Election Night Surprise: Why Minnesota Will Turn Red on November 6

Battleground Watch ^ | October 19, 2012 | Keith Backer

[2ndDivisionVet]

Minnesota has crept into the news cycle recently with senior campaign surrogates stumping in the state and campaign dollars flowing to a state once thought out of reach for Republicans this cycle. I received a lot of push-back over my conclusion regarding Minnesota’s competitiveness based on Rochester, Minnesota being a top 10 ad market this week. Upon closer inspection, however, the evidence keeps piling up that the Land of 10,000 Lakes should be on everyone’s radar for an election night surprise.

The latest is a poll released yesterday from SurveyUSA gives President Obama a 10-point lead over Mitt Romney, 50 to 40. Romney leads by 3-points among Independents 45 to 42 with 4% are voting 3rd party and 6% are Undecided. Shouldn’t a 10-point lead definitely mean it is not a Battleground? If you believe that, you must be new to this blog. A 10-point lead would largely be safe at this juncture if the poll were an honest representation of Minnesota today (and remember other polls have it as close as 4). But this SurveyUSA poll is far from a fair representation of the Minnesota electorate. Before I get too deep into this flawed poll I give SurveyUSA credit for making all of the data available unlike too many other polling firms. This allows critics to make their own judgements on what is lying beneath the top-line numbers and justify their criticism with facts and figures and not just flippant calls of bias.

Party ID

The biggest issue with the poll is the Party ID. I understand polling firm do not weight their polls by party ID, but when they re-weight their polls based on age, race, etc and the outcome of respondents is a party ID disparity that defies all logic and reason, that means something is deeply wrong with the sample group they gleaned their answers from. This poll specifically has a disgraceful disparity between Democrats and Republicans surveyed. The Party ID is D +10 (Dem 37, Rep 27, Ind 30). This compares to 2008 of D +4 (Dem 40, Rep 36, Ind 25) and 2004 of D + 3 (Dem 38, Rep 35, Ind 27). First and foremost we see a Democrat advantage in the sampling 2.5x greater than that the 2008 peak of hopey-changey. This is ludicrous for many of the enthusiasm reasons often cited: •Democrat enthusiasm down 10% from 4 years ago while enthusiasm among Republicans is up 10% over the same period •This is translating into early vote trend in 2012 strongly favoring Republicans which is offsetting a huge Obama 2008 advantage •Enthusiasm for Obama among seniors, youth and hispanics is meaningfully lower than 2008 •Enthusiasm for Obama is down among African-Americans •Enthusiasm for Obama is down among Jewish voters •Republicans have dramatically cut into and at times surpassed Democrats 2008 voter registration advantage

Basically, for the above reasons there is a dramatically increased probability Republicans will vote with greater propensity in 2012 than they did in 2008 while the inverse is true for Democrats. But that is only one of the reasons this poll and party ID are ludicrous.

The Changing Minnesota

Minnesota is no ordinary state politically. The most important thing to know about Minnesota is the state is rapidly changing in favor of Republicans and has been for years. Sean Trende of Real Clear Politics did the seminal work in this regard. His state-by-state analysis of voting trends shows that over the last 8 elections the performance of Republican candidates in Minnesota has steadily gotten closer to the candidate’s national performance. That is, when a Republican Presidential candidate got 50.1% of the vote in 1980, you could expect them to get 43% in Minnesota. In 2008, the under-performance versus the national shrunk to 1%, meaning had John McCain received 51% of the national vote, he could have expected to get 50% of the vote in Minnesota.

(GRAPH AT LINK)

If we apply only the most superficial analysis of Minnesota today and we see Mitt Romney leading in the national average by only a few points, let alone as much as 7-points, it would seem more than likely he would carry Minnesota based solely that lead and the 30-year trend in Republicans favor shown above.

Party ID Recent History

This brings me back to the Party ID issue. In 2008 Minnesota’s political affiliation change was unlike most of America. Between 2004 and 2008 we saw Battleground States experience wide swings in their party ID as citizens bought into the magnetic story of Barack Obama. States like Ohio saw its Party ID swing 13-points in favor of Democrats; Nevada swung 12-points in favor of Democrats; North Carolina swung 12-points in favor of Democrats; Virginia swung 10-points; New Hampshire 9-points; and on and on all towards the Democrats. Minnesota’s party affiliation, however, only swung 1-point towards the Democrats. This was smaller than every party affiliation move among even the most remote of contested state. This lack of change during the Democrat tidal wave of 2008 is a major component of hidden Republican strength demonstrated in the chart above. Minnesota is,and has been, a state trending steadily Republican even in the face of the incredible Democrat wave seen in 2008.

