Sam Spade's 2010 Predictions

[Mr. Morden]

Didn't the Dems do the same thing in 2006 and 2008? Did it help them bring in more seats?

Personally, I doubt that any amount of money could significantly shift the outcome on a macro scale in the last ten days. Early voting is already going on, and you can only polish crap candidates so much. It might swing a few races, but I'm really skeptical that these last-minute multi-million dollar expenditures actually do much other than firm up the races that are already shakily leaning towards them.

Remember - not every state has early voting, particularly in the Northeast.  It's more of a Western and Southern phenomenon.  Expenditures in areas without early voting could go further.  Voters in those areas don't need to make our minds up until election day, unless they vote for-cause-absentee.

Do swing voters tend to do early voting anyway, or is it primarily used by people who are strong partisans, and have already made up their mind well in advance.....in which case what happens in the final week of the campaign wouldn't have changed their mind anyway?

I don't know.  Never seen any kind of analysis of this, whether early voting actually makes any difference to the results.

[Sam Spade]

Governor
AZ-GOV:  Nice job throwing away the Governor's seat to a politically astute, but stupid, politician, Mr. Obama (even though Goddard probably would have lost anyways).
CA-GOV:  Meg Whitman is done. (IMO)
CO-GOV:  You know, there's probably about a 10% chance Tancredo wins this thing, as scary as that sounds.  See, this is what Crist was trying to do - become the de facto nominee of the party.  Naturally, the tanned one failed.  As noted above, polling in Colorado tends to be a bit questionable, which adds to the general uncertainty.
CT-GOV:  The race is decently close, but note that Malloy tends to be at 48-50 where Foley is at 42-45, which is a lead outside MOE.  Some tightening (and preferably a poll showing Foley ahead) is going to have to occur for me to change the call.
FL-GOV:  It's FL and naturally the polling is literally *all over the place* (because FL polling sucks, you know).  I want to see the last Mason-Dixon before making any call, but if I were to bet now, it would be Scott.  Remember that Scott underpolled in the primary, the state has a natural Republican lean and early voting looks horrendous for Dems (IMO).
GA-GOV:  Deal is a crappy candidate, but given the year and the state, the Republican good ol' boy should beat the Democratic good ol' boy unless even worse things come out about Deal than before.  Polling has been sparse, but I'd like to see Barnes ahead in a poll before reconsidering this call.
HI-GOV:  Hawaii polling sucks.  Badly.  Of course, this is a whitey vs. a Hawaiian, which is probably why the race closed in the first place.  I'm not going to call this race - just wait for the actual results.
IA-GOV:  Sure, Culver is gone.  But this one will probably be closer than the polls say, maybe even single digits.  Think of it as being the opposite of 2008.
IL-GOV:  Unless the polling changes in any monumental way, Brady will win, but narrowly.  State Dems actually care about this race (unlike IL-SEN), so you can already see (and expect) different manuevers.
MA-GOV:  Baker is probably done, but I am less sure of this than CA (or see below).  Mainly b/c there's still a decent chance Cahill is overpolling a bit.
MD-GOV:  Ehrlich is done.  O'Malley is/has been garbage, but it's Maryland.
ME-GOV:  The polling continues to show LePage ahead narrowly, but most of the polling is by questionable orgs.  ME is one of those few states that will actually elect real third parties and Libby Mitchell (and LePage) are just bad enough to let that happen.  Honestly, I have no clue - Maine is not the type of place where I have a good gut feeling for the landscape.
MI-GOV:  No Democrat was going to win this year given voters' opinions of Granholm.  Hate to break it to ya... 
MN-GOV:  I still think Dayton has the edge, but I'm less sure of here than I was a week ago.  Some poll has to show Emmer up before I even start to think upset, though.
NH-GOV:  If you want to look for an under-the-radar upset that no one will consider possible, watch here.
NM-GOV:  NM is just weird enough for the race to completely turn in the last week without any warning, but it looks to me like Richardson completely destroyed Denish (in his own way).  I want to know what WMS is hearing from west ABQ, of course.
NV-GOV:  Just writing a lol at Harry Reid's son for thinking he could ever win with his father on the ballot.
NY-GOV:  I believe it was in June or so that I pointed out in this year (and also b/c of the candidate), Cuomo was likely to not poll any higher then than the percentage he would get in the GE.  Of course, I also said Paladino could win (lol) and that's turned out right...    Actually, he could have won, had he stuck to the message he ended his primary on.  Instead, well, you know,...  He's run perhaps the worst campaign possible.  Watch him still end up with better numbers than Gillibrand's opponent, McCain 2008 and Bush 2004.  Btw, Cuomo's running the particular type of campaign he's doing b/c he wants at least one Republican to win downballot and for the GOP to take over the State Senate.  Just FYI - I'm not blind.
OH-GOV:  Strickland has polled in the 43-45% range for months.  Generally, that = disaster.  Of course, Kasich is a mediocre candidate at best.  And now we have CNN/Time saying he has a 1% lead, but that's just one poll.  I'm in wait-and-see mode, but I'd still be surprised if he pulls it out unless the first fact has suddenly changed and he starts polling in the 48-49% area.
OK-GOV:  Fallin was never going to win by a Brad Henry-2006 type margin, but she was always going to win.  Yawn...
OR-GOV:  Dudley is a crappy candidate.  But OR has been in hyper-partisan mode this election with a Republican lean of a bit and that's why this election has been close (it's also why Schrader may well be a dead duck).  However, historically, in Oregon, Republicans lose these battles, even why hyper-partisan.  Maybe this year will be different, but I wouldn't bet money on it.
PA-GOV:  This race is over.  Don't let anyone make you think otherwise, though it certainly could be a narrow victory, but Corbett is almost certainly (99% or so) going to run ahead of Toomey and with Toomey so close, that means...  This type of result also fits PA historically anyways.
RI-GOV:  The polling in RI sucks.  Badly.  Rasmussen has Chafee up, everyone else has it close or Dems leading.  Who knows...
SC-GOV:  You know, if this year was more Dem-friendly, I suspect Haley could well lose.  Otherwise, it's going to be a rather unimpressive victory, I suspect.
TN-GOV:  Once again, why did all the Dems run away from this race this year?  Btw, Haslem is the type of GOPer who will give the office back to the Dems in 4 years (or 8 years if he wins re-election, probably likely), so don't fret too much, though all the Dem-friendly gerrymanders are gone here next year (may not matter though).
TX-GOV:  Guess White wasn't able to close the deal with those voters tired of Perry.  Why am I not surprised.  Rasmussen has probably got the margin close to right, fyi.
VT-GOV:  I really have no clue who will win here, except that it's probably a toss-up.
WI-GOV:  It's kinda funny to note that both Wisconsin races broke after the primary.  We'll see if that changes, but I suspect not.

[Mr.Phips]

