Early 2022 ratings for Senate and Governor (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 10:16:02 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election Predictions (Moderator: muon2)
  Early 2022 ratings for Senate and Governor (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Early 2022 ratings for Senate and Governor  (Read 22419 times)
MT Treasurer
IndyRep
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,284
United States


« on: December 02, 2020, 04:16:39 AM »

Likely: Not competitive at this point, but has the potential to become competitive

Lean: Competitive but one party has an advantage

Tilt: Competitive but one party has a slight advantage

Toss-up : The most competitive races which either party has a good chance of winning


SENATE



GOVERNOR

Logged
MT Treasurer
IndyRep
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,284
United States


« Reply #1 on: January 15, 2021, 08:38:01 AM »

Likely: Not competitive at this point, but has the potential to become competitive

Lean: Competitive but one party has an advantage

Tilt: Competitive but one party has a slight advantage

Toss-up : The most competitive races which either party has a good chance of winning


SENATE



GOVERNOR



GA-GOV: Toss-up -> Lean D; GA-SEN: Toss-up -> Lean D, rest stays the same. GA is not safe, but that election was more than an ominous sign for GA Republicans, and I don’t think it’s wise to expect so-called 'moderate' suburbanites/exurbanites who turned out for a runoff to vote out a generic R in order to give Biden a trifecta to 'snap back' in 2022. It’s possible that turnout patterns will be more R-friendly, but even with that in mind, it’s hard to see Kemp holding on or Warnock losing before some other vulnerable D incumbents.
Logged
MT Treasurer
IndyRep
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,284
United States


« Reply #2 on: September 13, 2021, 04:31:32 PM »

September Update (with changes since January):



Changes in favor of Republicans:

AK: Lean R -> Likely R*
AZ: Toss-up -> Lean R**
MO: Likely R -> Safe R***
GA: Lean R -> Toss-up

Changes in favor of Democrats:

CO: Likely D -> Safe D
IL: Likely D -> Safe D
MD: Likely D -> Safe D
OR: Likely D -> Safe D
VT: Likely D -> Safe D

*I agree completely with ElectionsGuy here in the sense that I see this turning into a Murkowski vs. generic/reliable R race fairly soon. I also doubt that RCV necessarily improves Murkowski's odds here, especially if she’s perceived as the de-facto D candidate and there aren’t enough Republicans willing to rank her at all. Overall, this will be the toughest reelection race of her career, but I’m not ready to write her off yet, especially with the state's D trend and the somewhat peculiar coalitions in that state.

**I am less confident about this change than about the PA call, but all the dominoes will need to fall into place for Kelly to hold on in a state which most Republican presidents not named Donald Trump would have managed to hold. There’s not a dramatic difference between the competitiveness of AZ and that of NV/NH/GA and I still expect most of the competitive races to break for the same party, but I see this race being a little closer to NC than NV/NH/GA in terms of what it would take for Republicans to lose it.

***The Blunt retirement improves Republican prospects of holding this seat — it’s not like he would have lost the seat in this environment either, but in case you were wondering why I ever had that state at Likely R in the first place, it was mostly due to the incumbent's unusually pronounced tendency to underperform. Much like in 2010, the environment alone has taken that seat off the table for the Democrats.

As you can see with some of these, I was very (and arguably too) cautious about some of the races in very D or R states. Two major developments have changed that: (a) The national environment has worsened for Democrats to the point that it would now take a substantial bounceback for them to hold AZ or PA; (b) paralleled by this R intensity is a rigid partisanship in blue states even at the non-federal level, which makes any state beyond the Big Four unattainable for Republicans (I was debating keeping CO at Likely D, but I don’t see the coalition being there even in a 2010-type Republican year). The shift in Biden's approval/the environment (which, frankly, has disproven my suspicion that Biden was guaranteed a 47%/48% floor no matter what due to inflexible partisanship — his floor is probably closer to 44%) can mostly be attributed to (in about this order) increased resentment against COVID policies, very unpopular D stances/messaging on cultural issues, concerns over a recession and reckless government spending, and to same extent the Afghanistan debacle (whose impact has been overblown, however).

With regard to the Toss-up races, I think Republicans have the best chance in NH (if Sununu runs), followed very closely by NV. However, it was an extremely close call between NH and NV, and I’m going to emphasize again that there’s still a real tendency among many to underestimate the D lean/trend of NH and to overstate its 'elasticity' (not unlike in the case of IA). While I see NH (and ME) trending to the right in 2022/2024, I’m sympathetic to any argument that envisions NV flipping before NH and would not at all be surprised if Hassan and Laxalt both won narrowly. Turnout patterns will make the Warnock seat more winnable in a regular midterm election as opposed to an off-year runoff, but Walker, who I think has more potential to make some inroads into 'non-ancestrally-Republican' D areas than people give him credit for, will want to avoid a runoff (and hope for no Libertarian candidate on the ballot) to truly feel good about his chances. There are few states in which the trends are even less on the Republicans' side than GA, and it’s going to take a lot to overcome those shifts even in a favorable environment. Unlike in VA in 2014, there just aren’t many rural/small-town voters left to convert, which is why the path is going to have to run through supercharged R turnout, inroads into majority-minority areas, and efforts to claw back some of the suburban and exurban losses (in that order) — a tall order.

For the first time, I have Republicans favored to flip the Senate just by winning the Lean/Likely/Safe R states. I will try to place considerably more emphasis on the so-called 'fundamentals' (i.e., most recent presidential results, partisan lean relative to the nation, favorable/unfavorable demographic trends) over deceptive polling (e.g. Sununu sweeping NH while Kelly is reelected in a landslide) or even polling in general, especially after a series of failures since 2014 and a particularly salient one in 2020. The VA/NJ/CA results will further underscore the problems of relying too much on early polling over actual math (Youngkin was always going to come closer to winning than Elder even when polls were showing a McAuliffe blowout and the CA-GOV recall tied).

Will post my House/Governor predictions/updates later, but I have Republicans flipping the governorships of KS, MI, WI, and two of PA/NV/ME and controlling no fewer than 225 but no more than 235 House seats (with the median outcome of 230 being most likely). The one thing I would point out is that I’m pretty confident that redistricting/gerrymandering will favor Democrats more than Republicans this cycle, which (combined with high D engagement/partisanship) is why the House is not considerably more likely to flip than the Senate or Republicans making lopsided (i.e., >30 seats) gains in the House is highly unlikely in my view.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.031 seconds with 13 queries.