While it may feel like we wrapped up the election cycle on Tuesday, there are always more elections to come. This post covers the special and runoff legislative races coming up in the next month. There are three other important races, the Mass. Senate race and the Houston and Atlanta mayoral runoff races, that will be covered in a future post.
Dems have a chance at picking up one seat in California, two in Tennessee and one in Kentucky, while they are defending another seat in Kentucky, one in Georgia and one in Iowa. There are also two interesting inter-party fights going on in the Georgia runoffs.
This is cross posted on my new blog dedicated to following special elections and culling absentee ballot information from all states into one spot to increase turnout in local races. To read more about each race and learn more about the candidates, click here.
I am sure I left out some races - I hope you will let everyone know about them in the comments and I will be sure to write about them shortly
Since that time, Dave's Redistricting Application has become available for the state. The Application is an invaluable tool in doing these maps. It has helped me greatly in trying to come up with a new, better version of a plan for the state. I have also taken reader comments from my last diary into consideration in drawing this new plan for California. The comments have helped me greatly in terms of refining the districts here. As several readers rightfully noted, several of the districts I drew last time were not Democratic enough to assure that they would be virtually guaranteed to elect Democrats, and parts of the previous map were too gerrymandered. Here's my new version ...
Last night's election exhibited two trends: one positive for the country as a whole, and one more ominous for Democrats. Firstly, Americans rejected negative campaigning and extremism - whether it be in Virginia, New Jersey, NY-23, or Maine. Secondly, the electorate as a whole shifted quite profoundly to the right.
Negative Campaigning and Extremism
In the most-watched races, voters chose the side that espoused moderation and ran a positive message. The Democratic candidates in both Virginia and New Jersey focused on the negative: state congressman Creigh Deeds of Virginia spent most of his time attacking Attorney General Bob McDonnell's college thesis, while Governor Jon Corzine of New Jersey launched a barrage of negative ads. Both candidates lost.
The other races featured the victory of moderate politics over extremism. In NY-23, a Republican-represented district since the Civil War, conservatives sabotaged the moderate Republican candidate in favor of hard-line Doug Hoffman. Fortunately, voters in upstate New York rejected the Glenn Beck nominee and instead chose Democrat Bill Owens, an independent turned Democrat.
Thus the election results enforced a positive trend in politics - one of moderation and positive campaigning focused on the issues, rather than divisive personal attacks. For Democrats like myself, however, the other trend - a rightward shift - is more worrisome.
A Rightward Shift
For Democrats, the election's most worrying result was not in Virginia, New Jersey, or Maine. It was the special election in CA-10.
At first glance, this might seem a bit puzzling. Democrats won that election, after all - and they won it by a comfortable 10% margin.
Yet, when compared to previous elections, this result is quite an underperformance. Barack Obama, for instance, won this congressional district by three times that margin. Since 2002, moreover, former Democratic congressman Ellen Tauscher had never polled below 65% of the vote.
Moreover, the election revealed more about the national mood than, say, Virginia or New Jersey. Those races were heavily dependent on local factors (e.g. the quality of the Deeds campaign, the unpopularity of Governor Jon Corzine). In CA-10, you had two low-recognition candidates and little publicity; it was closer to a generic ballot poll.
If CA-10 could be characterized as a generic ballot poll, then Democrats should be extremely worried. In 2009, CA-10 went from a 30% Democratic victory to a 10% one: a 10-point shift to the right. Similar shifts were seen in New Jersey and Virginia; the electorate as a whole moved substantially to the right. The Democrats were very fortunate that Tuesday did not constitute a full-blown congressional election; they would have been crushed.
There is good news, however. Democratic weakness two days ago resulted more from an energized Republican base than a fundamental shift in the national mood. Republicans, motivated and unhappy, turned out; President Barack Obama's coalition did not. The president still attains approval ratings in the low 50s - hardly the sign of an unpopular incumbent.
