One of the most common questions received here at the atlas is whether there are data for U.S. President tabulated by Congressional District. Many of the inquiries are from visitors whom wish to perform an analysis on how the results of the Electoral College would be different using a district method (such as that currently in use by Maine or Nebraska). The Atlas currently has an incomplete (although growing) set of data for U.S. President compiled by Congressional District for the 2004 general election. The problems facing such a compilation are many.

As an example of the problems encountered, consider the state of Georgia. With thirteen congressional districts to be drawn across 159 counties, the state legislature saw fit (for some reason) to gerrymander the congressional districts such that the boundaries split 33 counties when the decennial redistricting took place following the 2000 census. To compile the results, the data from each of these counties must be obtained at the precinct level and cross-referenced with a key that describes to which district each precinct belongs. However, it turns out that many precincts do not belong to a single district - the CD boundaries actually split precincts. For example, Cobb County has 19 precincts split between districts (either between district 5 and 11 or district 6 and 11). These votes, unfortunately, can not be allocated to a congressional district. Furthermore, all counties in Georgia have a dedicated precinct that includes all absentee ballots cast in the county into a single precinct (this is different from other states, such as New York, where absentee ballots are counted with their individual precincts). In all 33 of the split counties, the absentee ballots can not be allocated to congressional districts. Typically, in 2004, the absentee ballots comprise 10 to 20 percent of the total votes cast in the county. Like absentee ballots, provisional ballots also have their own “precinct” and can not be allocated (although the number of votes in this category is signficantly smaller than absentees or split precincts).

Overall, in Georgia, about 490,000 votes can not be allocated to the correct congressional district (about 15% of total votes cast state-wide). This is a relatively significant figure that may impact the accuracy of the results for President by Congressional District. Its also quite unfortunate for those of us who prefer precicsion in their data.

For those of you keeping track, I have made several small corrections to the “official” 2000 election data recently in South Carolina, North Dakota, and New York. In SC, the votes from Richland County, Ward 13 were omitted from the statewide results - adding 489 votes for Bush, 478 votes for Gore, 79 votes for Nader, 12 for Browne, 1 for Buchanan and 1 for Hagelin (a gain of 11 votes for Bush). In New York, the State Board of Elections seems to have a problem transcribing the figures from the county canvasses. There are four counties (Cattaraugus, Columbia, Livingston, and Wyoming) in which vote figures were given to the incorrect candidates (typically between minor parties, but also between a minor party and Gore under the Working Families party - where fusion merges these figures with the Democratic and Liberal party votes). There were also errors in Albany County. The net is that Gore gains 210 votes and Bush remains the same. A few changes to figures for Nader, Buchanan, and Hagelin in North Dakota rounds out the changes to 2000.

Election results for the Democratic Primary race have been updated for CA, FL, MD, NY, and TX. Official county-level data and maps have been posted to the site. I am still working on the congressional district results for MD, CA, FL, and NY (the TX SOS did not have Congressional District results on its website). Illinois releases their official canvass later this week. Wisconsin is still figuring out how to write a complete pdf file of their results (they seem to be having some “technical difficulties”).

Well, I was a bit optimistic in my attempt to compile the official results from the Super Tuesday states this weekend. Turns out that most states have not posted official results yet. California doesn’t release their canvass until April 10. I do have updated data for Georgia. New York and Rhode Island have results posted, but no indication whether or not they are official. The Utah primary results (from Feb 24) are not on-line yet. Although Wisconsin has posted official results, they omitted the vote totals from Lafayette County. I’m going to give the agencies a couple of additional weeks before I update the primary results on the site.

Just thought I would share my current undertaking with regard to the site (in addition to adding the primary results listed below). I am in the process of compiling, from official county canvasses, the complete precinct-level Presidential Election results for New York for the last three general elections (1992, 1996, and 2000). I would like to have the most comprehensive and accurate county, city/town, and precinct-level results for the state of New York on the web (BTW, New York is my original home state, having grown up in Onondaga County). I have a stack of paper here a foot tall and have completed 45 counties, adding 1992 city/town maps today for Saratoga, Alabany, Chautauqua, Columbia, Oneida, Orange, Rensselaer, Schoharie, Schuyler, and Tioga. I’ll add the city/town and precinct data for these counties in a few days (I’ll add a few more counties before performing the data upload). There are still several large urban counties to go (including Suffolk, Nassau, Westchester, Rockland, Monroe, Erie, and the five boroughs of New York City).

