Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


Look to Senate Race, Not Walker Recall for Romney vs Obama Tilt in Wisconsin

Bookmark and Share

The Badger State has voted for the same party in presidential and U.S. Senate races in 14 of 16 cycles over the last century

tommythompson10.jpgA recent Smart Politics report found Wisconsin to be one of the Top 3 battleground states in presidential politics over the last 100 years, and the battleground state of the last 40 years.

For while the Badger State has trended Democratic in recent presidential cycles, the vast majority of contests have been very competitively decided.

The state is currently immersed in the recall election of Republican Governor Scott Walker, but the outcome of that race on June 5th will likely be less of a barometer of what will happen at the top of the ticket in the presidential race this November than the trajectory of the state's U.S. Senate race.

A Smart Politics review of Wisconsin election data finds that Badger State residents have voted for the same political party in presidential and U.S. Senate races in 14 of 16 cycles since the introduction of direct vote contests for senator nearly 100 years ago.

Of course, it is usually the top of the ticket contest that influences races races down the ballot, not vice versa, but with Wisconsin's history of extremely competitive presidential elections, the Romney vs. Obama battle may go down to the wire in a toss-up. (Obama has enjoyed a single-digit lead in most matchup polls over the last couple months).

As such, looking at the state's 2012 U.S. Senate race to replace the retiring Herb Kohl may just give an indication of where the presidential race will ultimately end up in Wisconsin.

The candidates on the Republican side will not be solidified until after a contested primary in mid-August, although former four-term GOP governor Tommy Thompson is the current favorite to take on Democratic U.S. Representative Tammy Baldwin.

Thompson has been leading Baldwin in the polls for most of the year.

If Thompson (or whoever emerges as the Republican nominee) should win the seat in November and the state votes once again to reelect President Obama, it would be just the third time Wisconsinites would split their ticket for these two federal offices over the past century.

The first time voters split their vote for president and senator was in the Election of 1940, when Wisconsin helped send Franklin Roosevelt back to the White House for a third term with a narrow 1.8-point win over Republican Wendell Willkie.

Down the ballot, Robert La Follette, Jr. won his second term in the U.S. Senate as a Progressive with a 3.9 point victory over Republican Fred Clausen with Democrat James Finnegan barely reaching double-digits.

Twenty-eight years later, the state was divided for the second and last time at the ballot box for these two federal races.

A plurality of Wisconsin voters helped send Richard Nixon to the White House that fall, by 3.6 points over Democrat Hubert Humphrey.

Meanwhile, voters reelected Democrat Gaylord Nelson to a second term in the U.S. Senate by 23.4 points over Republican Jerris Leonard.

During the next six cycles the two offices appeared on the ballot in the state, Wisconsinites voted Democratic for both offices five times (1976, 1988, 1992, 2000, and 2004) and Republican for both offices once (in 1980, with Ronald Reagan and Robert Kasten in two tight races).

The state also voted Republican for both offices in 1916, 1920, 1928, 1944, 1952, and 1956 and Democratic for both in 1932 and 1964.

So what can we learn from the June 5th gubernatorial recall election as it pertains to Obama's reelection chances in 5+ months?

While the Badger State has not had a race for governor in a presidential cycle since 1964, prior to that period the state frequently split its vote for these two races at the top of the ballot during the period under analysis.

During the 14 election cycles from 1912 to 1964, Wisconsinites voted for the same political party in the presidential and gubernatorial races seven times (1916, 1920, 1928, 1932, 1944, 1952, 1956) and split their ticket another seven times (1912, 1924, 1936, 1940, 1948, 1960, 1964).

As for any potential advantage Mitt Romney might have in picking off this battleground state with Scott Walker in office at the time of the general election, a previous Smart Politics report demonstrated there is no correlation between a state's vote for president and the party of the sitting governor:

A Smart Politics analysis of 550 statewide presidential election results dating back to 1968 finds there to be no correlation between states won by Democratic and Republican presidential nominees and the partisan control of the governor's mansion.

Democratic presidential candidates have won virtually an identical percentage of states in which they have held control of the governor's mansion (33.8 percent) as those in which Republicans had control (32.3 percent).

Likewise, success for Republican nominees has been essentially the same in states with GOP governors (67.3 percent) as those with Democratic governors (65.2 percent).

The same also holds true for Wisconsin in particular.

The state has actually voted into office more presidents from the opposing party of the sitting governor (six) than the same party (five) since 1968.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Previous post: Romney's Numbers Underwhelm in Final Primary Contests
Next post: Fun Facts in Texas U.S. Senate Primary Election History

Leave a comment


Remains of the Data

Is There a Presidential Drag On Gubernatorial Elections?

Only five of the 20 presidents to serve since 1900 have seen their party win a majority of gubernatorial elections during their administrations, and only one since JFK.

Political Crumbs

Strike Three for Miller-Meeks

Iowa Republicans had a banner day on November 4th, picking up both a U.S. Senate seat and one U.S. House seat, but Mariannette Miller-Meeks' defeat in her third attempt to oust Democrat Dave Loebsack in the 2nd CD means the GOP will not have a monopoly on the state's congressional delegation in the 114th Congress. The loss by Miller-Meeks (following up her defeats in 2008 and 2010) means major party nominees who lost their first two Iowa U.S. House races are now 0 for 10 the third time around in Iowa history. Miller-Meeks joins Democrat William Leffingwell (1858, 1868, 1870), Democrat Anthony Van Wagenen (1894, 1912 (special), 1912), Democrat James Murtagh (1906, 1914, 1916), Democrat Clair Williams (1944, 1946, 1952), Democrat Steven Carter (1948, 1950, 1956), Republican Don Mahon (1966, 1968, 1970), Republican Tom Riley (1968, 1974, 1976), Democrat Eric Tabor (1986, 1988, 1990), and Democrat Bill Gluba (1982, 1988, 2004) on the Hawkeye State's Three Strikes list.


Larry Pressler Wins the Silver

Larry Pressler may have fallen short in his long-shot, underfunded, and understaffed bid to return to the nation's upper legislative chamber, but he did end up notching the best showing for a non-major party South Dakota U.S. Senate candidate in more than 90 years. Pressler won 17.1 percent of the vote which is the best showing for an independent or third party U.S. Senate candidate in the state since 1920 when non-partisan candidate Tom Ayres won 24.1 percent in a race won by Republican Peter Norbeck. Overall, Pressler's 17.1 percent is good for the second best mark for a non-major party candidate across the 35 U.S. Senate contests in South Dakota history. Independent and third party candidates have appeared on the South Dakota U.S. Senate ballot just 25 times over the last century and only three have reached double digits: Pressler in 2014 and Ayres in 1920 and 1924 (12.1 percent). Pressler's defeat means he won't become the oldest candidate elected to the chamber in South Dakota history nor notch the record for the longest gap in service in the direct election era.


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