The bad news is that I am not sure if Mr. Obama's coalition will turn out for the 2010 congressional elections. His voters have been curiously lethargic ever since his election; their low turn-out was how Senator Saxy Chambliss in Georgia went from a 3% general victory to a 14% run-off victory. Republicans, then, may do well next year.
In fact, I am not even sure Mr. Obama's coalition will re-emerge in 2012, when he goes up for re-election. The president, after all, ran on a campaign of hope, change, and idealism. The difficult compromises forced by governing have tainted this brand, and it will inevitably continue to be diluted over the next three years. Obama's 2008 coalition may go down as unique in American history, much like former President Jimmy Carter's coalition.
Taking into account some suggestions and comments, I made some changes to my previous attempt at redistricting California. I conceded an additional 2 seats to the GOP, which concomitantly makes a number of other seats more strongly Democratic. The additional 2 safe GOP seats are CA-4 and CA-48. Here's what version 2 looks like, overall:
I decided to try my hand at redistricting California's Congressional districts for 2010-2012, using Dave's Redistricting App. After playing around with it a bit, here's what the map I came up with looks like overall:
Here's the 2008 Obama/McCain vote in California, on the precinct level:
Here is my first attempt at redistricting California for 2010. I gave myself an extra challenge of keeping the representatives' residences in their respective districts save of course McClintock, and assuming Garamendi wins CA-10.
For the demographics, I noticed that even in obviously heavy Hispanic areas, the "Hispanic" percentage was ridiculously low, while the "Other" category was more representative of the Hispanic population, so for "Hispanic" I will use the "Hispanic" and "other" numbers.
Later on I will attempt redistricting the State Senate and Assembly. I know there is a panel that will draw the state legislative districts, but I still intend to give a shot at these maps.
Here are my SSP-style ratings for the California State Legislature in 2010. In the State Senate table, I listed all the districts, even-numbered, that are up, because there are only 20 of them, and as of now only 3 are somewhat competitive. In the State Assembly table, I listed only the districts that are or could be competitive since all 80 districts there are up. Open seats are in italics.
District details can be found at the 2010 California Race Tracker. Feel free to jump in and add any updates as you find them.
Yes, this is my first diary about my home state and my second diary not involving redistricting. I have noticed many of you (including myself) believe that Democrats will gain seats in the California State Senate, State Assembly and in U.S House Representation. Even though the Democrats are falling nationally, they should not be falling in California. If the Republicans cannot reach out to Hispanics (a Survey USA poll on July 25th showed that 73% of California Hispanics approve of Obama's job,) Democrats should have a good year in California, especially southern California. It should take an election or two to have Californians vote more Democratic at a statewide level. So a 50% for McCain win in a State Senate district would probably rank Lean Republican, not a Toss Up. Here is an analysis of the first ten State Senate Districts up for reelection (in 2010, only the even numbered districts are up for reelection.) I will post a diary about the other ten (eventually.) Overall, Democrats should gain 1-2 seats. Here is a link to the map of the California State Senate districts.
http://www.sen.ca.gov/~newsen/...
State Senate District 2 Pat Wiggins (D)
We are lucky that her district is not trending Republican anytime soon. Here is a basic overview of Wiggins: July 13th, State Senate passes bill introduced by Wiggins to help rid Sonoma County of domestic violence. On June 22nd, the State Senate passed a Wiggins bill that supports expanding Marine Sanctuaries off the coast of California. On June 3rd, the State Senate passed two Wiggins bills that expanded solar power opportunities and production. We should not lose her until 2014. Her district voted 69% for Obama. The demographics as of 2000 are 5% Black, 7% Asian and 16% Hispanic.
Status is Safe Democrat.
