2018 Gubernatorial Rankings

[KingSweden]

These are fair.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

OK isn't a tossup

[Xing]

AK: Toss-UP -> Lean R
GA: Likely R -> Lean R
MD: Lean R -> Likely R
SD: Safe R -> Likely R

[ON Progressive]

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

MD and NH will get competetive.  Especially, MD,  with Cardin on ballot.

[ON Progressive]

MD and NH will get competetive.  Especially, MD,  with Cardin on ballot.

Why in the world is HI Lean D LMAO

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

mistake

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Following Newsom's qualification for the GE, California moves from Likely D to Safe D. Also, as Dems chose a poor candidate, Iowa moves from Toss-Up to Lean R.

Safe D (4): OR, HI, NY, CA
Likely D (4): CT, RI, IL (D+1), PA
Lean D (6): CO, MN, MI (D+2), ME (D+3), NM (D+4), WI (D+5)
Toss-Up (2): NV, FL
Lean R (7) : GA, VT, KS, NH, OH, IA, AK (D+5, R+1)
Likely R (6): SC, TN, SD, OK, AZ, MD
Safe R (7): ID, WY, NE, TX, AR, AL, MA

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

[ON Progressive]

Following Newsom's qualification for the GE, California moves from Likely D to Safe D. Also, as Dems chose a poor candidate, Iowa moves from Toss-Up to Lean R.

Safe D (4): OR, HI, NY, CA
Likely D (4): CT, RI, IL (D+1), PA
Lean D (6): CO, MN, MI (D+2), ME (D+3), NM (D+4), WI (D+5)
Toss-Up (2): NV, FL
Lean R (7) : GA, VT, KS, NH, OH, IA, AK (D+5, R+1)
Likely R (6): SC, TN, SD, OK, AZ, MD
Safe R (7): ID, WY, NE, TX, AR, AL, MA

Wasn't it obvious that Hubbell would get nominated?

He's not even a bad candidate anyhow.

[wesmoorenerd]

Inspired by Spenstar's wonderful five Senate scenarios for 2018, here are my eight Gubernatorial scenarios for 2018, ranked from worst for Democrats/best for Republicans to best for Democrats/worst for Republicans. The most likely result, of course, is probably not one of the maps below - it's still early and a lot could happen. That said, let's start with:

Scenario 1: Trump's America



Democrats 10 (-6), Republicans 40 (+7), Independents 0 (-1)

The Red Wave was real. Trump supporters and Republican Atlas hacks rejoice across the nation as the Republicans gain an absolutely unprecedented degree of control over the nation. Why? A combination of the economy staying strong and Trump somehow becoming palatable. The Democrats have no answers, as the Democratic Party proves to be, once and for all, completely incompetent on the state level.

In short, Democrats lose every seat other than California, Hawaii, and New York. Everyone else from Kate Brown to Gina Raimondo to Tom Wolf is forced out in a shocking upset of a wave. Democrats flip absolutely zero Republican seats, with even Bruce Rauner managing to stay afloat. The thought of flipping seats like New Mexico are a distant memory. Democrats are absolutely not favored to win anything in 2019 and the prospects of unseating Trump in 2020 just got a lot dimmer. It's hard to say what will happen next, but it's certainly not the enactment of progressive policies. With massive Republican gains in the Senate and even minor gains in the House, Trumpism has taken over the nation.

Scenario 2: Democratic Disappointment



Democrats 14 (-2), Republicans 36 (+3), Independents 0 (-1)

The Democrats had an opportunity. An unpopular President and a country hungry for change. They waste that opportunity completely. Needless to say, Democratic leadership is forced out. If there's a silver lining to this scenario for Democrats, they have fresh new leadership that will hopefully be competent.

J.B. Prtizker manage to pick up Illinois, but this is offset by losses in Colorado, Connecticut, and Minnesota. Democrats in every race see much scarier margins than they were anticipating as the expected turnout of anti-Trump voters completely fails to materialize. Again, the Democrats are probably going to remain fairly irrelevant at the state level throughout more than just Obama’s presidency. Trump remains a slim favorite in 2020 and Republicans make gains in both houses. The DNC has failed, big time.


Scenario 3: The Status Quo



Democrats 18 (+2), Republicans 32 (-1), Independents 0 (-1)

Not much changes. The Democrats failed to fully capitalize upon Trump’s unpopularity and only ended up making modest gains. The Republicans lose a bit but breathe a sigh of relief as it could’ve been far worse. Democrats are unhappy but it could’ve been worse.

