Skip links

2014 Governor

Sabato's Crystal Ball

Skewed

U.Va. Center for Politics Director Larry J. Sabato is contributing a regular column to Politico Magazine. This week, he examines polling averages, finding that while they are a very useful source of information, they occasionally misfire. — The Editors “Do you ever get the feeling that the only reason we have elections is to find out if the polls were right?” — Comedy writer Robert Orben, who once penned speeches for President Ford America has a love-hate relationship with polls. If you’ve clicked on this column, you likely cull through the latest survey numbers every chance you get. Activists thrill to the polling that shows their party’s candidates ahead, and they tout these favorable numbers as though they were handed down to Moses on the Mount. But if a survey has the opponent leading, many partisans not only feel a punch to the gut, they dig into its “internals” (racial demographics, party ID of respondents, etc.) to find fault. “Too many Republicans are in the sample!” “No way will Democratic minorities be so large a proportion of voters on election day!” There are always defects that supposedly twist the real state of the race, as perceived by activists. Mostly, these

Larry J. Sabato

“Bombs Away” Tackles LBJ, Goldwater and 1964 Election

Marking the 50th anniversary of the groundbreaking 1964 presidential campaign, the University of Virginia Center for Politics and Community Idea Stations have released the first trailer for their latest documentary, Bombs Away: LBJ, Goldwater and the 1964 Campaign that Changed It All. Scheduled for nationwide and international release later this fall, the one-hour documentary looks back at a presidential election that not only redefined both political parties but also ushered in a new age of highly negative television advertising. The documentary will be released nationwide beginning Nov. 1, 2014, and will air on PBS stations across the country. It will also be offered to other affiliated networks around the world. Directed by Paul Tait Roberts, Bombs Away examines the 1964 presidential contest between President Lyndon Johnson and Sen. Barry Goldwater. Polarized by very different personalities and ideologies, Johnson and Goldwater attacked each other with gusto — and in the process opened the door to a modern era of campaigning that features highly negative TV advertising campaigns. Bombs Away is the latest documentary produced by the U.Va. Center for Politics and Community Idea Stations, which regularly partner to produce documentary films for public television on American politics and history. The last

UVA Center for Politics

Notes on the State of Politics

Gubernatorial changes: Déjà vu for Coakley? We’ve got four gubernatorial ratings changes to make this week. The big one is in Massachusetts, where state Attorney General Martha Coakley (D) can no longer be called a favorite over Charlie Baker (R), also his party’s 2010 nominee. The most recent polls have generally shown a dead heat, with RealClearPolitics’ polling average showing an overall tie. Polling data, Coakley’s struggles in her infamous 2010 special Senate election defeat to Scott Brown (R), and Massachusetts’ willingness to elect Republican governors despite its deeply blue hue compel us to move this race from Leans Democratic to Toss-up. We assume national and state Democrats will assemble a Coakley rescue team (much as Republicans have done for Sen. Pat Roberts in Kansas). There is a key similarity here despite the differing offices: In this polarized era, the pool of Democratic voters in Massachusetts, like the pool of Republican voters in Kansas, is so large that there is time to pull Coakley and Roberts across the finish line. Whether it will happen in either case is anybody’s guess a month out. Also moving to Toss-up, from Leans Republican, is the gubernatorial election in Alaska. Gov. Sean Parnell (R)

Kyle Kondik and Geoffrey Skelley

Senate Ratings Changes: North Carolina, New Hampshire, and Minnesota

Another week is down the drain in the race for the Senate, and while our overall outlook is unchanged — a five to eight seat gain for the GOP — some of our ratings are in need of adjustments. One of these comes as a surprise, as Sen. Kay Hagan (D-NC) is proving to be quite resilient. Several Democrats privately expressed to us earlier this year their pessimism about Hagan’s chances. They didn’t think she had the wherewithal and entrenched image of someone like Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA), who is a much more respected campaigner. But now those same Democrats, to their surprise, believe Hagan can now win. And we’ve seen a lot of polling, both public and private, indicating that she is ahead, though she’s closer to 45% than 50%, which is still tenuous territory for a Democratic incumbent in a Republican year. The problem for Republicans in the Tar Heel State is that Thom Tillis, their candidate and the speaker of the state House of Representatives, has particularly poor numbers for a challenger: His unfavorables are usually higher than his favorables, and not just by a few points. It’s not hard to imagine that a more generic Republican

