Sunday, November 09, 2014

Dems lost due to Gerrymandering? BS!

The leftists and their media allies are blaming gerrymandering for their 2014 losses in the state house. From the Macomb Daily's Chad Selweski

State House

1,536,711 (51.2%) total votes cast for state House Democratic candidates that resulted in 47 Democratic House seats (43%)

1,464,983 (48.8%) total votes for state House Republican candidates result in 63 Republican House seats (57%)
 That's their talking point. That's pure BS in the lies, damn lies, and statistics area. What Selweski doesn't get is the following.

1. Candidate quality.
2. Geography.
3. Self-packing.
4. APOL standards

1. Candidate quality. Candidates vary from district to district. 

2. Geography. Obviously, votes aren't spread out evenly across the state. State rep districts range from about 77,000-91,000 per district.

3. Self Packing. This is the big one and relates to geography. Most of the Michigan democrat vote in this state is clustered. Detroit. Upper Downriver. Metro Airport area. South Macomb. Southeast Oakland. Pontiac. Ann Arbor/Ypsi. NW Ingham County. Flint and Northern Genesee suburbs. Saginaw. Kalamazoo. Grand Rapids (City). Muskegon. Marquette. Bay City, Battle Creek and Jackson to a lesser extent. That covers most of it. When these democrats pack into an area on their own, funny districts don't need to be drawn to get skewed results.

Here's the straight ticket vote from Oakland County as an example, by precinct. Straight tickets went 50-49% dem in Oakland County this year. The vote is clustered. Pontiac, a little of Auburn Hills, and a small part of Waterford (competitive, more GOP than not overall). Then you have Southern West Bloomfield, Wixom's village area, some apartment areas of Novi, and Eastern Famington Hills in one area. Then there's Southfield roughly east to the county line. This is self packing. All of Pontiac is in a district. Auburn Hills is with Pontiac. That makes perfect sense. Farmington Hills is in a district to its own (with Farmington), as is Southfield. Royal Oak I believe has next door Madison Heights. The SE cluster is all together as well in a neatly shaped district. That's gerrymandering?  Some of those districts haven't changed for years.



4. APOL Standards.
Here's the general guidelines for state legislature districts.  You also have federal issues regarding race, etc that factor into some of the Detroit district shapes.

4.261 Redistricting plan for senate and house of representatives; enactment by legislature; guidelines.
Sec. 1.
By November 1, 2001, and every 10 years thereafter, the legislature shall enact a redistricting plan for the senate and house of representatives. Except as otherwise required by federal law for legislative districts in this state, the redistricting plan shall be enacted using only the following guidelines:
(a) The senate districts shall consist of 38 single-member districts.
(b) The house of representatives districts shall consist of 110 single-member districts.
(c) Senate and house of representatives districts shall be areas of convenient territory contiguous by land. Areas that meet only at the points of adjoining corners are not contiguous.
(d) Senate and house of representatives districts shall have a population not exceeding 105% and not less than 95% of the ideal district size for the senate or the house of representatives unless and until the United States supreme court establishes a different range of allowable population divergence for state legislative districts.
(e) Senate and house of representatives district lines shall preserve county lines with the least cost to the principle of equality of population provided for in subdivision (d).
(f) If it is necessary to break county lines to stay within the range of allowable population divergence provided for in subdivision (d), the fewest whole cities or whole townships necessary shall be shifted. Between 2 cities or townships, both of which will bring the districts into compliance with subdivisions (d) and (h), the city or township with the lesser population shall be shifted.
(g) Within those counties to which there is apportioned more than 1 senate district or house of representatives district, district lines shall be drawn on city and township lines with the least cost to the principle of equality of population between election districts consistent with the maximum preservation of city and township lines and without exceeding the range of allowable divergence provided for in subdivision (d).
(h) If it is necessary to break city or township lines to stay within the range of allowable divergence provided for in subdivision (d), the number of people necessary to achieve population equality shall be shifted between the 2 districts affected by the shift, except that in lieu of absolute equality the lines may be drawn along the closest street or comparable boundary.
(i) Within a city or township to which there is apportioned more than 1 senate district or house of representatives district, district lines shall be drawn to achieve the maximum compactness possible within a population range of 98% to 102% of absolute equality between districts within that city or township.
(j) Compactness shall be determined by circumscribing each district within a circle of minimum radius and measuring the area, not part of the Great Lakes and not part of another state, inside the circle but not inside the district.
(k) If a discontiguous township island exists within an incorporated city or discontiguous portions of townships are split by an incorporated city, the splitting of the township shall not be considered a split if any of the following circumstances exist:
(i) The city must be split to stay within the range of allowable divergence provided for in subdivision (d) and it is practicable to keep the township together within 1 district.
(ii) A township island is contained within a whole city and a split of the city would be required to keep the township intact.
(iii) The discontiguous portion of a township cannot be included in the same district with another portion of the same township without creating a noncontiguous district.
(l) Senate and house districts shall not violate the precedents established in Miller v Johnson, 115 S Ct 2475; 132 L Ed 2d 762 (1995); Bush v Vera, 116 S Ct 1941; 135 L Ed 2d 248 (1996); and, Shaw v Hunt, 116 S Ct 1894; 135 L Ed 2d 207 (1996).

