The third part of my analysis of this election cycle will focus on the large number of gubernatorial races occurring this November.
Here are some basic observations before breaking down the races:
1) There seems to be a natural cycle in terms of gubernatorial races where the parties alternate control in many states. This natural cycle favored the Democrats during the 2000s, but hammered them during the 1990s. Right now, it appears even without the electoral adversity they are facing nationally, Democrats would likely be suffering from the natural shift that seems to occur from party to party every 8 to 12 years in many states. This natural cycle does benefit the Democrats in a few places like Florida and Georgia.
2) Very few sitting governors are popular at the moment. Many of them are term-limited, but there seems to be a strong effect they are having on some races forcing the candidates carrying their party’s banner to suffer too.
3) The breakdown after the election will be as follows: 31 Republican, 18 Democratic, 1 Independent.
4) Of the tossups, the Democrats will win Georgia and Maine. The Republicans will find a way to win in the rest including California by spending $300 million if necessary. Most of the tossups with the exception of California and Ohio have been horribly underpolled to say the least.
No Race Democratic (7)
Delaware
Kentucky
Missouri
Montana
North Carolina
Washington
West Virginia
Safe Democratic (3)
Arkansas
New Hampshire
New York
Likely Democratic (2)
Colorado
Connecticut
Lean Democratic (4)
Florida
Hawaii
Massachusetts
Minnesota
Tossup (7)
California
Georgia
Maine
Maryland
New Mexico
Oregon
Lean Republican (5)
Illinois
Michigan
Ohio
Texas
Vermont
Wisconsin
Likely Republican (6)
Arizona
Iowa
Oklahoma
Nevada
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
Safe Republican (9)
Alaska
Alabama
Idaho
Kansas
Nebraska
South Dakota
Tennessee
Utah
Wyoming
No Race Republican (6)
Indiana
Louisiana
Mississippi
New Jersey
North Dakota
Virginia
Lean Independent (1)
Rhode Island
Edit: I have moved Ohio from Tossup to Lean Republican in light of recent polling.
But you might want to ask StephenCle how to add maps to your diaries. They add a certain spice to it that is otherwise missing. It’d also really highlight how stark a 31 to 18 advantage is for the Republicans. Otherwise excellent job and I agree with you on everything except for Maryland and Oregon.
Also, in RI, Caprio has been leading the polls over Chafee so far. This also is Lean D for me.
know if the GOP will win California. I’m not denying that Whitman is helped by her huge checkbook and the fact the national climate is playing to her favor, but Whitman has been forced to flip flop on a ton of issues including HCR and immigration. Also the governor is Republican. I guess Whitman could argue she’s the only think stopping Sacramento Democrats from “redistributing your wealth.” But then Brown could argue Whitman would mean even more gridlock, which is currently leaving us without a budget right now.
the money argument suggests that as money goes up, support goes up, even if the return on their investment drops. the very fact that meg needs to spend so much reveals the weakness of her candidacy (as well as the state’s democratic strength). At some point more money will probably not help at all, or even make things worse.
Republicans have an expensive and increasingly negative primary between two high profile candidates and Mark Neumann might come out of that the victor. But beyond that we have few non Rassmussen polls, and Rassmussen, with it’s slight tilt to Republicans, has continued to give Walker a lead within the margin of error. Tom Barrett is a very strong candidate and he will likely have more resources post primary than whoever the Republican nominee is, and he will also be helped by WI’s Democratic lean. What’s more Democrats are definitely helped by the fact their two highest profile candidates are popular figures from the two liberal areas where turnout might otherwise be low; Feingold from Madison, and Barrett from Milwaukee. They both help each other by driving up Democratic turnout in their bases, then add the trio of competitive northern WI races, with Kind, Kagan, and Lassa’s competitive campaigns, and you begin to see a picture where turnout is quite high for Democrats due to many local races bringing out Democratic voters. This has to be considered a positive for Democrats in a state, where, with normal high turnout conditions, they are significantly favored over conservative Republican candidates.
Republicans winning Oregon or Maryland, I simply can’t. Chris Dudley simply can’t win Oregon, he can’t. He’s some highly conservative neophyte in a state that doesn’t support those kinds of politicians. Kitzhaber just needs to bring out his old more aggressive self to pull out the base and pull out a narrow victory is necessary.
I don’t really see Brown losing either. Whitman’s already spent 100 million and never achieved anything other than parity. Another 200 million won’t change that, but 40-60 million from Brown and his associated labor and environmental allies should do a lot to help him since he hasn’t advertised much so far.