Tag: Obama

Most people agree voters tend to get more conservative as they age, but the age gap in 2008 (and 2004 as well) was huge compared to previous elections like 2000 and the previous few.  In this diary, I’m going to examine the age gap in every state from the 2008 presidential election to see which states are trending towards us in future elections and which away from us.  This would help the Democratic party focus its resources on states like North Carolina, which we all know IS trending towards us, and away from states like West Virginia, which aren’t.  However, when examining the data, I found quite a few surprises as well.  I’m going to start with states with about an average age gap (the Obama percentage of those under 30 minus that of seniors).

17% Gap:

This is still quite large, but these states don’t seem to be trending either way:

Missouri and Arkansas

  As it turned out, this actually surprised me a lot.  So what seems to be happening in these states, which obviously ARE trending red in PVIs, is that older Democrats are voting Republican more so than younger people are more Republican than their parents/grandparents.  This seems to be a phenomenon in quite a few Upper South states.

18% Gap:

Tennessee

  See Missouri and Arkansas for an explanation.  It’s a “the party left me” scenario.

Illinois

  This states seems to be holding quite steady.  The nice thing about the age gap is there’s no need to account for home-state effect, since EVERY voter in Illinois had Obama as their home-state senator.

Massachusetts

  Another blue state that doesn’t seem to be moving much either direction.

Nebraska and Kansas

  Two extremely similar states.  Despite Omaha moving leftward relatively quickly, I guess the rest of Nebraska must be making up for it somehow.

16%:

Florida

  Whites are moving right, but Hispanics are moving left.  They cancel each other out, basically.

Pennsylvania

  The west is moving right more quickly than the east is moving left, but the east is more populous.  Neutral as well.

Michigan

  The Grand Rapids area is moving leftward slightly as the Detroit area shrinks in clout and the suburbs hold relatively steady or move slightly left.  FL, MI, and PA are big swingy states (Michigan is Lean D, PA Tilt D, FL Tilt R in an average year) that are here to stay in the battleground.

15%:

Wisconsin

  Another Tilt/Lean D state that doesn’t have much of a trend.  The Midwest generally seems to be exemplifying this

Maryland

  A strongly blue state that’s not moving anymore, although it moved quite a bit in the 60s/70s/80s.  

Virginia

  There are two possibilities here:

1–It turns out that the state is no longer moving, and while no longer safe for Republicans, won’t become Lean D anytime soon or

2–The new Democrats moving here are in their late 20s or 30s and so mostly don’t fit into this younger age group.  I’m not sure which is the case, but you’ll see this again when it comes to a couple other states.

14%:

Montana

 At this point, it could almost be called a slight red trend, since the age gap is quite small, and older people in Montana actually tend to be more Democratic.

19%:

New Mexico

 Possibly a slight Democratic trend, but this evidence seems to show that New Mexico won’t become Safe D anytime soon.

Ohio

 This one surprised me.  I consider this state to be trending Republican long-term, as is much of the Great Lakes Region, but I may be wrong.  Your thoughts?

13%:

Vermont

 This states seems to have gotten as blue as possible at this point, so maybe that’s the reason the age gap is small.  Or it’s because everyone’s a Democrat.

20%:

Delaware

 Basically in the same boat as Maryland, maybe still getting a bit bluer.

Louisiana?!?!

 One of my big WTF states.  I’m not sure if there are more Black young people than White or what’s going on here.  Is Darth Jeff still around? Or GOPVoter of course.

Slight R:

12%:

Colorado

 Another surprise.  But I think this is similar to the Virginia case, where many young professionals in their 30s or late 20s move here and are more liberal.

Kentucky

 Definitely trending GOP.  No surprise here.

Hawaii

 Seems to have maxed out it’s blue-ness.

10%:

Rhode Island

 Extremely white and religious for such a blue state.  Plus it’s not really growing.  Anyways, not so much of an Obama age gap.

Minnesota

 The older people are actually more liberal than the younger ones here.  Minnesota is basically a Tilt D state, and should be a true toss-up soon, in my opinion.

Slight D:

22%:

New Jersey

 Many young Hispanics who vote overwhelmingly for our side.  

23%:

Texas

 This was a popular number.  Texas is in the D-trending states, but it’s not moving as fast as many others, as Texas Hispanics are more conservative than their California or East Coast counterparts.

Washington

 Still moving leftward, and I’m not sure it’s even winnable for the GOP anymore barring a landslide.

New York

 More minorities and few young people in Upstate, which is basically hemorrhaging population as we speak.

South Carolina

 Same boat as Texas, slowly moving left, but it’ll take multiple decades, most likely.

Maine

 Much of the Northeast is still moving our way.

Strongly Moving GOP:

9%:

Arizona

 You can’t chalk this up to John McCain.  Arizona just doesn’t seem to be trending our way like everybody thinks.  A 9% age gap in a state known for conservative seniors isn’t good whatsoever.

8%:

Idaho

 Did we THINK it was moving our way?

7%:

Oklahoma

 Same here.

6%:

South Dakota

 Same.  Another small rural Republican state not moving our way.

Wyoming

 See South Dakota.

5%:

New Hampshire

 This one’s a shocker.  Anyone wanna explain, because I really don’t understand it.

4%:

Oregon

 I think this is an extreme young professionals example.  Because Oregon is certainly not trending Republican like Wyoming.

3%:

West Virginia

  No surprise.

2%:

Georgia

 Either another extreme young professional effect, or we’ve been wasting our energy.  Only three states have a smaller age gap.

1%:

North Dakota

 Maybe Kent Conrad just saved himself a loss.

-1%:

Alaska and Utah

 That’s right, older people are MORE liberal here than younger ones.

Strong Dem Trend:

Here they are.  

26%:

Indiana and Nevada

Both of these states had big swings leftward over the past three years or so, and while many people think Indiana is an anomaly, I’m not so sure.  It swung back right in 2010, which Nevada didn’t really, but the youth in both states are extremely liberal compared to older folks, and in Indiana, they’re still mostly white as well.

27%:

Connecticut

Long a bastion of Yankee Republicanism, I was surprised to see how this was the Northeastern state with the biggest age gap, as it’s held almost completely stable since Bush 41 left office.  But here it is.

28%:

California

This was the leading vote-getter, and while it’s quite liberal, the age gap isn’t quite as large.  While the youth are like 3/4 Obama supporters, the seniors just aren’t conservative enough for a large age gap

29%:

Alabama

This was possibly the biggest shocker.  A red state that seems to be trending redder every election, and yet such a large age gap.  What gives?  More Blacks?  I’m not sure, since I really don’t think there are more liberal whites here in large numbers.  Maybe Gradydem can explain?

and..the top 2 are:

31%:

North Carolina

A swing state to stay, with huge college centers in Chapel Hill, Durham, and to a smaller extent Asheville and Boone.  I wasn’t surprised at all, but by number one…

33%:

Mississippi

That’s right.  Mississippi.  Only one person guessed this, comment if it was you.  This is a state Obama should be contesting long before Texas and possibly before Georgia.  The only states he didn’t win he should be putting money into are Missouri, Montana, Arizona, South Carolina, Mississippi, and maybe Georgia, in my opinion.

There is nothing original about this short diary.  I just wanted to make you aware of an interesting Gallup survey from yesterday that measures President Obama’s approval in all 50 states:

Here’s the link:  http://www.gallup.com/poll/141…

You should go to “page 2” in the survey for a chart showing approval/disapproval by state. Also, here’s a map from the survey above:

The Gallup labeling appears slightly misleading to me because, while in all the states marked as “below average” Obama does have a net negative approval, in all the states marked as “above average” AS WELL AS in all the states marked as “average” his approval is a net positive.

The only “unpleasant surprises” to me are New Hampshire and Missouri.  On the other hand, there are a number of pleasant surprises, including Ohio, Colorado, South Dakota, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi and Texas.  The map almost looks like a very plausible near-future electoral college configuration to me, with the lightest green states going GOP, and the medium green and dark green ones going Democratic — maybe plausible in 2016 or 2020, that is !

I thought as me first diary I should take a look at what lies ahead in 2012. Take in mind, while I do take in mind facts in each state, these are purely speculative and should be taken with a grain of salt. However, I do put in mind three factors which I think would affect state by state results:

1.) Obama on the ballot: With Barack Obama most likely running for reelection, his presence on the ballot should increase Democratic turnout that was not present in Virginia or New Jersey in 2009, and will definitely have an impact of key states.

2.) Tea Party: Just as Obama’s presence will mobilize the left, I expect the Tea Party to have the same impact on the Republicans as they are currently having during the current primary calendar.

3.) 2011 Redistricting: I suspect by the time the states redraw their Congressional Districts, a number of House members may be drawn out of their old districts and may be seeking greener pastures of higher office.

So here’s my completely speculative predictions for 2012. I’ll look at the Senate first:

Arizona: Jon Kyl, once looking like a dead duck, seems to have gotten a second wind with immigration reform once again front and centre. Gabrielle Giffords is probably the most likely challenger, however at this point it doesn’t look like Kyl will be unseated.

Kyl 51%, Giffords 47%, Others 2%

California: Dianne Feinstein will be 79 years old, and while normal people expect someone that age to retire, this is after all the United States Senate, so I’m working with the assumption that Feinstein is running for reelection. Schwarzenegger is the only statewide Republican who’s won statewide, so I’ll use him as a template.

Feinstein 55%, Terminator 41%, Others 4%

Connecticut: Three words: Murphy vs. Lieberman. Republicans won’t even run a candidate to give Joementum a better chance to win.

Murphy 52%, Lieberman 48%

Delaware: I actually think Tom Carper will retire. Beau Biden, after recovering from his health scare, will make up for not running for his father’s seat. Republicans will pick a sacrifical lamb.

Biden 56%, Republican 44%

Florida: I’ve got three different scenarios for this one. George Lemieux might run, and possibly Jeb Bush. Marco Rubio does NOT win in 2010, and tries to take on Bill Nelson.

Nelson 53%, Lemieux 46%, Others 1%

Bush 57%, Nelson 40%, Others 3%

Rubio 51%, Nelson 48%, Others 1%

Hawaii: At 88 years in 2012, I’m guessing Akaka’s going to retire. Linda Lingle is going to run. In case Akaka doesn’t retire:

Lingle 51%, Democrat 49%

Indiana: I think Lugar’s got one more term in him, but this time the Dems aren’t letting him get away unopposed like last time; I’m just going to pull Baron Hill out of my arse here. Look for the Tea Party to make some kind of third party bid here.

Lugar 60%, Hill 30%, Tea Partier 10%

Maine: Tea Party makes good on its threat. Snowe faces a primary challenge and LOSES. Shockwaves are felt for about a week before people focus on the race. Mike Michaud runs for the Democrats and gets easiest pickup ever.

Michaud 58%, Republican 42%

Maryland: I think Cardin’s pretty weak. If the GOP finds another Michael Steele type candidate (I mean Steele before he became RNC Chairman), namely a black Republican, they might have a chance.

Black Republican 49.8%, Cardin 47.2%, Others 3%

Massachusetts: Pretty sure everyone is going to be watching this one come election night. Brown is popular now, but with Obama on the ballot and strong Democratic turnout this isn’t going to be the lucky break he got with Martha Coakley. Let’s just use Michael Capuano as the expected candidate.

Brown 51%, Capuano 49%

Michigan: This might be Stabenow’s last stand. The popularity of Dems in Michigan has gone down because of the economy, but with Obama on the ballot there is still a chance she could be saved. But this would depend if the GOP nominates a Tea Partier or a moderate Republican. Let’s use Dick DeVos as an example.

DeVos 50%, Stabenow 49%, Others 1%

Minnesota: I don’t see Amy Klobuchar losing at all.

Klobuchar 62%, Republican 36%, Others 2%

Mississippi: Same thing with Roger Wicker I see with Klobuchar.

Wicker 61%, Democrat 39%

Missouri: This is most likely going to be a McCaskill/Talent rematch.

McCaskill 52%, Talent 48%

Montana: Montana only has one Congressional district, so it’s not going to be changed anyway. Still, Denny Rehberg might be interested in running against a less stronger candidate like Jon Tester, who squeaked past the hapless Conrad Burns by a hair.

Rehberg 54%, Tester 44%, Others 2%

Nebraska: a Rasmussen poll last year showed Gov. Dave Heineman leading Ben Nelson by 31 points. Heineman’s very popular and could be seeking higher office after reelection this year. Either Nelson’s going to retire, or Heineman is going to run against him.

Heineman 59%, Nelson 41%

Heineman 70%, Some Other Guy 30%

That’s all I’ve got for now. Stay tuned for Part 2 of me Ridiculous 2012 Senate Predictions.

(Note: This is a two-part diary on analysis of Orange County, i am writing up analysis of the effect of Prop 8 tomorrow. I apologize if it seems too long, but this is from a perspective of an OC resident. Comments and criticisms are welcomed.)

In 2008, Barack Obama accomplished something no other Democrat statewide could do: Keep Orange County within single digits (47-50%). While everyone knew he would win California (maybe not by the double-digit margin he did it by), no one including many OC Democrats here would imagine him being on the cusp of a symbolic victory: Winning in territory the media calls “America’s most conservative county”, the home of Richard Nixon and the center of Conservatism in California.

Well, how did he do it? Well, much like the so-called “Obama Wave” swamped the entire country, it also hit ground here in Orange County, taking the top three populated cities (Santa Ana, Anaheim and Irvine) and making large inroads in normally-conservative areas. President Obama wasn’t the only major change to Orange County politics, the controversional ballot measure known as Proposition 8 also broke-down boundaries, and you wouldn’t believe which cities voted for (or narrowly against) and against it, but first let’s take a look at each cities performance for the 2008 Presidential election (08′ only):

City	PVI	% ’08	Notes
(Orange County)	R+4	47/50	Whole county.
Aliso Viejo	D+1	53/45	Incorporated after 2000 Census
Anaheim	R+1	51/47	Minority-majority; Second-largest city
Brea	R+10	42/56
Buena Park	D+1	53/44	Large Asian and Latino populations.
Costa Mesa	EVEN	52/46
Cypress	R+5	47/51
Dana Point	R+5	47/51
Fountain Valley	R+9	43/55
Fullerton	R+3	48.6/49.8	College town; Minority-majority
Garden Grove	R+5	48/51	Minority-majority; Large Vietnamese population
Huntington Beach	R+6	46/52	Libertarian-leaning
Irvine	D+5	57/41	College town
La Habra	R+3	49/48.6	Minority-majority
La Palma	R+3	48.4/49
Laguna Beach	D+11	63/35	Well known for large LGBT community
Laguna Hills	R+7	45/53
Laguna Niguel	R+6	46/52
Laguna Woods	EVEN	52/46	Extremely high percentage of Senior citizens
Lake Forest	R+7	46/53	Large evangelical presence; Added communities after 2000 census
Los Alamitos*	R+4	49/50
Mission Viejo	R+8	44/54
Newport Beach	R+12	40/58	Libertarian-leaning
Orange	R+7	45/53
Placentia	R+9	43/55	Large Hispanic population
Rancho Santa Margartia	R+9	43/55
San Clemente	R+10	42/56	Home of Ronald Reagan
San Juan Capistrano	R+10	42/56
Santa Ana	D+14	66/32	Largest city; Hispanic-majority; Most Democratic
Seal Beach	R+5	48/51
Stanton	D+2	54/44	Minority-majority
Tustin	EVEN	52/46
Villa Park	R+25	27/71	Most Republican; Least populated city
Westminster	R+10	42/56	Large Vietnamese population, home to Little Saigon
Yorba Linda	R+18	32/66	Birthplace of Richard Nixon

*Number 12 on the map, wasn’t added to the list.

If your one who prefers visuals (and tolerates crappy novice-style use of paint :P), then look below:

This result shows that Obama made a large impact on Hispanic voters (OC was very Pro-Clinton during the primaries, as well as Hispanics), winning the heavily hispanic cities of Santa Ana, Buena Park, Stanton and Anaheim. He also made inroads with more conservative areas in the south, losing Huntington Beach by only 6 points (46-52) while it has a majority GOP registration edge, and Lake Forest by a similar margin (46-53), known for its strong evangelical presence such as the Saddleback Church and its pastor Rick Warren. Obama also gained huge support amongst young voters, handily carring Irvine (home to UC Irvine), and narrowly (48.6-49.4) losing Fullerton (home to Cal State Fullerton). From here, we’re going through a city-by-city analysis of how it votes, demographics and whether its going to be competitive in the elections to come:

(Note: I will detail the important cities to look for below, so not all 34 cities will be listed below.)

Aliso Viejo:

Population: 46,123

Analysis: Nestled in the fast-growing area of South Orange County, Aliso Viejo (the youngest city as of 2001) is an example of a city that is trending Democratic. Not only did it vote for Obama by a comfortable 6 point margin, it was one of only 4 cities here in Orange County that voted AGAINST Proposition 8 (48.5-51.5) and the second-strongest showing against the measure, Laguna Beach being the strongest. It is the stereotypical “Country club” Republican city, fiscally conservative on most issues (Also voting against the state’s High speed rail initative, which passed) but fairly moderate-to-liberal on social issues, voting against Propositon 4 which sought to restrict contraceptives to minors unless a parent has consent. If any Democrat statewide seriously plans to turn Orange County blue, winning Aliso Viejo is a must.

