COLORADO 2008 – County by County - Part I
The West: extremes in geography, demographics and ideology
COLORADO is the seventh in a state-by-state, county-by-county analysis series. The first nine states in the series are the nine Democratic pick-ups from the 2008 General Election. All analyses are published at Google Docs.
Mid-west:
OHIO - Part I, Part II, Part III , raw data / INDIANA - Part I, Part II and Part III, raw data
IOWA – Part I, Part II, Part III, raw data
South:
VIRGINIA – Part I, Part II, Part III, raw data / NORTH CAROLINA – Part I, Part II, Part III, raw data
FLORIDA – Part I, Part II, Part III, raw data
West:
COLORADO – Part I , Part II , Part III , raw data, special 9-county 48-year voting history study
Supplemental to Colorado: DEMOGRAPHIC and ECONOMIC profile of Colorado (p.4, hispanic population)
NEW MEXICO and NEVADA: in progress
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
President Obama, who won the state of Colorado with a near-landslide +8.95% margin, is the first Democratic candidate to win the state since 1992 and the second since 1964. He won 26 counties, 7 of which were pick-ups. 3 of those pick-ups are counties in the population rich central/north-central portion of the state, known as the „Denver-Aurora-Boulder Combined Statistical Area“, which has increased in population by 14.03% since 2000 and in which 61.07% of all Coloradans live. This area comprises mostly of the cities along I-25, in a north-south line, especially at the east-west junction with I-70, directly through the upper-central portion of the state of the state, nestled between the Rocky Mountains. Here is an excellent document on the infrastructure of Colorado, which helps one to visualize this information. Two of those pick-ups are two of the four largest counties in Colorado:
Arapahoe County, pop. Approximately 545,100, county seat: Littleton
Jefferson
County,
pop. approximately 529,400, county seat: Golden
Most importantly, these two counties are known for their military and aerospace presence in the state and have not gone for a Democrat since 1964. This is proof positive that President Obama captured a good chunk of the military vote in Colorado. The only mega-county in Colorado that remained faithful to the GOP was El Paso county, where the GOP's winning margin was cut-in half from 2004. Much more detail on this in Part II.
The type of extreme county wins in Colorado is very indicative of the Southwest portion of the US: where Obama won, he won mostly with overwhelming landslides. Where John McCain won, he also won mostly with overwhelming landslides. Only 9 counties in Colorado were won by less than 9% and only 3 of them were truly close races (more on these counties in Part II). Conversely, 36 counties were won with with over +20% margins, 16 of those counties were won with over +40% margins!!
First, some important background information on Colorado:
Since the GOP first appeared on the national ballot in Colorado in 1880, there have been 33 election cycles, of which the democratic party has won 11 cycles (33.33%), the GOP has won 21 cycles (63.63%). and a third party candidate won 1 cycle (3.04%): in 1892, James Weaver (Populist party) won with 57.07% over Benjamin Harrison (41.13%). The Democratic party was not on the ballot in Colorado in 1892.
Having entered the Electoral College in the middle of the so-called „gilded age“ in American electoral politics, also during the rise of the populist movement, Colorado has a mixed political history, first for geographic reasons, later for military reasons, and now for demographic reasons.
The state started as a burgeoning Republican state, and in spite of extremely close elections in 1880, 1884 and 1888, went for the GOP with ever increasing margins, from +5.23% in 1880 to +12.57% in 1884 to +14.38% in 1888, three consecutive elections where the national winning margin was less than 0.84% of the PV. With the economic upheaval of the 1890s, Colorado went for an Independent candidate (see above) in 1892 and then for Democrat William Jennings Bryan every time he ran: in 1896 (84.95%!!!), 1900 (55.43%) and 1908 (48.00%). Bryan, also known as the „silver tongued Orator“ and an ardent proponent of the Silverite movement (The Silver Standard) instead of the Gold Standard, was the state's „favorite son“ in spite of the fact that he was born and raised in Illinois. It should be noted that the 1908 Democratic National Convention was held in Denver, Colorado and most historians cite the convention as part of Bryan's success in winning Colorado in 1908 while losing the GE in a landslide to William H. Taft. 100 years later, the Democratic Convention was once again held in Denver.
