Michigan, 2006

[Beet]

Both Granholm and Stabenow will win but it won't make Michigan soild democrat.  Stabenow will win due to lack of good candidate.  Granholm will win for the same reason and due to the fact that the michigan republican party is ing stupid.

Sadly, a lot of local Republican parties in the Midwest (namely Michigan, Illinois, and Ohio) have serious problems.

Why Ohio? I thought the GOP controlled everything there?

The governor's scandal, maybe?

In any case, I take state legislative behavior to be the best indicator of a state's political leanings, if only because this is the lowest and most local level of government, therefore the most "grassroots" level, where party id means something close to what it means nationally. Executive positions like the governorship are of course important, but are not quite as partisan since the governor's job isn't to pass laws.

[Beet]

Both Granholm and Stabenow will win but it won't make Michigan soild democrat.  Stabenow will win due to lack of good candidate.  Granholm will win for the same reason and due to the fact that the michigan republican party is g stupid.

Sadly, a lot of local Republican parties in the Midwest (namely Michigan, Illinois, and Ohio) have serious problems.

Why Ohio? I thought the GOP controlled everything there?

The governor's scandal, maybe?

In any case, I take state legislative behavior to be the best indicator of a state's political leanings, if only because this is the lowest and most local level of government, therefore the most "grassroots" level, where party id means something close to what it means nationally. Executive positions like the governorship are of course important, but are not quite as partisan since the governor's job isn't to pass laws.

This is true, but it is worth considering that there is very low education about the state legislature.  It almost follows district approval of each party on state level in many cases.  Incumbnents will get booted out just because they are of a certain party and there was a slight political change.

Well if they're very vulnerable, at least they'll be responsive. Their relative invisibility actually is more of a strength then a weakness. It's much easier to criticize a governor or president than a lawmaking body. In general, even on the national level, the lower, more lawmaking-oriented elected positions are often more important than executive ones. No matter what your objective, winning the support of legislatures means you've won the support of the population--you have a more long-term political base (contrary to myth about the 'special interests', most lawmakers are responsive to their consituents' opinions). Winning the support of an executive does not. Too often, the latter is what grabs a disproportionate amount of headlines and attention.