| But the devil is in the details. This was a general election, not a mid-term. Carol had to earn the support of a whole lot more voters this time around - 176,461 now compared to 100,691 in '06, to be exact. Moreover, there was a libertarian candidate in the race this cycle who, while not competitive to win, garnered enough of a vote percentage easily to turn this close race into plurality win instead of a majority one if it were truly a toss-up. Yet Congresswoman Shea-Porter actually gained a higher majority this time than the last, albeit narrowly, while Jeb Bradley fell a full three points down from 49% in '06 to 46% two weeks ago.
So, what changed in two years? First off, let's have some fun and take a look at the towns and wards that switched winners from '06 to '08. The mighty Jeb flipped two whole towns - Hart's Location (29 votes cast) and Freedom (less than 900 votes cast).
The Congresswoman, on the other hand, flipped the following 2006 Bradley wins to her corner: Barnstead
Laconia Ward 2
Laconia Ward 3
Laconia Ward 4 (was a tie in 2006)
Manchester Ward 6
Manchester Ward 8
Milton
North Hampton
(over 1000 total votes cast for each) By far the most impressive swings from Jeb to Carol in terms of percentage points were in the voter-rich wards of Laconia and Manchester, as you will see below.
After the flips, I figured the best way to gauge the major shifts in the race would be to calculate all the town and ward percentages for Shea-Porter for both 2006 and 2008, subtract the former from the latter, and then take a look at those areas that were either a three percent or above gain or loss for her. I chose three as the cutoff number, figuring that anything less than that would be harder to argue against statistical noise, even in a well populated town.
First, the towns and wards where Carol Shea-Porter lost 3 or more percentage points from her 2006 totals, plus the added data of the '08 vote percentage for her, and the sum of the total votes cast in 2008. I included that last figure so the percentages would have more context - big swings either way in sparsely populated rural towns, e.g., are likely to be less meaningful as an indicator of anything than the same swings in the larger city wards. Finally, the color of "'08 CSP %" indicates who won that town or ward (blue for Shea-Porter, red for Bradley):
| Town/Ward |
'08 CSP % |
'06-'08 +/-% Diff. |
Total Votes Cast |
|---|
| South Hampton | 50.00% | -12.58% | 502 |
| Hart's Location* | 44.83% | -9.72% | 29 |
| Effingham | 50.00% | -5.14% | 818 |
| Deerfield | 44.37% | -5.13% | 2542 |
| Portsmouth Wd.2 | 73.19% | -4.89% | 502 |
| Eaton | 61.07% | -4.83% | 280 |
| Tamworth | 55.65% | -4.77% | 1567 |
| Northwood | 49.76% | -4.49% | 2339 |
| Albany | 57.82% | -3.63% | 422 |
| Ossipee | 45.04% | -3.41% | 2136 |
| Portsmouth Wd.5 | 69.02% | -3.39% | 2877 |
| Brentwood | 45.71% | -3.03% | 2179 |
* Flipped to Bradley in 2008.
Next, the towns and wards where Carol Shea-Porter exceeded her 2006 totals by three percent or more:
| Town/Ward |
'08 CSP % |
'06-'08 +/-% Diff. |
Total Votes Cast |
|---|
| Laconia Wd.2* | 56.39% | +8.82% | 1213 |
| Manchester Wd.11 | 59.26% | +7.27% | 2776 |
| Somersworth Wd.1 | 61.04% | +6.61% | 1286 |
| Laconia Wd.3* | 52.88% | +6.33% | 1163 |
| Laconia Wd.4* | 55.32% | +5.32% | 1184 |
| Manchester Wd.9 | 56.51% | +4.46% | 3911 |
| Manchester Wd.3 | 62.68% | +4.22% | 2886 |
| Manchester Wd.8* | 50.07% | +4.10% | 4729 |
| Manchester Wd.7 | 56.12% | +3.96% | 3571 |
| Somersworth Wd.5 | 65.01% | +3.85% | 761 |
| Manchester Wd.4 | 57.89% | +3.64% | 3173 |
| Rochester Wd.6 | 60.90% | +3.64% | 1949 |
| Manchester Wd.10 | 54.90% | +3.54% | 3905 |
| Center Harbor | 46.87% | +3.27% | 719 |
| Milton* | 52.45% | +3.13% | 2227 |
* Flipped to Shea-Porter in 2008.
So, what broad observations can we come to based on the differences between the 2006 and 2008 Bradley - Shea-Porter races?
* Jeb's successes were small in number, and unstrategic. Looking at the first chart, you can throw away right off the bat the Portsmouth wards, Eaton, and Albany. They went from big landslides and wins for Carol to slightly less so. Moreover, a fair number of the others are sparsely populated and therefore less critical toward winning elections.
* Bradely, nonetheless, did score some areas that, if I were part of Team CSP, I would want to target for her next race: Effingham, Deerfield, Tamworth, Northwood, Ossipee, and Brentwood.
* The lion's share of the larger gains made by Carol Shea-Porter from 2006 to 2008, whether resulting by design or not, were exactly where you would most want to have them to build a healthy win margin. A look at voter-dense Manchester says it all. Carol gained in eleven out of twelve of Manchester's wards, in seven of them significantly so, and even stole two from Jeb's 2006 totals. Wow!
* I don't know what's in Milton's water but I want some of it.
* The breakout surprise of all this data? Without a doubt - Laconia. Three flipped wards, and major gains made all around. Whoa! Could this have anything to do with Shea-Porter's campaign manager, Pia Carusone, having once been an area organizer in Laconia for the Dean campaign?
* Look at the total votes cast in the second table. Carol won a greater share of support from more densely populated areas of the state. That is an enviable position to be in for someone who was supposed to be in the fight of her life. In fact, I'll go one further. These kinds of ward to ward vote gains in voter rich zones, and in the less blue of the two districts, make me wonder whether Carol might be in one of the strongest structural positions of our incredible field of Democrats to run for even higher office.
Adding: please add what you know on the ground in your community that will help flesh out further how these numbers played out town by town. I also plan at a later date to overlay these numbers with Obama's and Shaheen's to see what that might tell us too. |
