HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Politics 2014 (Forum) » Alaska: Future Swing Stat...

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 02:52 PM

Alaska: Future Swing State? From Nate Silver

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/05/alaska-future-swing-state/

Nate makes some good points here. Of course, there are all kinds of countervailing opinions, but Mr. Silver is not often wrong. If our current asshat governor continues on with his quest to give the state away to the oil companies and big resource extractors (see, Pebble Mine), he may push more and more concerned Alaskans into the D column.

The state where Barack Obama most improved his performance from 2008 was Alaska. He lost it by “only” 14 percentage points this year, considerably less than his 22-point margin of defeat in 2008.

Part of the reason is that the former governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin, was on the Republican ticket in 2008 but was not this year. That probably doesn’t explain all of the shift, however.

Consider that in 2000 — also without Ms. Palin on the ballot — the Democratic nominee, Al Gore, lost Alaska by 31 points.

There are reasons to think that Alaska could continue to become more competitive in the coming years.

<snip>




I've been saying for some time that Alaska is more purple than most people realize. While recent statewide elections have consolidated Republican power, everyone agrees that it was due to extreme gerrymandering of legislative districts, the legality of which is still before the court.

29 replies, 3222 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 29 replies Author Time Post
Reply Alaska: Future Swing State? From Nate Silver (Original post)
Blue_In_AK Dec 2012 OP
Arkana Dec 2012 #1
Blue_In_AK Dec 2012 #2
Arkana Dec 2012 #9
Blue_In_AK Dec 2012 #10
Filibuster Harry Dec 2012 #3
msongs Dec 2012 #4
geek tragedy Dec 2012 #5
Blue_In_AK Dec 2012 #6
geek tragedy Dec 2012 #7
Blue_In_AK Dec 2012 #8
geek tragedy Dec 2012 #11
Blue_In_AK Dec 2012 #12
geek tragedy Dec 2012 #13
pbrower2a Dec 2012 #24
cire41 Dec 2012 #15
Blue_In_AK Dec 2012 #17
geek tragedy Dec 2012 #18
cire41 Dec 2012 #19
Hekate Dec 2012 #20
madinmaryland Dec 2012 #14
Blue_In_AK Dec 2012 #16
ellisonz Dec 2012 #21
Blue_In_AK Dec 2012 #22
LiberalFighter Dec 2012 #23
sarcasmo Dec 2012 #25
Arctic Dave Dec 2012 #26
Blue_In_AK Dec 2012 #28
David__77 Dec 2012 #27
bluestateguy Dec 2012 #29

Response to Blue_In_AK (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 02:57 PM

1. There's people in Alaska?

(I kid, I kid).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Arkana (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 03:22 PM

2. About 723,000 according to latest figures

Some interesting factoids at this link. http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/02000.html

Especially note number of people per square mile toward the bottom of this list of facts. That's why it seems like no one is here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_In_AK (Reply #2)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 04:46 PM

9. If I remember my geography, you guys have the second-lowest population density of all 50 states.

The first, of course, being Wyoming.

e: And apparently that's not true anymore. Wyoming has a population density of nearly 6 people per square mile.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Arkana (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 04:58 PM

10. We have 1.8 according to that fact sheet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_In_AK (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 03:23 PM

3. wouldn't it be terrific if Alaska went blue in 2016 -- only 8 years after you betcha!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_In_AK (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 03:28 PM

4. if we could move 200K californians there for the election, mission accomplished nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_In_AK (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 03:32 PM

5. Awful analysis by Silver.

14 points is still a blowout. Georgia and North Carolina and South Carolina and Mississippi and Missouri and Indiana and Montana and Arizona were all closer.

So, the only way Alaska will ever be a swing state is if Democrats need over 400 Electoral votes to win the White House.

Also, Sarah Palin was a moderate do-gooder by this state's standards. Ted Stevens got convicted of official misconduct, and still barely lost there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #5)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 04:08 PM

6. Thanks for the vote of confidence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_In_AK (Reply #6)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 04:19 PM

7. I grew up in North Dakota. Rural, non-diverse, cold states

in the west are core Republican states.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #7)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 04:43 PM

8. In actuality

Alaska was founded as a Democratic state back in 1959. In fact, Eisenhower was against statehood because he was afraid Democratic representation from AK would shift the balance in the US Senate. At the time HI was Republican. This is why the two states were admitted at roughly the same time. We sent several great democrats to Washington - Ernest Gruening, Bob Bartlett, Nick Begich, and my personal fave, Mike Gravel. We have one of the most liberal/progressive state constitutions in the country, had civil rights laws 20 years before the 1965 Civil Rights Act. Abortion was legal here before the Lower 48 and MJ has been virtually decriminalized since a court decision in 1975.

