[EL] State by State party ID breakdown

Thu Dec 3 07:02:54 PST 2015

Hi All,

Julianna Pacheco uses HLM with post-stratification to create a measure of
state partisan identification over time.  She's generous in sending
up-dates to requests.

http://clas.uiowa.edu/polisci/people/julianna-pacheco

Carl

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Schultz, David A. <dschultz at hamline.edu>
wrote:

> Thanks so far for the responses  but maybe I was unclear in my request.  I
> do not care how people actually voted and I do not care who won the
> election.  What I want to know is among those surveyed in each state how do
> they self-identify in terms of their partisan affiliation, especially
> during a presidential race.
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Rob Richie <rr at fairvote.org> wrote:
>
>> I would qualify Charles' helpful post by adding that the most reliable
>> way to use the presidential results is not as a "straight tally", but in a
>> relative sense. That is, given that Obama defeated Romney by four
>> percentage points in the two-party vote even as the underlying partisan
>> balance in the country is assume to be about 50-50, then a state that
>> mirrored the national average with a 52% to 48% tally has partisan balance,
>> while a state like Florida that was dead even in the 2012 race in fact is a
>> Republican-leaning state.
>>
>> FairVote developed this "partisan index" approach in 1997 with our first
>> "Monopoly Politics" report based on the most recent election, and then
>> Charlie Cook later that year adapted it to the "partisan voting index" by
>> factoring in the last two elections. We keep using the single election
>> method and find it controls outcomes in most partisan elections.
>>
>> Here are just two examples of its connection to state legislative results
>> from an analysis we're doing on the impact of independent redistricting
>> commissions. Keep in mind that the legislative seats were elected largely
>> in 2014, but the relative 2012 presidential vote dominates outcomes.
>>
>> *Arizona*: Out of 80 seats, total of 3 have "partisan mismatch
>>
>> * 30 legislative districts each used to elect 1 state senator and 2 house
>> members
>>
>> - 12 have Democratic partisanship, and all have 1  Democratic senator and
>> 23 of 24 house members are D's
>> - 18 have Republican partisanship, and R's win 17 of 18 senators and 35
>> of 36 in house
>> - Of 30 districts, 5 are a generously defined competitive area between
>> 43.6% and 58.3% partisanship
>>
>> *California*: Out of 120 seats, total of 7 Republicans in Democratic
>> districts and none in Republican districts
>>
>> * CA state senate, 40 seats
>> - 2 R's in D in districts, and no D's in R districts
>>
>> * CA assembly, 80 seats
>> -  5 R's in D district and no D's in R districts
>>
>> TO be sure there are exceptions here and in other states -- especially
>> when picking governors. But the number of "mismatches" keeps declining.
>>
>> Rob
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 8:56 AM, Charles Stewart III <cstewart at mit.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I think most political scientists (or at least many) would say the best
>>> quick place to start is just to take recent election returns in
>>> presidential elections.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I like Leip’s presidential atlas for such things:
>>> http://uselectionatlas.org/.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Rather than take just the 2012 election, you might want to average 2008
>>> and 2012.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Party registration is a non-starter, so don’t even try that one.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> There may be a source out there that reports party identification from
>>> the big national academic surveys (like the CCES), and maybe someone on the
>>> listserv would run that table for you quickly.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The book “Statehouse Politics” is probably out-of-date for your
>>> purposes, but you might want to give it a look in any case.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -cs
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
>>>
>>> *Charles Stewart III*
>>>
>>> *Kenan Sahin Distinguished Professor of Political Science *
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Department of Political Science*
>>>
>>> *The Massachusetts Institute of Technology*
>>>
>>> *E53-449*
>>>
>>> *30 Wadsworth Street*
>>>
>>> *Cambridge, Massachusetts   02139*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Office:  617-253-3127 <617-253-3127>*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:
>>> law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] *On Behalf Of *Schultz,
>>> David A.
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, December 03, 2015 8:43 AM
>>> *To:* michael.mcdonald at ufl.edu; law-election at uci.edu;
>>> lawcourt-l at legal.umass.edu
>>> *Subject:* [EL] State by State party ID breakdown
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi all:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Does any one know of a database that has already organized state by
>>> state  population party identification  or affiliation over the last few
>>> election cycles?   (I.e. of those surveyed, what percentage identify as
>>> Democrat, Republican, or independent).   I would prefer to be able to look
>>> at presidential election cycles over the last few elections but also
>>> including congressional (midterm) is fine too.  What I have in mind is the
>>> exit poll data that does the state by state breakdown of partisan
>>> affiliation.  I know I can go back and go to CNN or other sites and create
>>> the data myself but before I do that I want to see if anyone has already
>>> done that.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> David Schultz, Professor
>>> Editor, Journal of Public Affairs Education (JPAE)
>>> Hamline University
>>> Department of Political Science
>>>
>>> 1536 Hewitt Ave
>>>
>>> MS B 1805
>>> St. Paul, Minnesota 55104
>>> 651.523.2858 (voice)
>>> 651.523.3170 (fax)
>>> http://davidschultz.efoliomn.com/
>>> http://works.bepress.com/david_schultz/
>>> http://schultzstake.blogspot.com/
>>> Twitter:  @ProfDSchultz
>>> My latest book:  Presidential Swing States:  Why Only Ten Matter
>>>
>>>
>>> https://rowman.com/ISBN/9780739195246/Presidential-Swing-States-Why-Only-Ten-Matter
>>> FacultyRow SuperProfessor, 2012, 2013, 2014
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Law-election mailing list
>>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>>> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> Rob Richie
>> Executive Director, FairVote
>> 6930 Carroll Avenue, Suite 240
>> Takoma Park, MD 20912
>> rr at fairvote.org  (301) 270-4616  http://www.fairvote.org
>> *FairVote Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/FairVoteReform>*   *FairVote
>> Twitter <https://twitter.com/fairvote>*   My Twitter
>> <https://twitter.com/rob_richie>
>>
>> Thank you for considering a *donation <http://www.fairvote.org/donate>*
>> <http://www.fairvote.org/donate>to support our reform vision
>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U50uJohIw4c>.
>> (Note: Our Combined Federal Campaign number is 10132.)
>>
>
>
>
> --
> David Schultz, Professor
> Editor, Journal of Public Affairs Education (JPAE)
> Hamline University
> Department of Political Science
> 1536 Hewitt Ave
> MS B 1805
> St. Paul, Minnesota 55104
> 651.523.2858 (voice)
> 651.523.3170 (fax)
> http://davidschultz.efoliomn.com/
> http://works.bepress.com/david_schultz/
> http://schultzstake.blogspot.com/
> Twitter:  @ProfDSchultz
> My latest book:  Presidential Swing States:  Why Only Ten Matter
>
> https://rowman.com/ISBN/9780739195246/Presidential-Swing-States-Why-Only-Ten-Matter
> FacultyRow SuperProfessor, 2012, 2013, 2014
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>

-- 

Dr. Carl Klarner

Academic / Political Consultant

Klarnerpolitics.com

Former Associate Professor of Political Science

Carl.Klarner at gmail.com

Cell: 812-514-9060
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20151203/95785a5e/attachment.html>