What if the Wave Went the Other Way?

[SPC]

So, pretty much every Senate election since 2006 has been a wave election for one party or the other. Thus, I was curious to see what would happen if each election had a wave the went in the opposite direction.

First installment: 2006
Indiana and Connecticut were excluded from this analysis, due to the unusual situations in both of those states. Kerry won the remaining states by 0.3% (2.8% more Democratic than the nation), while Democratic Senate candidates won overall by 13.7%. Thus, 10.9% was subtracted from the Democratic column and added to the Republican column:

Republicans 60 (+5)
Democrats 40 (-5)

Closest races:
Florida Bill Nelson 49.4% Katherine Harris 49.0%
Minnesota Mark Kennedy 48.8% Amy Klobuchar 47.2%
California Dianne Feinstein 48.5% Dick Mountjoy 45.9%
Hawaii Daniel Akaka 50.4% Cynthia Theilen 47.7%
Pennsylvania Rick Santorum 52.2% Bob Casey 47.8%
Washington Mike McGavick 50.8% Maria Cantwell 45.9%

[SPC]

Second Installment: 2008
Arkansas was excluded from this analysis, for the same reasons as Indiana and Connecticut above. Obama won the remaining states by 1.3% (6.0% more Republican than the nation), while Democratic Senate candidates won overall by 5.9%. Thus, 11.9% was subtracted from the Democratic column and added to the Republican column:

Republicans 61 (+1)
Democrats 39 (-1)

Closest races:
New Mexico Steve Pearce 50.6% Tom Udall 49.4%
South Dakota Tim Johnson 50.6% Joel Dykstra 49.4%
Iowa Tom Harkin 50.8% Christopher Reed 49.1%
West Virginia Jay Rockefeller 51.8% Jay Wolfe 48.1%

[SPC]

Third installment: 2010
South Dakota and Alaska were excluded from this analysis, while both Crist and Meek were counted as Democratic candidates in Florida. For convenience, let us say that either Ted Stevens's plane crash is retconned or a Republican wins the special election to replace him. Obama won the remaining states by 10.1% (2.9% more Democratic than the nation), while Republican Senate candidates won overall by 0.9%. Thus, 3.8% was subtracted from the Republican column and added to the Democratic column:

Republicans 62 (+3)
Democrats 38 (-3)

Closest races:
Massachusetts Martha Coakley 50.8% Scott Brown 48.0%
Wisconsin Russ Feingold 50.9% Ron Johnson 48.0%
Kentucky Rand Paul 51.9% Jack Conway 48.1%
North Carolina Richard Burr 51.0% Elaine Marshall 46.9%

[SPC]

Fourth installment: 2012
In Maine, both King and Dill were counted as Democratic candidates. Things worked slightly differently for this edition, since many of the incumbents in this cycle would be different by making 2006 a Republican wave instead of a Democratic wave. Averaging the average incumbent performance versus vote in the 2012 presidential election indicated that Democratic incumbents performed 11.6% better than Obama, while Republican incumbents performed 9.9% better than Romney. Obama won these states by 6.7% (2.9% better than the average), while Democratic Senate candidates won these states by 5.1% once the incumbent adjustments were made. Thus, 2.3% was subtracted from the Democratic column and added to the Republican column:

Republicans 61 (-1)
Democrats 39 (+1)

Closest races:
Wisconsin Tommy Thompson 48.7% Tammy Baldwin 48.6%
New Mexico Martin Heinrich 48.2% Heather Wilson 48.1%
Indiana Joe Donnelly 47.2% Richard Mourdock 47.1%
Maryland Some Democrat 42.5% Michael Steele 39.8%
North Dakota Rick Berg 52.1% Heidi Heitkamp 47.4%

[SPC]

Fifth Installment: 2014
The same procedure was used here as in 2012. Orman in Kansas was counted as a Democrat. Republican incumbents outperformed by 4.0% while Democratic incumbents outperformed by 6.2%. Romney won these states by 2.2% (6.1% more than the nation) while Republican candidates won by 8.2% after adjustments were made. Thus, 2.1% was subtracted from the Republican column and added to the Democratic column:

Republicans 62 (+1)
Democrats 38 (-1)

Closest states:
New Hampshire John Sununu 51.3% Some Democrat 48.4%
Georgia David Perdue 50.8% Michelle Nunn 47.3%
Minnesota Some Democrat 50.1% Norm Coleman 46.0%
Iowa Joni Ernst 50.0% Bruce Braley 45.9%
New Mexico Some Democrat 52.5% Steve Pearce 47.5%
Virginia Mark Warner 51.2% Ed Gillespie 46.2%

[Jerseyrules]

Wow.  Obviously there are butterflies with Republican supermajority status 2006-present.  I wonder what would have been the first thing to have come out of the 110th Congress...

[OSR stands with Israel]

So, pretty much every Senate election since 2006 has been a wave election for one party or the other. Thus, I was curious to see what would happen if each election had a wave the went in the opposite direction.

