[Doug64]

So we're getting into the campaign season again, with off-year elections that are more important than usual when it comes to Congress and especially the Senate. Checking Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball, as of January 10th he has the Senate at 49 Republicans, 46 Democrats, and 5 Toss-Ups (Arizona (R), Florida (D), Indiana (D), Missouri (D), & Nevada (R)), so a slim chance Democrats take control (they'd need to win every single toss-up). Rolling the bones on the current numbers, he gives the Senate to the Republicans 51-49.

For the House, he has Republicans 223, Democrats 192, Toss-Ups 20 (Arizona (R), California (4 R), Colorado (R), Florida (R), Michigan (R), Minnesota (1 R, 2 D), Nebraska (R), New Hampshire (D), New Jersey (R), Nevada (D), New York (2 R), Texas (R), Virginia (R), Washington (R)), so zero chance the Democrats take back the House. Rolling the bones, he has the House at 241 to 194.

For Governors, he has Republicans 27, Democrats 15, Toss-Ups 8 (Alaska (I), Colorado (D), Connecticut (D), Florida (R), Illinois (R), Maine (R), Michigan (R), & Nevada (R)). Rolling the bones on the toss-ups, he has Republicans 33, Democrats 16, Independent 1.

[Doug64]

So, it's been about a month, and for actual outcomes Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball hasn't changed one bit -- the Senate is still 51 R/49 D, the House is still 241 R/194 D, and the Governors are still 33 R/16 D/1 I. For a more in-depth look at why the Senate race is weighted this way, here's this:

Senate 2018: Republicans Still Have Plenty of Targets

Republicans have better than 50-50 odds to hold control of the U.S. Senate even in the event of a Democratic wave in November.

The reason is the map: Including the two independents who caucus with them, the Democrats are defending 26 of the 34 seats being contested this fall, which is the most lopsided Senate map any party has faced in a midterm since 1938. Five of the Democratic seats are in states that Donald Trump won in landslides, and another five are in states he won.

Because the map is so good for Republicans, it is possible they will add to their majority even if the electoral environment otherwise breaks against them in other elections, such as those for the U.S. House of Representatives.

That said, the Democrats do have a path to a Senate majority, albeit slim.

Our current outlook is for a continuing Republican majority but little net change in what is already a closely divided Senate.

The overall picture: Don’t lose sight of how bad of a map this is for Democrats

The victory by Sen. Doug Jones (D-AL) in a special election in December did provide Democrats a potential path to a Senate majority, albeit a narrow one. The Democrats need to defend all 26 of the 34 seats they currently hold, [1] and then flip two of the eight Republican-held seats. Those would most likely be Arizona, an open seat, and Nevada, where Sen. Dean Heller (R) is seeking a second term.

We know that the presidential party usually suffers in midterms, especially if the president is unpopular. While President Trump’s approval rating has rebounded slightly in recent weeks, moving from an average in the high 30s to one that’s now in the low 40s, his overall numbers are still weak and could just as easily fall back as the year moves on. The midterm reelection rate for non-presidential party Senate incumbents is 91% in the era of popular elections (since 1913), while it’s just 75% for presidential party incumbents. Democrats are fortunate that they have incumbents running in all 26 seats, although Sen. Tina Smith (D-MN) is an appointee.

But it’s hard to overstate how Republican this year’s Senate playing field is.

First of all, both the Senate and the House have a similar Republican bias. The median House seat based on 2016 presidential performance, held by Rep. Scott Taylor (R, VA-2), voted for Trump by 3.4 points. Hillary Clinton won the national popular vote by 2.1 points, so the median House seat is about 5.5 points right of the nation. The same is true in the Senate. The median Senate seat based on 2016 is an average of North Carolina (Trump by 3.7) and Arizona (Trump by 3.5), which is Trump by about 3.6 — again, about the same as the House (5.7 points to the right of the nation). So the Democrats are just naturally at a bit of a disadvantage in the House and Senate at the moment.

But that natural disadvantage is exacerbated by the roster of seats that Democrats are trying to hold on this year’s Senate map.

Democratic incumbents are defending seats in the following five landslide Trump states: Indiana (Trump +19.0 points), Missouri (+18.5), Montana (+20.2), North Dakota (+35.7), and West Virginia (+41.7). If these states were House seats — two of them, Montana and North Dakota, actually are because both states only have single, statewide at-large seats — all would rank among the top third of Trump’s districts nationally.

Democrats currently hold only a single House seat among the third of districts that voted most heavily for Trump, moderate Rep. Collin Peterson (D, MN-7).

So the danger for Democrats is that all five of these incumbents are living on borrowed time and several of them may be doomed no matter what the national environment is. And remember that whatever Trump’s national approval is, his standing in these states is going to be significantly higher, as demonstrated recently in Gallup’s rundown of Trump’s state by state approval in 2017. Trump’s average 2017 approval in Gallup was 38%, but his two best states — West Virginia (61%) and North Dakota (57%, tied with Wyoming for Trump’s second-highest approval) — both have Democratic senators running for reelection. Trump was also above water in Montana (52%) but below in Missouri (47%) and Indiana (44%), as well as every other state where a Democratic senator is running for reelection. It seems likely Trump’s approval will be positive in North Dakota and West Virginia in November almost no matter what, but the Republicans would have an easier time in other states if they could defeat incumbent Democratic senators by appealing just to Trump approvers alone. However, to beat vulnerable Democratic incumbents in red states, the GOP may still need to win at least some voters who disapprove of the president, which strikes us as something of a heavy lift. But that’s also where Trump being in the low 40s nationally in approval as opposed to in the 30s could make a considerable difference in individual states.

In other words, there’s a world in which Democrats win control of the House but lose several net Senate seats. That would be an odd result historically, but it’s not impossible given the unique circumstances of this year’s Senate slate.

Let’s turn to the state of play in individual races.

The Senate, seat by seat

Republicans hold a 51-49 edge in the U.S. Senate, so to flip the chamber Democrats must retain all of their current seats and win two Republican-held seats. Let’s start with the Democrats’ two best targets to achieve the latter goal.

