WEBVTT 00:00:00.600 --> 00:00:03.140 Imagine you are staring at a computer screen 00:00:03.140 --> 00:00:06.259 right now. Just picture it open in front of you 00:00:06.259 --> 00:00:10.880 is this massive, seemingly endless scrolling 00:00:10.880 --> 00:00:13.779 spreadsheet. Oh, yeah. A real wall of text. Exactly. 00:00:14.019 --> 00:00:17.460 You are looking at rows upon rows of names, dates, 00:00:17.660 --> 00:00:21.019 vote counts, percentages. all neatly organized 00:00:21.019 --> 00:00:22.960 into these perfectly gray and white grid lines. 00:00:23.160 --> 00:00:25.640 And at first glance, it is literally just a Wikipedia 00:00:25.640 --> 00:00:28.859 article titled List of United States Senate Elections 00:00:28.859 --> 00:00:31.679 in Delaware. Honestly, it sounds, well, it sounds 00:00:31.679 --> 00:00:33.560 incredibly dry, right? It does. It certainly 00:00:33.560 --> 00:00:36.240 presents that way on the surface. When you first 00:00:36.240 --> 00:00:39.179 scroll through, it is just raw data, just a ledger 00:00:39.179 --> 00:00:41.799 of political history, logging who won, who lost, 00:00:41.880 --> 00:00:43.820 and the margins between them. Right, just a digital 00:00:43.820 --> 00:00:46.079 filing cabinet. But today's deep dive is all 00:00:46.079 --> 00:00:48.380 about doing what we absolutely love to do, which 00:00:48.380 --> 00:00:51.020 is taking that raw, unassuming data and finding 00:00:51.020 --> 00:00:52.979 the hidden human drama pulsing right beneath 00:00:52.979 --> 00:00:55.439 the surface. Because there is always drama. always 00:00:55.439 --> 00:00:58.179 because when you actually stop and look closely 00:00:58.179 --> 00:01:00.280 at these numbers you realize this isn't just 00:01:00.280 --> 00:01:03.520 a spreadsheet we're going to extract the shifting 00:01:03.520 --> 00:01:06.819 eras, the epic rivalries, and the razor -thin 00:01:06.819 --> 00:01:09.840 margins hidden inside over a century of Delaware's 00:01:09.840 --> 00:01:12.840 political history. And just to give you a sense 00:01:12.840 --> 00:01:14.980 of the scope of our source material today, we 00:01:14.980 --> 00:01:17.439 are looking at the comprehensive election results 00:01:17.439 --> 00:01:21.120 for both Class I and Class II United States Senate 00:01:21.120 --> 00:01:24.099 seats in Delaware. We are starting from the dawn 00:01:24.099 --> 00:01:27.239 of the popular vote in 1916 and tracking the 00:01:27.239 --> 00:01:29.439 numbers all the way through the 2024 election. 00:01:29.950 --> 00:01:32.269 It is a massive sweep of time. It really is. 00:01:32.390 --> 00:01:34.549 OK, let's unpack this for a second, because the 00:01:34.549 --> 00:01:37.189 terms class one and class to pop up immediately 00:01:37.189 --> 00:01:39.750 in the text for anyone who doesn't, you know, 00:01:39.750 --> 00:01:41.730 spend their weekends reading constitutional procedure. 00:01:42.010 --> 00:01:44.689 How does the document actually define those categories? 00:01:44.950 --> 00:01:46.989 Yeah, that's a crucial structural point for understanding 00:01:46.989 --> 00:01:49.730 the entire spreadsheet. So the U .S. Senate is 00:01:49.730 --> 00:01:52.349 divided into three classes. The terms are staggered 00:01:52.349 --> 00:01:54.329 so that only one third of the Senate is up for 00:01:54.329 --> 00:01:56.670 reelection every two years. It is designed to 00:01:56.670 --> 00:01:59.049 ensure institutional stability. So you never. 00:01:59.239 --> 00:02:01.120 have a situation where the entire Senate turns 00:02:01.120 --> 00:02:03.959 over at once. Delaware, like every state, has 00:02:03.959 --> 00:02:06.579 two senators. And in this case, they hold a class 00:02:06.579 --> 00:02:09.099 one seat and a class two seat. Meaning they are 00:02:09.099 --> 00:02:11.039 never on the regular ballot in the exact same 00:02:11.039 --> 00:02:13.460 year. Precisely. That makes the timeline much 00:02:13.460 --> 00:02:16.039 clearer. But you might be wondering why you should 00:02:16.039 --> 00:02:17.840 care about Delaware's election table specifically. 00:02:18.099 --> 00:02:20.759 I mean, why this state? It's a fair question. 00:02:21.080 --> 00:02:23.500 The answer is that this single state's data acts 00:02:23.500 --> 00:02:27.419 as a perfect microcosm. Delaware is a small state, 00:02:27.599 --> 00:02:30.099 which means the data isn't diluted by millions 00:02:30.099 --> 00:02:33.219 and millions of transient votes. By tracking 00:02:33.219 --> 00:02:35.680 these numbers, you get a pristine, mathematically 00:02:35.680 --> 00:02:39.219 undeniable look at how incumbency works. You 00:02:39.219 --> 00:02:41.639 see the sheer power of name recognition in a 00:02:41.639 --> 00:02:44.379 confined geographic area. And you see absolute 00:02:44.379 --> 00:02:46.900 mathematical proof that every single vote truly 00:02:46.900 --> 00:02:49.370 matters. The trends are sharp. They are clear, 00:02:49.509 --> 00:02:52.229 and they tell a remarkable story about how American 00:02:52.229 --> 00:02:55.069 voting behavior has evolved over a century. I 00:02:55.069 --> 00:02:57.009 want to pull your attention to the very top of 00:02:57.009 --> 00:03:00.069 this Wikipedia table, the starting line. The 00:03:00.069 --> 00:03:03.330 year is 1916. And here's where it gets really 00:03:03.330 --> 00:03:05.229 interesting. Oh, this is one of my favorite parts 00:03:05.229 --> 00:03:07.349 of the data. Right. You see, the table starts 00:03:07.349 --> 00:03:10.889 in 1916 for a very specific reason. Before 1914, 00:03:11.590 --> 00:03:13.750 U .S. senators from Delaware weren't elected 00:03:13.750 --> 00:03:16.409 by the public at all. Which is wild to think 00:03:16.409 --> 00:03:18.430 about today. It is. If you lived in Delaware 00:03:18.430 --> 00:03:20.849 before then, you didn't go to a ballot box to 00:03:20.849 --> 00:03:22.770 pick your senator. They were chosen entirely 00:03:22.770 --> 00:03:25.090 by the Delaware General Assembly. What's fascinating 00:03:25.090 --> 00:03:28.409 here is the massive structural shift that represents. 00:03:28.830 --> 00:03:31.469 The source text notes the 17th Amendment. to 00:03:31.469 --> 00:03:34.289 the U .S. Constitution, which finally provided 00:03:34.289 --> 00:03:37.150 for the popular election of U .S. senators. So 00:03:37.150 --> 00:03:40.050 1916 is a monumental data point. It's a huge 00:03:40.050 --> 00:03:42.349 milestone. It marks the very first time that 00:03:42.349 --> 00:03:45.289 everyday citizens in Delaware got to cast a ballot 00:03:45.289 --> 00:03:48.030 for their class one senator. Do we have the breakdown 00:03:48.030 --> 00:03:50.430 of how that very first public vote actually played 00:03:50.430 --> 00:03:53.469 out? We do. If you look at the results for that 00:03:53.469 --> 00:03:56.129 inaugural popular vote, it was won by Democrat 00:03:56.129 --> 00:03:59.789 Josiah O. Wolcott. He took the seat with precisely 00:03:59.789 --> 00:04:02.370 50 percent of the vote, defeating Republican 00:04:02.370 --> 00:04:06.229 Henry A. DuPont, who had 45 percent. 50 to 45. 00:04:06.569 --> 00:04:09.009 Yeah. And to put the population size of the era 00:04:09.009 --> 00:04:11.849 into perspective, Wolcott received just over 00:04:11.849 --> 00:04:15.830 25 ,000 votes. That was the very first popular 00:04:15.830 --> 00:04:18.050 mandate for a class one senator in the state's 00:04:18.050 --> 00:04:21.050 history. Just over 25 ,000 votes securing a U 00:04:21.050 --> 00:04:23.480 .S. Senate seat. It really grounds you in the 00:04:23.480 --> 00:04:25.819 reality of the early 20th century. It's a totally 00:04:25.819 --> 00:04:28.240 different scale. It really is. But while we were 00:04:28.240 --> 00:04:29.860 looking at the procedural notes at the top of 00:04:29.860 --> 00:04:32.620 the document, there is another absolute gem of 00:04:32.620 --> 00:04:35.360 trivia hidden in the text. It's a calendar quirk. 