Kentucky 2015 - Predictions and Results Thread

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Disappointing, but not surprising. If there was a lesson to be learned from 2014, it was that Republican states don't turn Atlas red whenever the GOP nominates a Tea Partier.

Part of the frustration with this loss comes from the fact that, after our successes in 2012 and 2013, many Democrats (including myself) gained a false sense of security when it came to "Tea Party conservative" vs. " 'moderate' Democrat' " races. After Donnelly and McCaskill won in '12 and McAuliffe scraped by in '13, there was a sense that the extreme right was doomed. That clearly isn't the case. The GOP learned from their mistakes in those years to win strong victories in '14 and '15; it remains to be seen whether the Democrats will learn from theirs.

That said, it wasn't a terrible night for the left. Grimes and Beashear held on, Hogsett won in Indianapolis, and things are looking good in NJ. If VA Dems take the state senate and/or Hood wins in MS, it will have been a moderately successful night; even without, we won't have walked away empty handed. Conway squandered a golden opportunity, but we can come back from this. And, of course, John Bel Edwards has yet to take the stage.

[Xing]

So Andy Beshear is going to lead the Democrats to victory in 2019, correct?

Haha, one can dream.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

So ugly.

Is the Democratic Party worth it? Evidence points no.

It's not as terrible as it might appear at first glance. WI, MI, NJ, and ME will probably flip in the next cycle; MD, MA, and IL will be solid D seats once their incumbents retire, and the Dems will have a decent shot in the next election besides. The map is as lopsided as it is right now because the GOP had a really good year in 2014, when most of those governorships were up for election.

[Figueira]

So ugly.

Is the Democratic Party worth it? Evidence points no.

It's not as terrible as it might appear at first glance. WI, MI, NJ, and ME will probably flip in the next cycle; MD, MA, and IL will be solid D seats once their incumbents retire, and the Dems will have a decent shot in the next election besides. The map is as lopsided as it is right now because the GOP had a really good year in 2014, when most of those governorships were up for election.

No.

[ElectionsGuy]

Grimes: 55%
Knipper: 45%

Beshear: 54%
Westerfield: 46%

Edelen: 52%
Harmon: 48%

Conway: 48-49%
Bevin: 47-48%
Curtis: 3-4%

Ball: 53%
Nelson: 47%

Quarles: 57%
Spann: 43%

(By the way, something like 47-48% means between those two, I'm not considering 48.4% as 48% for this practice)

I made a final decision about the Governor's race. I'm predicting a very slight Conway victory. After looking deep into polling data and fundamentals, I think Conway winning is more likely. Here's a list of things that convinced me...

 - Matt Bevin's biggest problem is Beshear's approval rating - nearly 60%. Conway can build off that. Its the opposite of LA-Gov, where Edwards is building off of Jindal's unpopularity.
 - Conway's favorability is better than Bevin's. This matters in a non-federal election.
 - As Obama nears the end of his term, he is increasingly less relevant. Bevin can't really say OBAMA! without voters wondering why he's doing it as it has no relevance to statewide politics.
 - Conway is getting almost all Democrats. In both the 2014 Senate race and 2012 Presidential Race, the Republicans got >20% of Democrats. Independents are also up for grabs, usually heavily Republican in Kentucky.
 - Older voters (65+), more likely to be a large segment of the electorate in this low turnout environment, are actually leaning more Conway than any other age group.
 - Only around 8% are undecided. They would have to ALL go for Bevin at this point in order to save him. Many of them are mostly independent and conservative, leading to a likely Bevin-leaning demographic. Its still not enough though. There's plenty of blacks, liberals, and younger voters that haven't made up their mind.

The only points helping Bevin is the Republican trend of the state (not yet seen in statewide offices, btw) and the difficulty imaging what a map of Conway winning would look like, but those aren't very strong points. Unless the polls are completely wrong (and with the margin of error, they could be), this is the logical conclusion. So I'm predicting the margin of victory won't be as big as the polls suggest, but the late Bevin surge won't be enough. I hope I'm wrong. Still, I wouldn't be surprised at all to see Bevin win by 3 points or something.