Presently, Sen. Dean Heller (R-NV) is probably a little worse than 50-50 to win reelection in a state that Clinton narrowly carried, although his race remains a Toss-up in our ratings. As it stands, Heller may have trouble in his primary against perennial candidate Danny Tarkanian (R), although Heller now seemingly enjoys the support of the White House and Republicans argue he is better-positioned in the GOP contest than before. However, Trump’s backing probably doesn’t help Heller in the general election against Rep. Jacky Rosen (D, NV-3), a first-termer who beat Tarkanian in a very close race in 2016. Rosen was a blank slate in 2016 and even though she now has a federal voting record, she may be something of a generic Democrat in November, which may not be a bad thing in a midterm environment that is something of a referendum on the president’s party. If Democrats don’t win the Nevada Senate seat, they probably are having an underwhelming performance across the board.

The open seat in Arizona is a pure Toss-up. National Republicans hope that Rep. Martha McSally (R, AZ-2) fends off fringe opponents Kelli Ward and Joe Arpaio in the GOP primary — Ward is a former state senator who challenged Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) in a 2016 primary and Arpaio was the controversial and long-tenured Maricopa County sheriff who lost reelection decisively in 2016. Arpaio’s campaign, which may be something of a stunt to pay off legal fees, could actually end up helping McSally by splitting what might charitably be called the “anti-establishment vote” with Ward (the non-charitable adjective, as used by a source, would be the “crazy vote”). On the other hand, some Democrats argue that Arpaio’s presence in the primary generates more coverage for a primary that very well could pull McSally to the right, potentially hurting her in much the same way that Heller could be hurt by his primary.

Three-term Rep. Kyrsten Sinema (D, AZ-9) will likely face the Republican nominee in the general election. She has cultivated a relatively moderate voting record, but Republicans will hope to paint her as a liberal in a state that is probably trending Democratic but still has deep Republican lineage: The state hasn’t elected a Democrat to the Senate since 1988, when Sen. Dennis DeConcini (D) won his final term before retiring in 1994.

The other six Republican seats are clearly less viable targets for Democrats. Republican incumbents in Mississippi, Nebraska, and Wyoming should be fine, and former Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney should be a lock to win an open seat in Utah (Republican Senate institution Orrin Hatch is retiring).

That leaves Tennessee and Texas, though those races remain Democratic reaches for the time being.

In the Volunteer State, early polling shows Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R, TN-7) well ahead in the GOP primary field. Her strongest opponent for the nomination is likely ex-Rep. Stephen Fincher (R), who had $3.7 million cash on hand compared to Blackburn’s $4.6 million at the end of 2017. Tennessee does not require a runoff if a candidate falls short of a majority in the primary, and Blackburn benefits from stronger name ID, making her better positioned to win her party’s nomination. The Republican nominee will almost certainly face ex-Gov. Phil Bredesen (D) in the general election. Bredesen’s entry led attorney and veteran James Mackler to abandon his bid for the Democratic nomination, and many believe the former governor is the only candidate who could make this deep-red state race competitive. Yet Tennessee has become much more Republican than it was previously. This means that Bredesen is really going to have to find the special electoral sauce to overcome the state’s lean. Granted, Bredesen won 69% in his 2006 reelection, so no one is counting him out. However, neither Blackburn nor Fincher seem likely to throw a Senate race away like some poor GOP candidates in recent past cycles. The Tennessee race remains Likely Republican.

Texas is something of a white whale for Democrats. Believers in the “demographics is destiny” Democratic thesis see it as a state that the party can put into play in the near future. Is 2018 that time? Probably not, but there are at least signs that the Senate race could be competitive. Depending on the pollster, Sen. Ted Cruz (R) has a middling-to-solid approval rating. It is true that Gallup found Trump’s approval at 39% and disapproval at 54% in Texas, findings that caused some to wonder if Cruz might be in trouble. However, one important caveat to the Gallup data (also cited above) is that the firm surveyed all adults, not just registered or likely voters. As Texas has one of the highest population shares of non-citizens in the country and white voters turn out to vote at a much higher rate than Latino voters do, the state’s electorate differs quite a bit from its overall population. Cruz’s likely general election opponent is Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D, TX-16), who actually outraised the incumbent senator $2.4 million to $1.9 million in the fourth quarter (though Cruz maintains a $7.3 million to $4.6 million cash-on-hand edge). It appears O’Rourke is capable of making the race interesting. Although Trump is almost certainly more popular with Texas voters than among all Texans, the president’s nine-point win there was the smallest margin for any Republican presidential nominee since 1996. And while the electorate may be more GOP-leaning, shifts in turnout have flipped expectations on their head in races like the Alabama special election in December 2017, so a relative voter surge among Democratic-leaning constituencies is not out of the question in November. In fact, given the partisan trends in Tennessee and Texas, it would not be unreasonable to view the Lone Star State as a better Democratic target than the Volunteer State. The Texas race is still Likely Republican but the Crystal Ball remains watchful.

The Republicans’ best pickup opportunity is the Toss-up race in Missouri, where Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) very well could be trailing against state Attorney General Josh Hawley (R), the likeliest Republican nominee. Two recent polls gave some indicators as to the dynamic. A Republican pollster, Remington Research, polled the state for the publication Missouri Scout and found Hawley up 49%-45%, while Democratic pollster Public Policy Polling found McCaskill up 45%-44%. The PPP poll’s question order — it asked several questions before getting to the Senate horse race — might have primed respondents in McCaskill’s favor, which is why we look at the two polls (and some other things we’ve heard) to suggest McCaskill might be starting from behind. But McCaskill also is a strong campaigner who has won tough races in the past even as Missouri has become more and more Republican. McCaskill was also heartened by four special state legislative elections in Missouri on Tuesday where Democrats ran significantly ahead of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 performance, capturing one of the seats. This continues a strong positive trend for Democrats in special elections across the country this cycle, although those races are not necessarily predictive for the future, particular because they typically feature turnouts much lower than even midterm turnouts.

Hawley has had some troubles lately, such as some controversial comments about how the 1960s sexual revolution led to the nation’s human trafficking problem. McCaskill is hoping Hawley’s comments are a redux of Todd Akin’s infamous comments on rape from 2012, but we don’t really see this as a game-changing comment in and of itself. Additionally, Rep. Ann Wagner (R, MO-2) is rumored to be taking another look at the race after she surprisingly decided not to run several months ago. One never knows what might happen but Wagner certainly isn’t fundraising like someone seeking a Senate seat: She raised just a little over $100,000 last quarter, although the former Republican National Committee co-chair is sitting on an impressive $3.2 million war chest. Hawley’s fundraising total was a little bit under $1 million, which was OK but not great for one of the GOP’s elite Senate recruits, and some Missouri Republicans are getting a little antsy about Hawley’s campaign. Hawley, who was just elected as attorney general in 2016, is now running a major office while also running against a cagey incumbent for Senate: That’s a lot to juggle.

