Listen to “Understanding the Governor’s ‘Batting Average’” on Spreaker.
Politics these days is often about claiming victory — whether you won or not. It’s called spin, and it’s nothing new.
Governor Patrick Morrisey took to social media the day after the election with bold claims. A graphic titled “Major Win for Morrisey Agenda” prominently displayed the governor’s “batting average” at .767 — certainly a number that would get a player to Cooperstown. But the official scorer might have something to say about how that average was calculated.
Here’s a bit of analysis to better understand the influence truly at play. Disclaimer: Understand results are not final until canvassing is concluded, and a few races are too close to definitively call.
The rules are simple: give the governor one point for every endorsement that resulted in a win and negative one point for every endorsement that resulted in a loss. If multiple factions endorsed the same candidate, no points are awarded. Likewise, if a candidate ran unopposed, no points are awarded.
Those no-point variables help measure exclusive influence — meaning a politician only gets credit or blame when they uniquely backed someone.
Conceptually, this kind of index attempts to measure political judgment, faction strength, an ability to move voters independently, and whether a politician can truly “deliver” races. Obviously, a greater score indicates a higher degree of success.
In the Senate, Governor Morrisey endorsed 12 candidates. One of them, Zack Maynard, did not face a primary challenge. That left eight points earned for wins and three negative points for losses, generating a net score of +5.
Give the governor his due here. He won enough seats to maintain the status quo in the Senate. Critics will note that seven of those eight wins came from incumbents — meaning the endorsement may not have had to work particularly hard. That is a fair point, and some indexes like this offer a lower point value for an incumbent win. But what value is fair? Readers can decide for themselves how much value to place on incumbent victories.
The Senate remains largely unchanged – a win or not depending on perspective punting focus to post-general and who will control the presidency.
The House is another story.
Morrisey endorsed 31 candidates, but 11 of those races were ineligible for points either way — 10 candidates ran unopposed, and one candidate was endorsed by multiple factions. Of the 20 remaining races, the governor won 11 and lost 9, producing a net score of just +2.
That amounts to a two-seat advantage after all was said and done — not exactly enough to move major legislation or force alignment. Combine that with comments from House Speaker Roger Hanshaw to Amelia Knisely earlier this week — where he warned that the House “will not forget” — and the obstacle facing the governor becomes clearer.
And it is worth paying attention not only to Hanshaw’s words, but to the fact that he made the comments at all. Hanshaw is intentional by nature. He is not typically given to reaction, but to response. One comes without much thought; the other comes only after considerable thought.
Hanshaw likely would not have made those comments unless he fully understood that most of his caucus stands firmly behind him.
One source told me lawmakers were not motivated to fall in line because the governor “went after” House members like Vernon Criss, Scott Heckert, and Clay Riley. They are not fearful of being next. Instead, they are rallying for retribution.
What that ultimately looks like remains to be seen.
As for the governor’s batting average — walks do not count as hits. Neither does endorsing candidates running unopposed or those backed by both factions.
Judging by the comments under Morrisey’s post, most West Virginians appear to understand the rules of both baseball and politics.