I’ve been reading The Big Sort, by Bill Bishop, and decided to do some mapping based on the premises of the book, as well as to test out some hunches I had about certain Dayton suburbs.

 

The Big Sort shows how politics reflects geographic clustering of like-minded folks, how communities are becoming more and more homogeneous.  One of the points of the book is that beyond the red/blue divide, political geography at a more granular scale reveals counties and cities that become more polarized over time, becoming more and more Democrat or Republican.    The author uses the increasing number of  “landslide counties”  to measure polarization.  If the Democrat (or Republican) vote was 20% over the vote for the opposing party  (ie a “landslide” win) the county was deemed polarized.

 

For Montgomery County, in the 2000 & 2004 presidential elections, the vote was nearly exactly 50/50, with the GOP making a slight increase in 2004, so not  polarized at the county level.  Below that things get more interesting.

 

What I did is use the 2006 general election results, which had two high-profile statewide races (and also one where I could easily get precinct level data), and mapped out results by precinct for two suburbs, Oakwood and the unincorporated areas of Washington Township.

 

If you are not familiar with the Dayton area here is a map, with study areas outlined in blue.

 

 

I was particularly interested in Oakwood, as it is one of those blue-blood older Ohio suburbs, similar to Bexely or Upper Arlington in Columbus, Ottawa Hills in Toledo, Cleveland and Shaker Heights in Cleveland, and the Hyde Park/Grandin Road area in Cincinnati (not suburbs, but similar places).

 

So, given the stereotype an as old money/snob appeal kind of place one would  exepct Oakwood to be Republican.

 

The reality is more nuanced.

 

The following chart shows the Oakwood precincts by election in 2006.  From left to right the Senate race, Governor and statewide offices, followed by two county commissioner races and a county auditors race.  The blue-Dem/red-GOP graphic convention is used to show which party carried a precinct.  The number shows the point spread for the precinct.  In other words it shows by how many % points the Dem or GOP candidate carried the precinct (negative number shows a GOP win). 

 

For example, for precinct V, Senate race, red color indicates  the Republican carried the precinct, and the number shows the Republican won it by 26.5 percent points over the Democrat.  Since the interest here is in political polarization….”landslide precincts”…the degree of partisan support is of interest , as well as how frequently a precinct goes Dem or GOP.

 

The bottom bar shows which party won the suburb by office, and just by this Oakwood is pretty Republican;  the GOP carried nearly all the offices listed here.

 

 

 

 

However, looking at the pattern in the chart, it becomes quickly evident that Oakwood is not monolithically Republican, as there are examples of precincts that split their tickets, and even a few that are mostly Democratic.  I categorized this at the far left column.  Note, however, that there is no precinct in Oakwood that is always Democratic, as the GOP carried all precincts for the congressional race, not shown here.

 

Oakwood Political Neighborhoods

 

Mapping the results of the chart by precinct, one can easily see how Oakwood divides up into ‘political neighborhoods’, with Far Hills Avenue being the obvious divide.  Far Hills has long been a social divide, with “West of Far Hills” being the estate district and “East of Far Hills” being mostly smaller houses.  Yet it’s interesting to see this also map out politically. 

 

Things get more interesting in northern Oakwood, where the Shantz Park area (the gridded area at extreme north, or top) is swing precinct splitting its vote between Dems and Republicans.  There is also a strong GOP presence in precinct B, east of Far Hills.

 

 

 

Let’s look at the Senate and Governors race to see if polarization is evident.

 

For the Senate race the GOP did well.  Four precincts in northern Oakwood polarized towards the GOP, including a leaning GOP precinct.  The Dem precincts in southeast Oakwood went Dem, but with tight point spread

 

 

For the governor’s races, the GOP apparently had a weak candidate as he didn’t carry any GOP precinct over 20%, and lost two of the swing precincts.  In contrast two of the Democratic leaning precincts polarized, with point spreads 20% or over in favor of the Dem candidate.

 

Revisiting the chart, and looking at landslide wins one can see the areas that are GOP tend to deliver more landslides while the Democratic areas are less likely too.  Precinct O seems to be the most reliable Democratic-leaning precinct.

 

 

Without having multiyear comparisons one can’t say if there is a Democratic or Republican trend in Oakwood.  Given the suburbs’ reputation and the evidence of mostly Democratic and swing precincts, one can infer that this suburb, or parts of it, is more Democrat than the stereotype.  What’s also evident is that the suburb isn’t that polarized.  The point spread depends on the office and candidate, and there is considerable ticket splitting in at least two precincts.

 

Next we will look at a much more politically polarized suburb; the unincorporated parts of Washington Township.