Another Toss-up race is Indiana, where Sen. Joe Donnelly (D-IN) is running for a second term after a 2012 victory against a flawed GOP opponent. Republicans concede that Donnelly is popular but they argue his numbers are soft and that the GOP nominee can eventually overwhelm the incumbent. Democrats point to a divisive primary that could go to any of three candidates: Reps. Luke Messer (R, IN-6), Todd Rokita (R, IN-4), or Mike Braun (R), a wealthy businessman and former state legislator. There’s every reason to expect this to be a top GOP pickup opportunity, but until the primary gets sorted out it’s hard to say much more about it.

Our final Democratic-held Toss-up is Florida, which is based on the strong possibility that term-limited Gov. Rick Scott (R) will challenge Sen. Bill Nelson (D). Scott, who possesses immense personal wealth, is typically a late-starter when it comes to campaigns. That’s fine for him, but potentially not for Republicans if he decides against a bid. We would upgrade Nelson’s standing if Scott passes, and the GOP likely would need to find another self-funder to enter the race. Assuming Scott runs, he has better personal favorability and approval than when he won very close races in 2010 and 2014. Then again, 2018 is not going to be as Republican a cycle nationally as those elections were.

We list five other states as Leans Democratic in deference to Democratic incumbents: Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. These combined with Florida, Indiana, and Missouri round out what we see as the true Republican targets.

Sens. Jon Tester (D-MT) and Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND) are both seemingly good fits for their Republican-leaning states, and neither faces a top-tier GOP recruit. Republicans believe Heitkamp is more vulnerable because North Dakota is just fundamentally more Republican. For instance, Montana has a Democratic governor and two-fifths of its state legislators are Democrats; North Dakota hasn’t elected a Democratic governor since 1988 and only about a sixth of its state legislators are Democrats. The Democratic fear is that North Dakota is just so Republican that even a popular Heitkamp can’t win there, although they are confident that she has the right profile to win. Fortunately for the incumbent, her potential challengers are unproven: state Sen. Tom Campbell (R) or former state GOP Chairman Gary Emineth (R).

Unlike some of his red-state colleagues, Tester has not really moderated his voting record in the Trump era. He is likely banking on the weakness of his opponents, and it’s unclear as of yet who will face him: state Auditor Matt Rosendale (R), Air Force veteran Troy Downing (R), and former Judge Russell Fagg (R) are the likeliest candidates.

Ohio is not as red as the five aforementioned Trump states with Democratic incumbents, but Trump’s eight-point win in 2016 suggested that Ohio might be headed in that direction. Certainly if populist Sen. Sherrod Brown (D) loses reelection, the Democrats in Ohio are through, at least for the time being. Brown was set to face a rematch with state Treasurer Josh Mandel (R), but Mandel dropped out last month to take care of his wife, who is dealing with a health issue. Replacing Mandel as the likeliest GOP nominee is Rep. Jim Renacci (R, OH-16), who switched from the gubernatorial primary after Mandel’s exit and also after it had become apparent that state Attorney General Mike DeWine (R) was locking up the gubernatorial nomination. Trump has essentially endorsed Renacci, although the congressman first has to get past businessman Mike Gibbons (R), who was pushing Mandel in the primary a little bit before the state treasurer got out. One example: The Franklin County (Columbus) Republican Party actually endorsed Gibbons over Mandel, although the Franklin County party is effectively an arm of outgoing Gov. John Kasich (R), who does not get along with Mandel, and some former Kasich staffers are working for Gibbons. A Republican businessman winning a statewide primary would be far from surprising, but Renacci is the favorite. One other wrinkle: Gibbons is squishy (for a Republican) on the abortion question, which could cause him trouble in the primary if Renacci feels the need to attack.

In the general election, Brown will have to restore some Democratic strength in the predominately Appalachian part of the state east and south of Greater Cleveland. Renacci represents some of that territory in the House, and if a pro-Trump voting record ends up being an asset in the fall, Renacci has it. That said, we’re not sure Trump is going to be an asset here (or in many other states, even ones that voted for him). All in all, the Mandel for Renacci swap has not really changed our outlook in Ohio: Brown is a modest favorite but he should face a very competitive challenge.

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) may be a bit rattled these days. He is running again in a state that Trump won by more than 40 points and his fellow Democrats are disappearing. Former Rep. Nick Rahall (D, WV-3) lost a southern West Virginia House seat in 2014 and was replaced by Rep. Evan Jenkins (R, WV-3), who is seeking the nomination to challenge Manchin against state Attorney General Patrick Morrisey (R). The turf Jenkins represents backed Trump by 50 points last year, and Manchin likely needs to win that district decisively to win reelection (WV-3 was Manchin’s strongest district in his 2012 reelection win). Manchin helped Gov. Jim Justice win the governorship in 2016, but Justice switched parties from Democrat to Republican last year. Manchin apparently had second thoughts about even running for reelection, which likely would have forfeited the seat to Republicans, and he’s been circulating a proposal in which sitting senators would agree not to campaign against one another. The White House also seems set to run hard against Manchin after it seemed possible the administration would give him a pass. The GOP nomination is very much worth having even though it’s possible that Manchin retains enough of a unique appeal to survive and even thrive.

One perplexing wild card in the Mountain State is the candidacy of a third Republican, disgraced former Massey Energy CEO Don Blankenship (R), who was convicted of conspiring to circumvent federal mine safety rules following the Upper Big Branch Mine disaster that left 29 dead in 2010.

Finally, in Wisconsin, Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D) should also face a strong challenge but her opponent is unclear, and there is a late primary (August 14). Veteran Kevin Nicholson (R) has the support of outside conservative groups like the Club for Growth as well as GOP megadonor Richard Uihlein, but the state’s powerful GOP party apparatus seems to prefer state Sen. Leah Vukmir (R), and party bigwigs like former Trump Chief of Staff Reince Priebus (R) back her. Businessman Eric Hovde (R), the 2012 GOP primary runner-up, may also get in. Baldwin, a liberal from Madison, presents a textbook target for Gov. Scott Walker (R) and state Republicans, who have turned Wisconsin politics into a battle of Madison and Milwaukee versus everywhere else (a calculus that can break in favor of everywhere else, if only barely in the case of Trump in 2016). But with Trump in the White House, Wisconsin could easily snap back to the left in reaction, which would help Baldwin and potentially imperil Walker, who will also be on the ballot as he seeks a third term as governor.

