This doesn't make sense. IF MS-GOV is only Tilt R, LA-GOV should be Lean D. If LA-GOV is Tilt R, MS-GOV should be at least Likely R.
Not if demographics, trends, and partisanship really are the be-all and end-all. If JBE wasn’t the incumbent and Bevin wasn’t so unpopular, MS would clearly be the most likely win for them simply because it’s the most Democratic of the three states.
I wouldn’t even be that surprised if Hood and Rispone both won very narrowly, even if it’s unlikely.
You'll have to flesh this out more.
Demographics-wise, MS probably does have the largest Dem base, but Louisiana is only 5% less African-American (32% vs. 37%) and MS is still nowhere near majority-black. LA has the film industry in NOLA, while MS doesn't have any comparable concentration of the cultural left. Despite the difference in demographics, both states were 58% Trump in 2016.
Trend-wise, LA has big cities making up a larger % of the statewide vote than MS or KY. It's especially hard to fathom a winning Dem coalition in KY if the rural white areas continue to shift toward voting like rural MS/LA. Louisville + Lexington isn't even 1/3rd of the population and those were the only places Clinton won (with Trump still cracking 40% in both). It's hard not to come away thinking KY is headed for WY/OK status.
Partisanship-wise, there has been a significant group of quasi-3rd party Dems in all states that is rapidly fading, but it has historically been hardest for Dems to swing the last 10% to get over the line statewide in MS vs. in LA or KY. If the 2019 LA primary and 2015 LA-GOV election are any guide, the group of single issue pro-life voters in the South is a lot more upscale than commonly assumed. Hood stands to gain a bunch of ground in Madison/DeSoto/Rankin, but the statewide vote is still dominated by rural areas + the hardcore Trumpist Gulf Coast.
