Dem might not lose any ground in the Senate

Conventional wisdom has it that Senate Democrats, who will have to defend 25 seats, including 10 in states that Trump won in 2016, are likely to lose ground in the 2018 midterms. The numbers alone would make it hard for Republicans not to gain ground, right? Well, as things are playing out, Republicans might make no gains or even lose a seat.

Talk of Democratic Senate losses may be overblown, given how adroitly many red-state Democrats have navigated (so far) through the Trump presidency. Stalwart defense of Medicaid and opposition to an unpopular Republican health-care bill but more conservative votes for Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch allow moderates like Sens. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D., and Joe Manchin III, D-W.Va., to keep their base intact without getting tagged as “Washington liberals” by GOP opponents.

In some cases, Trump undercut his party’s chances of picking up a seat. He selected as his interior secretary former congressman Ryan Zinke, R-Mont., and potential Montana challenger to Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont.

Meanwhile, in Alabama, Trump’s support for the less kooky Republican candidate, Sen. Luther Strange, R-Ala. - who was appointed to fill Jeff Sessions’s seat - doesn’t seem to have helped. (The governor who appointed Strange, however, was forced to resign in disgrace. ) Gadfly, birther and ex-judge (who was booted off the bench twice, once for putting the Ten Commandments up behind his bench and again for refusing to recognize gay marriage after the Supreme Court ruled otherwise) Roy Moore is leading Strange by almost 20 points in two separate polls. (Even an internal poll shows Strange trailing by 4 points.) Hard as it is to imagine, if Moore wins the primary the GOP might lose the seat, knocking their Senate advantage down to 51-49. (Even with Moore, the GOP would seem to have the advantage.)

And, most egregiously, Trump has made life miserable for both Sen. Jeff Flake, RAriz., whom he accused of being “weak on borders, weak on crime” at his Arizona rally this week and Sen. Dean Heller, RNev., the most vulnerable Republican, someone who got in Trump’s cross hairs over Obamacare’s repeal. (He eventually voted for repeal, annoying just about everyone.) Democrats may have able challengers in both races. Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., has not formally announced but would be a solid, moderate challenger; in Nevada, Democrats snared their top pick, Rep. Jacky Rosen, D-Nev.

Kyle Kondik, from Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball, comes to the conclusion that this adds up to a status-quo election. that is, no change in the 52-48 split:

“Applying the historical averages to next year’s Senate elections would result — drumroll please — in a net party change of ... zero seats. If 91% of the Democrats/Democratic-caucusing independents are reelected, that would be 23 out of 25, and if 75% of the Republicans are reelected, that would be six of eight, leading to no net change.

“Without making any predictions, such a scenario is plausible: Democrats could lose two of the incumbents defending dark red states, in states such as Indiana, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota and West Virginia, but otherwise hold everything else, while Republicans could lose the only two seemingly vulnerable seats among their much smaller stable of incumbent-held states: Arizona and Nevada.

It’s very likely then, that in part because of Trump, Republicans lose both toss-up states (Nevada, Arizona) while Democrats keep their losses to two (Indiana, Missouri). As Kondik observes, “Ask any Senate observer or campaign participant which Democratic senator is most vulnerable and you’re likely to get one of two responses: either Sens. Joe Donnelly (D-IN) or Claire McCaskill (D-MO). . . . One potential new vulnerability for Donnelly is a recent Associated Press report that his family’s company benefited from low-cost Mexican labor even as Donnelly has argued against outsourcing.” But, of course, if there is a wave election and despondent Republicans stay home, it would not be impossible for the GOP to lose both its most vulnerable senators and Democrats to save one or both of their own.