Skip to main content

Dave Wasserman has his Pres-by-county spreadsheet, and wwmiv has a congressional district PVI spreadsheet out there. I'm going to join the crowd and stick to the turf that I know best: California. More specifically, this is a spreadsheet of California State Legislature district PVIs, including both the state senate and the state assembly.

Update: Link removed.

For this spreadsheet, I used raw percentages, not two-party percentages. 2008 results were taken from Meridian Pacific, a GOP consulting firm (so I'm not linking to it), while 2012 results were culled the data from the counties' statements of vote.

As you can see, there are numerous gaps and missing numbers. Feel free to help fill in the blanks! Ok well, you have to do it in the comments below and I'll do the filling in. Also, feel free to correct any mistakes.

Once the spreadsheet is filled in (or when the Secretary of State comes out with a statement of vote supplement in February or April), I'll probably combine it with California congressional district PVI's that I'm (now openly announcing that I'm) stealing from wwmiv and compile a complete California district PVI sheet.

Below are some notes and proverbial asterisks of the spreadsheet that take a bit of explaining but are tangential to this diary. So unlike my other diaries and many other diaries on Daily Kos, reading below the Kossacks' Golden Poppy is optional, even discouraged for the faint of heart.

State senate districts
The senators' names listed in the even-numbered districts do not necessarily correspond to the actual senator for that district.

These state senators are (in order by district number) Berryhill, Rubio, Fuller, Padilla, Negrete McLeod, Hernandez, de Leon, Lieu, Price, Calderon, Wyland, and Anderson.

Here's why: while senators in odd-numbered districts (those elected in 2012) represent districts in the new 2011 commission-drawn maps, senators in even-numbered districts (those elected in 2010) are elected based on the old 2001 gerrymandered maps and continue to represent them until 2014. Special elections in the even-numbered districts are held under the old lines. This leads to a situation where some areas have two state senators and other places have none.

For example, in the spreadsheet, SD-08 is listed as Tom Berryhill (R-Modesto). The new SD-08 mostly corresponds to the areas he is currently representing in the state senate, and he plans to run there in 2014. However, his actual district number based on the old districts is SD-14, and he continues to represent areas in the old SD-14 until 2014. The 2010 SD-08 is represented by Leland Yee (D-San Francisco), who continues to represent his old district on the San Francisco Peninsula (this district incidentally got vaporized in redistricting). In this case, half of San Francisco, which is in both the old SD-08 and new SD-11 (represented by Democrat Mark Leno) now have both Yee and Leno as their senators.

Conversely, the new SD-28 is located in the Mojave Desert and has its state senator elected in 2014. The old SD-28 is in West LA and is represented by Ted Lieu (D-Torrance). Lieu continues to represent the old SD-28. However, since much of what is now SD-28 was in the old SD-37 (which, being an odd-numbered district, is now gone), this leaves places like Palm Springs and Lake Elsinore without a state senator for two years. Yes, it's really weird.

For the purposes of my spreadsheet, I use the new 2011 districts, and put the even-numbered senators' names where they are because their old districts correspond best to the new district listed, and most of those people will run in those districts in two years. This means Yee's name is left out (even though he's still very much a member of the state senate) and SD-28 is simply called "(Temecula/Coachella)" on the spreadsheet, as there's no clean fit (the old SD-37's incumbent, Bill Emmerson (R-Hemet), ran and won in SD-23 in 2012).

Initial analysis
If anything, this election shows how much more Democratic California can be, and it's still on the way to becoming even bluer. The strongest swings towards Team Blue occurred especially among Latinos, with swings above seven points in heavily Latino AD-27 (eastern San Jose) and AD-53 (Downtown Los Angeles). Heavily Asian districts also saw a huge shift to Democrats, as noted by SD-10 and AD-25 (southern East Bay), AD-49 (western San Gabriel Valley), and AD-72 (Huntington Beach/Little Saigon).

