By Dave Anderson:
I live and vote in a Democratic base precinct. And my precinct is the story of the election. Here is the data from 2006 and last night.
2006 | 2010 | 2010-2006 | |
Total RV | 709 | 705 | -4 |
Total Voters | 360 | 314 | -46 |
% Voting | 50.8 | 44.6 | -6.2 |
Straight Dem | 120 | 92 | -28 |
Straight GOP | 28 | 36 | 8 |
Dem Senate | 253 | 209 | -44 |
GOP Senate | 96 | 98 | 2 |
Dem Senate Vote Margin | 157 | 111 | -46 |
Sestak needed to be able to flush base precincts like the one that I live in and win 70:30 or better instead of 65:35. The margin in the base precincts were not reduced compared to 2006 because Republicans came out in much larger numbers, but Democratic voters stayed home. Pat Toomey picked up 2 votes in my precinct over Rick Santorum. That is statistical noise. Joe Sestak won my preinct by a 2:1 margin, a decisive win, but not decisive enough. Basically every voter from 2006 who did not show up at the senior center yesterday to vote and buy some very yummy brownies was a highly probable Sestak voter.
I wonder would there be a larger turn-out if, like Nevada, the ballot had an option: None of These Candidates. Then again maybe more useful to simply view any modern day election as a binary cycle as Roger Hodges writes in The Mendacity of Hope:
ReplyDelete"We cast our empty ballots for one party; then, disgusted with the inevitable betrayals, pray for a redeemer from the opposing party to rescue us from politics and history, only to repeat the cycle once again."