This stops the dems from baconstripping districts from Detroit to Livonia or Livingston County for that matter to get these districts to fit the results they want. This goes back 20 years due to some of the 1970's and 1980's era democrat gerrymanders out there. Some of these aren't "perfect" in their breaks, but county breaks and municipal breaks are fairly uncommon in these maps.

As long as democrats self pack into places like Detroit, there's going to be skewed results between popular vote for an office by party, and the winners by district. There's nothing wrong with that as we have DISTRICT offices as well as state wide offices.

In depth elections report - 2014

It wasn't quite as much of a blowout as some thought. A lot of the education board seats were thought to be won by the GOP until the next morning - when Wayne County came in. Melanie Foster won her seat back on MSU, but that was about it. Jeff Sakwa's loss hurt (and surprised me). He would have done a great job there. I'd like to see the straight ticket level taken out. End it. It helps to an extent in Livingston County, but hurts us all statewide.

Snyder won with 50.92% Schauer got 46.86% 128,130 vote spread. It was 54% most of the night, but Wayne County came in and made it closer than it looked - and made the spread in the end close to a lot of the actual pills. 4%. Bill Schuette and Ruth Johnson both won re-election as well.

Totals  1,605,034 1,476,904 3,151,835 50.92% 46.86% 128,130


  Snyder  Schauer  TOTAL  Snyder Schauer Vote Spread
70 OTTAWA 65,889 21,954 89,543 73.58% 24.52% 43,935
47 LIVINGSTON 47,110 21,484 70,019 67.28% 30.68% 25,626
03 ALLEGAN 23,301 11,187 35,452 65.73% 31.56% 12,114
57 MISSAUKEE 3,209 1,541 4,884 65.70% 31.55% 1,668
08 BARRY 12,821 6,757 20,057 63.92% 33.69% 6,064
76 SANILAC 7,986 4,288 12,642 63.17% 33.92% 3,698
12 BRANCH 7,044 3,905 11,283 62.43% 34.61% 3,139
30 HILLSDALE 8,308 4,598 13,312 62.41% 34.54% 3,710
41 KENT 116,969 67,293 188,381 62.09% 35.72% 49,676
24 EMMET 8,065 4,580 13,023 61.93% 35.17% 3,485
62 NEWAYGO 8,980 5,031 14,528 61.81% 34.63% 3,949
05 ANTRIM 5,880 3,406 9,517 61.78% 35.79% 2,474
75 ST. JOSEPH 9,127 5,310 14,909 61.22% 35.62% 3,817
56 MIDLAND 17,699 10,607 29,056 60.91% 36.51% 7,092
32 HURON 7,141 4,378 11,831 60.36% 37.00% 2,763
64 OCEANA 4,999 3,045 8,284 60.35% 36.76% 1,954
69 OTSEGO 4,777 2,972 7,969 59.94% 37.29% 1,805
67 OSCEOLA 4,337 2,642 7,238 59.92% 36.50% 1,695
15 CHARLEVOIX 6,255 3,998 10,549 59.29% 37.90% 2,257
22 DICKINSON 5,053 3,376 8,603 58.74% 39.24% 1,677
83 WEXFORD 5,868 3,835 10,041 58.44% 38.19% 2,033
28 GD. TRAVERSE 19,461 12,992 33,366 58.33% 38.94% 6,469
34 IONIA 10,422 7,091 18,005 57.88% 39.38% 3,331
40 KALKASKA 3,330 2,202 5,779 57.62% 38.10% 1,128
59 MONTCALM 9,866 6,686 17,166 57.47% 38.95% 3,180
44 LAPEER 17,023 11,613 29,625 57.46% 39.20% 5,410