What has poisoned Alaska's politics was oil development and the arrival here of so many Texans and Oklahomans in the late '70s and early '80s. Carpetbaggers, we call them. Frankly, my hope is that with the increased development in North Dakota and other cheaper to get to oil resources in the Lower 48, maybe Exxon, BP and ConocoPhillips will give us our state back. I would happily give up my permanent fund dividend and pay state income taxes just to get them out of here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_In_AK (Reply #8)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 05:33 PM

11. In 1959, the Democrats were the party of segregationists.

North Dakota used to believe in socialism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #11)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 06:19 PM

12. Whatever.

There's no talking to you. You can read Alaska history as easy as I can try to explain it to you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_In_AK (Reply #12)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 06:20 PM

13. Sure, I can read. And how people voted in 1959 is quite irrelevant

to how people vote now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #7)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 08:14 PM

24. Alaska...

Alaska has a large First Peoples population.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #5)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 07:00 PM

15. You missed Nate's point

What matters isn't the absolute size of the margin of victory but its general trend.

2000 MOV = 31 points
2004 MOV= 26 points
2008 MOV= 22 points
2012 MOV = 14 points


Very few states have undergone such a dramatic political shift in just 12 years. If such a trend continues, then it is very likely that Alaska will be swing state within another 10 years

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cire41 (Reply #15)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 07:02 PM

17. Thank you for "getting it"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cire41 (Reply #15)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 07:08 PM

18. Statistical noise.

It was R+9 in 1992 and R+17 in 1996.

So, essentially, its R partisanship spiked in the 2000's but now has reverted to the prior existing levels.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #18)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 07:18 PM

19. You are ignoring Perot's effect in both races

He obviously took votes away from the R side....

1992
Clinton 30 %
HW 39 %
Perot 28%

Total non-dem MOV: 37 points

1996
Clinton 33%
Dole 50 %
Perot 11 %

Total non-dem MOV: 28 points


Now lets look at the trends again

1992: 37 points
1996: 28 points
2000: 31 points
2004: 26 points
2008: 22 points
2012: 14 points

Clearly there is a trend here

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cire41 (Reply #15)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 07:48 PM

20. That's a whopping trend, alright

Thanks cire41, and welcome to DU.

Hekate

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_In_AK (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 06:41 PM

14. While you will never see a Ted Kennedy liberal coming out of Alaska, you guys

have elected democrats to the Senate (Mark Begich and nearly Tony Knowles) and the Governorship (Tony Knowles).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madinmaryland (Reply #14)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 07:01 PM

16. And before the gerrymandering we had a 50-50 split in our state senate,

resulting in a bipartisan majority coalition. Governor Asshole and his redistricting board assured that that wouldn't last, but it was great for a while. As I said, our redistricting is still before the court, they just couldn't resolve it in time for this election. Hopefully, things will be better in 2014.

Since statehood we've had five Democratic governors and seven Republicans. Wally Hickel and Jay Hammond, although Republicans in name, were far more independent. I voted for Jay with pleasure and would again in a heartbeat if he were still alive. Wally is a legend.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_In_AK (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 09:44 PM

21. So is Begich going to be re-elected as Senator in 2014?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #21)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 10:12 PM

22. Not certain.

It depends on how badly all the Republicans who want to run against him beat each other up in the primary and who comes out victorious. Mark walks a fine line. He's had to legislate a bit more conservatively than he might like to in order to appeal to the R's here. It makes the more liberal of us kind of crazy, but I understand what he's doing. I just hope it works for him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_In_AK (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 01:47 AM

23. Swing state? That would take a few years. Like maybe. Maybe 100 years.

It would require Alaska to have a substantial increase in population so that they have more than just the 3 electoral votes.

But, I would agree that Alaska could be in the D column in just a few years. But to be considered a swing state. No.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_In_AK (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 11:32 PM

25. Kick!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_In_AK (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 12:19 AM

26. We are a solid purple state.

 

If Sarah hadn't drawn so much attention to us we would have a much closer margin then now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Arctic Dave (Reply #26)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 02:30 AM

28. I agree, Dave

I don't think Alaska is nearly as crimson as everyone thinks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_In_AK (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 02:16 AM

27. I think Nate Silver is right.

There are several factors that bode well for Democratic gains:

1. The ideological unity between ideological libertarians and the GOP is at a post-1980 low (with the exception maybe of the 92 election).

2. Alaska is experiencing important demographic changes just like the rest of the country.

3. These people are racists, nativists, or theocrats generally... they just gobbled up a line of crap that isn't native to their basic outlook.

With education and much effort, Alaska is a NATURAL Democrat state, as with Vermont or Washington.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_In_AK (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 03:24 AM

29. Campaiging in Alaska would be a big chore

You basically lose the whole day traveling there and back; in contrast, you can do events in NC, VA and FL all in one day.

Having said that, the Obama people were setting up to give Alaska a try in 2008, but they pulled out once Sarah Palin was put on the ticket.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread