Archives for posts with tag: 2016

Still trying to figure out how to best visualize Trump’s overwhelming victory on Election Day in Florida. The following panel of figures draw on precinct-level data that our Election Sciences team at UF has helped me collect. The data presented here show only the precincts in the state in which white voters made up at least 75% of the votes cast for each method of voting (Election Day, Early In-Person, and Vote-by-Mail), and that had at least 100 ballots cast for each method.  In other words, these are heavily white precincts where whites cast at least 75% of all ballots cast for each method of voting.

Running along the X-Axis is the proportion of the overall vote that Trump won (so, from 0% to 100%). The height of each vertical bar (there are a total of 60 bars) constitutes the fraction of the total votes Trump received — that is, add them all up and they equal 100% of Trump’s total votes by each method). The red vertical line in each panel is set at .5, or precincts in which Trump won 50% of the total votes cast.

Trump by Precincts3

As should be clear, Trump crushed it Election Days in these predominantly white precincts. The peak of the very tight normal distribution curve for Election Day voters in precincts where three-fourths of the votes cast were by white voters is greater than 65%.  Trump did not do nearly as well (relatively speaking) among vote-by-mail voters in predominantly white precincts; he fared better with predominantly white precincts whose voters cast early in-person ballots.

Stay tuned for similar graphs with Trump’s support among predominantly Hispanic precincts, broken down by method of vote.

Advertisements

TotVoters_ABTurnout_PrecinctResults1TotVoters_EVTurnout_PrecinctResults1TotVoters_EDTurnout_PrecinctResults1

(In each graph, the X-Axis is a precinct’s Election Day or Vote-By-Mail or Early In-Person votes cast out of total votes cast in that precinct by all three methods. The Y-Axis is Trump’s and Clinton’s share of total votes cast out of votes for all presidential candidates for each of the three methods.)

In his detailed article today, New York Times Upshot’s Nate Cohn asks the following:

“Is it possible that the registered Democrats who turned out were Trump supporters, and that the Democrats who stayed home were likelier to be supporters of Mrs. Clinton? Perhaps, but our polling suggests the opposite. In our pre-election Upshot/Siena polls, voters were likelier than nonvoters to support their party’s nominee.”

My preliminary analysis from Florida suggests otherwise. Along with my UF Election Sciences team, we painstakingly collected precinct-level election results for Trump and Clinton by method of voting (early in-person, vote-by-mail, and Election Day) from the nearly 6,000 precincts in Florida’s 67 counties, parsed them and cleaned them up, and then merged the presidential results with precinct information gleaned from the Florida voter file. Since we know which method of voting Florida voters used to cast their ballots, we’re able to make lots of different kinds of precise estimates. One goes to the heart of Nate’s question, at least for Florida.

The plot below shows the proportion of total votes cast on Election Day by White Democrats in each precinct, and the vote share for Trump and Clinton won on Election Day.  The horizontal (X-axis) reveals that the range of White Democratic Election Day voters making up a precinct’s total Election Day votes ranges from 0% (e.g., heavily Republican, or Hispanic and Black precincts) to a handful that top 40%.

The precinct dots (weighted by Election Day turnout) and the accompanying lowess fit lines suggest a telling pattern: Trump generally won a greater share of the Election Day vote in precincts where the share of White Democrats exceeded 5% of the total Election Day votes cast on Election day. The greater the share of White Democratic Election Day voters, the greater Trump’s share of the vote.

WhiteEDDem_ResultsWeightTurnout

(This is the identical plot, just with Trump’s precinct vote share overlaying Clinton’s precinct vote share.)

WhiteEDDem_ResultsWeightTurnout2

Interestingly, the pattern doesn’t exist for either Early In-Person or Vote-by-Mail votes cast in a precinct by White Democrats (see below), suggesting that some 11th hour surprise (hmmm, I wonder what that could have been, James Comey?), may have influenced the vote choice of White Democrats who waited until Election Day to cast their ballots.

%d bloggers like this: