A very detailed analysis of the 3rd Congressional District of Illinois Democratic primary

While Chicago-area progressives can claim multiple victories from Tuesday's Democratic primary in Illinois (including Chuy Garcia's victory in the 4th Congressional District primary and Fritz Kaegi's victory in the Cook County Assessor primary), progressives suffered a disappointing defeat in the 3rd Congressional District Democratic primary, as Dan Lipinski, the incumbent machine Democrat who is strongly opposed to women's reproductive rights, defeated progressive challenger Marie Newman by an approximately 2.4% margin. Lipinski is almost completely certain to win re-election in the November general election, as the Republican nominee who is running against Lipinski is Arthur Jones, a self-proclaimed neo-Nazi who won the Republican nomination with no opposition in the Republican primary. The 3rd Congressional District of Illinois includes southwestern and central portions of Cook County, a very small section of southeastern DuPage County, and northern portions of Will County, and the district is entirely within the Chicago local television market.

After Newman's narrow defeat, some Democrats and progressives have claimed or implied that:

• People who usually vote for Republican nominees in general elections voted in the Democratic primary for Lipinski in enough numbers to be the deciding factor.
• Had Illinois had a closed primary, in which only registered members of any given political party can vote in that party's primary, Lipinski would have lost re-nomination to Newman.
• U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and the Bernie Sanders-aligned political organization Our Revolution endorsing Newman cost Newman votes that she would have needed to win the nomination.

In the rest of the blog post, I will use precinct maps of the 3rd Congressional District of Illinois that were created by J. Miles Coleman of Decision Desk HQ and my own political analysis in an attempt to prove or disprove the claims in the above list. Anything in this blog post that is not a map is reflective of the opinion of the author of the blog post and not necessarily reflective of the opinions of J. Miles Coleman or Decision Desk HQ.

Illinois is a state that uses open primaries, or primary elections in which any voter can request a ballot for the primary election of any political party that has access to the primary election system. Additionally, Illinois lacks a system of political party registration that is maintained by state and/or local government authorities that is typical of states with closed primaries, such as New York, or semi-closed primaries, such as Arizona. Without a database of political party registration of any significance in Illinois, one way to either prove or disprove a claim of Republican voters voting in a Democratic primary in enough numbers to be significant in regards to the final outcome of the primary would be to compare the results of past general elections in the district to the results of the primary in question.

The first map is that of the 2014 3rd Congressional District of Illinois general election for the district's seat in the U.S. House of Representatives, and it's indicative of a landslide victory for the Democratic nominee:

Exhibit 1: 2014 U.S. House general election in the 3rd Congressional District of Illinois. Map courtesy of J. Miles Coleman of Decision Desk HQ.

As the map indicates, the areas of the district where the Republican nominee in that race, Sharon Brannigan, did very well in were in the eastern half of the Will County portion of the district and the western-most parts of the Cook County portion of the district. The areas of the map in medium-to-dark red are expected to be areas where a large percentage of voters are strongly Republican voters that wouldn't consider voting in a Democratic primary election.

The second map is that of the 2014 Illinois U.S. Senate race, which is a statewide election, but the map only includes the U.S. Senate results in the 3rd Congressional District, and it is indicative of a typical expected general election result in the district:

Exhibit 2: 3rd Congressional District of Illinois in the 2014 U.S. Senate general election in Illinois. Map courtesy of J. Miles Coleman of Decision Desk HQ.

Statewide, the Democratic incumbent, Dick Durbin, won re-election with 53.5% of the vote, and the Republican nominee, Jim Oberweis, received 42.7% of the vote. This means that the 3rd Congressional District was slightly more Democratic than the state as a whole in the 2014 U.S. Senate race.

The third map is that of the 2014 Illinois gubernatorial election, which is a statewide election, but the map only includes the gubernatorial results in the 3rd Congressional District, and it is indicative of a stronger-than-average general election performance for the Republican nominee:

Exhibit 3: 3rd Congressional District of Illinois in the 2014 gubernatorial general election in Illinois. Map created by J. Miles Coleman of Decision Desk HQ.

Statewide, the Republican nominee, Bruce Rauner, defeated the Democratic incumbent, Pat Quinn, by a margin of 50.3% to 46.4%. This means that the 3rd Congressional District was a few percentage points more Democratic than the state as a whole in the 2014 gubernatorial race.

As all three of the above maps indicate, there were precincts in the 3rd Congressional District that, in 2014, Jim Oberweis and/or Bruce Rauner were able to win, but Sharon Brannigan was unable to win. This map indicates the crossover precincts of the 3rd Congressional District, which, for the purposes of this map, are precincts that, in the 2014 general election, voted for the Democratic nominee for U.S. House, but for the Republican nominee in either the U.S. Senate election, the gubernatorial election, or both:

Exhibit 4: 2014 crossover precincts in the 3rd Congressional District of Illinois in the gubernatorial, U.S. Senate, and U.S. House general elections. Map created by J. Miles Coleman of Decision Desk HQ.

