PolitiJunkie's 2014 Gubernatorial Predictions (Party, Not Candidate)

[PolitiJunkie]

I have had this spreadsheet with predictions for a few months now, and I change them as new events occur, new candidates announce, and the national mood shifts. I will continue to do so, and every time I make major changes, I will post a revised screenshot here. Discuss, debate, challenge, etc.

[PolitiJunkie]

I'd assume Cuomo's running for re-election.

Although If you want to run for President that isn't a safe strategy.

Technically he's unconfirmed, even though it's obvious.

[PolitiJunkie]

I have had this spreadsheet with predictions for a few months now, and I change them as new events occur, new candidates announce, and the national mood shifts. I will continue to do so, and every time I make major changes, I will post a revised screenshot here. Discuss, debate, challenge, etc.

That's a nice list there, but of course, I would like to make some considerations.

1. New Mexico likely R (she has outstanding approval ratings)
2. South Carolina Lean R/Likely R (Toss-Up? lol), Connecticut Lean D
3. Michigan, Florida still Toss-Up
4. Colorado Lean D (New Poll shows close competition)
5. Texas Safe R
5. Wisconsin Lean R (if NV, OH, and IA are Lean R, so is WI), otherwise move Ohio, Nevada, and Iowa to Likely R with Wisconsin.
6. Maine Lean D

That is all. I might consider Hawaii and Maryland Safe D since its nearly impossible for republicans to get elected in those states, but I haven't learned enough about the races. Oh well, feel free to criticize.

None of your suggestions are unreasonable, but it's fun to justify my choices:

1. It's still NM and Martinez is still very conservative. The 2010 candidate was weak; if her opponent is good it can be competitive.
2. Sheheen is LEADING Haley in all polls so far. Not to mention Haley was elected by a razor thin margin in a deep red state in a deep red year. This can't be anything other than a toss up. Also Malloy is sooo unpopular and losing to Foley in polls.
3. Maybe but Scott and Snyder are just so toxic.
4. Perhaps, but I still think Hickenlooper has a very substantial edge.
5. At a point it seemed like a pickup was plausible, but now that it's Abbott and not Perry ill prolly move it to safe.
6. Walker has an edge over Sandoval, Martinez, and Kasich if his approvals decline again, but yeah all four of these straddle between likely and lean.
7. All three way polling besides Michaud's internals show LePage leading; all two-ways show him losing. With Cutler and Michaud both in this LePage can still very plausibly pull it out. Pure toss up until we see if either Cutler or Michaud can rally the whole base instead of splitting it.
8. In Hawaii Abercrombie is scary unpopular, and Maryland's Republican bench is strong. Both are considered likely D in most polling.

[PolitiJunkie]

9/5/13 CHANGES:

Colorado: Likely D --------> Lean D
Massachusetts: Lean D --------> Likely D
Illinois: Lean D --------> Toss-Up
Ohio: Lean R --------> Toss-Up
Iowa: Lean R --------> Likely R

[PolitiJunkie]

I have had this spreadsheet with predictions for a few months now, and I change them as new events occur, new candidates announce, and the national mood shifts. I will continue to do so, and every time I make major changes, I will post a revised screenshot here. Discuss, debate, challenge, etc.

That's a nice list there, but of course, I would like to make some considerations.

1. New Mexico likely R (she has outstanding approval ratings)
2. South Carolina Lean R/Likely R (Toss-Up? lol), Connecticut Lean D
3. Michigan, Florida still Toss-Up
4. Colorado Lean D (New Poll shows close competition)
5. Texas Safe R
5. Wisconsin Lean R (if NV, OH, and IA are Lean R, so is WI), otherwise move Ohio, Nevada, and Iowa to Likely R with Wisconsin.
6. Maine Lean D

That is all. I might consider Hawaii and Maryland Safe D since its nearly impossible for republicans to get elected in those states, but I haven't learned enough about the races. Oh well, feel free to criticize.

