• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

2018 Senate Elections and the next 2 years...

UNCG Deac

UNCG Deac

Member
Joined
May 31, 2013
Messages
175
Reaction score
22
WASHINGTON — A long list of Senate Democrats who face re-election in 2018 are from states Donald Trump won or nearly won on Election Day. That could mean a politically excruciating next two years for many of them, and for party leaders trying to chart a legislative path as the new age of Trump.

The election two years from now had already looked difficult for Senate Democrats, who must defend 25 seats compared to just eight held by Republicans. The Democrats’ list includes two independents, Vermont’s Bernie Sanders and Maine’s Angus King, who align with them.

Of those 25 senators, 13 are from states Trump captured or narrowly lost. Among those are Maine, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, which hadn’t backed a GOP presidential candidate since the 1980s, leaving both parties trying to discern how much Tuesday may have reordered the lineup of blue, red and swing states.

Five Democrats are from states Trump easily carried, by 19 percentage points or more — Indiana, North Dakota, West Virginia, Missouri and Montana.
Click to expand...

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/several-democrats-facing-2018-re-election-states-trump-carried/


Many are saying that Senate Democrats can just filibuster Donald Trump's agenda, but it will not be that simple. Many Senate Dems will be forced to make a right-ward shift just to try to save themselves in the 2018 election. Even after all that, Republicans will probably still get a super majority.

So much for the Democrats who believe that Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are going to be the Democratic leaders in the Senate this session.
 
It's nice to speak in generalities but the only ones of those who could be in trouble are Donnelly (IN) and possibly Balwdin (WI) -if Walker runs against her. The others are safe assuming they run for re-election.
 
McCaskill isn't safe. She's dead meat. Baldwin is probably okay, especially if Trump isn't overly popular in 2 years. Heitkamp and Tester are from red states, and while they're not safe, they have a better chance of being reelected under a Trump presidency than a Clinton one. Kaine will win. The Dems should be elated if they're still at 48 in 2 years. (And they're not going to be filibustering everything in sight.)
 
RJKarl said:
It's nice to speak in generalities but the only ones of those who could be in trouble are Donnelly (IN) and possibly Balwdin (WI) -if Walker runs against her. The others are safe assuming they run for re-election.
Click to expand...

We arent even a week removed and you still talk in absolutes like this?
 
The Pubs are only a single state legislature majority away grom being able to pass constitutional amendments.
 
Would think Manchin would be shaky too, if he doesn't jump ship. If 'Pubs believe they'll have 60+ Senators in 2019, Pence needs to thread the needle with Scalia's replacement. If he pushes the envelope with someone who gets shot down via filibuster, may not want to nuke the filibuster since won't need it in 2019. Pence is a hardcore social conservative idealogue and trust Trump to govern more pragmatically than Pence. Does look like Trump wants to act more like a Chairman/CEO and let Reince or Bannon jockey with Pence for hands on operational COO.
 
RJKarl said:
It's nice to speak in generalities but the only ones of those who could be in trouble are Donnelly (IN) and possibly Balwdin (WI) -if Walker runs against her. The others are safe assuming they run for re-election.
Click to expand...

Are they as safe as you said that Hillary was.....when she was going to get 340+ electoral votes?
 
AS I've said MANY, MANY times, if I am saying something is a fact, I use the word. But I guess I'm the only person who either isn't allowed to have an opinion or has to put the word "opinion" in the post.

Of course when given the work of hundreds of experts at over a dozen agencies, even in a subject bob has no knowledge of, he says he's right and they are all wrong.

Of course bob is the biggest hypocrite on the board. He states he supports HB2 because it might keep bad men from going into ladies rooms. At the same time, he supports a candidate for POTUS whom women said came into dressings rooms of TEENAGE girls while they were either partially or totally nude. Other women, who were in their late teens to twenties have also said that candidate did the same to them.

But bob is extremely vocal in supporting protecting women from a potential event, but supports a person who actually did what he's afraid of happening.

Of course, all of those women are lying in bob's world. Just like the 100s of intelligence lifetime, professional intelligence officers are wrong about Russia being behind the hacks for the purpose of electing Donald Trump POTUS.
 
Dems are going to get crushed in 2018. Pretty naive to think otherwise. We don't vote in midterms.
 
Two years is a long time. Way too early to make any predictions. Obviously mid-terms are often unkind to incumbents. I do agree with the poster who said the number of Dems up for re-election in "red" states when coupled with the way the electorate broke to Trump means playing a lot of games may not be a wise move.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top