State Senate District 4 Sam Aanestad (R)
Aanestad's website says that his main priorities are protecting Northern California water and rural health care. He will not fight for those issues for long. He is term limited out in 2010. Two Republicans are lined up to take his seat. They are Rick Keene and Doug LaMalfa. Rick Keene is the former Assemblyman from the 3rd district and he lives in Chico. He supports low taxes and is a big supporter of North State water rights (since the water is shared with other parts of the state and reservoirs are low, water rights are a big issue in North State. ) Keene also promises to fight for "Conservative values." Those include deregulation and getting rid of environmental burdens. I would not vote for Keene. LaMalfa seems to be a favorite. His website is more organized because he has the endorsements page up while Keene's says "endorsements coming soon." LaMalfa endorsements are influential and they include most of the sheriffs and district attorneys of the 4th district. Also, the State Senate Republican Leader Dennis Hollingsworth and the Assistant Leader Mimi Walters support LaMalfa. LaMalfa was in the State Assembly and represented the 2nd district. He is against high taxes but he is inconsistent on his views like some "Libertarians." His website says quote, "Doug LaMalfa's firm beliefs are that government should do no harm and that limited government means government should do only what people cannot do for themselves, in the most efficient manner possible," unquote. Yet his website also says quote, "Doug helped lead Northern California efforts to protect marriage on both Proposition 22 and Proposition 8 that reaffirmed marriage is only between one man and one woman," unquote. He can campaign for the government's right to prevent people from marrying who they love as much as he wants. He should at least remove the line about supporting small government off his site! Something people CAN do for themselves is marry so why should LaMalfa interfere? Besides an endorsements page, his volunteer page is more developed and he has people sign up for email alerts, unlike Keene's website. That leads me to believe that LaMalfa will win because he has better organization. No clear Democrat has emerged yet. His district voted 54% for McCain. The demographics are 4% Asian and 12% Hispanic. Status is Safe Republican.
State Senate District 6 Darrel Steinberg (D)
Steinberg is the President Pro Tempore of the State Senate. He succeeded Don Perata who carried a concealed gun due to death threats from anti gun control advocates. Steinberg hit the news for filing a lawsuit against Schwarzenegger because some of the budget cuts may be unconstitutional. He will be President Pro Tempore until he reaches term limits. Obama won 64% of the vote in his district. Demographics are 14% Black, 15% Asian and 18% Hispanic. Status is Safe Democrat.
State Senate District 8 Leland Yee (D)
Yee has a spotty background but at least he works hard in the State Senate. On August 17th, the Assembly approved SB 242 which Yee authored. SB 242 says that people cannot be denied a job based on the language they speak. Yee should not worry about a Republican challenge. He may worry about Tom Ammiano, a State Assemblyman from San Francisco. Ammiano was elected in 2008 but he is active in San Francisco. He ran for mayor in 1999 and was a San Francisco Supervisor. Ammiano is very Liberal, even for San Francisco. I expect that Ammiano may pass on this seat to wait for 2014, when Yee and he are term limited out of their seats. If he ran for 2010, I do not expect him to win. The reason is that Yee's district is more working class and not as ultra Liberal as Ammiano's Assembly district. Ammiano will definitely run to the left so I do not see him winning. Yee appears safe because he has a large presence in the area. He was elected to the State Assembly in 2002. Obama won 76% of the vote here. Demographics are 16% Hispanic and 35% Asian. Status is Safe Democrat.
State Senate District 10 Ellen Corbett (D)
Corbett is fighting hard to prevent a NUMMI plant in Fremont from being closed. On August 21st, she rallied with workers at the plant. No Republican has a shot at winning this district because it is too Democratic. She has had a presence in this district for more than 10 years. With no looming baggage, she should have an easy ride through 2010. Obama won 71% of the vote here. Demographics are 7% Black, 21% Hispanic and 32% Asian. Status is Safe Democrat.
State Senate District 12 Jeff Denham (R) Term Limited Out!
