2018 California Assembly elections | |
---|---|
General | November 6, 2018 |
Primary | June 5, 2018 |
Past election results | |||||||
2016・2014・2012・2010・2008 2006・2004・2002・2000 |
2018 elections | |
---|---|
Choose a chamber below: | |
Democrats maintained their supermajority in the California State Assembly in the 2018 elections, winning 60 seats to Republicans' 20. A party needed 54 seats in the Assembly to hold a two-thirds supermajority.
All 80 Assembly seats were up for election in 2018. Heading into the election, Democrats controlled 55 seats and Republicans controlled 25 seats.
Democrats maintained their trifecta in California by holding the state Assembly, the state Senate, and the governor's office.
California state assembly members serve two-year terms, with all seats up for election every two years.
The California State Assembly was one of 87 state legislative chambers holding elections in 2018. There are 99 chambers throughout the country. In 2017, three chambers in Virginia and New Jersey were up for election. In 2016, 86 out of 99 legislative chambers held elections. Prior to 2018, the California State Assembly last held elections in 2016.
For more information about the top-two primary, click here.
The Democratic Party attained supermajority status in both chambers of the California State Legislature in the 2018 election. Democrats in the California State Assembly already held a supermajority, but Democrats in the California State Senate did not previously hold the minimum 27 seats needed for a supermajority. In the state Senate, 20 out of 40 seats were up for election. Democrats increased their majority in the California State Senate from 26-14 to 29-11. Two Republican incumbents were defeated in the general election.
The California State Assembly held elections for all 80 seats. The Democratic supermajority in the State Assembly increased from 55-25 to 60-20. Three Republican incumbents were defeated in the general election.
On November 6, 2018, 87 of the nation's 99 state legislative chambers held regularly scheduled elections for 6,073 of 7,383 total seats, meaning that nearly 82 percent of all state legislative seats were up for election.
Want more information?
California State Assembly General Election 2018 |
|||
|
|||
Office | Democratic | Republican | Other |
District 1 |
Brian Dahle (i) |
|
|
District 2 |
Jim Wood (i) |
|
|
District 3 |
James Gallagher (i) |
|
|
District 4 |
Brandon Nelson (Libertarian Party) |
||
District 5 |
Frank Bigelow (i) |
|
|
District 6 |
Kevin Kiley (i) |
|
|
District 7 |
Kevin McCarty (i) |
|
|
District 8 |
Ken Cooley (i) |
|
|
District 9 |
Jim Cooper (i) |
|
|
District 10 |
Marc Levine (i) |
|
|
District 11 |
Jim Frazier (i) |
|
|
District 12 |
Heath Flora (i) |
|
|
District 13 |
|
||
District 14 |
|
||
District 15 |
|
||
District 16 |
Catharine Baker (i) |
|
|
District 17 |
|
||
District 18 |
Rob Bonta (i) |
|
|
District 19 |
Phil Ting (i) |
|
|
District 20 |
Bill Quirk (i) |
|
|
District 21 |
Adam Gray (i) |
Justin Quigley (Libertarian Party) |
|
District 22 |
Kevin Mullin (i) |
|
|
District 23 |
Jim Patterson (i) |
|
|
District 24 |
Marc Berman (i) |
|
|
District 25 |