None of your suggestions are unreasonable, but it's fun to justify my choices:

1. It's still NM and Martinez is still very conservative. The 2010 candidate was weak; if her opponent is good it can be competitive.
2. Sheheen is LEADING Haley in all polls so far. Not to mention Haley was elected by a razor thin margin in a deep red state in a deep red year. This can't be anything other than a toss up. Also Malloy is sooo unpopular and losing to Foley in polls.
3. Maybe but Scott and Snyder are just so toxic.
4. Perhaps, but I still think Hickenlooper has a very substantial edge.
5. At a point it seemed like a pickup was plausible, but now that it's Abbott and not Perry ill prolly move it to safe.
6. Walker has an edge over Sandoval, Martinez, and Kasich if his approvals decline again, but yeah all four of these straddle between likely and lean.
7. All three way polling besides Michaud's internals show LePage leading; all two-ways show him losing. With Cutler and Michaud both in this LePage can still very plausibly pull it out. Pure toss up until we see if either Cutler or Michaud can rally the whole base instead of splitting it.
8. In Hawaii Abercrombie is scary unpopular, and Maryland's Republican bench is strong. Both are considered likely D in most polling.

1. OK, I suppose that's fine for now
2. Still despite the polls right now, the states electorate is powerful in both and most people aren't paying attention right now in the summer time SC-Toss-Up/Lean R. CT-Toss-Up/Lean D
3. Polls aren't good right now, but incumbent advantages make these two still toss-ups (against generic candidates).
4. Lean D period.
5. Abbott is running, Its been at least 20 years since any democrat has won statewide. Safe R
6. Fine either way Lean R/Likely R
7. I would either call it a Toss-Up or Lean D. Some polls have him leading by a tiny bit, some of them have Michaud leading by a tiny bit. I think the blue state will choose a blue candidate in the end (not to mention LePage is a gaffe-machine) but it depends how Cutler affects the race (in yet another 3-way race).
8. OK, both I suppose are Likely D.

Just so you know, I've moved Colorado to Lean D. I'm leaving Maine, South Carolina, and Connecticut as toss-ups, but I think your arguments for each are reasonable and the possibility that Michaud, Haley, and Malloy all come out victorious is certainly plausible.

[PolitiJunkie]

I agree on most of that especially moving Ohio and Illinois to tossups given the current standings with both of those. Although Nevada and Kansas seem a little bit out of order.

Nevada's polling shows Sandoval beating any plausible Democratic opponent by double digits. He is a Republican in a state that leans Democratic, but granted, is certainly moderate enough to easily win re-election. It's probably a likely Republican hold rather than lean R.

And Kansas might seem like a solid Republican hold, but his approval is really low and if someone who could be competitive against him like Carl Brewer decides to run, this race could get interesting. It's certainly not a lean R, but maybe a likely Republican now from safe.

Brewer has declined to run, as have most of the other candidates that would keep the race in single digits. I get that Brownback is unpopular and all, but with Kansas being as red as it as and no strong Democrat running, I'm keeping this at Safe R. Nevada and New Mexico will probably move to Likely R soon, but I just want to wait and see what happens.

[PolitiJunkie]

9/13/13 CHANGES:

Texas: Likely R -------> Safe R

[PolitiJunkie]

10/8/13 Changes:

Nevada: Lean R ---> Likely R
New Mexico: Lean R ---> Likely R
South Carolina: Toss-Up ---> Lean R
Florida: Lean D ---> Toss-Up

Pondered moving Wisconsin from Likely R to Lean R, and moving Connecticut from Toss-Up to Lean D, but I decided against both. I will keep my eyes open though.

Updated Image:

[PolitiJunkie]

10/8/13 Changes:

Nevada: Lean R ---> Likely R
New Mexico: Lean R ---> Likely R
South Carolina: Toss-Up ---> Lean R
Florida: Lean D ---> Toss-Up

Pondered moving Wisconsin from Likely R to Lean R, and moving Connecticut from Toss-Up to Lean D, but I decided against both. I will keep my eyes open though.

Updated Image:

What development made you shift Florida to Toss-Up?

Not so much a development as realizing that I never really should have placed it in Lean D in the first place. If Crist enters, it will probably go back to Lean D, but it's not a sure thing.

[PolitiJunkie]

10/13/13 Changes:

Georgia: Likely R ---> Lean R

[PolitiJunkie]

I made a similar table in Excel here similar to yours.



Let me know if you have any concerns about these. There's a few here I'm debating. Like whether Wisconsin is is Lean R or Likely R or whether Rhode Island is Likely D or Safe D. Mostly though the reason why there are so many "Likely D's" and not as many "Safe D's" is because of Open Seats (MD, MA, RI) and unpopular incumbents (HI), the rest (MN, NH) are normal.