Republicans have surged in local politics

But more than just a macro statistical argument, Republicans have made dramatic strides at the ballot box. Over the last four years Minnesota caught the 2010 midterm wave for the GOP and flipped both houses of its state legislature, and in dramatic fashion: •Republicans gained a State Senate majority of 55/45 which was a dramatic shift from the 31/69 disparity previously (based on percentages not actual seats) •Republicans also gained a State House e majority of 54/46 which was also a dramatic shift from the 35/65 split previously (based on percentages not actual seats) •At the Federal level, Republicans picked up one seat balancing out the Congressional delegation at 4 for each party

Despite all of these substantial moves in favor of the Republican party, polls like SurveyUSA’s D +10 turnout still show up and is the basis for people to argue Minnesota is out of reach this election.

But what if Minnesota is not D +10 or anywhere near that?

Below I breakdown the exact same SurveyUSA poll. First, as they have it with D +10. Second with the 2008 party ID of D +4 and then prospectively with an even party breakdown for all of the reasons outlined above. I use with the same number of Independents for the 2012 estimate that SurveyUSA found in their poll although I suspect Independents will be even higher on election day. Pollsters, campaigns, or individuals can make their own assumptions, these are just mine.

This following needs to be clear up front: •Party ID does not equal 100% in the SurveyUSA poll so I make Other 6%. Also, the “Other” category in the survey was unusually high at 6% but instead of eliminating that I shaved 3% from the two major parties for 2008 and 2012 est. Also the Other voters overwhelmingly supported 3rd party candidates in the poll so their impact on this analysis is small. •The vote total also does not equal 100% because of Undecideds which are also 6%. Due to space constraints I put Undecideds and Other on the same line which can look, when reading from left-to-right, like there are 106% of voters. But this is not Cook County, it is just labeled that way so you know where the numbers come from. “Other” turns out to be +1% for each candidate and Undecideds are expected to break at least 2/3 for the challenger which is +2 for Obama and +4 for Romney. Note: adding in Undecideds to the SurveyUSA poll gives the candidates final totals of Obama 52 and Romney 44.

Calculating the vote

(CHART AT LINK)

Our three scenarios produce the following results: •Party ID D +10: Obama wins by 8 •Party ID D +4: Obama wins by 3 •Party ID even: Romney wins by 1

The point of running these scenarios is the initial read of an Obama 10-point lead based on a D +10 party affiliation is folly. With Undecideds factored in that lead drop to 8 even in this unrealistic scenario. If there is no party affiliation shift from 2008 despite the overwhelming evidence provided, Romney is only down 2.8 points with an unconsolidated base (think a visit might help?) as well as conservative estimates on Undecideds. If, however, Republicans have burnished their brand and the enthusiasm issue is as meaningful as polling would indicate, the decades-long steady rise in Republican performance in Minnesota should deliver a victory for Romney on November 6. Enhancing every one of these scenarios is the prospect of a decided national popular vote victory for Romney evidenced by the national tracking polls from Gallup and Rasmussen Reports. If that happens, deep purple Minnesota will turn red on election night.

[annieokie]

Whatever you do, do not make your "lib" father mad. lol

It is going to be very difficult for him to do this and he needs lots of comfort.

[OneVike]

I grew up in Duluth, left at 16 when I joined the carnival. I have only been back a few times since. It was already a liberal bastion back in the early 1970's when I left. I always refereed to it as SF of the North due to its liberal commie policies.

It's in the 8th Congressional District that had been in Democrat hands since 1947. I never thought I would see the day that Congressman Jim Oberstar would lose his seat to a Republican. I was convinced he would die in office, but then 2010 happened and Chip Cravaack defeated him.

That Congressional seat was considered the most secure Democrat seat in the nation. I wrote about it being a sign of the Democrats demise back in 2010.

Now I am of the opinion that Minnesota could very well go Republican this time around for Romney. If it does, then I would also bet that California is a lot closer then we know. Not that Romney will win Ca, but many Americans now know who Obama and the democrats are, and they don't like what they see.

[Road Glide]

“Election Night Surprise: Why Minnesota Will Turn Red on November 6...”

Heh.

I’ll believe it when I see it.

[luvie]

Going red would be wonderful in November because we have a legislature to hold, and Voter ID and the marriage amendment to get passed.

From your fingers to God's ears, Sir! :)

[freemama]

Not figured into the analysis is the marriage referendums effect on turn out. I think conservatives who heretofore didn’t vote in MN because it just always goes dem will turn out this time to vote on that. It could be the tipping point.

