Final Midterm election predictions

[Spark]

U.S. Senate

AL: Katie Britt (R) 63% , Will Boyd (D): 35%
AK: Lisa Murkowski (R) 51% , Kelly Tshibaka (R) 48%
AZ: Blake Masters (R): 50%, Mark Kelly (D, inc.) 48.3%
AR: John Boozman (R): 60%, Natalie James (D) 36%
CA: Alex Padilla (D): 63%, Mark Meuser (R) 36%
CO: Michael Bennet (D, inc.) 51%, Joe O'Dea (R): 44%
CT: Richard Blumenthal (D, inc.) 61%, Leora Levy (R): 35%
FL: Marco Rubio (R, inc.) 52%, Val Demings (D): 44%
GA: Hershel Walker (R): 49.5%, Raphael Warnock (D, inc.) 47%
HI: Brian Schatz (R) 72%, Bob McDermott (R) 26%
IA: Chuck Grassley (R, inc.) 55%, Michael Franken (D): 41%
ID: Mike Crapo (R, inc.) 68%, David Roth (D): 24%
IL: Tammy Duckworth (D, inc.) 53%, Kathy Salvi (R) 44%
IN: Todd Young (R, inc.) 56% , Thomas McDermott Jr. (D) 40%
KS: Jerry Moran (R, inc.) 63% , Mark Holland (D) 31%
KY: Rand Paul (R, inc.) 62%, Charles Booker (D): 36%
LA: John Kennedy (R, inc.) 53%, Gary Chambers Jr. (D) 20%
MD: Chris Van Hollen (D, inc.) 60%, Chris Chafee (R) 36%
MO: Eric Schmitt (R) 56%, Lucas Kunce (D) 42%
NV: Adam Laxalt (R) 48.7%, Catherine Cortez-Masto (D, inc.): 47.5%
NY: Chuck Schumer (D, inc.) 68%, Aleksander Mici 28%
NH: Maggie Hassan (D, inc.) 48.7%, Donald Bolduc (R): 47.9%
NC: Ted Budd (R) 50.5%, Cheri Beasley (D): 47.5%
ND: John Hoeven (R, inc.) 81%, Katrina Christensen (D) 18%
OH: J.D. Vance (R) 55%, Tim Ryan (D): 44%
OK (regular): James Lankford (R, inc.) 69%,, Madison Horn 28%
OK (special): Markwayne Mullen (R) 67%,, Kendra Horn (D): 31%
OR: Ron Wyden (D, inc.) 65%, Jo Rae Perkins (R) 34%
PA: Mehmet Oz (R) 49.0%, John Fetterman (D) 47.9%
SC: Tim Scott (R, inc.) 61%, Krystle Matthews (D): 36%
SD: John Thune (R, inc.) 71%,   Brian Bengs (D): 26%
UT: Mike Lee (R, inc.) 51%, Evan McMullin (I): 39%
VT: Peter Welch (D) 61% Christina Nolan (R): 28%
WA: Patty Murray (D) 53% , Tiffany Smiley (R): 44%
WI: Ron Johnson (R, inc.) 51%, Mandela Barnes (D): 47%


Governor
AL: Kay Ivey (R) 67%, Yolanda Flowers 32%
AR: Sarah Huckabee Sanders 65%, Chris Jones (D) 33%
AZ: Karri Lake (R) 51%, Katie Hobbs (D) 48%
AK: Mike Dunleavy (R, inc.) 51%, Bill Walker (I) 48%
CA: Gavin Newsom (D, inc.) 61%, Brian Dahle (R): 38%
CO: Jared Polis (D, inc.) 53%, Heidi Ganahl: 45%
CT: Ned Lamont (D, inc.) 52%, Bob Stefanoski (R): 46%
FL: Ron DeSantis (R, inc.) 55%, Charlie Crist (D): 42%
GA: Brian Kemp (R): 52%, Stacey Abrams: 45%
HI: Josh Green (D): 65%, Duke Aiona 33%
ID: Brad Little (R) 68%, Stephen Heidt 30%
IL: J.B. Pritzker (D, inc.): 52%, Darren Bailey (R): 46%
IA: Kim Reynolds (R, inc.): 56%, Deidre DeJear (D): 42%
KS: Derek Schmidt (R): 51%, Laura Kelly (D, inc.): 48%
MA: Maura Healey (D): 63%, Geoff Diehl (R): 36%
MD: Wes Moore (D): 56%, Daniel Cox 44%
ME: Janet Mills (D, inc.): 49.5%, Paul LePage (R): 46.5%
MI: Gretchen Whitmer (D, inc.): 50.5%, Tudor Dixon (R): 48.5%
MN: Tim Walz (D, inc.): 49.5%, Scott Jensen: 46.5%
NE: Jim Pillen: 61%, Carol Blood (D): 38%
NH: Chris Sununu (R): 56%, Tom Sherman (D): 41%
NV: Joe Lombardo (R): 50%, Steve Sisolak (D, inc.): 48%
NM: Michelle Lujan-Grisham (D, inc.): 55%, Marc Ronchetti (R): 44%
NY: Kathy Hochul (D, inc.): 52%, Lee Zeldin (R): 44%
OH: Mike DeWine (R): 56%, Nan Whaley (D): 38%
OK: Kevin Stitt (R): 54%, Joy Hofmeister (D): 45%
OR: Tina Kotek (D): 44%, Christine Drazan (R): 41%, Betsy Johnson (I) 8%
PA: Josh Shapiro (D): 50%, Doug Mastriano (R): 47%
RI: Daniel McKee (D, inc.): 61%, Ashley Kalus 36%
SC: Henry McMaster (R, inc.): 56%, Joe Cunningham (D): 42%
SD: Kristi Noem (R, inc.): 54%, Jamie Smith (D): 45%
TX: Greg Abbott (R, inc.): 53%, Beto O’Rourke (D): 44%
VT: Phil Scott (R, inc.): 56%, Doug Racine (D): 42%
WI: Tim Michels (R): 49.4%, Tony Evers (D, inc.): 48.3%
WY: Mark Gordon (R, inc.): 72%, Chris Ruthfuss (D): 26%

[Spark]

Maps

U.S. Senate



GOP
Pick-ups: NV, AZ (+2)
Run-off: (1)

DEM
Pick-ups: None (0)

Overall control: GOP 52-48.


Governor



GOP
Pick-ups: NV, WI, KS (+3)

DEM
Pick-ups: MA, MD (2)

[ElectionsGuy]

Senate

County Map (key races)



Three increments: <60%, 60-70%, >70% for both parties. Green in Utah = McMullin. Yellow in Alaska = Tsibaka.

Ratings

Likely = >90% chance
Lean = 70-90% chance
Tilt = 50-70% chance



Safe D: 44
Likely D: 2
Lean D: 0
Toss-Up/Tilt D: 0
Toss-Up/Tilt R: 3
Lean R: 2
Likely R: 2
Safe R: 47

Dems: 46
Reps: 54 ✓ (+4)

Predictions (Rounded to nearest 0.5%)

Alaska: 53.5% Murkowski, 46.5% Tshibaka (Safe R, Likely Murkowski)
Arizona: 50.5% Masters, 49.0% Kelly
Colorado: 52.0% Bennet, 46.5% O’Dea
Florida: 55.0% Rubio, 44.0% Demings
Georgia: 49.0% Walker, 47.5% Warnock (Lean Runoff)
   If Runoff: 51.0% Walker, 49.0% Warnock
Nevada: 50.5% Laxalt, 46.5% Cortez-Masto
New Hampshire: 49.0% Bolduc, 49.0% Hassan (--> Tilt R)
North Carolina: 53.5% Budd, 45.5% Beasley
Ohio: 55.5% Vance, 44.5% Ryan
Pennsylvania: 50.5% Oz, 47.0% Fetterman
Washington: 54.0% Murray, 46.0% Smiley
Wisconsin: 53.0% Johnson, 47.0% Barnes

Overall Rating: Lean R (around 80% chance R’s take Senate)

Governors

County Map (key races + some others)



Ratings



Republicans: 30 (+4, -2)
Democrats: 20 (+2, -4)

Predictions

Alaska: 54.0% Dunleavy, 46.0% Gara
 or 53.0% Dunleavy, 47.0% Walker
Arizona: 52.5% Lake, 47.5% Hobbs
Connecticut: 55.0% Lamont, 44.5% Stefanowski
Florida: 55.5% DeSantis, 43.5% Crist
Georgia: 53.5% Kemp, 45.5% Abrams
Illinois: 53.5% Pritzker, 44.5% Bailey
Kansas: 52.0% Schmidt, 46.0% Kelly
Maine: 50.0% Mills, 48.5% LePage
Michigan: 49.5% Dixon, 49.0% Whitmer
Minnesota: 50.5% Walz, 47.5% Jensen
Nevada: 51.0% Lombardo, 46.5% Sisolak
New York: 53.5% Hochul, 46.5% Zeldin
New Mexico: 50.0% Grisham, 49.0% Ronchetti
Oregon: 46.5% Kotek, 46.0% Drazan
Pennsylvania: 51.0% Shapiro, 48.0% Mastriano (--> Lean D)
Rhode Island: 56.0% McKee, 43.0% Kalus
Texas: 55.5% Abbott, 43.0% O’Rourke
Wisconsin: 51.5% Michels, 48.0% Evers