Governor
AZ-GOV:  Nice job throwing away the Governor's seat to a politically astute, but stupid, politician, Mr. Obama (even though Goddard probably would have lost anyways).
CA-GOV:  Meg Whitman is done. (IMO)
CO-GOV:  You know, there's probably about a 10% chance Tancredo wins this thing, as scary as that sounds.  See, this is what Crist was trying to do - become the de facto nominee of the party.  Naturally, the tanned one failed.  As noted above, polling in Colorado tends to be a bit questionable, which adds to the general uncertainty.
CT-GOV:  The race is decently close, but note that Malloy tends to be at 48-50 where Foley is at 42-45, which is a lead outside MOE.  Some tightening (and preferably a poll showing Foley ahead) is going to have to occur for me to change the call.
FL-GOV:  It's FL and naturally the polling is literally *all over the place* (because FL polling sucks, you know).  I want to see the last Mason-Dixon before making any call, but if I were to bet now, it would be Scott.  Remember that Scott underpolled in the primary, the state has a natural Republican lean and early voting looks horrendous for Dems (IMO).
GA-GOV:  Deal is a crappy candidate, but given the year and the state, the Republican good ol' boy should beat the Democratic good ol' boy unless even worse things come out about Deal than before.  Polling has been sparse, but I'd like to see Barnes ahead in a poll before reconsidering this call.
HI-GOV:  Hawaii polling sucks.  Badly.  Of course, this is a whitey vs. a Hawaiian, which is probably why the race closed in the first place.  I'm not going to call this race - just wait for the actual results.
IA-GOV:  Sure, Culver is gone.  But this one will probably be closer than the polls say, maybe even single digits.  Think of it as being the opposite of 2008.
IL-GOV:  Unless the polling changes in any monumental way, Brady will win, but narrowly.  State Dems actually care about this race (unlike IL-SEN), so you can already see (and expect) different manuevers.
MA-GOV:  Baker is probably done, but I am less sure of this than CA (or see below).  Mainly b/c there's still a decent chance Cahill is overpolling a bit.
MD-GOV:  Ehrlich is done.  O'Malley is/has been garbage, but it's Maryland.
ME-GOV:  The polling continues to show LePage ahead narrowly, but most of the polling is by questionable orgs.  ME is one of those few states that will actually elect real third parties and Libby Mitchell (and LePage) are just bad enough to let that happen.  Honestly, I have no clue - Maine is not the type of place where I have a good gut feeling for the landscape.
MI-GOV:  No Democrat was going to win this year given voters' opinions of Granholm.  Hate to break it to ya... 
MN-GOV:  I still think Dayton has the edge, but I'm less sure of here than I was a week ago.  Some poll has to show Emmer up before I even start to think upset, though.
NH-GOV:  If you want to look for an under-the-radar upset that no one will consider possible, watch here.
NM-GOV:  NM is just weird enough for the race to completely turn in the last week without any warning, but it looks to me like Richardson completely destroyed Denish (in his own way).  I want to know what WMS is hearing from west ABQ, of course.
NV-GOV:  Just writing a lol at Harry Reid's son for thinking he could ever win with his father on the ballot.
NY-GOV:  I believe it was in June or so that I pointed out in this year (and also b/c of the candidate), Cuomo was likely to not poll any higher then than the percentage he would get in the GE.  Of course, I also said Paladino could win (lol) and that's turned out right...    Actually, he could have won, had he stuck to the message he ended his primary on.  Instead, well, you know,...  He's run perhaps the worst campaign possible.  Watch him still end up with better numbers than Gillibrand's opponent, McCain 2008 and Bush 2004.  Btw, Cuomo's running the particular type of campaign he's doing b/c he wants at least one Republican to win downballot and for the GOP to take over the State Senate.  Just FYI - I'm not blind.
OH-GOV:  Strickland has polled in the 43-45% range for months.  Generally, that = disaster.  Of course, Kasich is a mediocre candidate at best.  And now we have CNN/Time saying he has a 1% lead, but that's just one poll.  I'm in wait-and-see mode, but I'd still be surprised if he pulls it out unless the first fact has suddenly changed and he starts polling in the 48-49% area.
OK-GOV:  Fallin was never going to win by a Brad Henry-2006 type margin, but she was always going to win.  Yawn...
OR-GOV:  Dudley is a crappy candidate.  But OR has been in hyper-partisan mode this election with a Republican lean of a bit and that's why this election has been close (it's also why Schrader may well be a dead duck).  However, historically, in Oregon, Republicans lose these battles, even why hyper-partisan.  Maybe this year will be different, but I wouldn't bet money on it.
PA-GOV:  This race is over.  Don't let anyone make you think otherwise, though it certainly could be a narrow victory, but Corbett is almost certainly (99% or so) going to run ahead of Toomey and with Toomey so close, that means...  This type of result also fits PA historically anyways.
RI-GOV:  The polling in RI sucks.  Badly.  Rasmussen has Chafee up, everyone else has it close or Dems leading.  Who knows...
SC-GOV:  You know, if this year was more Dem-friendly, I suspect Haley could well lose.  Otherwise, it's going to be a rather unimpressive victory, I suspect.
TN-GOV:  Once again, why did all the Dems run away from this race this year?  Btw, Haslem is the type of GOPer who will give the office back to the Dems in 4 years (or 8 years if he wins re-election, probably likely), so don't fret too much, though all the Dem-friendly gerrymanders are gone here next year (may not matter though).
TX-GOV:  Guess White wasn't able to close the deal with those voters tired of Perry.  Why am I not surprised.  Rasmussen has probably got the margin close to right, fyi.
VT-GOV:  I really have no clue who will win here, except that it's probably a toss-up.
WI-GOV:  It's kinda funny to note that both Wisconsin races broke after the primary.  We'll see if that changes, but I suspect not.

I am wondering which states Democrats could have won if the environment was better.  I think Florida for sure.  Michigan probably wouldnt have mattered after Granholm and probably not Pennsylvania either.  Texas and Georgia might still have been too much of a stretch for Democrats at this point. 

[Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey]

KY-SEN:  Repeat after me - the most likely outcome is that Paul wins by 5-10 points.  Second to that is that he wins narrowly - 1-5 points.  Third is that he wins by double-digits.  The chances of Conway winning come after that, but are probably too low for me to count seriously.  The Dems should have nominated Mongiardo, at least they would have had a serious chance at winning.

Do you think the chances of Paul winning are that likely? I think Paul will win, but the polls have been closing up in KY (despite the whole Aqua Buddha ad controversy), and Conway's been hammering at Paul for his support for a $2000 Medicare deductible and a national sales tax. What makes you think that the chances of Conway winning are "probably too low for [you] to count seriously?"

[Sam Spade]

KY-SEN:  Repeat after me - the most likely outcome is that Paul wins by 5-10 points.  Second to that is that he wins narrowly - 1-5 points.  Third is that he wins by double-digits.  The chances of Conway winning come after that, but are probably too low for me to count seriously.  The Dems should have nominated Mongiardo, at least they would have had a serious chance at winning.

Do you think the chances of Paul winning are that likely? I think Paul will win, but the polls have been closing up in KY (despite the whole Aqua Buddha ad controversy), and Conway's been hammering at Paul for his support for a $2000 Medicare deductible and a national sales tax. What makes you think that the chances of Conway winning are "probably too low for [you] to count seriously?"

It's Kentucky.  Though probably his chances of winning by more than 10 are only slightly more likely than Conway winning.

[Sam Spade]

House update:  (DEM seats) 15 Gone R, 15 Lean R, 13 Tossup/Tilt R, 14 Pure Tossup, 13 Tossup/Tilt D, 20 Tilt D, 30 Watch List
(GOP seats) 2 Gone D, 2 Pure Tossup, 4 Lean R, 7 Watch List

Observations
1) I'm probably being generous with the Lean Rs.  In general, I think the best in all possible worlds Dems can hope for is -30 seats total.  Right now, my call is for 50-60 seats, and I would be just as surprised if Republicans won over 70 seats total (as with the -30 Dem seats call).  It is highly unlikely, but still possible Dems retain the House.  However, the probability can be placed as no better than Republicans taking the Senate and possibly worse.
2) I think there's at least a 1 in 3 chance that one Dem seat on the Watch List falls.

[Torie]

RCP is getting very busy lately - almost hyperactive.

