Nevada 2008 – County by County - Part I
The West: extremes in geography, demographics and ideology
Nevada is the ninth in a state-by-state, county-by-county analysis series and completes the series of 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 – Part I, Part II, Part III, raw data, special 12 county 48-year voting history study
Supplemental to Nevada: DEMOGRAPHIC and ECONOMIC profile of New Mexico(p.4, hispanic population)
NEVADA - Part I, Part II, Part III, raw data, special 6 county 48-year voting history study
Supplemental to Nevada: DEMOGRAPHIC and ECONOMIC profile of Nevada (p.4, hispanic population)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
President Obama, who won the state of Nevada with 55.15% of the popular vote and a sizeable +12.49% landslide margin, is the first Democratic candidate to win the state since 1996 and the second since 1992. His winning percentage and margin:
-were the 2nd largest of the nine Democratic pick-ups in 2008.
-were the largest for any candidate since 1988 (Bush: 58.86%, +20.94% margin)
-were the largest and the first majority win for a Democrat since 1964 (Johnson: 58.58%, +17.16% margin) and
-the second largest for a Democrat since 1940 (FDR: 60.08%, +20.15% margin).
-resulted in a partisan-shift of +15.08%, the 3nd largest partisan shift of the nine pick-up states in 2008 (after Indiana: +21.71% and New Mexico: +15.13%); it was Obama's 6th largest partisan-shift overall (behind New Mexico, Vermont, Delaware, Indiana, Hawaii) and is 1.90 times larger than the national partisan shift of +9.73%.
-resulted in a win that was more solid than in a number of „safe“ Democratic states that were not considered in play in 2008 or states that one side claimed were in play but were, statistically speaking, never in play. Here an excerpt from the so-called „everything table“ that I published with the large national GE 2008 analysis in January 2009:
|
State |
EV |
BO-% |
JM-% |
Margin |
PC 12 |
Diff. 1 |
2004 |
Diff. 2 |
NJ |
15 |
57.15 |
41.62 |
15.54 |
16.00 |
-0.46 |
6.68 |
+8.85 |
WI |
10 |
56.22 |
42.31 |
13.90 |
11.34 |
+2.56 |
0.38 |
+13.52 |
|
NV |
5 |
55.15 |
42.65 |
12.49 |
6.83 |
+5.66 |
2.59 |
+15.09 |
|
MN |
10 |
54.06 |
43.82 |
10.24 |
12.00 |
-1.76 |
3.48 |
+6.76 |
PA |
21 |
54.48 |
44.17 |
10.32 |
7.30 |
+3.02 |
2.50 |
+7.82 |
NH |
4 |
54.13 |
44.52 |
9.61 |
10.43 |
-0.82 |
1.37 |
+8.24 |
IA |
7 |
53.93 |
44.39 |
9.53 |
12.75 |
-3.22 |
0.67 |
+10.20 |
CO |
9 |
53.66 |
44.71 |
8.95 |
6.62 |
+2.33 |
4.67 |
+13.62 |
USA |
-- |
52.88 |
45.61 |
7.27 |
7.54 |
-0.27 |
2.46 |
+9.73 |
|
VA |
13 |
52.63 |
46.33 |
6.30 |
4.93 |
+1.37 |
8.20 |
+14.50 |
OH |
20 |
51.38 |
46.80 |
4.58 |
2.30 |
+1.94 |
2.11 |
+6.69 |
FL |
27 |
50.91 |
48.10 |
2.81 |
1.79 |
+1.02 |
5.01 |
+7.82 |
|
NE-02* |
1* |
49.97 |
48.75 |
1.21 |
4.00 |
+5.21 |
21.79 |
+23.00 |
|
IN |
11 |
49.91 |
48.88 |
1.03 |
1.18 |
+2.21 |
20.68 |
+21.71 |
|
NC |
15 |
49.70 |
49.38 |
0.33 |
0.62 |
-0.29 |
12.43 |
+12.76 |
In terms of margin and winning percentage, Nevada came in right under Wisconsin and New Jersey, but above Minnesota, Pennsylvania and New Hampshire, as well as above all other pick-ups except New Mexico.
Obama won 3 of 17 Nevada counties, and two of those counties were pick-ups.
The type of extreme county wins in Nevada 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 3 counties were won with less than 9% margin, and only two of them are tipping point counties.
First, some important background information on Nevada:
Since Nevada first participated in the Electoral College in 1864, there have been 37 election cycles, of which the democratic party has won 16 cycles (43.24%), the GOP has won 20 cycles (50.05%), and an independent candidate won 1 cycle (2.71%) - James Weaver (Populist Party) in 1892.
From 1864 to 1888, the GOP dominated Nevada, aside from 1880. With the financial meltdown of the 1890s, Nevada first went for an Independent candidate in 1892 and then, in line with Colorado, went for Democrat William Jennings Bryan, the „silver tongued orator“ who supported the silver standard, for all three of his unsuccessful runs: 1896, 1900 and 1908. However, Teddy Roosevelt (R), who was immensely popular, easily took the state in 1904 with a +23.79% margin.
In 1912 and 1916, Woodrow Wilson captured Nevada, and, as was the case with Colorado, he did better in Nevada for his re-election in spite of the fact that 1916 was a much closer race nationally than 1912. As the Democratic party practically imploded during the 1918 congressional elections, Nevada went easily over to the GOP column in 1920, 1924 and 1928.
With the great depression and FDR, Nevada went comfortably democratic for 5 cycles in a row, from 1932-1948. The Eisenhower landslides of 1952 and 1956 swayed the „Silver State“ back to the GOP, and with impressive margins. The Kennedy re-alignment election of 1960 pulled Nevada back into the Democratic column, but barely. Johnson landslided in Nevada in 1964. But from 1968 until 1992 (24 years), Nevada stayed in the GOP column. This is the longest period of time that this state has stayed faithful to one party.
Bill Clinton (D) took the state with very lean single-digit margins both in 1992 and 1996. At first, the conventional wisdom was that this was so only because of the three man-race that happened in both of those cycles. However, as George W. Bush, Jr. recaptured the state for the GOP in 2000 and retained the state in 2004, it was also with lean single-digit margins. At this point, it became clear that Nevada, because of demographics, was becoming a true battleground state. Obama's landslide win broke a 16 year cycle of very lean wins in Nevada.
Through 2007, Nevada was the fastest growing state in the US. Utah overtook the lead in 2008, and Nevada moved from number 2 (2007 - end) to number 8 (2008 - end) on the list just for the year 2008. However, when you measure growth from the last census, Nevada is bound to be one of the top three strongest growing states in the Union and is guaranteed to pick-up at least 1 elector after the 2010 census, going from 5 EV to 6 EV, and likely to 7 EV after the 2020 census.
Here the results from the 12 Democratic winning presidential cycles, where the 7 democratic candidates also carried Nevada:
|
Year |
Candidate |
D % |
R % |
I/O % |
Margin |
Part. Shift. |
|
1912 |
Wilson |
39.70% |
15.89% |
44.41% |
+11.76% |
+9.98% |
|
1916 |
Wilson |
53.36% |
36.40% |
10.24% |
+16.96% |
+5.20% |
|
1932 |
Roosevelt, F |
69.41% |
30.59% |
0.00% |
+38.82% |
+51.89% |
|
1936 |
Roosevelt, F |
72.81% |
27.19% |
0.00% |
+45.62% |
+6.80% |
|
1940 |
Roosevelt, F |
60.08% |
39.92% |
0.00% |
+20.15% |
-25.47% |
|
1944 |
Roosevelt, F |
54.62% |
45.38% |
0.00% |
+9.24% |
-10.91% |
|
1948 |
Truman |
50.37% |
47.26% |