House

Ratings

https://www.yapms.com/app/?m=idrd

Likely D: CA-21, CA-26, CT-02, FL-09, FL-23, IL-08, IL-11, NJ-03, NJ-05, NJ-11, NM-01, NY-04, NC-14, OR-04, PA-04, PA-12, TX-28, VA-10
Lean D: CA-09, CO-07, GA-02, IL-06, IL-14, IN-01, NH-02, NM-03, NC-06, OR-06, PA-06, TX-34
Tilt D: AZ-04, CA-47, CA-49, CT-05, IL-13, MD-06, MI-03, MI-08, NV-01, NV-04, NY-17, RI-02
Tilt R: AK-AL, CA-13, CA-27, IL-17, KS-03, MN-02, NV-03, NM-02, NY-03, NY-18, NY-22, NC-01, OH-01, OR-05, PA-17, VA-07, WA-08
Lean R: AZ-01, CO-08, CA-22, CA-45, FL-27, IA-03, ME-02, MI-07, NH-01, NY-19, NC-13, OH-09, OH-13, PA-07, PA-08, VA-02
Likely R: AZ-02, AZ-06, CA-03, CA-40, CA-41, FL-15, FL-28, IA-01, MI-10, NE-02, NJ-07, NY-01, NY-02, TX-15, WI-03

Safe D: 151 (inc. TX-35)
Safe R: 194 (inc. FL-04, FL-07, FL-13, GA-06, MT-01, OH-14, TN-05, TX-38)

Total D: 193 (-29)
Total R: 242 ✓ (+29)

Overall House vote

Republicans: 52.5% (+6.0%)
Democrats: 46.5%

Overall Rating: Safe R

I'll make another post solely dedicated to commentary and analysis later tonight, but as far as raw predictions go, this is it for me.

[ListMan38]

U.S. House
252 R-183 D
U.S. Senate



GOP
Pick-ups: GA (election day or runoff), AZ, NH (+3)

DEM
Pick-ups: None (0)

Overall control: GOP 53-47.


Governor



GOP
Pick-ups: WI, KS (+2)

DEM
Pick-ups: MA, MD (+2)

[President Johnson]

Ok, I'll have a try.


SENATE

52 - 48 Republican

Arizona: Kelly 50.5%, Masters 48.7%
Colorado: Bennet 53.2%, O'Dea 43.7%
Florida: Rubio 54.7%, Demings 44.8%
Georgia: Walker 49.3%, Warnock 48.4% (Runoff: Walker 50.5%, Warnock 49.5%)
Iowa: Grassley 58.0%, Franken 40.9%
Nevada: Laxalt 49.5%, Cortez-Masto 46.8%
New Hampshire: Hassan 50.8%, Bolduc 48.0%
North Carolina: Budd 52.0%, Beasley 46.7%
Ohio: Vance 55.0%, Ryan 44.6%
Pennsylvania: Oz 49.7%, Fetterman 48.9%
Washington: Murray 55.5%, Smiley 44.5%
Wisconsin: Johnson 52.8%, Barnes 47.2%


HOUSE

237-198 Republican


GOVERNORS

Arizona: Lake 50.3%, Hobbs 48.0%
Connecticut: Lamont 54.0%, Stefanowski 44.8%
Florida: DeSantis 56.0%, Crist 42.9%
Georgia: Kemp 52.8%, Abrams 46.2%
Kansas: Schmidt 51.5%, Kelly 47.9%
Maine: Mills 51.2%, LePage 45.9%
Michigan: Whitmer 52.3%, Dixon 47.0%
Minnesota: Walz 50.9%, Jensen 44.1%
Nevada: Lombardo 50.0%, Sisolak 47.2%
New York: Hochul 57.7%, Zeldin 42.2%
New Mexico: Grisham 51.4%, Ronchetti 47.3%
Oregon: Drazan 45.5%, Kotek 44.9%, Johnson 8.1%
Pennsylvania: Shapiro 54.3%, Mastriano 45.5%
Texas: Abbott 54.9%, O'Rourke 42.6%
Wisconsin: Michels 50.2%, Evers 49.0%

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Kelly and Fetterman aren't losing

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Maps

U.S. Senate



GOP
Pick-ups: NV, AZ (+2)
Run-off: (1)

DEM
Pick-ups: None (0)

Overall control: GOP 52-48.


Governor



GOP
Pick-ups: NV, WI, KS (+3)

DEM
Pick-ups: MA, MD (2)

No

[ElectionsGuy]

Individual Races and General Commentary, as promised. Some of these are just small notes that I thought were interesting to add, while others are more holistic analyses.

Senate

AZ: While the left-wing pundits continue favoring Kelly over Masters, I do expect Masters to narrowly prevail over Kelly. Polling overestimated Kelly by over 3 points in his 2020 race, yet this time his polling average is only +1 (over 4 points worse!) and we're supposed to just believe they're accurate now? In addition, in the last week or so the Libertarian dropped out and endorsed Masters, possibly giving him a little pad on the margin for election day voters who otherwise would've gone Libertarian. I think Kelly overperforms for a Democrat this cycle but I think Arizona's partisanship and the environment are too tough for him to hang on.

CO: I don't think Republicans have much of a chance in this state anymore, although I think O'Dea will likely keep it under 10 and have one last "decent" showing that looks more like 2016 than 2020. Polis will likely win by double digits.

GA: While the election mafia celebrated prematurely at the idea that Walker's scandals meant he was doomed, the polling in Georgia has actually improved for Walker. In addition, there's this false idea that polling in Georgia overestimates Republicans. In reality, it's more accurate than the country, and slightly overestimated Biden and Democrats in 2020. There's a real possibility here that Walker avoids a runoff and gets >50%, even though that's not my prediction. In the event of a runoff, I suspect that Chase Oliver (L) voters who are going to Kemp in the Governor race will choose Walker disproportionately, but we don't exactly know. The reason I still rate this race "Tilt R" is largely because of the runoff factor. But I think Kemp winning more easily over Abrams helps him.

NV: If there's any place in the Senate battlegrounds this year where polling may be the most accurate, it's either here, Georgia, or NH. I don't suspect as has been the case in polls that Nevada will vote so much more R than AZ. I suspect some of that same problem that historically has underestimated Democrats in Nevada is still present, but just less so compared to the past. Still, both R candidates for Senate and Governor are favored by about the same amount. The early voting in Nevada looks terrible for Democrats as well, and frankly, Ralston is a political hack who shamelessly knows this but is predicting Masto winning anyway to please his Democrat audience. Given Nevada trends and the overall political environment, Republicans are moderately favored here.

NH: While I have always favored Hassan over Bolduc to win, some of the most accurate polling in NH is starting to suggest otherwise. NH was always a state with large independent voting pools that could swing hard in midterms, and this year looks to be no exception with a late surge for Bolduc despite being counted out. No matter who wins, it ain't going to be the 7 point margin that Biden won by in 2020. This to me is a legitimate toss-up, but I'm choosing Bolduc because waves typically pickup some unexpected races. I'm probably more likely to be right in choosing 53 Republicans instead of 54, given how unlikely 55 is, but my gut is telling me otherwise.

NC: Frankly, the idea that this was even a toss-up was absurd. NC polling has consistently overestimated Democrats, and even most polling gave Budd a slight lead (bigger now). NC was supposed to go to Biden and Cunningham in 2020. It was supposed to go to Hillary in 2016. Given those failed expectations, it's not unreasonable to say Budd will get close or even obtain a double-digit margin here. NC is a Lean R state in a neutral environment, so go figure.

OH: This race was never going to be close, but Ohio has some of the worst polling of any state and people fall for crappy Ohio polling time and time again and choose their narrative as to why (weak candidate, working class whites returning to Dems, ...) and then it doesn't happen. Remember, Tim Ryan led in several polls this cycle. He still is underperforming Biden in them, who was expected to either win Ohio or make it super close, when he lost by 8.

PA: There's no other state this cycle where prognostication and punditry has bothered me more than this. While the election mafia was saying Oz couldn't win because summer polling showed him down double digits (which was because the Republican base wasn't united!), they were fluffing up Fetterman as some all-star candidate. Well, how does that look now? They still to this day are pretending everything is fine with him and that the debate performance he had didn't hurt him. Why couldn't they ("non-partisan" analysts) just be honest and say the stroke clearly has hampered his ability to think and speak correctly, and that he shouldn't be in the race? Well, unfortunate as it is, I suspect he's now going to lose by much more than just about anybody expects. And there's few places where I expect polls to do worse this cycle than PA as far as swing states.

UT: Evan McMullin will likely do better than any Democrat would've, but he's not going to come close to winning. The same polls showed Trump in danger of losing Utah, only to win by 20.

WA: While many polls show a close race here, I'm not fully buying it. It should be closer than usual for a race in Washington, but I'm still leaning heavily toward the primary vote share and partisan lean as predictive values, so if there are places where the polls will underestimate Democrats, I'd bet it's going to be in blue states like WA.

WI: One of the most unusual things this cycle has been the almost unanimous agreement that Johnson is favored, despite being counted out completely in 2016 when no polls showed him ahead. Yet this time, polls show him narrowly ahead and have for the last two months, signaling that this is going to be a rather comfortable margin this time in his last re-election of his political career. WI also is now a state that leans more to the right than the country and is easily impacted by national headwinds.

Governors

AZ: Pretty uneventful, actually. Despite no difference between the treatment of Lake and Mastriano by the media, the attacks and prognostication about her never diminished her appeal, and she's consistently held a small lead by the same pollsters that showed a Kelly landslide in 2020. She'll likely win by about a Trump 2016 margin if not larger.

GA: Ever since the primary, Kemp held a consistent 5-10 point lead over Abrams, despite this idea that Georgia is super inelastic and can't go much more Republican. Both her and O'Rourke losing by far more than in 2018 will showcase them among a group of the most prematurely overrated candidates in the modern era.

FL: By all accounts, it looks like this cycle Miami-Dade is finally going Republican. And it could be by more than people even think. Safe R state this cycle, should be called early.

KS: Little polling here, some that shows Kelly slightly up, but very poor political environment for a red state, which is usually what wins out. Also keep in mind polls showed basically a tie for the Kansas Senate race in 2020, which ended up being an 11 point blowout.

ME: While I narrowly have Mills favored, I think this is one state where the polls will embarrass themselves once again (and also in ME-02, which showed Biden ahead when he lost by 7, still show Golden narrowly favored). The polls look a lot like the 2020 Senate race, only a bit more Democratic. It's unreasonable to expect Mills to do better than Biden when she's running against a former Governor who's well-known in the state in a poor political environment, but that's what they seem to show. Upset watch here.

MI: Regardless of the outcome here, and I am making a bold move by predicting Dixon over Whitmer, I knew the early polling which showed Whitmer ahead by huge margins was nonsense. She was never going to win by her 2018 margin or even get close to it. The reality is, Whitmer is literally a 2016 error away from losing, and given other fundamentals this election, I'm leaning towards she will.

MN: Underdiscussed race for how close it's likely to be, but I think the Dem trends in Minneapolis suburbs will likely save Walz, in addition to him coming off like a moderate. Still, I would look here for a potential upset, even though I think NM and ME are more likely. Ellison looks like he's going down.

NM: Another sleeper race here for upset potential. While Ronchetti surprised everyone by only losing by 6 points to Ray Lujan in the 2020 Senate race when it was declared Safe D, the polls suggest he's only going to do slightly better in this Governor race. Yeah, I feel like something isn't right here and this race is very close, although I'm still going with Lujan Grisham narrowly.

NY: While many polls have shown this race much closer than anybody would've anticipated months ago, I do expect the partisan lean of NY to bear itself out. Given the way NY counts it's ballots, I expect Zeldin to lead on election night. Regardless of the result, it's likely to be the most impressive performance by a Republican in NY since George Pataki. It's worth noting that Phil Murphy was polling better than Hochul is in NY, so if the wave is massive, this could get tight.

OK: While it does look like Stitt will underperform, Oklahoma polls are notoriously bad, and no this race will not be close. Same polls that had Stitt down had Trump only winning the state by 12. LOL

OR: This one has been tough to figure out, especially with the independent taking up so much vote earlier on. While earlier today I predicted Drazan narrowly prevailing, I'm going to backtrack on that for a final time and predict Kotek. I previously thought that as the independent vote would diminish, more vote would come home to the Dems. But then I saw polling showing the independent vote diminishing and Drazan still leading, causing me to slightly predict Drazan. But now as I'm thinking more about it again, I'm more comfortable relying on the political lean of Oregon, which is tough for Republicans to overcome (especially recently). This could easily be one of those races I'm wrong about and regret going back and forth.

PA: While this race is much likelier than not to stay Dem this cycle, I think the margin will be much closer than the polls suggest and will underestimate Mastriano (who has a Trumpier coalition) more than Oz. I think after the election, we'll sit here wondering why we ever believed Shapiro was going to win by double digits in a perennial swing state in a poor national environment for Democrats. Seriously folks, when fundamentals and polling collide, skew towards fundamentals.

TX: It'll be interesting to see the Rio Grande this cycle. Much like 2020 and unlike 2018, I do expect the polls to overestimate O'Rourke this time, given Texas' political lean.

WI: While many suspected Evers would not be favored this time, many polls still show him in contention to win, while they show Barnes behind. In general, it has been my feeling that polls overestimate the amount of "ticket-splitting" in the electorate, and this is no exception. While Michels will do worse than Johnson, I don't think it'll be by more than 3 points. Given how WI voted relative to the polls in 2020, Evers will have a good performance if he loses by 2. There's just no fundamental reason to expect him to win here, other than believing some cherry-picked polls that only have him up 1. His rural WI support will likely collapse.

House

Again, I believe the generic ballot is underestimating Republicans, which no polls got right in 2020 and very few polls were able to accurately capture 2014, the last Republican wave which was forecasted poorly. The prognosticators may not have as bad of a night that they had in 2020, considering how delusional they were about that election, but I think they're significantly underestimating the amount of seats that will flip again, in some cases just based off one crappy poll or some fundraising differentials. In many cases, the fundamentals and partisanship of the district is screaming in their face that it's going to flip red, but these prognosticators think Republicans have a bad candidate so Democrats somehow still maintain. It's astonishing. The amount of seats flipping was always going to be lower than 2010/1994 due to the 213 already won in 2020, but the amount of total seats they obtain will probably be similar to 2010, possibly even 2014 given the similarities (just with less favorable districting)

One special note about AK-AL: I view Peltola vs Begich as Lean R but Peltola vs Palin as Lean D. I took the average. I increasingly think Begich will prevail over Palin for 2nd place, but in the event that doesn't happen, this is a race I could easily be wrong about, as I was for that special election.

To speak about demographics for a moment (and this applies to House, Senate, and Governor races) I think we're going to see a continuation of the type of swing and trend we saw in the 2020 election and in the Virginia governor race. Most places will swing Republican this election, but Democrats have built up a strong reliable base of college-educated whites, some of whom used to vote Republican and aren't going back. On the other hand, Democratic shedding with Latino voters will continue, black turnout and Dem percentage looks subpar, and Democrats will have what is their worse showing yet in rural working-class America. That will affect certain states and districts more than others, and I think that will explain a lot of why certain states/districts voted the way they did.

I think in terms of turnout, it'll be perhaps the highest turnout midterm yet, eclipsing 2018. The fact that the early vote is not eclipsing 2018 shows a lot of people will vote on election day this year in a return from 2020 (but election day vote being heavily Republican remains). Like 2018, it'll be a highly polarized election where R's do well but in vast majority of cases can't win beyond a certain partisan lean.

Overall, my prediction is what it has been for the past year or so, regardless of some individual race outcomes. The pundits, polls, and prognosticators are going to have yet another miserable night, missing Republican gains in multiple races and calling many "Likely D" that end up going Republican or close. They've spent the vast majority of the year claiming Democrats were greatly favored to win the Senate (many still do!) and that House loses would be kept below 20 for Democrats. Remember that these are the same people that claimed Democrats would gain over 10 more seats than 2018 in 2020 even though the generic ballot was tighter (and even that was 4 points too Dem!). They've claimed, based on one supreme court decision, the same crappy polls that forecasted a Biden landslide, and wishful thinking about the Republican base and their candidates, and very poor analysis of special elections and early voting, that a Republican wave this cycle was off the table. Of course, this analysis never applied in 2018 or any Republican incumbent midterm. In the face of this delusion, some people never wavered, and in fact predicted that this groupthink would apply again just like it did in 2020. I never thought the polls would favor Republicans this cycle, or that the prognosticators would get any better after their failures in 2020. My goal here is to try and counteract this, so if anything I'm okay with overestimating Republicans, because there's so much Democratic overestimation. But there is still the chance, that this could be a large enough wave that I end up underestimating many Republicans.

How many elections is it going to take, to understand we're being manipulated? Sure polls may have underestimated Republicans for the last 4 election cycles in a row, but we just don’t know if they’re going to do the same this time. Sure, Vance is just barely ahead in Ohio, Mike Lee is struggling against Evan McMullin in Utah, Kevin Stitt may lose in Oklahoma, Whitmer is going to outperform her 2018 performance, Mastriano is going to lose by 15 points, Republicans are doing worse in certain House districts than they did in 2020, but we just don’t know whether the polling is underestimating Republicans. Use common sense folks. Is JD Vance going to massively underperform Trump in a midterm of a Democratic president? Are Republicans going to do worse in MI-07 or ME-02 than 2020 despite polling 10 points better on the generic ballot (D+7 to R+3)? Think about that and you’ll realize how bad these polls are going to look after the election.

