Talk:2022 United States Senate elections/Archive 1

Archive 1

Map changes

The map needs updating, as 2016 Louisiana race went Republican. GoodDay (talk) 07:33, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

McCain is going to be dead in 2022

I know it's sad, but speculating on ages of people in their 80s with glioblastoma 6 years into the future is not based on any science. The ages need to be removed. Don't object if this is done across the board 2600:387:2:811:0:0:0:6A (talk) 00:53, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

• After his August 25, 2018 death, this concern is now moot. —GoldRingChip 15:53, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Should we state what age candidates will be by 2022?

It seems irrelevant and sort of ageist. SHould we include it anyway? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6001:E7C4:1E00:4C61:CB3B:8A21:B9F1 (talk) 00:19, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Charles Booker

I think we should include Charles Booker as a potential candidate in Kentucky as it has been widely talked about. KRed221 (talk) 00:45, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

California notes need updating

Note (c) says that a special election will need to be held if Kamala Harris is elected Vice President in 2020. That is not the case. The Governor will appoint Harris's replacement, and the election in 2022 will be a normal general election. Note (3) lists Akinyemi Agbede as a democratic candidate for the seat. Aside from the 2017 article cited in the note, there is no evidence that Agbede has announced or intends to run in 2022. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.58.35.171 (talk) 06:33, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Map/California

Because Kamala Harris is the vice president-elect, we do not know who the incumbent will be in 2022. While is is basically guarantied to be Democratic, it should still be coloured grey as the incumbent is undetermined. Nojus R (talk) 20:20, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Senate majority leader

I did this at least twice. In order to become Senate majority leader, Schumer has to get 50 votes from Democrats and then tie breaking vote from Kamala Harris. So he ain't becoming majority leader at least until 20 January. I think we should semi-protect this page, otherwise vandals will continuously portend that Schumer is the majority leader. Ppt2003 (talk) 04:02, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

I need to observe here that the material point is that this article describes a future set of Senate elections, and at the time the elections are held (in 2022), Chuck Schumer will have been the Senate Majority Leader for over 1.5 years. Therefore, the edits listing him as such are accurate and do not in any way violate this policy, or any other, for that matter. The fact that Schumer is not now Senate Majority leader is immaterial in this case, since this article contains content about a future election, for which he will be serving as such. So it is absolutely correct, and no different than defining Joe Biden as the president for this future election, which also happens to be true. 'Nuff said. --Jgstokes (talk) 04:42, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

@Jgstokes:,Okay. I agree with you. Ppt2003 (talk) 05:45, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Predictions

Please edit the link titles in every state race thread, they are incorrect Thanks 69.121.243.76 (talk) 17:40, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Could you clarify what is incorrect and what should it be changed to? Thanks! DanCherek (talk) 18:25, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

The links’ names were of the 270towin source, however they merged with Sabato’s so Wiki began to use the Sabato Crystal Ball link. I fixed the errors myself, so it is all good now. 👍🏻 --69.121.243.237 (talk) 21:34, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

FEC filings

For our purposes on this encyclopedia, a person is running if they have made a public statement to that effect. That statement can be quoted in a verifiable source for citation purposes. An FEC filing, however, is just a legal minimum that allows someone to raise funds. Even if the filing refers to the person as a candidate, it is insufficient for our purposes here. —GoldRingChip 14:29, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

@GoldRingChip: It seems that these sources have been restored and also added to the 2022 United States House of Representatives elections page. Is there previous consensus to remove those entries only sourced with FEC filings? --WMSR (talk) 00:44, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

@WMSR: No consensus; it hasn't been discussed, but I don't know if it really needs discussion (see WP:BB). —GoldRingChip 00:49, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

@Flames675: Please undo your edit. An FEC filing is not a secondary source (see WP:RS) and the existence of a filing does not indicate that a candidate is running. In fact, a few senate candidates who filed FEC paperwork for 2022 have since announced their retirements. Anyone can file paperwork and make a website, but until a secondary source reports on their candidacy, it's not notable enough for inclusion here. --WMSR (talk) 23:17, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

@WSMR: In that case, half of the state specific senate pages are wrong. I am only trying to synchronize both pages' Senate lists. If this is a problem, please edit said state senate lists before contacting me for an edit I got from pre existing information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flames675 (talk • contribs) 00:25, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

@Flames675: The table on this page lists major candidates. This is defined in the footnote as those who have previously held office and/or those who are the subject of media attention. Another footnote explicitly states that [t]hose who have filed paperwork but have not declared their candidacy are not listed here (emphasis mine). The candidates you are listing do not fit those criteria for inclusion. State pages may, perhaps incorrectly (due to sourcing requirements), go into more detail by listing non-major candidates, but certainly the national overview does not need to list such candidates. I again urge you to undo your edits. --WMSR (talk) 16:48, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