[Henry Hnyellar]

Too bad it’s not 1972.

[Fred Hayek]

PA will go red before MN. I would like to see MN go red, however. It would be interesting to see heads explode in Minneapolis.

[CaspersGh0sts]

I could see it. It’s a very white state with a higher than average rate of religious observance. There’s a long history of liberalism, particularly in the Twin Cities area. Lots of old unions are falling by the wayside, but you still have cities like Duluth that are chock full of blue collar unions guys.

I honestly see MN and WI increasingly breaking the GOP way. It’s long past due.

[Fred Hayek]

It was also surprising to see Norm Coleman beat Walter Mondale in 2002, but I think that was the reaction to the Wellstone Funerally.

[Two Kids' Dad]

Try this with your dad:

“Dad, you know 0bama’s going to win Minnesota, so you and your buddies should vote your wallets and go for Romney. The result will be the same but you’ll still be able to feel warm inside for doing right by your financial situation.”

If a few thousand people convinced their family members to do that and they each convinced one or two others, election day could show some much better results. Barring that, you could suggest that he simply leave the presidential box unchecked as a protest vote against the debt and deficit situation.

[SeekAndFind]

With President Obama in the SurveyUSA Party ID section this breaks down as (27 x .06) + (37 x .93) + (30 x .42) + (6 x .17) + (6 x .33) = 51.7 or 52

Scenario 1: Survey USA Party ID	27	37	30	6	[6]	Vote Total
	Republicans %	Democrats %	Independents %	Other %	Undecided %
Obama	6	93	42	17	33	51.7
Romney	89	4	45	17	66	44.0
Scenario 2: 2008 Party ID	33	37	25	6	[6]
	Republicans %	Democrats %	Independents %	Other %	Undecided %
Obama	6	93	42	17	33	49.9
Romney	89	4	45	17	66	47.1
Scenario 3: 2012 Party ID est.	32	32	30	6	[6]
	Republicans %	Democrats %	Independents %	Other %	Undecided %
Obama	6	93	42	17	33	47.3
Romney	89	4	45	17	66	48.2

Our three scenarios produce the following results:

• Party ID D +10: Obama wins by 8
• Party ID D +4: Obama wins by 3
• Party ID even: Romney wins by 1

[lquist1]

I live here in the Twin Cities and I’ve been seeing Obama ads for a couple months now. Not a whole bunch of them, but they do advertise here somewhat regularly. Haven’t seen any Romney ads. I have assumed that they were targeted toward Western Wisconsin, which is only about 20 minutes from St Paul. I just can’t imagine this state turning red, but I’m sure it could happen with a big enough wave.

[MNGal]

Yes, my dad is a retired school teacher, and I was raised to have liberal tendencies throughout my colleges and early working years. I happened to marry a conservative “red neck” Texan who brought me from the darkness into the light. The rest is history. :-)

[editor-surveyor]

>> “Al Franken. Enough said!” <<

.
Franken didn’t win the election, it was given to him by the courts that refused to uphold the law.

[editor-surveyor]

Ann Romney seems to believe that PA is theirs.

[Flatus I. Maximus]

Gov. Romney is somewhat similar to President Nixon and Mr. Obama is to the left of Sen. McGovern

The late Senator George McGovern.

Sorry, I'm just going to keep saying that for the next few days. It makes me almost as happy as saying the late Jane Fonda would.

[2ndDivisionVet]

At least Senator McGovern served honorably and bravely in World War II in the Army Air Forces. What has Miss Fonda ever done for this country?

[grey_whiskers]

Name recognition, plus she does the whole 'constituent service' thingy that the late Uncle Ted from Taxachusetts perfected.

NO cheers, unfortunately.

[Bshaw]

I predict a red PA.... Though I’m no sage. Obama has beaten coal up too badly to win PA.

[TomEwall]

“In 2008, the under-performance versus the national shrunk to 1%, meaning had John McCain received 51% of the national vote, he could have expected to get 50% of the vote in Minnesota.”

I didn’t understand where this number came from, given that Obama won Minnesota by 3% more than the national vote. It seems like this would translate to McCain would have needed to have obtained 3% more of the vote to have a shot at Minnesota.

I remember reading some years ago from Jay Cost, when he was doing the horse race blog, that Minnesota, and other Upper Midwest states, were trending Republican. If this is the case, and given a +3 Dem bias to overcome, it seems from logic that if Romney wins by 2% or so, he ought to have a shot.