00:04:35.519 --> 00:04:38.120 Oh, the start dates. Yes. The text points out 00:04:38.120 --> 00:04:40.579 that before 1935, a senator's term didn't start 00:04:40.579 --> 00:04:44.139 until March 4th. But after 1935, that start date 00:04:44.139 --> 00:04:46.639 moved up to January 3rd. The practical implications 00:04:46.639 --> 00:04:49.060 of that are staggering when you think about it. 00:04:49.480 --> 00:04:52.480 If we connect this to the bigger picture. Elections 00:04:52.480 --> 00:04:55.560 are held in early November. Before the rules 00:04:55.560 --> 00:04:59.199 changed in 1935, there used to be a massive four 00:04:59.199 --> 00:05:02.420 -month gap between the November election and 00:05:02.420 --> 00:05:05.540 the winner actually taking office in March. Meaning 00:05:05.540 --> 00:05:08.899 if an incumbent lost, they still sat in the Senate 00:05:08.899 --> 00:05:11.699 for a third of a year. Exactly. That procedural 00:05:11.699 --> 00:05:14.480 footnote alone hints at a completely different 00:05:14.480 --> 00:05:17.689 rhythm to American governance. It does. It meant 00:05:17.689 --> 00:05:20.230 the lame duck period was a significant portion 00:05:20.230 --> 00:05:23.389 of the legislative calendar. But returning to 00:05:23.389 --> 00:05:25.649 the data itself, there is a distinct pattern 00:05:25.649 --> 00:05:28.009 that jumps out in the early 20th century rows. 00:05:28.269 --> 00:05:29.870 I think I know what you're going to say. As you 00:05:29.870 --> 00:05:32.250 scroll through the early decades, you start to 00:05:32.250 --> 00:05:34.709 see a very famous name in American industry appearing 00:05:34.709 --> 00:05:37.629 repeatedly. DuPont. I noticed that. You just 00:05:37.629 --> 00:05:39.670 mentioned Henry A. DuPont, the Republican who 00:05:39.670 --> 00:05:42.069 lost that very first popular election in 1916 00:05:42.069 --> 00:05:45.259 to Wolcott. But the family name certainly doesn't 00:05:45.259 --> 00:05:47.540 disappear from the tables after that loss. Far 00:05:47.540 --> 00:05:51.800 from it. In 1922, and again in 1924, a Republican 00:05:51.800 --> 00:05:54.639 named T. Coleman DuPont is right there on the 00:05:54.639 --> 00:05:58.180 ballot. Jump ahead a few decades, and in 1952, 00:05:58.199 --> 00:06:00.920 the data shows Alexis I. DuPont Bayard running 00:06:00.920 --> 00:06:02.759 as a Democrat. So the name just keeps popping 00:06:02.759 --> 00:06:05.540 up. It clearly reflects the localized power dynamics 00:06:05.540 --> 00:06:08.160 of early 20th century Delaware. When you have 00:06:08.160 --> 00:06:10.579 a single family with that much economic and social 00:06:10.579 --> 00:06:12.839 influence in a relatively small population pool, 00:06:13.019 --> 00:06:15.399 their name naturally dominates the political 00:06:15.399 --> 00:06:17.860 data as well. Which brings us to the data points 00:06:17.860 --> 00:06:20.660 from the early 1920s. Let me set the scene based 00:06:20.660 --> 00:06:23.500 on the tables because the numbers here are, they're 00:06:23.500 --> 00:06:26.060 just staggering. They really are. Remember Josiah 00:06:26.060 --> 00:06:28.120 O. Wolcott, the Democrat who won the first popular 00:06:28.120 --> 00:06:31.300 vote in 1916? Well, footnote B in the text tells 00:06:31.300 --> 00:06:33.819 us he resigned. That triggered a special election 00:06:33.819 --> 00:06:37.000 on November 7th. 1922. And this is where the 00:06:37.000 --> 00:06:38.839 spreadsheet delivers an astonishing statistical 00:06:38.839 --> 00:06:41.480 anomaly. For that special election, we have Democrat 00:06:41.480 --> 00:06:44.079 Thomas F. Bayard Jr. facing off against the Republican 00:06:44.079 --> 00:06:46.839 T. Coleman DuPont. OK, I am looking at the vote 00:06:46.839 --> 00:06:50.560 totals for that specific race right now. Democrat 00:06:50.560 --> 00:06:55.139 Thomas F. Bayard Jr. received 36 ,954 votes. 