Hot take: Budd will win the general election by double digits. Beasley is a terrible candidate, since she just lost a statewide election and supports the filibuster. Also, it will be a bigger red wave than 2010, book it.
Is it really a hot take? Unlike 2014, there's no Democratic incumbent to make the margin narrower than anticipated.
Presidential:
2000: R+12.83 (13.35 right, NPV)
2004: R+12.43 (9.97 right)
2008: D+0.33 (6.93 right)
2012: R+2.04 (5.90 right)
2016: R+3.66 (5.75 right)
2020: R+1.35 (5.80 right)
The trend in the 2000s reached a halt in the 2010s.
Senatorial:
2002: R+8.61 (3.88 right, GCB)
2004: R+4.58 (1.94 right, GCB / 2.12 right, NPV)
2008: D+8.47 (2.13 right, GCB / 1.21 left, NPV)
2010: R+11.77 (5.03 right, GCB)
2014: R+1.56 (4.14 left, GCB)
2016: R+5.70 (4.60 right, GCB / 7.79 right, NPV)
2020: R+1.75 (4.88 right, GCB / 6.20 right, NPV)
Average of R incumbents (sample size of 4, going by GCB): 4.41 right
Average of D incumbents (1): 4.14 left
Average of open seats (2): 2.91 right
Obviously the averages don't mean anything and 2016 and 2020 (the average of 4.74 right) are probably more important, but it's a nice thought exercise.
TL;DR: I see where you're coming from, especially if the GCB is R+7 or so.
Good, Beasley was the stronger candidate anyways.
Why?
She wants to spend more time fundraising than campaigning, which is always a surefire strategy. Just ask Senator Gideon.