Post-election, you’re going to be hearing a lot of “Republicans performed better than expected” from the media and their lackeys in the election mafia. But please note, that this was entirely predictable for people who base their analysis on real life fundamentals and not polling, subjective analysis of what makes a “good candidate”, and media “experts”. The “expectations” are set by people who are partisan Democrats pretending to be neutral analysts. And they have reasons to do this, since most of their wishful thinking is backed up by polls conducted by liberal media and university outlets. As a result, they get to set the agenda as to when and where the Democrats compete and where their fundraising goes. This is not an accident; this is an agenda at this point. So long as Democrats benefit from crappy polling that overestimates them, and the left-wing pundits eat it up and downplay how inaccurate they are, while smearing and demonizing more accurate polling as "right-wing", there's no incentive for them to change.

I'll make a few posts after the election, mostly correcting myself and making a few analytical points, but I will not be posting frequently post-2022. And contrary to what people may think of me, I'm not going to be spending time dunking on people who got it smugly wrong. I just want people to wake up. It's a waste of time to spend 2 years posting on a forum with people who will deny any chance of Republicans winning in 2024. There's little value to this forum anymore, it's entirely predictable and stale, with little variation in opinion (even from "Republicans"). It's sad, really. I wish it wasn't this way, but it is.

[oldkyhome]

2022 Midterm Predictions

Margin Key
Tilt - >1.5
Lean - 1.5-5
Likely - 5-10
Safe - 10+

U.S Senate

Safe D: 7 (CA, OR, IL, MD, NY, VT, CT)
Likely D: 1 (CO)
Lean D: 2 (WA, GA)
Tilt D: 0
Tilt R: 2 (NH, AZ)
Lean R: 2 (PA, NV)
Likely R: 4 (WI, OH, NC, FL)
Safe R: 15 (OK, AR, KS, AL, SC, ND, SD, etc..)

Wisconsin: 52.5% Johnson, 47.0% Barnes
Ohio: 54.5% Vance, 44.5% Ryan
Colorado: 53.0% Bennet, 47.0% O'Dea
Florida: 53.5% Rubio, 45.0% Demings
Washington: 52.0% Murray, 48.0% Smiley
Arizona: 50.0% Masters, 49.0% Kelly
Nevada: 50.5% Laxalt, 47.0% Cortez-Masto
Georgia: 49.5% Warnock, 48.0% Walker (goes to runoff)
New Hampshire: 50.0% Bolduc, 49.5% Hassan
Pennsylvania: 50.5% Oz, 48.5% Fetterman
North Carolina: 52.5% Budd, 46.5% Beasley
Alaska: 53.0% Murkowski, 47.0% Tshibaka

Senate Majority
Republican Party: 53 (+3) ✓
Democratic Party: 47 (-3)

Governorships

Safe D: 6 (CA, CO, IL, MD, MA, RI)
Likely D: 2 (NY, CT)
Lean D: 5 (NM, MN, PA, ME, KS)
Tilt D: 0
Tilt R: 2 (OR, MI)
Lean R: 3 (WI, AZ, NV)
Likely R: 2 (OK, GA)
Safe R: 15 (TX, ID, FL, WY, SD, NE, SC, AL, etc...)

Arizona: 52.0% Lake, 48.0% Hobbs
Nevada: 51.0% Lombardo, 47.0% Sisolak
Oregon: 45.0% Drazan, 44.5% Kotek, 8.0% Johnson
Kansas: 49.0% Kelly, 47.0% Schmidt
New Mexico: 51.5% Grisham, 48.0% Ronchetti
New York: 52.5% Hochul, 46.0% Zeldin
Wisconsin: 51.5% Michels, 48.0% Evers
Pennsylvania: 52.0% Shapiro, 47.5% Mastriano
Maine: 51.5% Mills, 47.5% LePage
Georgia: 53.5% Kemp, 46.0% Abrams
Oklahoma: 54.5% Stitt, 45.0% Hofmeister
Minnesota: 51.0% Walz, 48.0% Jensen
Connecticut: 55.0% Lamont, 44.5% Stefanowski
Michigan: 50.0% Dixon, 49.5% Whitmer

Gubernatorial Majority
Republican Party: 30 (+4, -2) ✓
Democratic Party: 20 (+2, -4)


Not gonna delve too far into individual House races for my Congressional prediction. I expect Republicans to gain roughly 25 seats and take the majority with anywhere between 237-242 seats. If I had to put an exact number on it, 239. As for the generic ballot, Republicans will win the popular vote by 4% with a margin of 51-47.

Here's to hoping I hit the mark with these calls.

[Utah Neolib]

https://www.270towin.com/2022-senate-election/MGO7OZ

Final Midterm Predictions:
Senate:
Arizona: Masters <1
Nevada: Laxalt +4
Georgia: November: Walker +1.5, Runoff: Warnock +2
North Carolina: Budd +5
Wisconsin: Johnson +6
New Hampshire: Hassan +2.5
Governor:

Oregon: Kotek +1.9
Lombardo +3
Arizona: Lake +3
New Mexico: Lujan Grisham +1.5
Kansas: Laura Kelly +1.3
Minnesota: Walz +4
Wisconsin: Michels +4.9
Michigan: Whitmer <1
Pennsylvania: Shapiro +4
New York: Hochul +8
Georgia: Kemp +4.5

House:
https://www.270towin.com/2022-house-election/jMGdLJ5 (Don’t have time to write it all down, sorry)

[Sir Mohamed]

election mafia

I definitely stopped reading here.

What's that even supposed to be? You realize most predictions on this forum aren't very D-favorable, right?

[RussFeingoldWasRobbed]

I know it sounds like the worst case scenario but I truly believe the bottom has fallen out for dems. I will be happy to answer questions about it

[MT Treasurer]

I was also going to change my gubernatorial prediction on Atlas and submit my final map, but it was too late. Otherwise, I would have flipped MI and NM to the GOP.

Anyway, my final prediction:

Senate - 54R, 46D

House - 247R, 188D

Governor - 31R, 19D

Crossposting from the Congressional board thread, while adding my NH/PA prediction:


SENATE

It is hard for me to see how Republicans do not pull off or at least come very close to a clean sweep (54R-46D) today. Whenever you see people predicting a major divergence between the Senate and the House, it’s largely because they are more emotionally invested in the Senate and want Democrats to hold it because it is the more powerful chamber of the two. As far as the individual races are concerned, I’d be shocked if NV didn’t flip (and I maintain that it won’t be particularly close). In AZ, Masters is favored based on state fundamentals (I do not trust polling in AZ, and I think Masters is a more competent candidate than Oz and Walker, both of whom could conceivably lose even on a very good night for the GOP). North Carolina is not competitive (the close race in summer polling was basically a mirage due to asymmetrical polarization), and Wisconsin is only winnable for Democrats if they get a very favorable turnout gap (unlikely — yes, their base is energized, but so is the Republican base in a midterm under a DEM trifecta). Vance's margin will be underwhelming relative to the national environment and the state's partisan lean/trend, but I don’t see how he actually loses (although I disagree that national groups didn’t need to spend any money on his behalf, even if he’s now on track to win by high single digits/low double digits). In Georgia, I was going back and forth on whether the race would go to a runoff or not, but I am now predicting an outright win for Walker in part because I think Republicans will make enough inroads with Black and Latino voters (particularly male voters of color) for a statewide sweep. In Washington, I predict that Smiley will have the biggest overperformance of any Senate candidate, but partisanship should bail Murray out (~4-point win) unless we’re really looking at a tsunami of historic proportions. I actually think CO has less upset potential for the GOP than WA, with Bennet potentially falling below 50% but still holding on by a 2016-type margin. That leaves us with two races: Pennsylvania and New Hampshire. I think Republicans will win at least one of those, and I am honestly pretty close to giving them both states. The only reason I still have some doubts about PA even as I’m predicting a major national wave for the GOP is because Oz is the single most flawed candidate on the Republican side on a basic human (as opposed to just candidate) level this cycle, lacking sincere convictions and basic empathy, having a background which screams ruthless selfishness instead of commitment, and demonstrating an unscrupulous willingness to lie to people in a very transparent manner. A candidate having a somewhat unappealing personality to voters is nothing out of the ordinary; a candidate combining this many undesirable traits and this amount of baggage very much is. While voters have gotten used to holding their nose for certain candidates, I think the prospect of voting in a candidate who exhibits as many psychopathic traits as Dr. Oz will give at least some people pause. While some of the attacks against Fetterman are potent, I am less sure that they are all that effective when it is Mehmet Oz who is making them (his handling of Fetterman's stroke could have been a lot worse, but it might still have reinforced the perception that the man lacks empathy). Of course Oz has also done a rather pathetic job of making himself palatable even to Republican base voters (his willingness to throw Mastriano under the bus for his own electoral gain is only the latest example here). Does all of this matter enough to voters to make a difference in a year like this? Probably not, but I think the potential for a serious Oz underperformance in the Republican-trending parts of the state has been seriously underdiscussed (I am not only talking about potential crossover votes for Fetterman here, but also about people leaving the race blank or voting third party). I also believe the coverage of the PA races has (predictably) paid a disproportionate amount of attention to the stereotypical Oz/Shapiro voter, who is probably also overrepresented in polling in addition to focus groups. I do not actually expect the same gulf between Oz's and Mastriano's performance that polling is indicating and pundits are forecasting, although the former is still more likely to win. In NH, I think Bolduc is basically in a 50/50 position, and I expect that race to be extremely tight all night. At the end of the day, I think Bolduc has run a solid enough campaign against the (unpopular) incumbent that he rides the wave to victory, but the state's partisanship may yet prove too big an obstacle for him. Gun to my head, Bolduc wins by half a point.