This is good and very similar to mine. The only differences are that I have Minnesota, Ohio, Arkansas, and Georgia each one slot left, and Connecticut and Illinois each one slot right. I could probably move Minnesota; I never really gave it any thought. The rest I'd really put up a fight about though, mainly Illinois and Connecticut. Both Democrats are very unpopular, trailing in polling, and facing strong challengers. There's just no tilt here.

Also, I have Maryland in Likely D, but I'm starting to wonder why. Like Hawaii makes sense cause Abercrombie sucks, Massachusetts because of the whole Scott Brown situation (I'm not talking about him being in the race, but rather his effect on MA politics) and the fact that Coakley is horrible, and Rhode Island just because Chafee's massive unpopularity could maybe bring down the Dem and that they haven't had a Democratic Governor in forever and the Republican slate is good. But like, why isn't Maryland Safe D? Between Brown, Gansler, and Mizeur, we have a fantastic field, and like do people really think Michael Steele will matter or have any impact on this race? Maryland is quickly becoming one of the most safely Democratic state on all levels federal, state, local, etc.

EDIT: WOW, I just found out Steele has declined to enter, something I was unaware of. This just makes me even more confused as to why some think this race will be competitive.

[PolitiJunkie]

10/13/2013 Changes (Round 2):

Minnesota: Safe D ---> Likely D
Maryland: Likely D ---> Safe D

[PolitiJunkie]

I made a similar table in Excel here similar to yours.



Let me know if you have any concerns about these. There's a few here I'm debating. Like whether Wisconsin is is Lean R or Likely R or whether Rhode Island is Likely D or Safe D. Mostly though the reason why there are so many "Likely D's" and not as many "Safe D's" is because of Open Seats (MD, MA, RI) and unpopular incumbents (HI), the rest (MN, NH) are normal.

This is good and very similar to mine. The only differences are that I have Minnesota, Ohio, Arkansas, and Georgia each one slot left, and Connecticut and Illinois each one slot right. I could probably move Minnesota; I never really gave it any thought. The rest I'd really put up a fight about though, mainly Illinois and Connecticut. Both Democrats are very unpopular, trailing in polling, and facing strong challengers. There's just no tilt here.

Also, I have Maryland in Likely D, but I'm starting to wonder why. Like Hawaii makes sense cause Abercrombie sucks, Massachusetts because of the whole Scott Brown situation (I'm not talking about him being in the race, but rather his effect on MA politics) and the fact that Coakley is horrible, and Rhode Island just because Chafee's massive unpopularity could maybe bring down the Dem and that they haven't had a Democratic Governor in forever and the Republican slate is good. But like, why isn't Maryland Safe D? Between Brown, Gansler, and Mizeur, we have a fantastic field, and like do people really think Michael Steele will matter or have any impact on this race? Maryland is quickly becoming one of the most safely Democratic state on all levels federal, state, local, etc.

EDIT: WOW, I just found out Steele has declined to enter, something I was unaware of. This just makes me even more confused as to why some think this race will be competitive.

I'm also questioning Maryland's "Likely D" rank. Its one of the most democratic states (only because of DC suburbs and Baltimore), but apparently from what I've heard, is that the republican bench is "strong". I'll keep for now, but in the future I will most likely move it to Safe D. As far as the other ones in Likely D...

Hawaii: This is purely because of Abercrombie's unpopularity. Otherwise this should be easy Safe D
Massachusetts: Defined Candidates but Coakley is horrible, otherwise Safe D
Rhode Island: Chafee's unpopularity + Open Seat. Once the candidates are defined, this should be safe D.

I should also mention that the New England states have history of electing republican governors, but I don't think that's relevant now.

Connecticut and Illinois are only Lean D because of the heavily ideological tilt of those states, I don't think they will elect republicans, but the races are too early to tell.

Thanks for the suggestions.

Actually, no, Maryland is much more of a CT/VT/MA state that is Democratic mostly everywhere, minus a small portion, rather than a state like Pennsylvania, Oregon, or Illinois that is Republican in most areas but Democratic overall because of one or two heavy Democratic areas. Maryland is Democratic almost everywhere, with the exception of that bit near West Virginia. This can be proven by the fact that 6/7 of Maryland's Representatives are Democrats, which is similar to Connecticut's 5/5 and Massachusetts' 9/9- differing vastly from Illinois' 12/18 Democratic or Pennsylvania's 5/18 Democratic. It's not just the Baltimore and DC suburbs.

