The GOP is holding a state senate

redistricting meeting on Friday.  I hope the democrats show up for it.  If not the committee might just pass the plan with no objections.

Okay kidding about that but one can imagine state senate redistricting could be brutal this year.  

---

by: rdelbov @ Fri Feb 18, 2011 at 03:22:52 AM UTC

Wisconsin Legislature

While looking at the Congressional districts can be helpful, I think looking at the actual districts would be better. Here are two Excel spreadsheets that point out the partisan nature of all Assembly seats and the Senate seats that were up last year.  Since 3 Assembly seats correspond with a Senate seats, you can fill in the gaps using the Assembly seats. These spreadsheets aggregate the results of the 08 presidential, 06 gov, 04 pres, and 02 ag (ag is used because the gov race was three way so it messes up the two party preferred).  So it is a bit old and does not include the 10 gov, but is still offers a pretty detailed look at the partisan nature of the seats.  Actually having only the Senate seats from last year is helpful because these were the seats that brought in the Dem majority in 06 and brought them out last year as no seats changed hands in 08.  So here are the spreadsheets.  

Assembly:
http://app.blastnewsletters.co...

Senate:
http://app.blastnewsletters.co...

Here are the 2010 election results:
http://gab.wi.gov/sites/defaul...

Here is my somewhat limited analysis of the Senate seats:

The seats that were targeted all of last year were 5, 21, 23, and 31.  These were the seats the Dems gained in 06 that brought them the majority.

5 is a largely suburban Milwaukee seats. I would say this is the most marginal district in the state due the fact that the main population centers, West Allis and Wauwatosa, are incredibly swingy, but do not swing wildly.  So these are areas Obama won with maybe 52/53 percent of the vote, but that Walker won with 52/53 percent. So last year, these areas just swung toward Vukmir.  This area does contain parts of Milwaukee, but this is counterbalanced by a large chunk of very GOP Waukesha county.  In fact the Democrat, Jim Sullivan, won the Milwaukee County portion of the district by 1,000 votes but lost the Waukesha county portion by 4,000.  So basically, this District is in GOP hands because at the 2000 redistricting this district went from being completely within MKE county to shedding some parts and heading into uber Republican Elm Grove and Brookfield.  

21 is much more polarized.  It contains heavily Dem (and in some parts heavily African-American) city of Racine and then heavily Republican parts of Racine County.  I think this was a victim of the enthusiasm gap as victory meant getting out the base in Racine and that simply did not occur this year.  This the rural and suburban parts of the district overwhelmed the urban parts, leading to victory for Van Wangaard.

23 and 31 are pretty similar.  The both contain parts of the city of Eau Claire and then rural territory.  The difference between the two districts is the the rural parts of the 31 are more Democratic than the rural parts of 23. The partisan difference can be seen in the spreadsheet.  31 contains more the West and Southwestern rural areas that are still pretty Democratic.  That made all the difference. Thus while the Dem in 23 fell to Moulton, Vinehout in 31 barely held on by  a few hundred votes.  In fact it is the fact than Vinehout pulled out such a close victory that denied Republicans the 20th seat and have given Democrats the ability to utilize what seems to be their last remaining tactic, which is leaving the state and leaving the GOP without a quorum.

The 29th was quite the surprise. This seat was held by former Senate Majority leader Russ Decker who held the seat since the 90s I believe.   As indicated in the spreadsheet this is a pretty marginal district, but this was in very few people's radar screens as he was the Majority leader and held it for so many years.  This district is like 23 and 31, with Wausau mixed in with rural areas.  I think Decker lost both because of the swing against the Dems in the rurals, the same the befell the 23rd, and since he was the Majority leader a lot of the problems could have been associated with him in the same way Doyle was so tarred and feathered.  There might have been doubts as to whether he was campaigning hard enough in his own backyard (which is the same reason the Speaker Mike Sheridan lost).  But, again the rurals just swung terribly against the Dems last year.  However, unlike other states, it is the rural parts that are the swingy areas as the rurals voted quite heavily for Obama. It is the MKE suburbs where the GOP base in the state lies.