Kansen Chu (i) |
|
|
District 26 |
Devon Mathis (i) |
|
|
District 27 |
Ash Kalra (i) |
|
|
District 28 |
Evan Low (i) |
|
|
District 29 |
Mark Stone (i) |
|
|
District 30 |
|
||
District 31 |
Joaquin Arambula (i) |
|
|
District 32 |
Rudy Salas (i) |
|
|
District 33 |
Jay Obernolte (i) |
|
|
District 34 |
Vince Fong (i) |
|
|
District 35 |
|
||
District 36 |
Tom Lackey (i) |
|
|
District 37 |
|
||
District 38 |
Dante Acosta (i) |
|
|
District 39 |
Luz Maria Rivas (i) |
|
|
District 40 |
|
||
District 41 |
Chris Holden (i) |
Alan Reynolds (Independent) |
|
District 42 |
Chad Mayes (i) |
|
|
District 43 |
Laura Friedman (i) |
|
|
District 44 |
Jacqui Irwin (i) |
|
|
District 45 |
Jesse Gabriel (i) |
|
|
District 46 |
Adrin Nazarian (i) |
|
|
District 47 |
|
||
District 48 |
Blanca Rubio (i) |
|
|
District 49 |
Edwin Chau (i) |
|
|
District 50 |
Richard Bloom (i) |
|
|
District 51 |
Wendy Carrillo (i) |
Christopher Stare (Libertarian Party) |
|
District 52 |
|
||
District 53 |
|
||
District 54 |
|
||
District 55 |
Phillip Chen (i) |
|
|
District 56 |
Eduardo Garcia (i) |
|
|
District 57 |
|
||
District 58 |
Cristina Garcia (i) |
|
|
District 59 |
|
||
District 60 |
|
||
District 61 |
Jose Medina (i) |
|
|
District 62 |
Autumn Burke (i) |
|
|
District 63 |
|
||
District 64 |
Mike Gipson (i) |
|
|
District 65 |
|
||
District 66 |
Al Muratsuchi (i) |
|
|
District 67 |
Melissa Melendez (i) |
|
|
District 68 |
Steven S. Choi (i) |
|
|
District 69 |
Tom Daly (i) |
Autumn Browne (Libertarian Party) |
|
District 70 |
Honor Robson (Libertarian Party) |
||
District 71 |
Randy Voepel (i) |
|
|
District 72 |
|
||
District 73 |
William Brough (i) |
|
|
District 74 |
Matthew Harper (i) |
|
|
District 75 |
Marie Waldron (i) |
|
|
District 76 |
|
||
District 77 |
|
||
District 78 |
Todd Gloria (i) |
|
|
District 79 |
Shirley Weber (i) |
|
|
District 80 |
|
The candidate list below is based on a list provided by the California Secretary of State website on March 29, 2018. The filing deadline for the June primary was on March 9, 2018. (I) denotes an incumbent.[1]
A margin of victory (MOV) analysis for the 2018 California State Assembly races is presented in this section. MOV represents the percentage of total votes that separated the winner and the second-place finisher. For example, if the winner of a race received 47 percent of the vote and the second-place finisher received 45 percent of the vote, the MOV is 2 percent.
The table below presents the following figures for each party:
California State Assembly: 2018 Margin of Victory Analysis | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Party | Elections won | Elections won by less than 10% | Unopposed elections | Average margin of victory[2] |
Democratic | ||||
Republican | ||||
Other | ||||
Total |
The margin of victory in each race is presented below. The list is sorted from the closest MOV to the largest (including unopposed races).
The below map displays each seat in the California State Assembly which changed partisan hands as a result of the 2018 elections, shaded according to the partisan affiliation of the winner in 2018. Hover over a shaded district for more information.
