Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


How Big will Barrett Score in Dane and Milwaukee Counties?

Bookmark and Share

Holding 2010 totals constant for the state's other 70 counties, Barrett would need to carry 75.1 percent of the vote in Wisconsin's two most populated counties to beat Walker on Tuesday (up from 64.1 percent in 2010)

tombarrett10.jpgThe Wisconsin Government Accountability Board estimated last week that turnout in the state's gubernatorial recall election Tuesday could hit an astounding 60 to 65 percent, from somewhere between 2.6 and 2.8 million voters.

Turnout in 2010 was only 49.7 percent, or 2.1 million voters.

Underdog Democratic challenger Tom Barrett will obviously have to improve his 2010 numbers across the state's 72 counties in order to score an upset victory over Republican Governor Scott Walker.

No doubt part of his recipe for success is a particularly large turnout in the state's most populated counties, Dane and Milwaukee, where Barrett tallied his second (68.0 percent) and third (61.6 percent) best showings in the state nearly two years ago respectively.

(Barrett also won 77.9 percent of the vote in sparsely populated Menomonee County and 61.6 percent in Ashland County).

Presuming, for the moment, that turnout patterns increase equally across all counties in the state in the recall race, and presuming that the Barrett/Walker county splits hold constant from 2010 in the other 70 counties, how big a share of the vote does Barrett need to snag in Dane and Milwaukee Counties to win the election?

In 2010, more than a quarter of the votes cast in the gubernatorial race came from Dane and Milwaukee Counties: 561,290 out of 2,160,832 total votes, or 26.0 percent.

Barrett carried these two counties by a 64.1 percent to 35.1 percent margin, netting 162,781 votes on Walker.

Walker meanwhile won the rest of the state by 287,419 votes, for a final victory tally of 124,638 votes.

Estimating voter turnout on Tuesday in the middle of the Government Accountability Board's projections at 2.7 million, that would mean 701,612 votes will be cast in Dane and Milwaukee Counties.

Looking at the Barrett-Walker splits from 2010 across the state's 72 counties with the new turnout model, Barrett is operating at a deficit of 153,900 votes that he needs to make up, or 1.409 million to 1.256 million statewide.

To make up those 153,900 votes in Dane and Milwaukee Counties, Barrett would have to increase his vote share from 64.1 to 75.1 percent (526,683 votes out of 701,612 cast), or a 17.2 percent increase, while Walker drops to 24.1 percent (169,316 votes).

Note: The model also presumes independent candidate Hari Trivedi captures approximately the same total as 2010's three third party candidates for governor.

Of course, the truth is, Walker does not need 75.1 percent of the vote in these two counties.

For if he increases his vote tally to even 68 or 69 percent in Dane and Milwaukee Counties he will undoubtedly be increasing his tally from 2010 in many of the state's other 70 counties - whether he won them or not in the last cycle.

Then again, it is also possible that turnout in either or both of these two counties could theoretically be much higher (or lower) than the rest of the state vis-à-vis the 2010 race.

So, while the numbers above do not reflect a predictive model, they nonetheless capture a rough gauge of the baseline from which Barrett will need to improve in order to have any chance at victory Tuesday evening.

The converse is also true: if Governor Walker improves on his 2010 best performances in Washington (75.0 percent) and Waukesha (71.5 percent) Counties, then his chances of building upon his 2010 margin of victory also likely increase.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Previous post: Wisconsin Poised to Extend Competitive Gubernatorial Election Streak
Next post: Scott Walker's Victory by the Numbers

Leave a comment


Remains of the Data

Which States Have the Longest and Shortest Election Day Voting Hours?

Residents in some North Dakota towns have less than half as many hours to cast their ballots as those in New York State.

Political Crumbs

No 100-Year Curse for Roberts

Defeating his Tea Party primary challenger Milton Wolf with just 48.1 percent of the vote, Pat Roberts narrowly escaped becoming the first elected U.S. Senator from Kansas to lose a renomination bid in 100 years. The last - and so far only - elected U.S. Senator to lose a Kansas primary was one-term Republican Joseph Bristow in 1914. Bristow was defeated by former U.S. Senator Charles Curtis who went on to win three terms before becoming Herbert Hoover's running mate in 1928. Only one other U.S. Senator from the Sunflower State has lost a primary since the passage of the 17th Amendment: Sheila Frahm in 1996. Frahm was appointed to fill Bob Dole's seat earlier that year and finished 13.2 points behind Sam Brownback in the three-candidate primary field. Overall, incumbent senators from Kansas have won 29 times against two defeats in the direct vote era. (Curtis also lost a primary in 1912 to Walter Stubbs, one year before the nation moved to direct elections).


The Second Time Around

Former Republican Congressman Bob Beauprez became the seventh major party or second place gubernatorial candidate in Colorado to get a second chance at the office when he narrowly won his party's nomination last month. Two of the previous six candidates were successful. Democrat Alva Adams lost his first gubernatorial bid to Benjamin Eaton in 1884, but was victorious two years later against William Meyer. Democrat Charles Johnson placed third in 1894 behind Republican Albert McIntyre and Populist incumbent Governor David Waite but returned as the Fusion (Democrat/Populist) nominee in 1898 and defeated GOPer Henry Wolcott. Gubernatorial candidates who received a second chance but lost both general elections include Democrat Thomas Patterson (1888, 1914), Progressive Edward Costigan (1912, 1914), Republican Donald Brotzman (1954, 1956), and Republican David Strickland (1978, 1986).


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