California party registration maps

[politicallefty]

This could also be titled: The Decline of the Republican Party in California.

On the left was the final voter registration data before the 2004 general election. On the right is the current data as of May 19. The top maps are pretty self-explanatory; they show which party has the highest percentage of registered voters per county. The lower maps, on the other hand, show the margins between the two parties in each county. This time period saw the state move from a 43.0%-34.7% (+8.3%) Democratic edge to a much stronger 43.4%-28.4% (+15.0%) Democratic advantage.





It's not so much that Democrats are increasing their numbers as a percentage (although they certainly aren't decreasing), but Republicans are losing numbers fast. In zero-sum politics, that's heavily strengthened the Democratic hold on the state. Six counties have flipped from R to D over this period (Alpine, Fresno, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Joaquin, and Ventura). Of those six, Kerry only carried tiny Alpine. However, Obama carried all of them twice. (Of course, Obama overperformed by winning several apparent Republican-leaning counties as well.)

Democratic strongholds have strengthened, while Republican ones are weakening. Los Angeles County alone has increased the Democratic registration edge in the state by about 500k, while Orange County has seen its Republican edge drop from about 270k votes in 2004 to about 130k now. San Diego County has gone from an 81k (+5.4%) Republican advantage to a 28k (+1.8%) Democratic one.

In 2004, only two counties (Placer and Sutter) had >50% Republican registration. There are now no counties with such. On the differential maps, the darkest blue is an R>20% margin. Only Placer had that in 2004. Currently, it's Modoc and Lassen Counties. Many Democratic counties easily exceed that, with SF and Alameda the most at a D>40% margin.

Interestingly, in 2004, the county most closely matching the state in terms of party registration was Sacramento. While Sacramento County has an almost identical Democratic percentage compared with the state as a whole, San Benito is slightly closer on the margin.

[politicallefty]

I also made Congressional district maps based on party registration. Interestingly, Democrats have the same 38-15 advantage that they have in terms of seats in Congress. However, each party holds two seats where the other party has a registration advantage. Democrats currently hold barely Republican-leaning CA-36 and CA-52 (which both have <2% Republican edge).

Republicans currently hold CA-21 and CA-31, which have Democratic registration advantages. CA-31 is an obvious Democratic target, which is very likely only Republican-held due to Democrats having been locked out in 2012 due to the top-two system. Charlie Cook rates that seat as Leans Democratic. If it doesn't flip this year, it'll only be an even bigger target in 2016.

CA-21 was probably my biggest surprise overall. President Obama did win the seat quite comfortably and Democrats did have a poor candidate in 2012, but I was surprised to see how strong a partisan advantage Democrats have in that seat. Currently, CA-21 stands at 45.5%-31.3% (+14.2%). It may very well be the case that Democrats have a tendency to underpeform in the Central Valley, but that sort of margin is very surprising. With presidential turnout, that's the kind of seat that should be a top target.

[eric82oslo]

Awesome maps and commentary.

That means that Democrats should expect to gain at the very least two more seats in 2014, or (if 2014 has lackluster turnout) in 2016. Not bad at all.

[jimrtex]

CA-21 was probably my biggest surprise overall. President Obama did win the seat quite comfortably and Democrats did have a poor candidate in 2012, but I was surprised to see how strong a partisan advantage Democrats have in that seat. Currently, CA-21 stands at 45.5%-31.3% (+14.2%). It may very well be the case that Democrats have a tendency to underpeform in the Central Valley, but that sort of margin is very surprising. With presidential turnout, that's the kind of seat that should be a top target.

CA-21 is likely intended as a Hispanic opportunity district, based on the hook into Bakersfield and linking Fresno and Bakersfield.  In addition the western part of the valley is more pure agriculture and therefore more Hispanic.  Hispanics will vote for a Democrat, but they won't get excited about a black president.   A representative of Portuguese descent may draw some Hispanic votes.

And Hispanic turnout is generally much lower.  Los Angeles County is around 13% turnout in the primary, and I found a precinct in Bell Gardens at under 2%.

[muon2]

CA-21 was probably my biggest surprise overall. President Obama did win the seat quite comfortably and Democrats did have a poor candidate in 2012, but I was surprised to see how strong a partisan advantage Democrats have in that seat. Currently, CA-21 stands at 45.5%-31.3% (+14.2%). It may very well be the case that Democrats have a tendency to underpeform in the Central Valley, but that sort of margin is very surprising. With presidential turnout, that's the kind of seat that should be a top target.

CA-21 is likely intended as a Hispanic opportunity district, based on the hook into Bakersfield and linking Fresno and Bakersfield.  In addition the western part of the valley is more pure agriculture and therefore more Hispanic.  Hispanics will vote for a Democrat, but they won't get excited about a black president.   A representative of Portuguese descent may draw some Hispanic votes.

And Hispanic turnout is generally much lower.  Los Angeles County is around 13% turnout in the primary, and I found a precinct in Bell Gardens at under 2%.

Yes, CD 21 is a Section 5 VRA district with a Latino CVAP of 49.26%. Here's what the Commission wrote in its final report:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Without a strong Latino turnout, one would expect the district to vote much the way of its neighbors in the Central Valley.

[politicallefty]

Awesome maps and commentary.

That means that Democrats should expect to gain at the very least two more seats in 2014, or (if 2014 has lackluster turnout) in 2016. Not bad at all.

Assuming Democrats can successfully hold on to their marginal seats, absolutely. President Obama won 41 of California's 53 CDs. I think all of those are winnable for Democrats, along with CA-25 (though obviously not this year). CA-31 is among the lowest of hanging fruit for Democrats this year, but only because they were locked out of the general election in 2012. Personally, I think this year Democrats are looking at either no net change or +1. I'd be very surprised to see Democrats have a net loss in California.

CA-21 is likely intended as a Hispanic opportunity district, based on the hook into Bakersfield and linking Fresno and Bakersfield.  In addition the western part of the valley is more pure agriculture and therefore more Hispanic.  Hispanics will vote for a Democrat, but they won't get excited about a black president.   A representative of Portuguese descent may draw some Hispanic votes.

And Hispanic turnout is generally much lower.  Los Angeles County is around 13% turnout in the primary, and I found a precinct in Bell Gardens at under 2%.

The majority of CA-21 is actually in Kern County, which is also it's most Democratic part. Only the Kings County part has a Republican voter registration advantage. With that said, it does have the lowest total voter registration of any CD in California, with just over 202k registered voters. The district also swung towards Obama from 2008 to 2012, going from about 52-46 Obama to 55-44 Obama. Even that result is an underperformance compared to the Democratic voter registration edge. It appears as though even registered Hispanics aren't really voting. If you look at 2010, Brown only by about 48-44, while Fiorina actually carried the district by about 50-40.

Democrats could have very well won CA-21 in 2012 with a good candidate (and they had a disastrous candidate), but that still doesn't explain the underperformance in what really should be a pretty heavily Democratic-leaning district. However, if you look at the past, it's clear that this isn't a new development in the Central Valley. For example, Merced County had about a 3% Democratic registration edge over Republicans, but Bush easily carried the county 57-42.

[Sol]

The Central Valley is also traditionally Democratic, IIRC, so maybe olds make the difference.

[Citizen Hats]

The Central Valley is also traditionally Democratic, IIRC, so maybe olds make the difference.

The Central Valley is traditionally democratic, especially in the San Joaquin areas, in the same sense that Arkansas and Oklahoma are traditionally Democratic--IE Republican

[Sol]

The Central Valley is also traditionally Democratic, IIRC, so maybe olds make the difference.

The Central Valley is traditionally democratic, especially in the San Joaquin areas, in the same sense that Arkansas and Oklahoma are traditionally Democratic--IE Republican

Of course. But those places also have higher D registration than expected.

[politicallefty]

The Central Valley is also traditionally Democratic, IIRC, so maybe olds make the difference.

That's true, but I don't think it holds up anymore. The former rural strongholds for the Democratic Party have already completed their transition. For example, in 1999 (the earliest year I can find for California party registration statistics), Fresno County was about 47% Democratic and 40% Republican. By Election Day 2004, it had flipped to 47% Republican and 40% Democratic. That would lead me to believe that its older habits had been shaken off. However, shortly thereafter, the trend reversed to the point that Fresno County is now 40% Democratic and 37% Republican (and the trend does not favour Republicans). It's not just that Republicans have lost ground in relative terms, but they've lost in terms of absolute numbers. (In fact, there are now less registered Republicans in California now than in 1999.)

That doesn't explain what I think is the anomaly of CA-21.