The remaining Democratic seats, including two in states Trump narrowly carried (Michigan and Pennsylvania), seem like much harder lifts for Republicans. If Republicans somehow win any of the seats that follow, they are likely having a historically strong cycle.

Minnesota has two Senate races to keep an eye on in 2018. The resignation of Sen. Al Franken (D) led to the appointment of now-Sen. Tina Smith (D) to replace him and precipitated a special election that Smith is running in. That contest will coincide with the regularly-scheduled election for Minnesota’s other seat, held by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D). We have rated Klobuchar’s seat as Safe Democratic since May 2017 as the incumbent won very comfortably in 2012 and has only token opposition in 2018. The real action seemed more likely to happen in the special election for Franken’s old seat, where Smith could be vulnerable as an appointed Senate incumbent. However, the GOP’s strongest-possible recruit, ex-Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R), passed on the race in January, though he still might run for his old job in St. Paul — in March, Pawlenty will leave his post as CEO of Financial Services Roundtable, seemingly a first step toward a gubernatorial bid (the state filing deadline is June 5). We would move the governor’s race from Leans Democratic to Toss-up if Pawlenty ran, although we suspect his time as a big-time DC association head would provide plenty of fodder for Democratic opposition researchers.

In Minnesota’s special election, ex-Rep. Michele Bachmann (R, MN-6) — a much less attractive statewide GOP option — also considered the race, but she decided against a bid. Smith’s leading general election opponent now appears to be state Sen. Karin Housley (R), and with Pawlenty and Bachmann out, it is unclear if any other notable Republicans will run. (Fun fact: Housley is married to NHL Hall of Famer Phil Housley.) Minnesota Democrats have largely rallied around Smith, and while she does have at least one intraparty opponent, she may avoid the type of serious primary challenge that has sometimes hampered past appointed incumbents. In light of the environment, Klobuchar’s popularity and potential coattails, and Pawlenty’s choice to stay out, Smith looks like a stronger bet to win the seat in her own right. As a result, we are moving the special election from Leans Democratic to Likely Democratic.

The Michigan GOP thought it had a decent recruit to challenge incumbent Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D) in a state that Trump won in a squeaker in 2016. However, former state Supreme Court Chief Justice Bob Young (R) exited the race in early January because of fundraising challenges. With Rep. Fred Upton (R, MI-6) having opted to run for reelection, the Republican nomination appears to be a battle between businessman Sandy Pensler (R) and businessman and veteran John James (R). Pensler can self-fund, having already seeded his campaign with $5 million, so perhaps he can make some noise if he wins the GOP nod. James raised about $700,000 in the fourth quarter, which is not a lot for a Senate race but also is not too shabby for an otherwise unproven candidate. Nonetheless, lacking an A-List opponent in what should be at least a Democratic-leaning environment, Stabenow is in a solid position to win reelection. This race continues to be Likely Democratic.

In New Jersey, recent events have slightly altered the picture for Sen. Bob Menendez (D). In November 2017, the judge in his federal corruption trial declared a mistrial after the jury could not reach a verdict. Then last week, federal prosecutors opted against retrying Menendez, who was accused of exchanging political favors for gifts and campaign contributions. These developments have made it far more likely that Menendez will successfully run for reelection. New Jersey is a solidly blue state at the federal level — it last elected a Republican to the U.S. Senate in 1972 — and Menendez should benefit from the midterm political environment. If Hillary Clinton were president, we would view this race differently. Still, we cannot completely rule out the possibility of a Menendez loss. The stench of corruption will hang over the incumbent throughout the campaign and it already shows in his underwater approval ratings. It seems he will first face at least some intraparty opposition, most notably attorney Michael Starr Hopkins (D), who worked for the past two Democratic presidential campaigns and is a cable news commentator. Nonetheless, most institutional parts of the Garden State Democratic Party remained solidly behind Menendez during his trial, so a primary loss seems unlikely in a state where county and state parties hold a lot of sway. The GOP field is still developing, but perhaps the name garnering the most buzz is recently retired pharmaceutical executive Bob Hugin (R), who is reportedly “definitely running” and has self-funding potential. We will keep an eye on this race to see if the GOP can truly put it into play, but for now it remains Likely Democratic.

Next door in Pennsylvania, Sen. Bob Casey Jr. (D) also holds one of the 10 Senate seats up for election in states that Trump carried in 2016. However, much like Stabenow in Michigan, there is not much reason to think Casey is in great danger at this point. The Keystone State only narrowly went for Trump and the midterm environment should boost Casey to some degree. On top of that, Casey’s likeliest general election opponent, Rep. Lou Barletta (R, PA-11), is now getting heat from some Republicans over how he’s running his campaign. According to the Washington Examiner, some in the Pennsylvania GOP worry that Barletta’s hard-edged immigration rhetoric will play poorly in the Philadelphia suburbs and hurt down-ballot Republicans. In addition to these concerns, Barletta raised only $500,000 in the last quarter of 2017, leaving him with about one-eighth of Casey’s campaign war chest to start 2018. We still rate this race as Likely Democratic.

In Maine, Sen. Angus King (I) remains on track to win a second term, particularly because Gov. Paul LePage (R-ME) seems unlikely to follow through on his repeated threats to challenge the incumbent (and it seems unlikely LePage could beat King even if the outgoing governor did run). The Pine Tree State remains Likely Independent/Democratic.

There’s one other race we want to mention in detail: In the Crystal Ball’s home state of Virginia, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) is seeking reelection in the aftermath of his defeat as part of the Democrats’ failed 2016 presidential ticket. Kaine appears to be in good shape for reelection: He has $9.2 million cash on hand, one of the highest figures among incumbents up for reelection in 2018; the Old Dominion should be Democratic-leaning in 2018 if its 2016 and 2017 election results are any indication; and the incumbent lacks a top-level GOP challenger, to the chagrin of Virginia Republicans. The most notable GOP candidates are Prince William County Board of Supervisors Chair Corey Stewart (R), state Del. Nick Freitas (R), and minister E.W. Jackson (R). Stewart made waves in the 2017 gubernatorial contest when he nearly upset Ed Gillespie for the GOP nomination while running as a neo-Confederate and immigration hardliner. Jackson ran a distant fourth in the 2012 Republican primary for U.S. Senate, but came to greater prominence as his party’s nominee in the 2013 lieutenant governor’s race, which he lost to now-Gov. Ralph Northam (D). The minister opened his 2018 campaign by attacking primary rival Stewart for supposedly having had “dealings” with the Muslim Brotherhood, rhetoric reminiscent in tone to some of Jackson’s previous comments. Freitas, a conservative member of the House of Delegates who has received backing from Sens. Rand Paul (R-KY) and Mike Lee (R-UT), may wind up being the establishment’s de facto choice against Stewart and Jackson. Stewart starts as the GOP favorite because of his performance in last year’s gubernatorial primary and the campaign network he has already built. Still, it is possible that Freitas and Jackson could take away parts of the anti-establishment primary vote from Stewart while Freitas garners enough support from more-establishment Republicans to win the nomination. However, it seems there is not much chance of a GOP win in 2018, so we are moving the Virginia race from Likely Democratic to Safe Democratic.