Republicans sweep all statewide offices.

Did you see the poll that had Grimes +13?

Clearly you never met Talleyrand. He thinks that the Democrats should just fold because they'll lose every election imaginable to the Republicans.

I wouldn't brush him off. He had one of the most accurate predictions in 2014.

Yep, the usual exception strikes again. This is kind of irritating as I switched my prediction at the last minute for decent reasons, and yet the irresponsibility of modern day pollsters to underestimate Republican strength is present everywhere, but especially red states. I wish I had stuck with my idea originally, which is that Bevin would trounce Conway and nobody would see it coming. That's clearly what happened.

Conway will get swamped and people will be shocked.

Yeah...

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

If it helps the Democrats here any, the new mayor of Indianapolis is a Democrat, Joe Hogsett.

Absolute yuck. The GOP candidate was much better. Hogsett got it on his name recognition and it helped the Dems in the council races. My hometown gave an annexation happy mayor another 4 year term when most of the anti-annexation folks live in the uber GOP townships/precincts.

[Gass3268]

If it helps the Democrats here any, the new mayor of Indianapolis is a Democrat, Joe Hogsett.

Absolute yuck. The GOP candidate was much better. Hogsett got it on his name recognition and it helped the Dems in the council races. My hometown gave an annexation happy mayor another 4 year term when most of the anti-annexation folks live in the uber GOP townships/precincts.

Where do you live, if you don't mind me asking?

[Penelope]

So ugly.

Is the Democratic Party worth it? Evidence points no.

Just realized that if 2016 = 1920 2.0, Democrats could be all the way down to 10 governorships.  Almost hoping Hillary loses now, so that we can actually start winning back the states.  If Ginsburg and Kennedy were 50 I would already be rooting for the GOP next year.

I think it is slightly unwise to desire a GOP government trifecta while they also have government trifectas in state houses across the country.

[JMT]

So ugly.

Is the Democratic Party worth it? Evidence points no.

It's not as terrible as it might appear at first glance. WI, MI, NJ, and ME will probably flip in the next cycle; MD, MA, and IL will be solid D seats once their incumbents retire, and the Dems will have a decent shot in the next election besides. The map is as lopsided as it is right now because the GOP had a really good year in 2014, when most of those governorships were up for election.

Very good point. All those mentioned have a possibility of flipping, including IL and MD. I could definitely see Rauner and Hogan losing in 2018. Baker probably will be reelected in MA but when he retires he most likely would be replaced by a democrat. Also, with Brian Sandoval term limited in NV, dems could pick up his seat. I would also say that NM is likely to go Democrat after Susana Martinez leaves office. And Mike Pence (IN) and Pat McCrory (NC) could be defeated in 2016, and its quite possible John Bel Edwards wins in LA later this month. So honestly, I think the number of democratic governorships will increase in the near future. Does look ugly right now, though.

[RFayette]

So ugly.

Is the Democratic Party worth it? Evidence points no.

Just realized that if 2016 = 1920 2.0, Democrats could be all the way down to 10 governorships.  Almost hoping Hillary loses now, so that we can actually start winning back the states.  If Ginsburg and Kennedy were 50 I would already be rooting for the GOP next year.

I think it is slightly unwise to desire a GOP government trifecta while they also have government trifectas in state houses across the country.

We desperately need something to run against.  The Tea Party stopped being scary to swing voters after 2012.  We need to make them scary again, so we can get our reverse 2010, pick up a bunch of legislatures and start actually moving the ball left on things that can just be revoked by the next president.  Again, the thought of 5 Scalia/Alito/Thomas SCOTUS justices basically overturning the past 50 years is the only thing holding me back. 

Eh, I think they were scary in 2013 with the government shutdown.  After the Obamacare debacle though, I think voters have been pretty ambivalent.  "Tea party" seems to work well as an epithet with voters who are already firmly Democratic to rev up the base, but it really doesn't mean much to independent voters at this point.  That being said, certain agenda points, like education cuts, can absolutely put "tea party" Republicans in danger, but it appears that's just not enough to lose in an off-year election.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

We already know a Clinton with a Republican congress is a pretty terrible combination, so it's not like having Hillary win would be that great. If she loses, the Democratic party can get some new leadership that actually wants to build the party, and the 2018 and 2020 elections will be important for congressional and state legislature redistricting.