 

Deep Red in Washington Township

 

On this map the incorporated areas of Centerville are omitted from the study (whited-out) and I only look at three races, Governor, Senator, and a bottom of the ticket race for County Auditor.

 

By looking at the Senate results, measuring the point spread between the GOP and Democrat candidates, one can see that this is quite polarized to the GOP, by far more than Oakwood, where the GOP landslide precincts in some cases beat the GOP margins in Oakwood.  In fact the GOP candidates two best precincts were in this township

 

 

The deep red areas are mostly in the newer areas in the southern half of the township (developed starting late 1980s through the 1990s and still developing), and in some older areas in the northwest quadrant.  What’s also noticeable are weak GOP areas to the west of Centerville, along OH 725, as well as individual weak precincts, conforming to older subdivisions.

 

Looking at the governors race, I only mapped out the landslide precincts for the GOP and weak GOP areas to see if there was a pattern, and there seems to be one, a political neighborhood developing along route 725, where the Democrats actually won some precincts.  The scattered weak GOP areas we saw for Senate reappear in this race, too.

 

 

Again, we see that the GOP did better in this township than in the blue blood Oakwood estate district.

 

Looking at the county auditors race the pattern is less clear, where this candidate did better than expected, perhaps due to name recognition.

 

 

Yet one can again see the same weak GOP precincts reappear.

 

Putting together the consistently weak precincts and the landslide areas one gets an picture of certain political neighborhoods, particularly the route 725 corridor in the west central part of the township….

 

 

….an area that has sometimes been called “downtown Washington Township”.  This area does have some quirks, as it has two liberal congregations..Unitarian/Universalist and a UCC congregation (Obama’s old denomination) founded and originally headed by a gay minister.

 

As you can see by this aerial, mapping out the “political neighborhood” of weak GOP precincts,  it isn’t anything like the uniform cul-de-sac world of new suburbia. 

 

 

…being a mix of various types of multifamily housing, office parks/light industry, and strip retail, including a collection of nightclubs and eating/drinking places.

 

This leads to some differences in demographics, not so much in ethnicity….

 

 

 

….but more in family composition (smaller households) and home ownership.  This census tract does have a concentration of same-sex partner households, too.

 

 

 

So when one gets to a granular scale, like census blocks and precincts, one can see areas that might seem homogenous are really not, that there is a bit more diversity out there.

 

It will be interesting to revisit this geography after the Presidential election.

 

 

 

Interesting.

^

Looking at the Oakwood maps, one could say Democrats prefer gridded street systems and Republicans don't.

 

 

Makes sense.  Cul-de-sacs are deadends, thus nobody wants to go down them, and therefore no one would have to worry about "elements" coming in.  Curvilinear streets were designed in some rich areas for the affect of (or fear) getting lost (meaning, only locals know).

^Don't forget that varied topography can force curvilinear/cul-de-sac development.  Also these areas are more difficult to develop, driving the price point up, not to mention the additional beauty factor of living near a valley, river, or what have you.  The Ottawa Hills/Old Orchard setup in Toledo seems similar to that of Oakwood.  Ottawa Hills is curvilinear while adjacent Old Orchard is a grid in the city limits.  Perhaps the development in Ottawa Hills turned out more exclusive because the topography is more varied--there are actually hills and a river--unlike Old Orchard which is pretty much flat (a slight slope at best in places, where the streets flood in summer rain). 

 

Sorry to bring up Toledo in a SW OH thread! 

 

Also, let me add that I've never been to this Oakwood, just Cleveland's, so I might be totally off base with its topography. 

No, you are correct.  The curvy streets on the Oakwood map drop down into little ravines and valleys, so larger lots for the estates (and more scenic).  The area with the gridded streets are flatter, and developed more dense, but still nice houses.

 

So there was a sort of snob appeal pyschology going on..the gridded areas attracted people who wanted the snob appeal of an Oakwood address (originally).

 

Now the area is attractive to professionals, academics, etc (think Oak Park or Evanston near Chicago), who bring their somewhat more liberal politics with them.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jeffrey-

 

Thank you. I have been waiting for your next installment. You never disappoint. :clap:

 

I have always found it interesting that you live in Washington Twp. instead of some fabulous urban neighborhood.

Do you find the Washington Twp. to be tolerant, if not liberal?

It is worth noting that choosing the grid versus curvilinear can be purposeful irrespective of the geography. Cincinnati's grid that makes up the basin actually continues up the hills - it looked great on a flat map but no so well in reality.

 

I have to imagine that proximity to UD also has some affect with faculty settling there.

Do you find the Washington Twp. to be tolerant, if not liberal?

 

I find it anonymous, which is what I like.