If Democrats want to gain a 2/3 majority, they have to pick up seats such as Denham's. With a Republican incumbent gone, Democrats have a great shot at it with a 13% registration advantage and 46% Hispanic population as of 2000. State Assemblyman from Modesto Tom Berryhill (R) might look at the race. He does not live in it but as we learned from carpetbagger Tom McClintock, people can just move to a suitable district and run. If I were him, I would probably stay in his safe district containing Republican parts of Modesto and the Sierras. He is term limited out in 2012. Possible Democratic candidates include Anna Caballero from Salinas. She is not term limited out until 2012. She said is interested in running but has not formerly announced yet. Her background includes chairing the Youth Violence Prevention Committee and representing unions in a strike. Other candidates include Luis Alejo (D), an attorney from Watsonville. Jamie De La Cruz (D) will run if Caballero does not run. Francisco Dominguez (D) from Gilroy has worked on a school board for 12 years. He will run if Caballero decides not to run. He said, "I'm very frustrated, just like other folks, about what's happening in Sacramento - not being able to resolve the budget and deliver to residents," he said. "There needs to be more cooperation in the legislature. My style is to resolve conflict." Rick Rivas (D) was Caballero's campaign manager in 2006 so I assume he will run if Caballero decides not to run. The last candidate is Eugenia Sanchez (D) who is the mayor of Hollister and served on Hollister's School Board. It is too early to tell who will win if Caballero runs. If someone from the Central Valley jumps in, that person could sweep the Central Valley while the other candidates split the Coastal area. If Caballero runs, the other candidates may defer to her. If they do not, I still believe she should win. The reason is that all the other candidates are Hispanic; they will split the Hispanic vote while Caballero sweeps the white vote. A Hispanic candidate would have a better chance to win this district because he or she could generate a large Hispanic turnout. The primary could damage the Democrats but it looks like the Democrats should win. Obama won 58% of the vote here. The Demographics are 46% Hispanic and 42% White. Status is Lean Democrat.
58%
State Senate District 14 Dave Cogdill (R)
Cogdill was the Senate Republican Leader from April 2008 to February, 2009. He seems to be in touch with his district because he supports cleaner air quality, low taxes and agricultural groups. One bill he proposed would cut red tape for agricultural vehicles but also protect the environment. He appears to be Conservative on most issues but moderate on others. He joined Darrel Steinberg and Schwarzenegger to campaign for the May 19th budget propositions. Since he is term limited out in 2014, he should be reelected in 2010. McCain won 56% of the vote. Demographics are 28% Hispanic and 5% Asian. Status is Safe Republican.
State Senate District 16 Dean Florez (D)
Florez appears to be sitting in the light of power. He became Senate Majority Leader in 2008 and will run for Lieutenant Governor in 2010. His grandparents are farm workers and he fights for farm worker's rights in the Senate. One main priority of Florez's is speaking out against using the Central Valley as a big dump for waste. Other accomplishments include sponsoring SB 700 which made farmers follow the Clean Air Act and supporting bills to make farm worker vans safer. Possible candidates for replacement include Danny Gilmore (R) of the 30th Assembly district and Juan Arambula (I) of the 31st Assembly district which covers Hispanic areas in the southern Central Valley. Gilmore won against Fran Florez (D), the mother of Dean Florez in 2008. Gilmore was a former marine. He may run because he has a shaky hold on the 30th district. I expect due to the district's large Hispanic population, a Hispanic Democrat will win in 2010. Even though it should be a Republican year, Gilmore was the Joseph Cao of California. He was Cao because he won an upset in a heavily Democratic district that will go back to normal by 2010. Arambula used to be a Democrat but switched parties in June 2009. Seeing an open seat, he may leap for the seat and because he is Hispanic, I see him winning. Obama won 59% of the vote here. Demographics are 63% Hispanic, 7% Black, and 6% Asian. Status is Likely Democrat.
