I am struck by how small the increases in white % are

I don't mean to impugn your analysis, but do increases of 5 percent--at absolute most, over ten years--really constitute "invasions"?  How much does something like that change a district's politics?  GA-05 went from 34% white to 36% white, was that really the kind of tipping point that could nearly swing a mayor's race?

Thanks for crunching the numbers, though--this is fascinating stuff.

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

---

by: Xenocrypt @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 13:48:43 PM UTC

Yes, it can...

GA-05 went from 34% white to 36% white, was that really the kind of tipping point that could nearly swing a mayor's race?

Especially if it's concentrated in certain areas, like The City of Atlanta, and it fundamentally changes the fabric of the inner city. While it definitely looks unlikely that Republicans are flocking into Atlanta or into other inner city areas (instead, the reverse continues as "white flight" is helping to keep certain exurban areas in GOP hands), the new residents moving in may want different Democrats than the ones long time residents have become accustomed to.

While the demographic changes in Atlanta are nowhere near as extreme as what's been happening in New Orleans (especially since Hurricane Katrina), the city is certainly changing as more "Creative Class" folks arrive with their own ideas on urban living.

Yes, Virginia, there ARE progressives in Nevada!
24, gay male, Democrat, NV-03 (or 04?)

---

by: atdleft @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 15:14:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm not sure how much the GA-05 change could deviate from the change in Atlanta

They're not quite coterminous, but pretty close.  Since, as usual, I am on my phone (gottta get a new laptop one of these days) I can't check Atlanta census tract by census tract, but still, I'm skeptical of the impact of a 34%-36% aggregate change.  Of course, that might belie changes at the neighborhood level that happen to cancel out.  

Another thing--how do we know the % increase reflects an influx of hipster/creative types  (or the extent it does) when it's coupled with an absolute decline?  Maybe white residents just left the city (slightly) less?  I don't doubt there's a creative class influx, but I would like more evidence of its impact, both on the overall demographics and on the consequent politics.

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

---

by: Xenocrypt @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 16:08:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The increase is mainly white liberals

It could effect dynamics as far primaries and local elections go, but the more partisan dynamics would be unaffected.

24, male, African-American, CA-24, Democrat. Chair of the SSP Black Caucus.

---

by: DrPhillips @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 15:26:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

This post brings up an interesting point about VRA districts in Texas

that I have been thinking about for a while.  Could there be a radical change in the composition of the members of the house delegation from Houston?

Sheila Jackson-Lee's district, and central houston in general, is less-and-less dominated by large, centrally located clusters of AA neighborhoods.  Plus, Al Green's district is minority-majority, but with a 36% AA plurarity.  Yes, you see that correctly, a 36% AA plurality.

Would the GOP in the texas state house possibly try to combine these two dems into one district, have TX-8 (far north houston suburbs, sapphire red) swing into Greenspoint (dem suburb represented by SJL) and have Ron Paul swing up into parts of Missouri City (Al Green represents this other dem suburb) and finally have TX-7 (Culberson) swing into acres homes/W. 34th street (also represented by SJL) to neuter these dems.  These three districts would change from something like R+15 to R+10 (TX-7 might go to R+5), nothing special, but would pit Al Green and SJL in a new mega-dem district.

This could be how, technically, the GOP could make the new districts 4-0, by combining even more dems into deep-blue seats in Houston, while still creating one or two new VRA districts in Dallas and the Valley.  You could try to combine canseco and gonzales into one district from central San. An. throughout the far-west valley, but you would put Lamar Smith and whatever new TX-thirtywhatever district into R+3/4 territory, something a Dem could definitely win.

---

by: badwolf @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 14:37:24 PM UTC

There are a lot of interesting questions about TX.

It's the only large state I've even tried to take a crack at in DRA, and the enormous amount of Hispanic growth EVERYWHERE is an interesting variable. It is now possible, for example, to draw a Rio Grande district for Cuellar (El Paso - Laredo) that is 95% HISPANIC. That is insane.

I can see that sort of plurality black Dem mega district becoming reality, but the lines would be super-ugly, and I don't think they'd throw Culberson under the bus to do it - R +5 is easily winnable by a Blue Dog in a good Dem year. On the other hand, I have no problem with potentially getting rid of SJL - she's long been an embarrassment to Democrats everywhere.

