What a difference a year makes. After last year brought record turnout and voter excitement, this November includes only two Governors’ races, Maine’s gay marriage referendum, and a single contested ballot measure (Prop D) in San Francisco. Gavin Newsom’s departure from the California Governor’s race means that the state’s political junkies won’t have a lot to write about through the June primary, adding to what could shape up to be a very low Democratic Party turnout next spring. Here are my predictions on tomorrow’s key races, and thoughts on why Newsom left the race and where he goes from here.

Governor: Virginia and New Jersey

The Virginia race has already been virtually conceded to Republican BobMcDonnel, with Democrat Creigh Deeds given little chance. Deeds ran away from the health care public option and from the Obama agenda, so few are mourning his expected defeat.

Recall how many millions former Clinton campaign chief Terry McAuliffe spent only to lose the Democratic nomination to Deeds – only to have Deeds run a terrible campaign, proving himself not ready for prime time.

Polls are split, and experts say that New Jersey is too close to call. But I’m going out on a limb and pick incumbent Democrat Jon Corzine to defeat Republican Chris Christie.

Here’s my reasoning.

First, New Jersey Democrats seem to always do better on Election Day than polls predict.

Second, Corzine will have a much better get out the vote operation, with many Obama campaign veterans involved.

Third, Corzine’s crack opposition research team has come up with enough dirt on Christie in the campaign’s last days to give swing voters pause. After reading in the New York Times about Christie charging the taxpayers for driving to Philadelphia to watch the Mets play, I don’t understand how the self-identified corruption fighter is not himself facing criminal charges.

With later deciders going to Corzine, he wins.

Maine’s Question 1

My colleague Paul Hogarth has provided great Beyond Chron coverage from the ground in Maine, and is coordinating get-out-the-vote in South Portland through Tuesday. My assessment of this race is based on his writings and on material read elsewhere; published polls have the race a dead heat.

I see the “No on 1” side becoming the first pro gay marriage ballot success in United States history for two reasons, neither of which applied to California’s Prop 8.

First, gay marriage proponents are more motivated. Maine does not have California’s longstanding right wing religious community, and the anti-marriage side lacks the passion that “Yes on 8” conservatives brought to the California campaign.

Recall that Republicans had nothing to do in California in November 2008 except fight to defeat gay marriage. John McCain never even made a pretense of trying to win the state, so the only vehicle for right-wing activists in California to mobilize against the Obama phenomenon was through defeating gay marriage.

Second, a low turnout election rewards motivated voters, which helps “No on 1.” Unlike California, where some voters who had not been targeted by gay marriage proponents went to the polls to vote for Obama and also voted “Yes on 8,” Maine does not have much else to draw people to the polls.

So I see a “No on 1” victory.

San Francisco’s Prop D

As I wrote two weeks ago Proposition D, the Mid-Market sign measure, will lose handily. I previously noted the process problems with Prop D, but its also clear that it failed to satisfy the most important of all of my rules for successful ballot initiatives: it is not perceived as benefitting the self-interest of a significant portion of the electorate.

This is one key factor that distinguishes Prop D from Lennar’s successful Prop G and its defeat of Prop F in June 2008: San Francisco voters wanted to back a plan to improve Bayview-Hunters Point, and weren’t concerned about Lennar’s potential profits, the process, or anything else raised by opponents.

In contrast, I am struck how few see the electrified signs of Prop D as bringing any benefit to the distressed area. Voters either do not trust that 40% of the revenue goes to arts groups, or do not care.

Had Prop D been part of a multi-pronged measure addressing Market Street’s problems, it might have passed. But standing alone, it fails.

Newsom’s Withdrawal

Prop D is a good segue into San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom’s withdrawal from the 2010 Governor’s race. Newsom announced only last Thursday that he was backing Prop D, and one had to laugh at press secretary Nate Ballard’s comment that they were thinking of how best the Mayor could help the initiative.

Help the initiative when you don’t take a stand until less than a week before Election Day, after a major part of the electorate has already voted absentee?

Newsom’s delay in taking a stand on the only ballot measure of interest in San Francisco reflects a disengagement from politics that the Mayor has shown since the fall of 2008. In fact, I would argue that the last time Gavin Newsom seemed truly engaged was when he was campaigning for Hillary Clinton in late 2007 and early 2008.

Rethinking Gavin Newsom

While Newsom detractors will argue that he withdrew because he could not win, this does not explain why a Mayor who seemed so ambitious through 2007 suddenly became far less interested in doing what it takes to win the nomination for Governor.

Such as raising money. Newsom put almost no time into this essential activity, after raising between $7-10 million for his 2003 mayor’s race.

I think Newsom withdrew because he realized after connecting with his now wife that politics is a family-killing business, and that he could not both have a loving family relationship and be on the road for the next year campaigning for Governor.

Newsom’s disengagement from city politics and the Governor’s campaign coincided with his engagement, marriage and parenthood. True, he was not around City Hall much as a Supervisor, but Newsom was an extremely engaged Mayor in his first few years in office.

Newsom needs politics a lot less than people think, and much less than the political insiders whose lives revolve around talking about who’s doing what, or running for what, at City Hall. Perhaps we got a clue into Newsom’s future when he fell in love with a woman who was not big on politics, and who was not interested in being a “political wife.”

Ironically, Newsom now joins longtime adversary Chris Daly in putting family relationships ahead of one’s political career.