Trouble Out in Nevada

Today's update is on a different note than some of the ones that have come before it. As this project has been progressed, I've been incredibly fortunate to have wonderful data made available by state's elections divisions - data down to every individual precinct, so I can truly plot out every district individually.

Unfortunately, I'm running out of state where that kind of data is readily available. Today's post will serve as an example of that problem - the state of Nevada only releases election results down to county level. In some states, you can get away with that, but not in Nevada, where nearly 75% of the state population is split between two counties.

So, before I get to the districts themselves, I want to put out a few instructions on how to read this data. The statewide average is accurate, and wouldn't change with more detailed information - at 51-49, Nevada is the closest state we have looked at thus far. At the presidential level, the state has been trending Democratic, but Democrats have struggled in state, losing the past two gubernatorial contests by significant margins. The one bright spot has been the legislature, where a Democratic majority is preventing Republican governor Brian Sandoval from implementing the same sort of destructive policies that have been emblematic of east-coast Republican governors.



So, the baseline data about the state as a whole is strong. The Democratic end of the spectrum has been compressed however, as the county level data keeps me from extracting out the districts that are significantly more or less democratic than the county as a whole. The Republican end is less distorted, as the rural districts have been kept largely in tact.

This data is precisely why this project relies on your help. Without more detailed data, we can't do the kind of analysis we love to provide, and the whole community suffers. If you have good data for how these districts overlap with the senate seats OR precinct by precinct data for ANY statewide race in the state, please e-mail me at mbreuer.vt@gmail.com. Furthemore, if you have that kind of data for ANY state, please feel free to reach out to me as well - while there are a few states remaining that I am set with, plenty more need an awful lot of help. And finally, as the 2011 year winds down, I would love any detailed redistricting data that is available, so I can start prepping these indexes for the upcoming elections.

Why the Tea Party Capsized in Delaware

Delaware doesn't get talked about all that often for being a blue state - before the arrival of Christine O'Donnell in 2010, most Democrats had written off the Senate seat to longtime representative Mike Castle. But Castle's popularity in the nation's first state doesn't warrant lopsided ideas about political preferences in Delaware - in fact, of all the states surveyed thus far, Delaware is the most Democratic state yet, giving generic Democrats a 60-40 advantage out of the gate.

The state's long tradition of re-electing incumbents has somewhat masked the fact that currently Democrats enjoy enormous advantages on the ground. With an all blue congressional delegation, and a Democratic trifecta at the state house, there are few states where Democrats have such a wide open path for implementing substantial change. And none of this even mentions the fact that the Vice President calls the state home.



So what kind of results can you get from the kind of legislature we see above? Governor Jack Markell managed to wind up with a $320 million surplus, allowing the state to pay down some of their debt while increasing funding for important programs, enacting civil unions, and legalizing the medicinal use of marijuana. Other than token Republican complaints, this style of smart governing does not seem to be creating enemies for Markell, who will face re-election next fall.



On the Senate side of things, Republicans appear to hold a wider variety of districts, rather than being as marginalized as they are in the house. Keep in mind for those who are not up on the Delaware maps, but the two chamber's districts don't follow each other's boundaries in any meaningful way. I'm not quite sure why a Republican is in such a Democratic district, unless I've either unintentionally ballooned Democratic strength there, or if there's something I simply don't know about. Keep in mind that while House Democrats picked up two seats in Delaware last fall, Democrats lost two from their ranks on the Senate side. Either way, the perspective of a native would be welcome, and I"ll be happy to dive in and try to find the error if that is indeed the case.

All these results ought to make clear the tactical immaturity of the Tea Party Express and their supporters. There was one Republican who could win this Senate seat for them - that's one Republican whose party registration might be the deciding factor in flipping control of the chamber. They managed to take that one politician, beat him mercilessly, and replace him with a woman who couldn't move a single percent past that generic gap during the best election year for Republicans in a long time. That money could have been spent in plenty more useful places: trying to finish off Senator Michael Bennet of Colorado, who only squeezed by District Attorney Ken Buck by a few votes; Senator Harry Reid, who while also facing an incompetent candidate, was in a far more electorally precarious position, or propping up Joe Miller in Alaska, who by all accounts would have been a real bomb-thrower in the Senate. Instead, they attached their carts to the little engine that could not, and find themselves spending to try and take back the Senate again this time around.

