicans will likely refuse to get anything done or work with them

With Trump as POTUS, that's a big win. Then there are the committee chairs and control. There might be a few worthy investigations that will occur. Can't wait for that!

And waiting until the 2020 election to confirm Supreme Court nominees.

[Ngelmish]

I really do believe that people here are either underrating Joe Donnelly's political talent (I am myself am not a fervent supporter or admirer of the man, but he threads the needle well and had the right political instincts to see an opening in 2012, even before Lugar was knocked off in the primary) or underestimating his personal brand in the state. His numbers in both parties, for a generic Democrat in a red state are better than they have any right to be, and unlike the Bayh retread effort last year, he's in office right now. He may be at a generic disadvantage, but it's a small handicap.

Charisma is, at best, an inconclusive metric for picking candidates and has lead to a series of (mostly) bad presidents in recent decades stretching back to Carter. Charisma is also generally an artificial narrative frame boosted by media incentivized to look for the most exciting coverage, regardless of actual personality traits.

I agree for the most part, but voters look for charisma. If we want to lock up some former blue states and maybe some red states in 2020, some charisma may be necessary. But I'll still personally go for policy over charisma 100%.

I still think that 3-4 years of Trump being garish and loud and all style may create a rare opening for an anti-charisma candidate who promises reassuringly calm, smart, technocratic government provided that they check off a few of the other necessary performance boxes of presidential candidates. And I'm deeply skeptical of any candidate who is going to pitch their campaign, to any significant degree, on being a loud enough personality to compete toe to toe with Trump's histrionics.

[Major-Tom]

I really do believe that people here are either underrating Joe Donnelly's political talent (I am myself am not a fervent supporter or admirer of the man, but he threads the needle well and had the right political instincts to see an opening in 2012, even before Lugar was knocked off in the primary) or underestimating his personal brand in the state. His numbers in both parties, for a generic Democrat in a red state are better than they have any right to be, and unlike the Bayh retread effort last year, he's in office right now. He may be at a generic disadvantage, but it's a small handicap.

I agree for the most part, but voters look for charisma. If we want to lock up some former blue states and maybe some red states in 2020, some charisma may be necessary. But I'll still personally go for policy over charisma 100%.

I still think that 3-4 years of Trump being garish and loud and all style may create a rare opening for an anti-charisma candidate who promises reassuringly calm, smart, technocratic government provided that they check off a few of the other necessary performance boxes of presidential candidates. And I'm deeply skeptical of any candidate who is going to pitch their campaign, to any significant degree, on being a loud enough personality to compete toe to toe with Trump's histrionics.

You're from Indiana, so it is interesting to hear your perspective on Donnelly. I'd rate it as a tossup. If he is talented, which I don't doubt he is, he will have to use that talent, get lucky with the unpopularity of the Republicans, and potentially then win his seat for 2018. I hope he does. He is a conservative Democrat, but that is necessary for him to win his state I would think.

As for your latter point, that may be right. Biden would strike a perfect balance, but he is too old in the eyes of many voters who are still fans of Biden overall, I would say. We'll have to see what happens in the next few years and figure out who the perfect candidate is. But at this point, most Democrats could beat Trump in 2020.

[Jerzylvania]

With Trump as POTUS, that's a big win. Then there are the committee chairs and control. There might be a few worthy investigations that will occur. Can't wait for that!

And waiting until the 2020 election to confirm Supreme Court nominees.

Fucking A.

[Ngelmish]

I really do believe that people here are either underrating Joe Donnelly's political talent (I am myself am not a fervent supporter or admirer of the man, but he threads the needle well and had the right political instincts to see an opening in 2012, even before Lugar was knocked off in the primary) or underestimating his personal brand in the state. His numbers in both parties, for a generic Democrat in a red state are better than they have any right to be, and unlike the Bayh retread effort last year, he's in office right now. He may be at a generic disadvantage, but it's a small handicap.



I still think that 3-4 years of Trump being garish and loud and all style may create a rare opening for an anti-charisma candidate who promises reassuringly calm, smart, technocratic government provided that they check off a few of the other necessary performance boxes of presidential candidates. And I'm deeply skeptical of any candidate who is going to pitch their campaign, to any significant degree, on being a loud enough personality to compete toe to toe with Trump's histrionics.