The TX GOP might be stupid enough to try to make all 4 of the new seats Republican - this IS the TX GOP we're talking about here - but they do so at their own peril. At least one, probably two or three, is going to have to be a Hispanic vote sink.  

---

by: notanothersonofabush @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 14:59:17 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

TX GOP certainly might be...

But The RNCC may not. It's been clear their national redistricting roadmap this year is more about incumbent protection and less about screwing over existing Dems. They don't want to repeat the mistakes that turned out horribly for them in 2006 and 2008, so perhaps they'll lean on the TX GOP not to dummymander the map to death (like the PA GOP & OH GOP did in 2001)?

Yes, Virginia, there ARE progressives in Nevada!
24, gay male, Democrat, NV-03 (or 04?)

---

by: atdleft @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 15:18:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

WRONG!!!

Archie Bunker was NOT supposed to be from Bayside.  He was supposed to be from the Astoria/Sunnyside area of western Queens -- a more lower middle class area.  

---

by: kewgardens @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 15:17:06 PM UTC

I always thought Glendale

But both would've been in the "Archie Bunker district" of Geraldine Ferraro

---

by: DNick @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 15:30:17 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The evidence is contradictory, apparently

According to the Queens about.com site, the physical house that the show used for establishing shots was in Glendale. It also claims that the show's producer had Corona in mind as the neighborhood Bunker lived in. It also passes along a claim that the show was inspired by a real family that lived in Jackson Heights, although this is dubious, since there's a British sitcom that's usually credited as the inspiration for All in the Family.

Wikipedia and several other sources I won't link to place the show in Astoria, but without citation.

30, male, MI-11 (previously VA-08). Evangelical, postconservative, green.

---

by: borodino21 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 16:11:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I do remember

an episode where he gave his address to someone, and distinctly remember him saying "Astoria, Queens."

Astoria and Glendale are pretty similar anyway, so just northwest Queens would probably be accurate. The Bunkers probably would have hightailed it to Jersey or followed Cousin Maude out to cheaper parts of Westchester soon anyway, as it's hard to find high concentrations of WASPs there anymore.

25, Male, CT-01 (home), Perth-Wellington riding (sometimes)

---

by: WalterSobchak @ Wed Apr 13, 2011 at 00:11:44 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

The house in the credits is definitely in Glendale

they probably just shot it there and called it Astoria.  

---

by: DNick @ Wed Apr 13, 2011 at 00:27:16 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

yeah definitely wasn't Corona

even in the 1970s.  

---

by: DNick @ Wed Apr 13, 2011 at 00:28:10 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I am

sorry if this is a stupid question, but all of these districts have stayed the same over the years, no? If the lines changed slightly in some of these areas, wouldn't that account for the differences?

What's really going to be interesting is to see how the population growth adjusts as these people become second generation and third generation residents. If non-whites keep reproducing at the same rate as they are now reproducing and new immigration keeps up, we've only seen the beginning of an explosion in absolute numbers.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

---

by: b.j. @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 15:31:12 PM UTC

.

I'm assuming that mid-decade redistricting in Georgia and Texas is accounted for here. All of the other districts are the same as they were in the 2002 election.

21, Conservative Gay Democrat, NM-2 (Childhood) TX-10 (Home) TX-23 (School);   DKos: wwmiv.

---

by: wmayes @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 16:32:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

interesting

those two S Fla districts became less blue as they filled up with Hispanics. Is this due more to the new Hispanics being mostly conservative Cubans, or to the whites reacting better to Lieberman than to Obama?

41, Ind, CA-05

---

by: sacman701 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 15:34:01 PM UTC

It's the Jewish effect

Look at all the South Florida, NYC, North Jersey, and Jersey Shore districts, and (I'm willing to bet) MD-03 as well - all performed better for Gore than Obama.

Cubans are actually becoming more moderate with time.

21, Male, Democrat, MD-02 (home/registered), MD-05 (college)

---

by: Rupper @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 15:45:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Which specific ones are you referring to?

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

---

by: b.j. @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 15:56:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think

primarily it's because of Jewish senior citizens (the 19th has the highest percentage of 65+ residents of any district in the nation) more comfortable with Gore/Lieberman than Obama, yes. Cubans are increasingly moving into the 20th, so I think that's probably also a factor, though much less of one (since there's also a lot of growth among non-Cuban Hispanics in the Miami suburbs). The 20th, interestingly, is not a particularly old district, at least not by Florida standards.