The politics of the Tea Party Express, and their various affiliates, ignore reality at the expense of ideology. So long as they never question what kind of candidate a district needs in order to win, they can keep shoving very conservative Republicans down the throats of voters, with the knowledge that their donors will remain happy with the promotion of a single ideology. And if voters adjust their preferences over time to expect the Tea Party platform as that of the Republican party, than they have managed to win the war without winning the battle. It is precisely this reason that when Democrats face of against Tea Party candidates, painting them as extreme should be priority number one. If Democrats win the fights while letting them move the goalposts, we'll allow a highly flawed political strategy to undo our own electoral successes.

In closing, I would also note that thus far, I have not been able to get my hands on clear data about how the new district plans correspond to old voting districts - I'll be happy to provide ranking scores for the new-look legislature as soon as someone can find that data, just let me know at matthew.breuer@yale.edu

Windsor 6-1 (VT) Should Not Be Cause for Concern

For all the horrible choices governors tend to make when it comes to filling vacant Senate seats, they appear to fare much better when it comes to replacing state legislators. Today, Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin named special educator/filmmaker Teo Zagar to finish the term of former Representative Mark Mitchell, who had resigned for health reasons. Zagar is relatively young, and his knowledge of special education issues could be useful when the legislature takes up some systemic education issues in the not-so-distant future.

Any time an established incumbent is replaced with new blood, the other side is bound to be licking their lips, but in this case, Republicans are likely to come up empty. Below are the Vermont District Index scores for the past three cycles - not only does Windsor 6-1 sit at a healthy 57-43 Democratic edge, but it has also been trending away from Republicans by roughly 3% a cycle.



Representative Mark Larson also stepped down from his seat in the legislature to accept an appointment in the administration. Rep. Larson's seat gives Democrats even less to worry about, as you can see below. However, it isn't every day that an open seat shows up in Burlington, and you would have to imagine that a handful of people are going to want to be involved. It also happens to be the only single members district in the city of Burlington, which might avoid some of the ugly complications that have plagued races in that area. Hope for the appointment to be a good one, as this seat is blue enough that the person selected should be safe for a long while.

From the Front Page to the Front Lines: Taking Back New Hampshire

It has been a wild weekend for the Legislative District Index. On Saturday, I wound up on the front page of the Burlington Free Press for my work on this project and the work done so far, with a focus on my Vermont analysis. It was wonderful for the project to get that kind of exposure, and I am incredibly thankful for their coverage. The Hawaii Free Press also ran a small piece looking for hope in my Hawaiian data. This project would not be getting any kind of coverage however if there was not a constant stream of new state, so with that being said, today I am releasing the largest legislature we will cover here: New Hampshire.

For all the attention that midwestern states have received the past few months by the online progressive community, Republicans in New Hampshire have been doing everything possible to regress the state's laws. Led by their tea-flavored house leadership, Republicans have worked on "right to work", voter ID, deadly force, parental notification for abortions, and the New Hampshire Executive Committee recent voted to defund Planned Parenthood. Without Governor John Lynch's veto power, my neighbors would be looking a lot more comfortable below the Mason-Dixon Line rather than sharing the Connecticut River - but that hasn't stopped everything.



First, a note about the data above - because of the size of New Hampshire's house districts (they range from 1 to 13 members), I had to change up the way I present data. Each district is shaded with the color of the party who holds a majority of the seats in that district - in the few instances that the district is split, the district has been colored purple. If this is your first time looking at LDI data, you need to know that the "NH-DI" column is a measurement of how much greater the margin of victory for a Republican or Democrat is expected to be compared to the state on average. The 50-50 data, to the right, is simply the raw unadjusted score. The Senate, ringing in at 24 members, is much more simple to present, I have presented that data in the same manner that I always do.



Despite the small advantage the index finds in favor of Democrats, in many ways the results I've found in New Hampshire are worse for Democrats than they were in states like Wisconsin and Ohio, where Democrats had less of a generic edge. Of the 57 districts that the index indicates Democrats have an advantage, Republicans manage to hold most of the seats in a majority of those districts. While that is a huge advantage, the institutional factors somewhat distort their advantage. When districts are so small, slight changes in preferences can wind up flipping a massive number of seats. This makes the Republican majority look much stronger than it truly is - a rejection of the Republican legislative agenda (of which there is plenty to find objectionable could easily swing the pendulum back the other way, and give Democrats a governing majority.