[Xing]

We already know a Clinton with a Republican congress is a pretty terrible combination, so it's not like having Hillary win would be that great. If she loses, the Democratic party can get some new leadership that actually wants to build the party, and the 2018 and 2020 elections will be important for congressional and state legislature redistricting.

If you think Clinton with a Republican congress (the senate isn't certain, btw) would be bad, try Rubio, Cruz, or (God forbid) Carson or Trump with a Republican congress. Also, if Democrats squander their opportunity to take back the senate in 2016, and end up with 47 seats or less, the senate probably stays Republican until 2022. Unless 2018 is a bigger wave year than 2008, Democrats won't get the house, either, so Republicans will get at least four years of complete control. GIVING UP ON 2016 IS A HORRIBLE IDEA!

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

We already know a Clinton with a Republican congress is a pretty terrible combination, so it's not like having Hillary win would be that great. If she loses, the Democratic party can get some new leadership that actually wants to build the party, and the 2018 and 2020 elections will be important for congressional and state legislature redistricting.

If you think Clinton with a Republican congress (the senate isn't certain, btw) would be bad, try Rubio, Cruz, or (God forbid) Carson or Trump with a Republican congress. Also, if Democrats squander their opportunity to take back the senate in 2016, and end up with 47 seats or less, the senate probably stays Republican until 2022. Unless 2018 is a bigger wave year than 2008, Democrats won't get the house, either, so Republicans will get at least four years of complete control. GIVING UP ON 2016 IS A HORRIBLE IDEA!

Bill + Republican Congress = DOMA, DMCA, Mickey mouse copyright act, telecommunications deregulation, repeal of Glass Steagall, welfare reform, and other bad sh**t. Of course he didn't need the Republican Congress for DADT and NAFTA.

[RFayette]

We already know a Clinton with a Republican congress is a pretty terrible combination, so it's not like having Hillary win would be that great. If she loses, the Democratic party can get some new leadership that actually wants to build the party, and the 2018 and 2020 elections will be important for congressional and state legislature redistricting.

If you think Clinton with a Republican congress (the senate isn't certain, btw) would be bad, try Rubio, Cruz, or (God forbid) Carson or Trump with a Republican congress. Also, if Democrats squander their opportunity to take back the senate in 2016, and end up with 47 seats or less, the senate probably stays Republican until 2022. Unless 2018 is a bigger wave year than 2008, Democrats won't get the house, either, so Republicans will get at least four years of complete control. GIVING UP ON 2016 IS A HORRIBLE IDEA!

Bill + Republican Congress = DOMA, DMCA, Mickey mouse copyright act, telecommunications deregulation, repeal of Glass Steagall, welfare reform, and other bad sh**t. Of course he didn't need the Republican Congress for DADT and NAFTA.

But the Overton Window has shifted well to the left since the 1990's.  Obviously Clinton wouldn't be as progressive as Sanders, but I think she'd govern closer to Obama than Bill Clinton.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

We already know a Clinton with a Republican congress is a pretty terrible combination, so it's not like having Hillary win would be that great. If she loses, the Democratic party can get some new leadership that actually wants to build the party, and the 2018 and 2020 elections will be important for congressional and state legislature redistricting.

If you think Clinton with a Republican congress (the senate isn't certain, btw) would be bad, try Rubio, Cruz, or (God forbid) Carson or Trump with a Republican congress. Also, if Democrats squander their opportunity to take back the senate in 2016, and end up with 47 seats or less, the senate probably stays Republican until 2022. Unless 2018 is a bigger wave year than 2008, Democrats won't get the house, either, so Republicans will get at least four years of complete control. GIVING UP ON 2016 IS A HORRIBLE IDEA!

Bill + Republican Congress = DOMA, DMCA, Mickey mouse copyright act, telecommunications deregulation, repeal of Glass Steagall, welfare reform, and other bad sh**t. Of course he didn't need the Republican Congress for DADT and NAFTA.