As for 2012, I think we just have to see what results from redistricting.  There were many close races for the GOP in 08, but I doubt the climate will be as favorable in 2012, even if the enthusiasm gap is erased which as this past week indicates it clearly is gone.  With the GOP having the trifecta, I just have to feel they will try to beef up their incumbents.  The problem though is that many incumbents are in pretty Democratic areas, such as Kapanke, or are in the Fox Valley, which has been trending Dem.
As for defense, I think the only concern in 12.  24, Lassa's seat, is actually pretty Dem.  As you can tell by the spreadsheet, its constituent Assembly districts are all pretty Democratic and even this year, the district's population base, Portage County and Stevens Point,  still supported Barrett and Feingold. The 12th is more worrisome.  Its constituent Assembly districts are all pretty marginal and are all held by Republicans.  I would agree that if Holperin were up last year he probably would have lost. They contain rural parts of the NE Wisconsin which have traditionally been Republican.  So we just have to see how 2012 shapes up in Wisconsin (I still am waiting to hear what Kohl's plans are) and perhaps more importantly, see what the end result of redistricting is.

I might have left out some details, but I like to think I know a lot about Wisconsin politics so I can try and answer some more questions.  

---

by: glame @ Fri Feb 18, 2011 at 04:22:36 AM UTC

I have spreadsheets that include 2010

I don't know how to post them, but they are more updated than the links you posted.  I could potentially e-mail them to someone.  

The races I have on my spreadsheet are the 2004 presidential race, Feingold's 2004 Senate race, the 2006 AG race, Doyle's 2006 governor's race, the 2008 presidential race, and the 2010 governor's and Senate races.  

In addition, I also have comparisons of how the Democratic vote share rose or fell from 2004 to 2008 in the presidential race, a comparison of Feingold's percentages from 2004 to 2010, and a comparison of Doyle's percentages in 2006 to Barrett's percentages in 2010.  

The only catch is, I used Democratic shares of the two party vote, ignoring minor-party candidates.  Also, I rounded to the nearest percentage point.  So essentially my spreadsheet is less precise, but more up to date.  

One "teaser" fact that I'd just like to point out is that on a percentage basis, most of the majority-minority districts actually voted even more Democratic in 2010 than they did in 2006, but the overall turnout must not have been there.  Democrats just got killed in the northern rural areas that they did so well in during 2006 and 2008.  That's also why it might be harder than expected for Republicans to gerrymander too much--outside of Democratic Madison and Milwaukee, the Republican Milwaukee suburbs and exurbs, and perhaps the formerly rural areas that are now becoming Minneapolis exurbs, everywhere else in Wisconsin is genuinely swingy and independent.  

---

by: ajwagner @ Fri Feb 18, 2011 at 05:18:47 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thanks to you both

I only organized the districts by CD because it seemed like Wisconsin districts "nested" better than districts sometimes do.  Of course, that didn't entirely pan out.  

Random sidenote from: Wisconsin's 2010 Assembly elections had that rarest of events: A Dem flipping an open seat.  Janis Ringhard flipped District 80.  It seems to have been quite Democratic in its other voting patterns, though, based on your spreadsheet.  

25, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-12(now)

---

by: Xenocrypt @ Fri Feb 18, 2011 at 05:39:59 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Brett Davis was the only person who could keep that seat

As you pointed out, Brett Davis managed to keep that seat even though it was extremely Democratic.  In fact, in 2008, Davis won re-election by 12 percentage points even though Obama got 65% of the vote.  

Republicans barely even bothered to contest the district once Davis ran for lieutenant governor.  The GOP nominee didn't even have a campaign website.

---

by: ajwagner @ Fri Feb 18, 2011 at 16:53:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

What was so special about that guy?

Very quickly looking at his bio, he seems to be a conventional conservative in endorsements he mentions and career path.

25, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-12(now)

---

by: Xenocrypt @ Fri Feb 18, 2011 at 18:26:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

There are a bunch of different factors

The first factor is that he was actually pretty moderate when he was in the Legislature, and only moved further to the right when he ran for lieutenant governor.  He's also pretty smart and charismatic.  

