[SeekAndFind]

SEE HERE FOR SENATE RACE RATINGS MAP AS DESCRIBED IN THE ABOVE ARTICLE :

http://elections.nytimes.com/2010/forecasts/senate

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Since 1940, every time the House has flipped the Senate has followed suit, even when they weren't supposed to.

The House is going to flip.

[Jack Hammer]

If the NYT says one in four, it’s probably more on the order of fifty-fifty - at least.

[saganite]

Here is Intrades take:

http://www.intrade.com/

[NorCoGOP]

My hunch is that "American Revolution 2.0" is coming in November.

Invest in companies that make "Hello! my name is_____" nametags, cause they will be selling like mad in Congress.

[misterrob]

Matters not. With the House in the Repubs control and a weak majority in the Senate the Dems are going to get nothing done

[frogjerk]

from - http://hotair.com/archives/2010/09/02/sabato-every-time-the-house-has-flipped/

Larry Sabato - If the Republican wave on November 2 is as large as some polls are suggesting it may be, then the surprise on election night could be a full GOP takeover. Since World War II, the House of Representatives has flipped parties on six occasions (1946, 1948, 1952, 1954, 1994, and 2006). Every time, the Senate flipped too, even when it had not been predicted to do so. These few examples do not create an iron law of politics, but they do suggest an electoral tendency.

[ElkGroveDan]

One in four chance? Sure if we were rolling dice. But this isn’t random.

[Lazlo in PA]

Same modeling that had Kerry beating Bush on ‘04?

[RachelFaith]

Well, the Rachel Faith machine says there is a 100% chance of the GOP taking control of the US Senate.

How’d ya like THEM apples?

[Crichton]

Silver's model is pretty basic, and the more complex parts are heavily judgmental. In addition, his pollster ratings are poor.

It's amazing the complete dearth of analytical talent publicly working on this sort of thing.

[ConjunctionJunction]

Does Washington do all of its voting by mail now? Anybody know? If so, they might not be affected by election return results on the East coast.

[PATRIOT1876]

I’d say the Repubicans have the same chance of winning the Senate as Secretariat would’ve had against a random collection of horses at a racetrack in a small town.

[G Larry]

Here’s a model for you!

The folks at RealClearPolitics.com have the Senate race at 51 - 49 Dems, with WI and CA tilting R, which would flip the advantage to 51 - 49 Republicans.
If voter turnout in Nevada boots Reid from the Senate, then we’re 52-48 and bulletproof, assuming Graham and McCain get the message that “reaching accross the aisle” is a fools errand.(Maine is hopeless)

[Political Junkie Too]

Republicans should also focus on a more immediate, tactical strategy, packaging GOP wins in Delaware and West Virginia as a single goal.

These two races are special elections to fill vacant seats, which means that the winner is seated immediately, not at the start of the next Congress.

If the Republicans can go into the lame-duck session with 43 votes instead of 41, then they might be in a stronger position to prevent cloture on any of the Democrats' lame-duck legislations that they are reported to try to force on us, such as cap-and-trade or immigration reform.

-PJ

[djf]

A freakin piece of sandstone could run for Senate here in Washington and say “I have more brains than Patty Murray”.

It wouldn’t be a lie!!

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks SeekAndFind. This one is by the same author:

• Democrats Aren't Running From Health Care. But What Are They Running On?

[reader25]

Why aren't Republicans asking the one question which will have the greatest impact on their success. They all should be asking the question:

ARE YOU BETTER OFF TODAY THAN YOU WERE 2 YEARS AGO?

Simple question, priceless answer!