tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post6927919439886229780..comments2024-03-26T05:22:08.256-04:00Comments on Frontloading HQ: The Electoral College Map (7/6/08)Josh Putnamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06301836432446874997noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-60586935354977576172008-07-07T17:41:00.000-04:002008-07-07T17:41:00.000-04:00Jack,It isn't all bad news for the Dems. Even if ...Jack,<BR/>It isn't all bad news for the Dems. Even if things stay as they are now in the 26 states that are various shades of red on the current map, Democrats will still control 6 of those state legislatures (AL, AR, LA, MS, NC and WV). Six more state legislatures have split partisan control across chambers (IN, KY, MT, OK, TN and VA) and Nebraska has that non-partisan, unicameral legislature. That leaves just half of the red states that are controlled by Republicans. <BR/><BR/>On the whole, Democrats are still in a pretty good position in the state legislatures. Of course, there are different types of Democrats in different states and that makes for a different type of district drawing from state to state.<BR/><BR/>I'm going to think about this one a bit more. It may be something that we can expand to its own post.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-69800257663683788232008-07-06T23:46:00.000-04:002008-07-06T23:46:00.000-04:00Yet another reason the 50-state strategy is necess...Yet another reason the 50-state strategy is necessary, actually. Democrats will need to compete in more traditionally red states as they gain congressional seats and electoral votes.Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04365194237710177589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-82976348888688503392008-07-06T22:28:00.000-04:002008-07-06T22:28:00.000-04:00Jack,I agree. This is one of the doomsday misconce...Jack,<BR/>I agree. This is one of the doomsday misconceptions that many Democrats have. "Crap, all the states that are gaining seats, and thus electoral votes, are red states!" Well, human migratory patterns affect Democrats too. They may not like it, but a few may be forced to move from, say, New York to Texas. As Nate Silver said just the other day, <A HREF=" North Carolina could be 2012's Virginia, and Georgia could be 2016's" REL="nofollow">"North Carolina could be 2012's Virginia, and Georgia could be 2016's..."</A><BR/><BR/>If Democrats are really interested in building something, it isn't this election that is as important the ones in 2010. Those elections will be the ones that, on the state legislative level at least, will determine who will draw the districts for 2012-2020. <BR/><BR/>There's always something to talk about.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-17550668188809941472008-07-06T21:58:00.000-04:002008-07-06T21:58:00.000-04:00As a Democrat, this trend is very frustrating, and...As a Democrat, this trend is very frustrating, and what led Howard Dean (okay, okay, that was me writing as an anonymous) to suggest a "creative" solution. Al Gore's 5-point loss in 2000 would have been larger under the current map - even New Hampshire wouldn't have saved him, sparing Ralph Nader a lot of vitriol from Democrats.<BR/><BR/>Then again, this might not be all bad for Democrats. As more people move to certain states, particularly in the South, they are becoming more Democratic. This won't help in Utah, of course, but we are already seeing changes, with states such as Virginia becoming competitive.Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04365194237710177589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-84482023036906995202008-07-06T21:00:00.000-04:002008-07-06T21:00:00.000-04:00Now that's a 50 state strategy, Howard! I'll have...Now that's a 50 state strategy, Howard! <BR/><BR/>I'll have to find the link, but Texas and Utah are at the top of the list of states projected to gain congressional seats after the next census. Texas adds three and Utah gets the one seat they feel North Carolina stole from them in 2002. <BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:HILzgVLUp94J:www.apri.org/ht/a/GetDocumentAction/i/1932+states+projected+to+gains+seats+in+2012&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us" REL="nofollow">Here's a link</A>. It is a bit dated, but perhaps Barone will have an updated version soon.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-56510985893312726172008-07-06T20:10:00.000-04:002008-07-06T20:10:00.000-04:00I applaud your efforts to strip Idaho of an electo...I applaud your efforts to strip Idaho of an electoral vote. Can you also take care of Utah, Alabama, Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas while you're at it?