California VBM Returns

We all want to know whether November will be a blue wave. That’s a question that the California primary results may shed some light on. We’ll have to wait a couple of weeks for them. We have over 1 million VBM ballots returned. I’m going to try to interpret them to see Democrats or Republicans will get shut out in key congressional races.

In 2014 69.4% of the ballots were VBM. This keeps increasing, so the VBM vote should tell us a lot about how people are voting. Fortunately we have nearly a million returned ballots already.

In 2014 VBM ballots were 44.0%D/36.4%R for a Democratic margin of 7.6%. This electorate produced an average statewide two party result of Democrats 56% Republicans 44%. In 2016 the electorate was 49.0%D/33.8%R. This margin of 15.2% produced a Democratic 70%-30% result in the Presidential and Senate vote. Since there were only two races in 2016 the sample size was smaller, The results were fairly consistent.

These two elections give us only two data points so any extrapolation will be guessing. The Republican Presidential primary was irrelevant since Donald Trump had already sewn up the nomination and the Senate race featured no prominent Republican. So while a D+15 electorate probably should have something like a Democratic margin of 61%-39% it was much higher.

The congressional races produced a similar result, although it wasn’t nearly as large. There were 37 districts with at least one Republican and one Democrat on the ballot in both 2014 and 2016. In 2014 these districts had an average result of Democrats 52%-48%. In 2016 it was Democrats 60%-40%. So even with only a 7.6% gain in the electorate Democrats increased their vote margin by 16%.

Now that we’re done with the primer, let’s get to the results. Right now the VBM ballots are 44%D/34%R, D+10. The good news for Democrats is that it isn’t the D+8 it was in 2014. The bad news is that it isn’t the D+15 in 2016. I don’t think this is going to change that much. That doesn’t mean the electorate will be D+11, just the VBM ballots. Of course those are a high percentage of the ballots.

If all the races worked consistently based on “somewhere in the middle” predictions would be easy. Too bad they aren’t.

Let’s look at the 7 Republican districts Hillary Clinton won. The data is here.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qGwlpp3uQi_Wrq-wVRA6AsH9qE2ahLybGgJTN50AcME/edit?usp=sharing

It’s been collected by Political Data here: http://www.politicaldata.com/absentee-vote-tracker/

They do an amazing job collecting it and my analysis couldn’t be done without them. Thank you, Paul.

CA-10: Jeff Denham has been fairly consistent in his performance in each primary. The make-up of the electorate hasn’t varied much in each election either. So it’s safe to guess that Republicans could get 57-59% of the vote. There is another Republican on the ballot, but there was also in 2016. Robert Hodges got only 10% of the vote.

Possibility of Democrats getting shut out of top two: Very low. The final margin may be illuminating but there’s no reason to watch ballot returns closely.

CA-21: Ballot returns are D+15 right now, an increase even over 2016. That may indicate some trending towards the Democrats, although this is a primary and not the general election. You don’t get bonus points for doing better in a primary. Valadao’s primary margin dropped from 33% to 11% in 2016. That looked like a red flag that he was in trouble. His winning margin in the general election fell from 16% to 13% in 2016. I don’t know what the electorate would have to look like for Democrats to beat David Valadao. We ca address that in the general.

Possibility of Democrats getting shut out of top two: None. Valadao is the only Republican on the ballot. His opponent, TJ Cox, is the only Democrat. They’ve both already made top two.

CA-25: The primary electorate is slightly more Democratic than 2016. The numbers would suggest an encouraging trend for Democrats if they were for the general election.

Possibility of Democrats getting shut out of top two: None. Steve Knight is the only Republican on the ballot.

CA-39: Ed Royce is retiring and there are six Democrats and seven Republicans running to succeed him. There are two things to look at when looking at whether a party can get shut out of top two. The first is how many candidates a party has. If one party has only two and the other party has more than the other party could be in danger. Four of the Democrats are seen as serious candidates and three Republicans are. That would seem to favor Republicans but splitting the vote three ways could weaken that chance.

The second thing to look at is vote share. Republicans won the district by 41 and 21 points the last two cycles. That’s bad news for Democrats. They couldn’t crack 40% even in a year that was heavily Democratic. There were roughly 73k votes in the Democratic Presidential primary and only 58k in the Republican primary. Yet Ed Royce got 85k votes and Brett Murdock only got 56k.

This was a nothing race that didn’t matter. This year’s race is one where Democrats are spending money. So they should be able to win some Royce voters. The electorate is R+13. It was R+10 in 2016.

