Worst. Moniker. Ever.
I’d disagree. The standard gerrymandering strategy is to have a lot of districts that your party wins by comfortable margins, while your opponent wins a smaller number of districts by overwhelming margins. You want to shoot for winning with 60-65% of the vote while losing by as close to 100% as you can manage; if you have a bunch of 52-48 wins in a normal year, you can lose them all in a bad year, and your gerrymandering has bit you in the ass.
In Virginia, it’s hard to see what’s going on due to a large number of seats going uncontested (45 out of 100 - 29 GOP seats and 16 Dem seats).
But I did put together this table to show which party won how many seats by what margin:
Margin D R
<10% 2 12
10-20% 1 8
20-30% 2 10
30-40% 2 5
40-50% 5 1
50-60% 3 2
60-90% 2 0
>90% 16 29
If the GOP won by gerrymandering, I just don’t see it.
Tru dat, but that’s really my point. You’d expect Virginia’s red-to-purple move to gradually start showing up in the lower races, if the Dems were playing this game reasonably well. And it didn’t. I wasn’t expecting parity, or anything remotely close. But the Dems should be able to get some sort of net gain as the electorate shifts.
There really isn’t any evidence that that made a difference. Cuccinelli was wiping the floor with Bolling in the polls while Bolling was still considering contesting the nomination.
I’d heard former Congressman Tom Perriello had been considering the race.
Tru dat. And McDonnell certainly had aspirations, before he got overtaken by scandal.
Doesn’t always work that way. State parties are often very different from the national party and there are different structures in place.
Take neighboring West Virginia for example, they have been solidly “red” in Federal elections since 2000, but they haven’t had a Republican majority in either of the Houses of their legislature since IIRC the 1920s. It wasn’t until 2012 that the red-shift finally started to show up in State politics, as the GOP moved within 5 or something of taking the lower house of the legislature.
In States with a long history associated with a single party, you have a lot of old voters who grew up in the 30s/40s/50s and are still of the party mindset where they’re going to vote for “their” party with no regard to the issues or anything else. Further, the State party can afford to shift in different directions to try and keep relevant. For example in WV, most State level Democrats are pro-life, pro-gun, anti-environment (due to the importance of coal in that State) etc, really they’d be Republicans in any other State. But the governing structure is so entrenched for the Democrats even the conservatives run as Democrats there.
It isn’t quite that way in Virginia, because we don’t have a 100 year history of one party rule since Virginia was Democrat for most of the 20th century, then went Republican in the 70s and has always had a mixture of GOP/Democrat Governors, but you don’t always see state legislative races following the national trends because state level legislators can often tailor themselves to their local constituencies regardless of some of the larger issues. A lot of State legislators in many States are only part time politicians, and the job also tends to be less political than the Federal political offices. It’s not akin to non-partisan city council elections, but the big issues talked about on the internet and such that make everything seem so polarized aren’t as relevant in lower level elections.
That being said over time you should see a shift in the State legislature, but it takes time. Virginia is always going to be substantially more conservative than say, Maryland. The State isn’t really changing so much as it is being invaded by outsiders, but the people that have always lived here aren’t really changing political philosophies.
I’m pretty sure that counts as ‘changing’, Martin. That’s like saying that the influx of damnyankees (of which I am one) into South Carolina isn’t changing the electorate when it most certainly is.
Every one of those new people moving into Charleston - or Fairfax, for that matter - count just as much and are South Carolinians/Virginians just as much as someone whose G’g’g’g’g’grandfather climbed off the ship after being transported from England in the 1600s. There’s no ‘true Virginia’ that maintains in the face of immigrations, there’s only what Virginia now is due to immigration.
That’s half a dozen in one hand, six in the other. What I’m saying is political opinions aren’t changing, but the electorate is.
An even better example is Florida. Most of our population now seems to be damnyankees, or descended from damnyankees (like my Dad’s family – my Mom’s was old Florida Cracker), who moved to Florida after WWII (when air conditioning became widely available). That’s what makes Florida a such “purple” state electorally.
I think I’ve heard it said that no one has been born in Florida since the 1870s.
Florida would probably be outright red if its emigrants weren’t so prone to be old and wealthy enough to afford to move there and live there, both of which demographics trend conservative. Plus, of course, idiots. They elected Rick Scott a white collar criminal who by all rights should be in a jail cell.
In our defense he barely squicked by on a year were Republicans crushed every other race.
Do you mean that individuals’ political opinions do not change over time?
Yes, well, as to that, see here.
I have a cousin – decent guy, except for the whole “being laughably wrong about pretty much every belief he holds” thing – who lives in VA. I couldn’t wait for his reaction to this, and he didn’t disappoint:
“Congratulations Virginia, you just became the People’s Republic of Virginia. I hope you’re happy with yourselves. You got what you asked for and deserve whatever comes with it.”
I’ve been noticing that a lot of people who I know who make these kind of communism/socialism/facism claims were also the ones in high school more likely to be C level students in general. They certainly did not give a shit about politics or systems of government or history.
Suddenly as adults they are keenly focused on politics? At the very least, is it too much to ask that they try to actually understand the words/concepts that they are using? You know, all that stuff that they mocked other people for caring about in high school?
That’s the Dunning-Kruger Effect in action.
No. I’d assume over time most people change their opinions on a great many issues, although I’m sure some people’s opinions never change. Many of us have that ancient relative who still thinks it’s 1940 when they were in their “prime” with many associated outdated viewpoints.
They can’t expand their base without surrendering almost everything it means to be Republican.
Both of our senators are former governors aren’t they? Our current governor had a shot at becoming VP nominee if he didn’t become governor vaginal probe.
Or your 60/40 districts turned 55/45 on you over the course of a government shut down and tea party craziness.
If anything, Bolling was more closely tied to our ethically embattled governor than Cuccinelli.
I think that the electorate changes both as a result of immigration and as a result of older voters dying.