One other lurking problem for the Virginia GOP is the margin in the Senate contest, which will be at the top of the ballot. If Kaine wins by as much or more than Northam won the gubernatorial race (nine percentage points), his coattails could help down-ballot Democrats and endanger Republicans running for reelection to the House of Representatives, perhaps most notably Reps. Barbara Comstock (R, VA-10) and Scott Taylor (R, VA-2). And if Kaine were to win by what amounts to a landslide in this day and age, that could even threaten GOP House incumbents in redder seats, such as Reps. Dave Brat (R, VA-7) and Tom Garrett (R, VA-5). Fear of a blowout at the top of the ticket is one reason why many establishment Republicans are worried about Stewart, whose rhetoric might play very poorly in some parts of the commonwealth with competitive or potentially competitive House races.

Democrats are in no danger of losing a number of other seats they already hold: California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island, and Washington. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is also a safe bet to win reelection.

Generally speaking, Democratic Senate fundraising was a lot more impressive than Republican fundraising in the fourth quarter. Money isn’t everything, but it is helpful. Republicans argue that the passage of tax cuts late last year has reengaged donors and that 2018’s first quarter will be better for their candidates. We’ll see.

Overall, Democrats point to the fact that none of their vulnerable incumbents have retired and that Republicans have not gained a clear advantage in any of the red states defended by Democrats thus far. They also believe, and we tend to agree in some instances, that Republicans have not produced obviously top-tier challengers in several states, such as Montana and North Dakota. Republicans believe the internal politics of many of these states will eventually push at least some of these states into their column, particularly after primaries sort themselves out. Don’t be surprised if many of the races we’ve described are hotly contested all the way until Election Day — and in particular if the environment is only a little bit Democratic-leaning as opposed to a lot.

Footnotes

1. Two independents who caucus with the Democrats and who are seeking reelection this cycle are included as Democrats in this total: Sens. Angus King (I-ME) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT).

[Doug64]

From Utah, there's the news that Romney has easily acquired enough signatures to be on the Republican primary ballot whatever happened in the convention, but failed to get the 60% of delegates at the convention he needed to avoid a primary. In fact he came in second, with 49.12% of the vote to state Representative Mike Kennedy's 50.88%. Possibly, because of this: Romney won't commit yet to supporting Trump in 2020.

For the general view, here's the latest from Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball (though over a week old):

The Senate is still at 45 Democrat / 49 Republican / 6 Toss-Ups, so the Democrats still need to hold onto all four of their "Leans" seats and win all six toss-ups to take control of the Senate (the Republicans have no "Leans" seats at risk).

The House is at 198 Democrat / 212 Republican / 25 Toss-Ups, so Democrats need to hold onto all seven of their "Leans" seats and win 20 of the 25 toss-ups or (less likely) the 19 Republican "Leans" seats.

Governors are at 16 Democrat / 27 Republican / 7 Toss-Ups.

[Doug64]

So, Larry Sabato's first update of his Crystal Ball in around three and a half weeks, and things haven't changed much.

The Senate is still at zero Republican leaning seats, four Democratic leaning seats, and six toss-ups, meaning the Democrats need to hold on to every one of their leaning seats and pick up every single one of the toss-ups to win the Senate. Not likely, so even if the Democrats win the House they won't be able to be much more than a speed bump for judicial appointments -- but the likely one and possibly two Supreme Court appointments turn into a to-the-knife fight like we haven't seen in a generation, because thanks to the Left's dependence on judges to advance and protect their agenda they'll see that as a fight for all the marbles. Of course, if Justice Kennedy chooses to retire at the end of June that bloodbath happens during the summer and fall before November's general election -- right in the middle of the election season.

Senate
Republican Safe, Likely, and not up for a vote: 49
Republican Toss-Ups: 2
Democrat Safe, Likely, and not up for a vote: 41
Democrat Leans: 4
Democrat Toss-Ups: 4

Things are still looking better in the House, but also still not much. In the past almost-month one Republican seat has shifted into the Toss-Up category, bringing the total up to twenty-six. So Sabato currently has:

Republican Safe and Likely: 189
Republican Lean: 21
Republican Toss-Up: 24
Democrat Lean (Republican): 4
Democrat Likely (Republican): 1
Democrat Safe (Republican): 1

Democrat Safe and Likely: 189
Democrat Lean: 3
Democrat Toss-Up: 2
Republican Safe (Democrat): 1

So Republicans are likely to pick up two Democrat seats, meaning they can afford to lose twenty-four seats and still keep control of the House. Split the Toss-Ups and they are likely to lose eighteen, leaving them with 224 seats -- much more narrow than their current 240 seats, but still six seats more than than they need to retain control.

For Governors there are still seven Toss-Ups:

Republican Safe, Likely, and not up for election: 21
Republican Lean: 6
Republican Toss-Up: 3
Democrat Lean (Republican): 3

Democrat Safe, Likely, and not up for election: 15
Democrat Lean: 1
Democrat Toss-Up: 3

Independent Toss-Up: 1

So right now for the Democrats to win the House they need at least a small Wave Election, and it's possible that our Daily Prophets' drive to destroy the Trump administration may well be getting in the Democrats' way:

The Media Is Killing the Democratic Party

Ever since April 30, when the New York Times published a list of topics that special counsel Robert Mueller would like to ask President Trump about, cable news and the political press have focused exclusively on the two major legal matters in which the president is entangled.

