Rational Voting - state loyalty

Let us suppose that we are voting on purely regional lines. (As power is divvied up along regional lines via districts and the electoral college this makes sense as the default group loyalty – which loyalty is what makes voting rational)

Ideally one wants their region to have as much power as possible. To bring home the bacon or insure that governance is carried out as your region finds acceptable. Who, then should one vote for?

For Governors: The only value the governor has to acquiring federal power for your region is if he is elected president. Choose a governor that can plausibly make it on the federal scene: Charm and connections. But you have to weigh that chance against the power he will yield in your state. Usually not worth it as (Benefit of local prez)*(chance of election) < governor power. But that depends on how much the federal goverment can benefit versus the state goverment. At some point, (fifty times? less? more?) it makes sense to see the govenorship as mainly a platform for getting a local guy into the white house.

For representatives and Senators: Vote for the incumbent. That is because seniority and seats in committees make a big difference in how much power a congressperson wields. Vote for Charlie Wilson!
If there is no incumbent – Ideally you want a charming politician who could conceivably make it at a national level (he too could be president - but at leas speaker etc). Also, ideally, you want his party to be currently out of power, but soon to be increasing in power. (So the competition for committee chairs is lower, but the number of chairs available is increasing over all.)