In particular, the 1992 township map is very interesting… a partial map is available to members by clicking on the “Town” button on the 1992 New York page. The 1996 and 2000 city/town maps are already complete. I have also discovered several mistakes in the statewide Canvasses published by the New York State Board of Elections. I will be making corrections to the data and adding notes to signify the changes.

The Wisconsin Primary turned out to be more competitive than expected. In my opinion, a real problem with the 2004 Democratic Primary schedule has been the crowded nature of the contests. The schedule gives little time for the candidates to campaign in each state and little time for the voters to size-up those seeking the Democratic nomination. In Wisconsin, a single primary contested by multiple candidates resulted in a much closer result. Kerry “wins” the contest with 39.7% of the vote, followed by Edwards at 34.3% and Dean at 18.3%. The county map shown here is color-coded with red for Kerry and green for Edwards - with the various shades showing percenage of the vote in decades (>30%, >40%, etc.) Note that even though Kerry “wins”, he shares the delegates with the top three candidates (those that receive more than 15% in any of the congressional districts and state-wide at large). The current result predicts 30 delegates for Kerry to 24 for Edwards and 13 for Dean. Edwards won in two of the eight congressional districts (the first and fifth) and Kerry wins the remainder.

From a regional point-of-view, Kerry was the strongest in the north-west of the state and his best county was Menominee (62.7% - it is also the home of the Menominee Native American Tribe). Edwards had a better showing in the counties to the north and west of Milwaukee. His best county was Waukesha with 42% of the vote. Dean did not win a single county - likely a decidely disappointing result - and received the greatest percentage of votes in Douglas and Portage Counties (about 25%).

I have finally compiled and uploaded the county and congressional district results for the 2004 Iowa Caucus. Kerry is purple, Edwards is red, and Dean is green (with shades of each color representing the strength of the popular-vote win (in decades). The results are from the percentage listings at the Des Moines Register (It looks like the CNN data at the county level are wrong). Kerry and Edwards split the counties almost evenly with Kerry winning in three of the five congressional districts. Dean wins two counties - including Jefferson, the home of the University of Management (formerly Maharishi International University). This is the home county of John Hagelin of the Natural Law party, where he received 16% in 2000. There are several ties, noted by the striped shading - including a three-way tie between Dean, Edwards, and Kerry in Fremont County (located in the lower-left corner).

The (almost complete) results of the Iowa Caucus are available in the 2004 Primary pull-down option of the Election Results section. The county-level map is not yet finished (I’m having difficulty finding complete and accurate results - the Iowa Secretary of State does not run the event - If you have a site suggestion, please leave a comment.)

The race dynamics shown in the pre-caucus polls proved accurate in the rising support for the campaigns of John Kerry and John Edwards. It appears that the negative campaigning took its toll.

Also, any visitors that attended the Iowa Caucus and would like to share their experience, please let me know. I’d like to highlight the event (in a weblog entry) from the perspective of a participant.

The District of Columbia held its presidential “primary” yesterday. However, the event was nothing more than a political “beauty contest”, and not a very comprehensive one at that. Only four of the leading nine candidates were on the ballot (Howard Dean Dennis Kucinich, Carol Moseley Braun, and Al Sharpton). The remaining candidates did not participate (pressure was applied from the national Democratic party because the DC primary date violates party rules). No delegates were awarded from the results of the primary.

The preliminary results of the DC primary (from the District of Columbia Board of Elections and Ethics) show a very-low turnout of 16.3% (42,318 cast ballots out of 259,322 registered Democrats). Howard Dean captured the most votes, 17,584 (42.8%) followed by Al Sharpton with 14,090 (34.3%), Carol Moseley-Braun with 4,776 (11.6%), Dennis Kucinich with 3,408 (8.3%), and perennial presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche Jr. with 498 (1.2%). Other candidates garnered about 1.8%.

The preliminary (100% precincts reporting) results of the Louisiana Gubernatorial run-off election have been posted in the Gubernatorial section of the website. The results differ relative to many recent polls; Blanco wins with a margin of slightly less than 4 percentage points: 52% to 48%. The results by Parish show signficant geographic support for Blanco, winning 53 Parishes to Jindal’s 12.