Kyle Kondik

Oops! They Weren’t Supposed to Win

U.Va. Center for Politics Director Larry J. Sabato is contributing a regular column to Politico Magazine. This week he took a look at races that featured upsets and surprising outcomes in Senate and gubernatorial contests since 2002. In the piece, he asked for readers to let us know if we missed any races worth mentioning, and they didn’t disappoint. Here are the contests we heard the most about: 2008 Alaska Senate: The race we received the most emails and tweets about was the 2008 Senate contest in Alaska, and for good reason: Mark Begich (D) took down 40-year incumbent Sen. Ted Stevens (R) in a red state during a presidential election. Stevens was weighed down by scandal as he was indicted and initially convicted for failing to properly report gifts (the conviction was later thrown out). Begich, whose father, Rep. Nick Begich (D), disappeared in a plane while campaigning for reelection in 1972, was ahead in the polls — polling averages had him up four points over the incumbent. But in the end, the younger Begich only won by a little over a point, in part because of then-Gov. Sarah Palin’s (R) place on the Republican presidential ticket. In fact,

UVA Center for Politics

What Is a Wave in the Senate?

For several months, we’ve held steady on our range of expected gains for Republicans in the Senate: a net of four to eight seats. With Labor Day in the rearview mirror and with less than 55 days to go until the midterms, we’re giving Republicans a slight bump: Our new range is a Republican net of five to eight Senate seats. This means that the best-case scenario we can now envision for Democrats is a 50-50 tie in the Senate, with Vice President Joe Biden’s tiebreaking vote narrowly keeping Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) as majority leader. The likeliest outcome remains a Republican gain of six or seven seats, which we noted before Labor Day and stand by now. That would be good for a narrow 51-49 or 52-48 Republican Senate majority. What’s changed? Not a whole lot: It’s just that the weight of an unpopular president in the White House and a GOP-leaning Senate map is subtly moving things a tick or two in the Republican direction. We do have one major rating change this week: Arkansas is going from Toss-up to Leans Republican. We had Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR) as an underdog earlier this cycle, and we’re putting him

Larry J. Sabato, Kyle Kondik, and Geoffrey Skelley

Notes on the State of Politics

The GOP’s Jayhawk blues Washington Republicans were reaching for the Pepto-Bismol Wednesday night when the already intriguing Kansas Senate race took a dramatic turn: Chad Taylor, the Democratic candidate, is leaving the race. This gives independent businessman Greg Orman a clean shot at incumbent Sen. Pat Roberts (R). It’s been clear for much of the summer that national Republicans were going to have to spend substantial sums to save embattled, divisive Gov. Sam Brownback (R) in his reelection contest. Now they will have to mount a parallel rescue operation to save Roberts, too. Just last week we flagged this race, noting that Roberts — bearing ugly scars from his primary — was in a stunningly weak position, leading his two other major opponents but drawing less than 40% of the vote in some polls. We switched the race from Safe Republican to Likely Republican because Orman and Taylor were splitting the anti-incumbent vote. Roberts still appeared poised to pull off a plurality victory, unimpressive for a senior incumbent but a win nonetheless. Now his situation has worsened, and we’re downgrading him again: The Senate race in Ruby-Red Kansas, which hasn’t elected a Democratic senator since Franklin Roosevelt’s first presidential victory,