However, in 1904, the state went easily for Theodore Roosevelt (R), who used his term to set aside massive amounts of land in the state as nationally protected areas. The state went for Woodrow Wilson (D) in both 1912 and 1916 and was one of the few states in the Union to go for the „Professor“ by a substantially larger margin in 1916 than in 1912, in spite of the fact that 1916 was far closer nationally than 1912 was.
From 1920-1932, Colorado returned to the GOP ranks, but, as with most of the nation, switched to FDR in 1932 and 1936 with landslide margins. However, FDR was unable to retain the „Rocky Mountain State“ in 1940 or pick-it up again in 1944. And just to show how indecisive Coloradans can be: they voted for John Dewey (R) an against an immensely popular incumbent (FDR) by a +6.31% margin in 1944, but voted against him and for a generally unpopular Harry Truman (D) by +5.31% in 1948. It was shortly before this time that the US Government began to set aside large tracts of land in the state of Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah and Nevada for permanant military installations. Colorado is known as a major military hub in the US, and this has had a definite influence on Colorado's political tendencies, for US military personnel tend to vote Republican. With the Eisenhower (R) landslides of 1952 and 1956, Colorado voted Republican, also in 1960. Johnson (D) took the state in his national record-setting landslide of 1964, but the state returned to the GOP column in 1968 and stayed there for 24 years, the longest period of time that this state has remained faithful to one political party.
Bill Clinton (D) won the state in a three way race in 1992 with 40.13% of the PV and a +4.26% margin against George H. W. Bush (41) and Ross Perot. However, as Perot's 3rd party influence in the 1996 GE vastly diminished, Bob Dole (R) re-took the state for the GOP, but with only +1.37%, the smallest winning margin in the state since 1912. It should be noted that at this time, hispanic immigration into the southeast and mountain west of the US rose dramatically. Between 1990-2005, the hispanic population more than doubled in 30 counties in Colorado and the counties in the south and south-east portion of the state that did not grow so much are the counties that are already at around 50% hispanic population.
Though George W. Bush, Jr. (43) won Colorado both times, he won it in 2004 with a reduced margin: the Democratic party gained 4.63% over 2000, and the GOP winning margin fell from +8.36% in 2000 to +4.67% in 2004. Colorado was not in play in 2000. It was considered a battleground-in-the-making in 2004. And Obama is the first Democrat to win the state with an absolute majority since 1964.
Here the results from the 8 Democratic national winning cycles, where the 6 democratic candidates also carried Colorado:
|
CO |
Candidate |
D % |
R % |
I/O % |
Margin |
Part. Shift. |
|
1912 |
Wilson |
42.80% |
21.88% |
35.32% |
+15.71% |
+14.59% |
|
1916 |
Wilson |
60.74% |
34.75% |
4.50% |
+25.99% |
+10.28% |
|
1932 |
Roosevelt, F |
54.81% |
41.43% |
3.76% |
+13.38% |
+44.16% |
|
1936 |
Roosevelt, F |
60.37% |
37.09% |
2.54% |
+23.28% |
+9.90% |
|
1948 |
Truman |
51.88% |
46.52% |
1.60% |
+5.35% |
+12.16% |
|
1964 |
Johnson |
61.27% |
38.19% |
0.54% |
+23.07% |
+32.80% |
|
1992 |
Clinton |
40.13% |
35.87% |
24.00% |
+4.26% |
+12.04% |
|
2008 |
Obama |
53.66% |
44.71% |
1.63% |
+8.95% |
+13.62% |