Consider House Speaker Bill O'Brien (Hillsborough 4) as a case study. Under his guidance, the legislature has been focused on passing as much red meat to satisfy conservatives as possible. While this strategy has rendered him with little ability to effectively govern, he and the rest of the members of his new majority depend on big conservative turnout if they are to have any chance at maintaining their majorities. In his case, he is governing from a district where generic results point to a 50-50 tie, and doing so as if he came from a place far more conservative than any district in New Hampshire. While it is never easy to unseat a legislative leader, O'Brien represents a unique chance to dismantle the Republican caucus from the top.

I noted above that Republicans have been governing as though they represented a different state than their current home. That is not to say, however, that Democratic control should be thought of as a guarantee like in much of New England. Despite my girlfriend's protestations that New Hampshire is nothing more than an upside-down Vermont, Maine is where the real similarities lie. Consider the generic scores for both states - Vermont's Democratic edge is almost twice that of New Hampshire's - instead, New Hampshire Democrats have edged out just ahead of their underperforming eastern neighbors. However, comparing the scores from the three New England states surveyed presents a pretty remarkable similarity. All three are anchored by a Democratic stronghold - Burlington, Portland, and Hanover, nearly 50% of their seats are within 10% of the state average, and then each trails off into some rural territory that is slightly more Republican at the end. The graph below overlays the three scores, and yields what I think is a pretty remarkable result.



Lastly, just a little housekeeping. If you are the RSS feed type, it is easier than ever to subscribe to our feed - just click the RSS logo on the homepage. Also, I'm working on rehauling the website a little bit - please feel free to offer suggestions on things you would like to see, or that you believe need changing. Finally, the LDI is on the road this week - I'm working with the team at Begin Blue, a Democratic startup focused on providing training so that young people can be ready to make a meaningful difference in 2012 campaigns from the moment they are hired - check them out if you get the chance.

We Were Featured in the Burlington Free Press!

I have some really exciting news for all of our readers - in today's Burlington Free Press, there is a front-page feature on the LDI, and my work in getting the project started.

He applied for a research grant from Yale, but said that when he didn’t get it, he faced a choice: “Abandon it or just do it anyway. If I don’t do it now, when in my life would I have the time? I just decided to do it. If I make nothing out of it, at least I completed the project, which to me has value in itself.”

He has completed 15 states.

“It isn’t easy,” he conceded. The biggest challenge hasn’t been the six hours it takes on average to organize a state’s data from six elections to produce his index. Rather, he said, it has been the variable accuracy, detail and availability of state election data.

Breuer identifies himself as a Democratic activist but said he is sharing his index with anyone who is interested. “Everyone, whether a tea party activist or a progressive activist, should have information,” he said.

The article is a great look at what goes in on the backend of the project, and the effort it takes to release new states every week. I'm incredibly excited to share this work with a broader audience, and welcome all of our new readers. Below, I've provided quick links to all of my work on Vermont, but I hope you'll expand out and check some of the other states we have released as well - the data tells such interesting stories in every state we come across. Lastly, I just want to thank all of the people who have been reading from the start - your support means a lot to me.

Bipartisanship in Palin's Backyard and the Politics of Winning Presidential Candidates

On Monday, I released a state that a future presidential contender has been working his way through - the state I'm dropping today was once home to the most infamous vice presidential candidate in US history - Sarah Palin. It should come as no surprise that the state with the smallest legislature in the country - 40 house members, 20 senators - produces some of the most interesting outcomes, including the only chamber governed by a bi-partisan coalition.



One of the things that catches my eyes immediately with Alaska is the relative success of Democrats given the the territory. Despite only nine seats having positive 50/50 numbers for Democrats, they hold sixteen seats. Those sixteen are not spread out everywhere either - they are anchored in the seats they need to win in order to take the chamber.



The Senate side is where things get real interesting. Back in 2006, Democrats and a select few Republicans chose together into what they call the Alaska Senate Majority Bipartisan Working Group. The arrangement splits leadership positions between members of both parties that are part of the group, leaving a small Republican minority that has been aligned with recent governors.

Some parts of the coalition make easy sense - who would control the chamber was highly contested, and so it likely made sense for Republicans in more liberal districts to join forces and end the confusion. But that solution offer no explanation as to why the Senators representing the two most Republican districts - places where a 74 - 26 victory is to be expected - would also jump ship. The source of the division appears to instead result from the serious personal differences that permeate Alaskan Republican politics - the kind of divisions that allowed Sarah Palin to primary an incumbent governor, and find Republicans in her state complaining about her once she was elevated to the national stage.

