Talk:1892 United States House of Representatives elections

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Ohio changes[edit]

I don't know what the happened here. The changes made to Ohio make no sense at all. Maybe You'd like to change United_States_congressional_delegations_from_Ohio to fit the illogical changes made here. Please explain Roseohioresident (talk) 20:05, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

  • I'm sorry I didn't give edit summaries. That was my fault, and I should be doing a better job with that. With other years, we've noted redistricting and new districts this way. See, for example, United States House of Representatives elections, 1952#Ohio. You seem to know a lot more about Ohio elections than I do, so if I made mistakes please correct them. All I was trying to do is put it into this consistent format. When an incumbent is moved into a new district, we put the incumbent on the row for that new district and note that they were redistricted. If there are no incumbents in a district, then we note it as "None (District created)" and the Result is "New seat… Xxxx gain."—GoldRingChip 13:12, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
    • seems kind of silly to me- but it looks like the issue is settled.Roseohioresident (talk) 20:52, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
      • No- nothing is settled in Wikipedia! Let's have a discussion. What do you you think we should do? For example, let's look at Ohio in the current election, United States House of Representatives elections, 2012#Ohio, since we're more familiar with that as a currently-happening event. How would you suggest changing it? —GoldRingChip 01:27, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Here it is, as it shows today:

District Incumbent Party First
2012 status / Result Candidates
Ohio 1 Steve Chabot Republican 1994
Running for re-election Steve Chabot (Republican)
Jeff Sinnard (Democratic)
Jim Berns (Libertarian)
Rich Stevenson (Green)
Ohio 2 Jean Schmidt Republican 2005 Lost renomination Brad Wenstrup (Republican)
William R. Smith (Democratic)
Ohio 3 New seat Joyce Beatty (Democratic)
Chris Long (Republican)
Richard Ehrbar (Libertarian)
Ohio 4 Jim Jordan Republican 2006 Running for re-election Jim Jordan (Republican)
James Slone (Democratic)
Chris Calla (Libertarian)
Ohio 5 Bob Latta Republican 2007 Running for re-election Bob Latta (Republican)
Angela Zimmann (Democratic)
Eric Eberly (Libertarian)
Ohio 6 Bill Johnson Republican 2010 Running for re-election Bill Johnson (Republican)
Charlie Wilson (Democratic)
Ohio 7 Bob Gibbs
Redistricted from the 18th district
Republican 2010 Running for re-election Bob Gibbs (Republican)
Joyce R. Healy-Abrams (Democratic)
Ohio 8 John Boehner Republican 1990 Running for re-election John Boehner (Republican)
Ohio 9 Marcy Kaptur Democratic 1982 Running for re-election Marcy Kaptur (Democratic)
Samuel Wurzelbacher (Republican)
Sean Stipe (Libertarian)
Dennis Kucinich
Redistricted from the 10th district
Democratic 1996 Lost renomination
Democratic loss
Ohio 10 Mike Turner
Redistricted from the 3rd district
Republican 2002 Running for re-election Mike Turner (Republican)
Sharen Neuhardt (Democratic)
David Harlow (Libertarian)
Steve Austria
Redistricted from the 7th district
Republican 2008 Retiring
Republican loss
Ohio 11 Marcia Fudge Democratic 2008 Running for re-election Marcia Fudge (Democratic)
Ohio 12 Pat Tiberi Republican 2000 Running for re-election Pat Tiberi (Republican)
James Reese (Democratic)
Robert Fitrakis (Green)
Ohio 13 Tim Ryan
Redistricted from the 17th district
Democratic 2002 Running for re-election Tim Ryan (Democratic)
Marisha Agana (Republican)
Ohio 14 Steve LaTourette Republican 1994 Retiring David Joyce (Republican)
Dale Virgil Blanchard (Democratic)
David Macko (Libertarian)
Elaine Mastromatteo (Green)
Ohio 15 Steve Stivers Republican 2010 Running for re-election Steve Stivers (Republican)
Pat Lang (Democratic)
Ohio 16 Jim Renacci Republican 2010 Running for re-election Jim Renacci (Republican)
Betty Sutton (Democratic)
Betty Sutton
Redistricted from the 13th district
Democratic 2006 Running for re-election
  • Wikipedia and wiktionary both define incumbent as the "current holder of a political office". While the way the table above is constructed has internal logic, the heading of "incumbent" and what appears below clash.
    "New seat", and "none - district created" need better terminology. The third district is not "new" nor "created", it has been there since 1823. The boundary may have changed, but the seat is still the same. I've been reading wikipedia for years, and I assumed the whole "new seat" change was some kind of vandalism. I can imagine a more naive reader would assume it just another case of editors gone wild.Roseohioresident (talk) 19:00, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
    • Maybe we can come up with a better term? Instead of "new seat" pehaps we could use "new boundaries without an incumbent"? Or is there something shorter and more elegant than that? How about "New District" or "Empty District" or "No Incubent"? (I like the last one the best.) —GoldRingChip 21:02, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
      • “No incumbent” is better than the others, but seems to me to imply something like “Vacant - died” , “Vacant - resigned” or “Vacant - expelled”. If the district has a rep in 112th congress, "no incumbent" just doesn't seem correct. Roseohioresident (talk) 20:47, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
  • also, Dennis Kucinich is noted as "democratic loss". I think Marcy Kaptur would think differently. It seems that Ohio 9 is democratic now and will probably be democratic next year, thus "democratic hold", while ohio 10 is democratic now, and will probably be republican next year, thus "republican gain". The party representing the seat is what is important, not what counties it represents, or the fate of individuals, at least as far as I see it. The incumbents from ohio 17 and ohio 18, which are lost due to population loss in this state, would be in the fifth column as redistricted, democratic loss , and redistricted, republican loss, and the sixth column would say, "district inactive" . That was the logic behind the table for ohio 1892, as originally uploaded by me, [1].Roseohioresident (talk) 19:18, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
    • The Kucinich "loss" is because where there were previously two Democrats, and at least one of them, Kucinich, will no longer be in office. Where once there were two, now there is one. Thus, there is a loss of one Democrat. The Democrats in Ohio and in Washington see it as a Democratic loss, even if Kaptur still represents some of the same constituents; I think Kaptur is glad she beat Kucinich, but I'm sure she sees it as an overall loss because she'd rather have him in the House with her under a different redistricting. Furthermore, if she loses re-election, then it would be a "Republican (or Libertarian) gain." Similarly for the 10th district with two Republican incumbents.—GoldRingChip 20:49, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
      • I don't have time today to explain myself fully. There is no hurry, wikipedia will be here forever. I'll try to compose a detailed account of the strengths and weaknesses as I see them. One thing I will note is that Party shading/loss and party shading/hold look the same on my screen, very confusing. I have ideas on how I would assemble a table, starting from scratch, but since dozens or maybe hundreds of tables are already there, I will also consider what could be done with minimal disruption to existing code.Roseohioresident (talk) 21:26, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Why not shade Candidates column[edit]

If starting from scratch, assuming winners and losers just to make it more interesting, I would probably go with something like:

District Incumbent Party First
Result Candidates
Ohio 1 Steve Chabot Republican 2010 Re-elected
  • Steve Chabot (R) 73.0%
  • Jeff Sinnard (D) 25.0%
  • Jim Berns (Libertarian) 1.0%
  • Rich Stevenson (Green) 1.0%
Ohio 2 Jean Schmidt Republican 2005 (s) Lost Re-nomination
Republican Hold
Ohio 3 Mike Turner Republican 2002 Re-districted to 10th district
Democratic gain
  • Joyce Beatty (D) 52.4%
  • Chris Long (R) 45.6%
  • Richard Ehrbar (Libertarian) 2.0%
Ohio 4 Jim Jordan Republican 2006 Re-elected
  • Jim Jordan (R) 59.5%
  • James Slone (D) 39.4%
  • Chris Calla (Lib) 1.1%
Ohio 5 Bob Latta Republican 2007 (s) Re-elected
  • Bob Latta (R) 67.4%
  • Angela Zimmann (D) 30.4%
  • Eric Eberly (Lib) 2.2%
Ohio 6 Bill Johnson Republican 2010 Lost Re-election
Democratic gain
Ohio 7 Steve Austria Republican 2008 Retired
Republican hold
  • Bob Gibbs (R) 72.2%
  • Joyce Healy-Abrams (D) 27.8%
Ohio 8 John Boehner Republican 1990 Re-elected unopposed John Boehner (R) 100.0%
Ohio 9 Marcy Kaptur Democratic 1982 Re-elected
Ohio 10 Dennis Kucinich Democratic 1996 Re-districted to 9th district
Lost re-nomination
Republican gain
Ohio 11 Marcia Fudge Democratic 2008 (s) Re-elected unopposed Marcia Fudge (D) 100.0%
Ohio 12 Pat Tiberi Republican 2000 Re-elected
  • Pat Tiberi (R) 53.0%
  • James Reese (D) 43.0%
  • Robert Fitrakis (Lib) 4.0%
Ohio 13 Betty Sutton Democratic 2006 Redistricted to 16th district
Democratic hold
  • Tim Ryan (D) 55.0%
  • Marisha Agana (R) 45.0%
Ohio 14 Steve LaTourette Republican 1994 Retired
Republican hold
  • David Joyce (R) 50.1%
  • Dale Virgil Blanchard (D) 45.0%
  • David Macko (Lib) 4.0%
  • Elaine Mastromatteo (Green) 0.9%
Ohio 15 Steve Stivers Republican 2010 Re-elected
Ohio 16 Jim Renacci Republican 2010 Re-elected
Ohio 17 Tim Ryan Democratic 2002 Re-districted to 13th
Democratic loss
District in-active

Ohio 18 Bob Gibbs Republican 2010 Re-districted to 7th
Republican loss
District in-active

I think the most important part of this table to me is the shading in column Party and column Candidates. Just compare the two and change in compositon of delegation and change in each district is obvious, kind of like United States congressional delegations from Ohio turned on its side. With the current system, like shown at United States House of Representatives elections, 2012#Ohio and United States House of Representatives elections, 1892#Ohio, the change in composition and change of party in individual district, not so much. Shading in column “Result” would call attention to holds and changes in party. Even for years without any re-districting, I think shading the columns for party in previous congress, and elected party for next congress is the most important change that I think would clear things up. The only times there would be no incumbent would be (1) in cases of death, expulsion, or resignation with no replacement chosen in special election before the new term, or (2) for actual “new districts” created due to population growth.

Also, one small thing, in United States House of Representatives elections, 2012#Ohio, I don't know why Ohio 1 has two first elected dates for Steve Chabot. He won in 1994, 1996... 2006, lost in 2008 and won again in 2010. I think we should probably choose either the first election, or the first election contiguous to the this one. This could really get out of hand. Imagine the table for New York Elections in 1888... column 1 : New York 9 ; column 2 : Samuel S. Cox ; column 3 : Democratic ; column 4 : Ohio 1856, New York 1868, New York 1884, and New York 1886 (s). This could get silly looking.
Roseohioresident (talk) 21:08, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

I like this idea! It would take a lot of work to change all the existing pages, though. As for the multiple dates, I think it makes sense for individuals with discontinuous terms to list the first time they were elected and then the start of their current term in office. Although I'd probably go with something like "district eliminated" rather than "inactive" XinaNicole (talk) 03:54, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
Though, one small comment, it would be good to be able to show when there are two incumbents running in a single district. Perhaps something like italicizing candidates who were serving in Congress at the time of the election (and both bold and italic for someone who was re-elected) XinaNicole (talk) 03:59, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
I disagree. Shading the candidates column leads to too much shading.—GoldRingChip 14:46, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
Also, we should not list by representative, but by district.—GoldRingChip 14:46, 15 January 2013 (UTC)