A community-driven blog featuring news and commentary on local, state, and national politics.

Donate to CT Dems

Ads on My Left Nutmeg

Contact Info

To contact the site admin email ctblogger at ctblogger@yahoo.com

Dems Growing in Unconventional Places

by: mikect

Wed May 21, 2008 at 08:11:43 AM EDT

Democratic voter registration has been on th e rise since 2005, a trend that may affect electoral outcomes in changing regions like Fairfield and Litchfield counties. But what kind of towns and voters are experiencing this change? Overlaying demographic information can help to flesh out an answer. The CT State Data Center breaks down Connecticut towns into five categories based on local income, poverty rates, and population density: urban core (eg, Hartford, large cities), urban periphery (eg, Norwich, small cities, inner ring), suburban (eg, Cheshire), wealthy (eg, Westport), and rural (eg, North Stonington). (These categories are more fully explained below the fold.)

The GOP's elected officials have had much of their success in suburban, rural, and wealthy towns, but they are losing ground among the electorate to the Democrats in these towns, even among the highest-income voters.

On a percentage basis, Democratic registration increased the most in wealthy towns (16%), suburban towns (12%), and rural towns (9%). In terms of numbers of voters, the greatest increases were in suburban and urban periphery towns. Democrats now slightly outnumber Republicans in the suburbs, reversing the GOP's previous advantage. Looking at the changes another way, 41% of Democratic gains in the state were in the suburbs and 27% were in urban periphery towns.
Republican registration decreased across all town groups, with the greatest percentage losses in urban core, urban periphery, and wealthy towns.
Democrats outnumber Republicans across all town groups, except for wealthy towns. In part because of their initially smaller numbers, Dems in the wealthiest towns had the largest percentage increase. Dems enjoy a huge advantage in large and small cities, have a substantial advantage in rural towns, and edge out the GOP by a small margin in suburban towns.

Change in voter registration, Oct 2005 to Feb 2008

Town type	Dems 2008	Dem change	Dem % change	Repub 2008	R change	R % change	Ratio D/R 2008
Rural	87,518	7,496	9%	64,660	-631	-1%	1.4
Suburban	166,660	17,383	12%	159,705	-2,769	-2%	1.0
Urban core	163,995	2,611	2%	23,960	-1,794	-7%	6.8
Urban periphery	248,645	11,400	5%	119,935	-7,814	-6%	2.1
Wealthy	29,076	3,949	16%	44,332	-2,203	-5%	0.7
Total	695,894	42,839	7%	412,592	-15,211	-4%	1.7

% measured as percent change, not percentage point change.

More analysis of town registration trends below.

mikect :: Dems Growing in Unconventional Places

Changes by town groups

It is notable that the towns in the "wealthy" category - which had the greatest percentage gains for Democrats - are all in Fairfield County. This county accounted for one-third of the loss of Republicans in the state between 2005 and 2007. Anxious, Mr. Shays?
Since Dems overwhelmingly dominate Republicans in large cities, there is less "room" for them to grow.
The growth of suburban Democrats in the state may reflect national trends in voting and turnout in the suburbs that favor Democrats.

The towns in each category with the largest numerical increases in Democratic voter registration between 2005 and 2008 (rank ordered within each category):

Rural: Mansfield, Stonington, East Lyme
Suburban: Cheshire, Fairfield, Glastonbury
Urban core: New Haven, Bridgeport, Hartford
Urban periphery: Norwalk, West Hartford, Hamden
Wealthy: Greenwich, Westport, Ridgefield

The unaffiliated

Unaffiliated enrollment data by town is not readily available for 2008, but below are the numbers for October 2007. Given the continued Democratic surge since 2007, these numbers understate Democratic enrollment.

Party registration by town type, October 2007

Town type	D%	R%	U%
Rural	29	22	49
Suburban	26	26	47
Urban core	60	9	32
Urban periphery	36	18	45
Wealthy	24	39	38
Total	35	21	44

Unaffiliated voters still substantially outnumber both parties in most town groups, except for urban core and wealthy regions. The unaffiliated have their greatest advantage over Democrats in suburban and rural towns.

Change in unaffiliated and all voters, Oct 2005 to Oct 2007

Town type	U # change	U % point change	Total # voter change	Total % voter change
Rural	-2,623	-0.6%	-2,100	-0.7%
Suburban	-7,706	-0.8%	-6,536	-1.1%
Urban core	-4,880	-1.1%	-5,272	-1.9%
Urban periphery	-14,977	-0.6%	-24,312	-3.6%
Wealthy	1,474	1.3%	76	0.1%
Total	-28,712	-0.6%	-38,144	-2.0%

Change in unaffiliated measured as percentage point change, e.g., % of voters who were Us in 2007 - % U voters in 2005; not percent change, e.g., (2007 Us - 2005 Us)/2005 Us.

Most of the decline in unaffiliated and Republican registered voters over this period occurred in urban periphery towns (small cities and inner ring towns). Only wealthy, Fairfield County towns did not experience any decline in overall enrollment. However, in these towns, voters are choosing Democratic and unaffiliated status and are dropping out of the Republican party. These wealthy towns experienced the largest percentage point decline in Republican enrollment (-2.6%) and were the only grouping to see an increase in unaffiliated enrollment.

Overall voter shifts

There has been a net decrease in the number of voters since 2005, a decline that occurs routinely between Presidential elections. It is probable that the total number of voters will approach or exceed the level from the last Presidential cycle as the general election approaches.

It is quite possible that the percentage of Democrats as a share of all voters will decline slightly as more Republicans and unaffiliated voters join the rolls this year. But several months before the election, that is not yet happening. Indeed, because of growing Democratic enrollment, the trend from unaffiliated to Democratic registration as a share of the electorate accelerated after October 2007, then began to level off. Despite February's GOP primary, Republican enrollment as a share of state voters has been stagnant.

CT Voter Registration

Town groups

Here's an overview of the five categories of Connecticut towns as developed by the CT State Data Center at UCONN. For more information, see their report on the subject (PDF).

Rural	Average income, below average poverty, and lowest population density. Example: North Stonington.
Suburban	Above average income, low poverty, and moderate population density. Suburbs of more densely populated urban areas. Example: Cheshire
Urban Core	Lowest income, highest poverty, and the highest population density. Example: Bridgeport.
Urban Periphery	Below average income, average poverty, and high population density. The group of towns with the highest population. Transitional towns between the urban cores and the suburbs. Example: Norwich.
Wealthy	Exceptionally high income, low poverty, and moderate population density. Example: Westport.