Most of the crossover precincts are located in the north-central, central, east-central, and south-central portions of the district, with a few crossover precincts elsewhere in the district. The blue-colored precincts are precincts that were won by Lipinski in the 2014 U.S. House race, but were won by the Republican nominee in both the U.S. Senate race and the gubernatorial race held in the same year. If voters that are open to voting for Republican candidates in general election voted in the Democratic primary in the 2018 U.S. House primary, it would be expected that a significant portion of them would be voters in the 2014 crossover precincts.

Here is the map of the 2018 U.S. House Democratic primary in the 3rd Congressional District of Illinois:

Exhibit 5: 2018 U.S. House Democratic primary in the 3rd Congressional District of Illinois. Map created by J. Miles Coleman of Decision Desk HQ.

As is noticeable, many, but not all, of the 2014 crossover precincts actually went for Marie Newman in the 2018 Democratic U.S. House primary, although some others, particularly in the eastern portions of the district, went for Lipinski. This is a guesstimation on my part, but it would not surprise me if Newman actually received more votes than Lipinski in the crossover precincts, or, at the very least, the margin in the crossover precincts, if it was in favor of Lipinski, would not have been enough to account for the winning margin as a group of precincts by itself.

One other way to look at whether or not there were usual Republican voters is to look at the 2018 primaries in the context of Democratic primary votes versus Republican primary votes, and compare that to past general elections. Here is a map of Democratic votes cast versus Republican votes cast in the 2018 Illinois gubernatorial primary in the 3rd Congressional District of Illinois:

Exhibit 6: Total votes by party in 3rd Congressional District of Illinois in the 2018 Illinois gubernatorial primaries, excluding undervotes in the gubernatorial race. Map courtesy of J. Miles Coleman of Decision Desk HQ.

76.9% of 3rd Congressional District voters casting a Democratic ballot is an unusually high percentage, and, more importantly, since approximately 64% of primary voters statewide cast a Democratic ballot, the 3rd Congressional District was quite a bit more Democratic than the state as a whole, and, relative to the state as a whole, more Democratic-leaning compared to the 2014 U.S. Senate and gubernatorial general election results, when the 3rd Congressional District was only slightly more Democratic-leaning/slightly less Republican-leaning than the state as a whole. However, there doesn't appear to be any significant disuniformity (such as entire groups of precincts in one section of the district having a far larger uptick in 2018 Democratic ballot primary requests relative to 2014 general election results than entire groups of precincts in another section of the district) in the 2018 Democratic primary ballot requests in the 3rd Congressional District compared to the 2014 general election results.

The Republican primary for Governor of Illinois featured incumbent Bruce Rauner, who signed a bill  authorizing Medicaid payments for abortions into law in Illinois, facing ultra-conservative challenger Jeanne Ives, who, like Lipinski and unlike Rauner, is strongly anti-abortion. Here is a map of the 2018 Republican gubernatorial primary in the 3rd Congressional District of Illinois:

Exhibit 7: 3rd Congressional District of Illinois in the 2018 Illinois Republican gubernatorial primary. Map courtesy of J. Miles Coleman of Decision Desk HQ.

Rauner narrowly defeated Ives statewide in the Republican gubernatorial primary, so the 3rd Congressional District was slightly more pro-Ives than the state as a whole. It appears that some of the precincts went for Rauner in the Republican gubernatorial primary and Lipinski in the Democratic gubernatorial primary, suggesting that may have been some voters who pulled a Democratic ballot for Lipinski in the U.S. House race instead of pulling a Republican ballot for Ives in the gubernatorial race, although Ives won many Lipinski precincts in the 3rd Congressional District, so the number of usual Republican voters pulling a Democratic ballot in the 3rd Congressional District may not have been as large as would have been expected, given that Lipinski had support from anti-abortion organizations that normally back Republican political candidates.

One factor that could cancel out a surge of socially-conservative voters who would be expected to vote in a Republican primary voting in the Democratic primary to nominate an anti-abortion Democratic candidate for U.S. House would be an uptick in turnout by progressive voters who do not regularly vote in primary elections, but would be expected to vote in a Democratic primary if they were to vote in a primary election. This is a map of the 2016 Democratic presidential primary in Illinois, but only for the portion of the state that is in the 3rd Congressional District of Illinois:

Exhibit 8: 3rd Congressional District of Illinois in the 2016 Illinois Democratic presidential primary. Map courtesy of J. Miles Coleman of Decision Desk HQ.

Hillary Clinton narrowly won the 2016 Illinois Democratic presidential primary statewide, so the 3rd Congressional District was more favorable to Bernie Sanders, the ultra-progressive who had a deep base of support among progressive voters who don't always turn out for Democratic primary elections, than the state as a whole. Comparing the 2016 presidential primary to the 2018 U.S. House primary doesn't really indicate a strong correlation between pro-Sanders precincts and pro-Lipinski or pro-Newman precincts or a strong correlation between pro-Clinton precincts and pro-Lipinski or pro-Newman precincts, meaning that there appears to be numerous Sanders/Lipinski, Clinton/Lipinski, Sanders/Newman, and Clinton/Newman precincts. As there also was a competitive Republican primary for president in 2016, and there were significant ideological differences between Republican presidential candidates as a whole and the Democratic presidential candidates as a whole, there were probably only a statistically insignificant number of voters who usually pull a Republican ballot in a primary election and/or usually vote for Republican candidates in general elections who pulled a Democratic ballot in the 2016 Illinois primaries, or vice versa.

One way to determine whether or not progressive turnout may have effectively cancelled out turnout by usually-Republican voters in the 3rd Congressional District of Illinois, as well as to determine what kind of impact Bernie Sanders's support of Marie Newman had on the 3rd Congressional District Democratic primary, would be to cross-reference the 2016 presidential primary and the 2018 U.S. House primary in the 3rd Congressional District of Illinois. Here is a map comparing the results of the 2016 presidential primary with the results of 2018 U.S. House primary in the 3rd Congressional District of Illinois:

Exhibit 9: Comparison of 3rd Congressional District in 2016 Illinois Democratic presidential primary and 2018 3rd Congressional District of Illinois U.S. House Democratic primary. Map courtesy of J. Miles Coleman of Decision Desk HQ.

Excluding precincts that were tied in the 2016 Democratic presidential primary, the 2018 U.S. House Democratic primary, or both, Lipinski received more votes than Newman in 55.09% of the 3rd Congressional District of Illinois precincts that went for Bernie Sanders in the 2016 presidential primary, and Newman received more votes than Lipinski in 56.37% of the 3rd Congressional District of Illinois precincts that went for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential primary. That is despite the fact that Sanders, as well as the Sanders-aligned progressive organization Our Revolution, endorsed Newman. As there are statistically significant numbers of each of Sanders/Lipinski precincts, Clinton/Lipinski precincts, Sanders/Newman precincts, and Clinton/Newman precincts, it is possible to give a description of the expected political mindset, but not the political mindset of every single voter within each group, of Sanders/Lipinski voters, Sanders/Newman voters, Clinton/Newman voters, and Clinton/Lipinski voters:

• Sanders/Lipinski voters - Blue-Collar Labor Voters - Although Sanders is strongly supportive of abortion rights, he is not as well-known for being pro-choice like Clinton is, so a lot of voters in the 3rd Congressional District voted for Sanders over Clinton in the 2016 presidential race because of Sanders's progressive views and ideas on economic and labor issues. It is important to note that many, but not all, labor unions backed Lipinski over Newman in the 2018 U.S. House primary in the 3rd Congressional District. Blue-Collar Labor Voters are progressive or progressive-leaning on economic issues, and, while their views vary on social issues, social issues are not as important to them as economic issues.
• Sanders/Newman voters - Strong Progressives - These are voters who are ideologically very progressive on both social and economic issues and determine who to vote for in contested Democratic primaries based on which candidate is running on the most progressive campaign platform. Newman was supported by a couple of labor unions that refused to back Lipinski, as well as pro-reproductive rights organizations and progressive groups in the 2018 U.S. House primary in the 3rd Congressional District, and those groups played a significant role in Newman receiving more votes than Lipinski in over two-fifths of the 3rd Congressional District precincts that Sanders won in the 2016 presidential primary.
• Clinton/Newman voters - Cosmopolitans - These are voters who are progressive or very progressive on social issues, but economic issues are not as much of a priority for them as social issues. These voters were drawn to Newman's campaign because of her progressivism on social issues.
• Clinton/Lipinski voters - Anti-Progressive Democrats - There are voters who regularly vote in Democratic primaries, have political views that are at least somewhat left-leaning, but are reflexively inclined to vote for the least progressive and/or most pro-establishment candidate due to having a group grievance against progressive and anti-establishment Democrats.

Now, with enough factors considered to determine why Dan Lipinski won, and Marie Newman lost, the Democratic primary in the 3rd Congressional District of Illinois, I can make the following conclusions:

• Bernie Sanders and Sanders-aligned organizations/activists had a far more positive effect on Newman's campaign than any negative affect they may have had on the campaign.
• It is inconclusive as to whether or not usual Republican voters voting in the Democratic primary for Lipinski were significant in regards to the winning margin, although there probably were enough progressive voters who don't regularly vote in primary elections but voted for Newman to effectively cancel out any boost in support Lipinski received from usual Republican voters in the Democratic primary.
• If Illinois used a closed primary system, Lipinski probably would have won re-nomination by a larger margin than he did under the open primary that was used in real-life, although that cannot be conclusively proven.
• The primary reason why Lipinski won and Newman lost was because many voters who are may have been open to voting for Newman but voted for Lipinski incorrectly perceived Newman as a corporate feminist, at least in part due to her background as a businesswoman and consultant, even though Newman ran for the Democratic nomination on a campaign platform that was very progressive on both social and economic issues.