Notable races:

AZ: Masters +3.5 (FLIP, Lean R)
FL: Rubio +11.5 (Safe R)
GA: Walker +3.5 (FLIP, Toss-up/Tilt R*)
NV: Laxalt +6 (FLIP, Likely R)
NH: Bolduc +0.5 (FLIP, Toss-up/Tilt R)
NC: Budd +8.5 (Safe R)
OH: Vance +11 (Safe R)
PA: Oz +1 (Toss-up/Tilt R)
WA: Murray +4 (Lean D)
WI: Johnson +7.5 (Likely R)

*GA gets a different rating than AZ only because of the runoff law.

GOVERNOR

AZ: Lake +6 (Likely R)
FL: DeSantis +13.5 (Safe R)
GA: Kemp +9 (Safe R)
KS: Schmidt +5.5 (FLIP, Lean R)
ME: Mills +1.5 (Toss-up/Tilt D)
MI: Dixon +1 (FLIP, Toss-up/Tilt R)
MN: Walz +4 (Lean D)
NV: Lombardo +6 (FLIP, Likely R)
NM: Ronchetti +1.5 (FLIP, Toss-up/Tilt R)
NY: Hochul +4.5 (Lean D)
OK: Stitt +9 (Likely R)
OR: Kotek +1 (Toss-up/Tilt D)
PA: Shapiro +3 (Lean D)
WI: Michels +4 (FLIP, Lean R)
TX: Abbott +12.5 (Safe R)

Note: Oregon was basically a coin flip for me. I went against the conventional wisdom in NM because I’m expecting polling to underestimate Republican strength in the Southwest this time around (and in the foreseeable future, most likely), but I have very little confidence in that prediction, in part because NM is still a structurally Democratic state that has been less affected by GOP gains in demographically similar places and has a large white liberal & Native base that should be very reliable even for Lujan Grisham. Also, NM polling has been very accurate in the recent past (then again, the same was true for other states, until it wasn’t). I would also add that I would not be shocked if one of Walz or (especially) Hochul lost. A Republican win in NY would be this cycle's equivalent of MD-GOV 2014 — we didn’t have one of those upsets in 2018, but we might get one in this election.

HOUSE:

Not going to post individual seat predictions here (although I have done my share of simulations), but I will again note that Biden's biggest problem is that he has no sustainable or reliable coalition for him (rather than against Trump, like in 2020). Much like in VA-GOV 2021, I suspect the swing away from Democrats to be relatively uniform, with occasional overperformances by particularly skilled candidates (e.g. Hung in VA-10, Fung in RI-02). However, I think the Republican wave will hit districts with a large proportion of working-class, non-college-educated voters particularly hard, whether in rural/small-town/midsize-city (parts of New England, the Black Belt in GA, Rio Grande Valley/South Texas) or metropolitan areas with a substantial non-white population (e.g. Clark County NV, Southern CA).

TL;DR: In terms of the actual number of D/R seats after this election, I basically expect a repeat of 2014 across the board (Senate, House, Governors).

[Schiff for Senate]

PA: There's no other state this cycle where prognostication and punditry has bothered me more than this. While the election mafia was saying Oz couldn't win because summer polling showed him down double digits (which was because the Republican base wasn't united!), they were fluffing up Fetterman as some all-star candidate. Well, how does that look now? They still to this day are pretending everything is fine with him and that the debate performance he had didn't hurt him. Why couldn't they ("non-partisan" analysts) just be honest and say the stroke clearly has hampered his ability to think and speak correctly, and that he shouldn't be in the race? Well, unfortunate as it is, I suspect he's now going to lose by much more than just about anybody expects. And there's few places where I expect polls to do worse this cycle than PA as far as swing states.


…


MI: Regardless of the outcome here, and I am making a bold move by predicting Dixon over Whitmer, I knew the early polling which showed Whitmer ahead by huge margins was nonsense. She was never going to win by her 2018 margin or even get close to it. The reality is, Whitmer is literally a 2016 error away from losing, and given other fundamentals this election, I'm leaning towards she will.

…

PA: While this race is much likelier than not to stay Dem this cycle, I think the margin will be much closer than the polls suggest and will underestimate Mastriano (who has a Trumpier coalition) more than Oz. I think after the election, we'll sit here wondering why we ever believed Shapiro was going to win by double digits in a perennial swing state in a poor national environment for Democrats. Seriously folks, when fundamentals and polling collide, skew towards fundamentals.

…

WI: While many suspected Evers would not be favored this time, many polls still show him in contention to win, while they show Barnes behind. In general, it has been my feeling that polls overestimate the amount of "ticket-splitting" in the electorate, and this is no exception. While Michels will do worse than Johnson, I don't think it'll be by more than 3 points. Given how WI voted relative to the polls in 2020, Evers will have a good performance if he loses by 2. There's just no fundamental reason to expect him to win here, other than believing some cherry-picked polls that only have him up 1. His rural WI support will likely collapse.

WI: “Evers will have a good performance if he loses by 2.” Then what do you call his winning by 3 points?

PA: “The margin will be much closer than the polls suggest.” Yeah, Fetterman did better than most polls said he’d do - he won by over 13 points. Try again.

MI: “Predicting Dixon over Whitmer.” Yeah. Whitmer’s won, and it’s looking like it’s not going to be particularly close, either. Better luck next time.

PA: “I suspect he’s going to lose by much more than just about anybody expects.” Yeah, you’re actually right, Oz DID lose by more - oh, wait, you’re talking about Fetterman? Wrong again.

[Schiff for Senate]

Anyway, my final prediction:

Senate - 54R, 46D

House - 247R, 188D

Governor - 31R, 19D

Crossposting from the Congressional board thread, while adding my NH/PA prediction:


SENATE

…

Notable races:

AZ: Masters +3.5 (FLIP, Lean R)
FL: Rubio +11.5 (Safe R)
GA: Walker +3.5 (FLIP, Toss-up/Tilt R*)
NV: Laxalt +6 (FLIP, Likely R)
NH: Bolduc +0.5 (FLIP, Toss-up/Tilt R)
NC: Budd +8.5 (Safe R)
OH: Vance +11 (Safe R)
PA: Oz +1 (Toss-up/Tilt R)
WA: Murray +4 (Lean D)
WI: Johnson +7.5 (Likely R)

*GA gets a different rating than AZ only because of the runoff law.

GOVERNOR

AZ: Lake +6 (Likely R)
FL: DeSantis +13.5 (Safe R)
GA: Kemp +9 (Safe R)
KS: Schmidt +5.5 (FLIP, Lean R)
ME: Mills +1.5 (Toss-up/Tilt D)
MI: Dixon +1 (FLIP, Toss-up/Tilt R)
MN: Walz +4 (Lean D)
NV: Lombardo +6 (FLIP, Likely R)
NM: Ronchetti +1.5 (FLIP, Toss-up/Tilt R)
NY: Hochul +4.5 (Lean D)
OK: Stitt +9 (Likely R)
OR: Kotek +1 (Toss-up/Tilt D)
PA: Shapiro +3 (Lean D)
WI: Michels +4 (FLIP, Lean R)
TX: Abbott +12.5 (Safe R)

Note: Oregon was basically a coin flip for me. I went against the conventional wisdom in NM because I’m expecting polling to underestimate Republican strength in the Southwest this time around (and in the foreseeable future, most likely), but I have very little confidence in that prediction, in part because NM is still a structurally Democratic state that has been less affected by GOP gains in demographically similar places and has a large white liberal & Native base that should be very reliable even for Lujan Grisham. Also, NM polling has been very accurate in the recent past (then again, the same was true for other states, until it wasn’t). I would also add that I would not be shocked if one of Walz or (especially) Hochul lost. A Republican win in NY would be this cycle's equivalent of MD-GOV 2014 — we didn’t have one of those upsets in 2018, but we might get one in this election.

HOUSE:

Not going to post individual seat predictions here (although I have done my share of simulations), but I will again note that Biden's biggest problem is that he has no sustainable or reliable coalition for him (rather than against Trump, like in 2020). Much like in VA-GOV 2021, I suspect the swing away from Democrats to be relatively uniform, with occasional overperformances by particularly skilled candidates (e.g. Hung in VA-10, Fung in RI-02). However, I think the Republican wave will hit districts with a large proportion of working-class, non-college-educated voters particularly hard, whether in rural/small-town/midsize-city (parts of New England, the Black Belt in GA, Rio Grande Valley/South Texas) or metropolitan areas with a substantial non-white population (e.g. Clark County NV, Southern CA).

TL;DR: In terms of the actual number of D/R seats after this election, I basically expect a repeat of 2014 across the board (Senate, House, Governors).

I seriously hope your “predictions” were ironic? Because as for your “54-46 R senate”…yeah, the GOP should consider themselves VERY lucky if they can get to 51 at this point.

Going specific with your predictions - You underperformed the FLGOP a lot (but so did us all, to be fair), but other than that, many of your predictions were, uh, borderline hackish for the GOP. Michels+4, Shapiro+3? Really? Especially the former prediction - to be fair, your PA prediction isn’t too unreasonable, but Michels wins by 4? LOL. Even better - Schmidt+5.5 when Kelly won. HOWEVER, credit where credit is due, that’s not a hackish prediction - Kelly DID outdo expectations. MI and NM - NM has gone for Grisham, and it seems comfortably; MI has been won by Whitmer (and it doesn’t look particularly close). Also abundantly clear that if Lake wins in AZ, it won’t be by 6 points. Half of that, maybe, if she’s doing pretty well.
Love your NH-SEN prediction, given that it sees Hassan will do better than Biden, lol.

[Biden his time]

Looks like I got everything right except WI-GOV!

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

PA: While this race is much likelier than not to stay Dem this cycle, I think the margin will be much closer than the polls suggest and will underestimate Mastriano (who has a Trumpier coalition) more than Oz. I think after the election, we'll sit here wondering why we ever believed Shapiro was going to win by double digits in a perennial swing state in a poor national environment for Democrats. Seriously folks, when fundamentals and polling collide, skew towards fundamentals.

From the mouth of this true guru!

[SWE]

PA: There's no other state this cycle where prognostication and punditry has bothered me more than this. While the election mafia was saying Oz couldn't win because summer polling showed him down double digits (which was because the Republican base wasn't united!), they were fluffing up Fetterman as some all-star candidate. Well, how does that look now?

Looks pretty good, I would say

[Alcibiades]

~top-notch analysis~

So true!

[GALeftist]

CO: I think O'Dea will likely keep it under 10 and have one last "decent" showing that looks more like 2016 than 2020.

NH: No matter who wins, it ain't going to be the 7 point margin that Biden won by in 2020.

NC:Given those failed expectations, it's not unreasonable to say Budd will get close or even obtain a double-digit margin here.

PA: I suspect [Fetterman's] now going to lose by much more than just about anybody expects. And there's few places where I expect polls to do worse this cycle than PA as far as swing states.

ME: While I narrowly have Mills favored, I think this is one state where the polls will embarrass themselves once again (and also in ME-02, which showed Biden ahead when he lost by 7, still show Golden narrowly favored). ... It's unreasonable to expect Mills to do better than Biden when she's running against a former Governor who's well-known in the state in a poor political environment, but that's what they seem to show. Upset watch here.

MI: I knew the early polling which showed Whitmer ahead by huge margins was nonsense. She was never going to win by her 2018 margin or even get close to it.

PA: I think after the election, we'll sit here wondering why we ever believed Shapiro was going to win by double digits in a perennial swing state in a poor national environment for Democrats.

WI: There's just no fundamental reason to expect [Evers] to win here

House

Again, I believe the generic ballot is underestimating Republicans ... Overall, my prediction is what it has been for the past year or so, regardless of some individual race outcomes. The pundits, polls, and prognosticators are going to have yet another miserable night, missing Republican gains in multiple races and calling many "Likely D" that end up going Republican or close ... How many elections is it going to take, to understand we're being manipulated?

Senate - 54R, 46D

House - 247R, 188D

Governor - 31R, 19D

...

It is hard for me to see how Republicans do not pull off or at least come very close to a clean sweep (54R-46D) today ... TL;DR: In terms of the actual number of D/R seats after this election, I basically expect a repeat of 2014 across the board (Senate, House, Governors).

This is kind of mean and pretty unfair for me to pick on you for, but so is the self-righteousness about how smart you are and how stupid everyone else is for not seeing what was so obvious to you which has been so common on the forum as of late. I hope you will consider being less condescending and more open-minded now that olawakandi was literally orders of magnitude more accurate than you.

[Alcibiades]

NH: No matter who wins, it ain't going to be the 7 point margin that Biden won by in 2020.

Now, now, tbf he was right on this. Hassan won by more than Biden!

[MR DARK BRANDON]

I was also going to change my gubernatorial prediction on Atlas and submit my final map, but it was too late. Otherwise, I would have flipped MI and NM to the GOP.

Anyway, my final prediction:

Senate - 54R, 46D

House - 247R, 188D

Governor - 31R, 19D

Crossposting from the Congressional board thread, while adding my NH/PA prediction:


SENATE

It is hard for me to see how Republicans do not pull off or at least come very close to a clean sweep (54R-46D) today. Whenever you see people predicting a major divergence between the Senate and the House, it’s largely because they are more emotionally invested in the Senate and want Democrats to hold it because it is the more powerful chamber of the two. As far as the individual races are concerned, I’d be shocked if NV didn’t flip (and I maintain that it won’t be particularly close). In AZ, Masters is favored based on state fundamentals (I do not trust polling in AZ, and I think Masters is a more competent candidate than Oz and Walker, both of whom could conceivably lose even on a very good night for the GOP). North Carolina is not competitive (the close race in summer polling was basically a mirage due to asymmetrical polarization), and Wisconsin is only winnable for Democrats if they get a very favorable turnout gap (unlikely — yes, their base is energized, but so is the Republican base in a midterm under a DEM trifecta). Vance's margin will be underwhelming relative to the national environment and the state's partisan lean/trend, but I don’t see how he actually loses (although I disagree that national groups didn’t need to spend any money on his behalf, even if he’s now on track to win by high single digits/low double digits). In Georgia, I was going back and forth on whether the race would go to a runoff or not, but I am now predicting an outright win for Walker in part because I think Republicans will make enough inroads with Black and Latino voters (particularly male voters of color) for a statewide sweep. In Washington, I predict that Smiley will have the biggest overperformance of any Senate candidate, but partisanship should bail Murray out (~4-point win) unless we’re really looking at a tsunami of historic proportions. I actually think CO has less upset potential for the GOP than WA, with Bennet potentially falling below 50% but still holding on by a 2016-type margin. That leaves us with two races: Pennsylvania and New Hampshire. I think Republicans will win at least one of those, and I am honestly pretty close to giving them both states. The only reason I still have some doubts about PA even as I’m predicting a major national wave for the GOP is because Oz is the single most flawed candidate on the Republican side on a basic human (as opposed to just candidate) level this cycle, lacking sincere convictions and basic empathy, having a background which screams ruthless selfishness instead of commitment, and demonstrating an unscrupulous willingness to lie to people in a very transparent manner. A candidate having a somewhat unappealing personality to voters is nothing out of the ordinary; a candidate combining this many undesirable traits and this amount of baggage very much is. While voters have gotten used to holding their nose for certain candidates, I think the prospect of voting in a candidate who exhibits as many psychopathic traits as Dr. Oz will give at least some people pause. While some of the attacks against Fetterman are potent, I am less sure that they are all that effective when it is Mehmet Oz who is making them (his handling of Fetterman's stroke could have been a lot worse, but it might still have reinforced the perception that the man lacks empathy). Of course Oz has also done a rather pathetic job of making himself palatable even to Republican base voters (his willingness to throw Mastriano under the bus for his own electoral gain is only the latest example here). Does all of this matter enough to voters to make a difference in a year like this? Probably not, but I think the potential for a serious Oz underperformance in the Republican-trending parts of the state has been seriously underdiscussed (I am not only talking about potential crossover votes for Fetterman here, but also about people leaving the race blank or voting third party). I also believe the coverage of the PA races has (predictably) paid a disproportionate amount of attention to the stereotypical Oz/Shapiro voter, who is probably also overrepresented in polling in addition to focus groups. I do not actually expect the same gulf between Oz's and Mastriano's performance that polling is indicating and pundits are forecasting, although the former is still more likely to win. In NH, I think Bolduc is basically in a 50/50 position, and I expect that race to be extremely tight all night. At the end of the day, I think Bolduc has run a solid enough campaign against the (unpopular) incumbent that he rides the wave to victory, but the state's partisanship may yet prove too big an obstacle for him. Gun to my head, Bolduc wins by half a point.