You're from Indiana, so it is interesting to hear your perspective on Donnelly. I'd rate it as a tossup. If he is talented, which I don't doubt he is, he will have to use that talent, get lucky with the unpopularity of the Republicans, and potentially then win his seat for 2018. I hope he does. He is a conservative Democrat, but that is necessary for him to win his state I would think.

As for your latter point, that may be right. Biden would strike a perfect balance, but he is too old in the eyes of many voters who are still fans of Biden overall, I would say. We'll have to see what happens in the next few years and figure out who the perfect candidate is. But at this point, most Democrats could beat Trump in 2020.

Indiana is an odd state, Mike Pence is still extremely polarizing here, and if Trump hadn't tapped him for VP he, individually not as a Republican, would not have won reelection. There's definitely still a niche that a genuinely conservative Democrat can carve out on the state level, and Donnelly has already done that. Toss-up sounds about right to me, pending the results of the GOP primary which could tilt things in a couple different directions, basically depending on how Rokita acts(win or lose). And frankly, Donnelly could likely benefit from being thought to be such an easy pickup, it makes it easy for him to punch above his weight without being expected to. I do expect the election to be close.

[Arlenton]

My current Senate ratings
CA- Solid D
MT- Likely D
NJ- Lean D
PA- Lean D
VT- Solid D
MN (Klobucher)- Likely D
MN (Special)- Toss-up
CT- Likely D
DE- Solid D
HI- Solid D
MD- Solid D
MA- Solid D
NM- Solid D
NY- Solid D
RI- Solid D
VA- Likely D
WA- Solid D
MI- Lean D
WI- Likely D
FL- Toss-up
ME- Lean I
ND- Toss-up
OH- Toss-up
IN- Lean R
MO- Lean R
WV- Toss-up
AZ- Toss-up
NV- Toss-up
TN- Lean R
TX- Solid R
MS- Solid R
NE- Solid R
UT- Solid R
WY- Solid R

Mine would be similar to this. I need to make one of these.

[Morgantown West Virginia]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/28/politics/ ... index.html

Roy Moore refuses to quit.

[San Lumen]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/28/politics/roy-moore-files-complaint/index.html

Roy Moore refuses to quit.

This just reinforces my belief that Republicans dont believe in free and fair elections.

[Morgantown West Virginia]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/28/politics/roy-moore-files-complaint/index.html

Roy Moore refuses to quit.

This just reinforces my belief that Republicans dont believe in free and fair elections.

Why is that?

[Thermodolia]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/28/politics/roy-moore-files-complaint/index.html

Roy Moore refuses to quit.

This just reinforces my belief that Republicans dont believe in free and fair elections.

Even though 99% of republicans, including Steve Bannon and Trump, have told Moore to concede? Facts are nasty things

[Petrasylvania]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/28/politics/roy-moore-files-complaint/index.html

Roy Moore refuses to quit.

Remember when Republicans gloated about Al Gore being a sore loser crybaby?

[Thermodolia]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/28/politics/roy-moore-files-complaint/index.html

Roy Moore refuses to quit.

Remember when Republicans gloated about Al Gore being a sore loser crybaby?

Well several of them are saying the same about Moore. Steve Bannon even told him to give it up and conced

[Trumptonium]

My opinion

75% chance Pennsylvania going GOP
75% chance Wisconsin going GOP
75% chance North Dakota going GOP
50% chance Ohio going GOP
50% chance West Virginia going GOP
50% chance Montana going GOP
50% chance Florida going GOP
25% chance Michigan going GOP
25% chance Indiana going GOP
25% chance Missouri going GOP
15% chance Connecticut going GOP

as for Dems
75% chance Nevada going Dem
50% chance Arizona going Dem
15% chance Tennessee going Dem

rest stays as-is

All in all, my final guess is that GOP increases their majority by 2. 3 is an insurance option.

I think it'll look something like this


ignore hawaii, my mistake