State legislative seats flipped in 2018, California State Assembly | |||
---|---|---|---|
District | Incumbent | 2018 winner | Direction of flip |
California State Assembly District 16 | Catharine Baker | Rebecca Bauer-Kahan | R to D |
California State Assembly District 38 | Dante Acosta | Christy Smith | R to D |
California State Assembly District 40 | Marc Steinorth | James Ramos | R to D |
California State Assembly District 74 | Matthew Harper | Cottie Petrie-Norris | R to D |
California State Assembly District 76 | Rocky Chávez | Tasha Boerner Horvath | R to D |
Five incumbents did not run for re-election in 2018.[3] Those incumbents were:
Name | Party | Current Office |
---|---|---|
Tony Thurmond | Democratic | Assembly District 15 |
Anna Caballero | Democratic | Assembly District 30 |
Marc Steinorth | Republican | Assembly District 40 |
Travis Allen | Republican | Assembly District 72 |
Rocky Chavez | Republican | Assembly District 76 |
See statutes: Section 8020-8028 and Section 8100-8107 of the California Elections Code
Before accepting or spending money related to campaigning for office, a candidate for state office must file a candidate intention statement with the California Secretary of State. Note that this requirement does not apply to candidates for congressional office; federal campaign finance requirements apply to candidates for federal office. Candidates may qualify to run for office either by paying a filing fee or by submitting a petition in lieu of the filing fee.[4][5][4]
In addition to the candidate intention statement, a candidate is required to file nomination forms with his or her home county. These forms become available as early as the 113th day prior to the primary election and must be filed no later than the 88th day prior to the primary election.[6][7]
Nomination forms include a statement of economic interests, a declaration of candidacy, and nomination papers. Nomination papers require a certain number of signatures from registered voters. If a candidate qualifies by submitting an in-lieu-of-filing-fee petition, the signatures on that petition will be counted towards the requirement for the nomination paper. Registered voters may sign both the in-lieu-of-filing-fee petition and the nomination paper, unless the candidate is using the signatures on the in-lieu-of-filing-fee petition to count toward the nomination paper requirement. If that is the case, a registered voter can sign only one of the documents.[4][8][9]
The number of signatures required for nomination papers are as follows:[10]
If an individual is running as a write-in candidate, the only nomination forms required are the nomination papers and a statement of write-in candidacy. These forms should be filed in the candidate's home county.[4]
The filing fee for a candidate seeking a seat in the United States Senate or a state executive office (e.g., governor or treasurer) is 2 percent of the first year's salary for that office. The filing fee for a candidate seeking the office of United States Representative, state senator, or state assembly member is 1 percent of the first year's salary for that office. The fee is paid to the California Secretary of State through the candidate's home county election office.[8]
Instead of paying a filing fee, a candidate may submit a petition. Signatures may be collected to cover all or any prorated portion of the filing fee.[4]
A candidate seeking the office of state assembly member must file signatures from 1,000 registered voters. Those seeking the office of state senator or United States Representative must file 2,000 signatures, and those seeking statewide office must file 7,000 signatures.[8][11][12]
If the number of registered voters in the district in which the candidate seeks nomination is less than 2,000, a candidate may submit a petition containing four signatures for each dollar of the filing fee, or 20 percent of the total number of registered voters in the district in which he or she seeks nomination, whichever is less.[8]
Completed petitions must be submitted 15 days before the end of the qualifying period to the counties in which the signers reside.[8]
According to Article IV of the California Constitution, the candidate must be a United States Citizen, a resident of California for three years, a resident of the legislative district for one year and a registered voter in that district by the time nomination papers are filed.[13]
State legislators | |
---|---|
Salary | Per diem |
$114,877/year | $211/day |
California legislators assume office the first Monday in the December following their election.
In the 2018 elections, Democrats increased their majority in the California State Assembly from 55-25 to 60-20.
California State Assembly | |||
---|---|---|---|
Party | As of November 6, 2018 | After November 7, 2018 | |
Democratic Party | 55 | 60 | |
Republican Party | 25 | 20 | |
Total | 80 | 80 |
In 2016, Democrats increased their majority in the California State Assembly from 52-28 to 55-25, gaining a two-thirds supermajority in the chamber. In California, a two-thirds vote in each legislative chamber is required to increase taxes, certify proposed constitutional amendments for the ballot, enact laws immediately through an urgency clause, and override a gubernatorial veto.[14]
Democrats also gained a 27-13 majority in the California State Senate in 2016, giving Democrats a two-thirds supermajority in both chambers.
California State Assembly | |||
---|---|---|---|
Party | As of November 7, 2016 | After November 8, 2016 | |
Democratic Party | 52 | 55 | |
Republican Party | 28 | 25 | |
Total | 80 | 80 |
A state government trifecta is a term that describes single-party government, when one political party holds the governor's office and has majorities in both chambers of the legislature in a state government. Democrats gained a trifecta in California as a result of the 2010 election when they recaptured the governor's mansion. Democrats had trifectas from 1999 to 2003 and from 2011 to 2017.
California Party Control: 1992-2021
Sixteen years of Democratic trifectas • No Republican trifectas
Scroll left and right on the table below to view more years.
