This is map ensures a Republican 6 to 1 delegation for the entire decade. It strenghtens Wilson’s district while creating a new Republican seat. I currently live in District 4 and am active in the redistricting process.
District 1 - Tim Scott
68% White 21% AA 7.2% Hispanic
This uses some Republican low country areas from Clyburn’s old district along with Republican Charleston and Hilton Head to create a Safe Republican district for Scott.
District 2 - Joe Wilson
73.5% White 18.1% AA 5% Hispanic
A Lexington County based district that adds some of the conservative upstate while dropping some southern counties. Adds Calhoun County from Clyburn’s old district (SC-6) and loses some Democrat areas of Columbia in Richland County. The new SC-2 then extends north to pick up parts of heavily republican Anderson and Pickens Counties from SC-3. A Safe Republican district for Wilson.
District 3 - Jeff Duncan
69.5% White 23.7% AA 4.3% Hispanic
This new SC-3 district picks up parts of Wilson’s old districts opposite Augusta (from Wilson)and western Orangeburg Country (from Clyburn), while giving up parts of upstate counties to SC-2 (Joe Wilson’s district). In addition, it maintains Duncan’s residence in the district. Safe Republican.
District 4 - Trey Gowdy
67.5% White 22.4% AA 6.6% Hispanic
Greenville County based upstate district that includes Gowdy’s Spartanburg residence and the most democratic areas of downtown Spartanburg. The new 4th also adds two counties of Spratt’s old district. The new configuration keeps SC-4 from being a Republican vote sink while still being a solid republican district. Safe Republican.
District 5 - Mick Mulvaney
69.1% White 22.8% AA 4.7% Hispanic
By adding heavily republican northern Spartanburg County, York based SC-5 is able to keep Kershaw County (stopping Vincent Shaheen from running in SC-7) and the Democratic regions of Dilon and Marlboro Counties. Divides the rest of the counties that kept reelecting Spratt to SC-4, SC-6, and the new SC-7. A Safe Republican district for Mulvaney.
District 6 - Jim Clyburn
30.9% White 62.5% AA 3.8 % Hispanic
This District gives up some low country republican areas, Calhoun and western Orangeburg counties, while picking up more of Columbia, and parts of Lee and Darlington Counties from SC-5. Also picks up parts of low country counties from SC-2, and gives up more republican areas closer to Horry County.
A genuine, quite fair Majority-Minority district now. Safe Democrat.
District 7 - New Open Seat
69.9% White 23.1% AA 4.1% Hispanic
With Horry County and the northeastern exurbs of Charleston to anchor this district, this should be safely Republican for the foreseeable future. Republicans should be very competitive even in the parts of the district outside of Horry and Ex-urban Charleston. Likely to Safe Republican.
Rhode Island doesn't offer much for redistricting fans to sink their teeth into: it has two districts that are about equally blue, the Dems control the redistricting trifecta, and the disparity between the two districts, while not New Hampshire-close, requires only minimal boundary-shifting. Rhode Island's target is a tiny 526,284 (only up from 524K in 2000... Rhode Island had the smallest growth, percentage-wise, of any state over the decade, putting it 2nd overall behind only Michigan, which actually lost population). If this continues, there's the distinct possibility we could see Rhode Island reduced to one House seat come 2020. Also worth noting: Rhode Island had a lot of Hispanic growth over the decade, not quite on par with the Southwest but high for the Northeast; it went from 8.5% Hispanic to 12.4%, and Providence moved to a Hispanic plurality.
District
Rep.
Population
Deviation
RI-01
Cicilline (D)
519,021
(7,263)
RI-02
Langevin (D)
533,546
7,263
Total:
1,052,567
South Carolina is gaining one seat to move from six to seven; its new target based on 7 seats is 660,766 (it was 668K in 2000, so every district gained significantly over the decade). With the GOP holding the trifecta and much of the growth seeming to come among white retirees, look for the creation of one more Republican-friendly seat... with one possible wild card, that the Obama DOJ might weigh in and push for a second African-American VRA seat (theoretically possible if terribly ugly, as SSP's crack team of freelance mapmakers have shown here). The biggest growth has come in the coastal Low Country, rather than the fiercely evangelical uplands; I'd expect Charleston and Myrtle Beach, both part of SC-01 for now, to wind up each anchoring their own districts.