Possibility of Democrats getting shut out of top two: Medium. There are a lot of serious candidates and if they’re splitting a share in the low 40’s they might not have one candidate stand out. If Republicans take 60%+, as they have in the last two primaries, Democrats could be in big trouble in getting shut out.

Possibility of Republicans getting shut out of top two: Low. There are less serious Republicans and Republicans could get 60% of the vote. If the vote is 60%-40%, then one of the three Republicans will get at least 20% and there’s no way two Democrats can get more than that.

CA-45: Of the seven Clinton districts this district is probably the least likely to flip. Democrats have never come close, the district is very Republican, and Walters is a scandal free Republican.

Possibility of Democrats getting shut out of top two: None. Walters is the only Republican candidate.

CA-48: This is a pretty Republican district but it could start trending away from Republicans. Rohrabacher margin in the general sank from 28% to 17% and the district is running stronger for Democrats with VBMs. Still, the returns are R+11 and there are only two serious Republicans running. There is a plethora of Democrats. That seems to be set up for a Democratic shut out.

Possibility of Democrats getting shut out of top two: Medium. Democrats are taking the strategy of pushing down Scott Baugh’s vote but they also need a higher share of the vote. In 2014 Republicans got 68% of the vote. They got 56% in 2016. Democrats need to keep the vote closer to 56% and not split their vote too much.

Possibility of Republicans getting shut out of top two: Very low. There are only two serious Republicans and the GOP should get at least 55% of the vote. You get two candidates having more votes than any Republican if you’re only getting 45%.

CA-49: This district is trending seriously Democratic. Darrell Issa was weaker in the primary and in the general election. Democrats are overperforming VBM ballots. They’ve dropped from R+8 to R+1. Issa only got 50% of the vote with R+8 VBM. Three Democrats have raised over $1.5 million and a fourth Democrat, Doug Applegate, was the 2016 candidate who did so well. His fundraising is good, just not as good as others.

The perception is that there are only two serious Republicans, Diane Harkey and Rocky Chavez. Kristin Gaspar was mayor of Encinitas and Brian Maryott is Mayor Pro-Tem in San Juan Capistrano.

Possibility of Democrats getting shut out of top two: High? Low? No idea. They could get half the vote or they could do worse. They could have one or two strong candidates or split the vote four ways.

Possibility of Republicans getting shut out of top two: High? Low? No idea. Republicans are seen as having less serious candidates and they’ve gotten a higher vote share in the past. But they might have more serious candidates than people think and their vote share might be smaller. I’d guess the Democrats are in more danger of getting shut out than Republicans since Democrats are attacking Rocky Chavez and he’s seen as the candidate who could give Republicans two in top two. On the other hand, Republicans are attacking any Democrat. That tells me they aren’t as concerned and figure they have at least one spot wrapped up.

There are some other districts to watch.

CA-3: The VBM returns on CA-3 are trending heavily Republican. In 2014 returns were D+5. In 2016 they were D+10. This year it’s D+0.5. This district is a bit unusual, as it’s a mix of Democratic leaning suburbs and Republican leaning rural areas. VBM returns have been light here and it’s possible that Democratic leaning Solano county is behind on reporting ballots. If this holds, Republicans might take more votes in the primary than Democrats. I’m not saying John Garamendi is endangered, but people will talk about him as if he is.

CA-7: Ami Bera took the district in 2012 and pulled off narrow wins in both Republican heavy 2014 and Democratic heavy 2016. It’d be unusual if this district weren’t in play and VBM returns show it between 2014 and 2016 right now.

CA-9: I’m not ready to proclaim Jerry McNerney to be endangered but Republicans got more primary votes in both 2012 and 2014. Early VBM returns show the margin to be very close to 2014. So it’s very possible we’ll be talking about the district after the primary.

CA-22: Some Democrats think that because Devin Nunes is close to Donald Trump that he’s in trouble. While the VBMs are less Republican than in years past there aren’t enough Democratic ballots for Nunes to worry.

CA-24: Like CA-9 Republicans got more primary votes in 2012 and 2014 in CA-24. Democratic VBM returns are down in this district. So a close primary vote is likely.

CA-36 and 52: These used to be swing districts but they aren’t any more. Democratic incumbents should win easily.