Anaheim:

Population: 353,643

Analysis: The second largest city in the county and the main entertainment hub, home to Disneyland. Anaheim is a city that is easily classified by geography. Most of Anaheim is fairly urban and very Hispanic, mainly around the Downtown area. But to the East, lies a whole different kind of Anaheim: the community of Anaheim Hills. Already hearing the name, and you’re correct to guess that its a more wealthy, upscale area far different than its neighbor to the west. Home to mansions and a getaway for celebrities, Anaheim Hills is strongly GOP turf, fiscally and socially conservative but more so on the fiscal side. For someone to want to turn Orange County blue, they would need to keep their margins down in Anaheim Hills and fairly high in the rest of Anaheim.

Brea:

Population: 40,377

Analysis: This one is personal since this is where i live, but its also the most descriptive as well. Surrounded by large cities (Fullerton, Chino Hills and Diamond Bar), Brea is a sanctuary to escape from the bigger more urban cities in and around LA County. Politically, however Brea is strongly conservative, especially socially. There is a large and very influential Mormon presence here (There’s two LDS places of worship here alone!) along with large Catholic, and Baptist faiths. To the south is the even-more conservative city of Yorba Linda, who uses the city of Brea’s Police since they don’t have their own department. However there is a steadily growing Hispanic population, mainly from neighboring La Habra and cities near Brea in LA County, but like with Mormons they are socially-conservative as well, so its a double-edged sword. No Democrat will win here, but cracking 40% here is an accomplishment in its own.

Buena Park:

Population: 84,141

Analysis: It shares similarities with its neighbor Anaheim in that: Both have large Hispanic populations, and both are known for its amusement parks (Knott’s Berry Farm for Buena Park). Yet Buena Park is slightly more Democratic due to its large Asian population (most likely from nearby Cerritos in L.A County) and its higher turnout rates than Anaheim. Buena Park is a must win city, and getting around 55% would be enough for a squeaker county-wide.

Costa Mesa:

Population: 117,178

Analysis: Surrounded by larger cities, Costa Mesa is a popular city to live in due to its close proximity to Huntington/Newport Beach, and close to UC Irvine. But Costa Mesa has made the news for declaring itself a “Rule of Law” city, taking a hard line against illegal immigration. The person most responsible for bringing it up for a vote? The Mayor, Allan Mansoor, who is also running for the State Assembly (Gee, see how that all works out?) in 2010. Despite this, Costa Mesa is trending Democratic because of its large Latino population, along with people from nearby Irvine moving to Costa Mesa. Another must-win to turn the OC Blue.

Fullerton:

Population: 106,335

Analysis: Home to Cal State Fullerton (the largest in the state by enrollment), Fullerton is a fast-growing suburb of Los Angeles and an overall enjoyable city. Gaining a larger Latino population due to its close proximity to Whittier and South Los Angeles, makes Fullerton a swing city for elections to come.

Garden Grove:

Population: 174,715

Analysis: Garden Grove is home to a very large Vietnamese population, much like nearby Westminster is as well. In terms of voter registration, Republicans edge Democrats by around 3,000 voters but gave John McCain a solid 52%. The reason being because Garden Grove is very conservative on social issues, and viewed Obama as too liberal for them. Along with their generally anti-communist views, Garden Grove is also home to a small, but noticable Latino population, mainly from nearby Santa Ana.

Huntington Beach:

Population: About 200,000

Analysis: A well-known tourist destination for those looking for great surfing, Huntington Beach symbolizes a “Live free and Die” mentality, and its voting record is one to notice carefully. Voting for McCain 52-46% while subsequently voting against Prop 4 by 3 points and narrowly voting for Prop 8 by 2 points. If this trend continues, Huntington Beach will be poison for social conservatives.

Irvine:

Population: 212,184

Analysis: Irvine is a city that is rapidly turning Democratic, due to the extremely large influence the University of California, Irvine campus has on the city. In fact, all of the precincts in and around UC Irvine went around 80% for Obama. The city council has a Democratic majority, along with the Mayor, and has implemented many progressive policies. Democrats, Republicans and Decline to State voters all have around 30,000 voters each, meaning Irvine is a solid tossup for elections to come, but give it a Democratic edge due to its large youth voters.

Laguna Beach:

Population: 23,727

Analysis: Laguna Beach is the major LGBT scene in Orange County, and was one of the first cities to sponsor a resolution opposing Proposition 8, so its no surprise that Obama carried Laguna Beach by a landslide. Laguna Beach is the second most Democratic city in Orange County, and will likely overpower Santa Ana as #1 in the near future. Any Democratic candidate can easily win here.

Lake Forest:

Population: 78,720

Analysis: Home to the Saddleback Church and its pastor, Rick Warren, Lake Forest is situated within Southern Orange County and is close to the cities of Mission Viejo and Irvine. Despite its reputation as being home to major evangelical groups, Obama did surprisingly well, keeping his loss within single digits. Could he win here in 2012? It depends on a number of factors, but it can’t be ruled out.

Santa Ana:

Population: 355,662

Analysis: Santa Ana is ground zero for Democrats, its strongest (being the most populated city in the county) and safest city politically. Home to an extremely large (almost 80%) Hispanic population, Democrats routinely poll in the high 60’s and all of the currently elected officials (State Senate/Assembly/Congress) have Santa Ana as their major base.

After reading this entry http://www.fivethirtyeight.com… by Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight about dividing Texas up into 5 states I became interested in other possibilities.  After all, as the second most populous state in the nation there is certainly enough people to make several decently sized states.  To pay homage to Nate Silver for the idea I decided to keep a few of the states names, one of which is almost identical to what he did since it was so awesome.  Using Daves redistricting application this is my vision of Texas.  A few major differences between the 538 version and my version is that I have no problem splitting up metropolitan areas.

Plainland

The plains of west Texas are conservative.  So conservative that Plainland would be the most conservative state in the United States giving Barack Obama a mere 24% of the vote to John McCain’s 75%.  If you are not familiar with Texas do not let the geographic size fool you, it is the least populated of the new states.  If a Liberal, Progressive or Democrat gets off on getting crushed in elections and wants to put on a token campaign Plainland is the place.

Population:  2,547,860

Demographics:  71% White, 4% Black, 23% Hispanic, 2% Asian

2008 Vote:  McCain 75% Obama 24% Other 1%

Major Cities:  Lubbock, Amarillo, Witchita Falls

Congressional Seats: 3

East Texas

East Texas is slightly more populated that Plainland.  The small population increase may be enough to give East Texas an additional congressional seat.  The partisan difference between Plainland and East Texas is minimal.  Giving Barack Obama 29% of the vote compared to John McCain’s 70%.  Don’t expect much love for Liberals, Progressives or Democrats here since Plainland would be the second most conservative state in the United States based on 2008 Presidential Election results.  East Texas expands down into the greater Houston Metro area and is home, like Plainland, to several of the lesser populated DFW Metro area counties.

Population:  2,775,191

Demographics:  75% White, 13% Black, 10% Hispanic, 2% Asian

2008 Vote:  McCain 70% Obama 29%, Other 1%

Major Cities:  Tyler, Longview, College Station-Byran

Congressional Seats: 4

Trinity

Names after the trio of major cities which comprise the majority of the states population, Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington.  The four county conglomeration comprises the overwhelming majority of the population with the most of the remainder along I-35 running south including the cities of Waco, Killeen-Temple, Georgetown and Round Rock.  Dallas and Fort Worth would run the show and I suspect a death match of monumental proportions would ensue to see who gets the title of “State Capitol.”  At last we have a state where there is a county which voted for Barack Obama.  Dallas County gave Barack Obama a respectable 57% of the vote in 2008, also Dallas County has by itself has a population roughly equal to Plainland.  However in Trinity Dallas County was the only county to vote for Obama.  Based on the 2008 results Trinity would essentially be a smaller  version of old Texas mirroring the 55%-44% McCain-Obama results.  Given the large population Trinity would be home to 11 congressional seats.  

