I also got work from PPP that they will likely not be polling the LA run-off again unless they are commissioned to do so. Common consensus seems to be that Landrieu is dead in the water right now. This is basically true as evidenced by both sides pulling funding out of the race. Landrieu runs into the problem that many moderate to conservative Democrats run into: she doesn't have support from liberal or conservative groups. Her support of the Keystone XL pipeline has discouraged any investment in her campaign by environmentalist groups. She is also in an odd place with gun control groups. (though not at the level of Mark Pryor who had the NRA behind him up until the last few months. He even voted against universal background checks that the NRA endorsed in the late 90's) While taking a more liberal approach to these issues wouldn't necessarily mean she would win, she would have more money and more outside group activity as well as an energized base.
At the moment, I now have her projected to lose the run-off by a 10.5% margin. I have her opponent as a 99.69% favorite to win. This does, however, run on the assumption that turnout will be similar to the 11/4 elections in LA and around the country. This projection is unlikely to change much, if at all between now and then since no one is polling this one.
Presuming she does lose, we may very well see her back in the Senate after the 2016 elections. If Vitter runs for Governor as expected and then wins, we have an open seat. Landrieu would be on the inside track to be the Democrat in the best position to take on anyone from the GOP. Her chances in 2016 would likely be much better than they are now. The same can also be said for Mark Begich in Alaska, though he could be in an even better situation than Landrieu in 2016. He wouldn't have to deal with a jungle primary and would either be facing a split GOP ticket between a possible Murkowski run and possibly a re-run of Joe Miller. Polling in Alaska this year was actually pretty much spot on. So much for the "common knowledge" idea that Alaska polling always under estimates the GOP by several (usually stated 5-7) points. Averaging out the Gov. and Sen. elections, the GOP basically performed exactly at where the polls pegged them.
When all is said and done, the GOP will likely have 54 seats to the Democrats 46 come January 2015. This means Democrats would need to pick up 4 seats in 2014 to have 50 if they win the white house. I will go more into depth with this next year, but they have many opportunities depending on primaries and the state of the Presidential races. Best Dem pick-up opportunities for 2016 are NC, NH, FL, KY (if Rand Paul's candidacy creates an open seat), LA, AK, AR (if Bebe runs), IL, WI, PA, and OH (if Portman is primaried out). Democrats would need to win 4 of these 11 and hold onto all their current seats. This field could widen if something develops (retirement, primary, etc) in AZ, IA, GA, and IN. If the Democrats have a night in 2016 like the GOP had in 2014, the Democrats could easily be looking at a 10 seat Senate gain giving them 56 (one more than they have now). They need less than half of that to get the Senate if they win the white house.