Lol... no. Franken would easily crush McFadden, Ortman, or Dahlberg. His path to reelection would have actually gotten even easier had a candidate with no money and whose only claim to fame was winning a non-partisan race driven the contest to August, but they decided to go with Mitt Romney-lite. McFadden's millions might be enough to keep what is truly a terrible candidate from getting blown out but that's about it.

The GOP swung and missed by a mile on its big "expanding the map because Democrats can't win because of Obamacare!!11oneone" initiative. For months we were treated to outdated-C.W. by clueless and lazy media personalities who swore up and down that popular incumbents in New Hampshire, Oregon, Virginia, and Minnesota would somehow have competitive races against GOP-recruited candidates. The slate of winners they were able to scrounge up include a carpetbagging oaf who's running a campaign in name only, a habitual stalker, a George W. Bush lackey, and now this free-spending neophyte who runs from reporters. The Senate battleground is the same as it was in December 2012.

Listen stupid, I didn't say Franken's seat was in danger, I said the path got a tiny bit rougher. McFadden has bankroll, which means he can at least make a public case for himself, unlike the rest of the candidates who lack cash. You didn't contradict what I said, so stop with your epically moronic "Lol, noes."

But it didn't get any rougher, because McFadden was always expected to be the challenger. The only electoral impact that the convention might have had on the race is that Franken's path to reelection could have gotten even easier had Dahlberg forced the race to August. No one expected anyone to supplant McFadden as the likely nominee and the fact that no one did does not change the electoral calculus in any way. Franken was the overwhelming favorite before, he remains the overwhelming favorite. One could even make the argument that based on the way events transpired at the convention, Franken's odds actually improved despite him drawing the challenger he was always likely to draw.

I didn't say that you said Franken's seat is in danger, your electoral commentary is so irrelevant and inaccurate that it's barely even worth responding to. This thread is primarilly about the overall state of play and how it is characterized by popular media. My second paragraph addressed the larger narrative that's been supported frequently over the first half of 2014, which the Minnesota election is a part of, that contended that safe Democratic seats held by popular Democratic incumbents were magically going to be competitive this year because the GOP had allegedly recruited capable candidates. That fairytale didn't pan out, and it's one of the primary causes for the recent projections listed in the OP to be less GOP-friendly than the projections made at the beginning of the year.

Because you have a history of offering such mind-bogglingly poor electoral analysis, you can safely assume in the future that I am addressing the commentary offered by people who hold actual influence (rightly or wrongly) over how the election cycle is being perceived by the public, and not your commentary individually. If there's any confusion, it should be cleared up pretty easily by taking note of the same writing style used in the preceding post: separating different arguments into separate paragraphs. The first paragraph in the post addressed your incorrect claim, the second addressed the overall electoral argument being perpetuated by the media that remains off-base.

This post was edited by Pollster on Jun 2 2014 03:04am

If you actually understood convention politics in MN and the makeup of the delegation MN has been assembling over the last few cycles, making the claim McFadden was expected to be the challenger prior to a primary he was going to force had he not won endorsement would have been, you would have been just plain stupid. A large share of the caucus was prepared to put in anyone not named McFadden.

@ bold: ...and one would be wrong, because this race isn't going to a primary anymore.

...But it wouldn't be stupid because he won as expected and predicted. The only impact on the race is that McFadden emerges even weaker than people previously thought. I understand the state's politics quite well, after all it's this type of continued stupidity that has put MN Republicans in the huge hole they're currently in.

And no, there's clearly a strong argument behind the claim that Franken's odds could have actually improved: his challenger displayed an overwhelming sense of weakness by being taken deep into the balloting process by a candidate with no money and no meaningful support. It was understood that he was a weak candidate but this was the clearest sign yet that is not capable of waging a credible bid against a popular incumbent on unfavorable terrain. Up until this point in the race McFadden's weakness was largely attributed to him coming off as inexperienced/unpolished, terrible with the media and speaking to crowds and who avoids debates and answering questions. But then votes started to get cast and it's even more apparent just how truly weak he really is, almost losing to an even weaker candidate.

While there's nothing to support the notion that Franken's reelection prospects got a little worse, it's easy to see how they could have gotten better. Since McFadden found a way to underperform even the lowest of expectations Franken, who outraised him by 5x in 1Q and who has $6 million COH, can conceivably do even better among the wider electorate than previously thought. He didn't even need Dahlberg to force the race into August, the fact that that was even a possibility speaks to how much weaker McFadden was than what he was previously thought to be. This is as close to "Safe Democratic" as this seat has ever been at any time since Franken won it.

...except he wasn't favored, Ortman was.

Yes, actually, he was favored. Every major elections analyst and forecaster, from the Sabato's and Cook's who just produce ratings for website hits on down to the lesser-known and better forecasters, anticipated that McFadden would be the nominee. You could start to see the conventional wisdom shift several months ago. For a decent take: http://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2014/02/mcfadden-factor-gop-candidate-alters-expectations-franken-race



This was consistent with the dynamic that everyone would come to recognize: meaningless straw polls and endorsements from washed-up half-term Governors can rarely compensate for pathetic fundraising figures, having little-to-no name ID, and having even less institutional support. You could start to see the better-known election analysts, namely Sabato [See: http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/senate-update-domino-effects/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Crystal_Ball+(Larry+J.+Sabato%27s+Crystal+Ball)] start to move McFadden into the lead position while sometimes hedging the prediction with the straw poll results, but they ultimately stopped putting any weight behind those results once the money never came and Ortman remained an afterthought.

McFadden was predicted to be Franken's likeliest challenger and he won. He did fare worse than expected, which does boost Franken's odds if anything.

We could be on the eve of the Tea Party's big 2014 score. Mississippi Republican Senator Thad Cochran has long been considered the incumbent who is most vulnerable to a primary challenge from a Tea Party challenger, and his head-to-head numbers against State Senator Chris McDaniel heading into tomorrow's primary contest are not where he'd like them to be:

A leaked internal from the Democratic campaign showed Cochran actually trailing his challenger 44%-46%.
Harper Polling found Cochran up 45%-40%.
RedRacingHorses found Cochran up 42%-41%.

People should use appropriate caution when looking to these numbers because these are not the ideal sources for reputable polling. Democratic campaign internals have proven to be pretty good historically but it is still an internal. Harper is a shameless Republican shill that has a truly terrible record. RedRacingHorses is a GOP elections blog without a dependable track record yet. The big takeaway is that if these numbers are even close to accurate they could spell doom for Cochran. In order to win renomination outright he needs to clear 50% tomorrow. If he doesn't then the race goes to a June 24th runoff, where McDaniel is believed to have an advantage. Cochran's best chance of winning (and the GOP's best shot of keeping this seat "Safe Republican") is to clear 50% tomorrow. If he doesn't then top-tier Democratic candidate Travis Childers has already planned to begin campaigning seriously to put the seat in play.

Favored by analysts =/= favored in polls.

McFadden carrying the nomination is better for the GOP than Ortman winning and carrying the fight to a primary, and in that light, everything I've said is perfectly accurate. Doesn't really matter to me either way, I didn't like either, and the candidate I will vote for in November is assuredly not winning: Hannah Nicollet.

Where did you get these odds from?