2.36% |
+3.11% |
-6.13% |
|
1960 |
Kennedy |
51.16% |
48.84% |
0.00% |
+2.32% |
+18.26% |
|
1964 |
Johnson |
58.58% |
41.42% |
0.00% |
+17.16% |
+14.84% |
|
1992 |
Clinton |
37.36% |
34.73% |
27.92% |
+2.63% |
+23.57% |
|
1996 |
Clinton |
43.93% |
42.91% |
13.15% |
+1.02% |
-1.61% |
|
2008 |
Obama |
55.15% |
42.65% |
2.20% |
+12.49% |
+15.08% |
Here the same table, arranged by winning percent, descending:
|
Year |
Candidate |
D % |
R % |
I/O % |
Margin |
Part. Shift. |
|
1936 |
Roosevelt, F |
72.81% |
27.19% |
0.00% |
+45.62% |
+6.80% |
|
1932 |
Roosevelt, F |
69.41% |
30.59% |
0.00% |
+38.82% |
+51.89% |
|
1940 |
Roosevelt, F |
60.08% |
39.92% |
0.00% |
+20.15% |
-25.47% |
|
1964 |
Johnson |
58.58% |
41.42% |
0.00% |
+17.16% |
+14.84% |
|
2008 |
Obama |
55.15% |
42.65% |
2.20% |
+12.49% |
+15.08% |
|
1944 |
Roosevelt, F |
54.62% |
45.38% |
0.00% |
+9.24% |
-10.91% |
|
1916 |
Wilson |
53.36% |
36.40% |
10.24% |
+16.96% |
+5.20% |
|
1960 |
Kennedy |
51.16% |
48.84% |
0.00% |
+2.32% |
+18.26% |
|
1948 |
Truman |
50.37% |
47.26% |
2.36% |
+3.11% |
-6.13% |
|
1996 |
Clinton |
43.93% |
42.91% |
13.15% |
+1.02% |
-1.61% |
|
1912 |
Wilson |
39.70% |
15.89% |
44.41% |
+11.76% |
+9.98% |
|
1992 |
Clinton |
37.36% |
34.73% |
27.92% |
+2.63% |
+23.57% |
And the same table, arranged by winning margin, descending:
|
Year |
Candidate |
D % |
R % |
I/O % |
Margin |
Part. Shift. |
|
1936 |
Roosevelt, F |
72.81% |
27.19% |
0.00% |
+45.62% |
+6.80% |
|
1932 |
Roosevelt, F |
69.41% |
30.59% |
0.00% |
+38.82% |
+51.89% |
|
1940 |
Roosevelt, F |
60.08% |
39.92% |
0.00% |
+20.15% |
-25.47% |
|
1964 |
Johnson |
58.58% |
41.42% |
0.00% |
+17.16% |
+14.84% |
|
1916 |
Wilson |
53.36% |
36.40% |
10.24% |
+16.96% |
+5.20% |
|
2008 |
Obama |
55.15% |
42.65% |
2.20% |
+12.49% |
+15.08% |
|
1912 |
Wilson |
39.70% |
15.89% |
44.41% |
+11.76% |
+9.98% |
|
1944 |
Roosevelt, F |
54.62% |
45.38% |
0.00% |
+9.24% |
-10.91% |
|
1948 |
Truman |
50.37% |
47.26% |
2.36% |
+3.11% |
-6.13% |
|
1960 |
Kennedy |
51.16% |
48.84% |
0.00% |
+2.32% |
+18.26% |
|
1992 |
Clinton |
37.36% |
34.73% |
27.92% |
+2.63% |
+23.57% |
|
1996 |
Clinton |
43.93% |
42.91% |
13.15% |
+1.02% |
-1.61% |
Again, the same table, this time arranged by partisan shift, descending:
|
Year |
Candidate |
D % |
R % |
I/O % |
Margin |
Part. Shift. |
|
1932 |
Roosevelt, F |
69.41% |
30.59% |
0.00% |
+38.82% |
+51.89% |
|
1992 |
Clinton |
37.36% |
34.73% |
27.92% |
+2.63% |
+23.57% |
|
1960 |
Kennedy |
51.16% |
48.84% |
0.00% |
+2.32% |
+18.26% |
|
2008 |
Obama |
55.15% |
42.65% |
2.20% |
+12.49% |
+15.08% |
|
1964 |
Johnson |
58.58% |
41.42% |
0.00% |
+17.16% |
+14.84% |
|
1912 |
Wilson |
39.70% |
15.89% |
44.41% |
+11.76% |
+9.98% |
|
1936 |
Roosevelt, F |
72.81% |
27.19% |
0.00% |
+45.62% |
+6.80% |
|
1916 |
Wilson |
53.36% |
36.40% |
10.24% |
+16.96% |
+5.20% |
|
1996 |
Clinton |
43.93% |
42.91% |
13.15% |
+1.02% |
-1.61% |
|
1948 |
Truman |
50.37% |
47.26% |
2.36% |
+3.11% |
-6.13% |
|
1944 |
Roosevelt, F |
54.62% |
45.38% |
0.00% |
+9.24% |
-10.91% |
|
1940 |
Roosevelt, F |
60.08% |
39.92% |
0.00% |
+20.15% |
-25.47% |
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 |
|
1932 |
Roosevelt, F |
+38.82% |
+51.89% |
+35.18% |
+16.71 |
|
1916 |
Wilson |
+16.96% |
+5.20% |
-11.32% |
+16.52 |
|
1992 |
Clinton |
+2.63% |
+23.57% |
+13.29% |
+10.28 |
|
