Below are some charts that a few of you will like, and for others of you will be like reading train tables.
What follows is a each state's historical voting record for each Presidential Election since 1948. These charts should be fairly easy to interpret: an "r11" (Republican +11) for instance means that the Republican candidate beat the Democratic candidate by 11 points.
The only exception is when an independent or third-party candidate actually won the state. We indicate these cases with an "i7", meaning that the independent candidate won by a 7-point margin over the second-place finisher.
This next version is actually a little more interesting: this is a state's electoral history relative to the rest of the country. In 1972, for instance, Richard Nixon beat native son George McGovern by 9 points in South Dakota. However, since Nixon beat McGovern by 24 points overall, this was actually a relatively good showing for McGovern: he overperformed his nationwide popular vote margin by 15 points in South Dakota. Thus, this would be indicated in the table as a 'd15' (Democrat +15).
These tables will have a permanent home under the 'History' link in the navigation bar.
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Electoral History Charts
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments
These electoral history charts are very cool. One suggestion is to order them by effect size, within region. See, e.g. Michael Friendly's paper "Effect ordering for data display"
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=942043
another winner. this site is amazing.
Yep, that is interesting.
I didn´t know that the Dixiecrats won MS by 77 (!) points in 1948...
Great charts. The relative ones show the Democrat shift from the South to the North very well. Also interesting that Big Sky, Prairie and Southwest have been reliably Republican all along.
(Btw, wouldn't Oklahoma fit in better under "prairie", both literally and demographically? What's the rationale for putting it under Highlands?)
Gotta agree about Oklahoma.
Rasmus, you should also keep in mind that African Americans were largely excluded from voting in the South before the enactment of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. That's part of the explanation for the Dixiecrat landslide in 1948.
Two interesting things: first, looking at the relative charts, demographics is destiny. It's easy to see, for example, Highland and Big Sky states steadily shifting from blue to red over the decades, while Pacific, North Central, and Rust Belt moves the other way. BTW, that's one GREAT reason to keep Oklahoma in the Highlands: demographically, they're a lot more like Arkansas than Kansas.
Second, looking at the non-relative charts, the candidate makes a big difference! Just scan down the columns of '72 and '76 to see what I mean. The big "change" election in the country wasn't Reagan's win in 1980, it was Nixon's win in 1972.
I suggest making a five point moving average of the electoral vote won by each party since 1948. It is very interesting. The parties first diverge up until the middle of the graph and then converge, touching each other at the end of the graph.
Say, is it too late to retroactively surrender to the Confederate States of America? Let them form their own country, please. It would really make the electoral map much nicer if we took those 153 electoral votes away from McCain. (Even if you take into account Obama's slim chances of winning those states, it's still effectively stripping 105 delegates).
The last time one party depended so completely on the old south for electoral success as GWB/GWB/McCain have in these three election cycles was the old Dixiecrats of Grover Cleveland and Woodrow Wilson.
Hey these are sweet....
This is going to totally kick-
Go Dems .....
Very nice charts! However, PA and WI have exactly the same numbers, which seems like a mistake.
Great charts! But you should be aware that Acela stops in Pennsylvania....
we in PA are not in the fucking midwest.
^^^^ Hey, PA, I hope you are just expressing frustration on the geo-ignorance of your state's location.
Don't be dissin' us here in the midwest!
Whats the deal with Oregon 00'? I am pretty sure the Dems won that.
Nate, please note that you have the results for WI totally wrong! (It seems like the state's row is a duplicate of the PA results.) The last five elections WI was d4, d4, d10, d0 and d0 respectively.
for buffs in '48 Mississippi I believe didn't have a Dem Candidate
Pennsylvania fits in the Midwest. You have to remember these election charts have a very, very long view of history and time. Pennsylvania use to be considered a western state. Chill out, Pennsylvania is a shit hole, it wished it was as pure as a midwestern state.
Post a Comment