Anonymous wrote:The Cook Political Report just changed its rating on the Cunningham-Tillis North Carolina race to tossup. LFG!!!
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/486298-cook-political-report-moves-north-carolina-senate-race-to-toss-up
Anonymous wrote:Copying this from the mitch mcconnell thread by a super nerdso I will remember how to donate ---
"This. I follow #electiontwitter pretty closely, and everyone there seems to think that the piles of money being shoveled at McGrath in Kentucky and Harrison in South Carolina would be MUCH better spent on...
* Cal Cunningham, who just won his primary in NC handily over a more progressive challenger despite Mitch’s PAC giving her $3M to try to keep him from running against Thom Tillis;
* Sara Gideon, the speaker of the Maine State house who is widely expected to win her primary in June and take on Susan Collins;
* Mark Kelly who is running against McSally in Arizona (although he is already swimming in money);
* John Hickenlooper in Colorado (who’s a multimillionaire so maybe save your money);
* Theresa Greenfield in Iowa who’s the most likely pick to challenge Joni Ernst;
* Laura Bollier in Kansas, who has a fighting chance there if hideous cretin Kris Kobach ends up being the R nominee;
* Whichever Democrats win the primaries for BOTH Georgia seats which are eminently more flippable than KY or SC
* Wait a couple days to see if Steve Bullock gets in for Montana - he makes Daines’s seat flippable and no one else does
* Doug Jones to try to save that Alabama seat for the Democrats
* Gary Peters in Michigan or Jeanne Shaheen in New Hampshire to hold those seats for the Ds. Expected to stay blue, though."
Anonymous wrote:SC is remotely flippable, IMO. People in SC are not buying Lindsay's BS.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Just saw this showing that Democrats have non-trivial leads in four GOP held Senate races:
NORTH CAROLINA:
Cunningham 46 - 41 Tillis
MAINE:
Gideon 47 - 43 Collins
ARIZONA:
Kelly 47 - 42 McSally
COLORADO:
Hickenlooper 51 - 38 Gardner
Of course, Doug Jones is likely to lose in Alabama, so that would be a net 3 for Democrats. Whichever party held the vice-presidency would be the tie-breaker in that situation.
Is not the Democrat Senator from Michigan projected to lose this cycle?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Just saw this showing that Democrats have non-trivial leads in four GOP held Senate races:
NORTH CAROLINA:
Cunningham 46 - 41 Tillis
MAINE:
Gideon 47 - 43 Collins
ARIZONA:
Kelly 47 - 42 McSally
COLORADO:
Hickenlooper 51 - 38 Gardner
Of course, Doug Jones is likely to lose in Alabama, so that would be a net 3 for Democrats. Whichever party held the vice-presidency would be the tie-breaker in that situation.
Is not the Democrat Senator from Michigan projected to lose this cycle?
Anonymous wrote:Just saw this showing that Democrats have non-trivial leads in four GOP held Senate races:
NORTH CAROLINA:
Cunningham 46 - 41 Tillis
MAINE:
Gideon 47 - 43 Collins
ARIZONA:
Kelly 47 - 42 McSally
COLORADO:
Hickenlooper 51 - 38 Gardner
Of course, Doug Jones is likely to lose in Alabama, so that would be a net 3 for Democrats. Whichever party held the vice-presidency would be the tie-breaker in that situation.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Just saw this showing that Democrats have non-trivial leads in four GOP held Senate races:
NORTH CAROLINA:
Cunningham 46 - 41 Tillis
MAINE:
Gideon 47 - 43 Collins
ARIZONA:
Kelly 47 - 42 McSally
COLORADO:
Hickenlooper 51 - 38 Gardner
Of course, Doug Jones is likely to lose in Alabama, so that would be a net 3 for Democrats. Whichever party held the vice-presidency would be the tie-breaker in that situation.
Holy macaroni!