Population:  7,620,736

Demographics:  62% White, 13% Black, 20% Hispanic, 5% Asian

2008 Vote:  McCain 55% Obama 44%, Other 1%

Major Cities:  Dallas, Fort Worth, Arlington, Waco

Congressional Seats: 11

Gulf Land

With a population of 9,142,795 Gulfland is the most populous of the new states.  Austin would remain as the state Capital and the largest city is Houston.  Barack Obama would have won Gulf Land in by a slim 3% margin, roughly 73,000 votes.  As a slightly GOP leaning swing state Democrats would have to rely on serious get out the vote efforts in Travis, Harris and Hidalgo Counties to pull off wins.  One item I have neglected to speak about up to this point is demographics.  As seen in Plainland and East Texas they are rather bland, very white, Trinity is a bit more diverse.  However Gulfland would join the rank of majority-minority states at 44% white, 38% hispanic, 13% black and 5% asian.  

Population:  9,142,795

Demographics:  44% White, 13% Black, 38% Hispanic, 5% Asian

2008 Vote:  Obama 51% McCain 48% Other 1%

Major Cities:  Houston, Austin, Corpus Christi, McAllen-Edinburg

Congressional Seats: 13

El Norte

This would be a Democratic strong hold.  Obama would have won El Norte with a 13% margin, larger than Pennsylvania.  The cities of San Antonio and El Paso bring the majority of the population here.  However El Norte is not that populous, in fact it’s population is only about half a million larger than Plainland.  However that may be enough to give El Norte 5 seats.  

Population:  3,155,854

Demographics:  28% White, 5% Black, 64% Hispanic, 4% Asian

2008 Vote:  Obama 56% McCain 43% Other 1%

Major Cities:  San Antonio, El Paso

Congressional Seats: 4 or 5

The congressional seat estimates were done in an incredibly rough manner.  

(Cross-posted on Daily Kos and the Swing State Project)

Beginning in the 1960’s the Republican Party won many elections using their “Southern Strategy”.  The strategy worked pretty well for them for over three decades, but beginning maybe a dozen years ago, it began to have a counter-effect whereby areas outside the South began to increasingly vote Democratic (in part as a reaction to the “Southernization” of the GOP).   This trend accelerated rather rapidly over the last few election cycles, culminating in the 2008 election where the “Southern Strategy” literally blew up in the face of the Republican Party.  The latest polling from Research 2000  –summarized here in a diary from earlier today: http://www.dailykos.com/weekly… — indicates that this realigning trend has perhaps reached new and unprecedented levels.

Looking at simply support for President Obama and support for the Republican Party will give you an idea of what I’m talking about …

Obama:

Northeast – 81% favorable; 13% unfavorable

Midwest – 62% favorable; 33% unfavorable

West – 60% favorable; 36% unfavorable

“non-South” – 67% favorable; 28% unfavorable (for the “non-South” I combined the data for the three regions above, adjusting for population proportions)

South – 27% favorable; 68% unfavorable

As you can see, the numbers for the South vs. the “non-South” are almost exactly the reverse of each other !  If you look at this as a net plus/minus aggregate, the difference between the South and the non-South is an astounding 80 points !

It appears that, despite the fact that President Obama’s overall numbers have gone down over the last several polls, he is still VERY popular in the “non-Southern” area of the country which encompasses 70% of our population.

The Research 2000 polling also included data based on race/ethnicity.  I played with the numbers here a bit to try to extrapolate (an educated “guesstimate”) what the proportion of “Southern whites” thinks about the President.  For this purpose I assumed that blacks and Hispanics, regardless of whether they live in the South or not, would generally have a similar opinion of President Obama (blacks: 86% favorable, 5% unfavorable; Hispanics: 63% favorable, 30% unfavorable).  My extrapolated numbers for Southern Hispanics may be off a bit as the largest concentrations include both the relatively more Democratic population in Texas, as well as the relatively more Republican population in Florida; nevertheless, the Hispanic numbers here don’t play as large of a role as the numbers for the black population, so I feel my final extrapolated numbers are quite accurate.  After crunching all the numbers I “guesstimated” the following:

“Southern Whites” (approx. 21% of the U.S. population):

Obama – 5% favorable; 91% unfavorable

“everyone else” (non-Southerners of all races and Southern blacks and Hispanics; approx. 79% of the U.S. population):

Obama – 68% favorable; 26% unfavorable

The net difference between the two groups above is an amazing 128 points !

I repeated the entire process to analyze support for the Republican Party:

GOP:

Northeast – 6% favorable; 91% unfavorable

Midwest – 10% favorable; 81% unfavorable

West – 11% favorable; 77% unfavorable

“non-South” – 9% favorable; 83% unfavorable

South – 46% favorable; 40% unfavorable

“Southern Whites” – 64% favorable; 18% unfavorable

“everyone else” – 9% favorable; 84% unfavorable

The favorable number above for “everyone else” is really only a bit over 8.5% (which I rounded to 9%), so among the 4/5 of the U.S. population that isn’t “Southern white” the opinion of the Republican Party is, in effect, a 10 to 1 unfavorable to favorable ratio !  These numbers clearly support the assertion made by many over the last number of months that the Republican Party is becoming a rump, regional entity.

The purpose of this diary is not to bash Southern whites.  I simply find it very interesting how disparate the numbers are when comparing that particular population with the rest of the nation.  Much of this may already seem like “common knowledge” but the numbers from the Research 2000 polling are still mind-boggling to me.  

Perhaps the point to all this is that when looking at aggregate national poll numbers that measure the “popularity” of President Obama, the Republican Party, or health care for that matter, we should always keep in mind that they are just an average, and the overall “toplines” should not necessarily be used to measure the country as a whole.  Instead, greater consideration should be given to how the numbers play out regionally.  A good example of this includes when we’re trying to figure out how the 2010 Congressional elections will play out.  The GOP may indeed capture seats from us next year — but where will those seats be ?  With 46-40 favorable/unfavorable numbers in the South, it seems quite conceivable that a number of Southern seats may be lost; on the other hand, with a 6-91 numbers in the Northeast, it’s a much steeper hill to climb for the GOP in that region (btw, this poll also provides Generic Congressional Ballot preference numbers, though with decidedly larger numbers of undecideds; for ex. the generic GOP candidate in the South beats the generic Democrat by a 2 to 1 ratio, while in the Northeast the generic Democrat wins by a ratio of 5 to 1).  All politics is local, ofcourse, but understanding the current state of regional political differentiation in this country at this point in our history will go a long way towards planning strategy, whether the battle is winning Congressional elections or the health care debate.

One thing does seem certain here, though.  The GOP’s Southern Strategy is dead, and it appears to have taken the party down with it.  Whether the GOP can rise from the ashes is another question.  But if it rises, it will not be through the resurrection of the Southern Strategy.

UPDATE:

Reader KTinOhio (from the Daily Kos version of this diary) makes a really good observation re. the realignment process.  I am adding KTin’s comment below as I think it’s very relevant to this discussion:

First, the most recent polling – especially the Gallup tracker that gives Obama a +7 favorability rating – matches the election results closely.  Gallup had Obama up 50-43.  Last fall’s vote was 53-46, and very few of those 46% will support the president now.

Second, in comparing the Research 2000 regional favorability ratings as posted on Kos to the election results, it is odd that Obama is doing better now than he did in the election in three out of four regions.  Any guesses as to which one is the exception?

NORTHEAST

Popular Vote:  Obama 16,955,765 (59.44%), McCain 11,163,386 (39.14%), Total 28,524,587.  Electoral Vote:  Obama 117, McCain 5.

Research 2000:  81% Favorable, 13% Unfavorable.

MIDWEST

Popular Vote:  Obama 17,790,208 (52.98%), McCain 15,253,735 (45.43%), Total 33,576,392.  Electoral Vote:  Obama 97, McCain 34.

Research 2000:  62% Favorable, 33% Unfavorable.

WEST

Popular Vote:  Obama 15,720,655 (55.94%), McCain 11,765,120 (41.86%), Total 28,104,554.  Electoral Vote:  Obama 96, McCain 28.

Research 2000:  60% Favorable, 36% Unfavorable.

SOUTH

Popular Vote:  Obama 19,032,324 (46.14%), 21,767,161 (52.77%), Total 41,251,078.  Electoral Vote:  Obama 55, McCain 106.

Research 2000:  27% Favorable, 68% Unfavorable.

TOTAL

Popular Vote:  Obama 69,498,952 (52.87%), 59,949,402 (45.60%), Total 131,456,611.  Electoral Vote:  Obama 365, McCain 173.

Research 2000:  55% Favorable, 40% Unfavorable.

So, if we compare the election results to the current favorability polls, which are obviously not the same thing, but the election was a much a referendum on Obama as anything else, Obama has gone from +7 to +15 nationally, +20 to +68 in the Northeast, +8 to +29 in the Midwest, +14 to +24 in the West, and – 7 to -41 in the South.  Somehow, a lot of McCain voters in the Northeast now give Obama a favorable grade, as do a smaller number of McCain voters in the Midwest and West.  But in the South, the opposite is true; large numbers of Obama voters seem to have turned against him.

