2014 races
With some pretty close and contentious elections coming up soon, I figured I'd post my analysis predictions on what will happen. So you can all laugh when I end up wrong about everything, or I can go "neener neener." :P
First up is the Senate, the thing everyone's talking about. The generally accepted view is that the Republicans will retake it, if perhaps by a slim margin. I think that's pretty likely. The argument for Democrats holding it is "it might be 50/50, because we might win every single contentious race there." What does that sound like? Um, the Romney's-going-to-win crowd in 2012. It's just not the way winning sides argue. I also doubt Republicans will win each and every one, so it's not going to be a landslide by any measure, but I'd be shocked if it's not a Republican victory.
There's more debate over how the gubernatorial races will fare. Particularly Wisconsin, Florida, and Kansas, where three Republican Governors are facing heavy opposition and Democrats may actually see serious gains. RealClearPolitics is showing a bare lead for Scott Walker and the Republicans in Wisconsin, and bare leads for Democratic challengers in Florida and Kansas. I've listed the three in that order because that's my order of confidence in their outcomes.
In Wisconsin, all but one poll (with his opponent having a 1% lead) shows Walker somewhat ahead. Once even lists him as 7% ahead, though that an outlier. The overall average is 2.0 in his favor. His opponent has strong backing from the labor movement, which is an easy voter pool to mobilize. But, Walker has much more corporate funding, which means more ads in the run-up to the election. In the 2013 elections, literally every single candidate with more funding won, and that generally holds elsewhere. Plus, he's not widely hated; Democrats in his state despise his policies, but moderates don't seem to care and might easily choose to side with the Governor they know over someone they're just learning about. Verdict: a narrow Walker win.
Florida is a weird race between the current Republican Governor, Rick Scott, and former-Republican-now-Democratic Governor Charlie Crist. Both have decent but not heavy pools to mobilize, in the form of churches/tea-party groups for Scott and immigrants/labor for Crist. Their mutually iffy capabilities here, I think, reflect the fact that both have no real populist appeal. Scott is basically a corporate overlord who only seems to care much about fiscal issues. Meanwhile, Crist is very much an establishment politician with no clear ideology who could easily fit in either party; his charisma is often praised, but it's less presenting a vision or inspiring anyone, more personal charm. What that gives both, though, is an abundance of funding. Scott can take in huge amounts of corporate donations, is a Koch darling, and has plenty of his own money to spend too. But, so does Crist, and Crist has built up networks of support from his own time as Governor. Plus he can rely on some traditionally Republican donors; he was Jeb Bush's heir, I wouldn't be surprised if some of the GOP establishment is actually divided here. With both candidates having such tremendous advantages, the election boils down to undecided voters. They'll look for someone with experience (which both have), who they can relate to (which neither have), and with moderate appeal. Only Crist has that. Verdict: Crist becomes a bipartisan gubernatorial Grover Cleveland. xD
Kansas is the one I'm really shaky about. The RCP average for the Democratic challenger here is actually higher than for Walker in Wisconsin, 2.8 as opposed to 2.0. That said, there are more polls to the contrary than in Wisconsin, with one giving Brownback a 3-point lead and several giving him 1 or 2. Brownback is widely disliked, and Kansas is in pretty dire straits right now. He's often blamed for it. But, Kansas is the Koch Brothers' backyard, and though Brownback's main focus has long been on issues that they couldn't care less about (e.g. abortion), he receives enormous amounts of their money as a consequence. He represents them first and foremost. He's vastly better-funded than his opponent, means he'll be running more last-minute ads. Plus, as a consequence of his social-crusader/farmer's-boy image, he has strong support among the churches. They've long been the main mobilization tool for the GOP, and can get out the vote for him. His opponent has not-Brownback as a selling point, and polling-wise that's working decently, but that's really his only advantage and possibly not enough to counteract a well-oiled political machine. Verdict: I would bet absolutely nothing on this, but I lean towards a very narrow (Bush/Gore-level) Brownback victory.
