Who is the most vulnerable Governor in 2022?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Leaving off term-limited ones. Also if any decide to not run again for unrelated reasons (like how old Kay Ivey is) that doesn't count either, only if they're defeated.

[SnowLabrador]

Hot take: Evers. While it's not his fault that he has no accomplishments to point to, the average Wisconsin voter doesn't necessarily know that. They'll just see an ineffective Governor, and plus the state is trending rightward. I'm not going to count Laura Kelly out just yet, she seems pretty popular and gubernatorial races are different from federal races.

[xavier110]

Evers is dead on arrival

[Thunder98 🇮🇱 🤝 🇵🇸]

Evers and Kelly are goners.

[2016]

Evers and Kelly are goners.

I think Republicans will win the entire Rust Belt/Midwest Back with the Excemption of Pennsylvania.

The Corporated Liberal Media bragged hard about all these Governorships in 2018.

If Kinzinger runs in IL and runs a Campaign like Youngkin he can flip that State too.

And then the Border Crisis, if it continues, may put New Mexico back in play and potentially solidifies AZ.

[RussFeingoldWasRobbed]

Whitmer

[MT Treasurer]

Kelly is much more skilled at duping gullible Republicans into believing she’s a moderate (see: her recent signing/touting of the vaccination exemption law) than Evers or Whitmer but her state is also >10 points more Republican than Evers's or Whitmer's (while not trending D nearly fast enough to offset this), and she’ll need to outrun the D Senate nominee by at least 25 points. I haven’t seen much reliable (read: not Morning Consult) polling out of KS, but I can buy that Kelly is relatively popular/slightly above 50% right now. There’s a case to be made that having virtually no crossover appeal (Evers, Whitmer) or actively antagonizing the other side (Whitmer) in this environment (in which generic R almost certainly has a healthy lead in WI/MI) is arguably worse than running for reelection as a Democratic governor in KS, especially given the success Republican governors had even in deep blue states in 2018. However, I still think Republicans would have to run an extremely and unusually flawed campaign to lose to Kelly, and there’s still a chance her numbers just outright collapse like Bollier's (or that polls just dramatically overestimate her standing*). Republicans will need to put more effort into defining Kelly, but it’s definitely doable.

*In all fairness, Kelly seems to be closer to 50% than Bollier was, but you get the point.

I have WI and KS as Lean R, MI as Tilt R (but very close to moving this to Lean R). And FTR, I don’t think Brian Kemp is far behind them in terms of vulnerability — his combined odds of winning the primary and GE are, at the very least, below 50/50.

[Xing]

There’s no way it isn’t Kelly. Hard to see Evers winning without a better environment, but it’s easier to see someone winning in a Biden +1 state than a Trump +14 state. I think Kelly loses even if the environment gets better for Democrats.

[NewYorkExpress]

Kelly and Charlie Baker would top my list.

Baker can only win if he runs as an Independent, and while that's very plausible, I'm not sure the political will is there for him to run a Lincoln Chafee style campaign.

Kelly is pretty much DOA, and probably would be if Trump had won too, presuming Republicans nominated someone compete (i.e not Kris Kobach). Her win in 2018 had nothing to do with Trump, and everything to do with a reaction to the Brownback era in Kansas.

[THG]

Kelly.

[NOVA Green]

Kate Brown.

She is term limited and ineligible to run for reelection as Governor in 2022.

[Calthrina950]

Kelly, followed very closely by Evers.

[Chips]

Kelly definitely.

[morgieb]

Voted Kelly, though now I think about it you could argue for Hochul (obviously safe if she gets to the GE but that could be very tough)

[South Dakota Democrat]

Kelly is much more skilled at duping gullible Republicans into believing she’s a moderate (see: her recent signing/touting of the vaccination exemption law) than Evers or Whitmer but her state is also >10 points more Republican than Evers's or Whitmer's (while not trending D nearly fast enough to offset this), and she’ll need to outrun the D Senate nominee by at least 25 points. I haven’t seen much reliable (read: not Morning Consult) polling out of KS, but I can buy that Kelly is relatively popular/slightly above 50% right now. There’s a case to be made that having virtually no crossover appeal (Evers, Whitmer) or actively antagonizing the other side (Whitmer) in this environment (in which generic R almost certainly has a healthy lead in WI/MI) is arguably worse than running for reelection as a Democratic governor in KS, especially given the success Republican governors had even in deep blue states in 2018. However, I still think Republicans would have to run an extremely and unusually flawed campaign to lose to Kelly, and there’s still a chance her numbers just outright collapse like Bollier's (or that polls just dramatically overestimate her standing*). Republicans will need to put more effort into defining Kelly, but it’s definitely doable.

*In all fairness, Kelly seems to be closer to 50% than Bollier was, but you get the point.

I have WI and KS as Lean R, MI as Tilt R (but very close to moving this to Lean R). And FTR, I don’t think Brian Kemp is far behind them in terms of vulnerability — his combined odds of winning the primary and GE are, at the very least, below 50/50.

Sounds fair, great analysis.

[Del Tachi]

Evers has no crossover appeal and will likely be sunk thanks to the national environment, Kelly's potential crossover appeal is more of an open question.

Voted Evers.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

I voted for Kelly, but Mike DeWine isn't far behind. The polling data isn't particularly high quality but looks very, very bad for him, and I'd be confident that he was the most vulnerable if it was as reliable as it used to be.

It's not just the primary polls. It's the flipped approval ratings (Democrats like him more than Republicans), and the implications those have for negative polarisation.

[Calthrina950]

I voted for Kelly, but Mike DeWine isn't far behind. The polling data isn't particularly high quality but looks very, very bad for him, and I'd be confident that he was the most vulnerable if it was as reliable as it used to be.

It's not just the primary polls. It's the flipped approval ratings (Democrats like him more than Republicans), and the implications those have for negative polarisation.

Charlie Baker is apparently retiring because he is in this exact same predicament (more popular among Democrats than Republicans). If DeWine were to lose his primary, that would probably spell an end to his political career. It would also be the third defeat he's suffered. He lost to John Glenn in 1992, and he was landslided out of office by Sherrod Brown in 2006.

[THG]

People are underrating how vulnerable Sisolak is on here, especially if Lombardo is the nominee.

[Calthrina950]

People are underrating how vulnerable Sisolak is on here, especially if Lombardo is the nominee.

I haven't thought much about that race, but Sisolak isn't any safer than Kelly, Evers, or Whitmer are. I would put them all in the same category.

[THG]

People are underrating how vulnerable Sisolak is on here, especially if Lombardo is the nominee.

I haven't thought much about that race, but Sisolak isn't any safer than Kelly, Evers, or Whitmer are. I would put them all in the same category.

Exactly this.

I would specify that this scenario applies if Lombardo is the nominee however, as Heller is a fairly mediocre candidate and Sheriff Joe is a strong one.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

Kelly, but I don't think there's any governor who is DOA this cycle, at least not at the moment.

[Ferguson97]

Laura Kelly, and it's not close.

[Xing]

People are underrating how vulnerable Sisolak is on here, especially if Lombardo is the nominee.

I haven't thought much about that race, but Sisolak isn't any safer than Kelly, Evers, or Whitmer are. I would put them all in the same category.

I'd say he's at least more likely to win than those three. Michigan and Wisconsin tend to swing more with the national environment, whereas Democrats have a higher ceiling in Nevada. Sisolak could lose, but I don't think that the environment will automatically sink him, whereas it probably does sink Evers and Whitmer. I'd rate Nevada a Toss-Up, while Michigan is Tilt R, Wisconsin is Tilt/Lean R and Kansas is Likely R.

[Schiff for Senate]

Evers and Kelly are goners.

Can't say I disagree. WI is lean to likely Republican, KS is likely Republican and possibly even safe Republican.