10/24   KY6     Leans Dem »»» Toss Up   
10/24   NY23   Toss Up    »»»    Leans GOP   
10/24   SC5     Toss Up    »»»    Leans GOP   
10/23   CA11   Toss Up    »»»    Leans GOP   
10/23   FL22    Toss Up    »»»    Leans GOP   
10/23   IN9      Toss Up    »»»    Leans GOP   
10/23   OH18   Toss Up    »»»    Leans GOP

[xavier110]

RCP is getting very busy lately - almost hyperactive.

10/24   KY6     Leans Dem »»» Toss Up   
10/24   NY23   Toss Up    »»»    Leans GOP   
10/24   SC5     Toss Up    »»»    Leans GOP   
10/23   CA11   Toss Up    »»»    Leans GOP   
10/23   FL22    Toss Up    »»»    Leans GOP   
10/23   IN9      Toss Up    »»»    Leans GOP   
10/23   OH18   Toss Up    »»»    Leans GOP

RCP is a joke.

[Sbane]

RCP is getting very busy lately - almost hyperactive.

10/24   KY6     Leans Dem »»» Toss Up   
10/24   NY23   Toss Up    »»»    Leans GOP   
10/24   SC5     Toss Up    »»»    Leans GOP   
10/23   CA11   Toss Up    »»»    Leans GOP   
10/23   FL22    Toss Up    »»»    Leans GOP   
10/23   IN9      Toss Up    »»»    Leans GOP   
10/23   OH18   Toss Up    »»»    Leans GOP

What happened in ca-11 over the weekend that justifies moving it to lean Republican?

[Torie]

RCP's methodology is a secret.  Nobody knows. But what RCP does, tends to be followed later by Cook (with Cook having this no incumbent is worse than tossup rule unless caught raping an underage boy while having AIDS), and then Stu finally gets the message. Sabato is too depressed to do much at all.

My guess, is that they are picking up internal poll buzz, and "know" which ones are of good currency, and which are confederate. And like Sam, I am sure that they are watching the money flows like a hawk.

I notice that RCP has IA-1 and 2 as tossups. If those seats fall (particularly IA-2,  which has a high Dem PVI and Iowa City in it (if anyplace still loves Obama outside the hood, it is left wing leaning campuses), I will just amazed, but Sam will say hey, I told you!  Not that Sam is predicting that they will fall as of this moment of course.

[Sam Spade]

RCP's methodology is a secret.  Nobody knows. But what RCP does, tends to be followed later by Cook (with Cook having this no incumbent is worse than tossup rule unless caught raping an underage boy while having AIDS), and then Stu finally gets the message. Sabato is too depressed to do much at all.

My guess, is that they are picking up internal poll buzz, and "know" which ones are of good currency, and which are confederate. And like Sam, I am sure that they are watching the money flows like a hawk.

I notice that RCP has IA-1 and 2 as tossups. If those seats fall (particularly IA-2,  which has a high Dem PVI and Iowa City in it (if anyplace still loves Obama outside the hood, it is left wing leaning campuses), I will just amazed, but Sam will say hey, I told you!  Not that Sam is predicting that they will fall as of this moment of course.

Never predicted they would fall, Torie - rather they were to be watched very closely, that's all... 

[Torie]

IA-1 is back to RCP lean Dem within the last couple of hours.

[Sam Spade]

Couple of changes.

[nhmagic]

Sam what are you hearing about AZ8.  There have been zero polls since the one showing the two tied.  Most of the prognosticators have been moving (mainly from lean dem to tossup) the race in Kelly's direction.  RCP also notes they think Kelly is ahead.  The only one, and its kind of weird - it must be his model, who keeps moving the race in Giffords direction is Silver.

[Sam Spade]

Sam what are you hearing about AZ8.  There have been zero polls since the one showing the two tied.  Most of the prognosticators have been moving (mainly from lean dem to tossup) the race in Kelly's direction.  RCP also notes they think Kelly is ahead.  The only one, and its kind of weird - it must be his model, who keeps moving the race in Giffords direction is Silver.

I hear very little.  DCCC only went back in there a day ago with 300K - they'd been gone since September before.  Waiting to see what NRCC does, btw.  I really don't have a good feel for the CD (lot of moderate Republicans there, as memory serves me), also, but suspect it should be close.

I actually have a good feel for a lot of what I'm seeing and the strategy involved (I need to update the House - just wait there).  I may discuss it post-election if it plays out the way it appears, b/c it might detail some new strategy to watch for in certain elections (provided the methods stay similar to the last few elections).  Yes, this is vague, but there's a point.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

Looking over the list to comment on the few seats I feel "expert" about.

• NJ-03 should probably be toss-up/lean R at this point. Clear movement to Runyan here (or, more accurately, away from Adler).
• NJ-07 should be watch listed. Little ain't the best, but polling has it close, and her former primary opponent just dropped $100,000 in 501 (C) (4) ads. This area of the state showed some surprisingly strong movement to Christie in 2009 (Middlesex County, in particular), with the size of Republican legislative losses here getting smaller with each passing cycle.
• NJ-12 is probably going to be lean D if we ever see another poll out of there is apparently in the exact right spot -- watch list.
• MA-04 probably deserves watch listing. I can't believe that Bielat has enough money to be advertising, and Frank's ads -- ironically -- are a bit limp wristed.
• MA-06 -- just right.
• MA-10 should probably slide back to toss-up/lean D.

[BillyW]

My "expertise" such as it is is only in Texas. Your Texas picks look pretty good. Not that we have much in the way of races here. I do think Edwards is done in 17. However, I cant fault anyone for listing it as only leaning R considering how long he has held the seat. Its probably the right call.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

Oh, and I might even watchlist MA-05 (Tsongas). This is a weird year in Massachusetts. Every Democrat is scrambling and on air with brutally negative attacks calling their opponents crazy. Quite literally.

They're just not good at this "actual campaigning" thing. I got a mailer from Rep. Neal, and I'm about 50 miles outside his district.

[Sam Spade]

I'm working on my final lists and predictions, as we speak.  Some of these races I could place numbers right now, others not...

[Sam Spade]

Gave some final calls and rankings for a good bit of the easier-to-call Senate and Governors.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Oh, and I might even watchlist MA-05 (Tsongas). This is a weird year in Massachusetts. Every Democrat is scrambling and on air with brutally negative attacks calling their opponents crazy. Quite literally.

They're just not good at this "actual campaigning" thing. I got a mailer from Rep. Neal, and I'm about 50 miles outside his district.

The democratic strenglehold on MA is held together with bamboo candidates, all hollow in terms of candidate skills. If the MA gop could double its registration numbers and recruit a lot of real talent, there are plenty of Dems who were safe that would be sent scurrying away Coakley style, especially in the state legislature.

This ironically was a big concern for the ME GOP in the 1960's and 1970's, and that was they had dominated the state but with weak candidates and when the Dems begin to gain strength they started being picked off like low hanging fruit.

[Meeker]

Since the appropriate thread has been locked, I guess I'll ask here - will we be allowed to post in the results thread on election night? Or are you guys not allowing that either?

[cinyc]

If you want to get a sense of the enormity of Sam's predictions - or just where the target seat are - the seats Republicans are seeking are in blue; Democratic targets are in red (HI-01 isn't on the map and LA-02 is barely visible):



The 10/25 calls for the GOP targets were:


(Dark Blue = Going R; Purple =Toss up; Dark Red= Watch List - others in between)

And the 10/25 calls for the DEM targets were:

(Dark Red = Going D, etc.) 

Purple HI-01 is off the map; LA-02 is barely visible.

[cinyc]

I see you've put up your final Congressional predictions.  Did you add any Congressional seats to the lists since 10/25?  PA-13 and MI-15 appear to be off the list.

[Sam Spade]

I see you've put up your final Congressional predictions.  Did you add any Congressional seats to the lists since 10/25?

Not final predictions, merely final rankings.  Predictions will come later.