00:06:55.939 --> 00:07:00.740 Republican T. Coleman DuPont received 36 ,894 00:07:00.740 --> 00:07:02.980 votes. I want you to really visualize the math 00:07:02.980 --> 00:07:05.459 here. That's crazy. Both men are listed in the 00:07:05.459 --> 00:07:09.060 table as receiving essentially 50 % of the vote. 00:07:09.420 --> 00:07:13.019 Out of over 73 ,000 total votes cast in that 00:07:13.019 --> 00:07:15.199 special election, the difference between the 00:07:15.199 --> 00:07:18.120 winner and the loser was exactly 60 votes. 6 00:07:18.120 --> 00:07:20.800 -0. 60 people in the entire state decided who 00:07:20.800 --> 00:07:23.220 went to the United States Senate. 60 votes. Just 00:07:23.220 --> 00:07:25.439 imagine the sheer tension. of counting those 00:07:25.439 --> 00:07:28.839 physical paper ballots by hand in 1922, making 00:07:28.839 --> 00:07:31.300 piles on a desk and at the end of the night realizing 00:07:31.300 --> 00:07:33.500 the state is split literally down the middle. 00:07:33.660 --> 00:07:35.519 It's the definition of a nail biter. But the 00:07:35.519 --> 00:07:37.259 data shows this wasn't even the end of the story 00:07:37.259 --> 00:07:39.279 for these two men that year. Not at all, because 00:07:39.279 --> 00:07:41.220 that was just the special election to fill the 00:07:41.220 --> 00:07:43.839 vacancy. And the regular election held that exact 00:07:43.839 --> 00:07:46.779 same year for the full term. The data shows the 00:07:46.779 --> 00:07:49.379 exact same two guys facing off again. Bayard 00:07:49.379 --> 00:07:52.680 versus DuPont. How does a state even process 00:07:52.680 --> 00:07:55.879 that kind of division? twice in the same cycle. 00:07:56.019 --> 00:07:58.720 What were the numbers for the regular election? 00:07:59.019 --> 00:08:03.180 Bayard received 37 ,304 votes. DuPont received 00:08:03.180 --> 00:08:07.620 36 ,979 votes. Bayard won again, but this time 00:08:07.620 --> 00:08:11.660 by just 325 votes. Wow. In two separate Senate 00:08:11.660 --> 00:08:13.660 elections held in the same year between the same 00:08:13.660 --> 00:08:16.279 two men, the combined margin of victory was less 00:08:16.279 --> 00:08:19.040 than 400 votes. It is the ultimate mathematical 00:08:19.040 --> 00:08:21.660 validation of the phrase, every vote counts. 00:08:21.699 --> 00:08:24.019 You literally cannot get closer than that without 00:08:24.019 --> 00:08:26.259 triggering a tie. But as we scroll down the table, 00:08:26.279 --> 00:08:29.220 leaving the volatility of the 1920s behind, the 00:08:29.220 --> 00:08:31.740 narrative thread seems to shift. The margins 00:08:31.740 --> 00:08:34.019 widen, the names stop bouncing back and forth, 00:08:34.120 --> 00:08:36.200 and Delaware develops a very distinct taste for 00:08:36.200 --> 00:08:38.570 stability. The power of incumbency becomes the 00:08:38.570 --> 00:08:40.570 defining feature of the spreadsheet from the 00:08:40.570 --> 00:08:42.889 mid -20th century onward. The state starts keeping 00:08:42.889 --> 00:08:45.230 people in office for a very, very long time. 00:08:45.350 --> 00:08:48.330 If the 1920s showed us absolute gridlock, the 00:08:48.330 --> 00:08:50.730 mid -century data introduces us to the era of 00:08:50.730 --> 00:08:52.710 the Delaware Giants. Let's trace the class one 00:08:52.710 --> 00:08:55.649 seats first. Starting in 1946, Republican John 00:08:55.649 --> 00:08:57.870 J. Williams wins the seat. And then he wins it 00:08:57.870 --> 00:09:01.370 again in 1952. And