What SHOULD have happened?

[Free Bird]

Which governors were supposed to have won/lost but were either sunk by or rode the wave?

[Free Bird]

Partisanship aside

[Mr. Smith]

Sean Parnell, Anthony Brown,Tom Foley and Charlie Crist had no business losing

Rick Scott, Sam Brownback, Bruce Rauner,and Scott Walker had no business winning.

[Talleyrand]

Rick Scott, Sam Brownback, and Paul LePage are the most clear-cut examples of Governors who were only pulled over the winning threshold by the Republican wave.

You can argue that some other races (like Baker in Massachusetts and Hogan in Maryland) went the way they did a large part due to the wave, but there were definitely some other factors at play there which muddy the picture a bit.

[ElectionsGuy]

Many governors were carried by the wave, including Snyder, Brownback, Scott, and LePage. Republicans picked up MA, MD, and IL, blue states that would never go Republican outside of a wave. Many blue state governors, such as Dayton and Kitzhaber, should have had much larger margin of victories.

[Kraxner]

I feel bad for michaud and crist, they seem like really nice guys who should of won but were beaten back by a republican wave.

Many blue state governors, such as Dayton and Kitzhaber, should have had much larger margin of victories.

Also had it not been for the republican wave, Jerry Brown might have won 65%+ and perhaps even orange county.

Dayton and Kitzhaber had their predicted 10% margins wiped out in half.


And Hickenlooper would of got a more decisive margin on election night against beauprez despite the gun control which was bad bad policy.  Had it not been for the well performing economy in Colorado he would of been toast.

[IceSpear]

The Criminal, Brownback, and LePage.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

I feel bad for michaud and crist, they seem like really nice guys who should of won but were beaten back by a republican wave.

Many blue state governors, such as Dayton and Kitzhaber, should have had much larger margin of victories.

Also had it not been for the republican wave, Jerry Brown might have won 65%+ and perhaps even orange county.

Dayton and Kitzhaber had their predicted 10% margins wiped out in half.


And Hickenlooper would of got a more decisive margin on election night against beauprez despite the gun control which was bad bad policy.  Had it not been for the well performing economy in Colorado he would of been toast.

McCain won Orange County(, CA) in the Democratic Tsunami of 2008. It just doesn't go republican.

[publicunofficial]

Probably would have won:
-Anthony Brown

Might have won:
-Pat Quinn

Probably would have lost:
-Sam Brownback
-Rick Scott

Might have lost:
-Scott Walker
-Paul LePage


I think Rick Snyder and Charlie Baker would probably have held on even with Presidential turn-out.

[Mr. Smith]

Yes but Obama was an out of state spendocrat to them, Brown was a perfect GOP golden-boy by economic standards. He definitely should've made it competitive there since IN FACT, he DID win Orange County at least once.

But Del Norte County should've gone to Brown (it's the ONLY county that voted for Kashkari but not Whitman....contrasted by Ventura, San Diego, San Luis Obispbo, Mono, and Nevada counties) along with Butte, Riverside, and Fresno.


Also Jason Carter probably would've gone into run-off.

[Mr. Illini]

They should have stayed that way.

[Free Bird]

CLEARLY The People's Pat will become a modern folk hero

[Person Man]

The Democrats should have picked up the states. This was about a R+7 election. In an neutral election, FL,ME,MA,MD,WI,MI,KS,IL should have swung the other way. If this were  2006 or 2008, I could see AZ and GA flipping and OH getting a good enough candidate to win. But there was a reason this was an R wave. Between the media bias, the changing (a lot of opportunity and at least neutral macros, but still feels bad) economy, poor candidates and an agenda that went off the rails, it was supposed to be bad.
2014 was a lot like 1986 than 2006. People tried something new, it had staying power and they wanted to go back into their comfort zone.

[Bigby]

Connecticut should have went to Foley, for starters. Oh, and the Republicans should have found a competent person in Michigan and a non-carpetbagger in New Hampshire for the Senate. We had no business losing either race.

[The Other Castro]

Connecticut should have went to Foley, for starters. Oh, and the Republicans should have found a competent person in Michigan and a non-carpetbagger in New Hampshire for the Senate. We had no business losing either race.

How would Foley have been helped by the absence of a Republican wave?

[Kraxner]

CLEARLY The People's Pat will become a modern folk hero

For being a terrible leader?

They should have stayed that way.

Actually these states did deserve to go republican, i don't feel bad for either quinn or brown.

Plus, the responsibility of fixing the poor economy in illinois will now be given to a republican after a poor democrat stewardship of 12 years pandering to the unions and leftist media/special interests. Democrats should be more joyful since if the economy in illinois still has yet to recover it helps them in which they can blame bruce rauner, and if it does recover they can steal credit anyway from bruce rauner's work, by the 2016 election considering illinois is giving President Obama a negative approval rating.

Also had Brown won he obviously would of kept O'Taxley's taxes whoch would of slowly turned many democrats there to red.

[pbrower2a]

Gullibility prevailed in America on November 4.

[hopper]

The Democrats should have picked up the states. This was about a R+7 election. In an neutral election, FL,ME,MA,MD,WI,MI,KS,IL should have swung the other way. If this were  2006 or 2008, I could see AZ and GA flipping and OH getting a good enough candidate to win. But there was a reason this was an R wave. Between the media bias, the changing (a lot of opportunity and at least neutral macros, but still feels bad) economy, poor candidates and an agenda that went off the rails, it was supposed to be bad.
2014 was a lot like 1986 than 2006. People tried something new, it had staying power and they wanted to go back into their comfort zone.

Yeah true the US Senate Election were comparable in a 1986 vs 2014 comparison. The Dems gained 8 Senate Seats to a Senate Majority in 1986 just like the Republicans gained 9 Senate Seats on their way to a Senate Majority in 2014.

The difference is though the Republicans gained 13 seats so far(pending LA results in LA-05 and LA-06) in 2014  in the US House where as the Dems gained 5 seats in the US House in 1986.

Basically 2014 was comparable to 1986 in the US Senate and 1984 in the US House when the Republicans gained 16 US House Seats if LA-05 and LA-06 go Republican which they probably will.

[hopper]

Lepage  still might have won  because of a 3rd Party Candidate(Elliot Cultler) being in the race and getting 8% of the vote. ME-02 the R's probably would not have not won it without the wave though.

[CountryClassSF]

Lepage  still might have won  because of a 3rd Party Candidate(Elliot Cultler) being in the race and getting 8% of the vote. ME-02 the R's probably would not have not won it without the wave though.

Interesting happenings in Maine.  I thought ME-Gov would be a nailbiter, never thought LePage would outperform even 2010 performance.  ME-02 was a surprise ,especially considering a 3rd party conservative candidate pulled double digits. Maybe, just maybe, there's a positive trend going on there.

[free my dawg]

Lepage  still might have won  because of a 3rd Party Candidate(Elliot Cultler) being in the race and getting 8% of the vote. ME-02 the R's probably would not have not won it without the wave though.

Interesting happenings in Maine.  I thought ME-Gov would be a nailbiter, never thought LePage would outperform even 2010 performance.  ME-02 was a surprise ,especially considering a 3rd party conservative candidate pulled double digits. Maybe, just maybe, there's a positive trend going on there.

Wouldn't doubt it. While it is trending R, Maine's 2nd is more socially conservative than fiscally conservative, and is generally hostile to New Democrats like Cain. Think of it as one of the few districts where Blue Dogs can survive - generally economically liberal, but pro-union. Her plays of bipartisanship won't fly here, especially with her "compromise" on tax cuts for the rich. However, the issues that she's not willing to compromise on are issues that the more rural parts of her district does not agree with, and Democrats deserved to lose here (and do again if Israel gets the rematch he wants).

Troy Jackson or Jeff McCabe would be favored against Poliquin, but Cain would be an underdog.