MO Gov Galloway in

[Frenchrepublican]

She will get 45% minimum.

I know she defeated a literal crazy person but now that she won her election she has more good will.

Galloway seems lucky as a rule. I would not be shocked if that luck continues

She will get 45% minimum at the best.

I am studying all Midwestern suburban areas very thoroughly.  This is something god told to me do and she will earn between 45 and 47% of the vote.

And this number is based on what ? McCaskill who spent 40 millions dollars barely won 45% of the vote last year. And she was an incumbent.

Yeah, some wealthy, inner suburbs around St Louis are trending D but you have then to take into account Jefferson County where democrats have collapsed over the past few years, St Charles Co is not becoming more D friendly either. Anyway even if Galloway can make some gains in college educated suburbs, it won't be enough because she will get crushed in rural areas and smaller metro areas like Springfield

She will be lucky to win 43% of the vote

[jamestroll]

She will get 45% minimum.

I know she defeated a literal crazy person but now that she won her election she has more good will.

Galloway seems lucky as a rule. I would not be shocked if that luck continues

She will get 45% minimum at the best.

I am studying all Midwestern suburban areas very thoroughly.  This is something god told to me do and she will earn between 45 and 47% of the vote.

And this number is based on what ? McCaskill who spent 40 millions dollars barely won 45% of the vote last year. And she was an incumbent.

Yeah, some wealthy, inner suburbs around St Louis are trending D but you have then to take into account Jefferson County where democrats have collapsed over the past few years, St Charles Co is not becoming more D friendly either. Anyway even if Galloway can make some gains in college educated suburbs, it won't be enough because she will get crushed in rural areas and smaller metro areas like Springfield

She will be lucky to win 43% of the vote

Yes, McCaskill was such a popular incumbent as evidenced by this:



And you are absolutely right that in this day and age a Democrat can not win Greene County as evidenced by this



Galloway probably wont win but Parson isn't incredibly well known either. It will be competitive-ish but Parson probably wins 51 to 47

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

I am not saying she will win or lose, almost every MO Gov have had tough reelection battles. 

Heikamp and McCaskill both won in 2012 years and PVI wasnt +9, it was +4 and they both lost in midterms, where minority turnout in MO was down.

MO, NC and NH, have a habit of having close Gubernatorial elections. Look what Kelly did, she cut Sununu's lead to 7 from 16

[UncleSam]

Missouri has swung hard R in the age of Trump, just like VA has swung hard D. It’s just no where near competitive any longer.

[Frenchrepublican]

She will get 45% minimum.

I know she defeated a literal crazy person but now that she won her election she has more good will.

Galloway seems lucky as a rule. I would not be shocked if that luck continues

She will get 45% minimum at the best.

I am studying all Midwestern suburban areas very thoroughly.  This is something god told to me do and she will earn between 45 and 47% of the vote.

And this number is based on what ? McCaskill who spent 40 millions dollars barely won 45% of the vote last year. And she was an incumbent.

Yeah, some wealthy, inner suburbs around St Louis are trending D but you have then to take into account Jefferson County where democrats have collapsed over the past few years, St Charles Co is not becoming more D friendly either. Anyway even if Galloway can make some gains in college educated suburbs, it won't be enough because she will get crushed in rural areas and smaller metro areas like Springfield

She will be lucky to win 43% of the vote

Yes, McCaskill was such a popular incumbent as evidenced by this:



And you are absolutely right that in this day and age a Democrat can not win Greene County as evidenced by this



Galloway probably wont win but Parson isn't incredibly well known either. It will be competitive-ish but Parson probably wins 51 to 47

Parson is a scandal free, fairly popular governor, he will be reelected by a wide margin. He will also be helped by the fact that Trump will carry MO by 15 to 20. Concerning Galloway, yeah she won Greene county against a total unknown dude, against a popular republican governor she will get crushed there.

Now if you want to believe that Parson is vulnerable it your own problem, believe what you want.

But MO is now a blood red state, no matter what you think, just ask Air Claire

[Frenchrepublican]

Missouri has swung hard R in the age of Trump, just like VA has swung hard D. It’s just no where near competitive any longer.

Yeah, to be more precise, it was already clear in 2012 when Obama lost the state by a wide margin that MO was becoming a red state.

But some democratic hacks love to pretend that every state will trend D

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Missouri has swung hard R in the age of Trump, just like VA has swung hard D. It’s just no where near competitive any longer.

I fully agree, but at state level, MO has elected statwide officials and like KY, Dems have been competetive in AG office and auditor office. That's why Beshear is only 6 points done, and can overcome that, by Nov, 2019

[Kingpoleon]

Not the best recruit, but they recruited so well in 2016 for Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and Senator that they’re out of most other options. Stephen Webber would be a pretty good gubernatorial candidate, but he’d be perfect for Lieutenant, AG, or Treasurer down the ballot.

As someone who has met Webber many times... he is a moron.

I’ve met several Missouri Democrats who were big fans, so that’s pretty interesting.

[user12345]

Not the best recruit, but they recruited so well in 2016 for Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and Senator that they’re out of most other options. Stephen Webber would be a pretty good gubernatorial candidate, but he’d be perfect for Lieutenant, AG, or Treasurer down the ballot.