UVA Center for Politics

Off to the Races

Earlier this week we offered a pre-Labor Day assessment of the midterm state of play in the Senate, House, and gubernatorial races coming up in November. The conclusion of that piece, written in Politico Magazine, is as follows: The overall picture is this: A Republican Senate gain of four-to-eight seats, with a GOP Senate pickup of six-to-seven seats the likeliest outcome; a GOP gain of somewhere around a half-dozen seats in the House; and little net party change in the gubernatorial lineup even as a few incumbents lose. So what could shift these projections in a significant way, beyond candidate implosions that move individual races on and off the board? For Democrats, the road to a better result than what we’ve sketched out is Republicans’ ideological disunity and their refusal to march together tactically and strategically. (The destructive sideshow over potentially impeaching President Obama is a prime example.) Last October, Democrats saw, briefly, how the government shutdown boosted their numbers. When Congress returns next month, Democrats hope Republicans will act foolishly just before the election, perhaps during consideration of a short-term continuing resolution to fund the government that Speaker Boehner will have to get through the House. For Republicans, a further curdling of

Larry J. Sabato, Kyle Kondik, and Geoffrey Skelley

Abercrombie Makes History the Wrong Way

Given the reports coming out of the Aloha State in the lead up to the contest, Gov. Neil Abercrombie’s (D-HI) renomination loss this past Saturday may not have been that surprising. But Abercrombie’s defeat at the hands of little-known state Sen. David Ige (D) was shocking in terms of the margin. In fact, with 99% of precincts reporting (a couple precincts weren’t able to vote due to storms and will vote this Friday), Abercrombie’s defeat by 36.1 points is the largest primary loss by any sitting governor in U.S. history. The old record was held by Preston Smith (D-TX), who lost renomination in 1972 by 35.2 points, receiving only 8.7% of the vote and failing to make it to the Texas Democratic runoff, which Dolph Briscoe went on to win. In states without runoffs, the next-biggest loss is Frank Murkowski’s defeat by Sarah Palin in Alaska’s 2006 GOP primary. Below is a table of incumbent governors who lost by at least 10 points when seeking renomination. And please, feel free to e-mail us at [email protected] to let us know if we missed a result. Pre-1950s primary results vary in availability! Table 1: Incumbent governors who lost primaries by at least

Geoffrey Skelley

What’s the Matter with Kansas — and Hawaii?

Royal Blue Hawaii and Ruby Red Kansas are two of the most predictable states in presidential and Senate elections. Yet both states have incumbent governors from the dominant parties who are fighting for their political lives. What gives? The 2014 gubernatorial map features a number of fascinating races, some of which — like Hawaii and Kansas — defy the partisan conventions of this highly polarized era. To understand the difference between the gubernatorial contests and the Senate races, just remember the basic distinction between the two offices: governors act and achieve while senators talk and vote. As a consequence, some slice of the electorate is inclined to judge Senate and governor incumbents in distinct ways. Voters naturally link their senator with his or her national party and its federal ideology, which is increasingly uniform (liberal or conservative) for Democrats and Republicans. There is a kind of triangulation or correlation that takes place in many voters’ minds — the party ID of the senator, the party ID of the resident of the White House, and a voter’s own views of the senator’s party and the president’s party. Challengers help voters make these connections by using the best tangible record of a

Larry J. Sabato, Kyle Kondik, and Geoffrey Skelley

Notes on the State of Politics

Reaction to third-party piece In an article on the topic last week, we asked readers to chime in with other races where they thought third-party and independent candidates might have an impact on some statewide races. We got a lot of e-mails and tweets about the gubernatorial and Senate contests in Georgia, but multiple readers also mentioned the Connecticut gubernatorial race. Some thoughts on those three races are below. GA-Gov: With ethics troubles making his life more difficult, Gov. Nathan Deal (R) may not be able to win in November; that is, he might have to win in a December runoff. Deal’s problems, which also include lingering frustration with the state’s response to ice storms this past winter, might push some voters toward Libertarian Andrew Hunt, a former tech company CEO. In a June SurveyUSA poll, Hunt garnered 7%. Hunt could send the race into overtime, so to speak, if he helps keep either Deal or his opponent, state Sen. Jason Carter (D), from winning a majority. Should that happen, a Dec. 2 runoff looms. Nonetheless, unless Deal’s problems get even worse (which they could), he would likely be positioned to win that runoff, which would almost certainly feature lower

