Monday, November 29, 2004
Glad Tidings
In the wake of Team Reform's election day drubbing it became fashionable to whine that state GOP legislative candidates were overcome by a "Kerry tidal wave" that swept across the Commonwealth. (source: Boston Globe, 11/3/2004)
So we went to the numbers to see if this theory held water.
Four years ago, 32 percent of the Massachusetts electorate voted for Bush/Cheney. This year, Bush/Cheney received 37 percent of the state's vote. In other words, a greater percentage of Massachusetts voters voted against John Kerry in 2004 than voted against Al Gore in 2000.
Four years ago, Al Gore beat George Bush in Massachusetts by 737,985 votes. This year, John Kerry beat George Bush by 726,753 votes. From 2000 to 2004 the Dems margin of victory actually fell by 11,232.
George W. Bush received 1,067,163 votes in the Commonwealth in 2004. That is the highest Republican vote since 1988, when Michael Dukakis beat Bush I/Quayle. (source: Sec of State's office, PD43)
Finally, the 2004 total number of votes cast (2,888,083) was 5.6 percent higher than the total number of votes cast in 2000 (2,734,006). And while the number of Democratic votes increased by 10.9 percent from 2000 to 2004, the number of Republican votes increased by 21.4 percent.
If there was a Kerry tide in 2004, it barely covered the lowest clam beds.
But at least the election solidified the state GOP, right? After all, the 37 percent of the electorate who voted for Bush also voted for Republican legislative candidates.
Right?
Wrong.
We reviewed the state Senate races. A total of 624,220 votes were cast for Republican candidates to the upper chamber. That's just 21.6 percent of the electorate who voted for a presidential elector.
Okay, so not every person who voted for president cast a vote for state Senator. While 2,888,083 voted for presidential electors, only 1,929,513 voted for a state Senator. That means that the total vote cast for Republican state Senate candidates (624,220) may have been smaller than the total number of blanks that were registered across the board.
Think we're being unfair? We'll put it another way. If 1,929,513 persons cast a state Senate vote, and 624,220 voted Republican, Team Reform can say that Republicans won 32.7 percent of the state Senate votes - in a state where 37 percent of the electorate voted for a Republican president.
The Fraud Governor couldn't deliver Massachusetts for the Republican presidential election, or the Republican presidential vote for the Massachusetts election.
Okay, so there's a wee bit of good news for Willard Mitt in the dark cloud that was November 2004. In 72 communities across the Commonwealth, the percentage of Republican votes for state Senate seats equalled or exceeded the percentage of votes cast for George W. Bush. Unfortunately, the wee bit of good news ends there. Because these 72 communities cast ballots for 15 combined Senate candidates, and only three of them (Brown, Tarr and Tisei) won. These three were all incumbent legislators.
Which means that not one of Willard Mitt's reform outsiders survived Election Day, 2004. Despite the fact that more persons voted for George W. Bush in Massachusetts than cast ballots for Ronald Reagan in 1980. (source: Sec of State's office, PD43)
Three weeks after their election day drubbing, Team Reform unveiled tighter welfare policies. Under their plan, the workfare requirements for Massachusetts welfare recipients would be lengthened, including for those persons who have disabilities. (source: Boston Globe, 11/25/2004.)
The Fraud Governor, in explaining his policy, said, "what we're saying is that even folks with disabilities can engage in "productive work activities."
Too bad Willard Mitt doesn't expect productive work activities from Alex Dunn, Tagg Romney and the other architects of his failed 2004 campaign.
In the wake of Team Reform's election day drubbing it became fashionable to whine that state GOP legislative candidates were overcome by a "Kerry tidal wave" that swept across the Commonwealth. (source: Boston Globe, 11/3/2004)
So we went to the numbers to see if this theory held water.
Four years ago, 32 percent of the Massachusetts electorate voted for Bush/Cheney. This year, Bush/Cheney received 37 percent of the state's vote. In other words, a greater percentage of Massachusetts voters voted against John Kerry in 2004 than voted against Al Gore in 2000.
Four years ago, Al Gore beat George Bush in Massachusetts by 737,985 votes. This year, John Kerry beat George Bush by 726,753 votes. From 2000 to 2004 the Dems margin of victory actually fell by 11,232.
George W. Bush received 1,067,163 votes in the Commonwealth in 2004. That is the highest Republican vote since 1988, when Michael Dukakis beat Bush I/Quayle. (source: Sec of State's office, PD43)
Finally, the 2004 total number of votes cast (2,888,083) was 5.6 percent higher than the total number of votes cast in 2000 (2,734,006). And while the number of Democratic votes increased by 10.9 percent from 2000 to 2004, the number of Republican votes increased by 21.4 percent.
If there was a Kerry tide in 2004, it barely covered the lowest clam beds.
But at least the election solidified the state GOP, right? After all, the 37 percent of the electorate who voted for Bush also voted for Republican legislative candidates.
Right?
Wrong.
We reviewed the state Senate races. A total of 624,220 votes were cast for Republican candidates to the upper chamber. That's just 21.6 percent of the electorate who voted for a presidential elector.
Okay, so not every person who voted for president cast a vote for state Senator. While 2,888,083 voted for presidential electors, only 1,929,513 voted for a state Senator. That means that the total vote cast for Republican state Senate candidates (624,220) may have been smaller than the total number of blanks that were registered across the board.
Think we're being unfair? We'll put it another way. If 1,929,513 persons cast a state Senate vote, and 624,220 voted Republican, Team Reform can say that Republicans won 32.7 percent of the state Senate votes - in a state where 37 percent of the electorate voted for a Republican president.
The Fraud Governor couldn't deliver Massachusetts for the Republican presidential election, or the Republican presidential vote for the Massachusetts election.
Okay, so there's a wee bit of good news for Willard Mitt in the dark cloud that was November 2004. In 72 communities across the Commonwealth, the percentage of Republican votes for state Senate seats equalled or exceeded the percentage of votes cast for George W. Bush. Unfortunately, the wee bit of good news ends there. Because these 72 communities cast ballots for 15 combined Senate candidates, and only three of them (Brown, Tarr and Tisei) won. These three were all incumbent legislators.
Which means that not one of Willard Mitt's reform outsiders survived Election Day, 2004. Despite the fact that more persons voted for George W. Bush in Massachusetts than cast ballots for Ronald Reagan in 1980. (source: Sec of State's office, PD43)
Three weeks after their election day drubbing, Team Reform unveiled tighter welfare policies. Under their plan, the workfare requirements for Massachusetts welfare recipients would be lengthened, including for those persons who have disabilities. (source: Boston Globe, 11/25/2004.)
The Fraud Governor, in explaining his policy, said, "what we're saying is that even folks with disabilities can engage in "productive work activities."
Too bad Willard Mitt doesn't expect productive work activities from Alex Dunn, Tagg Romney and the other architects of his failed 2004 campaign.