2008 |
Obama |
+12.49% |
+15.08% |
+9.73% |
+5.35 |
|
1960 |
Kennedy |
+2.32% |
+18.26% |
+15.56% |
+2.70 |
|
1936 |
Roosevelt, F |
+45.62% |
+6.80% |
+6.49% |
+0.31 |
|
1948 |
Truman |
+3.11% |
-6.13% |
-3.01% |
-3.12 |
|
1996 |
Clinton |
+1.02% |
-1.61% |
+2.96% |
-4.57 |
|
1964 |
Johnson |
+17.16% |
+14.84% |
+22.42% |
-7.58 |
|
1944 |
Roosevelt, F |
+9.24% |
-10.91% |
-2.46% |
-8.45 |
|
1940 |
Roosevelt, F |
+20.15% |
-25.47% |
-14.30% |
-11.17 |
|
1912 |
Wilson |
+11.76% |
+9.98% |
+22.97% |
-12.99 |
So, based on the above information, here are the cold, hard facts about Obama's win in Nevada in 2008:
|
Year |
DEM |
GOP |
IND |
DEM % |
GOP % |
IND % |
Margin |
Margin % |
|
2008 |
533,736 |
412,827 |
21,285 |
55.15% |
42.65% |
2.20% |
+120,909 |
+12.49% |
|
2004 |
397,190 |
418,690 |
13,707 |
47.88% |
50.47% |
1.65% |
+21,500 |
+2.59% |
|
Diff: |
+136,546 |
-5,863 |
7,578 |
+7.27% |
-7.82% |
+0.55% |
142,409 |
+15.08% |
1.) Obama set a new Nevada raw vote record for a candidate of any party: 533,736 votes, 115,046 votes more than Bush's record-breaking raw vote from 2004. The Democratic party's jump of 136,546 votes from 2004 to 2008 is also the largest jump in the state's history. The state's growth rate over 2004 was 16.67%, more than double the national 7.48% growth rate.
2.) Obama won with the 5th largest winning percent, the 6th largest winnnig margin, the 4th largest partisan shift and the 4th largest partisan value in Nevada's democratic electoral history. This places him in the upper third of the Nevada 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 17 counties can be found here.
Here the breakdown:
|
Party – NV 08 |
retentions |
% of 17 |
pickups |
% of 33 |
Total no. |
% of 17 |
|
Democratic |
1 |
5.89% |
2 |
11.76% |
3 |
17.65% |
|
Republican |
14 |
82.35% |
0 |
0.00% |
14 |
82.35% |
|
Total |
15 |
88.24% |
2 |
11.76% |
17 |
100.00% |
Comparison to the first eight states in the analysis:
|
State |
DEM counties |
DEM % |
GOP counties |
GOP % |
|
Nevada |
3 of 17 |
17.65% |
14 of 17 |
82.35% |
|
New Mexico |
18 of 33 |
54.54% |
15 of 33 |
45.45% |
|
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: |
234 of 694 |
33.72% |
460 of 694 |
66.28% |
And now, the table, in descending order to DEM %:
|
State |
DEM counties |
DEM % |
GOP counties |
State |
|
New Mexico |
18 of 33 |
54.54% |
15 of 33 |
New Mexico |
|
Iowa |
53 of 99 |
53.53% |
46 of 99 |
Iowa |
|
Colorado |
26 of 64 |
40.63% |
38 of 64 |
Colorado |
|
Virginia |
49 of 134 |
36.57% |
85 of 134 |
Virginia |
|
North Carolina |
33 of 100 |
33.00% |
67 of 100 |
North Carolina |
|
Florida |
15 of 67 |
22.39% |
52 of 67 |
Florida |
|
Ohio |
22 of 88 |
25.00% |
66 of 88 |
Ohio |
|
Nevada |
3 of 17 |
17.65% |
14 of 17 |
Nevada |
|
Indiana |
15 of 92 |
16.30% |
77 of 92 |
Indiana |
|
Total: |
187 of 580 |
32.24% |
393 of 580 |
Total: |
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.
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 |
17 |
0 |
14 |
3 |
17 |
0 |
|
DEM |
0 |
17 |
0 |
17 |
0 |
17 |
|
OTHER |
0 |
17 |
0 |
17 |
-- |
-- |
The margin loss or gain is also known as „SWING“. In this case, all of Nevada swung DEMOCRATIC.
.
So, the GOP lost ground in 17, 17 or 17 counties. Since the margin is most used for comparative purposes, the number 17 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.