The California State Assembly has been a term-limited state house since California voters approved Proposition 140 in 1990. Under the terms of Proposition 140, the members of the state Assembly can serve no more than three two-year terms in the state Assembly. It permits a politician to serve in either or both chambers of the legislature for a maximum of 12 years.
All 80 seats in the California State Assembly were up for election in 2018. In the 2018 elections, one representative was ineligible to run because of term limits. The following state representative was term limited in 2018:
Democratic: (1)
Republicans (0):
Of the 87 state legislative chambers that held elections in 2018, 24 of them—12 senate chambers and 12 house chambers—included incumbents who were unable to run for re-election due to term limits.[15] In the 24 chambers affected by term limits in 2018, 1,463 seats were up for election.[16] The Nevada Senate, Arkansas House, and Arkansas Senate are impacted by term limits, but no incumbents were term-limited in 2018. There are 99 chambers throughout the country.
A total of 271 state legislators—96 state senators and 175 state representatives—were ineligible to run in the 2018 elections because of term limits. This represented 4 percent of the 6,066 total seats up for election in November 2018.[17][18] Republicans had twice as many state legislators term-limited in 2018 than Democrats. A total of 86 Democrats were term-limited, while 177 Republicans were term-limited.
The term wave election is frequently used to describe an election cycle in which one party makes significant electoral gains. How many seats would Republicans have had to lose for the 2018 midterm election to be considered a wave election?
Ballotpedia examined the results of the 50 election cycles that occurred between 1918 and 2016—spanning from President Woodrow Wilson's (D) second midterm in 1918 to Donald Trump's (R) first presidential election in 2016. We define wave elections as the 20 percent of elections in that period resulting in the greatest seat swings against the president's party.
Applying this definition to state legislative elections, we found that Republicans needed to lose 494 seats for 2018 to qualify as a wave election.
The chart below shows the number of seats the president's party lost in the 10 state legislative waves from 1918 to 2016. Click here to read the full report.
State legislative wave elections | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Year | President | Party | Election type | State legislative seats change | Elections analyzed[19] | |
1932 | Hoover | R | Presidential | -1,022 | 7,365 | |
1922 | Harding | R | First midterm | -907 | 6,907 | |
1966 | Johnson | D | First midterm[20] | -782 | 7,561 | |
1938 | Roosevelt | D | Second midterm | -769 | 7,179 | |
1958 | Eisenhower | R | Second midterm | -702 | 7,627 | |
2010 | Obama | D | First midterm | -702 | 7,306 | |
1974 | Ford | R | Second midterm[21] | -695 | 7,481 | |
1920 | Wilson | D | Presidential | -654 | 6,835 | |
1930 | Hoover | R | Presidential | -640 | 7,361 | |
1954 | Eisenhower | R | First midterm | -494 | 7,513 |
Every year, Ballotpedia uses official candidate lists from each state to examine the competitiveness of every state legislative race in the country. Nationally, there has been a steady decline in electoral competitiveness since 2010. Most notable is that the number of districts with general election competition has dropped by more than 10 percent.
Below is Ballotpedia's 2016 competitiveness analysis. Click here to read the full study »
Uncontested elections: In 2014, 32.8 percent of Americans lived in states with an uncontested state senate election. Similarly, 40.4 percent of Americans lived in states with uncontested house elections. Primary elections were uncontested even more frequently, with 61 percent of people living in states with no contested primaries. Uncontested elections often occur in locations that are so politically one-sided that the result of an election would be a foregone conclusion regardless of whether it was contested or not.
Open seats: In most cases, an incumbent will run for re-election, which decreases the number of open seats available. In 2014, 83 percent of the 6,057 seats up for election saw the incumbent running for re-election. The states that impose term limits on their legislatures typically see a higher percentage of open seats in a given year because a portion of incumbents in each election are forced to leave office. Overall, the number of open seats decreased from 2012 to 2014, dropping from 21.2 percent in 2012 to 17.0 percent in 2014.
