Results by MSA (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2024, 07:08:43 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results
  2008 U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Dereich)
  Results by MSA (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Results by MSA  (Read 13705 times)
Stranger in a strange land
strangeland
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,174
United States


« on: September 20, 2009, 11:16:01 PM »
« edited: September 20, 2009, 11:18:05 PM by Stranger in a strange land »

Results by Metropolitan Statistical area starting with the most populated:

Dallas/Fort Worth: McCain 55%-45%

Greater Houston: McCain 54%-46%



I am aware that Travis County went heavily Democratic, but is it large enough to offset much of Rural Texas, especially when you consider McCain got over 70% in pretty much every country in West Central Texas and Texas Panhandle and over 70% in most East Texas save a few with large African-American populations.

Although the numbers seems reasonable, how the heck did the statewide results come out to 55% McCain and 44% Obama when aside from the Hispanic South, McCain won most of rural Texas by a landslide, in most cases over 70% and in many cases over 80%.

Travis County (Austin makes up about 3/4 of the population) was won by Obama 63.52-34.25

As was stated much of rural Texas is sparsely populated.  Obama won Travis County by a little over 117,000 votes,  the largest vote advantage either candidate had in any county in the state.

Obama also won Bejar county, meaning that he won San Antonio. He almost definitely won the El Paso MSA too.
Logged
Stranger in a strange land
strangeland
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,174
United States


« Reply #1 on: October 29, 2009, 09:19:25 AM »

I always thought Obama's performance in Ohio in general was very poor when you consider just how bad the state economy was. The fact that 47% still wanted the Republicans in charge after Bush + Iraq + the state economy + the meltdown + the loss of manufacturing jobs throughout the decade does not speak well of Democratic strengths in the state.



Its true he didn't do as well as some might think, although I think this was a state more suited to a Hilary Clinton type Democrat as opposed to Obama one.  Also McCain campaigned quite heavily in the state in the final month while Obama did some but not quite to the extent of McCain.  Relative to Pennsylvania, his numbers were reasonable as the Republicans always perform slightly better in Ohio than Pennsylvania, although the difference in Republican performance between Ohio and Indiana was rather small as normally the Republicans do quite a bit better in Indiana.  Although Obama did campaign there a fair bit while I think most Republicans just assumed they would win the state as they always have.

Also, Obama is black, you see. It wasn't a major factor, but it was a factor.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.018 seconds with 11 queries.