#247: If 2020's Wave Is Bigly Breaking
...................
My fascination with 2020's US presidential election seems all-encompassing at times; but aren't we all just waiting for a presidential exit? For example, the campaign to tackle Climate Change could use the US out front, yet that's all but impossible with our current failure at the top.
Who's most likely to get the Blue agenda passed? Let's take a look at a recent survey of our current president's state-by-state approval ratings, use these as a rough estimate of 2020 senate races, then add in coattails for either Elizabeth Warren (left-wing reformer) or Amy Klobuchar (farm state progressive). We'll then examine three scenarios: Optimistic (-2%--slowing economy, impeachment), Neutral (+3%) , and Pessimistic (+6%--good economic numbers, impeachment backlash), and see who does the best in each. Farm states will give Klobuchar minus 3%. Urban states will give Warren minus 3%. Meanwhile, farm states will cost Warren +3% and urban states will cost Klobuchar +3%. North Carolina, Georgia, Virginia and Colorado are neither rural, nor urban.
An '*' indicates an incumbent Republican senator. A '(Blue)' indicates a Democratic incumbent. 28 states had Trump underwater (Vermonters, for example, pegged his approval rating at 24% in October and 25% in November), while 21 states have him above. Ohio was about even.
Vermont - 24 - 25
Massachusetts - 25 - 26 (Blue)
Hawaii - 26 - 24
Maryland - 28 - 28
California - 28 - 30
Rhode Island - 31 - 32 (Blue)
Washington - 33 - 31
Oregon - 33 - 37 (Blue)
New York - 34 - 34
Illinois 34 - 35 (Blue)
Connecticut - 35 - 37
New Hampshire - 36 - 39 (Blue)
New Jersey - 36 - 37 (Blue)
Delaware - 37 - 39 (Blue)
Nevada - 38 - 40
New Mexico - 39 - 40 (Blue)
Minnesota - 40 - 41 (Blue)
Colorado - 40 - 41 (*)
Maine - 41 - 42 (*)
Virginia - 41 - 41 (Blue)
Pennsylvania - 42 - 44
Michigan - 44 - 45 (Blue)
Iowa - 44 - 45 (*)
Arizona 45 - 46 (*)
North Carolina - 45 - 46 (*)
Wisconsin - 45 - 49
Georgia - 46 - 45 (**)
Florida - 47 - 48
Ohio - 48 - 51 ................. even
Utah - 49 - 49
Kansas - 49 - 50 (*)
Texas - 49 - 49 (*)
S. Carolina - 50 - 51 (*)
Indiana - 51 - 52
Alaska - 52 - 52 (*)
Missouri - 52 - 53
Montana - 52 - 51 (*)
Nebraska - 53 - 51 (*)
Mississippi - 54 - 56 (*)
Louisiana - 54 -53 (*)
Tennessee - 55 - 56 (*)
Alabama - 57 - 59 (Blue)
Idaho - 59 - 62 (*)
S Dakota - 60 - 63 (*)
Arkansas - 62 - 63 (*)
Kentucky - 62 -59 (*)
Wyoming - 62 -67 (*)
Oklahoma - 63 - 63 (*)
North Dakota - 67 - 65
W Virginia - 68 - 67 (*)
Warren
Optimistic: net, plus 7 seats (TX, GA x 2, NC, AZ, IA, ME, CO, minus AL).
Neutral: Plus 2-3 (AZ, ME, CO, minus AL; NC a toss-up)
Pessimistic: No change - plus 1 (CO, minus AL; AZ a toss-up)
Klobuchar
Optimistic: plus 12 (NE, LA, MT, AK, SC, KS, GA x 2, NC, AZ, IA, ME, CO, minus AL
Neutral: plus 3-4 (GA x 2, NC, IA, ME, CO, minus AL, MI; NC a toss-up)
Pessimistic: plus 1 (ME, IA, CO minus AL, MI)
This is, of course, a very rough approximation. There would be other factors like incumbency, and candidate competence, and who's to say that ±3 is appropriate. But, it does give one a feel for what a farm state candidate might accomplish in electing Blue senators, compared to an urban state nominee with better turn-out among city folk.
A super-optimistic scenario makes the contrast stark: if a -6 modifier is used (instead of only -2 for optimistic), the result for Klobuchar is an astonishing swing: +15, giving Blue 62 senators! Meanwhile, Warren's result would be a more modest +9, and 56.
Is Trump's floor at 35% - 40% nationwide, or could it be 30-35? If 30%, a -6, scenario could be stretched to -8 or beyond, which would allow Klobuchar to rescue the Alabama seat as well, and Warren to wrangle SC.
Update 10/11: one month later and the numbers have moved slightly Red-wards (if you click the link at the top, you'll see that many states are one digit higher; though some, like Wisconsin, moved from 45 to 49; I've added these numbers, above). Would these changes alter our admittedly very rough projections? Actually, they increase Klobuchar's haul to 59 in an optimistic wave, while leaving Warren at 54. In our neutral setting, the numbers see the possibility of a new vice president having the tie-breaking vote in both cases, and the possibility of a Red Senate for Warren (with Michigan the culprit). Our super-optimistic scenario, meanwhile, nets Klobuchar MI, MS, TN, with AL and KY at 50% likelihood, for around 63-64.
Fun: If we assign the major candidates to their home state numbers, we have a fairly accurate list of how 'liberal' each candidate is. Bernie (Vermont, at 25--is the most liberal state here), then Warren (Massachusetts, at 26), Harris (California, at 30), Yang (New York, at 34), Booker (New Jersey, at 37), Biden (Delaware, at 39), Klobuchar (Minnesota, at 41), and Buttigieg (Indiana, at 52).
The reason I mention these numbers is to underline how easy it is for supporters of the left-leaning candidates to project their own assurance: "Bernie'll knock their socks off out in the farm states!" when they don't live surrounded by reddish-purple farmers. Whether you like it or not, farm states like Iowa and Wisconsin have disproportionate weight in the Electoral College (and Senate). Either you deal with this reality, or you live with the consequences of your over-confidence.
No comments:
Post a Comment