Here the same table, arranged by winning percent, descending:
|
Year |
Candidate |
D % |
R % |
I/O % |
Margin |
Part. Shift. |
|
1964 |
Johnson |
61.27% |
38.19% |
0.54% |
+23.07% |
+32.80% |
|
1916 |
Wilson |
60.74% |
34.75% |
4.50% |
+25.99% |
+10.28% |
|
1936 |
Roosevelt, F |
60.37% |
37.09% |
2.54% |
+23.28% |
+9.90% |
|
1932 |
Roosevelt, F |
54.81% |
41.43% |
3.76% |
+13.38% |
+44.16% |
|
2008 |
Obama |
53.66% |
44.71% |
1.63% |
+8.95% |
+13.62% |
|
1948 |
Truman |
51.88% |
46.52% |
1.60% |
+5.35% |
+12.16% |
|
1912 |
Wilson |
42.80% |
21.88% |
35.32% |
+15.71% |
+14.59% |
|
1992 |
Clinton |
40.13% |
35.87% |
24.00% |
+4.26% |
+12.04% |
And the same table, arranged by winning margin, descending:
|
Year |
Candidate |
D % |
R % |
I/O % |
Margin |
Part. Shift. |
|
1916 |
Wilson |
60.74% |
34.75% |
4.50% |
+25.99% |
+10.28% |
|
1936 |
Roosevelt, F |
60.37% |
37.09% |
2.54% |
+23.28% |
+9.90% |
|
1964 |
Johnson |
61.27% |
38.19% |
0.54% |
+23.07% |
+32.80% |
|
1912 |
Wilson |
42.80% |
21.88% |
35.32% |
+15.71% |
+14.59% |
|
1932 |
Roosevelt, F |
54.81% |
41.43% |
3.76% |
+13.38% |
+44.16% |
|
2008 |
Obama |
53.66% |
44.71% |
1.63% |
+8.95% |
+13.62% |
|
1948 |
Truman |
51.88% |
46.52% |
1.60% |
+5.35% |
+12.16% |
|
1992 |
Clinton |
40.13% |
35.87% |
24.00% |
+4.26% |
+12.04% |
Again, the same table, this time arranged by partisan shift, descending:
|
Year |
Candidate |
D % |
R % |
I/O % |
Margin |
Part. Shift. |
|
1932 |
Roosevelt, F |
54.81% |
41.43% |
3.76% |
+13.38% |
+44.16% |
|
1964 |
Johnson |
61.27% |
38.19% |
0.54% |
+23.07% |
+32.80% |
|
1912 |
Wilson |
42.80% |
21.88% |
35.32% |
+15.71% |
+14.59% |
|
2008 |
Obama |
53.66% |
44.71% |
1.63% |
+8.95% |
+13.62% |
|
1948 |
Truman |
51.88% |
46.52% |
1.60% |
+5.35% |
+12.16% |
|
1992 |
Clinton |
40.13% |
35.87% |
24.00% |
+4.26% |
+12.04% |
|
1916 |
Wilson |
60.74% |
34.75% |
4.50% |
+25.99% |
+10.28% |
|
1936 |
Roosevelt, F |
60.37% |
37.09% |
2.54% |
+23.28% |
+9.90% |
And finally, the table to measure the partisan shift for the state over the national partisan shift for that year (this is often called „PARTISAN VALUE“):
|
Year |
Candidate |
Margin |
Part. Shift. |
Natl. Part Shift |
Part. Value |
|
1916 |
Wilson |
+25.99% |
+10.28% |
-11.32% |
+21.60 |
|
1948 |
Truman |
+5.35% |
+12.16% |
-3.01% |
+15.17 |
|
1964 |
Johnson |
+23.07% |
+32.80% |
+22.42% |
+10.38 |
|
1932 |
Roosevelt, F |
+13.38% |
+44.16% |
+35.18% |
+8.98 |
|
2008 |
Obama |
+8.95% |
+13.62% |
+9.73% |
+3.89 |
|
1936 |
Roosevelt, F |
+23.28% |
+9.90% |
+6.49% |
+3.41 |
|
1992 |
Clinton |
+4.26% |
+12.04% |
+13.29% |
-1.25 |
|
1912 |
Wilson |
+15.71% |
+14.59% |
+22.97% |
-8.38 |
So, based on these tables and more, here are the cold, hard facts about Obama's win in Colorado in 2008:
|
Year |
DEM |
GOP |
IND |
DEM % |
GOP % |
IND % |
Margin |
Margin % |
|
2008 |
1,288,576 |
1,073,589 |
39,196 |
53.66% |
44.71% |
1.63% |
+214,987 |
+8.95% |
|
2004 |
1,001,732 |
1,101,255 |
27,343 |
47.02% |
51.69% |
1.28% |
+99,523 |
+4.67% |
|
Diff: |
+187,321 |
-27,666 |
+11,853 |
+6.64% |
-6.99% |
+0.35% |
314,510 |
+13.62% |
1.) Obama set a new Colorado raw vote record for a candidate of any party: 1,288,576 votes, 187,321 votes more than Bush's record-breaking raw vote from 2004. The Democratic party's jump of 286,844 votes from 2004 to 2008 is also the largest jump in the state's history. The state's growth rate over 2004 was 12.72%, 5.27% above the national 7.48% growth rate.