Incumbent win rates: Ballotpedia's competitiveness analysis of elections between 1972 and 2014 documented the high propensity for incumbents to win re-election in state legislative elections. In fact, since 1972, the win rate for incumbents had not dropped below 90 percent—with the exception of 1974, when 88 percent of incumbents were re-elected to their seats. Perhaps most importantly, the win rate for incumbents generally increased over time. In 2014, 96.5 percent of incumbents were able to retain their seats. Common convention holds that incumbents are able to leverage their office to maintain their seat. However, the high incumbent win rate may actually be a result of incumbents being more likely to hold seats in districts that are considered safe for their party.
Marginal primaries: Often, competitiveness is measured by examining the rate of elections that have been won by amounts that are considered marginal (5 percent or less). During the 2014 election, 90.1 percent of primary and general election races were won by margins higher than 5 percent. Interestingly, it is usually the case that only one of the two races—primary or general—will be competitive at a time. This means that if a district's general election is competitive, typically one or more of the district's primaries were won by more than 5 percent. The reverse is also true: If a district sees a competitive primary, it is unlikely that the general election for that district will be won by less than 5 percent. Primaries often see very low voter turnout in comparison to general elections. In 2014, there were only 27 million voters for state legislative primaries, but approximately 107 million voters for the state legislative general elections.
There are no Pivot Counties in California. Pivot Counties are counties that voted for Barack Obama (D) in 2008 and 2012 and for Donald Trump (R) in 2016. Altogether, the nation had 206 Pivot Counties, with most being concentrated in upper midwestern and northeastern states.
In the 2016 presidential election, Hillary Clinton (D) won California with 61.7 percent of the vote. Donald Trump (R) received 31.6 percent. In presidential elections between 1900 and 2016, California voted Republican 53.33 percent of the time and Democratic 43.33 percent of the time. In the five presidential elections between 2000 and 2016, California voted Democratic all five times. In 2016, California had 55 electoral votes, which was the most of any state. The 55 electoral votes were 10.2 percent of all 538 available electoral votes and were 20.4 percent of the 270 electoral votes needed to win the election.
The following table details results of the 2012 and 2016 presidential elections by state Assembly districts in California. Click [show] to expand the table. The "Obama," "Romney," "Clinton," and "Trump" columns describe the percent of the vote each presidential candidate received in the district. The "2012 Margin" and "2016 Margin" columns describe the margin of victory between the two presidential candidates in those years. The "Party Control" column notes which party held that seat heading into the 2018 general election. Data on the results of the 2012 and 2016 presidential elections broken down by state legislative districts was compiled by Daily Kos.[22][23]
In 2012, Barack Obama (D) won 58 out of 80 state Assembly districts in California with an average margin of victory of 38.4 points. In 2016, Hillary Clinton (D) won 66 out of 80 state Assembly districts in California with an average margin of victory of 40.3 points. Clinton won 11 districts controlled by Republicans heading into the 2018 elections. |
In 2012, Mitt Romney (R) won 22 out of 80 state Assembly districts in California with an average margin of victory of 12.2 points. In 2016, Donald Trump (R) won 14 out of 80 state Assembly districts in California with an average margin of victory of 13 points. |
2016 Presidential Results by State Assembly District | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
District | Obama | Romney | 2012 Margin | Clinton | Trump | 2016 Margin | Party Control |
1 | 39.63% | 57.31% | R+17.7 | 36.09% | 56.75% | R+20.7 | R |
2 | 64.68% | 30.51% | D+34.2 | 62.20% | 28.98% | D+33.2 | D |
3 | 42.41% | 54.46% | R+12.1 | 39.47% | 53.31% | R+13.8 | R |
4 | 63.16% | 33.86% | D+29.3 | 63.03% | 29.95% | D+33.1 | D |
5 | 41.27% | 55.92% | R+14.7 | 38.51% | 54.85% | R+16.3 | R |
6 | 38.59% | 59.09% | R+20.5 | 41.17% | 52.02% | R+10.9 | R |
7 | 67.59% | 29.61% | D+38 | 67.63% | 25.69% | D+41.9 | D |
8 | 51.72% | 45.62% | D+6.1 | 51.77% | 41.03% | D+10.7 | D |
9 | 60.56% | 37.52% | D+23 | 61.47% | 32.89% | D+28.6 | D |
10 | 73.76% | 23.28% | D+50.5 | 75.65% | 17.96% | D+57.7 | D |
11 | 60.96% | 36.87% | D+24.1 | 58.86% | 35.17% | D+23.7 | D |
12 | 45.19% | 52.50% | R+7.3 | 43.11% | 51.05% | R+7.9 | R |
13 | 64.23% | 33.88% | D+30.4 | 62.97% | 31.79% | D+31.2 | D |
14 | 68.80% | 28.72% | D+40.1 | 69.55% | 24.47% | D+45.1 | D |
15 | 86.82% | 9.56% | D+77.3 | 87.39% | 7.04% | D+80.4 | D |
16 | 57.74% | 40.10% | D+17.6 | 64.47% | 29.23% | D+35.2 | R |
17 | 87.07% | 9.36% | D+77.7 | 88.12% | 6.95% | D+81.2 | D |
18 | 86.89% | 10.23% | D+76.7 | 85.89% | 8.44% | D+77.5 | D |
19 | 78.94% | 18.38% | D+60.6 | 81.63% | 13.34% | D+68.3 | D |
20 | 75.74% | 22.15% | D+53.6 | 75.52% | 19.12% | D+56.4 | D |
21 | 55.61% | 42.03% | D+13.6 | 54.63% | 39.46% | D+15.2 | D |
22 | 71.43% | 26.31% | D+45.1 | 75.16% | 19.75% | D+55.4 | D |
23 | 43.46% | 54.71% | R+11.2 | 43.95% | 50.78% | R+6.8 | R |
24 | 72.16% | 24.96% | D+47.2 | 78.19% | 15.93% | D+62.3 | D |
25 | 72.40% | 25.26% | D+47.1 | 73.61% | 20.90% | D+52.7 | D |
26 | 41.15% | 56.68% | R+15.5 | 41.54% | 52.93% | R+11.4 | R |
27 | 76.36% | 21.54% | D+54.8 | 77.76% | 17.29% | D+60.5 | D |
28 | 66.64% | 30.77% | D+35.9 | 70.63% | 23.08% | D+47.6 | D |
29 | 69.95% | 26.66% | D+43.3 | 70.00% | 22.96% | D+47 | D |
30 | 66.99% | 30.86% | D+36.1 | 66.70% | 27.32% | D+39.4 | D |
31 | 61.98% | 36.21% | D+25.8 | 62.13% | 32.93% | D+29.2 | D |
32 | 56.20% | 41.81% | D+14.4 | 56.50% | 37.98% | D+18.5 | D |
33 | 41.80% | 55.51% | R+13.7 | 40.02% | 54.61% | R+14.6 | R |
34 | 33.96% | 63.85% | R+29.9 | 34.07% | 60.21% | R+26.1 | R |
35 | 47.82% | 49.42% | R+1.6 | 49.57% | 43.43% | D+6.1 | R |
36 | 48.79% | 48.48% | D+0.3 | 49.94% | 43.86% | D+6.1 | R |
37 | 60.97% | 36.28% | D+24.7 | 64.27% | 29.21% | D+35.1 | D |
38 | 46.73% | 50.84% | R+4.1 | 49.64% | 44.39% | D+5.2 | R |
39 | 73.75% | 23.67% | D+50.1 | 74.64% | 19.80% | D+54.8 | D |
40 | 53.14% | 44.72% | D+8.4 | 54.08% | 40.01% | D+14.1 | R |
41 | 59.74% | 37.72% | D+22 | 62.82% | 31.27% | D+31.5 | D |
42 | 44.98% | 52.93% | R+7.9 | 45.61% | 49.70% | R+4.1 | R |
43 | 67.35% | 29.62% | D+37.7 | 68.94% | 25.45% | D+43.5 | D |
44 | 52.37% | 45.51% | D+6.9 | 57.12% | 36.99% | D+20.1 | D |
45 | 63.46% | 34.12% | D+29.3 | 67.36% | 27.39% | D+40 | D |
46 | 73.73% | 23.65% | D+50.1 | 76.20% | 18.48% | D+57.7 | D |
47 | 71.49% | 26.54% | D+44.9 | 70.10% | 24.80% | D+45.3 | D |
48 | 64.08% | 33.44% | D+30.6 | 65.60% | 28.50% | D+37.1 | D |
49 | 64.69% | 33.26% | D+31.4 | 67.57% | 27.17% | D+40.4 | D |
50 | 70.79% | 26.51% | D+44.3 | 76.72% | 18.33% | D+58.4 | D |
51 | 83.48% | 13.50% | D+70 | 84.05% | 10.19% | D+73.9 | D |
52 | 65.01% | 32.92% | D+32.1 | 65.78% | 28.71% | D+37.1 | D |
53 | 84.64% | 12.59% | D+72 | 84.83% | 9.63% | D+75.2 | D |
54 | 83.62% | 13.88% | D+69.7 | 85.15% | 10.12% | D+75 | D |
55 | 45.77% | 52.23% | R+6.5 | 49.92% | 44.61% | D+5.3 | R |
56 | 62.14% | 36.26% | D+25.9 | 64.21% | 31.24% | D+33 | D |
57 | 63.71% | 34.01% | D+29.7 | 65.92% | 28.39% | D+37.5 | D |
58 | 70.24% | 27.80% | D+42.4 | 72.54% | 22.26% | D+50.3 | D |
59 | 93.24% | 5.19% | D+88 | 90.70% | 5.09% | D+85.6 | D |
60 | 51.32% | 46.31% | D+5 | 52.48% | 41.97% | D+10.5 | D |
61 | 63.43% | 34.55% | D+28.9 | 62.47% | 31.62% | D+30.9 | D |
62 | 80.81% | 17.00% | D+63.8 | 82.05% | 13.06% | D+69 | D |
63 | 76.06% | 21.73% | D+54.3 | 77.35% | 17.38% | D+60 | D |
64 | 88.74% | 9.98% | D+78.8 | 86.21% | 9.61% | D+76.6 | D |
65 | 51.90% | 45.68% | D+6.2 | 56.73% | 37.28% | D+19.4 | D |
66 | 54.18% | 43.24% | D+10.9 | 59.97% | 33.60% | D+26.4 | D |
67 | 39.61% | 58.33% | R+18.7 | 38.89% | 55.94% | R+17.1 | R |
68 | 42.55% | 55.12% | R+12.6 | 49.42% | 44.58% | D+4.8 | R |
69 | 67.37% | 30.30% | D+37.1 | 71.94% | 22.33% | D+49.6 | D |
70 | 67.38% | 29.93% | D+37.5 | 68.13% | 25.09% | D+43 | D |
71 | 38.47% | 59.51% | R+21 | 38.19% | 56.26% | R+18.1 | R |
72 | 46.71% | 51.06% | R+4.4 | 51.40% | 43.13% | D+8.3 | R |
73 | 38.68% | 59.36% | R+20.7 | 43.89% | 50.38% | R+6.5 | R |
74 | 45.14% | 52.42% | R+7.3 | 50.71% | 43.29% | D+7.4 | R |
75 | 39.42% | 58.50% | R+19.1 | 43.22% | 50.68% | R+7.5 | R |
76 | 48.76% | 49.04% | R+0.3 | 53.11% | 40.38% | D+12.7 | R |
77 | 48.25% | 49.83% | R+1.6 | 55.16% | 38.94% | D+16.2 | R |
78 | 63.15% | 34.08% | D+29.1 | 67.48% | 25.85% | D+41.6 | D |
79 | 61.21% | 36.91% | D+24.3 | 64.24% | 30.04% | D+34.2 | D |
80 | 69.47% | 28.67% | D+40.8 | 73.15% | 21.34% | D+51.8 | D |
Total | 60.35% | 37.19% | D+23.2 | 62.25% | 31.89% | D+30.4 | - |
Source: Daily Kos |