Notable races:

AZ: Masters +3.5 (FLIP, Lean R)
FL: Rubio +11.5 (Safe R)
GA: Walker +3.5 (FLIP, Toss-up/Tilt R*)
NV: Laxalt +6 (FLIP, Likely R)
NH: Bolduc +0.5 (FLIP, Toss-up/Tilt R)
NC: Budd +8.5 (Safe R)
OH: Vance +11 (Safe R)
PA: Oz +1 (Toss-up/Tilt R)
WA: Murray +4 (Lean D)
WI: Johnson +7.5 (Likely R)

*GA gets a different rating than AZ only because of the runoff law.

GOVERNOR

AZ: Lake +6 (Likely R)
FL: DeSantis +13.5 (Safe R)
GA: Kemp +9 (Safe R)
KS: Schmidt +5.5 (FLIP, Lean R)
ME: Mills +1.5 (Toss-up/Tilt D)
MI: Dixon +1 (FLIP, Toss-up/Tilt R)
MN: Walz +4 (Lean D)
NV: Lombardo +6 (FLIP, Likely R)
NM: Ronchetti +1.5 (FLIP, Toss-up/Tilt R)
NY: Hochul +4.5 (Lean D)
OK: Stitt +9 (Likely R)
OR: Kotek +1 (Toss-up/Tilt D)
PA: Shapiro +3 (Lean D)
WI: Michels +4 (FLIP, Lean R)
TX: Abbott +12.5 (Safe R)

Note: Oregon was basically a coin flip for me. I went against the conventional wisdom in NM because I’m expecting polling to underestimate Republican strength in the Southwest this time around (and in the foreseeable future, most likely), but I have very little confidence in that prediction, in part because NM is still a structurally Democratic state that has been less affected by GOP gains in demographically similar places and has a large white liberal & Native base that should be very reliable even for Lujan Grisham. Also, NM polling has been very accurate in the recent past (then again, the same was true for other states, until it wasn’t). I would also add that I would not be shocked if one of Walz or (especially) Hochul lost. A Republican win in NY would be this cycle's equivalent of MD-GOV 2014 — we didn’t have one of those upsets in 2018, but we might get one in this election.

HOUSE:

Not going to post individual seat predictions here (although I have done my share of simulations), but I will again note that Biden's biggest problem is that he has no sustainable or reliable coalition for him (rather than against Trump, like in 2020). Much like in VA-GOV 2021, I suspect the swing away from Democrats to be relatively uniform, with occasional overperformances by particularly skilled candidates (e.g. Hung in VA-10, Fung in RI-02). However, I think the Republican wave will hit districts with a large proportion of working-class, non-college-educated voters particularly hard, whether in rural/small-town/midsize-city (parts of New England, the Black Belt in GA, Rio Grande Valley/South Texas) or metropolitan areas with a substantial non-white population (e.g. Clark County NV, Southern CA).

TL;DR: In terms of the actual number of D/R seats after this election, I basically expect a repeat of 2014 across the board (Senate, House, Governors).

lol

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

I know it sounds like the worst case scenario but I truly believe the bottom has fallen out for dems. I will be happy to answer questions about it

254 RH no and R winning NV and AZ I told you no

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

Individual Races and General Commentary, as promised. Some of these are just small notes that I thought were interesting to add, while others are more holistic analyses.

Senate

AZ: While the left-wing pundits continue favoring Kelly over Masters, I do expect Masters to narrowly prevail over Kelly. Polling overestimated Kelly by over 3 points in his 2020 race, yet this time his polling average is only +1 (over 4 points worse!) and we're supposed to just believe they're accurate now? In addition, in the last week or so the Libertarian dropped out and endorsed Masters, possibly giving him a little pad on the margin for election day voters who otherwise would've gone Libertarian. I think Kelly overperforms for a Democrat this cycle but I think Arizona's partisanship and the environment are too tough for him to hang on.

CO: I don't think Republicans have much of a chance in this state anymore, although I think O'Dea will likely keep it under 10 and have one last "decent" showing that looks more like 2016 than 2020. Polis will likely win by double digits.

GA: While the election mafia celebrated prematurely at the idea that Walker's scandals meant he was doomed, the polling in Georgia has actually improved for Walker. In addition, there's this false idea that polling in Georgia overestimates Republicans. In reality, it's more accurate than the country, and slightly overestimated Biden and Democrats in 2020. There's a real possibility here that Walker avoids a runoff and gets >50%, even though that's not my prediction. In the event of a runoff, I suspect that Chase Oliver (L) voters who are going to Kemp in the Governor race will choose Walker disproportionately, but we don't exactly know. The reason I still rate this race "Tilt R" is largely because of the runoff factor. But I think Kemp winning more easily over Abrams helps him.

NV: If there's any place in the Senate battlegrounds this year where polling may be the most accurate, it's either here, Georgia, or NH. I don't suspect as has been the case in polls that Nevada will vote so much more R than AZ. I suspect some of that same problem that historically has underestimated Democrats in Nevada is still present, but just less so compared to the past. Still, both R candidates for Senate and Governor are favored by about the same amount. The early voting in Nevada looks terrible for Democrats as well, and frankly, Ralston is a political hack who shamelessly knows this but is predicting Masto winning anyway to please his Democrat audience. Given Nevada trends and the overall political environment, Republicans are moderately favored here.

NH: While I have always favored Hassan over Bolduc to win, some of the most accurate polling in NH is starting to suggest otherwise. NH was always a state with large independent voting pools that could swing hard in midterms, and this year looks to be no exception with a late surge for Bolduc despite being counted out. No matter who wins, it ain't going to be the 7 point margin that Biden won by in 2020. This to me is a legitimate toss-up, but I'm choosing Bolduc because waves typically pickup some unexpected races. I'm probably more likely to be right in choosing 53 Republicans instead of 54, given how unlikely 55 is, but my gut is telling me otherwise.

NC: Frankly, the idea that this was even a toss-up was absurd. NC polling has consistently overestimated Democrats, and even most polling gave Budd a slight lead (bigger now). NC was supposed to go to Biden and Cunningham in 2020. It was supposed to go to Hillary in 2016. Given those failed expectations, it's not unreasonable to say Budd will get close or even obtain a double-digit margin here. NC is a Lean R state in a neutral environment, so go figure.

OH: This race was never going to be close, but Ohio has some of the worst polling of any state and people fall for crappy Ohio polling time and time again and choose their narrative as to why (weak candidate, working class whites returning to Dems, ...) and then it doesn't happen. Remember, Tim Ryan led in several polls this cycle. He still is underperforming Biden in them, who was expected to either win Ohio or make it super close, when he lost by 8.

PA: There's no other state this cycle where prognostication and punditry has bothered me more than this. While the election mafia was saying Oz couldn't win because summer polling showed him down double digits (which was because the Republican base wasn't united!), they were fluffing up Fetterman as some all-star candidate. Well, how does that look now? They still to this day are pretending everything is fine with him and that the debate performance he had didn't hurt him. Why couldn't they ("non-partisan" analysts) just be honest and say the stroke clearly has hampered his ability to think and speak correctly, and that he shouldn't be in the race? Well, unfortunate as it is, I suspect he's now going to lose by much more than just about anybody expects. And there's few places where I expect polls to do worse this cycle than PA as far as swing states.

UT: Evan McMullin will likely do better than any Democrat would've, but he's not going to come close to winning. The same polls showed Trump in danger of losing Utah, only to win by 20.

WA: While many polls show a close race here, I'm not fully buying it. It should be closer than usual for a race in Washington, but I'm still leaning heavily toward the primary vote share and partisan lean as predictive values, so if there are places where the polls will underestimate Democrats, I'd bet it's going to be in blue states like WA.

WI: One of the most unusual things this cycle has been the almost unanimous agreement that Johnson is favored, despite being counted out completely in 2016 when no polls showed him ahead. Yet this time, polls show him narrowly ahead and have for the last two months, signaling that this is going to be a rather comfortable margin this time in his last re-election of his political career. WI also is now a state that leans more to the right than the country and is easily impacted by national headwinds.

Governors

AZ: Pretty uneventful, actually. Despite no difference between the treatment of Lake and Mastriano by the media, the attacks and prognostication about her never diminished her appeal, and she's consistently held a small lead by the same pollsters that showed a Kelly landslide in 2020. She'll likely win by about a Trump 2016 margin if not larger.

GA: Ever since the primary, Kemp held a consistent 5-10 point lead over Abrams, despite this idea that Georgia is super inelastic and can't go much more Republican. Both her and O'Rourke losing by far more than in 2018 will showcase them among a group of the most prematurely overrated candidates in the modern era.

FL: By all accounts, it looks like this cycle Miami-Dade is finally going Republican. And it could be by more than people even think. Safe R state this cycle, should be called early.

KS: Little polling here, some that shows Kelly slightly up, but very poor political environment for a red state, which is usually what wins out. Also keep in mind polls showed basically a tie for the Kansas Senate race in 2020, which ended up being an 11 point blowout.

ME: While I narrowly have Mills favored, I think this is one state where the polls will embarrass themselves once again (and also in ME-02, which showed Biden ahead when he lost by 7, still show Golden narrowly favored). The polls look a lot like the 2020 Senate race, only a bit more Democratic. It's unreasonable to expect Mills to do better than Biden when she's running against a former Governor who's well-known in the state in a poor political environment, but that's what they seem to show. Upset watch here.

