Analysis of Party voting trends by state

[Fritz]

This is a mathematical analysis based on how each state voted in the 2004 election, and current makeup of congressional delegations, and governors.  To calculate this in Excel, I have assigned negative point values to the Republican party, and positive point values to the Democratic party.

First, each party is awarded a point for each state depending on how the state voted in the 2004 Presidential election.

Next, each party is awarded a point if both of the state’s senators belong to the same party.

For house majority and governorship, I am assigning less value.  Each of these is worth half a point.  Total possible: 3 points per state.

Here are the results:

-2.5 to –3 (Safe Republican): Alabama, Alaska, Georgia, Idaho, Kentucky, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas, Utah.  92 electoral votes.

-2 (Strong Republican):  Florida, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, Oklahoma, Wyoming.  58 electoral votes.

-1.5 to –1 (Lean Republican):  Arizona, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia.  103 electoral votes.

0 (True Tossups):  Colorado, Iowa, Montana, North Dakota.  22 electoral votes.

1 (Lean Democrat):  Arkansas, Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, West Virginia.  29 electoral votes.

2 (Strong Democrat):  California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Michigan, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont.  121 electoral votes.

3 (Safe Democrat):  Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Washington, Wisconsin.  110 electoral votes (113 if we add D.C.).


Here is the map:

Comments?

(Please let me know if you notice any mistakes.)

[Fritz]

I find it interesting that Arkansas and West Virginia, both of which voted for Bush in 2004, end up in the Lean Democrat group here.  Also, all of the Tossup states were Bush states.  Could North Dakota and Montana go to the Democrat in 2008?

[Fritz]

Could they?  Maybe.  But not in a race that wasn't an absolute landslide.  The Democrats also had the triects in North Dakota in 2004, and it didn't get them anywhere.  In Montana, Democrats can thank their lucky stars for a) a terrible state GOP in 2004, b) a terrible national GOP in 2006.

As interesting as it turns out, this measure doesn't mean much for federal politics.

Okay, my map is based solely on raw data.  Subjective considerations, such as those pointed out by Nighthawk, are not taken into account.  I get the impression from the forum that, for example, most of you don't consider Wisconsin to be Safe Democrat- it is viewed as more of a swing state, despite having a Democrat Governor, two Democrat Senators, a Democrat majority in the House, and voting for Kerry.

So, here is my challenge to you all.  I have divided the states into 7 groups, based on raw data.  What states are not, in your opinion, placed in the correct group?  Please support your opinions with convincing arguments.

[Fritz]

2008 Presidential race.

[Fritz]

Okay, well, I had fun putting it together anyways.  If I had the time (I definitely don't), I'd try to put this map together for past election years, and compare it to the Presidential election results map, to see how close it came.

Most people I know, who care about voting at all, tend to vote a straight party line, or at least have a strong leaning towards a particular party.  So I have a little trouble understanding this concept of local vs. national politics having different trends in the same locality.