<BR/><BR/>Please assign any extra electoral votes you may have lying around to Vermont and the District of Columbia.<BR/><BR/>Thanks much.<BR/><BR/>Sincerely,<BR/><BR/>Howard Dean<BR/>Chairman, Democratic National CommitteeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-65236320752180488822008-07-06T19:04:00.000-04:002008-07-06T19:04:00.000-04:00Alright, Idaho is fixed. It will undoubtedly be d...Alright, Idaho is fixed. It will undoubtedly be difficult for me to make amends to the good folks in the second district of the Gem state. Here's hoping I can (at least for the loyal FHQ readers from that district.).<BR/><BR/>Many thanks to Anonymous for pointing out the Idaho flaw. I'm honestly shocked that that mistake made it this far. <BR/><BR/>And for the record, the Montana mistake I referred to in the "Note" above was in the tally at the bottom of the map and not on the Montana part of the map itself. Ugh, it's bad enough that Idaho was screwy.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-28528230475747826792008-07-06T17:39:00.000-04:002008-07-06T17:39:00.000-04:00Montana is fixed in the poll table.Montana is fixed in the poll table.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-69069515434597031382008-07-06T17:38:00.000-04:002008-07-06T17:38:00.000-04:00Ugh. I'm not as sharp on the road as I am at home...Ugh. I'm not as sharp on the road as I am at home. Ha! That still doesn't explain Idaho. Good catch, Anonymous. Jack, I'll get that Montana poll fixed as well. That one will be a bit easier to fix though.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-26627216032185463942008-07-06T17:26:00.000-04:002008-07-06T17:26:00.000-04:00Also seems that the Idaho mistake is on all of the...Also seems that the Idaho mistake is on all of the maps, not just this one.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-89718003375546855182008-07-06T15:59:00.000-04:002008-07-06T15:59:00.000-04:00Your table of new polls shows the Montana poll as ...Your table of new polls shows the Montana poll as +5 McCain. It was +5 for Obama.Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04365194237710177589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-40545621837981843662008-07-06T15:20:00.000-04:002008-07-06T15:20:00.000-04:00Glad you fixed Montana on the map, but Idaho is st...Glad you fixed Montana on the map, but Idaho is still wrong. They have 4 electoral votes, not 3.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-48530302912898406512008-07-06T12:50:00.000-04:002008-07-06T12:50:00.000-04:00Thanks Scott.I suppose the real point of contentio...Thanks Scott.<BR/><BR/>I suppose the real point of contention isn't whether New York is a part of the Northeast, but whether you break the country down in to more than 4 (Census-style) regions. New York, in a more than 4 region definition, is typically part of the Atlantic region (with NJ, PA, MD and DE). <BR/><BR/>Region is a horrible variable though. Anytime Delaware is treated as part of the South (as it is in the Census and in the GSS--which I think mirrors that Census measure), you have a questionable measure. It is good on a basic level, but as a means of grouping states together for some explanatory value, it falls short. <BR/><BR/>In my own work on frontloading, region, whether in the Census sense, operationalized by the various collections of states that have actively organized and attempted (sub)regional primaries or by, say, Elazar's measure of state political culture, has always performed poorly. Then again, I'm in the process of refining the measure of the concept (the cultural one especially) for my dissertation. Readers of FHQ may be exposed to various parts of that effort in the future. I suppose that can either be viewed as a sneak peek or a warning. Ha!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-21214556161104285942008-07-06T12:19:00.000-04:002008-07-06T12:19:00.000-04:00Nice work, as usual.I live in New York, and I've n...Nice work, as usual.<BR/><BR/>I live in New York, and I've never heard it not counted as Northeast! It's not in New England, but New England is a subset of the Northeast. Other states in the Northeast but not New England certainly include Pennsylvania and New Jersey, and, depending on who you talk to, a bit more than that. The Census Bureau stops with those, though three + New England, though.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14690577323454357276noreply@blogger.com