The irony is that if not for the independent candidate who ran back in 2004, he probably would have never won the seat in the first place.  Davis actually got under 50% of the vote in his first election, but there was an independent candidate who had previously run as a Democrat who siphoned off 4 percent of the vote.  There were a bunch of radio ads that called Davis a "right-wing zombie" that supposedly turned people off and led them to vote for the independent candidate.  Even back in 2004, the 80th was supposed to be an easy pickup.  It was also supposed to be an easy pickup in 2006, and 2008, but it never panned out.  It was just a weird situation, and particularly maddening for the state party.  

---

by: ajwagner @ Fri Feb 18, 2011 at 23:08:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Kapanke

As a resident of the 31st, I'm quite familiar with western Wisconsin, so I'm curious your opinion on Dan Kapanke's chances in 2012.  I've always thought him particularly vulnerable, and that the fallout from this budget situation might make him the most-endangered GOP Senator next year.

---

by: alphaaqua @ Sat Feb 19, 2011 at 19:37:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It Depends

I really have no idea.  There is no way we really could know what the electorate looks like come 2012.  I mean there were very few people in Wisconsin who would have predicted such a bloodbath for the Dems at this time in 2009.  
Secondly, he still was able to survive in 2008 which I believe if probably the high-water mark for Dems in Wisconsin (or at least pretty close to it).  
Third, we do not know what his district will look like.  Granted it does not look as if there is much than can be done to substantially improve his district short of removing Assembly district 95, which covers the city of La Crosse, and swapping that with a rural assembly.  However, that still leaves the question of whom to attach that assembly district too and I believe he lives in the city. But, who knows what kind of map will result.
Finally, I do not know the quality of the bench there, so I cannot really say if there is just some quality opponent waiting in the wings.
So long story short, I really do not know because so much of it depends on above.

---

by: glame @ Sat Feb 19, 2011 at 22:34:43 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

2008 high-water point?

I know New York and Wisconsin might as well be different planets, but in the New York State Senate, Queens Republican Frank Padavan narrowly hung on in 2008 against a legitimate opponent, and then went on to lose 54-46 in 2010. I'm sure not every Republican who survives 2008 is safe.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/

---

by: sapelcovits @ Sun Feb 20, 2011 at 03:52:57 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yes.

As the primary electorate in NY stays on the right and picks people like Crazy Carl, the GOP's fate on the State Senate is the same as it was for Dems in the deep south.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!

---

by: LookingOver @ Sun Feb 20, 2011 at 03:55:14 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I Am Not Saying He is Safe

What I am saying is that he has found a way to get elected in 04 in a seat that Kerry likely won and in 08 where Obama did even better, thus he has shown an ability to hang on and outperform the top of the ticket, thus indicating that it would be difficult to knock him down.  Now, I do not know what the dynamics of  Padavan's seat are that changed from 08 to 10, but Kapanke has won by having a moderate image, by appealing to Democrats, and at least by having some relationships with area unions even if they do not endorse him.  If he were to vote for the bill then potentially that image, that appeal, and those relationships go down the toilet.  
A lot depends on how this budget turns out, if the Dem enthusiasm continues into next year, and exactly what the climate is next year, especially with Independents.  Thus, I am not saying he is safe, but with all the unknowns at this point I would probably rate this as a Tossup and likely the most vulnerable (or at least second most) GOP State Senator.  

---

by: glame @ Sun Feb 20, 2011 at 21:18:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Wisconsin does not border Canada

except by water. It borders the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, which is often mistaken for Canada.

16, Male, MI-01

---

by: Menhen @ Sun Feb 20, 2011 at 20:19:45 PM UTC

Silly me, sorry (nt)

25, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-12(now)

---

by: Xenocrypt @ Mon Feb 21, 2011 at 02:49:22 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Silly me, sorry (nt)

25, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-12(now)

---

by: Xenocrypt @ Mon Feb 21, 2011 at 02:49:23 AM UTC

[ Parent ]