The Dems narrowly end up losing Connecticut to a strong GOP campaign that toasts poor Ned Lamont for yet another time, but the news from elsewhere is mostly positive. Michelle Lujan Grisham and Janet Mills (as of writing this not all Maine votes have been counted yet) win narrowly while J.B. Pritzker wins comfortably. Overall, a missed opportunity perhaps, but still gains for the Dems at least. The Democrats make gains in the House but fail to capture the chamber while the Republicans gain a few seats there and lose a few seats there in the Senate.

Scenario 4: About What Everyone Expected



Democrats 22 (+6), Republicans 28 (-5), Independents 0 (-1)

Political junkies are slightly disappointed by the lack of surprises. Most races split cleanly for the favorite candidate in a decent night for the Democrats. Backlash against Trump results in a “Blue Ripple” that fails to match up to the Republican waves of the Obama years, but still gives the Democrats a foothold in a hostile national environment.

Democrats protect all of their seats, while Rauner gets predictably blanched and the Republicans lose five open seats, welcoming Governors Lujan Grisham, Mills, Whitmer, Sisolak, and Levine. Incumbent Democrats win comfortably and the Democrats look toward 2019 with optimism. The Democrats take the House and make minor gains in the Senate.

Scenario 5: A Good Night for Dems



Democrats 24 (+8), Republicans 25 (-8), Independents 1 (-)

Democrats have a good night as the blue wave comes out in force. Cementing themselves as opposition to the horrors of the Trump administration, Democrats make gains all across the nation and set themselves up for two years of obstructing conservatism.

Democrats end up winning all seats that they did in Scenario 5, in addition to victories from Cordray in Ohio and Evers in Wisconsin. Republicans fail to gain anything as Walker manages a narrow win in Alaska. Overall, with high single digit gains in Governor’s Mansions and capturing both chambers of Congress, the Democrats set themselves up for two years of strength as they look eagerly to 2019 and 2020.

Scenario 6: A Great Night for Dems



Democrats 27 (+11), Republicans 22 (-11), Independents 1 (-)

2018 goes down in the history books as a massive wave. Democrats capture an actual majority of Governor’s Mansions as they make strong gains in the House and the Senate. Despite the presence of Trump in the White House, Democrats completely control every other level and branch of government.

Democrats end up winning all seats that they did in Scenario 6, in addition to Hubbell in Iowa, Baker in Maryland, and Kelly in New Hampshire. Rauner loses by high double digits. Democrats do great in the House, winning upwards of 40 seats and managing a majority in the Senate with decent margins. Democrats are almost as strong as the Republicans were in 2010.

Scenario 7: The Blue Wave



Democrats 33 (+17), Republicans 17 (-16), Independents 0 (-1)

Nobody could’ve prepared themselves for this. Despite Trump’s presence in the White House, the Democrats have a commanding majority of Governor’s Mansions and gain enough seats in the House and Senate that not only can they obstruct Republican legislation effectively but pass bipartisan legislation by themselves.

Democrats win all seats in Scenario 7 plus Kelly in Kansas, Garcia in Arizona, Dean in Tennessee, Abrams in Georgia, and Edmondson in Oklahoma. Notice that Independents are back to 0 seats: Mark Begich wins in Alaska. Democrats have outdone the Republicans’ wave in 2010.

Scenario 8: N U T

 

Democrats 38 (+22), Republicans 12 (-21), Independents 0 (-1)

Solid’s wildest dreams come true as the Democrats win in an election that can only be described as defying logic. Even with Trump, Democrats take control of the American government.

Who in their wildest dreams could’ve predicted Governors Sutton, Hallquist, Gonzales, Smith, and Valdez? Well, I just did. Unfortunately, this will only happen in my dreams. But hey, it’s a nice thought.

[wesmoorenerd]

Progressively lazier writing pieces aside, here are my actual gubernatorial ratings:

With Tossups


No Tossups

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

switch FL and WI

[wesmoorenerd]

Scenario 1 (Trump's Playground): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/4nde

Scenario 2 (Lear was Right): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/xN67

Scenario 3 (No Blue Wave): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/xelv

Scenario 4 (Meh): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/myLj

Scenario 5 (Democrats rebound): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/mP6v

Scenario 6 (Democrats retake the mansions): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/xa6e

Scenario 7 (BIG Blue Wave): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/4Bpl

Scenario 8 (The Flood): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/4A8l

Scenario 9 (The Blue Armageddon): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/4dJP

Scenario 10 (WAKE UP THIS MUST BE A DREAM): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/x5ag

Poor Lupe Valdez can't even win in the dream scenario ;_;

[wesmoorenerd]

Scenario 1 (Trump's Playground): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/4nde

Scenario 2 (Lear was Right): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/xN67

Scenario 3 (No Blue Wave): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/xelv

Scenario 4 (Meh): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/myLj

Scenario 5 (Democrats rebound): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/mP6v

Scenario 6 (Democrats retake the mansions): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/xa6e

Scenario 7 (BIG Blue Wave): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/4Bpl

Scenario 8 (The Flood): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/4A8l

Scenario 9 (The Blue Armageddon): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/4dJP

Scenario 10 (WAKE UP THIS MUST BE A DREAM): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/x5ag

Poor Lupe Valdez can't even win in the dream scenario ;_;

Honestly, Bob Krist, Walt Maddox, Mary Throne, Paulette Jordan, and even Christine Hallquist and Jay Gonzalez are more likely to win than her.