---

by: Crisitunity @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 16:37:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Maybe I'm Captain Obvious . . ..

but the critical political question over the next three decades will be whether second and third generation Hispanics become more GOP-friendly (because of rising incomes and/or assimilation) like the Irish, Germans and Italians before them or whether the Hispanic population remains strongly pro-Dem in partisan preference -- like African-Americans and Jews.  

---

by: kewgardens @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 15:50:30 PM UTC

Hard to say.

In a very broad sense, either they will change and go with that party suits them, or the parties will change to get the voters. A combination of both is certainly possible, if not definite, but if it is definite, it seems much more likely that it'll be the Democrats who change slightly rather than the Republicans. Or maybe it's simply because the Democrats are much more willing, it seems, to accept people that aren't ideologues and extremists, whereas the Republicans are the opposite. Indeed, the strategy of the Republicans seems to be betting that the Republicans will come around to them. That's not the most insane notion ever, but there's a world of difference between a responsible, small(er) government conservative, like Mitch Daniels, and someone like Michele Bachmann, who seems hellbent on burning the damn thing down.


"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

---

by: b.j. @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 15:55:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

We really

Need to stop talking about the "Latino" vote.  Poli sci research consistently shows that there is much less pan-Latino identity than most Anglos suggest.  Cubans (obviously) are much more Republican than Mexican-Americans, and Mexican-Americans are more Republican than Puerto Ricans.  It is like lumping together someone from Vietnam and someone from Iran as "Asian."  Drives me nuts.

---

by: curiousgeorge @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 16:21:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Everything I've read

Suggests that three classes suffice for Hispanics in terms of voting patterns:

Cubans - heavily Republican
Mexican - not as heavily Democrat
South American - heavily Democrat

21, Conservative Gay Democrat, NM-2 (Childhood) TX-10 (Home) TX-23 (School);   DKos: wwmiv.

---

by: wmayes @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 16:35:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

This is my view too

And its why I don't think the impending bluening of texas is an eventuality.  I really think Mexicans in texas by the 2nd/3rd generation will be texans more than they will be Hispanics/Mexicans, and Texans are heavily Republican.  It might lead to a more mdoerate TX GOP, but it will still be the GOP running the show there.

---

by: rdw72777 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 16:59:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

...

When I said not as heavily democratic, I meant more like

Cubans 80-20
Mexican 30-70
South 20-80

21, Conservative Gay Democrat, NM-2 (Childhood) TX-10 (Home) TX-23 (School);   DKos: wwmiv.

---

by: wmayes @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 17:16:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I understand

And if the "Hispanic" vote in Texas is 25% for the GOP, it will remain a GOP-dominated state for a long time to come.

---

by: rdw72777 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 17:20:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not necessarily.

In 2008, the racial breakdown was 63/13/20/2/2 for whites, blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and others. Had Obama received 75 percent of the Hispanic vote and everything else stayed the same (assuming that he received 65 percent of the Asian and other vote; CNN doesn't provide such figures), he'd have 46.72 percent of the vote.

But imagine if the racial breakdown became 60/13/23/2/2. He'd then be up to 48.19 percent. Were he to get to 30 percent of the white vote (over time, probably a lot easier than it looks), he'd be at 50.59 percent. Were he to get 35 percent of the white vote, he'd be up to 53.59 percent.

Of course, this is all just speculation, but getting 75 percent of the Hispanic vote and not getting killed as badly as they do now amongst white voters in the state is great news for Democrats and probably awful news for Republicans.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

---

by: b.j. @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 17:41:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

So if...

If:

1.  Hispanic vote % increases +3% to the sole detriment of whites...and
2.  Hispanic vote goes from 63-35 Dem to 75-25 Dem...and
3.  the white vote for some reason goes from 26-73 to 30-70

Obama gets to a tie.  

I think you're basically proving my point because:

1.  The increase in hispanic vote % will impact black vote and white vote about the same, and given you're citing 2008 numbers, I'd say the baseline skews overly favorabel to the black vote in terms of proportion (13%) and results (98% D ????)

2.  There is still little proof the so-called Hispanic vote is trending Dem in Texas.

3.  There's no evidence of the white vote trending Dem in Texas.

The white population in texas grew 19.6% from 2000 to 2010, the black population grew 23.9% and the Hispanic/Latino vote grew 42%.  Texas isn't like most states, all groups are growing relatively fast.  