District
Rep.
Population
Deviation
SC-01
Scott (R)
856,956
196,190
SC-02
Wilson (R)
825,324
164,558
SC-03
Duncan (R)
722,675
61,909
SC-04
Gowdy (R)
770,226
109,460
SC-05
Mulvaney (R)
767,773
107,007
SC-06
Clyburn (D)
682,410
21,644
Total:
4,625,364
West Virginia is staying at three seats for now, although it might be headed for two seats in 2020, given its slow growth and low targets; its target is 617,665, only up from 603K in 2000. The 3rd, in coal country in the southern part of the state, is losing population (though not as fast as one might suspect); the 2nd needs to shed an amount equivalent to what the 3rd needs to gain, leaving the 1st pretty stable. Much of the state's growth is in the far east tip of the Panhandle (in the 2nd), especially Berkeley County, which serves as Washington DC's furthest-out exurbs. Dave Wasserman, who seems to get all the good redistricting-related gossip, says that while the obvious solution (moving Mason County from the 2nd to the 3rd, and calling it a wrap) still seems likely, the Dems who control the redistricting trifecta might want to cobble together a slightly Dem-friendlier 1st along the state's northern boundary that includes both Morgantown and the Panhandle exurbs (the only counties in the state that are getting bluer).
In my research on South Carolina's 2010 gubernatorial election, I came upon a fascinating chart. The chart describes the number of Democrats and Republican in South Carolina's State House of Representatives from the Civil War to the present day. The data offers a fascinating story of the Democratic Party in South Carolina, and the Deep South in general.
This is part of three posts analyzing the 2010 South Carolina gubernatorial election, in which Republican Nikki Haley won a closer-than-expected victory over Democrat Vincent Sheheen. The main focus of these posts will be to explore whether a racial effect accounted for Ms. Haley's unexpected poor performance.
(Note: This is also part of a series of posts analyzing the 2010 midterm elections.)
This is the second part of three posts analyzing the 2010 South Carolina gubernatorial election, in which Republican Nikki Haley won a closer-than-expected victory over Democrat Vincent Sheheen. The main focus of these posts will be to explore whether a racial effect accounted for Ms. Haley's unexpected poor performance.
The previous post can be found here, and the next post can be found here.
(Note: This is also part of a series of posts analyzing the 2010 midterm elections.)
This is the first part of three posts analyzing the 2010 South Carolina gubernatorial election, in which Republican Nikki Haley won a closer-than-expected victory over Democrat Vincent Sheheen. The main focus of these posts will be to explore whether a racial effect accounted for Ms. Haley's unexpected poor performance.
This is a short diary for me - and one where I just wanted to "make a point."
The diary is not really about South Carolina, although the state is used here as an example. The VRA has been discussed in a number of diaries recently, but I think it's important to revisit this issue again. I previously did a post on South Carolina where two compact black-majority districts are created:
This is a quick attempt at South Carolina with 7 seats and 2 Minority Majority districts.
SSPers speculated that there should be a second VRA seat in South Carolina, as there is a substantial black population. Personally I do not think South Carolina should have gotten another seat, the data on Daves App shows South Carolina at 4.5 Million or so, and 2010 Census showed it at 4.6 M or 663,710 per district. I however feel that as long as the US House stays with 435 seats and the size of each constituency rises with each census apportionment, the utility of VRA seats are going to collapse onto themselves.
We see instances like Mel Watt (NC), Corrine Brown (FL), and Sanford Bishop (GA) that getting 50% of their districts Black is a hard order when trying to make a district that has at best moderate gerrymandering.
South Carolina has a large African American population 30% in the 2000 Census; however the population is way too spread out to make a coherent congressional district within a state. As seen here
And my map seen here
It just is too agressive to get a 50% district and a 49% district. Also notice that the 4th district (yellow) is just barely contiguous. This gerrymander will only see Clyburn, Scott and Dowdy keep their seats I believe. It does really put Joe Wilson into a very strange district.