MI: Regardless of the outcome here, and I am making a bold move by predicting Dixon over Whitmer, I knew the early polling which showed Whitmer ahead by huge margins was nonsense. She was never going to win by her 2018 margin or even get close to it. The reality is, Whitmer is literally a 2016 error away from losing, and given other fundamentals this election, I'm leaning towards she will.

MN: Underdiscussed race for how close it's likely to be, but I think the Dem trends in Minneapolis suburbs will likely save Walz, in addition to him coming off like a moderate. Still, I would look here for a potential upset, even though I think NM and ME are more likely. Ellison looks like he's going down.

NM: Another sleeper race here for upset potential. While Ronchetti surprised everyone by only losing by 6 points to Ray Lujan in the 2020 Senate race when it was declared Safe D, the polls suggest he's only going to do slightly better in this Governor race. Yeah, I feel like something isn't right here and this race is very close, although I'm still going with Lujan Grisham narrowly.

NY: While many polls have shown this race much closer than anybody would've anticipated months ago, I do expect the partisan lean of NY to bear itself out. Given the way NY counts it's ballots, I expect Zeldin to lead on election night. Regardless of the result, it's likely to be the most impressive performance by a Republican in NY since George Pataki. It's worth noting that Phil Murphy was polling better than Hochul is in NY, so if the wave is massive, this could get tight.

OK: While it does look like Stitt will underperform, Oklahoma polls are notoriously bad, and no this race will not be close. Same polls that had Stitt down had Trump only winning the state by 12. LOL

OR: This one has been tough to figure out, especially with the independent taking up so much vote earlier on. While earlier today I predicted Drazan narrowly prevailing, I'm going to backtrack on that for a final time and predict Kotek. I previously thought that as the independent vote would diminish, more vote would come home to the Dems. But then I saw polling showing the independent vote diminishing and Drazan still leading, causing me to slightly predict Drazan. But now as I'm thinking more about it again, I'm more comfortable relying on the political lean of Oregon, which is tough for Republicans to overcome (especially recently). This could easily be one of those races I'm wrong about and regret going back and forth.

PA: While this race is much likelier than not to stay Dem this cycle, I think the margin will be much closer than the polls suggest and will underestimate Mastriano (who has a Trumpier coalition) more than Oz. I think after the election, we'll sit here wondering why we ever believed Shapiro was going to win by double digits in a perennial swing state in a poor national environment for Democrats. Seriously folks, when fundamentals and polling collide, skew towards fundamentals.

TX: It'll be interesting to see the Rio Grande this cycle. Much like 2020 and unlike 2018, I do expect the polls to overestimate O'Rourke this time, given Texas' political lean.

WI: While many suspected Evers would not be favored this time, many polls still show him in contention to win, while they show Barnes behind. In general, it has been my feeling that polls overestimate the amount of "ticket-splitting" in the electorate, and this is no exception. While Michels will do worse than Johnson, I don't think it'll be by more than 3 points. Given how WI voted relative to the polls in 2020, Evers will have a good performance if he loses by 2. There's just no fundamental reason to expect him to win here, other than believing some cherry-picked polls that only have him up 1. His rural WI support will likely collapse.

House

Again, I believe the generic ballot is underestimating Republicans, which no polls got right in 2020 and very few polls were able to accurately capture 2014, the last Republican wave which was forecasted poorly. The prognosticators may not have as bad of a night that they had in 2020, considering how delusional they were about that election, but I think they're significantly underestimating the amount of seats that will flip again, in some cases just based off one crappy poll or some fundraising differentials. In many cases, the fundamentals and partisanship of the district is screaming in their face that it's going to flip red, but these prognosticators think Republicans have a bad candidate so Democrats somehow still maintain. It's astonishing. The amount of seats flipping was always going to be lower than 2010/1994 due to the 213 already won in 2020, but the amount of total seats they obtain will probably be similar to 2010, possibly even 2014 given the similarities (just with less favorable districting)

One special note about AK-AL: I view Peltola vs Begich as Lean R but Peltola vs Palin as Lean D. I took the average. I increasingly think Begich will prevail over Palin for 2nd place, but in the event that doesn't happen, this is a race I could easily be wrong about, as I was for that special election.

To speak about demographics for a moment (and this applies to House, Senate, and Governor races) I think we're going to see a continuation of the type of swing and trend we saw in the 2020 election and in the Virginia governor race. Most places will swing Republican this election, but Democrats have built up a strong reliable base of college-educated whites, some of whom used to vote Republican and aren't going back. On the other hand, Democratic shedding with Latino voters will continue, black turnout and Dem percentage looks subpar, and Democrats will have what is their worse showing yet in rural working-class America. That will affect certain states and districts more than others, and I think that will explain a lot of why certain states/districts voted the way they did.

I think in terms of turnout, it'll be perhaps the highest turnout midterm yet, eclipsing 2018. The fact that the early vote is not eclipsing 2018 shows a lot of people will vote on election day this year in a return from 2020 (but election day vote being heavily Republican remains). Like 2018, it'll be a highly polarized election where R's do well but in vast majority of cases can't win beyond a certain partisan lean.

Overall, my prediction is what it has been for the past year or so, regardless of some individual race outcomes. The pundits, polls, and prognosticators are going to have yet another miserable night, missing Republican gains in multiple races and calling many "Likely D" that end up going Republican or close. They've spent the vast majority of the year claiming Democrats were greatly favored to win the Senate (many still do!) and that House loses would be kept below 20 for Democrats. Remember that these are the same people that claimed Democrats would gain over 10 more seats than 2018 in 2020 even though the generic ballot was tighter (and even that was 4 points too Dem!). They've claimed, based on one supreme court decision, the same crappy polls that forecasted a Biden landslide, and wishful thinking about the Republican base and their candidates, and very poor analysis of special elections and early voting, that a Republican wave this cycle was off the table. Of course, this analysis never applied in 2018 or any Republican incumbent midterm. In the face of this delusion, some people never wavered, and in fact predicted that this groupthink would apply again just like it did in 2020. I never thought the polls would favor Republicans this cycle, or that the prognosticators would get any better after their failures in 2020. My goal here is to try and counteract this, so if anything I'm okay with overestimating Republicans, because there's so much Democratic overestimation. But there is still the chance, that this could be a large enough wave that I end up underestimating many Republicans.

How many elections is it going to take, to understand we're being manipulated? Sure polls may have underestimated Republicans for the last 4 election cycles in a row, but we just don’t know if they’re going to do the same this time. Sure, Vance is just barely ahead in Ohio, Mike Lee is struggling against Evan McMullin in Utah, Kevin Stitt may lose in Oklahoma, Whitmer is going to outperform her 2018 performance, Mastriano is going to lose by 15 points, Republicans are doing worse in certain House districts than they did in 2020, but we just don’t know whether the polling is underestimating Republicans. Use common sense folks. Is JD Vance going to massively underperform Trump in a midterm of a Democratic president? Are Republicans going to do worse in MI-07 or ME-02 than 2020 despite polling 10 points better on the generic ballot (D+7 to R+3)? Think about that and you’ll realize how bad these polls are going to look after the election.

Post-election, you’re going to be hearing a lot of “Republicans performed better than expected” from the media and their lackeys in the election mafia. But please note, that this was entirely predictable for people who base their analysis on real life fundamentals and not polling, subjective analysis of what makes a “good candidate”, and media “experts”. The “expectations” are set by people who are partisan Democrats pretending to be neutral analysts. And they have reasons to do this, since most of their wishful thinking is backed up by polls conducted by liberal media and university outlets. As a result, they get to set the agenda as to when and where the Democrats compete and where their fundraising goes. This is not an accident; this is an agenda at this point. So long as Democrats benefit from crappy polling that overestimates them, and the left-wing pundits eat it up and downplay how inaccurate they are, while smearing and demonizing more accurate polling as "right-wing", there's no incentive for them to change.

I'll make a few posts after the election, mostly correcting myself and making a few analytical points, but I will not be posting frequently post-2022. And contrary to what people may think of me, I'm not going to be spending time dunking on people who got it smugly wrong. I just want people to wake up. It's a waste of time to spend 2 years posting on a forum with people who will deny any chance of Republicans winning in 2024. There's little value to this forum anymore, it's entirely predictable and stale, with little variation in opinion (even from "Republicans"). It's sad, really. I wish it wasn't this way, but it is.

LOL

I suppose you will vanish again only to appear again next year when you predict a Cameron +20 result in the Kentucky governor's race and attack everyone who doesn't believe such as a moron and then leave after Beshear wins or loses by a close margin.

Then you'll come back in 2024 with the same shtick, this time about how a recession will cause Republicans to get a 60-seat Senate majority, and repeat.

[Spectator]

A lot of arrogance and hubris here by two people in particular. At least MT Treasurer seems like a class act that can admit he was wrong and learn. ElectionsGuy…yikes. Just so unlikable on so many levels.