UVA Center for Politics

Americans Are Politically Divided and Our Feelings toward The Parties Show It

How politically divided are ordinary Americans? The recent release of a report on polarization in public opinion by the Pew Research Center has reignited a debate among journalists and academics about the depth of the divisions between supporters of the two major parties. One of the key findings of the report is that supporters of the two parties hold increasingly negative feelings toward the opposing party and its leaders. While some scholars like Morris Fiorina of Stanford University have disputed the significance of these findings, an examination of evidence from the American National Election Studies provides strong support for the conclusions of the Pew study. The ANES data make it possible to examine trends in feelings toward the Democratic and Republican parties over a fairly long period of time. Since 1978, the ANES has been asking national samples of American adults in every presidential election year and most midterm election years to rate both parties on a feeling thermometer scale. The scale ranges from zero degrees to 100 degrees with zero the most negative rating, 100 the most positive rating, and 50 a neutral rating. Ratings above 50 degrees are considered positive, while ratings below 50 degrees are considered negative.

Alan I. Abramowitz

An Above-Average Year for Incumbents?

With the primary season more than half over, it’s fair to say that incumbents have done just fine this cycle so far: better than fine, in fact. So far this cycle, 273 of 275 House incumbents who wanted another term have been renominated, and 18 of 18 Senate incumbents. That includes results from the 31 states that have held their initial primaries; while a few of those states — Alabama, Georgia, and North Carolina — have runoffs coming up later this month, those overtime elections for House or Senate seats are all in open seats. This is a better performance than the postwar averages in both chambers. Since the end of World War II, just 1.6% of House incumbents who have sought another term were not renominated by their party, and just 4.6% of Senate incumbents. The history of incumbent primary losses in each election since 1946 is laid out in Table 1 below. Table 1: Senate and House incumbent primary losses, 1946-2012 Note: Click here for a PDF of these data. Source: Vital Statistics on Congress Anti-incumbent insurgents are going to have to hustle to even match the paltry postwar averages. So what are their best targets? Let’s look

Kyle Kondik

2014 Races Where Third-Party and Independent Candidates Could Impact Outcomes

While it’s very hard for third-party and independent candidates to win statewide elections outright, they can have some impact on the outcome. This may be true again in some 2014 contests for U.S. Senate and governor. Some outsider candidates will get a fair amount of press, such as ex-Sen. Larry Pressler’s independent Senate bid in South Dakota or Libertarian Robert Sarvis’ second statewide run, this time in Virginia’s Senate contest (Sarvis won a sizable amount of the vote in the 2013 Old Dominion gubernatorial race). But only a few minor-party candidates will truly be in a position to actually affect the final results. Below are some races where this may be the case: AK-Sen: While most of Last Frontier ballot won’t be determined until the state’s Aug. 19 primary, Alaskan electoral history suggests that third-party nominees will get more than a few votes in November. In every Senate contest since 1992, non-major party candidates have won at least 5% of the vote, most notably Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s (R) write-in reelection victory in 2010 (where she won 39.5%). And in the state’s past three Senate elections, the victor has only won a plurality, not a majority. With vulnerable Sen. Mark Begich

Geoffrey Skelley

Republicans: “Thank God for Mississippi!”

Editors’ Note: A version of the story below appeared in Politico Magazine on Wednesday morning as Thank God for Mississippi. The Crystal Ball is taking a break for July 4, so our next edition will be published in two weeks, on Thursday, July 10. — The Editors “Mississippi adds another variant to the politics of the South. Northerners, provincials that they are, regard the South as one large Mississippi. Southerners, with their eye for distinction, place Mississippi in a class by itself…every other southern state finds some reason to fall back on the soul-satisfying exclamation, ‘Thank God for Mississippi!’” – V. O. Key Jr., Southern Politics in State and Nation, 1949 Establishment Republicans across the country are saying “Thank God for Mississippi,” but not in the derisive way that political scientist V.O. Key describes it above. The state’s Republican voters, and probably quite a few Democrats, allowed the GOP establishment to fend off a Tea Party challenge to a sitting senator. In the process, they kept Democrats from potentially expanding the Senate’s general election playing field in November and from giving anti-establishment forces in the Republican Senate caucus another ally. Mississippi, a state often ignored by the national political world,

Larry J. Sabato, Kyle Kondik, and Geoffrey Skelley