9:20pm: 100% is now reporting in SC-03. Duncan's sporting a 3% or 2,100 vote lead over Cash, but still no call from the AP after a short delay, the AP has called it for Duncan.
9:00pm: Given that the Ark of the Covenant is in Arizona, Tim D'Annunzio can try his next congressional run there. AP calls NC-08 for Johnson.
8:57pm: Duncan continues to hold his lead over Cash in SC-03; this territory went for Cash narrowly by 0.4% in the first round. This is a swing of 3.7% to Duncan, who needs a swing of 2.3% to win. In NC-08, Johnson continues to whomp D'Annunzio 62-38.
8:47pm: AP calls SC-01 for Tim Scott. He will likely become the first black Republican in Congress since JC Watts left office in 2003.
8:40pm: It's over for Rep. Bob Inglis - the AP calls it. Trey Gowdy has beaten him soundly. Inglis is the third House incumbent and fifth member of Congress to lose a primary/convention so far this cycle.
8:37pm: Man, maybe SSP HQ needs to take a ganja break this time! The two biggest races have been called (NC-Sen and SC-Gov), and NC-08, SC-01, and SC-04 all look like blowouts. And SC-03 isn't exactly a barnburner. We may not have much real action until Utah starts coming in later tonight.
8:33pm: Really bad news for fans of Raiders of the Lost Ark: Tim D'Annunzio is getting smashed by Harold Johnson, 68-32, with about 18% reporting. This represents an almost 15% swing to Johnson, which means Timmy D might wind up with a smaller share than in the first round. Pretty pathetic, but if anyone could pull this off, he could.
8:31pm: The one real barnburner tonight might be SC-03, the seat being vacated by gubernatorial loser Gresh Barrett. Duncan leads Cash 52-48 with over half the vote in. This represents a nice swing toward Duncan from round one, though, so it might not wind up being this close in the end.
8:30pm: Yeah, it's officially official - We Are Marshall. She'll take on Richard Burr this fall.
8:29pm: Buncha people on Twitter are saying the AP has called NC-Sen for Elaine Marshall. Really gotta wonder what the DSCC was thinking here. Time for them to embrace her fully.
8:22pm: AP calls SC-Gov for Nikki Haley. She'll face Dem state Sen. Vincent Sheheen in the fall. Unlike in SC-Sen, we definitely got the candidate we wanted in our primary.
8:19pm: Meanwhile, in SC-01, Tim Scott is cruising with a 73-27 lead with a quarter of the voted reporting. Hard to see him losing this one. I guess Paul Thurmond can go commiserate with Ethan Hastert.
8:17pm: With about 30% of the vote in, Nikki Haley is crushing Gresham Barrett 64-36. Gotta wonder what folks like Andre Bauer and the local Chamber of Commerce were thinking.
8:16pm: Terrible sign for Inglis - he's down 60-40 in his purported "base" of Greenville. He was a dead man walking for the last couple of weeks. Tonight is just the grand finale.
8:11pm: 1% of the vote has trickled in in NC-08, and Harold Johnson leads Tim D'Annunzio 70-30. This represents a 13% swing to Johnson from the first round (based on the two-candidate share of the vote).
8:04pm: True to the Greenville v. Spartanburg divide in SC-04, the one precinct from Greenville in has closed this to 70-30 Gowdy.
8:02pm: Cash has retaken the lead in SC-03 over Duncan narrowly at 50.3-46.7, but this is territory that went for him 26-19 in the first round.
7:59pm: In NC-Sen, Elaine Marshall continues to sport her 64-36 lead over Cal Cunningham. This is territory that went for Marshall 39-30 in the first round. In SC-Gov, Haley's lead is 62-38 over Barrett; this territory went for her 49-23 in the first round.
7:55pm: In SC-01, Scott's lead remains an impressive 70-30 over Thrumond. Further west in SC-03, Duncan now has a 52-48 lead over Cash.
