The Partisan Makeup of NH House Districts

curious & interesting (0.00 / 0)

and useful. Thank you for your time and effort into this project.  

---

by: pberch @ Sat Jun 12, 2010 at 13:07:29 PM CDT

Reminder for Republicans (4.00 / 3)

This math did not come from Karl Rove, so it isn't real and you shouldn't look at it.

--
@DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Sat Jun 12, 2010 at 16:42:14 PM CDT

So many other factors (4.00 / 5)

Back in 95, the DNC did a similar analysis which concluded that I could not win my House seat --which I had held for 8 years and would for 10 more. Numbers alone only creates a foundation of the true picture...sort of like looking at the newly poured concrete of a house foundation/basement walls and tryng to determine what the house will look like. It offers clues and basic information but far from a true undertandng of the end result of the completed home.

2012 starts today.

---

by: Ray Buckley @ Sun Jun 13, 2010 at 07:31:41 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Furthermore. . . . (0.00 / 0)

I agree with Ray.

While I find wtucker's information extremely interesting, we need to be aware that its limitation is the same as (I image) the analysis cited by Ray above: sample size and content.  

I don't question the use of 2004 and 2008 data -- it represents the most recent data, and takes into account the demographic and partisan shifts that New Hampshire has experienced since I was working in state politics during the '90s.  But, just as the study cited by Ray was probably warped by extreme GOP voting in 1994, so is this map the product of one marginally Democratic year (2004) and one that represented the most progressive Presidential year in nearly half a century.  

This could be because New Hampshire is now on a Blue trend that is growing in strength and reflects the enlightenment of its citizens.  Or it could be a sign that the pendulum has swung far to one side, and, as has happened so many times, is preparing to move back.  

Personally, I think that both are true -- in moderation.  We need to remember that New Hampshire is known for its historically skewed voting patterns, especially in midterm elections.  It takes national trends and puts them on steroids - both in Republican years (1994, 2002) and Democratic ones (1998, 2006).

Will this continue?  We'll see. . . . Certainly helps to have folks like Lynch and Hodes at the top of the ticket!  

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Sun Jun 13, 2010 at 18:01:19 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

And other considerations (4.00 / 1)

This information is fascinating, and thank you for all of it.  

I also notice that my district, Cheshire 2, is one of the more peculiar shapes on a pretty irregular map.

I, too, want to urge a note of caution, particularly when looking at the voting percentage numbers.  In that column, I garnered a whopping 79% of the vote, and I was the low vote-getter.  But one needs to know there was only one candidate on the R side of a three member district.  And of course, the caliber of the opposition candidates and how well they are known in the district before the race are important factors that should be borne firmly in mind.

---

by: Lucy Weber @ Sun Jun 13, 2010 at 20:58:02 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I also agree... (0.00 / 0)

At the risk of inciting marital discord (just joking), I would go even further and suggest that in NH Rep and Senate districts, PVI estimates based on partisan voting patterns in Presidential contests seem to have a very tenuous connection to how communities actually vote in local races, at least based on the outcomes of recent elections. This makes sense to me, since candidates' responsiveness to local issues and smart campaigning are likely to have a greater impact when a smaller voter pool makes it possible to have face-to-face contact with a significant percentage of voters.

So rather than seeing the foundation of building, my sense is that district-level PVI estimates provide a rough map of the changing political terrain. A candidate's ability to interpret and navigate the landscape makes a difference in who crosses the finish line first. In some districts, a candidate's sincerity, likability, and record as an active member of the community may ultimately matter more than party affiliation.

I've just about finished mapping the NH Senate election result 2002-2008, but as a preview, an interesting pattern shows up when you look at the results broken down by county. In Presidential races, there's no question that NH counties  voted progressively more blue between 2000-2008. But the 2008 NH Senate district results look much more like the 2000 Presidential map at the county level, with only five counties (Belknap, Cheshire, Grafton, Merrimack, and Strafford) tracking blue.

The new maps suggest that New Hampshire voters vote differently at the top of the ticket than in state House & Senate district races. Drop off is not outrageous compared to total ballots cast in the same-year general election, so it's not only a factor of voters self-selecting in or out of local elections.

   

---

by: judy stadtman @ Mon Jun 14, 2010 at 07:23:41 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Update (0.00 / 0)

Added "Party Distribution of House Seats by PVI" chart.

"Politics ain't beanbag" - Finley Peter Dunne

---

by: William Tucker @ Sun Jun 13, 2010 at 17:16:59 PM CDT

13 deep blue. 1 deep red. n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: elwood @ Sun Jun 13, 2010 at 18:05:29 PM CDT

Bedford... (4.00 / 1)

my hometown, where I and my father and grandmother grew up, looks so sad on that map.  Never a Democratic town, it has gone from presumably liberal Yankee Republican to reactionary North Shore Exile Republican in that time.

---

by: FrankLloydMike @ Mon Jun 14, 2010 at 06:20:55 AM CDT

[ Parent ]