Senate Math

So, I'm looking at 538's Senate projection map, and trying to supplement it with some subjective intuition. Democrats have 40 "continuing" Senators, so we need 10 from this election to retain a de jure majority, 20 to take back a 60-vote majority, and something in-between to have a decent chance of abolishing the filibuster come January. I count the following very likely Democratic wins: NY, NY, HI, VT, CT, MD, OR, WV. That makes 8, so Republicans would have to go 24-25 in the other races to win a majority. I count the following very plausible Democratic wins: WA, CA, NV, WI, IL, NH*, DE*, FL*. (*Both get a lot easier with a favorable primary result. I think Ayotte is beatable anyway, as the only post-Palin-endorsement non-Rasmussen poll had her up only 3 points. In Florida, I count Crist as a Democrat.) That's another eight. Then there are the somewhat less likely wins: CO, MO, OH, PA, NC, KY, and if I'm being generous, LA, though I'm skeptical there. That's another six genuine second-tier victory opportunities. Now, being quite honest, I think the Democrats will win WA, CA, NV, and IL. I've learned not to underestimate teabaggers, and a tea party win in NH or DE gives us +1 seats there. So the point is, we have, realistically, an absolute floor of 48 seats, and eight further seats where we have a very good chance of winning, and then another six seats where we have a non-negligible chance of winning. So that's 48-56-62, between definites, realistics, and possibles. I don't think that's such a bad landscape. There are, as there were a few months ago, a ton of races that Republicans are leading, but tenuously, and fewer such races where Democrats hold a marginal lead. So that leads me to think that things are really, really close to having become maximally bad, and that a slight shift toward the Democrats would shift things a whole frickin' lot.