First, of course, is Mueller’s open-ended probe into Russian interference in the 2016 election. Second is the Southern District of New York’s investigation into Trump attorney Michael Cohen’s business dealings, including with Stephanie Clifford, aka Stormy Daniels. The coverage has been typically sensationalist and hyperbolic. Each new revelation, personnel change, tweet, and television interview is greeted as a prelude to Trump’s defenestration and exile. Putin, Mueller, Comey, Stormy, Rudy, and the two Michaels, Cohen and Avenatti—these are the only names that seem to matter in American political discourse.

What the Democratic Party has not recognized is that Trump’s legal dramas, though good for ratings, have done little to benefit the political opposition. On the contrary: President Trump’s approval rating has been on the upswing. He stands at 44 percent approval in the Real Clear Politics average, his highest rating in a year. That number might well be slightly higher, given the existence of “Shy Trump Voters” who are afraid of the stigma attached to approving of the president.

Meanwhile, since December, the Democratic advantage on the congressional generic ballot has been cut in half, from plus 13 points to plus 6.5 points. In a new survey, pollsters for Democracy Corps and Women’s Voices Women’s Vote Action Fund, while optimistic about Democratic chances in the fall, nonetheless concede that the party’s “momentum has stalled in the last few months.”

His victory depended on a coalition between his devoted fans and more traditional Republican voters who, despite misgivings, supported him because they concluded that the alternative was worse personally and politically.

Why? Well, the most obvious answer is the economy, with its strong job market and positive wage growth. One could also say that voters like peacemakers, and so have embraced President Trump’s desire to meet with Kim Jong-un of North Korea. Both explanations sound reasonable to me.

But I would also suggest another one: The American electorate has not changed fundamentally in the decades since the Clinton presidency, when in the words of the late Jeffrey Bell it held a “bifurcated view” that separated the man from his policies. And as long as the policies seemed to be working, the man’s opponents found themselves wrapped around the axle of personal disgust, waiting in frustration for voters to recognize and repudiate defects of character that were all too plain to see.

Trump became president despite majority personal disapproval. His victory depended on a coalition between his devoted fans and more traditional Republican voters who, despite misgivings, supported him because they concluded that the alternative was worse personally and politically. Evaluations of his character are now “priced in” to the electoral market. That is why NBC News/Survey Monkey found this week that Republicans who say Trump is dishonest support him anyway. And it is why Trump’s overall approval in this poll is 45 percent, “tied with the highest rate of approval recorded by the NBC News/ Survey Monkey poll since he began his presidency.”

The incessant spotlight on the lawyers, on their clients and subjects and targets, not only occupies the attention of Democrats and the anti-Trump Resistance to the exclusion of other topics. It also relieves them of any responsibility to come up with a substantive message. The voters, by contrast, read the headlines with a cursory or prurient interest as they go about their lives in the real world of work, family, community, and faith. One voter told me the other day that legal terminology makes her eyes glaze over; she’d much rather browse Instagram. But such terminology is all anyone speaks in Washington nowadays—even if most pundits are not lawyers, probably couldn’t get into law school, and make up for their lack of expertise and inside knowledge with hyperbole and speculation.

“In the past few months,” write the authors of the Democracy Corps poll, “Democrats have appeared less focused on the economic and health-care battles that most engage anti-Trump voters; at the same time, Republican base voters, especially white working-class men, could finally point to a signature conservative policy achievement in the new tax cut law, where before they were grasping for news to justify their vote.”

Is it any wonder that Democrats appear less focused on the issues that engage voters, when the most prominent spokesmen for the party are Adam Schiff and his mannequins on the House Intelligence Committee, and Richard Blumenthal and Ron Wyden on the Senate side? When Michael Avenatti is on television to such an extent that by the end of this process he won’t just have his own show, but probably his own network?
Comments

I take exception with Democracy Corps’ analysis on one point. The tax bill passed in December, yet Trump’s approval began its most recent rise in March. That is exactly when he announced, against the wishes of his some of his own advisers and the Republican Congress, his first round of steel and aluminium tariffs. It is Trump’s desire to combat offshoring and deindustrialization, more than the tax bill, which is galvanizing his base and strengthening his economic message. More even than immigration, trade and manufacturing were the issues that distinguished Trump from elites in both parties and won him a mass majority of white voters without college degrees.

College-educated voters and suburban women disgusted with Trump may be enough to win the Democrats a slim House majority. But Democrats won’t find themselves in a truly commanding position until they make inroads among the Rust Belt voters who abandoned Hillary Clinton for the president. The more the party focuses on Robert Mueller and Stormy Daniels, the less likely it is to recognize the appeal of Trump’s economic message and to adjust accordingly. The more the party falls for the self-flattery, empty rhetoric, question begging, and maze-like complexity of media narratives—not to mention the more it succumbs to the fever-dream of impeachment—the less likely it is to recoup the power it once enjoyed.

[Doug64]

The Democrats have got to be getting worried, because that Blue Wave they've been dreaming of may be turning into a trickle if it happens at all. There's that tightening in the generic ballot Robert Porter mentioned (Democrats need an edge to overcome their geographic disadvantage):



There's headlines like this: Poll: Two-thirds of Americans give Trump credit for economy

There's the way that California's crazy electoral system is turning around to bite them in the butt, so that the Democratic Party is pouring over a million dollars into the so-called primary for a number of House races just so they can have a Democrat on the ballot come November. (California doesn't actually have a primary, it has a really early general election with a run-off come November):

Democratic dread: Party tries to keep California’s odd election rules from denying them the U.S. House

Dems increase effort to avoid California catastrophe

Meanwhile, after the primaries last Tuesday the Senate is unchanged:

Senate
Republican Safe, Likely, and not up for a vote: 48
Republican Leans: 1
Republican Toss-Ups: 2
Democrat Safe, Likely, and not up for a vote: 41
Democrat Leans: 3
Democrat Toss-Ups: 5

The House has seen a slight improvement for the Republicans, with a shift of one race from Toss-Up to Leans Republican:

House
Republican Safe and Likely: 189
Republican Lean: 21
Republican Toss-Up: 24
Democrat Lean (Republican): 4
Democrat Likely (Republican): 1
Democrat Safe (Republican): 1

Democrat Safe and Likely: 189
Democrat Lean: 3
Democrat Toss-Up: 2
Republican Safe (Democrat): 1

For now, Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball has Democratic victory in the House depending on a coin toss, even though things have improved for Democrats a little bit since February: The Democrats’ Drive for 25 in the House: An Update

The Governors races are also unchanged:

Governors
Republican Safe, Likely, and not up for election: 21
Republican Lean: 6
Republican Toss-Up: 3
Democrat Lean (Republican): 3

Democrat Safe, Likely, and not up for election: 12
Democrat Lean: 1
Democrat Toss-Up: 3

Independent Toss-Up: 1

[Zagadka]

The Dems really can't count on having an anti-Trump wave to win. They will lose. Again. They are idiots. They need a platform.