State Senate District 18 Roy Ashburn (R)
Republicans may be dwindling in California. They still have this area as a stronghold. The 18th district contains Republican parts of Kern, Tulare, Inyo and San Bernardino counties. This totals up to a McCain win with 61% of the vote. Even though Ashburn represents the most Conservative district in California, he is fairly moderate. During the budget crisis, he voted with the Democrats to increase taxes to help the economy. His constituents were furious so his political career should be finished. Voters will not have a chance to prove it because Ashburn is term limited. A possible candidate to replace him is Republican Jean Fuller. She represents the 32nd State Assembly District which is centered in Bakersfield. She was the former Superintendent of Bakersfield schools until she became a state legislator in 2006. Like Ashburn, she is not a Tom McClintock Conservative. She supports allocating more money for education. Besides Fuller, Republican Bill Maze will seek the seat and so will Democrat Carter Pope. Maze formerly represented California's 34th State Assembly District which covers Tulare County and some rural areas in Inyo County. In the Assembly, he was on numerous committees such as the Select Committee for Foster Care. Maze appears more Conservative than Fuller and he represented the 34th district for six years. The race should be a duel between Kern County and Tulare County. Maze has a better chance to win because he is more Conservative and he is more entrenched. I expect the race will split about 53%-47% or even closer. Democrat Carter Pope appears to have no legislative experience or political experience so he is should lose. The demographics for this district are 27% Hispanic. Status is Safe Republican.
State Senate District 20 Alex Padilla (D)
Like San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom, Padilla is a young rising star. Apparently, Newsom agrees with me because he appointed Padilla to chair his gubernatorial campaign calling Padilla, "One of the brightest and most accomplished rising stars in the country." Even if Newsom's poll numbers depict his as a falling star, Padilla is not falling. The Hispanic Business magazine named him one of America's most influential Hispanics. He spearheaded a tobacco tax bill last August and is trying now to get a fire protection bill passed. The San Gabriel Mountains near his district are on fire, why am I not surprised? Other projects include starting the Children's Museum of Los Angeles. Since he was elected in 2006, he sponsored 29 bills. Would he be LA Mayor Villaraigosa's replacement when Villaraigosa retires? Anyway, he should not worry about reelection. Obama won 72% of the vote here and the demographics are 61% Hispanic, 9% Asian and 23% White. Status is Safe Democrat.
I had three main goals in mind when thinking about redistricting California:
1.) Make the new map less gerrymandered than the current one, keeping more communities together in the same district.
2.) Increase the number of Hispanic-majority districts in the state, while preserving all the current Hispanic-represented seats.
3.) Increase Democratic representation in the state delegation.
All three goals above are met by the proposed map. Incumbent protection was a lesser goal. Nevertheless, at least for Democratic Representatives, this goal was also met by this proposal.
Under the proposed plan, 44 districts are made to be Democratic, 7 to be Republican, and 2 to be swing districts (one of which, CA-4, would have certainly gone Democratic in the 2006 and 2008 Congressional elections if the proposed plan was in place, and the other, CA-48, could quite conceivably go Democratic in the near future).
Bottom line: if these lines had been in effect during the 2008 elections, Democrats would have likely won 45 of the 53 districts
When Ellen Tauscher announced she was headed for the State Department it seemed there would be no shortage of Democrats running to replace her in this safe district, including California's Lt. Gov, John Garamendi, who ducked out of the race for governor when he got no traction and decided not to contest Republican held CA-03. Recently though, CNN's Campbell Brown (bleck!) interviewed a candidate I hadn't heard anything about until now, and after watching the clip I walked away impressed.
I've been saving the changes in registration differences in the competitive districts that I track in my regular registration number updates. Here I will show the changes in registration going from the last numbers before the 2008 election to the latest numbers released a few days ago. Here they are in tabulated form. And for the congressional districts, in addition to the 8 Obama-Republican districts, I tossed in CA-04, because the House race there was very close in spite of the considerable Republican advantage in registration and the presidential race, and CA-46, the district of McCain's closest win of the 11 McCain districts and the only one that he won with less than 50%.
With the release of the new registration numbers, and a couple of special elections just around the corner, I now have updates for the open and/or competitive State Senate and State Assembly districts, as well as the eight Obama-Republican districts. The Secretary of State's website has the presidential results by district, so I am including the presidential results in each district.
Breaking news: We now have a (albeit slight) registration advantage in AD-10!