Thank you KTinOhio for crunching the numbers and for your very relevant and insightful analysis.

Now that all 9 Democratic pick-up states plus NE-02 have been analysed, I have also provided an exhaustive and most unique non-partisan summary of the pick-up states. I can guarantee you that there is information in this summary that you will not find anywhere else in this quality, clarity or combination.

There are a number of side-documents that go with the summary, plus links to all of the nine analyses and the GE 2008 final analysis for the entire Union.

I want to explain again that I have farmed this kind of thing out to Google Docs as it makes it easier for me to publish charts, tables and graphics. It is my hope that you will read the summary in it’s entirety. There are surprises all over the place that only become apparent when one scratches under the surface and researches the GE 2008 at the county level, county for county. In the case of the 9.25 pick-ups, we are talking about 696 counties.

The summary is divided into 2 parts and all of this information is after the jump.

Part I of the summary contains:

– links for the individual analyses for all the pick-up states plus the links for the GE 2008 analysis for the entire Union are given again. They will be reproduced at the bottom of this diary entry.

– an overview of the raw vote and percentage totals for the pick-ups states, first for 2008 only and then a comparison to 2004.

– three maps. One shows the geographic position of the pick-ups within the USA. The second shows the geographical relationship between the pick-ups and the Democratic retentions from 2004. The third shows the Democratic states from 2008 plus the 5 leanest GOP wins from 2008.

– a question: “How does this compare on a historical level?”

The question is referring to the number of electoral votes that changed parties in 2008, namely, 113 EV. I then provide a table showing each general election back to 1948 and how many electors changed parties, and in which direction. The answer to the question is that Obama’s EC shift is on par with the last election cycle, but less than in the 1980s.

Afterward, there is an introduction to the county-level analysis, including an exact numeric count of counties per state: Democratic retentions, Democratic pick-ups, Republican retentions and Republican pick-ups.

Quote:

“In the pick-up states, the Democratic party retained 146 of 148 Democratic counties from 2004 and then picked-up an additional 89 counties, for a total of 235 counties (33.76%). The Republican party lost 89 counties from 2004, retaining 459 counties and then picked-up 2 counties, for a total of 461 (66.24%). 235 + 461 = 696 counties.”

“Nationally, all 9 states trended Democratic as Obama won them and their electors according to the WTA (winner-takes-all) system, but when we look at the inner details, the picture is much clearer: 642 of 696 counties in the pick-up states (92.24%) swung Democratic. The remaining 54 counties (7.76%) swing Republican. This indicates a statistical grand sweep for the Democratic party in the pick-up states.

In 4 states, the ENTIRE state trended Democratic: Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada (all three western pick-ups) and Indiana.The pick-up in Indiana is historic not only because this is the first time since 1964 that a Democrat has won the state, but it also had the largest partisan shift of all 50 states in the GE 2008: +21.71%

The state with the largest contra-trend (Republican) against the national trend: Florida.”

Part I ends with maps of Ohio, Virginia and North Carolina, showing the geographic position of the 28 counties that swung Republican, showing their proximity to Appalachia.

You can link to Part I via Google Docs.

Part II starts with an extensive study of the 39 largest counties out of the 9.25 pick-ups states, plus Durham County (NC) as honorable mention.

Quote:

“I have done a statistical analysis of the 39 largest counties of the 9.25 pick-ups. These are all counties that had a total vote of more than 170,000 and at least one candidate should have also gotten at least 100,000 of those votes or very,very close to it. All of those counties meet both criteria. Two counties (Stark County / OH, Washoe County / NV) had no candidate with 100,000 votes or more, but in both cases one candidate was very close to 100,000 and the countwide total vote was well over 170,000.  Those 39 counties accounted for 44.49% of the total popular vote of the pick-up states, which is actually slightly LESS than it was in 2004 for the same states: 44.91%. Nonetheless, when only 39 of 696 analysed counties (5.60%, numerically) have almost half the electoral firepower of the region, then it is statistically very clear that the large urban areas have the real electoral firepower in presidential elections. The candidate who sweeps the urban areas has a far better chance of winning the presidency.

Of these 39 counties, there were 21 Democratic retentions, 8 Democratic pick-ups and 10 Republican retentions. This means that of the same 39 counties in 2004, the picture was much more even: in 2004, there were 21 Democratic counties of these 39 and 18 Republican counties.

The Democratic party picked up Hillsborough (Tampa) and Pinellas (Clearwater) counties in Florida, Wake (Raleigh) county in North Carolina, Washoe (Reno) County in Nevada, Hamilton (Cincinnati) County in Ohio, Jefferson (Golden) and Arahapoe (Littleton) counties in Colorado and Douglas (Omaha) County in Nebraska.”

The important thing about this study is it’s depth and breadth: each of the 39 (40) counties are analysed comparing 2008 to 2004, measuring raw vote and margin differences, also the counties’ percentual take of their respective states’ popular vote and also their take of the pick-up states combined. But the counties are also each given a spreadsheet to trace their voting history back to 1960 and the results are nothing less than amazing!

Next, from the analysis in Part II:

Superlatives:

– the largest raw vote total of all 39 counties: Miami-Dade County, FL: 864,636 votes

– the largest Democratic winning raw vote total: Miami-Dade County, FL: 499,831 votes

– the largest Democratic raw-vote margin of the pick-ups: Cuyahoga County, OH (Cleveland): +258,542 vote margin

– the three highest Democratic winning percentages: Denver- CO,  Boulder, CO and Cuyahoga- OH: 75.45%, 72.29% and 68.70%, respectively.

– the three largest Democratic winning margins (by percent): Denver- CO,  Boulder- CO and Cuyahoga- OH: +52.41%, +46.14% and +38.74%, respectively

– the highest democratic margin-shift (swing): Marion County, IN: +26.40% margin shift. This is especially impressive, as this shift was not from a pick-up, but rather, a Democratic retention county.

– the largest Republican winning raw vote total: Duval County, FL: 210,537 votes

– the largest Republican raw-vote margin of the pick-ups: El Paso County, CO: +51,419 vote margin

– the three highest Republican winning percentages: Butler – OH, El Paso- Co and Lee- FL:  60.52%, 58.69% and 54.67%, respectively

– the three largest Republican winning margins (by percent): Butler – OH, El Paso- CO and Brevard- FL: +22.58%, +18.82% and +10.37%, respectively

– the lowest negative Republican margin-shift (swing): Brevard County, FL: -5.73% margin shift

All of the Democratic retentions and pick-ups showed raw vote, percentual and margin GAINS.

All of the Republican retentions showed percentual and margin LOSSES.

4 of the Republican retentions showed raw-vote gains: Brevard, Lee, Polk and Pasco counties, all in Florida. The other 6 Republican retentions showed raw-vote losses.

9 Republican or Democratic tipping-point (margin = less than 4%) counties from 2004 became solid Democratic wins in 2008: Pinellas, Volusia and Orange Counties-FL, Wake, Guilford and Mecklenburg Counties- NC, Montgomery and Stark Counties – OH, Arapahoe County- CO

5 Republican retentions have become tipping point counties for 2012: Sarasota (+0.10%), Virginia Beach (+0.71%), Duval (+1.90), Seminole (+2.70%) and Pasco (+3.75%) . Statistically this means that 1/2 of the Republican retentions studied here are endangered territory for 2012 and (this has been proven historically many times over) in the case of a sucessful re-election campaign for the Democratic party in 2012, these five counties are the most likely candidates to become Democratic pick-ups in 2012.

O Democratic retentions or pick-ups are tipping-point counties for 2012.

Here is the EXCEL SPREADSHEET that has all of the raw calculations for the 39 (40) largest counties.

In order to simplify the look of the table and make the information easier to see, I created a table to show the chronological progression of each county from 1960 to 2008. For each county and year, I have assigned either a D, R or an I, depending on which party won the county in that year. And then I have shaded each cell according to winning party. I then organized the table in order from CORE GOP counties to CORE DEM counties. Take a good, hard look at the table when you read Part II, it is most enlightening.

You can link to Part II via Google Docs.

Quotes:

“In the case of some counties that visually look as if they should be core GOP counties there is instead the marking steady; these are GOP counties that should be core counties, but which almost flipped in 2008, so their status is now uncertain. And some Democratic counties are marked as steady as the margins are very lean.

But the table makes it very easy to see which years are landslide years: 1972 and 1984, to a smaller extent 1992 and 2008. In 1972, we see a sea of red go through all counties except Lucas County, OH. In 1984, we see a sea of red go through all counties except the bottom 5. At the top we see 3 core GOP counties that also resisted the Johnson landslide of 1964. Notice that all three counties are in Florida.

