Click on the image below for a closer view of the 2008 general election presidential vote in Montgomery County by Congressional District, state legislative district, council district and local area.
Showing posts with label presidential elections. Show all posts
Showing posts with label presidential elections. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
MoCo General Election 2008: Presidential Vote
Monday, May 18, 2009
Free State GOP Fades to Black, Part One
Maryland’s Republican Party is in a downward spiral. The problem goes far beyond the ideological disputes between the party’s leaders. It also goes beyond the recent overwhelming victory in the state by President Barack Obama. And the party’s poor position in the state legislature is merely a reflection of the GOP’s difficulties, not the cause. By every measure, the party is in serious trouble and the end is not yet in sight.
First, let’s begin by comparing the last two presidential elections in the state. Here are the numbers by county from 2004:
And here are the numbers by county from 2008:
The obvious fact is that Obama’s total margin (25.4 points) nearly doubled Kerry’s margin (13.0 points). But that understates the extent of Obama’s domination. As depicted by the chart below, Obama surpassed Kerry’s performance in every Maryland county.
Maryland has voted for the Democratic nominee for President in every election since 1992. But the Democratic nominee’s margins have been far less than Obama’s, ranging from 13 points (Kerry) to 17 points (Al Gore). Was Barack Obama’s gigantic margin due to George W. Bush’s epic unpopularity, the state’s large black population, or something else?
Whatever the answer may be, this is just the start of the GOP’s problems. We will begin looking at voter registrations in Part Two.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Election 2008 by Legislative District
Straight from the Board of Elections, here are the votes for President, the slots referendum and the Ficker Amendment by legislative district. We also report how each state legislator voted on the slots referendum during the 2007 special session.
District 14
President
Obama 35,107 (64.7%)
McCain 18,531 (34.1%)
Slots
For 29,199 (56.2%)
Against 22,754 (43.8%)
Ficker
For 25,812 (53.3%)
Against 22,591 (46.7%)
Senator Rona Kramer and Delegate Anne Kaiser voted for the slots referendum. Delegate Herman Taylor voted against. Delegate Karen Montgomery was excused from the vote.
District 15
President
Obama 36,829 (64.5%)
McCain 19,486 (34.1%)
Slots
For 30,534 (55.8%)
Against 24,153 (44.2%)
Ficker
For 28,587 (55.9%)
Against 22,545 (44.1%)
The entire District 15 Delegation voted for the slots referendum. This district had the lowest vote for Obama and the highest vote for Ficker.
District 16
President
Obama 38,106 (73.7%)
McCain 12,893 (24.9%)
Slots
For 22,393 (44.8%)
Against 27,586 (55.2%)
Ficker
For 20,697 (45.2%)
Against 25,083 (54.8%)
Senator Brian Frosh voted against the referendum. Delegates Bill Bronrott, Susan Lee and Bill Frick voted for it. This district had the lowest vote for slots.
District 17
President
Obama 32,252 (70.9%)
McCain 12,552 (27.8%)
Slots
For 23,397 (53.7%)
Against 20,190 (46.3%)
Ficker
For 20,221 (50.1%)
Against 20,126 (49.9%)
Senator Jennie Forehand and Delegates Kumar Barve and Jim Gilchrist voted for the referendum. Delegate Luiz Simmons voted against.
District 18
President
Obama 34,380 (76.0%)
McCain 10,187 (22.5%)
Slots
For 21,049 (48.5%)
Against 22,318 (51.5%)
Ficker
For 18,442 (45.8%)
Against 21,785 (54.2%)
Senator Rich Madaleno and Delegate Ana Sol Gutierrez voted for the referendum. Delegate Jeff Waldstreicher voted against. Delegate Al Carr was not in office during the special session.
District 19
President
Obama 32,409 (68.1%)
McCain 14,472 (30.4%)
Slots
For 24,888 (55.1%)
Against 20,320 (45.0%)
Ficker
For 21,742 (51.9%)
Against 20,147 (48.1%)
Senator Mike Lenett and Delegates Henry Heller and Roger Manno voted for the referendum. Delegate Ben Kramer voted against.
