Wednesday, December 1, 2010

A quick note and some eye candy

I won't be posting as much post-election as I did pre-election, but I hope to keep up something of a regular pace.

There are many things still to wrap up from the election, including;

  • A Post-mortem
  • Updated hPVIs

and because 2012 can't come too soon, I'll start the house and senate versions of the

  • Most Vulnerable GOP Incumbents

Additionally I will continue to cover the redistricting process as it unfolds and provide background during the lead up.

If there are any suggestions for topics to cover, the comments of this thread would be the place for it.

In the meantime, here's a little something to consider, it's a chart of the partisan make-up of the Minnesota legislature, before and after the election.

The chart brakes down like this, for those not familiar with the formatting style; the vertical column of numbers represent Senate districts, the subsequent columns with letters represent the corresponding house district. A blue cell means the seat is held by a DFLer, a red cell means it is held by a GOPer.

The left side is pre-election, the right side post-election.

Image Hosted by


  1. How is it "eye candy" if the red is on the post-election side?
    and since you asked for suggestions: I'm interested in how the accuracy of polls corresponds to voter turnout. I would expect polls to be less accurate with lower turnout- is that true? and how much of a difference is there?

  2. Cause of the pretty colors?

    Yes, maybe eye candy was the wrong phrase.

    That's a good suggestion, the short answer is that yes; turnout, lower or higher than expected, can lead to inaccuracies in polls.

    Perhaps I'll do a "Source of Error in Polls" post.