Starting in 1988, the Democratic party started re-building in the urban areas:

3 counties were added to the Democratic column in 1988, resisting the GOP pull in that year: Boulder, Summit and Lucas counties. And those counties have become core DEM counties since then.

8 counties joined the Democratic column in 1992 and have stayed there since then: Palm Beach, Broward, Volusia, Bernalillo, Franklin, Montgomery, Clark, Miami-Dade. They are mostly strong DEM counties, save for Montgomery and Volusia, which tend to go with leans margins. There are 4 more counties that joined the Democratic column in 1992, but were reclaimed by the GOP in either 1996 or 2000: Pasco, Wake, Stark, Guilford. Pasco returned to the GOP in 2004 and has stayed there. It is therefore the only county to complete buck the blue trend, in spite of reduced margins in 2008.

Mecklenburg and Pinellas counties joined the Democratic column in 1996, were reclaimed by the GOP in 2000 or 2004 and were reclaimed by the Democratic party in 2004 or 2008.

Fairfax joined the Democratic column in 2000 and has stayed there since, with ever increasing margins.

Orange and Marion counties joined in 2004 and were retained in 2008. Both of these retentions had massive margin shifts toward the Democratic party in 2008: +18.41 and +26.40%, respectively.

The 8 counties that Obama picked-up are clear to see in the middle of the table. Six of those counties have one thing in common: this is the first time they have gone Democratic since 1964, statistical evidence of a sweep similar to but not as extreme as Johnson in 1964: Hamilton, Douglas, Jefferson, Wake, Hillsborough and Pinellas counties were slightly smaller wins for the Democratic party than in 1964. However, Washoe and Arapahoe counties were larger wins for the Democratic party than in 1964, thus breaking a 44 year record. Notice that both of those counties are in the west.

We can see clearly from the table that the last time a party had flipped 8 counties or more was in 1992, when Bill Clinton picked-up 12 counties. George W. Bush, Jr. picked up 3 counties in 2000 and 1 more in 2004. Those counties returned to the Democratic party in 2000 or 2004.

In 1988- just analyzing these 40 counties- there were 8 Democratic counties and 32 Republican counties. In 1992, out of the same mix of 40 counties, there were 20 Republican counties and 20 Democratic counties, an even split. In 2000, there were 21 Republican counties and 19 Democratic counties. But in 2004, in spite of a republican re-election, the Democrats had 22 counties, the Republicans 18. And now in 2008, it’s 30 Democratic, 10 Republican. There can be no doubt about it: statistically, the urban areas in the Union have moved decisively to the Democratic party in 47 of 50 states (the evidence for which I will present before the end of 2009). This example from the 9.25 Democratic pick-ups is mild in comparison to the statistical data that came out of cities in core Democratic territory: Philadelphia (83% for Obama), Detroit (74% for Obama), New York (86% for Obama), Los Angeles (69% for Obama), Seattle (70% for Obama), Portland (77% for Obama) Chicago (76% for Obama), Boston (64% for Obama), Honolulu (70% for Obama), Milwaukee (67% for Obama), Madison (73% for Obama), New Orleans (79%), Baton Rouge, Dallas (deep in GOP territory: 57% for Obama), St. Louis (60% for Obama) etc, etc, etc.”

Conclusion:

“The Democratic wins in the pick-up states, as in the retentions, was not the example of the Democratic party barely holding on the to so-called “blue” states plus one “red” state or getting to one vote over 50%. The sweep through the pick-ups is statistically clear. The last time a sweep like this happened in the Republican party, it held the white house for 12 years. On the other hand, Johnson and Nixon had massive sweeps in 1964 and 1972 and in spite of this,the White House switched hands in the following cycles. So, though such a sweep is no forecast for the future, the data tells us quite clearly where the new battle lines will form in these nine states for the 2012 General Election. And both parties will be targeting key counties in key districts in 2010 in order to sway the affected area to their side before 2012 even gets off the ground.”

————————————————————–

Here the links to the individual analyses, with a detailed description afterwards:

Mid-west:

OHIO – Part I, Part II, Part III , raw data / INDIANA – Part I, Part II and Part III, raw data

IOWA – Part I, Part II, Part III, raw data / NEBRASKA CD-02 – raw data

South:

VIRGINIA – Part I, Part II, Part III, raw data / NORTH CAROLINA – Part I, Part II, Part III, raw data  

FLORIDA – Part I, Part II, Part III, raw data

West:  

COLORADO – Part I , Part II , Part III , raw data, special 9-county 48-year voting history study

Supplemental to Colorado: DEMOGRAPHIC and ECONOMIC profile of Colorado (p.4, hispanic population)

NEW MEXICO – Part I, Part II, Part III, raw data, special 12 county 48-year voting history study   Supplemental to Nevada: DEMOGRAPHIC and ECONOMIC profile of New Mexico (p.4, hispanic population)  

NEVADA – Part I, Part II , Part III, raw data, special 6 county 48-year voting history study  

Supplemental to Nevada: DEMOGRAPHIC and ECONOMIC profile of Nevada (p.4, hispanic population)   Quick Census facts on Nevada  

An analysis for NE-02 (which is the „.25″ part of „9.25″) will be published when I have received the complete precinct data for Douglas and (part of) Sarpy counties from election officials who are willing to dig up the data over 48 years for me. But a comparison 2008 to 2004 is already possible and here is the raw-data.

Links to the large analysis for the entire Union

Full analysis Part I

Full analysis Part II  

Full analysis Part III

Full analysis Part IV  

Full analysis Part V

raw-vote total data  

Obama’s standing in the national rankings since 1824  

Obama’s standing in the rankings, per state

As was the case with INDIANA and OHIO, I have now completed a massive county-by-county study of the results of the GE 2008 for VIRGINIA.

President Obama, who won the Commonwealth of Virginia with a +6.30% margin, was the first Democratic candidate to win this state since 1964 and the second Democratic candidate to win since 1948. Of note: VIRGINIA and COLORADO, both Democratic pick-ups in 2008, are the no. 1 and 2 states that came closest to Obama’s national winning margin; VIRGINIA went „blue” for slightly less than the national margin while COLORADO went for President Obama with slightly more than the national margin. It is rare when an unexpected battleground state flips and also mirrors the national numbers, but even rarer when this happens with two such states. Note also that these two states are in completely different regions of the Union, more proof that the GE 2008 was a so-called “re-alignment election”.

In a nutshell:

1.) Obama set a new VIRGINIA raw vote record for a candidate of any party: 1,959,932 votes, 242,573 votes more than Bush’s record-breaking raw vote from 2004. This is also the largest increase in votes for one party from one cycle the the next in VA history; the Democratic party added 504,790 votes to it’s total over 2004. Incidentally, McCain also did better than Bush (2004) in VIRGINIA: he bested Bush’s PV take by 8,046 votes. However, the ratio of the democratic vote increase over the GOP vote increase was 63.74 to 1! The popular vote growth rate for VIRGINIA was 16.91%.

2.) Obama won VIRGINIA with the 11th largest winning percent, the 11th largest winning margin, the 4th largest state partisan shift and the 4th largest Partisan Value* in US history for a Democratic candidate. Of the 14 Democratic winning cycles in VIRGINIA, this puts Obama roughly in the middle of the standings. That 4th largest partisan-shift, by the way, is larger than Johnson’s from 1964. You have to go back to 1912 to find a Democratic partisan shift in VA larger than this one. The dynamics of President Obama’s win in VIRGINIA are very, very different than in the other two states (IN, OH); this information is critical and has far reaching ramifications for both the Democrats and the GOP in future elections. For this reason, I’ve done such an analysis.

*Partisan Value = the difference between the state partisan shift and the national partisan shift. For instance, the partisan shift in Virginia was +14.50%, while the national partisan shift was +9.73%, which means that Virginia was +4.77% stronger than the national pull toward the democratic party in 2008.

I’ve divided the information into three parts, and that data is in the extended text.  

In Part I, there is important background information on Virginia, including details on the 14 DEM election cycles where a democratic candidate won the state.  Also in Part I is the general overview of the county-wide results. You can link via Google Docs.

Part II contains a very large, detailed and enhanced (in comparison to the analyses of INDIANA and OHIO) table of the 134 counties/independent cities in Virginia, first by descending partisan shift and an analysis of the partisan shift ranges, and then by county size (% of the 2008 statewide popular vote), descending. Harrisburg (independent city), Fairfax and Buchanan counties are used as a prime examples of how Obama won Virginia, even through counties where he lost. We also see statistical proof of the “appalachian phenomenon” in the southwest part of the state. You can link via Google Docs.

Part III is an analysis of the democratic pick-up counties and also of the “tipping-point” counties, including some colorful maps. The conclusion draws pointed differences between Obama’s historic win in Virginia and his wins in Indiana and Ohio (quoted also below). You can link via Google Docs.

Auxiliary sources:

I took the county-wide raw data for the entire state for both 2008 and 2004 and plugged it into an excel spreadsheet, which you can find here. Subsidiary data for all 134 counties/independent cities in VIRGINIA can be found here. Should you have difficulty calling up the spreadsheet, if you email me, I can send you a copy.

—————————————————————————————————————

Here a full quote from the conclusion:

“In INDIANA, every single county trended more or less democratic, without exception – there was a blue shift that moved the entire state and those overwhelmingly white, rural counties contributed greatly to Obama’s narrow win here – yes, the counties that he still lost to McCain. This shows a large level of GOP defection to Obama in 2008. Here, Obama gained 405,028 raw votes over Kerry from 2004, while McCain lost 133,790 raw votes over Bush from 2004, an uneven shift. Indiana’s PV growth rate over 2004 was 11.47%. And Obama won by +1.03%.

In OHIO, not every county trended democratic (11 trended GOP), but there were no GOP county pick-ups. Also, in Ohio, the largest cities, all five of them, played the crucial role in moving the state into the democratic column and those overwhelmingly white, rural counties contributed very little to Obama’s narrow win, in contrast to INDIANA. Surely there were some moderate GOP defections, but there were also a moderate amount of newly registered voters. Here, Obama gained 198,877 raw votes over Kerry’s total from 2004, while McCain lost 181,948 raw votes over Bush’s total from 2004, a moderate mirror image shift. Ohio’s PV growth rate over 2004 was a nominal 1.36%, way under the national PV growth rate of 7.46%. And Obama won by +4.58%.

However, in VIRGINIA, there was real resistance to Obama, but this resistance occured in counties that are „emptying out”, so to speak. We see a large poli-demographic shift in VA, with the north and the southeast gaining greatly in political strength for the democratic party. Here there were obviously far fewer GOP defections, if at all (McCain scored more raw votes in VA than Bush from 2004), but far more newly registered and democratic dedicated voters. This poses a far larger problem for the GOP than either Indiana or Ohio, for Obama’s +1.03% margin in Indiana can be overcome and Ohio is expected to be a battleground state in virtually every cycle, but the addition of more then 500,000 voters to the democratic rolls in just one cycle is much harder for the opposition to overcome. The best case scenario for the GOP is that VIRGINIA becomes a bitter battleground state. However, +6.30% is hardly a battleground margin. It is a better margin than Obama scored in OHIO, FLORIDA, INDIANA and NORTH CAROLINA. It is a lean winning margin, but a comfortable one and will require a minimum 12.60% shift back in order for the GOP to regain the state; I doubt that this shift will come from those 500,000 new voters. The worst case scenario for the GOP is that Obama cements VIRGINIA into the democratic column in his first term, adding the state to core democratic territory and thus making the electoral math for the GOP more difficult.”

Obama beat McCain 61%-37% in California, performing 7% better than Kerry in his 54%-44% win over Bush. Here are the county-by-county percentages for Kerry and Obama and the difference between those percentages. Counties that flipped from Bush to Obama are bolded.

County	Kerry	Obama	Diff		County	Kerry	Obama	Diff		County	Kerry	Obama	Diff		County	Kerry	Obama	Diff
Alameda	75.2%	78.8%	3.6%		Kings	33.8%	42.1%	8.3%		Placer	36.3%	43.4%	7.1%		Shasta	31.4%	36.0%	4.6%
Alpine	53.3%	61.0%	7.7%		Lake	53.2%	58.2%	5.0%		Plumas	36.9%	42.8%	5.9%		Sierra	33.2%	37.4%	4.2%
Amador	36.6%	41.6%	5.0%		Lassen	27.6%	31.5%	3.9%		Riverside	41.1%	50.3%	9.2%		Siskiyou	37.8%	43.3%	5.5%
Butte	44.2%	49.9%	5.7%		Los Angeles	63.2%	69.2%	6.0%		Sacramento	49.6%	58.5%	8.9%		Solano	57.2%	63.5%	6.3%
Calaveras	37.1%	42.2%	5.1%		Madera	34.8%	42.4%	7.6%		San Benito	52.7%	60.5%	7.8%		Sonoma	67.2%	73.7%	6.5%
Colusa	31.6%	40.0%	8.4%		Marin	73.3%	78.0%	4.7%		San Bernardino	43.6%	52.1%	8.5%		Stanislaus	40.4%	49.9%	9.5%
Contra Costa	62.3%	68.0%	5.7%		Mariposa	37.6%	42.5%	4.9%		San Diego	46.4%	54.2%	7.8%		Sutter	31.9%	40.8%	8.9%
Del Norte	41.4%	45.4%	4.0%		Mendocino	63.5%	69.6%	6.1%		San Francisco	83.1%	84.2%	1.1%		Tehama	32.1%	36.7%	4.6%
El Dorado	37.4%	43.7%	6.3%		Merced	42.3%	53.4%	11.1%		San Joaquin	45.9%	54.5%	8.6%		Trinity	42.8%	50.8%	8.0%
Fresno	41.7%	50.3%	8.6%		Modoc	25.8%	29.8%	4.0%		San Luis Obispo	45.6%	51.4%	5.8%		Tulare	32.9%	41.5%	8.6%
Glenn	31.7%	37.8%	6.1%		Mono	49.3%	55.6%	6.3%		San Mateo	69.5%	73.5%	4.0%		Tuolumne	38.6%	42.5%	3.9%
Humboldt	57.7%	62.3%	4.6%		Monterey	60.4%	68.2%	7.8%		Santa Barbara	53.2%	60.4%	7.2%		Ventura	47.6%	55.3%	7.7%
Imperial	52.5%	62.3%	9.8%		Napa	59.5%	65.2%	5.7%		Santa Clara	64.0%	69.5%	5.5%		Yolo	59.4%	67.1%	7.7%
Inyo	38.9%	43.9%	5.0%		Nevada	45.0%	51.5%	6.5%		Santa Cruz	73.0%	77.5%	4.5%		Yuba	31.6%	41.5%	9.9%
Kern	32.6%	40.2%	7.6%		Orange	39.0%	47.7%	8.7%

As you can see, a lot of the counties that showed the most improvement from 2004, including a lot of those that flipped, are in the areas of the state that experienced the fastest growth this decade. This is good news for us heading into the 2010 elections, because a lot of congressional and state legislative seats in these areas are ripe for the picking. This is also good news for redistricting, as the rapid growth of Democratic numbers gives the Democrats more room overall and allows for further gains by them.

You can also see that the counties in the multi-county Democratic stronghold of the Bay Area showed smaller Democratic growth numbers. This does not exactly mean that the region is trending Republican; rather, it has just pretty much maxed out its Democratic numbers. So just relying on our old strongholds in the Bay Area and L.A. County only takes us so far, and I am pleased to see the improvements in the fast-growing counties, which allow us to expand our playing field greatly.

Check below the flip for the juicy details on the numbers by districts.

The districts are colored by the party of their current occupants. Republican-held districts that voted for Obama are bolded.

