Will D.C. Ever Go Republican?

[Simfan34]

Sorry for the bump, but let's say John Edwards vs. popular incumbent. We learn of Edwards' affair the week before the election. Still Dem hold?

[Verily]

Well here's a shot. Washington DC's population has actually started growing again and its largest single religious denomination is Islam [1]. So if the Republicans moderate somewhat from the Tea Party-ism and begins winning the Muslim vote [2] again and as US blacks become more middle-class there may be a remote possibility that the Republicans win DC.

[1] This is perhaps a bit unfair as Roman Catholics, Presbyterians, Baptists etc. are counted separately by the estimates while all Muslims are counted together.
[2] Not a crackpot idea actually. The Muslims are a natural Republican constituency much like East Asians-well-off, socially conservative, law-abiding. If not for the increasingly anti-Muslim rhetoric by the party...

Muslims in DC are Nation of Islam blacks, not the Middle Eastern immigrants you'd find in Astoria or Dearborn who used to vote Republican.

Also, DC is only 10% Muslim. Doubt it is the largest single denomination; at least Baptists must be more numerous, and probably Catholics, too.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Sorry for the bump, but let's say John Edwards vs. popular incumbent. We learn of Edwards' affair the week before the election. Still Dem hold?

Yes, without a doubt.

[Meeker]

Sorry for the bump, but let's say John Edwards vs. popular incumbent. We learn of Edwards' affair the week before the election. Still Dem hold?

Still guaranteed at least 65% of the vote I'd say.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Sorry for the bump, but let's say John Edwards vs. popular incumbent. We learn of Edwards' affair the week before the election. Still Dem hold?

Still no. DC Democrats really are that hackish.

A real life example would be the 1994 mayoral election, where the Democrat, Marion Barry, won 56% (despite running in a very Republican year, against a liberal Republican and getting in trouble with the law over drugs), compared to 42% for the Republican.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Popular incumbent moderate Republican vs. Democrat arrested for child molestation and abuse a week before the election.

Actually, maybe a little too much.

[Simfan34]

Lovely. Thank you.

[tpfkaw]

Sorry for the bump, but let's say John Edwards vs. popular incumbent. We learn of Edwards' affair the week before the election. Still Dem hold?

If John Edwards' affair with a dead boy is revealed the week before the election, it might be a toss-up.

[Mechaman]

Sorry for the bump, but let's say John Edwards vs. popular incumbent. We learn of Edwards' affair the week before the election. Still Dem hold?

If John Edwards' affair with a dead boy is revealed the week before the election, it might be a toss-up.

And that's only if the corpse was ten or under.

[Simfan34]

So DC would go Dem in a situation where the rest of the country went GOP, I am correct?

[HST1948]

So DC would go Dem in a situation where the rest of the country went GOP, I am correct?

You are right in that it would be the last part of the country to go Republican.  I would say anything short of a Republican getting above 75% nation wide, DC stays in the Democrat column (and even then...).

[Meeker]

It'd have to be even more than that. Democrats win D.C. about 90-10 in presidential elections that are about 50-50 nationwide. Given the 90-10 split, Republicans would need a swing of about 41 points to win D.C. If you assume the same swing nationally, the Republican candidate would need to get about 91% of the vote nationwide for the swing in D.C. to equal a victory.

Obviously such a situation will never occur. Therefore, D.C. will never go Republican.

(This all of course assumes we stay under the current party system.)

[greenforest32]

Will D.C. Ever Go Republican?

No.

[Nichlemn]

It'd have to be even more than that. Democrats win D.C. about 90-10 in presidential elections that are about 50-50 nationwide. Given the 90-10 split, Republicans would need a swing of about 41 points to win D.C. If you assume the same swing nationally, the Republican candidate would need to get about 91% of the vote nationwide for the swing in D.C. to equal a victory.

Obviously such a situation will never occur. Therefore, D.C. will never go Republican.

(This all of course assumes we stay under the current party system.)

Uniform national swing almost certainly breaks down at those levels.

[Antonio the Sixth]

It'd have to be even more than that. Democrats win D.C. about 90-10 in presidential elections that are about 50-50 nationwide. Given the 90-10 split, Republicans would need a swing of about 41 points to win D.C. If you assume the same swing nationally, the Republican candidate would need to get about 91% of the vote nationwide for the swing in D.C. to equal a victory.

Obviously such a situation will never occur. Therefore, D.C. will never go Republican.

(This all of course assumes we stay under the current party system.)

Uniform national swing almost certainly breaks down at those levels.

You're certainly right. Just for fun, however : John McCain would actually have needed to get 88.56% nationwide to win DC. Barry Goldwater, the republican who performed the best in DC ever (don't ask me why ), would still have needed 73.97%. Reagan in 1984 (worst performance ever) would have needed 94.6%.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

If Republicans ever begin to win African Americans again, on a large scale or at least 55% of them, DC would become competitive.

This.  DC is comprised of Less-affluent African-Americans, African-American Government Employees, White Government Employees, and White Liberals.  If any of those groups suddenly jumps to the GOP coalition, DC becomes competitive.  See 1994 D.C. Mayoral Election.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

Black Republican vs. white KKK member.

[Meeker]

If Republicans ever begin to win African Americans again, on a large scale or at least 55% of them, DC would become competitive.

This.  DC is comprised of Less-affluent African-Americans, African-American Government Employees, White Government Employees, and White Liberals.  If any of those groups suddenly jumps to the GOP coalition, DC becomes competitive.  See 1994 D.C. Mayoral Election.

A 56-42 loss is hardly "competitive".

[Nichlemn]

If Republicans ever begin to win African Americans again, on a large scale or at least 55% of them, DC would become competitive.

This.  DC is comprised of Less-affluent African-Americans, African-American Government Employees, White Government Employees, and White Liberals.  If any of those groups suddenly jumps to the GOP coalition, DC becomes competitive.  See 1994 D.C. Mayoral Election.

A 56-42 loss is hardly "competitive".

Competitive as far as DC as concerned, especially as some people in this thread are like "zomg DC will always go 75%+ Dem forever".

Now, Schwartz getting to 50% in that election may have been a much steeper climb. A third party black candidate may have been able to split the vote, but there's a risk such a candidate would attract a lot of protest votes that were going to Schwartz.

[phk]

This uniform swing business is silly. If one particular demographic bolts parties, things will change and certain areas will be more swingy than others.

[GOP732]

If Republicans ever begin to win African Americans again, on a large scale or at least 55% of them, DC would become competitive.

This.  DC is comprised of Less-affluent African-Americans, African-American Government Employees, White Government Employees, and White Liberals.  If any of those groups suddenly jumps to the GOP coalition, DC becomes competitive.  See 1994 D.C. Mayoral Election.

A 56-42 loss is hardly "competitive".

especially when u consider that the winner was caught on camera using crack with a prostitute.   

[Meeker]

If Republicans ever begin to win African Americans again, on a large scale or at least 55% of them, DC would become competitive.

This.  DC is comprised of Less-affluent African-Americans, African-American Government Employees, White Government Employees, and White Liberals.  If any of those groups suddenly jumps to the GOP coalition, DC becomes competitive.  See 1994 D.C. Mayoral Election.

A 56-42 loss is hardly "competitive".

Competitive as far as DC as concerned, especially as some people in this thread are like "zomg DC will always go 75%+ Dem forever".

Now, Schwartz getting to 50% in that election may have been a much steeper climb. A third party black candidate may have been able to split the vote, but there's a risk such a candidate would attract a lot of protest votes that were going to Schwartz.

I don't really think "competitive as far as DC is concerned" really makes sense. Either something is competitive - either side can win - or it isn't. "Competitive as far as DC is concerned" still means it's not close to winnable for the Republicans and therefore isn't competitive.

[Mechaman]

It'd have to be even more than that. Democrats win D.C. about 90-10 in presidential elections that are about 50-50 nationwide. Given the 90-10 split, Republicans would need a swing of about 41 points to win D.C. If you assume the same swing nationally, the Republican candidate would need to get about 91% of the vote nationwide for the swing in D.C. to equal a victory.

Obviously such a situation will never occur. Therefore, D.C. will never go Republican.

(This all of course assumes we stay under the current party system.)

Uniform national swing almost certainly breaks down at those levels.

You're certainly right. Just for fun, however : John McCain would actually have needed to get 88.56% nationwide to win DC. Barry Goldwater, the republican who performed the best in DC ever (don't ask me why ), would still have needed 73.97%. Reagan in 1984 (worst performance ever) would have needed 94.6%.

How exactly are you coming up with those numbers Tony?

District of Columbia:

1. Barack H. Obama (Democratic-Illinois) 2008 92.46% Popular Vote
2. John Kerry (Democratic-Massachusetts) 2004 89.18% Popular Vote
3. Lyndon Johnson (Democratic-Texas) 1964 85.5% Popular Vote
4. Walter Mondale (Democratic-Minnesota) 1984 85.38% Popular Vote
5. William J. Clinton (Democratic-Arkansas) 1996 85.19% Popular Vote
6. Albert Gore, Jr. (Democratic-Tennessee) 2000 85.16% Popular Vote
7. William J. Clinton (Democratic-Arkansas) 1992 84.64% Popular Vote
8. Michael Dukakis (Democratic-Massachusetts) 1988 82.65% Popular Vote
9. Hubert H. Humphrey (Democratic-Minnesota) 1968 81.82% Popular Vote
10. James Carter (Democratic-Georgia) 1976 81.63% Popular Vote
11. George McGovern (Democratic-South Dakota) 1972 78.1% Popular Vote
12. James Carter (Democratic-Georgia) 1980 74.89% Popular Vote

Cos yeah, I'm pretty sure Reagan did better in 1984 than McCain did in 2008.
And while Goldwater's numbers were quite impressive for a conservative Republican, Tricky Dick seems to have the best numbers with 21% in 1972.

[Antonio the Sixth]

This is Uniform National Swing : you need to take into account the national result. Mondale got crushed by 18 points, yet still managed an exceptional performance in DC. As your list shows, LBJ got rounghly the same score than Mondale : but he was winning in a landslide nationwide ! Thus his performance should be highly relativized.