Alaskan Democrats deserve attention - this isn't fertile ground, yet they hold an effective majority in one chamber, and are barely in the minority in the other. While it would be interesting to hear what they believe they've done well to get them to this point, I think the greatest success the party has had is a strategy that seeks to exploit every Republican misstep. As Sen. Ted Stevens slid deeper and deeper into scandal mode, they had a strong Democrat in Mark Begich waiting in the wings, who has quietly amassed a strong voting record despite his conservative constituency. While Scott McAdams came up shy, they were right in the thick of the campaign once Joe Miller one the primary, and had Sen. Lisa Murkowski not won the anti-Miller vote, I'd be willing to bet that we would have another Democrat in the Senate. If Democrats can continue to hold their own in the legislature, they'll always have the candidates that can pop up the next time Alaska Republicans name someone who is halfway from crazy.

While we are on the topic of crazy, it should be noted that Sarah Palin's election as governor doesn't get nearly as much attention as it should have during the campaign. While everyone bags on Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty's highly unimpressive election margins, at least he can point to Democrats generic average in the state. Sarah only picked up 48% of the vote, edging her opponent by 7 points, in a state where a Republican should be expected to double that. Anyone who had looked at her election for more than a second would know that her charisma had done nothing to win over independents - it exclusively excited conservatives. While conservatives might not have been in love with John McCain, the notion that they were not going to vote for him against the man they depicted as the anti-Christ was absolutely ludicrous - they forfeited electability for a candidate who could not fulfill the office's one real constitutional duty - ability to assume the presidency.

Politics is not as simple as winners and losers - plenty of successful politicians lose races at some point in their career, but their upward trajectory is clear. Obama or Clinton losing their campaigns for the House weren't daggers because they seemed capable of even greater things. That is the real failure of this current Republican field, and its leader, Mitt Romney. Romney has won a single campaign in his life, it was close, and he knew he didn't have a shot at re-election. He's not the kind of candidate whose lost on the way up - he's been running for significant office since 1994. Santorum has the same mark of a loser, as does Gingrich. The one person in the campaign who really has an ascendent political history is Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann - someone who has never lost a campaign, taken on incumbents, and been faced with heavily funded challengers. I think this accounts for her ability to stand behind everything she says, no matter how wrong it is. Politicians like Bachmann never have to second guess themselves, where as an old hand like Romney is constantly thinking of all the ways he has been burned in the past, and adjusting his statements and positions to get himself out of trouble. Her strength may not be a recipe for success at the national level, but in Republican primaries? It is as good as they get.

Fake Dems Fall in Wisconsin

Last night, the six Democrats attempting to win recall elections for the Wisconsin State Senate faced their first electoral challenge, albeit an unusual one. In a classic Walker-inspired maneuver, the Wisconsin GOP (recently headed up by national GOP Chairman Reince Priebus) entered six anti-recall "Democrats" into the races, forcing each challenger to burn money and energy to win a primary. While they certainly would have loved to win, the good luck wasn't with them last night, as the real Democratic candidates won every primary, with all but one race decided by a solid 20% margin.

The only question mark last night was District 10, where Shelley Moore maintained a narrow lead throughout the count, and finished with only 55% of the vote. Moore, a teacher who was laid off as a result of Walker cuts in January, differs from the other Democratic candidates with experience in public office. The choice of Moore as a candidate seemed an inspired one, so long as she could get her name out there. But after last night's performance, I think it is clear that of the six Senate seats, this is one where we might be in a bit of trouble. Moore has to better define herself to the public - she is a perfect symbol of what this entire debate has been about, but if people don't know that, her name recognition is going to sink her on election day.



For reference, above is the district index for the Wisconsin State Senate - recalled Senators are highlighted in Gray. As I said back when this website was first launching, despite the huge populist support in Wisconsin, this was going to be an incredibly tough recall election. Unlike Ohio, Florida, New Jersey, and Michigan - where new Republican governors are watching their popularity tank - Scott Walker still has fervent support, and Republicans are energized to validate his agenda through holding these seats. With the exception of Kapanke's seat, which is a must-win for Democrats, the other five races are an uphill battle - all would be expected to fall Republican if I was just writing a generic election preview. The engagement of the union community since last fall however may understand potential Democratic support in some of these districts, but either way, it is Democrats who have the hill to climb if they are going to win. For Shelley Moore, she is going to need as many people pushing her up that hill as possible.

