Anecdotal evidence department: I was up in rural NE Oklahoma for Thanksgiving, and my parents said that Humphreys hadn't even really run a campaign yet in rural Oklahoma. I have to assume that he will, the he will be well funded, and that his numbers will improve when he does. This one should remain in the GOP column.

Kevin,

Aside from the GWB effect (which should be significant) what other negative factors (for GOP) could be replicated from the disappointing Governor race last year. (And 2002 was a reasonable GOP year nationwide.)

For Steve Largent, his 2002 OK gubernatorial campaign suffered from the same national trend that defeated Matt Salmon in Arizona. From 2001 to 2003, the incumbent party (but not actual incumbents) was trashed in almost every race. Both GOP and DEM candidates lost party-held governor's mansions, and the Blue/Red state divide didn't make much difference. In total, Democrats took 11 out of 14 races in which a non-incubment GOP candidate ran for a seat held by a GOP governor. Similarly, the GOP took six of seven seats in which a non-incumbent Dem ran for a seat held by a Democratic governor.

For example, the GOP lost in Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Virginia, New Jersey, Louisiana, and Tennessee, but won in Hawaii, Maryland, and Alaska.

The only races in which the GOP was able to hold on to GOP-held seats without an incumbent were South Dakota, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island. Oregon was the only state held by a non-incumbent Democrat. Actual GOP incumbents did well (NY, TX, FL, OH, CO), but Dem incumbents did not (AL, GA, MS, SC).

When you consider that the incumbent party without an incumbent candidate lost 17-21 elections, that's a trend. It may be the most underreported trend around, but its proven to be an excellent predictor of governors' races.

Edward,

True indeed: it seems like the Governor's office (say, as opposed to seat) has been the safety valve used to relieve electoral frustration. But the GOP may have given away a couple by allowing local Dems to "out-GOP" them: in OK Largent took the "high road" -- if your road is 5th Avenue? -- of "opposing" cock fighting; in LA, the Dems nominated the "bubbaest" candidate, complete with resurrected "cajun" maiden name.) I was wondering if the OK senate race could position the Dems to out-GOP the GOP. These are the defeats that most kill me.

The Okla governor's seat was Largent's for the taking. He ran an absolutely inept campaign and Humphries will do much better. I don't see Oklahoma electing a Democratic senator this time around.

Ease up on poor Steve Largent, absent a fellow Republican running as an Independent, he'd have won.

The Dems taking Michigan had more to do with an incompetent GOP candidate. Granholm (AKA Governor Barbie) had a 10 point lead cut in half in the final week, despite running 3 ads to her opponent's one.. an opponent with a pulse wouldn't have been that far behind at that point.