Edit 1: I don’t analyze the numbers for governor or the senate here. I’ll just say that polling and VBM returns point to a Newsom-Cox gubernatorial match-up. Antonio Villaraigosa is more likely to finish behind Travis Allen than ahead of John Cox. There are enough Republican votes for a Republican to finish top two in the senate race. These numbers can’t tell us if those voters are backing one candidate.

You shouldn’t use these numbers to determine November results. There are too many steps in the process. These numbers will lead us to the primary vote and the primary vote and, later, the GE VBMs will give us an idea of how the general will go. Going from these numbers to a general election result is too much extrapolating. All I want to do with these numbers is determine if we’ll have any top two shutouts.

Edit May 26:

Friday was a good day for the GOP. There were 182k ballots returned, the highest amount of any day. The ballots were 44%D/35%R, dropping the statewide spread from D+10.7 to D+10.5. Two days ago it was D+11.1. On the one hand, a daily movement toward one party or the other may result from counties that lean toward that party reporting more. Still any movement is good and when it’s 182k ballots it’s probably most of the state.

CA-21 went from D+13.7 to D+11.2, a big swing toward the GOP. All four counties reported new ballots. This should be good for David Valadao’s vote total, although it won’t change top two. There are only two candidates.

CA-25 went from R+6.3 to R+6.7. The primary has become more Democratic in every cycle since 2012 . So this is good news for Steve Knight’s primary total. It may have no impact on his general election total.

CA-39 went from R+12.7 to R+12.1. That’s good news for Democrats, although it’s still better than R+10.0 in 2016. That electorate gave Republicans 60.5% of the vote. Democrats need to do better than that to avoid a shutout.

CA-48 goes from R+11.1 to R+10.9. That’s better than 2016 was for the Democrats and may help avoid a shutout.

CA-1 is now at R+14.2. This primary is the most Republican it’s ever been right now. It’s a very Trumpy district. Strong Republican VBM returns may indicate Trump voters will turn out.

CA-3 nearly doubled the VBM reporting with a ton from Democratic leaning counties. VBMs went from D+0.5 to D+3.3. That’s good news for Democrats but it still makes it the most Republican primary this district has had. I’m curious to see what the primary vote is here. If Republicans do well, we’ll have to watch it in November.

CA-16 had a big GOP increase and went from D+19.5 to D+14.4. That put it more in line with previous prmaries.

Edit May 29:

The statewide change has been R+4.6, going from D+15.2 in 2016 to D+10.6 in 2018. I found it strange then that the competitive districts were, pretty much all, not moving 4.6 points more Republican. So I decided to look at all 53 districts and find out why. I added the change at the bottom of the page. I noted the seven Republican-Clinton districts in orange, previously competitive Democratic districts in yellow, and other Republican held seats in blue.

The results are rather remarkable. The top 11 districts that have become more Republican are heavily Democratic districts that won’t be competitive. The bottom 14 districts include 7 that have had better Democratic returns. These consist of 6 Clinton/Republican districts, 2 competitive Democratic districts, and 5 other Republican districts. So while the VBM returns look better for Republicans statewide than they were in 2016 they aren’t in the districts that are most competitive.

Edit May 30:

Spreadsheet reflects latest ballot update. We’re at 1.4 million ballots. I wish someone would poll those who have already voted. We could get an idea of how the candidates are doing without worrying about whether the sample had the right age or ethnic mix. Sure, it wouldn’t reflect how the final vote will be, but it’d give us an idea. The partisan make-up of the electorate changes from VBM to election day but the vote within the parties doesn’t change much. John Cox is likely to get a similar share of Republican votes on election day as he gets in VBM.

The latest batch was D+9.6, lowering the statewide breakdown from D+10.6 to D+10.5.

While I updated all the districts I’m only highlighting those where a party could get shutout. CA-39 moves from R+12.1 to R+12.2. CA-48 moves the other way, from R+10.9 to R+10.5. CA-49 moves from R+1.8 to R+2.1. The CA-48 movement is good news for Democrats, while the CA-49 movement is good news for the GOP. While Democrats are at risk of getting shut out of all three districts, Republicans are only at risk in CA-49.

Edit May 31:

I have some good news for Democrats and good news for Republicans. Some of the good news for Democrats is tainted. (How’s that for a tease?)

The new numbers are a big positive for Democrats. A 46D/33R day pushes the margin from D+10.5% to D+10.9%. It’s still closer to 2014 than 2016 but it could be helpful to get Kevin de Leon into top two.