[PolitiJunkie]

I made a similar table in Excel here similar to yours.



Let me know if you have any concerns about these. There's a few here I'm debating. Like whether Wisconsin is is Lean R or Likely R or whether Rhode Island is Likely D or Safe D. Mostly though the reason why there are so many "Likely D's" and not as many "Safe D's" is because of Open Seats (MD, MA, RI) and unpopular incumbents (HI), the rest (MN, NH) are normal.

This is good and very similar to mine. The only differences are that I have Minnesota, Ohio, Arkansas, and Georgia each one slot left, and Connecticut and Illinois each one slot right. I could probably move Minnesota; I never really gave it any thought. The rest I'd really put up a fight about though, mainly Illinois and Connecticut. Both Democrats are very unpopular, trailing in polling, and facing strong challengers. There's just no tilt here.

Also, I have Maryland in Likely D, but I'm starting to wonder why. Like Hawaii makes sense cause Abercrombie sucks, Massachusetts because of the whole Scott Brown situation (I'm not talking about him being in the race, but rather his effect on MA politics) and the fact that Coakley is horrible, and Rhode Island just because Chafee's massive unpopularity could maybe bring down the Dem and that they haven't had a Democratic Governor in forever and the Republican slate is good. But like, why isn't Maryland Safe D? Between Brown, Gansler, and Mizeur, we have a fantastic field, and like do people really think Michael Steele will matter or have any impact on this race? Maryland is quickly becoming one of the most safely Democratic state on all levels federal, state, local, etc.

EDIT: WOW, I just found out Steele has declined to enter, something I was unaware of. This just makes me even more confused as to why some think this race will be competitive.

I'm also questioning Maryland's "Likely D" rank. Its one of the most democratic states (only because of DC suburbs and Baltimore), but apparently from what I've heard, is that the republican bench is "strong". I'll keep for now, but in the future I will most likely move it to Safe D. As far as the other ones in Likely D...

Hawaii: This is purely because of Abercrombie's unpopularity. Otherwise this should be easy Safe D
Massachusetts: Defined Candidates but Coakley is horrible, otherwise Safe D
Rhode Island: Chafee's unpopularity + Open Seat. Once the candidates are defined, this should be safe D.

I should also mention that the New England states have history of electing republican governors, but I don't think that's relevant now.

Connecticut and Illinois are only Lean D because of the heavily ideological tilt of those states, I don't think they will elect republicans, but the races are too early to tell.

Thanks for the suggestions.

Actually, no, Maryland is much more of a CT/VT/MA state that is Democratic mostly everywhere, minus a small portion, rather than a state like Pennsylvania, Oregon, or Illinois that is Republican in most areas but Democratic overall because of one or two heavy Democratic areas. Maryland is Democratic almost everywhere, with the exception of that bit near West Virginia. This can be proven by the fact that 6/7 of Maryland's Representatives are Democrats, which is similar to Connecticut's 5/5 and Massachusetts' 9/9- differing vastly from Illinois' 12/18 Democratic or Pennsylvania's 5/18 Democratic. It's not just the Baltimore and DC suburbs.

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/results/maryland

Don't think so. The republican areas of the state make up very little population, but that's not the point. 17/24 counties are republican, one of the 7 democratic counties barely voted democratic. The Eastern Shore, The Western "West Virginia" areas, and the western shore of Chesapeake Bay all vote republican. The DC suburbs, Baltimore, many of its suburbs, and areas inbetween (Howard County) are the only areas that vote democratic.

The reason Maryland has 7/8 democratic representatives was 1. It was Gerrymandered. 2. Most of the population lies within the small democratic areas anyway. Look at the map itself, that doesn't look like all around democrat like New England. The reason why it isn't all around democratic is because whites in Maryland vote republican (Hard to believe eh?), where as in New England whites vote democrat. 

Interesting. I looked at the map and you're right. It's not just the West Virginia bit, but also the enter east side bordering Delaware. Strange. It's still not quite at the Pennsylvania level, but I guess you can't group it with a place like Connecticut either.