New Material Added
LINK TO SCPR BLOG OF MARCH 9TH
Where are they in Stark County?
They?
Who are you talking about Olson?
These people, if one accepts David Brooks' definition:
With Brooks definition in mind, The Stark County Political Report went about locating folks in the statistical sense of "locating" from the context of last Tuesday's Ohio Republican primary vote in Stark County.
Here is a graphic of what The Report found.
(Note: data comparison in this blog ONLY includes votes cast for either Kasich or Trump; other candidate vote totals are not included; numbers are an "unofficial" tally)
Among absentee voters, here are some interesting numbers provided the the SCPR by the Board of Elections:
Switch from Republican to Non-Partisan – 10
Switch from Non-Partisan to Republican – 4,002
Switch from Democrat to Republican – 392
Switch from Non-Partisan to Democrat – 2,318
Switch from Republican to Democrat – 38
Switch from Democrat to Non-Partisan – 29
Hard to tell what may have been going on with these numbers.
What would be meaningful is to see the same numbers for categories for the 30% of Stark County's registered voters who turned out Tuesday, no?
But the absentee numbers might have a clue that in the non-absentee voters as a whole general category the dearth of the number of Democrats taking Republican ballots might account for Trump not doing as well as expected.
There was a theory that disaffected Democrats among the groups Brooks identified in his statement would cross over to the Republican side and vote for Donald Trump.
Apparently, that did not happen in any meaningful numbers and accounts in part why among Republican ballot takers who voted for either Kasich or Trump, Kasich came away with a 56% to 44% margin which is on the edge of being a Kasich slap-down over Trump in Stark County.
Moreover, it could be that the large number of "Switch from Non-Partisan to Republican" vote was the front edge of a "let's rally around" Kasich by Republicans who generally do not vote in primary elections (which over time causes one to loss partisan identity) heeding the call from Kasich to join the resistance to Trump getting the Republican nomination in Cleveland at the Republican Convention during the period of July 17th through July 21st.
It would be impressive if the Stark BOE could have provided the same data (i.e. the absentee vote) for the election overall numbers.
Perhaps over time as Auditor Alan Harold's crack team of IT people work with the BOE to improve the quantity and quality of voter information made available to analysts in easily massaged format like Excel.
One can see from the face put on last Tuesdays data, that progress is being made.
SUMMARY OF STARK COUNTY'S MAJOR URBAN AREAS
NORTH CANTON
The least populated Trump-friendly land is in North Canton.
Among Stark's urban areas, North Canton is the bastion of "mainline Republicanism."
But as seen from the numbers of 56% to 44% Kasich over Trump in the summary above, it is no surprised to see those numbers fleshed out in the North Canton's wards thusly:
The precincts of elected Republicans:
- Mayor David Held, 2-A,
- Council president Dan "Jeff" Peters, 2-B
- Councilwoman Stephanie Werren, 3-C
- Councilman, Dominic Fonte, Jr., 4-B
- Councilwoman at Large, Macia Kiesling, 4-B
- Councilman at Large, Mark Cerreta, 4-B
- Councilman at Large, Dan Griffith, 1-C
Now turning to Stark's most "friendly to Trump" urban area: Massillon, a predominately Democratic city.
The precincts of elected Republicans:
- Councilwoman Sarita Cunningham-Hedderly, 1-E
- Councilman at Large Milan Chovan, Jr., 1-A
- Councilman at Large Ed Lewis, IV, 6-D
TRUMP
An intriguing question to the SCPR is how Trump fared in the precincts of two of his main supporters in Stark.
Plain 19?
Hmmm. However, Trump did win a few precincts in Plain Township.
Better for Trump, no? But Trump won no precincts in Lake nor in Jackson.
Were it not for the effort of the likes of Case and Greer, Kasich might have bested Trump at near a 60/40 clip.
TRUMP: Highest Percentage to Lowest
Slide bar at bottom of graph to the right to see percentages
TRUMP: Highest Number of Votes to Lowest
As in the Trump analysis, the SCPR checked as to how Kasich did in the precincts of two of his ardent Stark County supporters.
Not bad.
Creighton's precinct bested the overall Kasich percentage (solely counting the votes of Kasich and Trump) of 56% to 44%.
Impressive, no? Harold gets credit for 67% to 33% win for his man Kasich.
KASICH: Highest Percentage to Lowest
Slide bar at bottom of graph to the right to see percentages.
.
Kasich: Highest Number of Votes to Lowest
1 comment:
Dear Mr. Olson, I was honored to have my post the sole subject of last Wednesday's Report. If I had known it would assume such prominent placement, I would have improved its composition. I do apologize for misspelling your name; I knew I should have checked the spelling but I had run out of time to write and I impolitely choose to press send to close the letter.
I also thank you for the well placed paragraph breaks. I hesitate to use them in comment boxes because many applications use an not as a line break but to send-post the comment. But the post read much better with appropriate subject divisions.
None-the-less, this brush with fame you offered suggests that few such complimentary posts are received at the SCPR. I am sorry that this infers a thankless job, for you obviously expend great time and effort to attend the council meetings and assemble detailed voter records. Few of us have time or the inclination. Nor is it particularly rewarding to become too involved as the private citizen-part time public servant (in the Jeffersonian model of democracy). I used to work with Mr. Mike Grady Esq. many years ago, and I know he had a thankless experience trying to offer his competence to local government. So you are our inside man, willing to fish the same holes of mundane council meetings every two weeks until the hard to hook "big fish issue" comes to the surface and you can report it to your readers (I apologize at this terrifically poor metaphor but I am practicing my Maryland-Virginia homilies).
So again I say, we, Stark County, are lucky to have you, Mr. Olson. I do clarify that this follow-up is not intended to capture the SCPR headlines in a repeat performance and is only worthy at most for those who may follow comments.
Post a Comment