O'Malley in 2016: Rising From the Sea of Blue

As ridiculous as all of the "Cuomo 2016" buzz I have been reading online appears, one person whose electoral fortunes are far more interesting to me is Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley. He is well networked, good-looking, the current Democratic Governors Association chair, but above all, he has an electoral record that inspires envy.

While his victory over incumbent governor Bob Ehrlich in 2006 was impressive, equally so was his defense of that office in 2010, where he doubled his margin in a re-match - a stark contrast against all the other blue governors who found themselves looking for work in the private sector after last fall.



Part of what enabled O'Malley to stay around is the state that he resides in. Maryland has now leap-frogged into first place on our "most Democratic list", topping Vermont and edging out Hawaii. Not only has Maryland voted strongly Democratic at the presidential level, but O'Malley's victory margins have proved an even stronger indicator of Democratic strength in the state. And with control of legislative seats the span an incredibly diverse range of ideologies within the state, culminating in control of both chambers, it is hard to argue with that kind of success.



The Democratic base in Maryland is anchored by performance in Washington D.C. suburbs and Baltimore, where black voters put up 95-5 margins for Obama in some districts. That huge base of votes has led to a legislature distribution that is bears little resemblance to anything we have seen so far. This is one of the cases where I think a graphic is incredibly helpful in understanding just how different Maryland is.



The graphic above plots out the partisan distribution of seats in every legislature we've tackled thus far. The y-axis uses the LDI numbers, while the x-axis measures from most Democratic to least. Starting at the left, Maryland winds up third highest on the list, but the difference is that they're the only one in that grouping from a very blue state, where the generic advantage has all ready been subtracted. In the case of Nebraska (1st) and Wisconsin (2nd), these were strong Democratic areas made even more so by their existance within a conservative to moderate state. But not Maryland - instead, these seats are just the beginning of a long string of incredible strong territory for the party. In almost every state we have worked on, after the first tenth of the seats, the LDI scores start approaching that middle-mark, where the only advantage in the district is the one that the party enjoys throughout the entire state. But not Maryland - there are districts near the D+40 mark through the first 20% of the state. When things do drop to the state average, they do it fast - there is an incredibly sharp decline within that middle 20% of seats, and then suddenly, the seats become more Republican than we've seen thus far - though that is also a function of the unprecedented advantage the Democratic party enjoys in the state.

I use the normalized LDI data as opposed to the 50/50 numbers because I believe it effectively illustrates one thing - Maryland is by far the most polarized state we have come across. Sure, there are other states with districts far more Democratic than the rest, but that is a natural feature - metro areas are going to produce these sort of bumps. But generically, the middle 50% of districts are within a fairly narrow electoral ban +/- 10% or so. Now, those districts might favor one party of the other, but the central point is that there is a large swath of the electorate that is of a relatively similar composition - the ability to win them over to your side probably translates into electoral success for your party.

In Maryland however, that middle section is totally absent. I believe the kind of data we're seeing here makes a strong case for campaigning to your base rather than the middle in Maryland, as there isn't a homogenous middle-group to court. It immediately brings to mind some of the ridiculous cynical campaign tactics employed by the Ehrlich and Steele campaigns - fake brochures advertising Republicans as Democrats, ground campaigns to designed to cause confusion and uncertainty within the Democratic base, rather than winning over those middle, "independent", Maryland voters. While their tactics were absolutely indefensible, they were operating them along the only path to victory they saw - bolstering turnout among their supporters, and counting on that huge Democratic base to miss out on election day.

Governor O'Malley strikes an impressive figure, and I really look forward to seeing what he brings to the table over the next few years - he could be a real exciting prospect for the party. But people on the sidelines need to be aware of the political realities all of our figures live with - in O'Malley's case, he's managed a consistent, effective, and diverse party within a state that starts out incredibly blue to begin with. He is doing it governing as a Democrat on most issues, unlike Cuomo, and if he keeps it up he could find himself challenging for a bigger stage. But after getting rolled on same-sex marriage this year, and allowing Cuomo to steal the spotlight and adulation of the progressive community, O'Malley is going to have to up his game if he thinks he is ready for primetime.