Add to this the fact that Texas state office races are held in non-presidential years where minority turnout is decreased and I think that only further strengthens the GOP's hold on the state level offices.  Senate races held in non-presidential years would be harder to crack.  

Do I think by 2030 Dems might get close to half of texas congressman, maybe, but that's about as optimistic as I would be.  There's no evidence other than conjecture about the future that can be offered up.  I just don't think every 2nd generation Mexican immigrant is going to become a solid Dem vote in all elections.

---

by: rdw72777 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 18:24:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You misunderstand me.

My point was to show that you weren't exactly right when you said that the Republicans could win only 25 percent of the Hispanic vote and dominated. I think I did that.

They could win, but it'd be very close if the Democrats were regularly getting 75 percent of the Hispanic vote and the Hispanic portion of the electorate kept growing to reflect their increasing numbers in the overall portion of the population. Remember that non-Hispanic whites are already below 50 percent in the population as a whole and are overrepresented when it comes to the electorate. And if the Democrats were to see some small increases in support from white voters, combined with the dominance of Hispanics, it's very likely they win the state regularly. Maybe they won't win white voters so easily, but then I don't think I have unrealistic totals.

Basically, the idea of the Democrats winning 75 percent of the Hispanic vote in Texas as the population gets bigger and votes more often terrifies the Republicans, and for good reason. They know it's an uphill battle to overcome those numbers. The politically smart ones are trying to do something about it.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

---

by: b.j. @ Wed Apr 13, 2011 at 06:22:40 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

"Non-Hispanic White"

Is a meaningless word outside of a an arbitrary census term. No one identifies themselves as "non-Hispanic" white, and voting is based on self-identity, not what the government thinks someone is. 53% of Hispanics said that they were "white only" in race, and if they tell exit pollsters the same thing, they will not show up as Hispanics.

While there is some evidence that there is lower Hispanic turnout in off-years, the idea that there is some giant legion of potential Democratic voters is a myth. That 38% Hispanic percentage of the population is voting. Its just that a good portion of them are telling exit pollsters that they are "white".

I mean a bunch of republicans in Texas right now are sitting in seats in the legislature that are under 40% non-Hispanic white.  

26 Right-leaning, Euro-Conservative, Anti-Tea Party Independent

---

by: BenjaminDisraeli @ Wed Apr 13, 2011 at 20:59:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The vast majority of Hispanics I've met would never call themselves white

they don't identify as such and they usually have darker skin. It's hard to imagine Mexicans in Texas being that different appearance-wise from Mexicans in Chicago.

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 @ Wed Apr 13, 2011 at 21:54:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think you're off by about five-ten points

on all three -- you have Cuban-Americans as too Republican and Mexican/South American voters as too Democrat.

When you control for socio-economic status, Latino voters are only about 10 points more Democratic than white voters, although some of that is doubtless due to the generally higher economic status of Cubans. The same is true if you control for ideology, for urban/suburban/rural residence, etc.

---

by: curiousgeorge @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 17:57:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Race/Ethnicity

When you control for socioeconomic status the difference completely disappears. Race/ethnicity simply is not a reliable predictor of vote intention outside of their socioeconomic status.

Even being black does not matter when you control for socioeconomic status. Everyone knows this... However, it is much easier to get ahold of and use data about race and ethnicity than it is for economic stratas. So the fact that lots of people use race/ethnicity as a proxy for vote intentions is legitimate.

For what its worth, I think you're wrong. If anything, I have all groups too Republican. Hispanics nationwide voted for Obama 75-25. For Kerry it was less, obviously, but we're running on a new baseline after Arizona's bill and Texas's new education plan.  

21, Conservative Gay Democrat, NM-2 (Childhood) TX-10 (Home) TX-23 (School);   DKos: wwmiv.

---

by: wmayes @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 18:05:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Where are you getting that from?

Just curious. The CNN exit poll, admittedly not the world's most reliable source, has it at 67-31.

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 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 18:07:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

.

Ah well. Rough memory? Obviously doesn't suffice.  

21, Conservative Gay Democrat, NM-2 (Childhood) TX-10 (Home) TX-23 (School);   DKos: wwmiv.

---

by: wmayes @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 18:09:05 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

no

Middle class blacks do not vote like middle class whites. Most blacks are middle class, not poor. They vote overwhelmingly for Dems in all cases.  

41, Ind, CA-05

---

by: sacman701 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 18:14:00 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

...

Most blacks are lower middle class. Most whites are upper middle class. There are definitely distinctions between the two socioeconomic groups.  

21, Conservative Gay Democrat, NM-2 (Childhood) TX-10 (Home) TX-23 (School);   DKos: wwmiv.

---

by: wmayes @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 18:38:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

no

From CNN's 2008 exit poll:

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/20...

Whites under 50k favored McCain 51-47.
Whites over 50k favored McCain 56-43.
Nonwhites under 50k favored Obama 86-13.
Nonwhites over 50k favored Obama 75-22.

Within the nonwhite group, blacks are much more heavily Dem than other nonwhites. It's true that the lower middle class favors Dems a bit more than the upper middle, but this is a much smaller margin than between blacks and whites controlling for income.

41, Ind, CA-05

---

by: sacman701 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 19:16:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

...

2008 is a distortion because Obama was black...

I direct you to Conway's Political Participation in the United States, Abramson et al's Change and Continuity, and Jacobson's The Politics of Congressional Elections amongst many, many, many others.  

21, Conservative Gay Democrat, NM-2 (Childhood) TX-10 (Home) TX-23 (School);   DKos: wwmiv.

---

by: wmayes @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 19:40:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hmm

Perhaps I should have said when controlling for both socioeconomic status and religion.  

21, Conservative Gay Democrat, NM-2 (Childhood) TX-10 (Home) TX-23 (School);   DKos: wwmiv.

---

by: wmayes @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 19:42:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

no

Here is the 2004 exit poll.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/20...

Whites went 58-41 for Bush, blacks 88-11 for Kerry, a 47 point difference.

In 2008 whites went 55-43 for McCain, blacks 95-4 for Obama, a 51 point difference--about the same as in 2004.

The 2004 poll did not have a poll by race and income, but with the black-white split so similar in both years I'd imagine it would have looked the same as in 2008.  

41, Ind, CA-05

---

by: sacman701 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 20:40:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Someone else also countered this.

But look at Jews, for example.  Solidly upper-middle class as a group, and far more Democratic than other white upper-middle class groups.  

Culture matters.  

---

by: eschaton @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 19:31:04 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yup

Indians too, I believe they're one of the best-educated and highest-earning ethnic minorities in the country, and their voting habits are similar to Jews.

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 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 19:35:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

...

This has to do with Religion which is a factor that cannot be neutralized even when controlling for socioeconomic factors.  

21, Conservative Gay Democrat, NM-2 (Childhood) TX-10 (Home) TX-23 (School);   DKos: wwmiv.

---

by: wmayes @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 19:41:59 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Actually, that isn't true

There is very little variance in African American voting patterns regardless of how you slice and dice it.  80 percent of black conservatives vote Democrat -- and there are more than you would think!  Same is true of urban/suburban/rural and income.

"Hispanics" are a whole different ballgame.

---

by: curiousgeorge @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 20:05:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Most people

seem to think it's going to become more friendly to the Democrats, even if it's still pretty friendly to the Republicans. Maybe a slightly better version of Ohio, perhaps? Overall, though, those who suggest it's going to go blue and never go back are the exception. Yet, even if it becomes a fifty-fifty shot state for the Democrats, that's a huge shift in their direction.


"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

---

by: b.j. @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 17:25:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Texas

I think Georgia is a much better comparison than Ohio is. In both TX and GA the native white population has been trending red for a long time, and this may continue. Obama did worse than Kerry in much of east TX and rural GA. At the same time, the big metro areas in both states have been filling up with northerners and Hispanics and are  turning purple. Go here

http://elections.nytimes.com/2...

and mouse over metro Atlanta. Obama won 3 outer counties where Kerry got smoked, and made it respectable in Cobb and Gwinnett. The TX metro areas mostly swung 7-9 points instead of 10-15, so they aren't trending quite as fast. (Bush was off the ballot, but Obama didn't contest TX the way he did GA either) GA appears to be a few years behind VA and NC. TX should move in the same direction over time.  

41, Ind, CA-05

---

by: sacman701 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 18:09:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The future of GA will be interesting

I quite hoenstly have no ide ahow to predict GA.  Atlanta has become such a sprawlign fiasco that I don't know where it ends and gwinnett County begins...but i know it takes about 4 hours to get from Atlanta to gwinnett in rush hour.