As someone who has met Webber many times... he is a moron.

I’ve met several Missouri Democrats who were big fans, so that’s pretty interesting.

He moved to Sacramento this spring to work for a labor union so who knows if he will ever move back to Missouri.

[mds32]

She will get 45% minimum.

I know she defeated a literal crazy person but now that she won her election she has more good will.

Galloway seems lucky as a rule. I would not be shocked if that luck continues

Claire McCaskill was lucky too, until she wasn't.

This is a Presidential year, McCaskill won in 2012, in a presidential year, MO does vote GOP in presidential years, but Trump might only win MO by 6, not 11

Trump won Missouri by 18. He isn't winning it by just 6 in 2020.

[Tekken_Guy]

Her chances are very slim, but there. I don’t think the state is gone at the gubernatorial level like it is at the Senate.

[Politician]

Likely R, Parson wins by ~8 or so.

[Pollster]

According to Gallup Trump is at 52/43 in Missouri (Morning Consult has him at 51/45, essentially the same due to margin of error). Very possible he only does 2-3 points better than Hawley in 2020. The right Dem (be it Galloway or Sifton, who also looks like a good candidate) could run just enough ahead of the presidential nominee to win.

[Frenchrepublican]

According to Gallup Trump is at 52/43 in Missouri (Morning Consult has him at 51/45, essentially the same due to margin of error). Very possible he only does 2-3 points better than Hawley in 2020. The right Dem (be it Galloway or Sifton, who also looks like a good candidate) could run just enough ahead of the presidential nominee to win.

Gallup has Trump at -12 nationwide, so if he is at 52/43 in MO it means that a he is doing 21 points better in MO than in the rest of the county. If Trump is winning MO by only six points, then he is losing the PV by 15

And no, Parson is not losing either

[MT Treasurer]

I mean yeah, Parson will probably win, but I don’t buy that Republicans are guaranteed to win every statewide/Senate race in MO from now on after Democrats came within three points of winning a Senate race in 2016 and actually won a statewide race by 6 points in 2018. McCaskill did lose, but she’s always been an unpopular Senator and still did 12 points better than Clinton. Missouri is still way more Democratic-friendly downballot than Indiana.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

French Republican thinks that 2016 will be the same as 2020, and that it wont be a wave. A wave can happen and just like in 2018, sweep Dems in red states

[Epaminondas]

French Republican thinks that 2016 will be the same as 2020, and that it wont be a wave. A wave can happen and just like in 2018, sweep Dems in red states

Of course all the Blue avatars desperately want to believe that, if it's 2008 presidential turnout again their trickle-down wet dreams are dashed for a decade.

Going by 538's early numbers and their "predictability", it could be the wave is about half the size of 2018, so D+4. Enough for the trending Bible states, but probably not Missouri unless Galloway pulls a blinder.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Claire McCaskill won in 2012 when it was a D+4 wave. If its a 2012 election Dems can win red states. Dont forget there are Dem incumbants in House seats that are in rubby red states, that can help downballot

[jamestroll]

Claire McCaskill won in 2012 when it was a D+4 wave. If its a 2012 election Dems can win red states. Dont forget there are Dem incumbants in House seats that are in rubby red states, that can help downballot

Are you even a real person?

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

538 also didnt have Dems winning KS gov 2018 either. The point I was making was that in 2020, higher Black and female turnout,  and Parsons signing anti-abortion bill, and Harris on ballot can be huge for Galloway in an upset

[Sir Mohamed]

Claire McCaskill won in 2012 when it was a D+4 wave. If its a 2012 election Dems can win red states. Dont forget there are Dem incumbants in House seats that are in rubby red states, that can help downballot

The vast majority of House districts Dems gained in 2018 are in suburban areas, where GOP support has plummeted since the age of Trump. Rural areas have trended non-Atlas red in recent years, which is why McCaskill, Donnelly and Heitkamp lost last year despite a D+9 year. If you didn't notice, things have changed since 2012. And in 2012, McCaskill may have lost or just won barely then if her opponent wasn't a deplorable apologist for rape.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Not much has changed, since Trump is the sane Wallstreet Capitalist that Romney is and Trump is no different. Together, they only help out their special interests and donors. I am very familiar with how things can repeat themselves in a Dem wave year and how Black and female votes spike in presidential years as opposed to midterm. It would be an upser, like I said before, but it can be another Dem blue wave

[Sir Mohamed]

Not much has changed, since Trump is the sane Wallstreet Capitalist that Romney is and Trump is no different. Together, they only help out their special interests and donors. I am very familiar with how things can repeat themselves in a Dem wave year and how Black and female votes spike in presidential years as opposed to midterm. It would be an upser, like I said before, but it can be another Dem blue wave

LOL, so your 2020 takes are this:

OH and IA: Toss-up

AZ and GA: Likely/Safe R.

[Coldstream]

She’s obviously not the favourite, but if she can win the Auditor race she can win the gubernatorial race. It’s ludicrous to pretend she doesn’t have a chance. She also has nothing to lose since she’d have to give up her position to run against Blunt in 2022.

[Epaminondas]

538 also didnt have Dems winning KS gov 2018 either.

Actually they had it as a dead heat in the Classic and Deluxe, and Kelly was likelier to win in the Polls-only model.