Since we now know the presidential results in most congressional districts for 2008, we now possess all the tools we need to calculate the new PVIs.
Charlie Cook’s official results will be out in a few months, but unlike in 2004 (where results from 2000 had to be fitted to the new congressional districts) there’s no reason we shouldn’t jump the gun and have our own figures ready. And there’s every reason to want to know who’s representing their districts and who’s a lot more vulnerable than they used to be.
I’m therefore going to attempt to calculate the new PVIs for the states listed in the diary title. They were picked because we have all the results from districts in those states, and because they represent around 20% of America’s congressioanl districts and I’m too lazy right now to do more than that in a sitting.
My methodology conforms to that given in David NYC’s comment to DGM’s diary. My figures are taken from this spreadsheet. My figures are approximate and you should probably ignore everything beyond the decimal point, because I’m using data rounded to the nearest whole number for the district-by-district results.
Details in the extended entry:
If anybody knows how to render this in tabular form, I’m all ears. There’s a Google spreadsheet with my data here and I’ve given a brief list of the new PVIs below.
The numbers aren’t that great, but that’s mostly because of Obama’s improved performance over Kerry. Expect a lot of these numbers to move back slightly towards the Dems if Obama can perform similarly in 2012, and bear in mind that D+0 is now a lot safer than it used to be. It’s also worth noting that the likes of Arkansas and north Florida were much better territory for Gore than for Obama.
AK-AL: R+15.6
AR-1: R+10.4
AR-2: R+7.0
AR-3: R+18.0
AR-4: R+9.4
AZ-1: R+8.2
AZ-2: R+15.3
AZ-3: R+11.8
AZ-4: D+10.7
AZ-5: R+7.2
AZ-6: R+16.8
AZ-7: D+3.6
AZ-8: R+7.0
CT-1: D+10.0
CT-2: D+3.7
CT-3: D+6.7
CT-4: D+2.8
CT-5: R+0.2
DE-AL: D+4.4
FL-1: R+23.6
FL-2: R+8.0
FL-3: D+15.7
FL-4: R+19.2
FL-5: R+11.5
FL-6: R+15.0
FL-7: R+11.0
FL-8: R+5.0
FL-9: R+9.5
FL-10: R+3.2
FL-11: D+9.0
FL-12: R+8.5
FL-13: R+8.0
FL-14: R+13.5
FL-15: R+9.5
FL-16: R+7.0
FL-17: D+31.8
FL-18: R+5.2
FL-19: D+12.2
FL-20: D+10.1
FL-21: R+7.7
FL-22: R+1.7
FL-23: D+25.8
FL-24: R+7.5
FL-25: R+7.0
GA-1: R+18.4
GA-2: R+1.7
GA-3: R+21.4
GA-4: D+21.7
GA-5: D+23.2
GA-6: R+20.4
GA-7: R+19
GA-8: R+12.5
GA-9: R+30.1
GA-10: R+17.0
GA-11: R+22.6
GA-12: R+1.7
GA-13: D+12.2
HI-1: D+8.5
HI-2: D+11.6
IA-1: D+2.4
IA-2: D+4.6
IA-3: R+1.2
IA-4: R+2.4
IA-5: R+11.6
ID-1: R+20.4
ID-2: R+20.0
IL-1: D+31.3
IL-2: D+33.3
IL-3: D+8.1
IL-4: D+29.2
IL-5: D+16.7
IL-6: R+1.9
IL-7: D+31.8
IL-8: R+2.9
IL-9: D+17.0
IL-10: D+3.6
IL-11: R+3.2
IL-12: R+0.1
IL-13: R+4.0
IL-14: R+4.0
IL-15: R+8.7
IL-16: R+4.5
IL-17: D+1.7
IL-18: R+7.5
IL-19: R+12.8
but obviously something is seriously wrong in your methodology. For example: How could it be that CT-05 goes from D+4 to R+0.2 if Obama outperformed the national average by 3% here. Thats impossible…
I was working on this exact same diary, but it looks like you beat me to it. FWIW, your numbers match mine (with a few exceptions where we differ by 0.1)
Most interestingly about the PVI formula is that the USA does NOT necessarily have a PVI of zero (I had always thought otherwise). For 2005-2008, the USA had a PVI of D+0.8. For 2009-2012, the USA has a PVI of R+2.5! This is a function of the formula, which seems completely screwy to me, but nevertheless is the way the formula works. Thus, there’s a background shift of R+3.3 in every congressional district and if you want to compare the new PVI to the old one, you should mentally subtract 3.3 points from every R district and add 3.3 points to every D district.
of more than a few points (unlike 2000 and 2004), the concept of PVI starts to become abstract and a little silly. If I understand this methodology correctly, a district that both Kerry and Obama won could conceivably get an R+ PVI now.
I am also listing the 10 districts that we don’t have data for yet, and including the old PVIs in parentheses and italics.
CA-01: D+13 (D+10)
CA-02: R+11 (R+13)
CA-03: R+6 (R+7)
CA-04: R+10 (R+11)
CA-05: D+15 (D+14)
CA-06: D+23 (D+21)
CA-07: D+19 (D+19)
CA-08: D+35 (D+36)
CA-09: D+37 (D+38)
CA-10: D+11 (D+9)
CA-11: TBD (R+3)
CA-12: D+23 (D+22)
CA-13: D+23 (D+22)
CA-14: TBD (D+18)
CA-15: TBD (D+14)
CA-16: TBD (D+16)
CA-17: D+19 (D+17)
CA-18: TBD (D+3)
CA-19: TBD (R+10)
CA-20: TBD (D+5)
CA-21: TBD (R+13)
CA-22: R+17 (R+16)
CA-23: TBD (D+9)
CA-24: TBD (R+5)
CA-25: R+6 (R+7)
CA-26: R+4 (R+4)
CA-27: D+13 (D+13)
CA-28: D+24 (D+25)
CA-29: D+14 (D+12)
CA-30: D+18 (D+20)
CA-31: D+29 (D+30)
CA-32: D+15 (D+17)
CA-33: D+35 (D+36)
CA-34: D+22 (D+23)
CA-35: D+32 (D+33)
CA-36: D+12 (D+11)
CA-37: D+26 (D+27)
CA-38: D+18 (D+20)
CA-39: D+12 (D+13)
CA-40: R+8 (R+8)
CA-41: R+11 (R+9)
CA-42: R+10 (R+10)
CA-43: D+13 (D+13)
CA-44: R+7 (R+6)
CA-45: R+4 (R+3)
CA-46: R+6 (R+6)
CA-47: D+4 (D+5)
CA-48: R+6 (R+8)
CA-49: R+10 (R+10)
CA-50: R+4 (R+5)
CA-51: D+8 (D+7)
CA-52: R+10 (R+9)
CA-53: D+15 (D+12)
http://spreadsheets.google.com…
and Idaho’s 1st district clocked in at R+17, not R+20. Who was that, and what’s the methodology difference?
the PVI naturally penalizes the winning party in certain states and districts. For example
Obama won nationally by 52% roughly
any district where he got 51% will be R+1 going by this years results because that district voted 1 point more Republican than the country as an average.
Kerry, who did worse nationally than Obama will be a drag on the PVI since all the districts and states will be compared to THIS YEARS national election.
So if Obama won a district with 53 but Kerry lost it with 49, its a Republican leaning district. If both Kerry and Obama won it with 51% its still Republican leaning simple because it didn’t vote as Democratic as the rest of the country.
The Cook PVI rating, in my opinion, is an awful way to do this. They way I have always done it is to use the last 2 elections and ignore the national average. If Obama won a district with 55 and Kerry won it with 52, it have a rating of D+3.5 Comparing a district to the national electorate is pointless when a party wins nationally, it sets the bar higher for one side. In this years case, both Kerry and Obama had to break the 52% barrier in a district in order for it to have a D+ rating. Having a district that voted Dem in the past umpteen elections by 51% and giving it a rating of R+1 is BS, that district does not lean to the Republicans.
Holy crap.