again in 1958. And a fourth 00:09:01.370 --> 00:09:04.570 time in 1964. Four straight elections. And the 00:09:04.570 --> 00:09:07.539 baton pass is equally stable. In 1970, another 00:09:07.539 --> 00:09:09.779 Republican named William Roth takes that same 00:09:09.779 --> 00:09:12.289 seat. Roth goes on to win five consecutive elections, 00:09:12.509 --> 00:09:17.690 1970, 1976, 1982, 1988 and 1994. He serves until 00:09:17.690 --> 00:09:20.190 2000. And when Roth is finally defeated in 2000, 00:09:20.490 --> 00:09:23.529 it is by Democrat Tom Carper, who proceeds to 00:09:23.529 --> 00:09:26.450 win four elections of his own, 2000, 2006, 2012 00:09:26.450 --> 00:09:29.710 and 2018, holding the seat until the 2024 election 00:09:29.710 --> 00:09:32.429 cycle. That means three men controlled that single 00:09:32.429 --> 00:09:35.090 class one Senate seat for nearly 80 years. 80 00:09:35.090 --> 00:09:37.210 years. And if class one showed us a dynasty, 00:09:37.450 --> 00:09:39.870 class two introduces us to the ultimate. incumbent 00:09:39.870 --> 00:09:42.330 in the data, Joe Biden. Yes. He wins his first 00:09:42.330 --> 00:09:44.990 election for the seat in 1972, and then he just 00:09:44.990 --> 00:09:47.009 keeps winning. He secures seven consecutive elections, 00:09:47.169 --> 00:09:52.549 1972, 1978, 1984, 1990, 1996, 2002, and finally 00:09:52.549 --> 00:09:54.909 2008. Seven straight victories spanning decades. 00:09:55.210 --> 00:09:57.289 This raises an important question. Why do voters 00:09:57.289 --> 00:09:59.090 do this? The spreadsheet mathematically proves 00:09:59.090 --> 00:10:01.169 that these Senate seats act less like recurring 00:10:01.169 --> 00:10:03.389 job interviews and more like lifetime appointments 00:10:03.389 --> 00:10:05.429 that are only occasionally revoked. The baseline 00:10:05.429 --> 00:10:08.509 is retention. Does the source text give us clues 00:10:08.509 --> 00:10:11.330 as to why that happens mathematically? Because 00:10:11.330 --> 00:10:13.990 when you look at the raw numbers, the margins 00:10:13.990 --> 00:10:16.230 of victory for these incumbents often expand 00:10:16.230 --> 00:10:19.169 massively over time. They go from squeakers to 00:10:19.169 --> 00:10:21.970 landslides. When you analyze incumbency advantage, 00:10:22.330 --> 00:10:24.840 especially in a geographically small state, the 00:10:24.840 --> 00:10:26.759 sheer mathematics of it become overwhelming. 00:10:27.080 --> 00:10:29.740 These senators aren't just names on a ballot. 00:10:29.879 --> 00:10:32.820 They become deeply entrenched fixtures of the 00:10:32.820 --> 00:10:34.879 community infrastructure. Yeah, it makes sense. 00:10:35.080 --> 00:10:37.620 You're talking about decades of constituent services, 00:10:37.799 --> 00:10:41.019 decades of localized media presence. The data 00:10:41.019 --> 00:10:43.159 clearly suggests that once you win that first 00:10:43.159 --> 00:10:45.460 time and you solidify your base, you possess 00:10:45.460 --> 00:10:47.899 a massive structural advantage over any challenger. 00:10:48.059 --> 00:10:50.820 The inertia is entirely on the side of the incumbent. 00:10:51.080 --> 00:10:53.340 Wait, if incumbency is that powerful and the 00:10:53.340 --> 00:10:55.470 inertia is that... strong, how does someone like 00:10:55.470 --> 00:10:58.289 William Roth actually lose after 30 years? Does 00:10:58.289 --> 00:11:00.429 the data show a sudden shift in the electorate 00:11:00.429 --> 00:11:03.250 or was it a gradual decline over several cycles? 00:11:03.669 --> 00:11:05.809 That is the crucial counter narrative in the 00:11:05.809 --> 00:11:08.870 data because incumbents usually win and win comfortably. 