District 20
President
Obama 32,888 (84.6%)
McCain 5,460 (14.0%)
Slots
For 16,727 (45.8%)
Against 19,813 (54.2%)
Ficker
For 14,389 (42.1%)
Against 19,782 (57.9%)
Senator Jamie Raskin and Delegate Heather Mizeur voted against the slots referendum. Delegates Sheila Hixson and Tom Hucker voted for it. This district had the highest vote for Obama and the lowest vote for Ficker.
District 39
President
Obama 29,872 (70.5%)
McCain 11,799 (27.9%)
Slots
For 23,203 (57.4%)
Against 17,213 (42.6%)
Ficker
For 20,326 (53.7%)
Against 17,544 (46.3%)
Senator Nancy King and Delegate Kirill Reznik voted for the slots referendum. Delegates Charles Barkely and Saqib Ali voted against. This district had the highest vote for slots.
Generally speaking, districts in the inner suburbs voted more liberally than those far from the Beltway.
Which politicians were most out of step with their districts? In District 39, slots passed by 14.8% but Delegates Barkley and Ali voted against the referendum. In District 14, slots passed by 12.4% but Delegate Taylor voted against the referendum. In District 16, slots failed by 10.4% but Delegates Bronrott, Lee and Frick voted for the referendum. And in District 19, slots passed by 10.1% but Delegate Kramer voted against the referendum.
In the future, we will calculate votes by County Council district and locality for the SERIOUS junkies out there!
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Who is MoCo's Smartest Pundit?
Last week, MPW held a contest between some of MoCo's most-addicted political junkies to pick Presidential, Senate and Maryland races. So who won?
The answer: we are not yet declaring a winner. While all of the Presidential states are in and the Maryland races are decided (with Ficker almost certainly winning), three Senate races are still outstanding. The Minnesota contest is headed to a full recount. Absentee and early ballots are still being counted in Alaska, though Fivethirtyeight.com believes Begich will probably defeat Stevens. And the Georgia race is headed for a run-off on December 2. So it's just too early to pick a winner.
That is not stopping some of our participants from pressuring me to label them "The Smartest Pundit in MoCo." One of them emailed me, "Are we going to recognize how awesome my picks were?" When I told this person that I had not yet decided who won, the individual wrote back, "It's totally me!" Another person wanted to know whether I would be posting an interim scorecard. When I said I would do only one post declaring a winner, this individual replied, "I’ll be on pins and needles until then!" Who knew that these gibbering addicts were so competitive?
So here is what will happen. After the Alaska and Minnesota races are decided, I will post one tally of the results by participant. If the Georgia run-off changes the outcome, I will do another post after it concludes. (David Lublin and Jamie Raskin were the only two prognosticators who picked Martin to beat Chambliss.) We are just going to have to wait a bit.
So if you are one of those contestants, don't be stupid enough to email me asking, "When are you declaring me the Smartest Pundit in MoCo?" If you do that, I will instead write a post declaring you "The Biggest Narcissist in MoCo!"
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
On Election 2008
Everywhere in America, liberals are awakening to sunrise after eight cold years of darkest night. They celebrate. They dream. But they should also reflect.
Euphoria on the left is understandable given the failures of the Bush regime and the rancor of the political season. It is the latter factor that fuels the left’s sense of triumph as well as its sense of grievance.
Do you remember the campaigns of President Reagan? His critique of the left was very different than that of his heirs. Reagan and his disciples believed liberals were weak, misguided and naïve, but not treasonous. Reagan desired victory but had no need to demonize his adversaries.
Twenty years later, a candidate for Vice-President accuses her opponent of “palling around with terrorists” and praises the “pro-America areas of this great nation.” When President Bush said, “You are with us or you are with the terrorists,” his statement was intended for foreign governments. Governor Palin has directed that sentiment at the American people. We will never forget that.