And an edit: I am including CA-04 in the list because of McClintock's less-than-1% win, even though the presidential race and registration gap are not particularly close.
Found this J. Moore Methods poll over at Calitics. Lt. Gov. John Garamendi leads among likely voters (36% have no opinion). (Rupf is Republican Warren Rupf, Sheriff of Contra Costa County.)
Garamendi
Rupf
DeSaulnier
Buchanan
Support:
24
17
13
10
Known:
80
20
39
45
Favorable:
35
9
16
17
Unfavorable:
12
9
13
12
While Garamendi does have a commanding lead in the polls and the name rec, Senator Mark DeSaulnier or Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan can try and catch up, but it will be a long shot when facing Garamendi's high name rec and campaign war chest. DeSaulnier is a great progressive in the state legislature and I would like him to win, but no one knows if it will be enough. For now this race is Garamendi's to lose.
I checked the California Secretary of State's site and found that each statement of vote has registration statistics going back to 1910. I decided to use the presidential elections from 1988 on, since 1992 marked the realignment in California, Illinois, and many northeastern states that caused them to vote Democratic in every presidential election from 1992 on. Here are the numbers.
Year
DEM
%
GOP
%
Other
%
1988
7,052,368
50.36%
5,406,127
38.60%
1,546,378
11.04%
1992
7,410,914
49.07%
5,593,555
37.04%
2,097,004
13.89%
1996
7,387,504
47.17%
5,704,536
36.42%
2,570,035
16.41%
2000
7,134,601
45.42%
5,485,492
34.92%
3,087,214
19.65%
2004
7,120,425
43.00%
5,745,518
34.70%
3,691,330
22.29%
2008
7,683,495
44.40%
5,428,052
31.37%
4,192,544
24.23%
The 2008 election marked the end of a streak of decreasing numbers of Democratic registered voters since the bump they got in 1992. Why the Democrats' share of the pie in 1992 fell from their 1988 numbers can be explained by the surge in unaffiliated voters, methinks, thanks to Ross Perot. Also, despite the fall in the Democrats' numbers in proportion to the total number of registered voters, the Democratic presidential nominee has won California by stronger margins. This can be accounted for by many unaffiliated voters becoming disenchanted with the GOP's rightward shift and voting Democratic in greater numbers, as well as more Republicans crossing over than Democrats. You will also notice that the GOP's share of the pie has been steadily declining since 1988, with the boost they got from Arnold and the 2004 election only temporarily stopping the bleeding.
Here are the rates of change in the numbers of each parties' registered voters. For 1992, I am showing the percent change in the numbers from 1988.
Year
DEM
GOP
Other
1992
5.08%
3.47%
35.61%
1996
-0.32%
1.98%
22.56%
2000
-3.42%
-3.84%
20.12%
2004
-0.20%
4.74%
19.57%
2008
14.20%
-5.53%
13.58%
From here, we can see that the only times since 1988 that the Republicans surpassed Democrats in the rate of increase in the number of registered voters were 1996, where Republican optimism got a jumpstart from their 1994 landslides, and 2004, and in 2008 the rate of increase in the number of registered Democrats surpassed the rate of increase in the number of unaffiliated voters for the first time in a while. (I'm not sure of the last time this happened; I'd have to look it up.) It remains to see if 2008 was a one-time deal, or if we'll be looking at similar numbers in 2012, with a faster increase in the number of registered Democrats than unaffiliated voters. Unaffiliated voters outnumbering Republican voters is not out of the question either, at least if current trends continue or speed up.
In 2010, Democrats need a strong candidate to run in California's 3rd Congressional District, which is rapidly trending Democratic. In 2006, Bill Durston ran against Republican Dan Lungren and lost by 21.5 percent. In 2008, Durston ran again. This time, he came within 5.5 percent of winning and kept Lungren's vote total under 50%.
But Durston has decided not to run again. And with the DCCC targeting the district, we desperately need a candidate who can step in and finish the job that Bill Durston started.