I still haven't looked through all of my primary ballot, aside from propositions.

[Hong Wu]

The Dems really can't count on having an anti-Trump wave to win. They will lose. Again. They are idiots. They need a platform.

I still haven't looked through all of my primary ballot, aside from propositions.

They have a platform man, a lot of them are saying "drain the swamp." Seriously. They just copied Trump's campaign slogan You still can't make this stuff up.

The latest Reuters poll had Republicans at a shocking +5. It might not be a fluke; Trump's approval has been going up steadily across the board. I also believe that Republicans have been outperforming their (averaged) polling numbers since at least 2010, which is also when Obama hysteria first started to get settled in with the media (when they started becoming really, really biased). Assuming that this is still the case, a +5 for Republicans in Reuters would be a red wave, not a blue one. The Democrats could be headed for a historically anomalous loss.

[Hong Wu]

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epoll ... -6185.html

Dem's generic ballot lead is down to +3.2 and dropping. Does anyone remember what their lead was in 2010?

I suspect that certain (perhaps even most) groups are still deliberately under polling Trump, or maybe they are tired of losing credibility. Being accurate in the midterms and then going back to fake polls in the general election would have a higher total payoff if they don't believe they can win right now.

America needs a red wave

[Doug64]

Does anyone remember what their lead was in 2010?

Here's the RCP generic ballot for 2009/2010:



So no, we probably aren't looking at a Red Wave this year.

[Hong Wu]

Here's the RCP generic ballot for 2009/2010:



So no, we probably aren't looking at a Red Wave this year.

Wow, I totally lost track of those polls. Thanks.

[Doug64]

Wow, I totally lost track of those polls. Thanks.

Happy to help.

[Hong Wu]

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/01/may-job ... crats.html

This hadn't occurred to me but it says that people with jobs are more likely to favor incumbents, which means that low unemployment is a boon to the GOP.

[Hong Wu]

RCP Average: Trump Approval Rises to 44.4% | Direction of Country at 5-Yr High

An approval rating of 45% is usually considered safe for re-election. But are polling agencies still under-rating Trump's approval? He won last time when he was allegedly in the 30% approval range.

We've still got almost six months to go. I'm still hopeful that we'll see a red wave. Republicans keep going up, Democrats keep talking about porn stars and how they want to raise taxes. The North Korean summit appears to be back on too.

[Doug64]

So another mini-Super Tuesday, and the Democrats in California dodged a bullet — it looks like they managed to come in second in all the races where they might have been shut out of the top two. They had to spend millions of dollars that they will badly need later, but they pulled it off. They didn’t have everything their way, though. The Republican candidate for Governor came in second, so Republicans can breathe a big sigh of relief, they aren’t threatened with a collapse in party participation come November. Also, state Senator Newman was recalled — and it wasn’t even close, he got trounced almost two to one; and the only issue his opponents were running on was his vote for the gas tax that has its repeal on the ballot come November, another vote to pull Republicans to the polls then.

Another plus, the judge that gave a rapist a sentence of only six months lost his bid to hold his position.

And another interesting possibility for Republicans, Senator Menendez of New Jersey may be more vulbnerable than previously assumed. (He’s the one that was charged with corruption and ended up with a hung jury.) He won his primary with 60% of the vote, but at the cost of $3.6 million against a liberal activist who didn’t even bother to file reports with the Federal Election Commission because she didn’t raise enough money.

[Hong Wu]

I'm reading that California Senate District 29 flipped from Democrat to Republican after the Democrat got recalled and as a result, California's Democrats lost their super majority in the state senate.

While this may or may not be significant (most of the stuff California's legislature was passing appeared to be pretty dumb anyway, with voters likely to repeal their new gas tax) it may be telling when it comes to the midterm elections. I've read headlines at RCP that Democrat's best shot at taking congress involves them picking up seats in conservative Orange County, California. This is probably a tall order normally but the fact that California's Dems just lost their supermajority to a Republican would suggest that they won't be taking many congressional seats from Republicans in Orange County when the midterms arrive.

[Doug64]

It is interesting how little all the sound and fury of the last month has changed numbers. Checking Trump's daily Job Approval numbers at Rasmussen, he started the month at 47% Approval / 50% Disapproval. Over the month it dropped to a low of 45/54 on June 27th, but as of today it's 48/51. The Generic Congressional Ballot for June 22-28 isn't out yet, but for the three weeks of June available the numbers for both parties have gone from 42 Republican / 43 Democrat in the last week of May to 41 / 45 in June 17-21. We'll see how long Democrats can sustain that slight shift.

And Larry Sabato's numbers (as of June 27) haven't shifted much, either, though what shifting there is has been in the Democrats' direction.

No change for Senate Republicans, for Senate Democrats Toss-Ups have remained the same but two of the Leans have become more secure, so splitting the toss-ups gives the edge to Republicans at 52.5. Democrats still need to win every single toss-up race to take control of the Senate:

Senate
Republican Safe, Likely, and not up for a vote: 48
Republican Leans: 1
Republican Toss-Ups: 2
Democrat Safe, Likely, and not up for a vote: 43
Democrat Leans: 1
Democrat Toss-Ups: 5

The House has been an additional decline for the Republicans, with a shift of two races from Safe/Likely Republican and one from Leans Republican, two going to Toss-Up and one to Likely Democrat, while there have been no shifts in the Democratic columns. Splitting the toss-ups and giving 1/3 of the leans to the opposing party, and the current result is Democrats 217.67 to Republicans 217.33. Now that is a serious toss-up:

House
Republican Safe and Likely: 186
Republican Lean: 21
Republican Toss-Up: 26
Democrat Lean (Republican): 4
Democrat Likely (Republican): 2
Democrat Safe (Republican): 1

Democrat Safe and Likely: 189
Democrat Lean: 3
Democrat Toss-Up: 2
Republican Safe (Democrat): 1

The Governors' races have also seen a slight shift, one Republican Lean to Toss-Up. So the current numbers are Republicans 26.83, Democrats 22.67, Independent 0.5. That's a shift of 6.67 to Democrats:

Governors
Republican Safe, Likely, and not up for election: 18
Republican Lean: 5
Republican Toss-Up: 4
Democrat Lean (Republican): 3

Democrat Safe, Likely, and not up for election: 15
Democrat Lean: 1
Democrat Toss-Up: 3

Independent Toss-Up: 1

[Doug64]

Larry Sabato has new numbers as of July 19 and again there's been a bit of a shift in the Democrats' direction -- but only in the races for governor, not exactly what Democrats are hoping for.

