Translate

Monday, November 11, 2013

.The Aftermath: 2013 General Election - Why Renata K. Lost...And Why the Democrats Should Never Lose any County Wide Seat Again!

I do my best (as one solitary blogger can ) to create accurate analysis from the data I have. To be certain, you should check my work before quoting it as accurate. - RMF

This election is really providing fertile ground for data analysis. Some categorical distinctions can be made that aren't so swing vote oriented such that the precinct data becomes to 'fuzzy' to be meaningful. The tables below represent the precincts with the least turnout for the four county council and two ports seats. What strikes me  is:
  • How tragically low these turnouts really are for fairly populous precincts.
  • How solidly Democratic these districts should be. They are almost all Bellingham 200s except for Lummi (?)  133 and 137.
  • How much the Democrats would have to gain if their ground game would have worked in these precincts.
In general, these 10 low turnout precincts sum to about 9500 registrants.  Most of them swing solidly Democratic. If the Democrats unlocked these districts in "off years", they stand to gain as much as 5000 additional votes over and above their anemic (but mostly victorious) turnouts below. Surprisingly, the lowest precinct turnouts for all six of these races are WWU precincts: 245,252,253. So much for the idea that the students steal away local Bellingham votes.

The ~55% Whatcom county turnout for this "off year" election was impressive.  But the Democrats could have actually done much better. The important take-away is that populous precincts that should tend Democratic still have many votes untapped. The Dems should go get them next time.

Precinct PrecinctTotal Participation Kowalczyk Robbins Diff Margin %TO
245 1392 187 135 52 83 61.48% 13.43%
252 697 115 96 19 77 80.21% 16.50%
253 1112 240 163 77 86 52.76% 21.58%
133 979 240 142 98 44 30.99% 24.51%
230 724 211 124 87 37 29.84% 29.14%
137 976 288 183 105 78 42.62% 29.51%
231 1019 330 193 137 56 29.02% 32.38%
247 850 276 217 59 158 72.81% 32.47%
204 568 189 95 94 1 1.05% 33.27%
229 1040 361 226 135 91 40.27% 34.71%
Precinct PrecinctTotal Participation McAuley Bell Diff Margin %TO
245 1392 185 126 59 67 53.17% 13.29%
252 697 115 88 27 61 69.32% 16.50%
253 1112 241 165 76 89 53.94% 21.67%
133 979 232 144 88 56 38.89% 23.70%
230 724 206 117 89 28 23.93% 28.45%
137 976 285 161 124 37 22.98% 29.20%
247 850 270 187 83 104 55.61% 31.76%
231 1019 328 201 127 74 36.82% 32.19%
204 568 189 90 99 -9 -10.00% 33.27%
101 959 333 209 124 85 40.67% 34.72%
Precinct PrecinctTotal Participation Weimer Luke Diff Margin %TO
245 1392 222 184 38 146 79.35% 15.95%
252 697 126 108 18 90 83.33% 18.08%
253 1112 262 201 61 140 69.65% 23.56%
133 979 245 163 82 81 49.69% 25.03%
137 976 292 196 96 100 51.02% 29.92%
230 724 217 146 71 75 51.37% 29.97%
204 568 188 100 88 12 12.00% 33.10%
231 1019 345 235 110 125 53.19% 33.86%
247 850 301 253 48 205 81.03% 35.41%
212 468 168 91 77 14 15.38% 35.90%
Precinct PrecinctTotal Participation Browne Knutzen Diff Margin %TO
245 1392 224 177 47 130 73.45% 16.09%
252 697 125 103 22 81 78.64% 17.93%
253 1112 264 197 67 130 65.99% 23.74%
133 979 247 162 85 77 47.53% 25.23%
137 976 291 193 98 95 49.22% 29.82%
230 724 223 147 76 71 48.30% 30.80%
231 1019 345 229 116 113 49.34% 33.86%
204 568 194 89 105 -16 -17.98% 34.15%
247 850 297 245 52 193 78.78% 34.94%
101 959 351 228 123 105 46.05% 36.60%
Precinct PrecinctTotal Participation Buchanan Kershner Diff Margin %TO
245 1392 226 180 46 134 74.44% 16.24%
252 697 127 106 21 85 80.19% 18.22%
253 1112 263 194 69 125 64.43% 23.65%
133 979 245 154 91 63 40.91% 25.03%
137 976 292 188 104 84 44.68% 29.92%
230 724 223 145 78 67 46.21% 30.80%
204 568 191 94 97 -3 -3.19% 33.63%
231 1019 346 232 114 118 50.86% 33.95%
247 850 303 253 50 203 80.24% 35.65%
229 1040 377 260 117 143 55.00% 36.25%
Precinct PrecinctTotal Participation Mann Elenbaas Diff Margin %TO
245 1392 221 181 40 141 77.90% 15.88%
252 697 126 105 21 84 80.00% 18.08%
253 1112 259 206 53 153 74.27% 23.29%
133 979 248 164 84 80 48.78% 25.33%
137 976 289 194 95 99 51.03% 29.61%
230 724 223 154 69 85 55.19% 30.80%
204 568 191 112 79 33 29.46% 33.63%
231 1019 349 265 84 181 68.30% 34.25%
247 850 304 251 53 198 78.88% 35.76%
229 1040 382 272 110 162 59.56% 36.73%