A Long Way from Home: Ending Republican Radicalization in Minnesota

Hope everyone had a great 4th of July weekend - I know the holiday certainly got me thinking about what has been going on across the country. For all the nonsense Republicans spout off about "following the founders", it seems that a key part of the founding wisdom has been thrown out the door by the GOP across the country. The founders sought legislators who would be a class above the rest - the responsibility they were entrusting them with demanded intelligent minds who could effectively govern. Yet from Washington D.C. to St. Paul, Minnesota, Republicans are completely abdicating that responsibility. Today I'm turning my lens on Minnesota, where Republican-controlled legislature has prioritized banning same-sex marriage and decreasing taxes for millionaires over keeping the state government running.




The Minnesota legislature was victim of the same Republican wave that took chambers in Wisconsin & Ohio, but Governor Mark Dayton provided one of the few bright spots for Democrats last fall, edging out a narrow victory. While the consensus is that Dayton wasn't the most inspiring candidate, the 9% advantage the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party possesses in the state was enough of an edge to take the governor's race, and since taking office, Dayton has shown himself more than capable of performing the job.

Unsurprisingly, it has been the Republican legislature that has provided the headache thus far. Early in the session, Republicans decided that amidst a struggling economy and severe budgetary problems, making a resilient stand against same-sex marriage was the best way the legislature could pass their time. Now, we all could be wrong here - maybe Minnesota Republicans are just hoping the National Organization for Marriage will inject a few million dollars into advertising revenues, but I've got a gut feeling that on this one, they are just wasting everyone's time with a hurtful, useless fight, trying to erect a hurdle that even if created, will only live to be knocked over in a few more years. While the issue hasn't been polled too much, in early June PPP found voters split at 46-47 on the amendment, which is right in line with Nate Silver's projections on the vote

*District 56 is actually represented by a Republican following the 2010 election

But the real issue commanding attention now is the government shutdown. Faced with a budgetary hole, Governor Dayton has been willing to do something that other blue state governors have cowered away from - taxing millionaires. In addition to significant cuts to state spending, Dayton sought to increase taxes on Minnesotans making over a million dollars a year. Naturally, Republicans found this appalling, and rather than tax their rich friends, they would rather delay $700 million in funding to schools, which would put the state more than $1 billion behind their educational funding promises.

So why have Republicans painted themselves into this ridiculous corner? Anytime a longterm minority party sweeps into power, they're going to be a little hungry for red meat, and I think that is the real motive on the same-sex marriage vote. Even if the issue is a losing one, it asserts that so long as Republicans are in control, they will determine what the state is talking about. The budgetary lockup, however, is a bit more complex. On the path to their new majority, the MNGOP made a Norquist-flavored promise to voters about not raising their taxes.

Another compounding factor is the size of the legislature. At 134 seats, the Minnesota House is one of the largest chambers we've looked at so far. It seems on a very basic level, the larger a chamber is, the stronger chance that ideological factions can control the chambers debate. In a smaller legislature, deep red legislators would still exist by the same proportions, but in this configuration there are many more voices in the cloak room to pressure moderates into holding tough. Twenty Republicans sit in House seats where a generic Democrat has an advantage (and roughly the same proportion in the Senate), yet instead of governing like the moderate their district suggests, they're throwing away their political career voting as an ideologue.

If progressives are serious about changing this country's political agenda, this is a key place where we need to start. Republicans built their to power through small, local elections, and eventually those people carried over into higher office. I know there are plenty of groups spending money to try to take over legislative chambers, but a situation like this begs for a group to exclusively target legislators representing moderate districts who vote like hardliners. It feels like since the advent of the Tea Party, progressives have been content to snicker about how unelectable tea party nominees are, but for every Christine O'Donnell, there are countless small-time legislators waiting in the wings. We can't keep their ridiculous politics out of legislatures all together, because there is an ideological support base for them - but we can make sure that if they try to share those views in moderate territory, they run out of oxygen fast, and are forced to choose between ideology and political livelihood.

As always, downloadable data can be found on the mainpage of the site. With midsummer upon us, I'm making my best efforts to gather all the data needed for the remaining states, but that isn't always easy. If anyone has comprehensive data from their state's elections at the precinct level, sending it to matthew.breuer@yale.edu is a huge help, and would be greatly appreciated.