I haven't listed any Candidates that have only filed paperwork, although I did specify if incumbents filed paperwork as I thought that seemed important. I did not see the footnote about "major candidates" or whatever, I just feel as if it would be easier sync the two pages instead of having to make extra clicks. If you want to undo my edit, go for it. I'm not, however, as I still stand by it, and I do not see how it is hurting anyone. If anything, it's helping by providing more information, something wikipedia is about, no? Flames675 (talk) 01:42, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Announcement Pending candidates

So just a little question about the "Race Summary" section is that should we include candidates who are listed as "Announcement Pending" such as Mo Brooks or Cheri Beasley since we already have Eric Schmitt who's counted as "announcement pending" on the Missouri page. I am fine if we have to wait until they officially announce it but I think announcement pending is close enough to be included on the race summary section. Justarandomnamejake (talk) 12:38, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

"At the mercy of"

I've been seeing a little bit of back and forth on the appointment of Alex Padilla and the phrasing of "by" or "the the mercy of" regarding his appointment by, or at the mercy of, Gov. Newsom. I don't really understand the nuances between these two different phrasings so I thought it might be good to discuss them here to avoid a potential edit war. Przemysl15 (talk) 01:20, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

question about endorsments

this is related to the nh race. Trump said he would like to see him run does this count as an endorsement ? Cookiemonstericecream (talk) 17:37, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Image map

The image map template is broken. Kingofthedead (talk) 00:41, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

@Kingofthedead: fixed. Elli (talk | contribs) 00:55, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Map updates need

Patrick Leahy (d-vermont) announced he will not be running for relection in 2022 2600:1000:B118:4C:59D1:48E6:C663:8D1F (talk) 04:37, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

The map has already been updated, you might want to clear your cache. Elli (talk | contribs) 18:04, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

"Paul Anthony Gutierrez" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Paul Anthony Gutierrez. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 December 9#Paul Anthony Gutierrez until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Hog Farm _Talk 17:47, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Race Summary Candidates

I think editors should wait until the official filing periods are open to add candidates in the race Summary! That way it's easier than constantly jumping around about this guy's in, and now he's out when he wasn't a substantial Candidate to begin with! Dickeyaustin786 (talk) 12:28, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Map

OK-special isn't on the map yet. SorichZiSorania (talk) 06:54, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@SorichZiSorania: I've updated the map now, if it doesn't show as updated, try clearing your browser cache. Elli (talk | contribs) 19:23, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

RWH

How can I establish notability for RWH? I would like to keep it on the page, so how can I? TheFreezerFlame (talk) 16:02, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

@TheFreezerFlame: You would first have to create an article for this site which includes proving its notability, see Help:Your first article for more details. Afterwards, you will have to demonstrate that this website is regularly consulted by other reliable sources to determine the political leanings for these races and start a discussion to include it on this page. Regards SoWhy 09:25, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Inhofe

Inhofe is listed under retirements, but he is resigning! He should be listed under Special elections. Dickeyaustin786 (talk) 18:35, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

@Dickeyaustin786: You can retire and resign at the same time, it's not mutually exclusive. And he is already listed in 2022 United States Senate elections#Special elections during the preceding Congress, so where exactly do you see the need for further changes? Regards SoWhy 09:17, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Retirement as I see it (in regards to politicians), applies when the term is over, not in the middle of the term. So a retirement from Inhofe would be 2026, but he's resigning at the end of this Congress, 4 years early. The only page change I would see is removing him from Retirements. Dickeyaustin786 (talk) 13:25, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

It says "Incumbent Resigning Jan 3, 2023" in the Special election section which he is already in. I don't understand what you are asking. Are you insisting that we pull him from the "Incumbent retiring (declared)" section in Partisan Composition and make a new section for "incumbent resigning"? Przemysl15 (talk) 15:43, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Cheri Beasley at the HBCU The Road To Justice Tour (cropped).jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:22, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Joe O'Dea.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:52, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Joe O'Dea.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:23, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Natalie JamesAR.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:07, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Prediction credibility consensus

I have seen a lot of edits going back and forth adding and removing different sources' predictions for individual Senate races. Is there a resource available that includes a comprehensive list of which prediction sources are considered credible enough to list? I have seen both CNN and DDHQ added and deleted over the course of the past few days, but DDHQ's predictions are shown on the page for 2020 and CNN's predictions are shown on the page for 2018. I believe a definitive answer would be helpful to all editors of this page. OutlawRun (talk) 17:24, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm in favor including both. It is annoying since AFAIK there are no definitive criteria for inclusion. I was (wrongly, in retrospect) fighting for inclusion of the Niskanen center's ratings back in 2020, and that was far more controversial than CNN and DDHQ. TheSavageNorwegian 19:48, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

It would be very useful to be able to sort the column order by date

Being able to scan the columns and see change over time would be a handy feature. 99.25.244.248 (talk) 00:21, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Primary Results

On the 2020 Senate elections page, the primary results are displayed for each race. Shouldn't they be shown here too? Or will that be done after the general election is over? Kevingates4462 (talk) 23:04, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Imagemap

The imagemap is broken —Lights and freedom (talk ~ contribs) 19:57, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Seconded, all of the state links are in the wrong place. 204.75.207.43 (talk) 21:33, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

538: Deluxe or Classic

I would argue that fivethirtyeight's "classic" model is more applicable to this page, since it doesn't include other handicapper's ratings. We are including said ratings here, so what purpose does including the deluxe model serve here? It's not a big deal either way, and certainly not a hill I'm willing to die on. The biggest argument against this change would be that since 2020 the deluxe model has been the default choice, unlike back in 2018 when default was classic. Thoughts? TheSavageNorwegian 19:56, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. --Jamaika-Koalition (talk) 20:40, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

FiveThirtyEight displays their Deluxe predictions on their homepage. I think they consider the Deluxe model to be their most accurate and as such, the one the put the most confidence in. For this reason, I am in favor of using their Deluxe predictions. OutlawRun (talk) 00:56, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Been listening to 538's model talk podcasts, and Nate seems conflicted about which version of the model is most authoritative. He's said things like the Deluxe model is "cheating" because it's including other forecasts. But also that the Deluxe model performs the best historically. But also that the classic model is the most authentic. He just goes back and forth like that, ad infinitum. In the mean time, looks like someone's been bold and changed it to classic. I'm not going to object. TheSavageNorwegian 21:09, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Annd it's reverted. @Scoutguy138, @Kairom13, care to bring the discussion here? TheSavageNorwegian 00:20, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm just going to say that I favor keeping the Deluxe model ratings in place. I say this because Deluxe is the model that 538 displays on their homepage and it's the model that users see by default when viewing 538's predictions for not only Senate races, but also House and Governor races. You have to manually select the Classic model from the menu on 538's prediction pages, so while some like Nate Silver may be conflicted on which model they personally prefer, I would argue that most of those who check 538's predictions are only viewing the Deluxe model and don't even bother to check under Classic or Lite. So the main point I'm trying to make is that Deluxe is presumably the most commonly viewed of 538's three prediction models and that's what this article should reflect. -- Scoutguy138 (talk) 01:16, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

I agree with the above editor. Przemysl15 (talk) 06:51, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Pretty late to this but the classic model was the most accurate to reality apparently. BogLogs (talk) 13:26, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Hindsight is always 20/20, but at this point, I think it’s fair to say there should be serious discussion on making the switch back to Classic for future cycles Scoutguy138 (talk) 14:07, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

You could always display both separately. SecretName101 (talk) 23:33, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Striping of Alaska on map

It should not be striped purple. Purple for runoff means a runoff will be held to determine the result. Not the case for Alaska. The votes have all been cast, it is only the TABULATION of second preferences that has not taken place. Furthermore, it is projected a Republican hold, as one of two Republicans will win. It should not be striped purple, but should be colored a Republican hold. SecretName101 (talk) 23:31, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Fixed the SVG graphic for this. SecretName101 (talk) 05:12, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Popular vote anybody?

I guess its relatively meaningless but still some sort of information to see which parties got more votes overall. 80.131.62.210 (talk) 19:29, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

The 2020 article shows that under the Election Results section. However, given that this just recently happened, it is likely that it will take some time for a similar section to be created here. --Super Goku V (talk) 23:48, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

I think it would be best to wait until every state has certified its votes to add the popular vote for the Senate, especially considering how long it's taking California. I do have a separate question, though. For states that use ranked-choice voting, do we use the final round (the first round where a candidate got over 50% of the vote) in popular vote calculations, or do we use the first round? I would imagine the final round, but I just want to make sure. OutlawRun (talk) 02:40, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

cool, any idea when that would get finished though? KratosVAsphodel (talk) 07:13, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Fixing tenses...

As a first-time reader of this page, it was, at times, challenging to decipher which was the most-current results. Post-election, much of the background information remains in the past tense. Especially in the state-by-state Senate results (I got as far as the end of that section before writing), and elsewhere throughout. MishaAmI (talk) 15:45, 29 December 2022 (UTC)