I mean I agree that she's not a good candidate but a Democrat, even a bad one, is infinitely more likely to win the governorship of Texas than f****** Wyoming or Alabama, even with a decent candidate like Walt Maddox.

[wesmoorenerd]

Scenario 1 (Trump's Playground): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/4nde

Scenario 2 (Lear was Right): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/xN67

Scenario 3 (No Blue Wave): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/xelv

Scenario 4 (Meh): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/myLj

Scenario 5 (Democrats rebound): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/mP6v

Scenario 6 (Democrats retake the mansions): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/xa6e

Scenario 7 (BIG Blue Wave): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/4Bpl

Scenario 8 (The Flood): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/4A8l

Scenario 9 (The Blue Armageddon): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/4dJP

Scenario 10 (WAKE UP THIS MUST BE A DREAM): http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/x5ag

Poor Lupe Valdez can't even win in the dream scenario ;_;

Honestly, Bob Krist, Walt Maddox, Mary Throne, Paulette Jordan, and even Christine Hallquist and Jay Gonzalez are more likely to win than her.

I mean I agree that she's not a good candidate but a Democrat, even a bad one, is infinitely more likely to win the governorship of Texas than f****** Wyoming or Alabama, even with a decent candidate like Walt Maddox.

The reason is because Greg Abbott is really popular.

And Kay Ivey isn't? Her approval ratings are ten points higher than Abbott's in a state that's both more conservative and less elastic.

[wesmoorenerd]

WY is much more elastic than TX and doesn’t have a popular incumbent Republican governor running for reelection. Obviously it’s more likely to flip than TX (and so is AL).

You didn't address Alabama. Alabama is even less elastic than TX and has an even more popular incumbent Republican. Not to mention, it's more conservative.

[wesmoorenerd]

WY is much more elastic than TX and doesn’t have a popular incumbent Republican governor running for reelection. Obviously it’s more likely to flip than TX (and so is AL).

You didn't address Alabama. Alabama is even less elastic than TX and has an even more popular incumbent Republican. Not to mention, it's more conservative.

Walt Maddox is a really strong candidate with decent crossover appeal. It's not likely, but it could happen.

Maddox is obviously a much stronger candidate than Valdez, but I just really can't see him winning in any scenario. The problem with predicting Maddox's victory is more than just the fact that he's running in one of the most solidly Republican states in the US that also happens to be one of the least elastic. Alabama is one of the only states that I don't see the national "blue wave" environment helping the Democrats much in. Trump's approval ratings in Alabama have been hovering around 60%: appeals to the anti-Trump vote will actually be counterproductive there by encouraging pro-Trump turnout. And before you mention Doug Jones, I'm willing to bet Jones would've lost if the election had taken place as part of the regular election cycle without peculiar special election turnout like the gubernatorial election will, not to mention Kay Ivey is on another plane of existence in terms of candidate quality compared to Roy Moore.

[YE]

I think you underestimate how separate winning federal races is from gubernatorial ones, where candidate quality matters a lot more and races are more elastic. Democrats had governors in OK, WY, MO, KY, KS, and TN not too long ago and I would not be shocked to see 1-2 deep red states to go the Demcratss way this cycle.

[Virginiá]

Maddox is obviously a much stronger candidate than Valdez, but I just really can't see him winning in any scenario. The problem with predicting Maddox's victory is more than just the fact that he's running in one of the most solidly Republican states in the US that also happens to be one of the least elastic. Alabama is one of the only states that I don't see the national "blue wave" environment helping the Democrats much in. Trump's approval ratings in Alabama have been hovering around 60%: appeals to the anti-Trump vote will actually be counterproductive there by encouraging pro-Trump turnout. And before you mention Doug Jones, I'm willing to bet Jones would've lost if the election had taken place as part of the regular election cycle without peculiar special election turnout like the gubernatorial election will, not to mention Kay Ivey is on another plane of existence in terms of candidate quality compared to Roy Moore.

I'm not optimistic about Democrats winning another high profile statewide office in Alabama, but the Senate special election had more votes cast in it than the 2014 Governor's race. It was a couple hundred thousand more too.

Special elections can have really low turnout that favors the party that is most energized, but in high profile special elections that involve a lot of money and attention, turnout can approach or surpass general election turnout. This has been the case for numerous US House special elections since 2016 as well.