John Garamendi is the absolute best person to lead the battle for California's 3rd Congressional District. He has deep roots in the district - he was born and raised in Mokelumne Hill, owns a ranch there, and was elected by the voters in the district to serve in the California state legislature from 1974 to 1990.
With the release of the new registration numbers, I now have updates for the open and/or competitive State Senate and State Assembly districts. The Secretary of State's website has the presidential results by district, so I am including the presidential results in each districts.
I am also tacking on the eight districts that are our top targets in 2010: CA-03, CA-24, CA-25, CA-26, CA-44, CA-45, CA-48, and CA-50.
I know we've all blamed California Democrats plenty for cowardice in 2002, but I've thought about it and I come to a clearer decision. Things were different then. They had just been through the hard fought 90s where they had to fight tooth and nail to win the senate Seats, the Governorship and a huge numbers of house seats.
Look at the political environment. Gray Davis was very unpopular, the Gary Condit scandal had just racked state Democrats, and Bush was wildly popular and many of areas of the state looked a lot different than they do now, after another 8 years of political trends.
Obama beat McCain 61%-37% in California, performing 7% better than Kerry in his 54%-44% win over Bush. Here are the county-by-county percentages for Kerry and Obama and the difference between those percentages. Counties that flipped from Bush to Obama are bolded.
County
Kerry
Obama
Diff
County
Kerry
Obama
Diff
County
Kerry
Obama
Diff
County
Kerry
Obama
Diff
Alameda
75.2%
78.8%
3.6%
Kings
33.8%
42.1%
8.3%
Placer
36.3%
43.4%
7.1%
Shasta
31.4%
36.0%
4.6%
Alpine
53.3%
61.0%
7.7%
Lake
53.2%
58.2%
5.0%
Plumas
36.9%
42.8%
5.9%
Sierra
33.2%
37.4%
4.2%
Amador
36.6%
41.6%
5.0%
Lassen
27.6%
31.5%
3.9%
Riverside
41.1%
50.3%
9.2%
Siskiyou
37.8%
43.3%
5.5%
Butte
44.2%
49.9%
5.7%
Los Angeles
63.2%
69.2%
6.0%
Sacramento
49.6%
58.5%
8.9%
Solano
57.2%
63.5%
6.3%
Calaveras
37.1%
42.2%
5.1%
Madera
34.8%
42.4%
7.6%
San Benito
52.7%
60.5%
7.8%
Sonoma
67.2%
73.7%
6.5%
Colusa
31.6%
40.0%
8.4%
Marin
73.3%
78.0%
4.7%
San Bernardino
43.6%
52.1%
8.5%
Stanislaus
40.4%
49.9%
9.5%
Contra Costa
62.3%
68.0%
5.7%
Mariposa
37.6%
42.5%
4.9%
San Diego
46.4%
54.2%
7.8%
Sutter
31.9%
40.8%
8.9%
Del Norte
41.4%
45.4%
4.0%
Mendocino
63.5%
69.6%
6.1%
San Francisco
83.1%
84.2%
1.1%
Tehama
32.1%
36.7%
4.6%
El Dorado
37.4%
43.7%
6.3%
Merced
42.3%
53.4%
11.1%
San Joaquin
45.9%
54.5%
8.6%
Trinity
42.8%
50.8%
8.0%
Fresno
41.7%
50.3%
8.6%
Modoc
25.8%
29.8%
4.0%
San Luis Obispo
45.6%
51.4%
5.8%
Tulare
32.9%
41.5%
8.6%
Glenn
31.7%
37.8%
6.1%
Mono
49.3%
55.6%
6.3%
San Mateo
69.5%
73.5%
4.0%
Tuolumne
38.6%
42.5%
3.9%
Humboldt
57.7%
62.3%
4.6%
Monterey
60.4%
68.2%
7.8%
Santa Barbara
53.2%
60.4%
7.2%
Ventura
47.6%
55.3%
7.7%
Imperial
52.5%
62.3%
9.8%
Napa
59.5%
65.2%
5.7%
Santa Clara
64.0%
69.5%
5.5%
Yolo
59.4%
67.1%
7.7%
Inyo
38.9%
43.9%
5.0%
Nevada
45.0%
51.5%
6.5%
Santa Cruz
73.0%
77.5%
4.5%
Yuba
31.6%
41.5%
9.9%
Kern
32.6%
40.2%
7.6%
Orange
39.0%
47.7%
8.7%
As you can see, a lot of the counties that showed the most improvement from 2004, including a lot of those that flipped, are in the areas of the state that experienced the fastest growth this decade. This is good news for us heading into the 2010 elections, because a lot of congressional and state legislative seats in these areas are ripe for the picking. This is also good news for redistricting, as the rapid growth of Democratic numbers gives the Democrats more room overall and allows for further gains by them.
