Sabato Rating Updates 7/31/14: Whats the matter with KS?

[Never]

Wolf leads by 13-25 points = "lean D"
Martinez leads by 0-7 points = "likely R"

Larry Sabato Logic.

Maybe he has an incumbent bias? Having read some of books and other things, I don't see him as having deeply partisan views one way or the other, which would help in explaining that kind of discrepancy between Wolf's and Martinez's ratings...

[IceSpear]

Wolf leads by 13-25 points = "lean D"
Martinez leads by 0-7 points = "likely R"

Larry Sabato Logic.

Maybe he has an incumbent bias? Having read some of books and other things, I don't see him as having deeply partisan view one way or the other, which would help in explaining that kind of discrepancy between Wolf's and Martinez's ratings...

I had it chalked up to the typical "muh incumbency" mindset before, but the fact that he moved Illinois to Lean R so easily (only WAA shows it as a blowout) kind of nullifies that hypothesis.

Hell, Wolf has a bigger lead than Abbott and Kitzhaber, and both of those races are rated as "safe".

[Miles]

Sabato on PA:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If the race doesn't budge (which I don't expect it to), I'd say he moves it to Likely D next update.

[IceSpear]

Sabato on PA:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If the race doesn't budge (which I don't expect it to), I'd say he moves it to Likely D next update.

Ah, the "PA always re-elects its governors" canard. I expect that to have as much impact as Richard Burr's "cursed seat" did in 2010.

[Vega]

Whether or not a state has re-elected it's Governors in the past is irrelevant.

What is relevant is that the Democratic nominee is leading the incumbent Governor by 10+ points in recent polls.

[Never]

Wolf leads by 13-25 points = "lean D"
Martinez leads by 0-7 points = "likely R"

Larry Sabato Logic.

Maybe he has an incumbent bias? Having read some of books and other things, I don't see him as having deeply partisan view one way or the other, which would help in explaining that kind of discrepancy between Wolf's and Martinez's ratings...

I had it chalked up to the typical "muh incumbency" mindset before, but the fact that he moved Illinois to Lean R so easily (only WAA shows it as a blowout) kind of nullifies that hypothesis.

Hell, Wolf has a bigger lead than Abbott and Kitzhaber, and both of those races are rated as "safe".

Quinn might be in a somewhat weaker position than Corbett based on their respective track records as governors, but I see what you mean. I hadn't thought about Wolf's sizeable lead. He is definitely going to win; I have him as Likely D right now on my personal ranking, but he is way closer to Safe D than Tossup.

I think that Miles is right about the high possibility that Sabato will soon recognize the race is shifting in Wolf's favor and update his rating in PA accordingly.

[NHLiberal]

Wolf leads by 13-25 points = "lean D"
Martinez leads by 0-7 points = "likely R"

Larry Sabato Logic.

Maybe he has an incumbent bias? Having read some of books and other things, I don't see him as having deeply partisan view one way or the other, which would help in explaining that kind of discrepancy between Wolf's and Martinez's ratings...

I had it chalked up to the typical "muh incumbency" mindset before, but the fact that he moved Illinois to Lean R so easily (only WAA shows it as a blowout) kind of nullifies that hypothesis.

Hell, Wolf has a bigger lead than Abbott and Kitzhaber, and both of those races are rated as "safe".

Quinn might be in a somewhat weaker position than Corbett based on their respective track records as governors, but I see what you mean. I hadn't thought about Wolf's sizeable lead. He is definitely going to win; I have him as Likely D right now on my personal ranking, but he is way closer to Safe D than Tossup.

I think that Miles is right about the high possibility that Sabato will soon recognize the race is shifting in Wolf's favor and update his rating in PA accordingly.

In no scenario is that anywhere close to true

[Never]

Wolf leads by 13-25 points = "lean D"
Martinez leads by 0-7 points = "likely R"

Larry Sabato Logic.

Maybe he has an incumbent bias? Having read some of books and other things, I don't see him as having deeply partisan view one way or the other, which would help in explaining that kind of discrepancy between Wolf's and Martinez's ratings...

I had it chalked up to the typical "muh incumbency" mindset before, but the fact that he moved Illinois to Lean R so easily (only WAA shows it as a blowout) kind of nullifies that hypothesis.

Hell, Wolf has a bigger lead than Abbott and Kitzhaber, and both of those races are rated as "safe".

Quinn might be in a somewhat weaker position than Corbett based on their respective track records as governors, but I see what you mean. I hadn't thought about Wolf's sizeable lead. He is definitely going to win; I have him as Likely D right now on my personal ranking, but he is way closer to Safe D than Tossup.

I think that Miles is right about the high possibility that Sabato will soon recognize the race is shifting in Wolf's favor and update his rating in PA accordingly.

In no scenario is that anywhere close to true

I was looking more at their records as governor, not just the polls. Illinois has bigger problems than Pennsylvania, which partly explains why the former state (which is much more Democratic than the latter) is highly competitive regarding this year's gubernatorial races. I didn't mean that Quinn is going to lose by what Corbett will (Quinn could even win), but a Democratic governor in a state like Illinois just shouldn't be in the position that Quinn is.

I'll admit the comment that you called out wasn't very good, but hopefully my explanation gives a better idea of what I'm trying to say.

[LeBron]

I think Georgia's gubernatorial race should have been put in the tossup category as well, considering Sabato rightly felt that Kansas is one.

Davis doesn't have to win a runoff.

True, but Deal is in a weak position, and I could see Jason Carter managing to reach 50% of the vote in November. 

The problem is, a third candidate is taking too much of the vote and with lower turnout this year, Deal should be able to hold Carter below the mark. Because of that, Sabato's right calling GA lean R.

I'm still skeptical of him leaving SC as lean R (which should be likely R) and him refusing to move OH to the left even just one, but hopefully he'll cave eventually. I'm glad to see Sabato is finally noticing the KS polls that show Brownback in deep trouble and AR's rating is looking good, but HI I wouldn't shift to a tossup yet until we know who wins the primary and I would hold off on changing the rating on IL until PPP polls here again because giving Quinn the same chance of winning re-election as Corbett is frightening. WI is more of a tossup than it is lean R, but at least he took it away from likely R.

[eric82oslo]

Pennsylvania is the only governor rating Sabato is really far off the mark on tbh

I think Sabato deliberately labels all governorships likely to switch parties as a lean, no matter the fundamentals/what the polls are showing. I mean, since there's only one way to read a party switch and it's with the lean color.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Pennsylvania is the only governor rating Sabato is really far off the mark on tbh

I think Sabato deliberately labels all governorships likely to switch parties as a lean, no matter the fundamentals/what the polls are showing. I mean, since there's only one way to read a party switch and it's with the lean color.

He can show party switches with the likely color, just look at his senate map.

[TJ in Oregon]

Pennsylvania is the only governor rating Sabato is really far off the mark on tbh

I think Sabato deliberately labels all governorships likely to switch parties as a lean, no matter the fundamentals/what the polls are showing. I mean, since there's only one way to read a party switch and it's with the lean color.

IIRC he had Joseph Cao's seat as Lean D when Cao was running for re-election.

[Senate Minority Leader Lord Voldemort]

I always considered his ratings favoring Republicans one notch over Democrats just from his past incorrect predictions. The senate and gov races that he has gotten wrong always were D victors that he predicted would go R.

In 2012 he got two Senate races wrong (North Dakota and Montana). Both were at leans R, both went D.

He got one gov race wrong in 2012 (Montana). He had it at leans R and the D won.

His electoral prediction for 2012 presidential was 290 Dem.

His 2010 senate prediction he got Nevada and Colorado wrong, both were lean R and the D won.

2010 gov: CT, IL, and OR were the ones he got wrong and were all leans R, but the D won in all.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I always considered his ratings favoring Republicans one notch over Democrats just from his past incorrect predictions. The senate and gov races that he has gotten wrong always were D victors that he predicted would go R.

In 2012 he got two Senate races wrong (North Dakota and Montana). Both were at leans R, both went D.

He got one gov race wrong in 2012 (Montana). He had it at leans R and the D won.

His electoral prediction for 2012 presidential was 290 Dem.

His 2010 senate prediction he got Nevada and Colorado wrong, both were lean R and the D won.

2010 gov: CT, IL, and OR were the ones he got wrong and were all leans R, but the D won in all.

ND was 92.5% odds of an R winning.

[DS0816]

I always considered his ratings favoring Republicans one notch over Democrats just from his past incorrect predictions. The senate and gov races that he has gotten wrong always were D victors that he predicted would go R.

In 2012 he got two Senate races wrong (North Dakota and Montana). Both were at leans R, both went D.

He got one gov race wrong in 2012 (Montana). He had it at leans R and the D won.

His electoral prediction for 2012 presidential was 290 Dem.

His 2010 senate prediction he got Nevada and Colorado wrong, both were lean R and the D won.

2010 gov: CT, IL, and OR were the ones he got wrong and were all leans R, but the D won in all.

I remember that.

That was unacceptable.

2012 was a deliberate tinkering with polls by numerous outfits like Rasmussen Reports. And Gallup was an inexcusable, epic failure unworthy of forgiveness.

Predicting a presidential election is far easier to deal with than congressional midterm elections.

I look to this, from Larry Sabato (who I do like), as nothing to take too seriously. Then again, I don't take the midterm elections too seriously anyway. (When you have a 25- to 30-percent drop-off, compared with presidential elections, it's not worth getting worked up.)