42 KEWEENAW 639 444 1,114 57.36% 39.86% 195
01 ALCONA 2,529 1,806 4,466 56.63% 40.44% 723
45 LEELANAU 6,172 4,600 11,006 56.08% 41.80% 1,572
14 CASS 7,520 5,425 13,419 56.04% 40.43% 2,095
55 MENOMINEE 3,634 2,728 6,498 55.92% 41.98% 906
20 CRAWFORD 2,656 1,962 4,758 55.82% 41.24% 694
11 BERRIEN 24,173 18,042 43,479 55.60% 41.50% 6,131
63 OAKLAND 247,863 191,341 446,616 55.50% 42.84% 56,522
54 MECOSTA 6,491 4,854 11,697 55.49% 41.50% 1,637
38 JACKSON 24,881 18,995 44,854 55.47% 42.35% 5,886
74 ST. CLAIR 28,399 21,306 51,232 55.43% 41.59% 7,093
80 VAN BUREN 12,310 9,250 22,228 55.38% 41.61% 3,060
16 CHEBOYGAN 5,288 4,007 9,582 55.19% 41.82% 1,281
79 TUSCOLA 9,412 7,188 17,142 54.91% 41.93% 2,224
19 CLINTON 15,939 12,722 29,109 54.76% 43.70% 3,217
48 LUCE 1,046 810 1,913 54.68% 42.34% 236
53 MASON 5,455 4,330 10,063 54.21% 43.03% 1,125
60 MONTMORENCY 1,912 1,497 3,540 54.01% 42.29% 415
68 OSCODA 1,498 1,158 2,778 53.92% 41.68% 340
35 IOSCO 5,089 4,054 9,442 53.90% 42.94% 1,035
31 HOUGHTON 5,581 4,449 10,358 53.88% 42.95% 1,132
50 MACOMB 142,830 116,644 265,090 53.88% 44.00% 26,186
13 CALHOUN 20,425 16,704 37,962 53.80% 44.00% 3,721
46 LENAWEE 15,574 12,664 29,071 53.57% 43.56% 2,910
36 IRON 2,262 1,839 4,223 53.56% 43.55% 423
49 MACKINAC 2,231 1,870 4,190 53.25% 44.63% 361
26 GLADWIN 4,579 3,735 8,606 53.21% 43.40% 844
10 BENZIE 3,823 3,183 7,227 52.90% 44.04% 640
72 ROSCOMMON 4,861 4,070 9,204 52.81% 44.22% 791
21 DELTA 7,070 6,051 13,414 52.71% 45.11% 1,019
77 SCHOOLCRAFT 1,507 1,321 2,889 52.16% 45.73% 186
71 PRESQUE ISLE 2,743 2,365 5,264 52.11% 44.93% 378
65 OGEMAW 3,621 3,095 6,982 51.86% 44.33% 526
29 GRATIOT 5,667 4,983 10,933 51.83% 45.58% 684
58 MONROE 24,275 21,447 47,003 51.65% 45.63% 2,828
66 ONTONAGON 1,295 1,156 2,535 51.08% 45.60% 139
39 KALAMAZOO 41,407 37,523 81,156 51.02% 46.24% 3,884
78 SHIAWASSEE 12,269 11,252 24,289 50.51% 46.33% 1,017
17 CHIPPEWA 5,590 5,166 11,077 50.46% 46.64% 424
18 CLARE 4,660 4,210 9,249 50.38% 45.52% 450
06 ARENAC 2,708 2,459 5,377 50.36% 45.73% 249
04 ALPENA 4,810 4,546 9,620 50.00% 47.26% 264
43 LAKE 1,745 1,656 3,520 49.57% 47.05% 89
23 EATON 19,989 20,049 40,785 49.01% 49.16% -60
37 ISABELLA 8,031 7,871 16,433 48.87% 47.90% 160
07 BARAGA 1,180 1,249 2,487 47.45% 50.22% -69
51 MANISTEE 4,360 4,650 9,252 47.12% 50.26% -290
09 BAY 17,471 18,902 37,347 46.78% 50.61% -1,431
61 MUSKEGON 22,879 24,749 49,070 46.63% 50.44% -1,870
02 ALGER 1,520 1,643 3,280 46.34% 50.09% -123
27 GOGEBIC 2,306 2,628 5,048 45.68% 52.06% -322
73 SAGINAW 30,264 35,370 67,142 45.07% 52.68% -5,106
81 WASHTENAW 50,393 68,260 120,895 41.68% 56.46% -17,867
52 MARQUETTE 9,265 12,466 22,263 41.62% 55.99% -3,201
33 INGHAM 35,445 50,131 87,202 40.65% 57.49% -14,686
25 GENESEE 48,894 79,573 131,602 37.15% 60.46% -30,679
82 WAYNE 177,678 323,685 509,792 34.85% 63.49% -146,007