2.) Obama won with the 6th largest winning margin, the 5th largest percent, partisan shift and partisan value in Iowa's democratic electoral history. This places him in the middle of the rankings.
And now, county for county...
I took the county-wide data for the entire state for both 2008 and 2004 and plugged it into an excel document, which you can link to here. Subsidiary data for all 64 counties can be found here.
Of those 64, Obama won 26 counties, McCain won 38 counties. Here the breakdown:
|
Party – CO '08 |
retentions |
% of |
pickups |
% of 67 |
Total no. |
% of 67 |
|
Democratic |
19 |
29.70% |
7 |
10.93% |
25 |
40.63% |
|
Republican |
38 |
59.37% |
-- |
-- |
38 |
59.37% |
|
Total |
57 |
89.07% |
7 |
10.93% |
64 |
100.00% |
Comparison to the first six states in the analysis:
|
State |
DEM counties |
DEM % |
GOP counties |
GOP % |
|
Colorado |
26 of 64 |
40.63% |
38 of 64 |
59.37% |
|
Iowa |
53 of 99 |
53.53% |
46 of 99 |
46.47% |
|
Florida |
15 of 67 |
22.39% |
52 of 67 |
77.61% |
|
North Carolina |
33 of 100 |
33.00% |
67 of 100 |
67.00% |
|
Virginia |
49 of 134 |
36.57% |
85 of 134 |
63.43% |
|
Ohio |
22 of 88 |
25.00% |
66 of 88 |
75.00% |
|
Indiana |
15 of 92 |
16.30% |
77 of 92 |
83.70% |
|
Total: |
213 of 644 |
33.07% |
431 of 644 |
66.93% |
And now, the table, in descending order to DEM %:
|
State |
DEM counties |
DEM % |
GOP counties |
GOP % |
|
Iowa |
26 of 64 |
40.63% |
38 of 64 |
59.37% |
|
Colorado |
25 of 64 |
39.06% |
39 of 64 |
60.94% |
|
Virginia |
49 of 134 |
36.57% |
85 of 134 |
63.43% |
|
North Carolina |
33 of 100 |
33.00% |
67 of 100 |
67.00% |
|
Florida |
15 of 67 |
22.39% |
52 of 67 |
77.61% |
|
Ohio |
22 of 88 |
25.00% |
66 of 88 |
75.00% |
|
Indiana |
15 of 92 |
16.30% |
77 of 92 |
83.70% |
|
Total: |
213 of 644 |
33.07% |
431 of 644 |
66.93% |
In the excel document everything is color-coded: red= GOP, blue = DEM, green= OTH. In the case of DEM pick-ups, those counties are also shaded in light-blue. The 2 GOP pick-ups are shaded in light red.
Here is a table of the number of counties, by party, where there was a percentage loss or gain, a numeric (raw vote) loss or gain and a margin loss or gain (not applicable to the „other“ vote“):
|
Party |
% loss |
% gain |
Num. loss |
Num. Gain |
Margin loss |
Margin gain |
|
GOP |
64 |
0 |
51 |
13 |
64 |
0 |
|
DEM |
0 |
64 |
0 |
64 |
0 |
64 |
|
OTHER |
5 |
59 |
4 |
60 |
-- |
-- |
The margin loss or gain is also known as „SWING“. In this case, all of Colorado swung DEMOCRATIC.
.
So, the GOP lost ground in 64, 51 or 64 counties. Since the margin is most used for comparative purposes, the number 64 is the most appropriate statistic for the GOP for this state. This alone is statistical proof that the Democratic trend was all-encompassing and state-wide.
All of the counties listed by number above are listed by name in the appendix to this analysis.