Congressional District

District	Kerry	Obama	Diff		District	Kerry	Obama	Diff		District	Kerry	Obama	Diff		District	Kerry	Obama	Diff
CA-01	59.7%	65.6%	5.9%		CA-15	62.9%	68.4%	5.5%		CA-28	71.0%	76.2%	5.2%		CA-41	36.9%	43.7%	6.8%
CA-02	36.6%	42.7%	6.1%		CA-16	63.4%	69.6%	6.2%		CA-29	61.2%	67.6%	6.4%		CA-42	36.9%	44.9%	8.1%
CA-03	40.8%	49.2%	8.4%		CA-17	65.6%	72.1%	6.5%		CA-30	66.1%	70.4%	4.3%		CA-43	58.1%	68.0%	9.9%
CA-04	37.4%	43.9%	6.5%		CA-18	49.3%	59.2%	9.9%		CA-31	76.9%	79.9%	3.0%		CA-44	39.9%	49.5%	9.6%
CA-05	61.1%	69.5%	8.4%		CA-19	37.9%	46.0%	8.1%		CA-32	62.3%	68.2%	5.9%		CA-45	43.1%	51.5%	8.4%
CA-06	70.3%	76.0%	5.7%		CA-20	50.6%	59.6%	9.0%		CA-33	82.8%	86.8%	4.0%		CA-46	41.6%	47.9%	6.3%
CA-07	67.1%	71.7%	4.6%		CA-21	33.7%	42.1%	8.4%		CA-34	68.8%	74.7%	5.9%		CA-47	48.6%	60.1%	11.5%
CA-08	84.2%	85.4%	1.2%		CA-22	31.0%	38.3%	7.3%		CA-35	79.0%	84.4%	5.4%		CA-48	40.4%	49.3%	8.9%
CA-09	85.9%	88.1%	2.2%		CA-23	58.3%	65.5%	7.2%		CA-36	59.0%	64.4%	5.4%		CA-49	36.5%	45.1%	8.6%
CA-10	58.5%	64.9%	6.4%		CA-24	43.1%	50.5%	7.4%		CA-37	73.5%	79.6%	6.1%		CA-50	43.9%	51.3%	7.4%
CA-11	45.3%	53.8%	8.5%		CA-25	39.9%	49.4%	9.5%		CA-38	65.3%	71.3%	6.0%		CA-51	53.4%	63.1%	9.7%
CA-12	71.5%	74.3%	2.8%		CA-26	43.7%	51.0%	7.3%		CA-39	58.5%	65.5%	7.0%		CA-52	37.7%	45.0%	7.3%
CA-13	70.9%	74.4%	3.5%		CA-27	59.3%	66.1%	6.8%		CA-40	38.4%	46.6%	8.2%		CA-53	61.2%	68.2%	7.0%
CA-14	68.3%	73.0%	4.7%

Board of Equalization

District	Kerry	Obama	Diff
BOE-1	67.2%	72.1%	4.9%
BOE-2	42.7%	50.9%	8.2%
BOE-3	42.4%	50.6%	8.2%
BOE-4	65.6%	71.5%	5.9%

State Senate

County	Kerry	Obama	Diff		County	Kerry	Obama	Diff		County	Kerry	Obama	Diff		County	Kerry	Obama	Diff
SD-01	38.6%	45.8%	7.2%		SD-11	68.3%	73.3%	5.0%		SD-21	63.2%	69.2%	6.0%		SD-31	41.6%	49.7%	8.1%
SD-02	63.3%	68.7%	5.4%		SD-12	47.7%	57.9%	10.2%		SD-22	74.1%	78.3%	4.2%		SD-32	58.9%	68.4%	9.5%
SD-03	77.8%	81.6%	3.8%		SD-13	67.4%	72.2%	4.8%		SD-23	65.0%	70.0%	5.0%		SD-33	36.3%	45.2%	8.9%
SD-04	36.9%	43.0%	6.1%		SD-14	34.8%	42.5%	7.7%		SD-24	64.4%	69.6%	5.2%		SD-34	46.6%	57.3%	10.7%
SD-05	53.7%	62.3%	8.6%		SD-15	52.5%	59.1%	6.6%		SD-25	72.3%	78.7%	6.4%		SD-35	40.3%	47.9%	7.6%
SD-06	55.6%	64.3%	8.7%		SD-16	49.5%	58.9%	9.4%		SD-26	81.6%	85.8%	4.2%		SD-36	34.5%	42.1%	7.6%
SD-07	60.9%	66.7%	5.8%		SD-17	39.9%	48.7%	8.8%		SD-27	59.5%	66.1%	6.6%		SD-37	41.2%	50.3%	9.1%
SD-08	73.9%	75.8%	1.9%		SD-18	30.2%	37.5%	7.3%		SD-28	61.6%	67.2%	5.6%		SD-38	40.3%	48.3%	8.0%
SD-09	81.1%	84.0%	2.9%		SD-19	48.4%	55.6%	7.2%		SD-29	41.8%	48.9%	7.1%		SD-39	57.6%	64.8%	7.2%
SD-10	67.3%	71.4%	4.1%		SD-20	65.4%	72.5%	7.1%		SD-30	62.3%	68.7%	6.4%		SD-40	52.9%	62.1%	9.2%

State Assembly

County	Kerry	Obama	Diff		County	Kerry	Obama	Diff		County	Kerry	Obama	Diff		County	Kerry	Obama	Diff
AD-01	60.1%	65.5%	5.4%		AD-21	66.6%	72.0%	5.4%		AD-41	62.3%	67.8%	5.5%		AD-61	54.4%	63.2%	8.8%
AD-02	32.3%	38.0%	5.7%		AD-22	67.3%	72.1%	4.8%		AD-42	72.0%	75.5%	3.5%		AD-62	61.8%	71.3%	9.5%
AD-03	41.8%	48.0%	6.2%		AD-23	66.2%	71.5%	5.3%		AD-43	63.9%	70.3%	6.4%		AD-63	42.6%	51.1%	8.5%
AD-04	38.1%	45.2%	7.1%		AD-24	62.1%	68.0%	5.9%		AD-44	60.8%	67.2%	6.4%		AD-64	41.2%	50.0%	8.8%
AD-05	42.3%	51.1%	8.8%		AD-25	38.0%	44.9%	6.9%		AD-45	78.5%	80.6%	2.1%		AD-65	39.0%	47.0%	8.0%
AD-06	71.0%	76.2%	5.2%		AD-26	41.8%	50.7%	8.9%		AD-46	80.6%	83.9%	3.3%		AD-66	34.4%	43.7%	9.3%
AD-07	65.1%	70.7%	5.6%		AD-27	66.7%	71.8%	5.1%		AD-47	80.7%	85.3%	4.6%		AD-67	39.6%	46.1%	6.5%
AD-08	55.6%	63.3%	7.7%		AD-28	59.8%	68.3%	8.5%		AD-48	86.0%	89.1%	3.1%		AD-68	38.4%	47.4%	9.0%
AD-09	66.0%	73.4%	7.4%		AD-29	36.3%	44.4%	8.1%		AD-49	61.2%	65.3%	4.1%		AD-69	52.7%	64.4%	11.7%
AD-10	42.5%	51.1%	8.6%		AD-30	42.2%	51.1%	8.9%		AD-50	70.6%	76.9%	6.3%		AD-70	42.0%	50.9%	8.9%
AD-11	64.3%	69.7%	5.4%		AD-31	52.8%	62.2%	9.4%		AD-51	75.5%	81.4%	5.9%		AD-71	34.4%	44.6%	10.2%
AD-12	79.1%	79.0%	-0.1%		AD-32	28.7%	35.8%	7.1%		AD-52	86.1%	90.8%	4.7%		AD-72	38.3%	47.3%	9.0%
AD-13	85.6%	87.5%	1.9%		AD-33	43.1%	49.5%	6.4%		AD-53	56.9%	62.4%	5.5%		AD-73	38.5%	46.5%	8.0%
AD-14	80.6%	83.8%	3.2%		AD-34	32.6%	40.6%	8.0%		AD-54	56.6%	61.9%	5.3%		AD-74	42.4%	50.2%	7.8%
AD-15	49.6%	57.6%	8.0%		AD-35	59.7%	66.9%	7.2%		AD-55	63.0%	69.4%	6.4%		AD-75	43.2%	51.3%	8.1%
AD-16	85.6%	87.9%	2.3%		AD-36	38.4%	49.3%	10.9%		AD-56	55.1%	62.1%	7.0%		AD-76	59.6%	66.2%	6.6%
AD-17	49.7%	59.5%	9.8%		AD-37	43.8%	51.0%	7.2%		AD-57	58.8%	66.2%	7.4%		AD-77	35.8%	42.7%	6.9%
AD-18	69.7%	73.8%	4.1%		AD-38	43.6%	51.4%	7.8%		AD-58	60.8%	66.4%	5.6%		AD-78	51.2%	60.2%	9.0%
AD-19	69.3%	72.9%	3.6%		AD-39	69.9%	76.4%	6.5%		AD-59	39.6%	46.6%	7.0%		AD-79	56.0%	65.0%	9.0%
AD-20	65.9%	70.3%	4.4%		AD-40	60.3%	66.9%	6.6%		AD-60	38.4%	45.8%	7.4%		AD-80	51.6%	59.6%	8.0%

Before I analyzed OHIO, I first did an intensive analysis of INDIANA, which you can find at Google Docs, in three parts:

Part I

Part II

Part III

Excel Document with all raw data.

If you don’t have a gmail account, you probably don’t have access to the excel document, you can get it from me over email by writing to me here

Rationale: Obama, who took the Hoosier state by a +1.03% margin, was the first democratic candidate to win this state since 1964. This means that two complete generations of citizens from Indiana had voted in the majority for the republican presidential candidate until 2008.

A number of myths and angry retorts have gone around (mostly from the GOP and the extreme right) about what happened in INDIANA since election day, so I decided to do an exact analysis to get to the facts and to dispel myth and rumour. The results of this analysis are quite amazing.