Tag Archives: President Biden

New Mason-Dixon Poll Shows
Rubio’s Re-Election Potential

By Jim Ellis

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio (R)

March 11, 2021 — Mason-Dixon Polling & Strategy completed a new Florida political poll testing Sen. Marco Rubio’s (R) standing as he begins to construct a re-election campaign for a third term.

Though M-D did not test Sen. Rubio against another potential opponent, either Democratic or Republican, they did ask whether the respondents would vote to re-elect him.

The poll, conducted during the Feb. 24-28 period, asked a sampling universe of 625 Florida registered voters a series of questions about Sen. Rubio and President Joe Biden. The results identified areas of political strength and potential weakness for the Republican senator and contrasted them with those for the new president.

According to the data, Sen. Rubio posts a 47:42 percent positive job approval rating statewide. This compares to President Biden already landing in slight upside-down territory, 47:49 percent.

Asking whether the respondents would vote to re-elect Sen. Rubio, by a margin of 46-40 percent, the sampling group participants said they would. Region, gender, age, ethnicity, and party registration segmented the respondent universe.

Comparing Sen. Rubio and President Biden’s numbers, the results were almost exactly opposite. From geographic regions, Sen. Rubio recorded positive numbers in north and central Florida, the Tampa Bay area, and southwest Florida. He was upside-down in the southeastern part of the state. For President Biden, his disapproval scores outpaced his approval ratings in all but southeast Florida.

In terms of gender, President Biden does better with women than men (49:46 percent, female; 45:53 percent, male), while Sen. Rubio is much more positive with men (51:39 percent, male; 44:45 percent, female). President Biden does well with those 50 years of age and younger (51:44 percent positive), while he falls into negative territory with those aged 50 and older (44:53 percent). Again, Sen. Rubio scores the exact opposite (39:48 percent, <50; 54:37 percent, >50).

In the race segment, it is not surprising that President Biden’s strongest group was blacks, where he scored an 86:9 percent favorability rating. Among whites, the president was upside-down, recording a 38:59 percent negative ratio. Again, unsurprisingly, Senator Rubio performed in the opposite manner. He posted a 51:39 percent approval ratio with whites and a negative 15:69 percent ratio with blacks.

Continue reading →

Biden-Trump Swings in 2020

By Jim Ellis

March 9, 2021 — The Daily Kos Elections website completed their analysis of the congressional districts that changed the most when comparing the 2020 presidential vote performance to that of 2016. The list is divided into the top 25 districts from two categories, those that swung the most to Joe Biden from Hillary Clinton and the seats where Donald Trump improved to the greatest degree when compared to his 2016 showing.

Perhaps the more interesting chart is the Trump improvement calculations, because every one of the top 25 D to R swing districts has a substantial minority population, particularly Hispanic. In fact, in these 25 CDs, the average Hispanic population figure is 59.8 percent, and we see a mean average improvement swing of 12.3 percent for Trump in 2020 with a median of 11.5 percent when compared with his 2016 standing in these districts.

DISTRICT \|	WINNER \|	HOUSE 2020 % \|	PRES. 2020 % \|	HOUSE WINNER \|	HISPANIC %
FL-26	Trump	52-47	52-47	Gimenez	68.6
FL-25	Trump	61-38	Unopposed	Diaz-Balart	75.8
TX-34	Biden	52-47	55-42	Vela	83.7
FL-27	Biden	51-48	51-49	Salazar	70.4
FL-24	Biden	75-24	76-20	Wilson	37.0
TX-28	Biden	52-47	58-39	Cuellar	77.4
NY-15	Biden	86-13	89-11	Torres, R.	66.1
TX-15	Biden	50-49	50-48	Gonzalez	81.2
CA-51	Biden	67-31	69-32	Vargas	70.1
CA-40	Biden	77-21	73-27	Roybal-Allard	87.6
TX-29	Biden	66-33	71-27	Garcia	77.1
NY-7	Biden	82-17	85-14	Velazquez	41.8
CA-44	Biden	78-19	68-32*	Barragan	70.0
CA-29	Biden	74-24	57-43*	Cardenas	68.7
NY-14	Biden	73-26	72-27	Ocasio-Cortez	49.1
NY-13	Biden	88-11	91-8	Espaillat	54.5
CA-19	Biden	70-28	72-28	Lofgren	40.8
FL-23	Biden	58-41	58-42	Wasserman-Schultz	35.5
CA-34	Biden	81-17	53-47*	Gomez, J.	64.3
TX-9	Biden	76-23	75-22	Green, A.	38.5
NY-6	Biden	62-37	68-32	Meng	19.2
CA-35	Biden	65-33	69-31	Torres, N.	70.0
CA-46	Biden	64-33	69-31	Correa	66.4
NJ-8	Biden	73-26	74-25	Sires	54.4
PA-2	Biden	70-29	72-28	Boyle	27.9

* Faced another Democrat in general election
• Avg. Swing 12.3 | Median 11.5 | Average Hispanic percent: 59.8%

Biden Swing

Obviously, President Biden still won all but two of these districts, and the vast majority with overwhelming percentages. Even so, the fact that so many of the Hispanic districts were giving former President Trump a double-digit vote total increase is significant, nonetheless. This could be a positive 2020 presidential campaign after-effect upon which the Republican Party can build.

As you will see similarly in the districts below that swung significantly to Biden, only one of the Trump improvement seats performed differently at the House level when compared to that same electorate’s presidential vote. The one CD of the 25 swings that voted Biden for president and a Republican for House was Florida’s 27th District as Maria Elvira Salazar (R) upset incumbent Rep. Donna Shalala (D-Miami).

Of the districts that showed the most significant gain for Trump we look to South Texas. This contrasts greatly with the vote changes in North Texas. As we can see, ex-President Trump showed significant improvement in all of the Texas-Mexican border districts.

The district with the sharpest Trump swing was Florida’s 26th District, with a 21.9 percent factor. The lowest of the 25 were New Jersey’s 8th and Pennsylvania’s 2nd CDs, both with a 7.0 percentage improvement for the Republican former president.

The chart immediately below shows the top 25 districts that produced the sharpest swing for the race winner, President Biden. Remember, the 2016 Democratic number was that of Hillary Clinton.
Continue reading →

The Impeachment Ten

By Jim Ellis

Rep. Liz Cheney, (R-WY)

March 4, 2021 — Another credible opponent for Wyoming at-large Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wilson/Jackson) came forward earlier this week, which continues the onslaught of political activity against the 10 House Republicans who voted in favor of impeaching then-President Donald Trump for his perceived role in the Jan. 6 Capitol uprising.

Already, Rep. Cheney has four credible opponents. The latest to announce is state Rep. Chuck Gray (R-Casper). He joins state Sen. Anthony Bouchard (R-Laramie), former Pavillion mayor Marissa Joy Selvig, and energy consultant Bryan Miller.

Of the four, Sen. Bouchard and Rep. Gray are the most credible, but the large field assembling against her actually helps Rep. Cheney. Considering that Wyoming is a plurality primary state, a person is nominated by simply obtaining the highest number of votes regardless of percentage attained. Therefore, with Cheney’s opposition split among multiple candidates, the chances of her winning re-nomination with less than a majority becomes a plausible outcome.

The other nine pro-impeachment members are in different situations. From this group, only New York Rep. John Katko (R-Syracuse) has not yet drawn Republican primary opposition.

Three others are from states with primary structures that will help them advance into the general election. Reps. David Valadao (R-CA), Jaime Herrera Beutler (R-WA), and Dan Newhouse (R-WA) will file under a top-two qualifying system.

Rep. Valadao represents a Bakersfield-Fresno district that voted heavily in favor of both President Biden and Hillary Clinton, the latter back in 2016. With all candidates on the same ballot, and not being from a strong Trump district, it is less likely that his vote to impeach the sitting Republican president will greatly affect him.

In the race are former Rep. T.J. Cox (D), the man who lost to Valadao by a percentage point in 2020 after defeating him by an even closer split in 2018, former state Assemblywoman Nicole Parra (D), and ex-Fresno City Councilman and 2020 congressional candidate Chris Mathys (R).

Washington Rep. Beutler, under the same top-two primary system as California’s Valadao, has already drawn three Republican opponents, none of whom have held elective office. We can expect a strong Democrat to emerge here, meaning the eventual preliminary vote division should provide Rep. Beutler with a relatively easy road into the general election.

Continue reading →

More Redistricting Delays – Part I

By Jim Ellis

Feb. 17, 2021 — The Census Bureau announced just before the Presidents’ Day holiday break that there will be yet another long delay in transmitting the census data to the states. Without the new numbers, redistricting becomes unachievable.

The new target date is Sept. 30, postponed from their first postponement date of July 30. At this point, the postponed apportionment release date remains April 30, long after the statutory deadline of Jan. 1. Apportionment is the first critical step in the redistricting process since this informs the states how many congressional seats they will be awarded for the current decade.

