Showing posts with label Swing Counties. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Swing Counties. Show all posts
Saturday, September 9, 2017
Swing Counties and Why Clinton Really Lost? It Wasn't Sanders Fault...It was Hers
So why did Hillary Clinton lose to Donald Trump? For many this is now a “Who cares?” and it is time to “move forward” as Bernie Sanders said Thursday on The Late Show. Yet Clinton cannot. In her forthcoming book she describes the attacks on her by Sanders as causing “lasting damage” damage to her campaign. No doubt, Clinton’s new book will seek the causes of her defeat in outside forces–the Russians and Sanders for example–but the roots of her defeat also lie within her own control. Much could be written about how all the mistakes she made and how she failed to learn from them eight years later. Yet perhaps one way to capture her mistakes is simply to look at her general election campaign, especially in terms of where she campaigned and how often.
I am in the process of doing a second edition of Presidential Swing States. In editing that book with Stacy Hunter Hecht I realized it is not simply swing states that make the difference in presidential elections, it is the swing voters within the swing counties in the swing states that are critical. In this second edition I am doing a chapter on the swing counties. Looking at county campaign activity tells one a lot about the mistakes made by Clinton in the 2016 general election.
There are 3,142 counties, parishes, or boroughs in the United States. During the 2016 general election, Clinton/Kaine made a total of 152 campaign visits to 75 counties located in 14 different states. Trump/Pence made a total of 248 campaign visits to 142 counties in 25 states. Total, they made 400 campaign visits to 167 counties located in 26 states. Between the two campaigns, they only campaigned in 5.3% of the US counties. For Clinton it was only 2.4% of all counties, for Trump it was 4.5%. Trump/Pence not only made nearly 60% more campaign visits than Clinton/Kaine, but they visited nearly 90% more counties. Simply put, they made more visits to more locations than Clinton/Kaine. Alone that tells one something about why Clinton lost–she did not campaign as much or broadly as Trump–he simply out-hustled her on the campaign trail.
But what is also interesting to consider is where the Clinton and Trump campaigns chose to visit.
Clinton and Trump demonstrated different tactics in terms of the counties they chose to visit. For Clinton, her most frequent visits were to Democratic Party strongholds located in big urban areas such as Philadelphia, Fort Lauderdale, and Detroit. For Trump, the focus seemed less on big Republican strongholds and more on visiting swing areas or counties such as Hillsborough County in New Hampshire or Mecklenberg County in North Carolina.
These contrasting strategies suggest that Clinton’s focus was either on shoring up her party base or simply trying to maximize her turnout among the Democrats. For Trump, the focus seemed more on swing voters, perhaps reflecting the fact that either he was sure he had his base or that he was trying to expand or shift it. All these are possible scenarios. Yet I would also argue that what the Trump campaign did was more strategic and realistic. His campaign understood that the key to winning an election is not just holding and mobilizing a base, but it is also going after the s wing voters in swing areas who control the balance of power in presidential elections.
Yes it is possible that Clinton had to campaign in the Democratic Party strongholds to overcome the attacks inflicted upon her by Sanders. But a stronger argument can be made is that she simply failed to make enough campaign visits in the critical swing countries among swing voters to ask them for their vote. If that is the case, she violated a cardinal rule of politics once enunciated by Tip O’Neill–never take a vote for granted and always ask for it. It appears Clinton just did not ask the swing voters in the swing states for their votes, and that is why is lost.
Clinton Campaign Visits
State County Visits
Pennsylvania Philadelphia 8
Florida Broward 7
Florida Miami-Dade 7
Nevada Clark 6
Michigan Wayne 6
Ohio Cuyhoga 6
Pennsylvania Allegheny 5
North Carolina Wake 4
Iowa Polk 4
Florida Orange 3
Florida Palm Beach 3
Ohio Franklin 3
New Hampshire Hillsborough 3
Trump Campaign Visits
State County Visits
New Hampshire Hillsborough 7
Colorado El Paso 6
New Hampshire Rockingham 6
Nevada Clark 5
North Carolina Mecklenberg 5
Florida Miami-Dade 5
Nevada Washoe 5
North Carolina New Hanover 4
Arizona Maricopa 4
Ohio Cuyhoga 4
Monday, August 22, 2016
As Scranton Goes So Goes the Nation: or Why Nineteen Counties Will Decide the 2016 Presidential Race
Today's blog appeared originally in the Philadelphia Inquirer under the title of As Scranton Goes So
Goes the Nation: or Why Nineteen Counties Will Decide the 2016 Presidential Race
It’s not simply a handful of swing states that will decide the 2016 presidential election. The swing voters in the swing counties of the swing states will decide it. And if my calculations are correct, it is perhaps no more than 19 counties in 11 states–less than 500,000 voters–who truly matter. That’s why Scranton, Pennsylvania seems to be so important this year.
From 1988 to 2012 the balance of power in US presidential races has centered on ten states. Republicans were likely to win 23 states totally 191 electoral votes and the Democrats winning 18 states and the District of Columbia totally 232 electoral votes. Then there are ten swing states–Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Virginia, and Wisconsin–totaling 115 electoral votes. As I described in my Presidential Swing States: Why Ten Only Matter, these are the states where the presidential candidates campaign and visit after the conventions. They are the bellwether states, the battleground states, they are those most likely to flip from one party to another, and the margin of election victory in each state is generally close, but with some, such as Florida and Ohio, even more decisive than others in terms of their presidential selection influence.
These are still the crucial swing states in the 2016 election. Trump’s candidacy, both its strengths in appealing to white working class voters which may open up Pennsylvania as a swing state, or its weaknesses such as its racial overtures in possibly making Utah and Georgia possible Democrat pickups, might change the electoral map slightly. But the Electoral College and the way states allocate their electoral votes, along with the rise of political polarization and the declining number of swing voters to perhaps 5% of the electorate, mean that even this year in approximately 40 states the presidential race is largely already over.