Swing districts are also moving swiftly in the blue column. Places like SD-05 (San Joaquin), AD-08 (Sacramento suburbs), AD-32 (Hanford/Bakersfield), and AD-65 (Fullerton/Buena Park) are now shifting rapidly leftward. Potential Dem trouble spots like SD-34 (Santa Ana/Huntington Beach) have appreciably tacked Democratic. New opportunities are opening up, such as SD-29 (Diamond Bar/Fullerton), AD-40 (San Bernardino), and AD-60 (Corona/Norco). If the GOP thinks they're done falling now, then I would advise them to reach for a parachute instead of a ladder.

Of course, there are areas where their PVIs went rightward instead. There's southern Orange County, which I think is simply reverting to form. There's AD-16 (Walnut Creek/Livermore) and AD-50 (Beverly Hills/Santa Monica), which I want to label as Hills of the Easily Disappointed. The Sierra foothills also became redder, solidifying Placer County's replacement of Orange County as the new Republican bastion in California.

The smallest PVI changes were mostly in rich areas outside of southern Orange County, such as AD-24 (Menlo Park/Palo Alto), AD-41 (Pasadena/Glendora), and AD-55 (Diamond Bar/Yorba Linda).

Of course, our favorite election cycle shocker, AD-36 (Lancaster/Palmdale), gets a paragraph all on its own. The 2008 PVI of R+4.5 would indicate it was getting competitive, but there are so many riper pickings ahead of it. So it was normal that this slipped under the radar, because it wasn't supposed to be on anyone's radar. Now, it's almost R+1.5, a near three-point shift, and other GOP districts aren't far behind. Watch out, they're coming our way faster and sooner than you think.

Originally posted to kurykh on Thu Dec 06, 2012 at 08:14 AM PST.

Also republished by California politics.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Goodie! (0+ / 0-)

    This is awesome. I'm thinking I should color code mine...

    23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

    by wwmiv on Thu Dec 06, 2012 at 09:01:33 AM PST

  •  That's interesting. (0+ / 0-)

    Henry Waxman's new district had a moderately larger shift away from Obama than the national one, and I figured it was the San Pedro area, but apparently Obama held steady in AD-66, so it was probably the Beverly Hills/Santa Monica AD-52, as you say.

    27, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-14 (formerly PA-02/NY-12).

    by Xenocrypt on Thu Dec 06, 2012 at 09:16:14 AM PST

    •  I agree (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Romney may have gained a few votes in those areas due to  some moderate high income voters who voted for Romney due to economic issues. I happen to know a few who switched from Obama to Romney based on economic issues who live in that district.

      the same thing happened in Marin County where I live. It was at 78% Obama but went down to 74%.

      For more election analysis and redistricting maps, check out my blog CA-2 (former CA-6) College in CA-37

      by Alibguy on Thu Dec 06, 2012 at 10:45:10 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks (0+ / 0-)

    Excellent stuff as usual

  •  This is cool stuff (0+ / 0-)

    I think it might help to call out what PVI is for people who aren't deep into it but might like to be part of your crowdsourcing. :-)

    Fry, don't be a hero! It's not covered by our health plan!

    by elfling on Thu Dec 06, 2012 at 12:30:44 PM PST

  •  Why not wait until results are certified on 12/7? (0+ / 0-)

    Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

    by KingofSpades on Thu Dec 06, 2012 at 12:36:28 PM PST

    •  The results aren't broken down (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      by state legislative district in the statement of vote. They come out in the supplement that is published in February or April (forgot which). I just wanted to beat them to the punch.

      22, D, CA-12 (old CA-08).

      by kurykh on Thu Dec 06, 2012 at 12:47:12 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  It comes out in April (0+ / 0-)

        150 days after the election. I wish it would be a bit faster.

        For more election analysis and redistricting maps, check out my blog CA-2 (former CA-6) College in CA-37

        by Alibguy on Thu Dec 06, 2012 at 02:54:03 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  What I THINK I saw in CA this year (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jacques Kallis, Alibguy

    is CA Dems underperforming the Presidential toplines less than they have most every other time.  In a few cases (AD-36 and CD-36), they overperformed the Presidential numbers.  I know Obama narrowly won AD-36, but Steve Fox had little money, so I consider that an overperformance and upset.

    Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

    by KingofSpades on Thu Dec 06, 2012 at 01:03:12 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site