7:49pm: Marshall's lead has ticked up slightly to 64-36 with 6% reporting in NC. Johnson is whomping D'Annunzio 75-25 with two precincts in.
7:47pm: Duncan's now taken the lead in SC-03, a slim 89-vote lead over Cash.
7:42pm: 1% reporting in North Carolina now, Marshall is up on Cunningham 63-37.
7:30pm: We only have five precincts reporting in South Carolina, and Nikki Haley leads Gresham Barrett by 61-39. In SC-01, Tim Scott leads Paul Thurmond by 67-33, and ice cream truck driver businessman Richard Cash leads state Rep. Jeff Duncan by 54-46 with one precinct counted in SC-03. Trey Gowdy is also crushing Bob Inglis by 85-15 in the early vote.
Polls have now closed in South Carolina. (North Carolina will close at 7:30pm ET.) We'll be using this thread to follow the returns.
Many people were scratching their heads Wednesday morning (or late Tuesday night), when we realized that South Carolina Democrats had nominated a literal "Some Dude" - an unemployed veteran living with his father - who somehow managed to front the $10,000 needed to run.
South Carolina State Senator Robert Ford weighed in on the matter later on Wednesday, remarking:
No white folks have an 'e' on the end of Green. The blacks after they left the plantation couldn't spell, and they threw an 'e' on the end.
(If you're wondering about the title, Gadsby is a 260-page novel that contains no instances of the letter E.)
Both Greene and Vic Rawl were relative unknowns and we'll assume no voter knowledge of either candidate . Given the campaigning by both candidates (or lack thereof), I think this is a relatively tenable assumption.
So, let's start at the county level - what's the relationship between the percent of non-white registered voters and the percentage Greene received?
Here are two maps, with the non-white voter percentage on the left and Greene's percentage on the right.
Is there a relationship? Maybe - hard to tell. Tom Schaller goes into this in more depth than I do.
However, thanks to the relatively good South Carolina State Election Commission website, we can go further to the precinct level. The geographic data for mapping precincts simply isn't available, but we can still look at the numbers. (Sidenote: Absentees and provisionals can't be attributed to a specific precinct and are tossed from here on out.)
Here's a scatterplot of the non-white RV percentage and the percentage that Greene received on Tuesday and a simple regression line through it. Below that are the Stata output from a simple regression taking the non-white RV% as the independent variable.
The regression tells us two things:
For every 1% increase in the non-white percentage of RVs, Greene's percentage can be expected to increase 0.22%.
For a hypothetical county with 100% white RVs, Greene's expected percentage should be (!!) 51.6%.
But is the relationship there? Hard to say - it is statistically significant, but the R-squared is a measly 0.1425, meaning the other 85.75% of variance in Greene's percentage is explained by something else.
Statistics disclaimer: Go ahead and skewer me for using a linear regression. (What else was I going to do?) I know the estimators here are going to be far from unbiased - that's a picture-perfect example of heteroskedasticity if I've ever seen one...
I'm hesitant to rely solely on percentages though - there were plenty of precincts with few RVs and where few votes were cast (as you can tell by the 100% Greene precincts floating along the top edge). We can also consider this in terms of numbers: the number of non-white RVs and the number of votes for Greene in a given precinct.
Now, the regression tells a few things again:
For every additional non-white voter, Greene's vote count can be expected to go up 0.09. (Keep this in context of 24% voter turnout between both primaries!) This effect, again, is statistically significant, and very much so.
For a hypothetical precinct with no non-white RVs, Greene will receive 7.8 votes.
62.6% of variance in Greene's vote totals by precinct can be explained by the number of non-white RVs.
So again, is the relationship there? I think the second method presents a stronger case for the "E"-phenomenon than that first. But that said, is this instance of identity politics any more extraordinary than other instances? Does this have to do with voters having very little information (paging Scott Lee Cohen)? The second analysis, I might add, is also confounded in part by varying turnout across precincts...
Robert Ford may be on to something, but it's all hard to say. (Lastly - if you haven't realized the difficulty in writing with no Es, this post excluding Stata outputs, contains 438 of them.)