I don't know how much GA is filling up with northerners compared to say NC or VA, which I think are ahead of the curve in that way.  I really don't know what the draw is to GA either, as VA is obviosuly driven by jobs related to the govt and NC has RTP and what's left of their banking industry.  

What industries are drawing people to GA?  And why isn't Atlanta's huge college poplulation enough to fill that economy?  Is GA drawing more black northerners than NC or VA (and if so, is it due to the ral Housewives of Atlanta)?  LOL.  So many questions.

---

by: rdw72777 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 18:38:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

A lot of it depends on what the GOP does

With guys like Bush running their party, they seemed to be on the path towards becoming competitive with Latinos.  With the current bunch....eh I dunno.

---

by: skaje @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 18:03:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That classification

misses Puerto Ricans, Dominicans, and Central Americans, who are probably the three biggest Hispanic groups in the Northeast. Having gone to a middle school and a high school that were around 1/3 Hispanic in the Northeast, I think I only met one Mexican guy, one Cuban guy (actually, half-Cuban, half-Dominican), and maybe one or two Colombian kids. Everyone else fell into the first three categories.

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 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 17:27:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yeah geographically it probably means different things...

...to different people.

I don't think Cnetral Americans are prevalent in most places outside of urban environments, but I'm sure in NYC Puerto Ricans and Domincans outnumber Mexicans by a pretty huge margin, even in 2011.

On a more technical note, its Domincans & Haitians who are the true Hispanics, right?  Coming from Hispaniola I think those are the only 2.  Or does the word "Hispanic" draw its origin from somewhere else.

---

by: rdw72777 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 17:37:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

.

Hispanic comes from Hispania, which is simply another term for the Iberian peninsula.  

21, Conservative Gay Democrat, NM-2 (Childhood) TX-10 (Home) TX-23 (School);   DKos: wwmiv.

---

by: wmayes @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 17:53:51 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

So then there are like only 100K real Hispanics in the US

LOL.

Yup, our nomenclature will be very confusing in eyars to come.

---

by: rdw72777 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 17:59:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It might not be technically correct, but it's what people go by.

for that matter, I very rarely hear Hispanic people refer to themselves as such, they usually say they're Spanish.

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 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 18:01:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Agreed

Puerto Ricans are very proud of their heritage, and from what I remember from my college roommate, Dominicans and haitians are the best of friends.  

And the Ecuadorian guy who lived down the hall said the Ecuadorians had a long-ago dispute about land with (I think) Columbia so they didn't like each other.

I miss college.

---

by: rdw72777 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 18:07:04 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

.

Other Islanders and Central Americans are generally lumped in with South America.


21, Conservative Gay Democrat, NM-2 (Childhood) TX-10 (Home) TX-23 (School);   DKos: wwmiv.

---

by: wmayes @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 17:54:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

First I've heard of that

Especially since they are actually considered North America. But given how they are the dominant group in the Northeast, I can't imagine many of them would appreciate being lumped in with South Americans.

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 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 18:00:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

.

I can't imagine they'd appreciate it either, but they're generally more Democratic than Mexicans.  

21, Conservative Gay Democrat, NM-2 (Childhood) TX-10 (Home) TX-23 (School);   DKos: wwmiv.

---

by: wmayes @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 18:08:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Speaking of House races....

PPP poll shows the US souring on the GOP badly.  Let's hope this isn't some outlier.
http://publicpolicypolling.blo...

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

---

by: LookingOver @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 15:58:26 PM UTC

When will we get an open thread?

Anyway, as far as that poll, it's really strange how Independents are turning on Republicans and on President Obama, at least in some other polls, at the same time. It's almost as if they aren't sure what the hell they want.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

---

by: b.j. @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 16:27:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

We're mad as hell and not going to take it any more

Independents are like the drunk guy/girl at the bar who is beyond trashed.  Try and tell him/her to stop drinking, or stop yelling (or what not), and watch how s/he reacts.  S/he'll turn on everyone around them and everyone is wrong about everything except him or her.

Anti-incumbency 101.  

And always remember, its probably not the independents who swung hard GOP in 2010, that just sat out due to lack of motivation.  Its not like Indies swarmed to polls and pushed so many GOP legislators into office at all levels, its just they and many Dems didn't vote at all.