This is part of a pattern extending back to the election of 2000. Karl Rove taught us that victory was not enough; permanent domination and humiliation of the other side was the real goal. In the Rovian world, the victors gloat insufferably, indulging themselves in the gleeful excesses of power. The losers sulk in vengeful fury, vowing retribution. This is not the America of my childhood. And I hope it is not the America of my old age.
As for John McCain, he is a decent man who succumbed to the pressures of an intense campaign. He is not the first politician to do so and he will not be the last. But let us remember the good in this son of America who spent much of his youth in North Vietnamese jails. When I recall Senator McCain in future years, I will remember the man who refused to leave captivity until POWs held longer than him were released. I will remember the man who made common cause with Ted Kennedy and Russ Feingold. I will remember the man who relentlessly pursued corrupt lobbyist Jack Abramoff in the face of great embarrassment to his own party. But most of all, I will remember the man who stood up to President Bush and told him that torture was wrong.
Look around the country! Nearly half of our fellow citizens voted for Senator McCain. Are they all deluded, racist, nativist or ignorant? Of course not. Just like us, they are anxious about the future. They do not want failure. Neither do we. Many of them recognize that George W. Bush has accomplished something unique in American history: he has bequeathed to his successor two raging wars, an apocalyptic economic crisis and diminished standing in the world. All of us, Obama voters and McCain voters, have to live with the smoldering devastation of that legacy. That alone provides cause for alliance.
So put away those champagne bottles. Put on your hardhats. Strap on your toolbelts. Report to the jobsite and take your place with moderates, independents and conservatives. It’s time to leave the strong words of Election 2008 in the past. It’s time to rebuild America.
Tuesday, November 04, 2008
As the Polls Close
Here's a handy timeline from the Glover Park Group for evaluating the election as the polls close.
Pictures at an Exhibition
Here's the scene at my home precinct, 13-24 - a pretty little neighborhood hiding in the shadow of the Intersection of Death. Voters started showing up around 6 AM, fully an hour before the polls opened. By 7 AM, 300 people had arrived, most of whom were in a line snaking throughout the precinct building's interior. Here's the tail end.
State Senator Rich Madaleno (second from left) and Delegate Jeff Waldstreicher (third from left) came by to cheer on the Democratic volunteers. Note how the crew's youngest member dressed up for the occasion.
This cheerful lady is a member of MCEA's famous Apple Ballot legions. The 800-pound Gorilla's goals this year are electing Phil Kauffman and Laura Berthiaume to the school board and defeating the much-detested Ficker Amendment.
Here is one of hundreds of thousands of MCDCC sample ballots being distributed to a voter. If the slots referendum vote is close in other parts of the state, the MoCo Dems' sample ballot will probably defeat it. As we have previously reported, the county's Democratic Party voted to oppose its own governor and urge its members to vote against slots.
In my precinct, there were 1,975 registered voters and 1,463 cards cast in the 2004 General Election - a turnout rate of 74%. As of 3:30 today, there were 2,050 registered voters and 1,250 cards cast - a turnout rate of 61% prior to the evening rush. Poll workers expect at least 200 absentee ballots. It is entirely possible that turnout here could approach 90%.
We'll be back later to look at some results in Maryland and Montgomery County as soon as the data comes in!
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Presidential Campaign Debate: Feldman vs Shalleck
Campaign Debate
UMBC at Shady Grove, Political Science and History Programs and
Montgomery College History & Political Science Department
Brian Feldman (D), Maryland State Delegate, MoCo D15 (Representing Obama)
Jim Shalleck (R), Chairman, MoCo Republican Party (Representing McCain)
Will present their candidates' views and answer their questions.
October 13th at 2:30 PM
Universities at Shady Grove, Building III, Room 3241
For more information, please contact Prof. Pete Melcavage at 301-738-6313.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Obama Opening Gigantic Lead in Maryland
It's not exactly news that Senator Barack Obama is leading Senator John McCain in Maryland. But his margin is growing so rapidly that it could culminate in a historic blowout.