You can also see that the counties in the multi-county Democratic stronghold of the Bay Area showed smaller Democratic growth numbers. This does not exactly mean that the region is trending Republican; rather, it has just pretty much maxed out its Democratic numbers. So just relying on our old strongholds in the Bay Area and L.A. County only takes us so far, and I am pleased to see the improvements in the fast-growing counties, which allow us to expand our playing field greatly.
Check below the flip for the juicy details on the numbers by districts.
With the release of the new registration numbers, I now have updates for the open and/or competitive State Senate and State Assembly districts. With the district results that I found (Senate here and Assembly here), I put in a new column, showing the margin of the 2008 presidential winner in each district, so we can clearly see what our biggest targets are.
Our current numbers in the Senate are 25 Democrats/15 Republicans, with winning 2 GOP-held seats necessary for 2/3; and in the Assembly 51 Democrats/29 Republicans, with winning 3 GOP-held seats necessary for 2/3.
Here is my analysis of the 2008 election in my home state of California. As I mentioned in my 50-state analysis, California was a mixed bag on November 4, 2008. The presidential results were anything but disappointing, while we came up short further down the ballot, from the House races to the state legislature and the 12 ballot measures.
I was amazed as I saw polls leading up to Election Day showing Obama up by more than 20 over McCain, and was astonished at the 61-37 Obama blowout that ended up occurring on Election Night (and the calling of the whole Left Coast for Obama, putting him over 270 electoral votes and making him the winner!). I couldn't wait to check out the county results and see which ones flipped for Obama and which ones were close.
As the final absentee ballots rolled in, I was able to check out the numbers, and see that Obama way outperformed Kerry, winning by 3 million votes and pumping up his national popular vote numbers very nicely. In fact, Obama outperformed every single Democratic presidential candidate except one, scoring the second-best Democratic presidential performance in California's history after Franklin Roosevelt in 1936. As you can see, Obama gained 1.5 million votes over Kerry, while McCain, who claimed he could compete in California, lost half a million votes from Bush.
2008: Obama 8,274,473; McCain 5,011,781
2004: Kerry 6,745,485; Bush 5,509,826
Looking through the voting histories of the California counties that went to Obama, I found that Obama broke some longtime Republican streaks in quite a few counties. Obama won a majority of the vote in two counties that last voted Democratic presidentially with more than 50% of the vote in 1976, Merced and Trinity.
Most significant are the six counties that in 2008 voted Democratic presidentially with more than 50% for the first time since 1964: Nevada, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, Ventura
And finally, San Diego County, which last voted for a Democratic presidential candidate with a majority of the vote in 1944, also delivered a majority of the vote to Obama!
Obama also came close to winning majorities, instead winning close pluralities, in Butte, Fresno, and Stanislaus Counties. The last Democrat to win a majority in Butte and Fresno was Lyndon Johnson in 1964, and the last Democrat to win a majority in Stanislaus was Jimmy Carter in 1976.
Now I will do a tour of the state, north to south. I will give a bit of an overall summary of California's counties: Obama improved upon Kerry's performance in all 58 of them. The amount of improvement varies from region to region, and the numbers are over the flip.
