If you’ve been poring over the presidential results-by-congressional district data that we’ve compiled, you’ve probably noticed that there are a whole lot of districts that flipped from being won by Bush in 04 to Obama in 08 (64 of them, to be exact), and only one that flipped from Kerry to McCain. That’s interesting enough, and other analysts have already delved into that… but I decided to look at one more data point, and also factor in what the district did in 2000.
When I start talking about districts in terms of them being “GBM” or “BBO” or “GBO” it may sound like I’m talking in terms of genetic code. I’m using those as shorthand for how the district performed in the last three elections: being won by Gore/Bush/McCain, or Bush/Bush/Obama, for instance. In a way, though, we are very much talking about the genetic code for each district, because each of these classifications reveals a lot about what kind of political ecosystem the district is located in.
Over 80% of all House districts are either Bush/Bush/McCain or Gore/Kerry/Obama; not so interesting. I’m concerned with the remaining 75 districts. Many of them aren’t what you’d traditionally think of as swing districts, but rather red districts in blue states that got pushed along by Obama’s strong performance in those states. Time will tell whether these become the “new” swing seats, or if they fall back as the blue wave passes. These fall largely into the “BBO” category:
Bush/Bush/Obama: CA-03, CA-11, CA-24, CA-25, CA-26, CA-44, CA-45, CA-48, CA-50, FL-08, FL-18, IA-04, IL-06, IL-08, IL-11, IL-13, IL-14, IL-16, IN-02, KS-03, MI-01, MI-04, MI-06, MI-07, MI-08, MI-09, MI-11, MN-01, MN-03, NC-02, NC-08, NE-02, NH-01, NJ-07, NY-19, NY-20, NY-23, NY-24, OH-01, OH-12, OH-15, OR-05, TX-23, TX-28, VA-02, VA-04, VA-10, VA-11, WA-03, WI-01, WI-06, WI-08
You can see a couple different trends here, primarily previously-Republican-leaning suburbs in states where Obama cleaned up (California, Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin) or where it was closer but he made a big push (Virginia, Ohio, Florida). There are also a fair number of rural Michigan districts here as well, pointing toward McCain’s more general collapse in that state.
There are also a few of the most conservative Hispanic-majority seats that finally cracked, and a few formerly red districts in midwestern cities that benefited from heavy Dem targeting (IN-02, NE-02). There are also a few rural northeastern Rockefeller Republican seats in New York and New Hampshire where patience with today’s GOP seems to be finally exhausted. Finally, I see at least three seats where I would wager that Dukakis actually beat Bush I, but where Democratic fortunes started to wane in the mid-90s until the recent rebound (IA-04, OR-05, and WA-03).
Gore/Bush/Obama: CA-18, CA-47, FL-10, GA-02, GA-12, IA-03, NJ-02, NJ-03, NV-03, NY-01, TX-15, TX-27
Among the “GBO” districts, there’s a mix of several things. There are more Hispanic-majority districts, where Bush’s attempts at Latino outreach in 2004 may have helped him eke out a win. There are some northeastern suburban seats where Kerry didn’t play very well (partially but not entirely explained by the 9/11 effect, perhaps). There are a few Georgia districts where paltry African-American turnout may have harmed Kerry, and finally some of the most knife’s-edge swing districts of all (FL-10, IA-03, NV-03), where Gore’s slightly better overall nationwide position vs. Kerry seemed to make the difference.
Bush/Kerry/Obama: NC-13, OR-04, TX-25
See a commonality here among the “BKO” districts? These are three districts dominated by college towns (Raleigh, Eugene, Austin) but with conservative surroundings. In OR-04 and TX-25, a lot of that may have to do with a strong Nader effect depressing Gore votes (and in Texas, a favorite son effect boosting Bush). Interestingly, Nader wasn’t on the ballot in North Carolina in 2000, meaning that this shift is probably based on demographic changes in the Research Triangle as liberal whites from elsewhere move in.
Gore/Bush/McCain: AR-01, AR-04, NJ-04, NY-03, NY-13, TN-08, WV-03
There are two clear sub-groups among the “GBM” districts: some of the most Dem-friendly districts (and ones that would be particularly responsive to favorite sons Clinton or Gore) in the Appalachian arc finally falling through the floor. And some of the most socially conservative districts in the New York metro area, where the 9/11 effect was especially pronounced and still seems to linger… but where Gore also seemed to overperform.
Gore/Kerry/McCain: PA-12
The lone “GKM” district, as I’ve discussed before, is one that’s trending away from us because of, more than any other reason, mortality. Former unionists who formed a strong Democratic core in the collar counties around Pittsburgh are dying off rapidly, leaving a mix of their economically dislocated and culture-wars-susceptible descendants, and new exurban residents. This brings us to the last possible permutation: the Bush/Kerry/McCain district… and there ain’t no such beast.
I like the idea of “genetic codes” being used elsewhere, especially in politics.
were swing districts back in the day, but then elected a competent Republican to represent them, and went pink from years of giving the Reps a pass. They are a classic example of how one close election can lead to change for decades, as voters continue to vote for incumbents and their parties who they have voted for before.
If Goyke beat Petri, and Aspin not went to the Cabinet, Wisconsin would be significantly more Democratic today than it is.
You can even see it in the 8th, put a Democrat in the House, and it goes a couple more points blue for everything.
You were correct about IA-04. Using present-day boundaries, the current IA-04 went 57-43 for Dukakis. Indeed, Dukakis did very well in Iowa, winning the state by ten points. In fact, it was his second-best state after Rhode Island. Sigh.
went to Obama by large margins.
I’m not sure the Nader effect had anything to do with these districts. I think it is likely that you’re seeing (1) the general trend of more educated voters to vote Democrat, especially those with graduate degrees, in reaction against the anti-intellectualism of the current Republican party and (2) the shifting and increased turnout of the youth vote for Democrats. Hardly surprising that these trends were first apparent in districs dominated by college towns.
I looked at the list and kept saying to myself, that is a House district we picked up. Well, it is largely true in the BBO list.
As of the 2004 election, the 44 BBO districts were rpresented by 5 Democrats and 39 Republicans in the House. These were solidly Republican and difficult for Gore and Kerry to crack. Democrats have picked up 18 of these districts in the last two cycles (46%). In fact, one third of our national House gains have been in BBO districts (18 out of 54).
since it didn’t exist in 2000, are we saying that Bush would have carried what is now NC-13?
My district! President Bush did barely win WA-3, but as you pointed out it was after trending towards the middle during the 90’s. Before the 90’s WA-3 was very democratic leaning. As it is while Obama did win the district it wasnt by alot and was his weakest winning district in the state. We will probably stay a swing district on the Presidential level for some time.
News to me.