The late September target (and there’s no guarantee even this date will be met) will make it difficult for many states to finish their redistricting on time, and could force the process into the courts if state legislatures are unable to convene or meet a legislative calendar in terms of allowing public input. Even now, at least several states will have to enact emergency legislation to change deadlines to avoid violating pre-existing legal redistricting deadlines.

The delays have already changed the political situation in New Jersey and Virginia. With both states having odd-numbered year state legislative elections, the two are always the first to receive their new census data. In both states, legislative elections will now proceed under the 2011 maps with previously enacted amendments. When the lines are eventually completed, it is possible that new elections, possibly for 2022, will be ordered in Virginia. New Jersey voters passed a referendum in November that allows redistricting to occur before the 2023 state legislative elections.

Another problem could be lawsuits filed against the eventual apportionment. Apparently, the principal problem for the delays is exactly which people to count and where they are placed. College students, for example, are typically counted at the university campus on which they reside. Now, however, so many are not attending in-person classes. Therefore, arguments are ongoing as to where this group should be counted, either at school or back at their primary residence.

Additionally, one of President Biden’s new executive orders reversed Trump Administration policies about whether or not to count non-citizens. This change of direction has also created further delays.

Based upon these controversies, and others, it is probable that at least one potential losing state – apparently Alabama is on the cusp of losing a seat but may not depending upon the counting criteria – could sue over the apportionment conclusion meaning even further delays as various potential lawsuits wind their way through the judicial process toward final determination. All of this could conceivably mean redistricting is postponed until the 2024 election cycle.

Continue reading →

More Redistricting Delays

By Jim Ellis

Jan. 29, 2021 — The Census Bureau announced at mid-week yet another postponement in releasing the national apportionment figures, this time until April 30. Reapportionment should have been completed by Dec. 31, but the Bureau previously announced that March 6 would be the new release date due to COVID-related problems. Now, we see further delays.

Reapportionment is the process of creating a new census data algorithm in order to project the number of congressional seats each state will be awarded for the coming decade. It appears that 10-12 seats could change states, with the northeast and Midwest typically losing districts to southern and western states. This time, however, California, for the first time in history, is reversing their trend and appears headed for the losing list.

Once the apportionment numbers are known and the individual data dispersed, the states can begin the redistricting process. The Census Bureau further stated that individual states won’t be receiving their particular data necessary for redistricting until at least July 30. This will clearly set the redistricting cycle back significantly, which could cause major problems for the coming election cycle.

In the past, the Census Bureau has prioritized the states with early primaries to be first to receive their data. This meant that New Jersey and Virginia initially received their new population numbers ahead of the others because they have odd-numbered year state legislative elections. Texas and Illinois were next to receive since they traditionally schedule their regular primaries in March of the election year.

Knowing that the numbers would not be available for them in 2021, New Jersey and Virginia took preparatory action. Garden State officials placed a referendum on the November ballot asking voters for approval to postpone legislative redistricting until 2023. The measure passed.

The Old Dominion leaders decided they would run their 2021 state Delegate elections on the amended 2011 map but could conceivably call elections again for next year once they receive their updated data and can draw district boundaries. Virginia state senators do not stand for election until 2023, so it is unlikely the redistricting delay will affect those campaigns.

The data distribution and processing delay could place most legislatures in a conundrum. Most will be adjourned when the data is received, so special sessions will have to be called in most cases to complete the process prior to the 2022 candidate filing deadlines. This suggests that the states having redistricting commissions might prove to be in better position to complete the task because they won’t have to deal with legislative politics, priorities, or calendars, all of which result in a lengthy process.

Additionally, since almost every map is challenged in court, we could well see a plethora of lawsuits being filed late in the year that keep the redistricting process tied in figurative knots for months.

The states in the most difficult situations will be those gaining and losing congressional representation. Because the number of districts these particular states will have differ from their current allotments, they do not have the option of reverting to the current map once 2021 apportionment becomes final.

In the case of gainers and losers not having completed maps, we may see at-large races for the House. This would be particularly difficult for the losing states because we may see all members in the affected places having to run at-large for seats in their House delegations.

Unofficially, the gaining states appear to be Texas (3 seats), Florida (2), Arizona, Colorado, Montana, North Carolina, and Oregon. The losers may be New York (possibly 2 seats), Alabama, California, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and West Virginia. Reports suggest that the closest developing situation concerns whether Alabama loses a seat or New York drops two.

President Biden’s executive order that mandates non-citizens be counted in the census will certainly affect the final data projections and may be another reason for this latest delay.

The only certainty about 2021 reapportionment and redistricting is the many moving parts in these various states will likely produce surprising political results.