Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


Minnesota State Senate Election Analysis: DFL Thoroughly Dominates Republicans

Bookmark and Share

The DFL expanded its lead in the Minnesota State Senate from 38-29 to 44-23, after picking up eight seats and giving back two in this month's election. The DFL has now not only nearly doubled the number of GOP seats in the Senate, but has also more strongly situated itself to pick up even more seats in 2010 before redistricting.

Overall, 55.3% of Minnesotans who voted in State Senate races voted for DFL candidates, compared to 43.3% for Republicans. This 12-point differential is the largest margin in the DFL's favor since 1992 when the DFL garnered 55.6% to the GOP's 43.2%.

The DFL's strong position in the State Senate lies not only in the number of seats won, but also by the strength of their victories: the DFL won nearly as many seats by more than 30 points (22) as the number of seats Republicans won overall (23).

For example, the DFL won 10 seats by between 50 and 99 points, compared to none for the GOP (both parties ran one candidate unopposed by the other party).

The DFL also won 11 more "very uncompetitive" races, decided by between 30 and 49 points, compared to none for the Republicans.

The GOP held on to 13 "weakly competitive" Republican-controlled districts, decided by between 11 and 29 points, compared to 11 for the DFL. The GOP also held onto 7 "competitive" Republican-controlled districts, decided by between 0 and 10 points, compared to just 5 for the DFL. In other words, Republicans are protecting a greater number of precariously held districts.

Lastly, both Republican pickups in 2006 were very narrowly won (1.7 and 2.7 points) whereas most of the DFL's eight pickups were decided by larger margins: 1.2, 4.3, 4.4, 5.9, 6.3, 7.3, 10.5 and 11.4 points.

Third Party Vacuum

Third party candidates were not much of a factor in 2006 with only 1.4% of votes cast for the State Senate going to non major party candidates, the lowest total since 1990 (0.4%). Only nine third party or independent candidates were even on the ballot in 2006, although all of these candidates did perform strongly in their respective districts—each winning at least 5.6% of the vote.

Previous post: Many Familiar Faces To Depart Capitol Hill After '06 Election
Next post: Gubernatorial Approval Ratings Rise Noticeably After Elections

2 Comments


  • Eric-

    What do you think about the three-cycle trend regarding close races (within 5 points) in the Minnesota legisative races?

    2002 - 11 close races (1 won by the DFL)

    2004 - 23 close races (12 won by the DFL)

    2006 - 24 close races (16 won by the DFL)

    Is this a sign that the state is swinging back to its historic DFL strength? Or that the the DFL has a better ground game than the Republicans? President Bush's falling popularity? All three? Some? None?

  • Ryan -

    I think this could be a sign of many things, including the decline of the Independence Party, which is not fielding as many candidates these days. Of the three points you listed above, I would speculate Bush's low popularity was likely the biggest factor in 2006 to motivate voters to vote against the GOP in races in the lower positions on the ballot (like State House / Senate).

  • Leave a comment


    Remains of the Data

    Gender Equality in the US House: A State-by State Quarter-Century Report Card (1989-2014)

    A study of 5,325 congressional elections finds the number of female U.S. Representatives has more than tripled over the last 25 years, but the rate at which women are elected to the chamber still varies greatly between the states.

    Political Crumbs

    Final Four Has Presidential Approval

    By edging Michigan in the final seconds Sunday, the University of Kentucky guaranteed that one school in the Final Four this year would be located in a state that was not carried by President Barack Obama in 2012. (Connecticut, Florida, and Wisconsin had previously earned Final Four slots over the weekend). Across the 76 Final Fours since 1939, an average of 3.1 schools have been located in states won by the president's ticket during the previous election cycle. All four schools have come from states won by the president 29 times, with the most recent being the 2009 Final Four featuring Connecticut, Michigan State, North Carolina, and Villanova. On 30 occasions three Final Four schools have been located in states won by the president, with two schools 11 times and only one school six times (the most recent being 2012 with Kansas, Kentucky, Louisville, and Ohio State). There has never been a Men's NCAA Division I Final Four in which no schools were located in states carried by the president's ticket.


    Three for the Road

    A new Rasmussen Poll shows Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker in a dead heat with likely 2014 Democratic nominee Mary Burke. Walker is seeking to win his third consecutive election after prevailing in 2012's recall contest. Eight of his predecessors accomplished this feat: Republicans Lucius Fairchild (in 1869), Jeremiah Rusk (1886), Robert La Follette (1904), Emanuel Philipp (1918), John Blaine (1924), Walter Kohler (1954), Warren Knowles (1968), and Tommy Thompson (1994). Three others Badger State governors lost on their third campaign: Democrat George Peck (1894), Progressive Philip La Follette (1938), and Republican Julius Heil (1942). One died in office before having the opportunity to win a third contest (GOPer Walter Goodland in 1947) while another resigned beforehand (Democrat Patrick Lucey in 1977 to become Ambassador to Mexico). Overall Wisconsin gubernatorial incumbents have won 35 of 47 general election contests, or 74.5 percent of the time.


    more POLITICAL CRUMBS

    Humphrey School Sites
    CSPG
    Humphrey New Media Hub

    Issues />

<div id=
    Abortion
    Afghanistan
    Budget and taxes
    Campaign finances
    Crime and punishment
    Economy and jobs
    Education
    Energy
    Environment
    Foreign affairs
    Gender
    Health
    Housing
    Ideology
    Immigration
    Iraq
    Media
    Military
    Partisanship
    Race and ethnicity
    Reapportionment
    Redistricting
    Religion
    Sexuality
    Sports
    Terrorism
    Third parties
    Transportation
    Voting