Closer to home, we had some blowout wins here, despite spirited challenged by the dems.

Our new Congressman is Mike Bishop.

Congress  Bishop Schertzing Total GOP Dem
33 INGHAM 29,314 52,374 84,273 34.78% 62.15%
47 LIVINGSTON 43,330 21,623 67,544 64.15% 32.01%
63 OAKLAND 59,801 27,194 89,902 66.52% 30.25%
Total 132,445 101,191 241,719 54.79% 41.86%

Bishop was very strong in his home area and did well in Livingston County where he worked quite hard. I didn't see or hear much of Schertzing working outside of simple "Generic D" push in Livingston or Oakland. I did hear he worked hard in his home county and it showed. Bishop's campaign folks wanted Mike Rogers numbers out of Livingston County, but that's tough to do. He did get about the same Rogers got in 2000 however. Putting it into that perspective, means there's plenty of room for growth. I like Mike going back to his 2010 Attorney General campaign and think he'll do a good job for us.

State Senate and State Rep
Joe Hune was easily re-elected despite an $80,000 challenge and high profile (locally) mudslinging from Shari Pollesch, assisted by LC Dems. He won all municipalities except two in Washtenaw County - City of Chelsea and Scio Township (and the one vote in the City of Ann Arbor). Shari Pollesch's campaign is crowing about winning the Washtenaw County portion of the district, but that's due to Scio Township's votes. Scio Township is Ann Arbor west and has been democrat for about 20 years. It's also the largest part of the Washtenaw portion of the district.

Joe Hune got 64% in Livingston County, 48% in Washtenaw County and 59% overall - which was better than Romney. In Livingston County, he got 43591 votes to Pollesch's 22408 votes.