---

by: rdw72777 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 16:57:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Isn't it a little bit of both?

Perhaps in some cases, we'd still have losses, but smaller ones.


"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

---

by: b.j. @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 17:12:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I guess I was responding to your point

About Indies turning on Obama and Republicans.  i think most of the McCain indies are still with the GOP, and the Obama Indies sat home and didn't vote (as opposed to actively voting for Scott Walker, Rick Scott, John Kasich, etc).  

So I don't really feel like Indies are turning on the GOP< the Indies never really sided with the GOP.  The indies turning on Obama really aren't turnign on him, they're just unhappy but we;ll see when the GOP has its defined alternative how they feel about Obama then.

---

by: rdw72777 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 18:09:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Do you account

For mid-decade redistricting in Texas and Georgia?  I only had time to skim, so forgive me if I missed this.

---

by: curiousgeorge @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 16:19:22 PM UTC

Yes

I probably should have mentioned that somewhere in there. The 2010 and 2000 data both reflect the current configurations.

---

by: Crisitunity @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 16:39:52 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

no need to draw a second Hispanic district in Chicago

IL-3 is turning into one on its own.

26, male, Dem, NJ-12

---

by: duffman @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 16:30:01 PM UTC

Isn't Lancaster in CA-22?

Also, can a CA expert tell me what's up with CA-41? Its demographic changes seem to match the rest of the Inland Empire, but its partisan changes most certainly do not.

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 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 17:29:54 PM UTC

Great Analysis - Kevin McCarthy Question

As stated elsewhere up thread, I wanted to expand on this just a bit. There are 3 California Republicans that have a lot of Hispanics in their district and they are growing at an incredibly fast rate. For example, Kevin McCarthy is in leadership and went from 21% to 32% Hispanic in just 10 years. While its hard to say what his district will turn out can he continue to lead his party that is so anti-immigration and frankly borders on xenophobic in a district where 40% of the population is Hispanic as it may happen in the not too distant future? While now they clearly don't vote as high as the whites in his district who I assume are very conservative but as those numbers grow it is going to be tougher for people like him especially with him being in leadership. If the Hispanic vote share gets to 30% of the district, which may happen in the not-too distant future and they are 70% Democratic which is plausible in California all the Democrat would need is 42% of the white vote for a majority.

While that is an oversimplified example many districts are becoming much less white to the point that only 40% of the white vote may be needed for victory for the Democrat. Now we just need to work on turning them out!!

Second up-thread others have wondered what future generations of Hispanics will vote. I can speak only for myself but I am first generation (Mexican) and I have 7 first cousins that are of voting age. 5 of us are solid democrats and 2 of us are apathetic. If future numbers continue in that direction it is very, very bad news for the GOP. Over simplified example I know but I rarely see young conservatives whose parents were not conservatives as well. My kids better not turn out that way!!!

28, Male, Democrat VA-08  

---

by: Cool_Arrow @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 17:39:51 PM UTC

I don't know about this sentence

"...but I rarely see young conservatives whose parents were not conservatives as well"

This assumes an oddity, that Dems raise Dems or apathetic or indie and Conservatives raise Conservatives only.  While it might eb the dream model on this site, it hardly holds true in any real way.  

I mean the born-again evangelical movement isn't even that old and certainly brought about a huge new wave of Ultra conservatives, and not all of them were parented by conservatives.

Not to mention that a lot of people who work their way up from humble beginnings and becoem succesful might focus more on the GOP's storng issues (taxes, security, etc) and switch views from their parents.

---

by: rdw72777 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 17:58:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

To clarify...

Maybe what I should have said is "young Hispanic conservatives". I don't know what the data is but if both of your parents are reliable Democrats I think that the chances of you becoming a hardcore Republican are a lot less then you becoming a reliable Democrat or left-leaning independent. My overall point is that as the Hispanic population grows (it is becoming a reliably Democratic vote when they do vote) I don't see it becoming a lot more conservative, especially with the Mexican-American vote. People like Kevin McCarthy in his district as configured will increasingly have to hope that the Latino vote share doesn't drastically increase or he is in trouble. I can't see it dipping below the 60-65% range anytime soon especially given the GOP's harsh rhetoric.  

28, Male, Democrat VA-08  

---

by: Cool_Arrow @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 18:28:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That makes more sense

I know so many white "kids of Dems" (KoD's) that are hard-core republican for numerous reasons.

I guess my thinking is that if the Hispanic vote stays under 75% for Dems Texas is just impenetrable in my lifetime, and I'm healthy and 33.  I just think the idea that hispanics are going to vote in these huge portions is lost on me, but then again I live in Philly where the black turnout is tragic in most elections.  

I just don't see why hispanics will evolve into such a high turnout segment in such a short amount of time.  I mean blacks have always had the power to alter elections and have not always done so, so I guess I dont see Hispanics as saving the day.  The sheer growth in overall population won't turn into a huge swath of voters, unless someone knows something I don't.

I also don't thinkt eh Souther white vote in sattes like TX is maxed out at 63% for the GOP either, further complicating the challenge.

---

by: rdw72777 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 18:44:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

.

You're right. The Southern white vote in Texas probably isn't maxed out at around 60%. The problem is that Southern whites aren't a growing group. The growth in the white population has alot to do with inmigration from places, like California, who have completely different voting habits.

21, Conservative Gay Democrat, NM-2 (Childhood) TX-10 (Home) TX-23 (School);   DKos: wwmiv.

---

by: wmayes @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 18:47:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

We're probably nearing the floor of the white vote.

Counties in rural Texas that used to vote Dem are already starting to vote 90-10 Republican or so, they're going to run into a wall pretty soon. Texas has Austin, and I'm guessing whites in places like Dallas and Houston have enough liberals that they'll never start voting 90-10, maybe 70-30 at worst. I'm no Texas expert but in a state with so many cities, it's hard to imagine that the white vote would resemble Mississippi or Alabama more than South Carolina or Georgia.

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 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 18:50:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

But its a consistent vote

Not as flighty as minority vote, and shows up in all election years for all offices.  Its one more reason as to what makes Texas so hard to crack.

I also always wonder that if whites flee California, is it liberal whites leaving for job opportunity or conservative whites fed up by California's taxes and big government.

Using the California domestic migration argument, we should see Idaho and Utah running blue-r by now too, but there's never an easy way to tell.  I think people just say "the Mormons offset Californians" and move on but I'm never quite sure I can accept that.

---

by: rdw72777 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 19:01:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well, I don't think anyone's denying

that if Texas does turn purple, it'll first be in a presidential year with an aggressive turnout operation.

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 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 19:36:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well

A lot of it is conservatives fleeing California - "big government" and "taxes are actually code words that mean "minorities," or maybe more accurately "conservative white men no longer control everything."

We're seeing it in Maryland now too - the state is so diverse that conservatives don't even want to live in conservative counties in Maryland anymore, so the rate of growth for Baltimore exurbs fell this decade, and the state lost white residents for the second decade in a row.

Certain conservative whites need to feel a certain amount of control in order to be comfortable; I think it has to do with white privilege, but that's another debate for another time.

21, Male, Democrat, MD-02 (home/registered), MD-05 (college)

---

by: Rupper @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 20:03:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hmm, I agree.

I know plenty of young liberals whose parents were conservative, but I can't think of a single young conservative who's parents were liberal.

21,Democrat, NY-02, male

---

by: lidem89 @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 17:58:43 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yeah

I know some who had apathetic parents, but not liberal parents.

21, Male, Democrat, MD-02 (home/registered), MD-05 (college)

---

by: Rupper @ Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 20:04:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

response

One of the big problems so far as CA-21 and 22 go with the PL94-171 data is a lack of a count of citizen/non-citizens. I've seen validated estimates that up to 1/3 of hispanics in Kern County are not citizens due the large need for unskilled labor in the ag sector.

After playing the the numbers it looks to me like if western Kern County (west of the crest  Sierra Nevada Mountains) is made its own district which it easily could be. By mid decade (2016ish) McCarthy would have serious problem getting re-elected as a republican. Over 60% of the population under 18 is hispanic in Kern County. In the short term, due the jungle primary I foresee a strong challenge to McCarthy from a non-Abernathy republican.

At this point having Kings County under VRA section 5 may actually help the republicans in California because it will either siphon (D) votes out of Metro Fresno or out of Metro Bakersfield.  Also, for those of you working on plans beware that there are 4 state prisons (Delano 1 + 2, Wasco & Techachapi) and a federal prison (Taft) in Kern county.  

---

by: hankmeister @ Wed Apr 13, 2011 at 00:05:28 AM UTC

[ Parent ]