According to Real Clear Politics, there have been three presidential polls in Maryland this summer.
On 8/18/08, Rasmussen polled 500 likely voters who gave a 10-point edge (53-43) to Obama.
On 8/29/08-9/5/08, Gonzalez Research polled 833 likely voters who gave a 14-point edge (52-38) to Obama.
And on 9/20/08, Rasmussen polled 500 likely voters who gave a 23-point edge (60-37) to Obama.
Now sure, there's over a month to go in this campaign and Maryland has been a consistently Democratic state for a long time. But Obama's lead is approaching Biblical proportions. Consider the margins by which Democratic candidates won the last four presidential elections in Maryland:
1992: Bill Clinton 50%, George H.W. Bush 36%, Ross Perot 14% - Margin of 14 points
1996: Bill Clinton 54%, Bob Dole 38%, Ross Perot 7% - Margin of 16 points
2000: Al Gore 57%, George W. Bush 40% - Margin of 17 points
2004: John Kerry 56%, George W. Bush 43% - Margin of 13 points
Is Obama going to break a record here? And if he does, what does that say about the state of Maryland's GOP?
Monday, June 02, 2008
Thoughts on the Vice-Presidency
By Marc Korman.
I try to keep my posts limited to Maryland politics, but the national political climate is too exciting to ignore. If you are a political junkie, and I suspect you are if you are reading this blog, then you have been talking about who will be the Democrats’ Vice Presidential nominee.
No One Says No
Last weekend, a friend of mine wrote to me upset that his favored Vice Presidential candidate, Jim Webb, had said on Meet the Press that he was not interested. John Edwards has also said he is not interested in the Vice Presidency. There has also been a lot of discussion about whether or not Hillary Clinton would accept the Vice Presidency. Setting aside the question of if the likely nominee, Barack Obama, would even ask any of these people, pundits and junkies are already trying to determine whether these people would or would not accept the job.
Let me share with you a secret about the Vice Presidency: no one says no.
The two people who have had the best reasons to turn down the job were Speaker of the House John Nance Garner in 1932 and Senate Majority Leader Lyndon Johnson in 1960.
In 1932, the Democratic Party gathered in Chicago and picked FDR as their nominee. The convention turned to Speaker of the House Garner to serve as the Vice Presidency. Despite his powerful position as Speaker of the House, he gladly accepted the nomination.
When the Democrats gathered in Los Angeles in 1960 to nominate JFK for the presidency, Democrats in the Senate had 65 seats and Lyndon Johnson was the “Master of the Senate.” The Vice Presidency was a step down in terms of power, but he took the job anyway.
The power and prestige of the Vice Presidency has only increased since these two legislative titans abdicated power for it. President Carter’s Vice President, Mondale, brought the office into the West Wing by getting office space in that center of power. Al Gore had weekly lunches with President Clinton, an unprecedented level of access. Dick Cheney’s power and influence in the current Administration is well known.
Not The Best Launching Pad
The political prestige of the Vice Presidency is also, despite some sobering history, quite high. Despite most people’s conception, the only proven path from the Vice-Presidency to the Presidency are circumstances of death or resignation. Nine times in our nation’s history Vice-Presidents have ascended to the Presidency this way.
But short of those death or removal circumstances, only a handful of Vice Presidents have directly succeeded the Presidents they served in elections. These are John Adams, Thomas Jefferson (who defeated the President he served as Vice President under), Martin Van Buren, and George H.W. Bush. Harry Truman was also the next elected President after the President he served as Vice President under, but he had already succeeded to the office.
Other Vice Presidents have tried, and failed, to be elected president. Alben Barkley, Truman’s Vice President, failed to even get nominated by his party. Hubert Humphrey, Walter Mondale, and Al Gore all had more luck in the primaries, but failed to win the general election (conceding for the moment that Al Gore lost the election).
By the numbers, Governors (preferably of large states) have a much better path to the presidency. 11 Presidents held governorships as their last political office before becoming president. 5 presidents held Senate seats as their last political office before the presidency. By comparison, three Presidents served as Secretaries of State as their last political office before the presidency. Another great path to the White House, at least until Eisenhower, was being a general.
My Bet
In case you care, my bet for the Vice Presidency is a middle-aged white guy, probably a Clinton loyalist like Wesley Clark, Ted Strickland, or Evan Bayh. Potentially, you could also see a non-Clinton middle-aged white guy such as Jim Webb. Kathleen Sebelius and Janet Napolitano will probably be spoken about because they are able, female governors, but none bring the defense and foreign policy weight that Obama needs (nor does Strickland). But my bet in 2004 was Tom Vilsack, so that shows how poor my track record is.
Friday, March 21, 2008
Maryland’s Democratic Presidential Primary Record
From Marc Korman.
Previously, we examined Maryland’s track record in presidential elections. Today, we take a look at Maryland’s Democratic presidential primary record since World War II.
According to the Maryland Secretary of State, Maryland’s first partisan presidential primary was in 1912. The practice did not become a regular quadrennial occurrence until 1952, with the exception of 1968 when the state did not hold a primary because of an overlapping state constitutional convention. From 1912 until 1984 Maryland held its primary in May. From 1988 until 2004 the primary was held in March.
A total of thirteen presidential primaries have been held in Maryland since World War II. In seven of those primaries, Maryland voted for the eventual Democratic nominee. That number climbs to eight if you count 1964, when home state Senator Daniel Brewster was standing in for incumbent President Lyndon Johnson.
Of the seven races where Maryland voted for the eventual Democratic nominee, only two went on to win the fall election. They were Kennedy and Clinton. If you count Brewster in 1964, three went on to win the general election. Two of the three were incumbent presidents, Clinton in ’96 and Johnson in ’64.
Of the eight races Maryland Democrats voted for the eventual Democratic nominee, six have come since 1980 beginning with the vote for Jimmy Carter over Ted Kennedy and continuing until 2004 with the exception of Tsongas’ victory over Clinton in 1992. Maryland Democrats’ new found ability to pick the eventual nominee probably reflects the trend, until 2008, of party nominees being picked earlier and earlier in the cycle.
Sunday, March 16, 2008
Maryland’s Presidential Record
From Marc Korman.
With Senator Clinton’s recent boast that “As Ohio goes, so goes the nation,” I thought this would be a good time to check in with Maryland’s record in presidential election years. As Maryland goes, does the nation follow?
Not so much. Since World War II, fifteen presidential elections have been held. Maryland voted for the winner ten times, compared to fourteen times for Ohio. The good news for Maryland’s record is that they voted for the winner in all three acknowledged electoral landslides since World War II (Johnson in ‘64, Nixon in ‘72, and Reagan in ‘84).
Maryland voted for the Democratic candidate over the Republican nine times, but only five of those times did the Democrat win the presidency. The highest Democratic vote was 65% for Johnson in 1964.
Maryland voted for the Republican candidate six times, and five of those led to Republican presidencies. The highest Republican vote was 61% for Nixon in 1972.
The biggest surprise for me when generating the list was Maryland’s support for Republican George H.W. Bush in 1988. Maryland is a safe Democratic state today, but given its support for Republicans twice in the 1980s, that status is a relatively recent development. Also interesting was Maryland’s narrow support for Republican Dewey in 1948, though that was strange election due to the presence of four major candidates on the ballot. Had Truman received the votes of Progressive Party candidate Henry Wallace in Maryland, he may well have carried the state.
Notes: Maryland winners listed in bold.
1960 was the first year Alaska and Hawaii were included in the Electoral College.
1964 was the first year the District of Columbia was included in the Electoral College. They are included as a “state” in the candidate state totals.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