First installment: 2006
Indiana and Connecticut were excluded from this analysis, due to the unusual situations in both of those states. Kerry won the remaining states by 0.3% (2.8% more Democratic than the nation), while Democratic Senate candidates won overall by 13.7%. Thus, 10.9% was subtracted from the Democratic column and added to the Republican column:

Republicans 60 (+5)
Democrats 40 (-5)

Closest races:
Florida Bill Nelson 49.4% Katherine Harris 49.0%
Minnesota Mark Kennedy 48.8% Amy Klobuchar 47.2%
California Dianne Feinstein 48.5% Dick Mountjoy 45.9%
Hawaii Daniel Akaka 50.4% Cynthia Theilen 47.7%
Pennsylvania Rick Santorum 52.2% Bob Casey 47.8%
Washington Mike McGavick 50.8% Maria Cantwell 45.9%

Not Possible unless Gore or Kerry are President

[Jerseyrules]

Clearly this would be under a Democratic presidency 2005-2009 at least, but it's interesting to consider.  With supermajority status, could we expect to see several Supreme Court appointments completely tabled and/or blocked completely?

[Flake]

If the 2014 election had been a Democratic wave equal to the Republican wave this year:

Closest winner would be Landrieu (50.17% runoff), followed by Graham (47.61%).

[Flake]

If the 2014 Governor's elections had a Democratic wave equal to the Republican wave this year:

[SPC]

First gubernatorial installment: 2006
Bush won these states by 0.7% (1.8% more Democratic than the nation), while Democratic gubernatorial candidates won these states by 6.1%. Thus, 4.3% was taken from the Democratic column and added to the Republican column.

Democrats 24 (+2)
Republicans 26 (-2)

Closest states:
Oregon: Ron Saxton 47.1% Ted Kulongoski 46.4%
Maine: Chandler Woodcock 34.6% John Baldacci 33.8%
Iowa: Chet Culver 49.7% Jim Nussle 48.7%
Wisconsin: Mark Green 49.6% Jim Doyle 48.4%
Illinois: Rod Blagojevich 45.5% Judy Baar Topinka 43.6%
Maryland: Bob Ehrlich 50.5% Martin O'Malley 48.4%

[SPC]

Second installment: 2010
Third-party candidates in Colorado, Rhode Island, and Maine were counted toward the Republican and Democratic columns, respectively. Republican incumbents overperformed by 4.3%, while Democratic incumbents overperformed by 6.0%, and these adjustments were applied to Oregon, Maine, Wisconsin, and Maryland. Obama won these states by 8.5% (1.2% more than the nation), while Republican gubernatorial candidates won by 1.6% once appropriate adjustments were made. Thus, 2.8% was taken from the Republican column and added to the Democratic column.

Democrats 23 (+1)
Republicans 27 (-1)

Closest states:
Maine: Chandler Woodcock 37.4% Eliot Cutler 37.0%
New Mexico: Susana Martinez 50.5% Diane Denish 49.4%
South Carolina: Vincent Sheheen 49.7% Nikki Haley 48.5%
Oregon: John Kitzhaber 50.0% Ron Saxton 47.1%
Pennsylvania: Tom Corbett 51.7% Dan Oronato 48.3%
Ohio: Ted Strickland 49.9% John Kasich 47.1%
Iowa: Terry Branstad 50.0% Chet Culver 46.0%
Georgia: Nathan Deal 50.2% Roy Barnes 45.8%
Wisconsin: Mark Green 51.6% Tom Barrett 47.1%
Florida: Alex Sink 50.5% Rick Scott 46.0%

[SPC]

Third Installment, 2014:
Bill Walker was counted as a Democrat for this analysis. This was almost as much of an anti-incumbent year as it was an anti-Democrat year; Republican incumbents overperformed by 5.1%, while Democratic incumbents underperformed by 7.1% (for perspective, Republicans in open races overperformed by 8.9%.) Since assigning a negative incumbent advantage seemed implausible, I opted to ignore incumbency for this election, and treat it the same way as 2006. Obama won these states by 5.6% (1.9% more Democratic than the nation), while Republican candidates won these states by 3.9%. Thus, 5.8% was taken from the Democratic column and added to the Republican column.

Democrats 28 (+4)
Republicans 22 (-4)

Closest states:
Arizona: Doug Ducey 47.6% Fred DuVal 47.3%
Arkansas: Asa Hutchison 49.7% Mike Ross 47.3%
New Mexico: Susana Martinez 51.4% Gary King 48.6%
South Carolina: Nikki Haley 50.1% Vincent Sheheen 47.2%
Oklahoma: Mary Fallin 50.0% Joe Dorman 46.8%
Idaho: Butch Otter 47.7% A.J. Balukoff 44.3%
Georgia: Jason Carter 50.3% Nathan Deal 47.0%

[badgate]

With some of these extremely close results, I have to question the results you give us. It doesn't seem that you are putting into account the field programs of these campaigns. A race as close as this AZGov2014 result would not be determined by a little algorithm, but by how effective Ducey or DuVal's field programs are.

[SPC]

With some of these extremely close results, I have to question the results you give us. It doesn't seem that you are putting into account the field programs of these campaigns. A race as close as this AZGov2014 result would not be determined by a little algorithm, but by how effective Ducey or DuVal's field programs are.

The reason I provide the close races is so that the reader may apply their own subjective analyses to determine how they would go, regardless of how the literalist interpretation says they would go. I feel that it would be beyond my scope to determine myself how the close races would go. Nevertheless, most of the close 2014 races were on Republican turf, so in that particularly they probably would go the same way as the algorithm dictates.