Republicans gained in CA-21, 25, 39, and 45. CA-21 was rather dramatic, going from D+11.0 to D+8.5. Democrats consistently return more ballots and yet David Valadao wins. I believe there’s a number where the Democrats get more votes than Valadao. Since the VBM return margin is now the same as 2012, and less than 2016, I don’t think we’re getting there.

CA-39 was already a bad VBM return margin for Democrats and the latest numbers make them worse. Republicans have overperformed their VBM margins in each primary. In 2016, for example, Republicans had a 10.0% advantage on returns but won by 21.0%. So the numbers looking worse could mean the Republicans topping 60% of the primary votes again.

The good news for Democrats is that CA-48 showed a dramatic shift towards them, from R +10.5 to R+9.6. Of course, even R+9.6 could be bad news for them.

The biggest good news for Democrats has some taint. Remarkably CA-49 is now R +0.4. Democrats have almost the same number of ballots in as Republicans. This district has moved heavily toward them. This district was the Democrats best chance of flipping that script and getting a D vs D result in a competitive district. Republicans did it twice before (CA-31 in 2012 and CA-25 in 2014) and Democrats would love to have one go their way. To do that they’d need Diane Harkey and Rocky Chavez to split the Republican vote. If Kristin Gaspar, Bryan Maryott, and the rest of the Republicans took enough votes two Democrats make top two.

The Democrats employed a strategy of blasting Rocky Chavez for being too liberal and working with the Democrats. Their goal was to drive Chavez voters to Harkey. If they’re successful they won’t have two Democrats finishing first and second. We’ll see if the Democratic strategy to secure one outcome prevents them from an even better one.

Edit June 1:

A slightly good day for Democrats. There were 197k ballots and they were 46D/34R. The state margin stayed virtually the same at D+10.9.

CA-21: This won’t impact top two but the Democratic advantage keeps falling. It’s down to D+7.2.

CA-39: Every little bit helps for the Democrats here. The district was R+12.6 and is now R+12.2.

CA-49: The VBMs are inching closer to parity. There are only 232 more Republican VBMs than Democratic ones. That’s R+0.3. No real advantage.

CA-24: The district dropped from a D+2.4 to D+1.9 advantage. This district was very close in 2014 and shouldn’t be dismissed as being competitive in November.

Everything else is in the spreadsheet.

Edit June 2:

We are now at 2.07 million VBM ballots returned. We’ll surpass 2014 on Monday. That might sound like a lot but there were 3.5 million more VBM ballots mailed out than in 2014. The return rate was 25.5% that year and is only 17.5% this year. While 2.14 million VBM ballots were mailed in prior to election day in 2014 another 957k VBM ballots were returned on election day that year. So we still have a lot of ballots to go.

There are 1.3 million more registered voters than in 2014. Since there are 3.5 million more VBM voters that means there are 2.2 million less precinct voters. So VBMs will be a higher share this year even if there’s better precinct turnout than VBM turnout. At this point it’s apparent that there isn’t a surge in voter turnout this year compared to 2014. It’s only a primary, of course, but the increased Democratic voter enthusiasm has been speculated based on elections that have happened this year. Right now that’s not apparent in California.

There is good news for Democrats here though. VBM returns were 47%D/33%R. The Democratic advantage is now D+11.3. VBM returns had been closer to 2014 than 2016 throughout the election period until now, but they are inching closer to the midway point. That’d be D+11.4. Obviously Democrats would like an electorate like they had in the 2016 primary but something in the middle is far better than the 2014 primary electorate.

CA-39 and 48 were virtually unchanged, although they did move 0.1% more Republican. CA-49 went from R+0.3% to R+0.9%, however. The district was R+8.0 in 2016 so even R+0.9 is great for Democrats. Still, the latest returns are going in the wrong direction for them. That makes a Republican shutout less likely but they can take comfort in that no matter how the returns go the rest of the way a Democratic shutout is very unlikely.

I’ll stick with my prediction that if a shutout happens, it happens in CA-48. CA-39 has had more Republican returns than CA-48 but has more Republican candidates.

CA-3 I think people want to ignore Democratic districts on the idea that we’re going to have such a blue wave that Republicans don’t have a shot at flipping Democratic districts. That may be the case but I ignore nothing! This district has some fairly blue areas, but also has some rural white working class areas. It’s possible we might not see a typical wave election. We might see a case where suburban voters move more to the Democrats and Trumpy areas turn out heavy for the Republicans. This district VBMs went from D+4.1 to D+3.0 yesterday and that’s a lower margin than even 2014. I’m not saying John Garamendi is in trouble, only that he shouldn’t put his campaign on cruise control just yet.

Edit June 4:

Click on my spreadsheet for the semi-final VBM report. There may be an update tomorrow, but it’ll be small as only a few counties give another update. There are other VBM ballots but they are ones turned in on election day or mailed on election day.

There are 2.6 million ballots in. This is greater than 2014, but that’s unsurprising. There are more VBM ballots out there. The total is lower than 2016 and that’s also unsurprising since this isn’t a presidential year. The partisan breakdwon is 45.0%D/33.7%R. That’s D+11.2%, almost equidistant between 2014 and 2018. The Republican share is almost the same as 2016. That was 33.8%. Right now there are 82% of the Republican total from that year. The Democrats have dropped from 49% of the electorate to 45%, only 76% of the Democratic ballots that year.

In 2016 there were 8.0 million registered Democrats and 4.9 million registered Republicans. Now there are 8.4 million registered Democrats and 4.8 million registered Republicans. I’d expect Democrats to retain a higher percentage of 2016 voters from the registration numbers. Yet the opposite is true.

That leads me to the simple conclusion. As of now, there’s no blue wave. I know a lot of people insist there is one. There may be elsewhere but it isn’t showing in California. Democrats just aren’t that motivated to show up this year.

Most of the key districts have a better Republican partisan advantage than 2016, so it shouldn’t be surprising if we see vote margins that are more Republican than they were two years ago. If that’s the case a lot of Democrats may be discouraged by the numbers. That might prove to be the wrong attitude, as Democrats did improve primary to general in 2012 and 2014. But we’ll worry about that when we have the primary vote totals.

CA-39: The VBMs are 34%D/46%R. That R+12 is more Republican than the R+10 in 2016. It wouldn’t be a surprise to me if the GOP got 60% of the vote. They got that two years ago. In fact, any Democratic total above 40% should be encouraging for the Democrats. It’s an indication that NPP voters are moving toward them. That said, a 42% showing could get them shut out of top two.

CA-48: The 36%D/45%R electorate should be encouraging for Democrats. It’s more Democratic than 2016 and could mean a closer vote than the 12% margin they lost by that year. They’re less likely to get shut out if they have 47% of the vote. Of course they had 48.5% in CA-31 in 2012 and they got shut out then.

CA-49: If you want to know what a blue wave would look like you want to look at CA-49. VBMs have dropped from R+8.0 to R+0.8. This is one of the few district with more ballots than 2016 and that’s largely because there are over 2,000 more Democratic ballots. Democrats should take the majority of the vote in this district. It’s the biggest flipping opportunity for them and one they better make sure they don’t blow by having a candidate fail to qualify top two.

CA-3 and CA-9: The Democratic VBM advantage this year is smaller than in 2014. I have a feeling we will be talking about both of these districts after tomorrow.

Edit June 5:

I’m not sure why but another roughly 10,000 ballots were added in the Central Valley CA-9 and 10 overnight. They were fairly Republican and have reduced the margin to D+11.2 from D+11.3. CA-9 is now down D+6.7.

Edit June 5 2:30 PM:

Counties usually stop submitting ballots received before election day but some counties are doing it today. I don’t know if these are ballots received yesterday or today. They are almost definitely VBM received at the county registrar’s office. I don’t think most counties update participation from the precincts until the precincts bring their ballots at the end of the day.

Word out is that San Mateo county is updating who’s voted hourly. I’m sure many of you have worked election day. You go from precinct to precinct and check off who’s voted. This gives the campaign an idea of how things are going and helps them to not call people who’ve voted. San Mateo county is eliminating the need for that. The man is taking work away from campaign volunteers!

Overall, the VBMs have bumped from D+11.2 to D+11.4. That’s midway between the very Republican 2014 and very Democratic 2016. It’s possible election day will be more Democratic than VBMs but then it probably was in 2014 and 2016. If voting behavior is consistent the results should be between the two.

CA-39: The LA county ballots have moved this district from R+12.1 to R+11.9. Every ballot here helps the Democrats.

CA-48: This district jumped from R+9.3 to R+9.9. I have no idea why this batch of ballots was so Republican but that’s going to make the Republican campaigns smile.

CA-49: The district goes from R+0.8 to R+1.1. That’s a small margin and it might not make a difference since both parties should be close to parity in the vote. Both parties have 3 or more viable candidates, so maybe this could make a difference.