Still no change for the Senate races, so splitting the toss-ups gives the edge to Republicans at 52.5. Democrats still need to win every single toss-up race to take control of the Senate:

Senate
Republican Safe, Likely, and not up for a vote: 48
Republican Leans: 1
Republican Toss-Ups: 2
Democrat Safe, Likely, and not up for a vote: 43
Democrat Leans: 1
Democrat Toss-Ups: 5

The House is also unchanged. So splitting the toss-ups and giving 1/3 of the leans to the opposing party, and the current result is Democrats 217.67 to Republicans 217.33. Still a flip of the coin:

House
Republican Safe and Likely: 186
Republican Lean: 21
Republican Toss-Up: 26
Democrat Lean (Republican): 4
Democrat Likely (Republican): 2
Democrat Safe (Republican): 1

Democrat Safe and Likely: 189
Democrat Lean: 3
Democrat Toss-Up: 2
Republican Safe (Democrat): 1

One thing that's interesting is that while there have been a host of retirements, so far there have been only three incumbents that lost to primary challengers, one Democrat and two Republicans. One of the two Republican races is a toss-up, but the other two are unlikely to switch parties in the general election

In the races for governor Arizona has shifted from Likely Republican to Leans Republican, Iowa has shifted from Leans Republican to Toss-Up, and Illinois has shifted from Leans Democrat to Likely Democrat (all three states currently with Republican governors). So the current numbers are Republicans 25.83, Democrats 23.67, Independent 0.5, an additional shift of one to the Democrats and a gain of 7.67 over their current sixteen governorships:

Governors
Republican Safe, Likely, and not up for election: 17
Republican Lean: 5
Republican Toss-Up: 5
Democrat Lean (Republican): 2
Democrat Likely (Republican): 1

Democrat Safe, Likely, and not up for election: 15
Democrat Lean: 1
Democrat Toss-Up: 3

Independent Toss-Up: 1

[Doug64]

So, Larry Sabato updated his numbers on August 8 and there's actually been a shift in the Senate races! One of the Democratic Toss-Ups has shifted to Leans Democrat, so now the Republicans' edge is 52.33. Democrats still need to win every single toss-up race to take control of the Senate:

Senate
Republican Safe, Likely, and not up for a vote: 48
Republican Leans: 1
Republican Toss-Ups: 2
Democrat Safe, Likely, and not up for a vote: 43
Democrat Leans: 2 (+1)
Democrat Toss-Ups: 4 (-1)

This time there is real movement in the House, all in the Democrats' favor. Now splitting the toss-ups and giving 1/3 of the leans to the opposing party, and the current result is Democrats 221.33 to Republicans 213.67. Not exactly the Blue Wave Democrats have been predicting -- it's only a third of a seat above the 26 average gain for the opposition party in an off-year election -- but I'm sure they'd be overjoyed to get it:

House
Republican Safe and Likely: 182 (-4)
Republican Lean: 15 (-6)
Republican Toss-Up: 32 (+6)
Democrat Lean (Republican): 8 (+4)
Democrat Likely (Republican): 2
Democrat Safe (Republican): 1

Democrat Safe and Likely: 189
Democrat Lean: 3
Democrat Toss-Up: 2
Republican Safe (Democrat): 1

And this time it's the governors' races that haven't seen any changes:

Governors
Republican Safe, Likely, and not up for election: 17
Republican Lean: 5
Republican Toss-Up: 5
Democrat Lean (Republican): 2
Democrat Likely (Republican): 1

Democrat Safe, Likely, and not up for election: 15
Democrat Lean: 1
Democrat Toss-Up: 3

Independent Toss-Up: 1

[Doug64]

It's been over a month and a half since I updated Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball, so here are his numbers as of today! (Sept. 20). For the Senate, assuming all the Leans break the way they're leaning, Democrats still need to win every single toss-up race to take control of the Senate:

Senate
Republican Safe, Likely, and not up for a vote: 47 (-1)
Republican Leans: 2 (+1)
Republican Toss-Ups: 2

Democrat Safe, Likely, and not up for a vote: 43
Democrat Leans: 2
Democrat Toss-Ups: 4

Again there is real movement in the House, except for a single race all in the Democrats' favor. Again assuming all the Leans break toward their parties and splitting the toss-ups, that gives the Democrats 222 seats -- a 27-seat pick-up, one above the average off-year election for the party out of power:

House
Republican Safe and Likely: 176 (-6)
Republican Lean: 22 (+7)
Republican Toss-Up: 26 (-6)
Democrat Lean (Republican): 13 (+5)
Democrat Likely (Republican): 2
Democrat Safe (Republican): 1

Democrat Safe and Likely: 188 (-1)
Democrat Lean: 4 (+1)
Democrat Toss-Up: 2
Republican Safe (Democrat): 1

And some changes in the governor's races, mostly but not entirely the Democrats' way -- the shift in the Republican-held governorships is entirely toward the Democrats, but the Democrats have had one race shift away from them and the Independent-held Alaska has shifted to Leans Republican:

Governors
Republican Safe, Likely, and not up for election: 16 (-1)
Republican Lean: 5
Republican Toss-Up: 6 (+1)
Democrat Lean (Republican): 1 (-1)
Democrat Likely (Republican): 2 (+1)

Democrat Safe, Likely, and not up for election: 14 (-1)
Democrat Lean: 4 (+3)
Democrat Toss-Up: 1 (-2)

Independent Leans Republican: 1

[jimjam]

Republicans seem to be doing an excellent job of shooting themselves in the foot this election. In addition to feeling backlash from the 60% or so that Donald is ignoring while playing to the 40% that he is feeding scraps from the table in exchange for power there are a few issues that should seriously play against them: let the medical industry have their way in not covering sick Americans ("pre existing conditions"), the 80% in Donald's booming economy who live paycheck to paycheck are already paying more for daily necessities due to the Trump Trade War and last but not least …. groping women and waving your penis in their face is no big deal.