Dr Henry Vaupel easily won his open seat against Jordan Genso. Vaupel and Hune worked together on the campaign quite often, especially in the primary (for Vaupel). Vaupel got 20,995 votes and 69% in his district to Genso's 8086 votes. Genso didn't run a very active campaign from what I've seen, and didn't nearly have the campaign money that Pollesch had. Lana Theis easily won his open seat against Timothy Johnson. She got 23477 votes and 65%  to Johnson's 12544 votes. Johnson ran a more active campaign than Genso in regards to signs and money, but Lana outworked him quite heavily and hit thousands of doors. It showed in the results.

Going back to Joe's senate election. Pollesch worked hard. She claimed to hit 19,000 doors. I have a hard time believing that number (due to bragging about 100 doors in at least 1/2 of a week), but I could be wrong. She raised money, and got a bunch of signs out (although signs don't vote). She didn't outwork Joe (nobody does), but she ran a tough campaign. How much did that move the needle? Not much. You have to know your district and your county. To put it bluntly - if the product sucks, the people aren't going to buy it.

Pollesch's 22408 votes in Livingston County are 1778 votes higher than the combined total of Johnson and Genso. Pollesch campaign spent $72000+ more than the combined total of Johnson and Genso. Hune's 43591 votes in Livingston County are 881 votes less than the combined total of Vaupel and Theis, two strong campaigners. In other words, it barely moved the needle.

Why? The product sucked. Bigtime. After that slime campaign, you can better believe that I'm gloating. From an ideology standpoint - Higher taxes. Higher spending. F rating from NRA. Massive regulations in the name of global warming. Tax funded abortions. That isn't in the mainstream of this state, nor is it the mainstream of center-right Livingston County. From a non-ideology standpoint, negative bashfests and slime campaigns are almost never rewarded in this county. That stuff works in Eastern/Central Oakland and Macomb, not here. There is a very strong "Don't crap where you live." mentality in these parts. We have a good community, worked hard to keep it that way, and don't want this crap to contaminate it. The people saw through that as I expected, and the results are what I expected.

On the commissioners level, no democrats broke 40%. Katakowski came close in the 8th district (Mostly Hamburg). He ran the strongest campaign and from what I've heard didn't really go negative. Mike Tipton barely cracked 35% despite the most active campaign. He has some of the same problems that Shari Pollesch had on the trail and got similar results (Pollesch got slightly under 33% in the county).

I'll have more on a macro level regarding the state later. On the county level, we did well, especially considering three open seats. It starts with candidates. Mike Bishop, Lana Theis, and Doc Vaupel are good recruits for the open seats. Bill Schuette, Ruth Johnson, Joe Hune and the Commissioners are good incumbents. Rick Snyder came through in the end to get enough coattails - at least outstate, to get a few of our folks over the line.

On to the presidential cycle. .

Wednesday, November 05, 2014

GOP wins. Union leadership lost a ton of money

After this election cycle, I'm spiking the football Gronk style, and I'm not even a New England Patriots fan.

It wasn't perfect. I wish Terri Lynn Land, Dennis Brewer, Judge James Robert Redford, and Jeff Sakwa (and rest of education boards) all won, but the results were overall good.

Mark Schauer can go back to getting pepper sprayed at Right to Work Protests.

Shari Pollesch's slime campaign against Joe Hune and his family got the results that were warranted. 80K was wasted and it wasn't all that much closer than Chuck Fellows campaign in the 2010 wave year. That's worth the spiked football alone.

Doc Vaupel and Lana Theis won their open seats for State Rep.

All nine County Commissioners were re-elected. Don Parker got 60% against Mike Tipton, the loudest critic of the board. That's worth a spiked football on its own as well.

Tom Barrett won a tough state rep district out in Eaton County (which Mark Schauer won)

This is despite the union leadership spending a ton of money on political hit pieces, "member communications" that were expensive hit piece mailings, and annoying phone calls (both sides guilty of those damn calls). That deserves a spiked football as well. 

I'll get to the details later with a full report.