But while pundits write about the swing states, more fascinating is how within them there are only a handful of counties that are decisive. They are the swing counties where the candidates actually campaign and where if they can win them they win the state. Since 1988 there have been a handful of swing counties. In Colorado it is Jefferson County that is key to winning that state. For New Hampshire, it is Hillsborough County, North Carolina it is Wake County, Virginia it is Prince William. In Florida it is Hillsborough, and in Ohio it is Hamilton County. Win Hamilton you win Ohio, win Ohio you win the presidency.
In 2012 there were 15 counties in the ten swing states that were critical to Obama’s victory. There were a total of 3,883,000 votes cast and Obama won 53.2%. He out-polled Romney by less than 350,000 votes. It is not clear whether Romney could have persuaded them to switch and vote for him or whether he needed to mobilize other voters, but the reality is that across those 15 counties in ten states, a switch of 350,000 or so votes would now have Mitt Romney running for his second term.
Assume these are the same swing counties and states in 2016. Perhaps now the number of swing voters in these states is up to 500,000 with population growths. Now add to that Pennsylvania, a state that has voted solidly for the Democratic presidential candidate since 1988. Trump needs to flip it to win. There are four counties in there–Bucks, Chester, Luzerne, and Lackawanna–that may be key to the state. Lackawanna County–where Scranton is located–seems to be the center of Pennsylvania’s political universe this year. Both Trump and Clinton have made recent visits there, expect more by November. In 2012 almost 97,000 voted in Lackawanna Country with Obama winning nearly 63%. Flipping that country seems like a tall order. Yet these four counties had a total of 790,000 voters in 2012, and Obama won them with less than 52%–about a 26,000 spread. Conceivably Trump could flip them but given that Obama won the state by more than 300,000 votes in 2012, Pennsylvania is a long shot.
Even with Pennsylvania thrown in, there are only about 19 swing counties in this year’s presidential contest that seem to matter. The number of swing voters there may be less than 500,000. The key to the 2016 election is moving these few swing voters in these swing counties in the swing states. The rest of us should vote, but the reality is that the next president will be selected by these few voters in a few counties.
It’s not simply a handful of swing states that will decide the 2016 presidential election. The swing voters in the swing counties of the swing states will decide it. And if my calculations are correct, it is perhaps no more than 19 counties in 11 states–less than 500,000 voters–who truly matter. That’s why Scranton, Pennsylvania seems to be so important this year.
From 1988 to 2012 the balance of power in US presidential races has centered on ten states. Republicans were likely to win 23 states totally 191 electoral votes and the Democrats winning 18 states and the District of Columbia totally 232 electoral votes. Then there are ten swing states–Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Virginia, and Wisconsin–totaling 115 electoral votes. As I described in my Presidential Swing States: Why Ten Only Matter, these are the states where the presidential candidates campaign and visit after the conventions. They are the bellwether states, the battleground states, they are those most likely to flip from one party to another, and the margin of election victory in each state is generally close, but with some, such as Florida and Ohio, even more decisive than others in terms of their presidential selection influence.
These are still the crucial swing states in the 2016 election. Trump’s candidacy, both its strengths in appealing to white working class voters which may open up Pennsylvania as a swing state, or its weaknesses such as its racial overtures in possibly making Utah and Georgia possible Democrat pickups, might change the electoral map slightly. But the Electoral College and the way states allocate their electoral votes, along with the rise of political polarization and the declining number of swing voters to perhaps 5% of the electorate, mean that even this year in approximately 40 states the presidential race is largely already over.
But while pundits write about the swing states, more fascinating is how within them there are only a handful of counties that are decisive. They are the swing counties where the candidates actually campaign and where if they can win them they win the state. Since 1988 there have been a handful of swing counties. In Colorado it is Jefferson County that is key to winning that state. For New Hampshire, it is Hillsborough County, North Carolina it is Wake County, Virginia it is Prince William. In Florida it is Hillsborough, and in Ohio it is Hamilton County. Win Hamilton you win Ohio, win Ohio you win the presidency.
In 2012 there were 15 counties in the ten swing states that were critical to Obama’s victory. There were a total of 3,883,000 votes cast and Obama won 53.2%. He out-polled Romney by less than 350,000 votes. It is not clear whether Romney could have persuaded them to switch and vote for him or whether he needed to mobilize other voters, but the reality is that across those 15 counties in ten states, a switch of 350,000 or so votes would now have Mitt Romney running for his second term.
Assume these are the same swing counties and states in 2016. Perhaps now the number of swing voters in these states is up to 500,000 with population growths. Now add to that Pennsylvania, a state that has voted solidly for the Democratic presidential candidate since 1988. Trump needs to flip it to win. There are four counties in there–Bucks, Chester, Luzerne, and Lackawanna–that may be key to the state. Lackawanna County–where Scranton is located–seems to be the center of Pennsylvania’s political universe this year. Both Trump and Clinton have made recent visits there, expect more by November. In 2012 almost 97,000 voted in Lackawanna Country with Obama winning nearly 63%. Flipping that country seems like a tall order. Yet these four counties had a total of 790,000 voters in 2012, and Obama won them with less than 52%–about a 26,000 spread. Conceivably Trump could flip them but given that Obama won the state by more than 300,000 votes in 2012, Pennsylvania is a long shot.
Even with Pennsylvania thrown in, there are only about 19 swing counties in this year’s presidential contest that seem to matter. The number of swing voters there may be less than 500,000. The key to the 2016 election is moving these few swing voters in these swing counties in the swing states. The rest of us should vote, but the reality is that the next president will be selected by these few voters in a few counties.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)