[wesmoorenerd]

I think you underestimate how separate winning federal races is from gubernatorial ones, where candidate quality matters a lot more and races are more elastic. Democrats had governors in OK, WY, MO, KY, KS, and TN not too long ago and I would not be shocked to see 1-2 deep red states to go the Demcratss way this cycle.

I absolutely wouldn't be shocked to see 1-2 deep red states go to the Democrats. I would be shocked if Alabama was one of those states. Oklahoma? Sure, Edmondson is a strong candidate and the environment in Oklahoma is very much not in the Republicans' favor post Fallin. Tennessee? Perhaps. Dean is also strong. Even South Dakota has a better chance than Alabama though. Alabama's just not elastic enough for a Democrat to even come close to unseating an extremely popular Republican incumbent. Maddox will put up a fight but he has a minuscule chance of winning.

[Atlas Force]

Alabama - Likely R
Alaska - Tossup
Arizona - Lean R
Arkansas - Safe R
California - Safe D
Colorado - Likely D
Connecticut - Lean D
Florida - Tossup
Georgia - Lean R
Hawaii - Safe D
Idaho - Safe R
Illinois - Lean D
Iowa - Tossup
Kansas - Lean R
Maine - Lean D
Maryland - Tossup
Massachusetts - Safe R
Michigan - Lean D
Minnesota - Lean D
Nebraska - Safe R
Nevada - Lean D
New Hampshire - Tossup
New Mexico - Likely D
New York - Safe D
Ohio - Tossup
Oklahoma - Lean R
Oregon - Safe D
Pennsylvania - Safe D
Rhode Island - Lean D
South Carolina - Likely R
South Dakota - Safe R
Tennessee - Likely R
Texas - Safe R
Vermont - Likely R
Wisconsin - Lean D
Wyoming - Likely R

[wesmoorenerd]

Maddox is obviously a much stronger candidate than Valdez, but I just really can't see him winning in any scenario. The problem with predicting Maddox's victory is more than just the fact that he's running in one of the most solidly Republican states in the US that also happens to be one of the least elastic. Alabama is one of the only states that I don't see the national "blue wave" environment helping the Democrats much in. Trump's approval ratings in Alabama have been hovering around 60%: appeals to the anti-Trump vote will actually be counterproductive there by encouraging pro-Trump turnout. And before you mention Doug Jones, I'm willing to bet Jones would've lost if the election had taken place as part of the regular election cycle without peculiar special election turnout like the gubernatorial election will, not to mention Kay Ivey is on another plane of existence in terms of candidate quality compared to Roy Moore.

I'm not optimistic about Democrats winning another high profile statewide office in Alabama, but the Senate special election had more votes cast in it than the 2014 Governor's race. It was a couple hundred thousand more too.

Special elections can have really low turnout that favors the party that is most energized, but in high profile special elections that involve a lot of money and attention, turnout can approach or surpass general election turnout. This has been the case for numerous US House special elections since 2016 as well.

The thing about turnout in the Alabama special wasn't that it was low, it was that it was lopsided. Turnout was severely depressed in Republican areas and high in Democratic areas. Moore had the percentage of his base voting for him over Jones he needed to win, but he didn't have the percentage of his base voting at all he needed, if that makes sense.

[Virginiá]

The thing about turnout in the Alabama special wasn't that it was low, it was that it was lopsided. Turnout was severely depressed in Republican areas and high in Democratic areas. Moore had the percentage of his base voting for him over Jones he needed to win, but he didn't have the percentage of his base voting at all he needed, if that makes sense.

Perhaps - but is there any guarantee that would not happen to some extent in a general election, even if the people turn out but leave it blank for Senate? I mean, look back to 2012, Moore barely won in a high turnout election if I recall correctly. You don't need low or lopsided turnout to win in Alabama if the candidate is messed up enough.

[wesmoorenerd]

The thing about turnout in the Alabama special wasn't that it was low, it was that it was lopsided. Turnout was severely depressed in Republican areas and high in Democratic areas. Moore had the percentage of his base voting for him over Jones he needed to win, but he didn't have the percentage of his base voting at all he needed, if that makes sense.

Perhaps - but is there any guarantee that would not happen to some extent in a general election, even if the people turn out but leave it blank for Senate? I mean, look back to 2012, Moore barely won in a high turnout election if I recall correctly. You don't need low or lopsided turnout to win in Alabama if the candidate is messed up enough.

Moore was a bad enough candidate, and affected turnout severely enough, to lose. However, the fact is Alabama has a slate of six GOP reps, not mention state reps and mayors, all of whom would be better than Moore. None of these candidates would have Moore's turnout issues.