Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 26, 2014, 09:44:30 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections (Moderator: Joe Republic)
| | |-+  Average White Share of the Electorate That Voted D in 2014, by State
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Average White Share of the Electorate That Voted D in 2014, by State  (Read 318 times)
Lowly Griff
Adam Griffin
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6219
Greece


View Profile
« on: Today at 07:43:14 am »
Ignore

Not sure if anybody has done one of these yet, but here we go. I decided to do a simple average between Gov/Sen contests where applicable. It worked well in around two-thirds of the states or more, but there are a lot of exceptions and stipulations listed below: 

If there was only one contest, then that is the only one used. I also combined results - even if there was a large difference between contests - in all states where exit polling was available AND Democrats were on the ballot in each applicable race.

As mentioned on the graphic (and above), some of the averages may skew the results. One example is Oklahoma, where Dorman came close to breaking 40% among whites. In the two Senate contests, however, whites were closer to 26% Democratic. For fairness' sake here, I averaged the two Senate contests together and counted them as one rather than averaging both Senate results against the Governor's race, which would essentially weigh the Senatorial white support double that of Gubernatorial white support. Ditto for SC.

Other notable examples of skewing will be in places like Maine, Iowa, Rhode Island and Hawaii. Examples of bad candidates where there was only one race (OH & NV) make things a little messy, too. NV deserves its own category; I made a special formula for calculating it as mentioned on the graphic.

I also opted not to average four other states: TN, AL, AK & KS. Tennessee's situation was similar to Nevada's in terms of whether or not there was actually a Democratic candidate running for Governor. AL had no contested Senate contest. AK & KS had independents running for Governor and Senate, respectively.

Logged

Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13623


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: Today at 08:33:43 am »
Ignore

I disagree with Nevada. I highly doubt 90% of Blacks voted Democrat there. Maybe 70-75%, perhaps a little higher than that. Kerry only won about 86% of the vote. Reid only got 79% of the vote in 2010 (though 11% voted other which is suspect). Overall, the west is not as racially polarized as the south or even the midwest. About 20% of blacks regularly vote for Republicans in California.
Logged
Lowly Griff
Adam Griffin
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6219
Greece


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: Today at 08:41:18 am »
Ignore

I disagree with Nevada. I highly doubt 90% of Blacks voted Democrat there. Maybe 70-75%, perhaps a little higher than that. Kerry only won about 86% of the vote. Reid only got 79% of the vote in 2010 (though 11% voted other which is suspect). Overall, the west is not as racially polarized as the south or even the midwest. About 20% of blacks regularly vote for Republicans in California.

Good to know - I'll keep that in mind when I ultimately revise this. I'm hoping to go back once the states that publish turnout by race all release their exact figures. FTR, adjusting it along the parameters you mention would boost white support for Goodman to roughly 18%.
Logged

KCDem
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1695


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: Today at 08:50:27 am »
Ignore

I disagree with Nevada. I highly doubt 90% of Blacks voted Democrat there. Maybe 70-75%, perhaps a little higher than that. Kerry only won about 86% of the vote. Reid only got 79% of the vote in 2010 (though 11% voted other which is suspect). Overall, the west is not as racially polarized as the south or even the midwest. About 20% of blacks regularly vote for Republicans in California.

Please provide evidence to support this. Exit polls with tiny subsamples don't count. NOT BUYING IT.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13623


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: Today at 08:57:07 am »
Ignore

I disagree with Nevada. I highly doubt 90% of Blacks voted Democrat there. Maybe 70-75%, perhaps a little higher than that. Kerry only won about 86% of the vote. Reid only got 79% of the vote in 2010 (though 11% voted other which is suspect). Overall, the west is not as racially polarized as the south or even the midwest. About 20% of blacks regularly vote for Republicans in California.

Please provide evidence to support this. Exit polls with tiny subsamples don't count. NOT BUYING IT.

If exit polls don't count, then how do we really know how blacks vote? Maybe only 85% of blacks vote for the Democrats. Maybe its actually 98%. How do we really know?

Of course you can look at multiple exit polls, create an aggregate of it, which would lower the subsample margin of error. In reality though, it is hard to get a gauge of minority voting patterns. It might be even more difficult in the case of California blacks because they are not concentrated in a couple of cities. They are widespread throughout suburban Southern California and the central valley. How do we know how these people vote? Are they really voting the same as those in Compton or Inglewood?
Logged
KCDem
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1695


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: Today at 09:01:07 am »
Ignore

I disagree with Nevada. I highly doubt 90% of Blacks voted Democrat there. Maybe 70-75%, perhaps a little higher than that. Kerry only won about 86% of the vote. Reid only got 79% of the vote in 2010 (though 11% voted other which is suspect). Overall, the west is not as racially polarized as the south or even the midwest. About 20% of blacks regularly vote for Republicans in California.

Please provide evidence to support this. Exit polls with tiny subsamples don't count. NOT BUYING IT.

If exit polls don't count, then how do we really know how blacks vote? Maybe only 85% of blacks vote for the Democrats. Maybe its actually 98%. How do we really know?

Of course you can look at multiple exit polls, create an aggregate of it, which would lower the subsample margin of error. In reality though, it is hard to get a gauge of minority voting patterns. It might be even more difficult in the case of California blacks because they are not concentrated in a couple of cities. They are widespread throughout suburban Southern California and the central valley. How do we know how these people vote? Are they really voting the same as those in Compton or Inglewood?

Well then your speculation is as good as mine if we don't really know. But aggregation of exit polls shows the black vote to be highly inelastic.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13623


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: Today at 09:01:45 am »
Ignore

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2006/pages/results/states/CA/G/00/epolls.0.html

I also want to add that Kasich received near 30% of the black vote this year, and Sandoval overperformed even Kasich. And black-white racial polarization is definitely worse in Ohio than Nevada.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13623


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: Today at 09:05:05 am »
Ignore

I disagree with Nevada. I highly doubt 90% of Blacks voted Democrat there. Maybe 70-75%, perhaps a little higher than that. Kerry only won about 86% of the vote. Reid only got 79% of the vote in 2010 (though 11% voted other which is suspect). Overall, the west is not as racially polarized as the south or even the midwest. About 20% of blacks regularly vote for Republicans in California.

Please provide evidence to support this. Exit polls with tiny subsamples don't count. NOT BUYING IT.

If exit polls don't count, then how do we really know how blacks vote? Maybe only 85% of blacks vote for the Democrats. Maybe its actually 98%. How do we really know?

Of course you can look at multiple exit polls, create an aggregate of it, which would lower the subsample margin of error. In reality though, it is hard to get a gauge of minority voting patterns. It might be even more difficult in the case of California blacks because they are not concentrated in a couple of cities. They are widespread throughout suburban Southern California and the central valley. How do we know how these people vote? Are they really voting the same as those in Compton or Inglewood?

Well then your speculation is as good as mine if we don't really know. But aggregation of exit polls shows the black vote to be highly inelastic.

Do you have data to support that when candidates overperform by huge margins the way the state usually votes, the black vote doesn't swing? I can buy that when Ohio votes by 5 points for the GOP, the black vote is basically constant. However, it is hard to believe that would be the case when the GOP wins by 30 points. Also, looking at precinct results can sometimes be misleading, especially in these blow out elections, since the black people who swing likely don't live in inner city black majority areas.
Logged
KCDem
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1695


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: Today at 09:20:23 am »
Ignore

I disagree with Nevada. I highly doubt 90% of Blacks voted Democrat there. Maybe 70-75%, perhaps a little higher than that. Kerry only won about 86% of the vote. Reid only got 79% of the vote in 2010 (though 11% voted other which is suspect). Overall, the west is not as racially polarized as the south or even the midwest. About 20% of blacks regularly vote for Republicans in California.

Please provide evidence to support this. Exit polls with tiny subsamples don't count. NOT BUYING IT.

If exit polls don't count, then how do we really know how blacks vote? Maybe only 85% of blacks vote for the Democrats. Maybe its actually 98%. How do we really know?

Of course you can look at multiple exit polls, create an aggregate of it, which would lower the subsample margin of error. In reality though, it is hard to get a gauge of minority voting patterns. It might be even more difficult in the case of California blacks because they are not concentrated in a couple of cities. They are widespread throughout suburban Southern California and the central valley. How do we know how these people vote? Are they really voting the same as those in Compton or Inglewood?

Well then your speculation is as good as mine if we don't really know. But aggregation of exit polls shows the black vote to be highly inelastic.

Do you have data to support that when candidates overperform by huge margins the way the state usually votes, the black vote doesn't swing? I can buy that when Ohio votes by 5 points for the GOP, the black vote is basically constant. However, it is hard to believe that would be the case when the GOP wins by 30 points. Also, looking at precinct results can sometimes be misleading, especially in these blow out elections, since the black people who swing likely don't live in inner city black majority areas.

http://www.nytimes.com/projects/elections/2013/general/new-jersey/exit-polls.html

Also where is your evidence that racial voting polarization is worse in Ohio than Nevada?
Logged
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13623


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: Today at 10:13:51 am »
Ignore

I disagree with Nevada. I highly doubt 90% of Blacks voted Democrat there. Maybe 70-75%, perhaps a little higher than that. Kerry only won about 86% of the vote. Reid only got 79% of the vote in 2010 (though 11% voted other which is suspect). Overall, the west is not as racially polarized as the south or even the midwest. About 20% of blacks regularly vote for Republicans in California.

Please provide evidence to support this. Exit polls with tiny subsamples don't count. NOT BUYING IT.

If exit polls don't count, then how do we really know how blacks vote? Maybe only 85% of blacks vote for the Democrats. Maybe its actually 98%. How do we really know?

Of course you can look at multiple exit polls, create an aggregate of it, which would lower the subsample margin of error. In reality though, it is hard to get a gauge of minority voting patterns. It might be even more difficult in the case of California blacks because they are not concentrated in a couple of cities. They are widespread throughout suburban Southern California and the central valley. How do we know how these people vote? Are they really voting the same as those in Compton or Inglewood?

Well then your speculation is as good as mine if we don't really know. But aggregation of exit polls shows the black vote to be highly inelastic.

Do you have data to support that when candidates overperform by huge margins the way the state usually votes, the black vote doesn't swing? I can buy that when Ohio votes by 5 points for the GOP, the black vote is basically constant. However, it is hard to believe that would be the case when the GOP wins by 30 points. Also, looking at precinct results can sometimes be misleading, especially in these blow out elections, since the black people who swing likely don't live in inner city black majority areas.

http://www.nytimes.com/projects/elections/2013/general/new-jersey/exit-polls.html

Also where is your evidence that racial voting polarization is worse in Ohio than Nevada?

That NY times exit poll backs me up if anything. Usually blacks in NJ vote 90-10 Dem.

I also did not mention anything about racial voting polarization. I mentioned racial polarization in society. If there is more racial polarization in a state, one would assume the black vote there would be more inelastic than in a state with less racial polarization.
Logged
shua
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11917
Kuwait


View Profile WWW
« Reply #10 on: Today at 12:05:05 pm »
Ignore

Where did you find all these exit polls?  The major news sites have several fewer states in their exit poll results than you have here.
Logged

Lowly Griff
Adam Griffin
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6219
Greece


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: Today at 07:33:18 pm »
Ignore

Where did you find all these exit polls?  The major news sites have several fewer states in their exit poll results than you have here.

If you check at the bottom of the original map, I took the Census voter turnout data by race from the 2010 elections and adjusted the figures based on a) the national shift in turnout by race and b) the demographic shifts in the state between 2010-2013 for states that had no exit polling in 2014. I then applied a formula (I tweaked it in a few states' cases) to project Democratic support among whites. Keep in mind that with the exception of the states explicitly mentioned in the graphic at the bottom (AL, AK, KS & TN), the numbers shown may be an average of both Senatorial and Gubernatorial races. This could, depending on the state, skew results - as could instances where a state only had one blowout election (examples include OK, ME, RI, NV, IA, OH, HI).
Logged

Lowly Griff
Adam Griffin
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6219
Greece


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: Today at 07:47:02 pm »
Ignore

I also completed my 2010 assessment. It uses the same overall variables mentioned in the OP (though fewer projections since the Census voter turnout data was available for this cycle). There are a couple of states where I am now convinced my projections will need to be refined.

Hawaii is a good example; its voting population is majority non-white and the natives appear to have more unique voting patterns than can be projected with a simple formula. I think that's causing the huge drop-off in white support in my calculations between 2010 and 2014.

In a few states (ME, RI, etc), I had no choice but to include the wacky three-party contests, seeing as how those Gubernatorial races were the only races in those states in 2010.

 

And a simple map showing the percentage point change in the white share of the vote for Democrats between 2010-2014 (includes the wacky states mentioned above and on the other maps; use discretion):

Logged

jaichind
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2086
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

View Profile
« Reply #13 on: Today at 07:55:48 pm »
Ignore

I do not agree with 37% for MD.  MD only had one race, which is for governor.  In 2012 Whites consisted of 59% of the electorate and most likely was around 63% of the electorate in 2014.  Looking at PG county results it is clear that, support for D among the AA voters was above 90%.  D got 47% of the vote in 2014.  Doing some simple math yields that the D share of the white vote was more like 27%-30%
Logged

Chinese from Taiwan Province.  Now in New York City suburb of Scarsdale.  Ex-GOP now Libertarian.
The important thing is not how they vote but how we count.             - Stalin
Lowly Griff
Adam Griffin
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6219
Greece


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: Today at 08:08:18 pm »
Ignore

I do not agree with 37% for MD.  MD only had one race, which is for governor.  In 2012 Whites consisted of 59% of the electorate and most likely was around 63% of the electorate in 2014.  Looking at PG county results it is clear that, support for D among the AA voters was above 90%.  D got 47% of the vote in 2014.  Doing some simple math yields that the D share of the white vote was more like 27%-30%

Thanks for catching that. I've went back and looked at the figures I had and I'm not sure how the 2014 number ended up being so off. Census shows in 2010 that MD electorate was 66% non-Hispanic white; assuming it was 65% white in 2014. That gives me whites at 42% D in 2010 and 25-26% D in 2014. I'll update the maps in just a bit.
Logged

Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines