There's an interesting statistical comparison between the 1994 Republican victory and the 2006 Democratic victory at the Columbia stats blog. From the post:
The Democrats' victory in the 2006 election has been compared to the Republicans' in 2004. But the Democrats actually did a lot better in terms of the vote. The Democrats received 56% of the average district vote for the two parties in 2006, whereas the Republicans only averaged 51.6% in 1994.
The post also has some comments, and links to papers, discussing the fact that Democrats got a higher percentage of the vote (nationwide) than seats in the House.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Chris of Mixing Memory points us toward a good comparison of the Democratic victory in 2006 to the Republican victory in 1994. In short, the comparison--located at a Columbia statistics blog, Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science--shows that the Democrats won a greater…
Eric McGhee at The Monkey Cage – a real political scientist who does these sorts of statistical analyses for a living – has done a nice post looking at the 2010 election results, and the effects of the votes for TARP, healthcare, the stimulus, and climate change, on Democrat's electoral prospects.…
I've gotten an absolutely unprecedented number of requests to write about RFK Jr's Rolling Stone article about the 2004 election.
RFK Jr's article tries to argue that the 2004 election was stolen. It does a wretched, sloppy, irresponsible job of making the argument. The shame of it is that I…
Since I posted my statistical analysis showing that voting for a climate bill didn't have a statistically significant effect on Democratic electoral success, two other independent analyses have come to roughly the same conclusion. My model found a statistically insignificant effect from climate…