But the Overton Window has shifted well to the left since the 1990's.  Obviously Clinton wouldn't be as progressive as Sanders, but I think she'd govern closer to Obama than Bill Clinton.

While he's not the best Republican President ever like Bill, Obama has been pretty disappointing. He's failed to stand up to Republicans, and let them walk all over him. ObamaCare left much to be desired. And the Republicans didn't make Obama agree to TPP or push for chained CPI. So I'm definitely not a fan of a candidate that is still well to the right of Obama.

Don't forget that a Hillary general election and actual Presidency will be well to the right of phony positions she's chosen in the primary. For example, everyone knows her opposition to TPP is a fraud.

[BigSkyBob]

Tonight, many of the nattering nabobs of negativity in the GOP establishment have egg on their faces. No, the GOP did not forfeit the Kentucky governorship by nominating a Tea Party "extremist." Bevins is a natural at retail politics. No, Bevins didn't blow it by not spending massive sums of money early. He spent his money more strategically, at the end, when he received more bang for his buck. And, he spent relatively little. It will be hard to claim Bevins enters the governorship bought and paid for. Nor, could it be said that Bevins rode a GOP wave to victory. Tonight, Bevins was the one bright spot in what was otherwise a mixed bag of results nationally. Perhaps, if the GOP elite had talked up his chances rather than trashing him, the GOP might had sweep every office. Then again, maybe Bevins benefitted from be opposed by both sides in DC.

Perhaps the same chattering class will reconsider their trashing of Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, and Ben Carson.

[philly09]

Don't feel like going through all the pages, but apparently there is a rumor that PPP had a poll last week that showed Bevin up 2, but for some reason they did not release it.


Edit: Rumor not true.

[Sir Mohamed]

No surpirse since KY polls were totally wrong about the Senate race last year.

[YaBoyNY]

So ugly.

Is the Democratic Party worth it? Evidence points no.

It's not as terrible as it might appear at first glance. WI, MI, NJ, and ME will probably flip in the next cycle; MD, MA, and IL will be solid D seats once their incumbents retire, and the Dems will have a decent shot in the next election besides. The map is as lopsided as it is right now because the GOP had a really good year in 2014, when most of those governorships were up for election.

No.

Yes? Are you insinuating that with a generic Dem vs a generic Rep, MA would be anything but solid D?

Lmao.

[Brittain33]

Jesus, Conway is below 44%. If you'd told me before the election that was going to be the result, I surely wouldn't have believed you.

Aqua Buddah will not be mocked.

[bobloblaw]

Can the Blue Grass poll or the Lousiville newspaper poll ever be trusted again?

[Hydera]

"@joesonka: Democratic Sen. Ray Jones on KET saying that Kentucky Democrats don't criticize Barack Obama enough."

This is a glorious march towards extinction.

Maybe Democrats should invest more in their state parties instead of patting themselves on the back for an Electoral College advantage and openly ridiculing the lifestyles of huge segments of the populations.  Despite calls that the RNC has shifted way right, it's perfectly comfortable running socially liberal candidates in places like MA and IL; I think most Dems feel they're "past" needing social conservatives, and that's just wrong if they want to keep governors' mansions and win back legislatures.

What are you talking about? Conway pandered to the right virtually every step of the way.

I seriously hope the people on this board don't keep buying into the delusion of "If we just transported a genuine liberal democrat to run then he'd obviously Win!!!/Do much better!!!


Yes the moderate candidate lost, but not as much had the dems just ran a generic progressive.

[bobloblaw]

Kentucky Democrats need to keep moving. They cede the state to the GOP, that shows that Democrats will have a hard time with white voters FOREVER.

That tends to happen when the national Dem party embraces BLM

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

I guess Vox Popel poll which showed a tie, was somewhat accurate, Conway's momentum had stalled over weekend.

[Potus]

I guess Vcx Popel poll which showed a tie, was somewhat accurate, Conway's momentum had stalled over weekend.

Elections don't shift 8 points in two days in the absence of major scandal or huge success. The polls are bad at predicting Kentucky.