00:11:09.129 --> 00:11:11.230 The inflection points where they actually lose 00:11:11.230 --> 00:11:14.450 are monumental. They prove that no seat is ever 00:11:14.450 --> 00:11:16.669 truly safe, regardless of how long a name has 00:11:16.669 --> 00:11:19.450 been on the door. Take us through the 2000 upset 00:11:19.450 --> 00:11:22.220 for class one. Roth had been comfortably in power 00:11:22.220 --> 00:11:24.580 for three decades. His vote counts in the 80s 00:11:24.580 --> 00:11:27.840 and 90s were massive. And then Tom Carper challenges 00:11:27.840 --> 00:11:30.659 him. And the result isn't a 60 -vote squeaker 00:11:30.659 --> 00:11:33.860 like the 1920s. Carper manages a decisive victory. 00:11:34.120 --> 00:11:37.600 He pulls in over 180 ,000 votes, beating Roth 00:11:37.600 --> 00:11:40.679 by nearly 40 ,000. That's a huge gap. It is. 00:11:40.679 --> 00:11:44.000 That is a 56 % to 44 % victory. It is a vital 00:11:44.000 --> 00:11:46.240 lesson hidden in the spreadsheet. A shifting 00:11:46.240 --> 00:11:48.700 electorate or a sufficiently compelling challenger 00:11:48.700 --> 00:11:51.639 can completely upend decades of the status quo 00:11:51.639 --> 00:11:54.440 in a single Tuesday in November. We see a similar 00:11:54.440 --> 00:11:57.779 shockwave in the Class II data in 1972. Before 00:11:57.779 --> 00:12:00.120 that election, the incumbent was Republican J. 00:12:00.159 --> 00:12:02.620 Caleb Boggs. He had comfortably won the seat 00:12:02.620 --> 00:12:06.399 in 1960 and again in 1966. A 12 -year run. He 00:12:06.399 --> 00:12:08.279 is the incumbent giant. And then a challenger 00:12:08.279 --> 00:12:10.299 named Joe Biden steps up. And if you look at 00:12:10.299 --> 00:12:13.419 the numbers for that 1972 race, it is incredibly 00:12:13.419 --> 00:12:15.840 tight, harkening back to those earlier nail biters. 00:12:16.340 --> 00:12:19.860 Biden received roughly 116 ,000 votes, which 00:12:19.860 --> 00:12:23.100 the table rounds to 50%. Boggs received nearly 00:12:23.100 --> 00:12:27.159 113 ,000 votes or 49%. A margin of barely over 00:12:27.159 --> 00:12:30.100 3 ,000 votes ended a 12 -year Republican run. 00:12:30.429 --> 00:12:33.450 It shows how a seemingly minor shift in the electorate 00:12:33.450 --> 00:12:36.289 can completely rewrite the state's political 00:12:36.289 --> 00:12:38.649 trajectory. Speaking of shifting trajectories, 00:12:38.649 --> 00:12:40.940 let's zoom out for a second. If you blur your 00:12:40.940 --> 00:12:43.100 eyes and look at the party column as a macro 00:12:43.100 --> 00:12:46.700 trend, you see a massive, undeniable shift in 00:12:46.700 --> 00:12:48.519 Delaware's political identity over the century. 00:12:48.659 --> 00:12:50.899 You really do. In the early and mid -1900s, the 00:12:50.899 --> 00:12:52.620 seats are highly competitive. You see a bounce 00:12:52.620 --> 00:12:54.399 back and forth between Republicans and Democrats. 00:12:54.740 --> 00:12:58.080 A Republican wins in 1928, a Democrat in 36, 00:12:58.259 --> 00:13:01.679 a Republican in 42, a Democrat in 48. It's fluid. 00:13:01.860 --> 00:13:04.179 But if you trace the data into the modern era, 00:13:04.299 --> 00:13:07.059 that fluidity vanishes. So what does this all 00:13:07.059 --> 00:13:09.740 mean for the modern voter? Just look at the recent 00:13:09.740 --> 00:13:12.419 numbers from Tom Carper's victory in 2000 all 00:13:12.419 --> 00:13:15.080 the way down to the class one column. It is a 00:13:15.080 --> 00:13:18.480 solid block of Democratic control. We just saw 00:13:18.480 --> 00:13:21.059 Lisa Blunt Rochester win the class one seat in 00:13:21.059 --> 00:13:24.620 2024 with a commanding 57 percent of the vote 00:13:24.620 --> 00:13:27.539 over Republican Eric Hansen, who took 39 percent. 00:13:27.679 --> 00:13:30.659 And you see the exact same consolidation in class 00:13:30.659 --> 00:13:33.580 two ever since the 2010 special election where 00:13:33.580 --> 00:13:36.419 Democrat Chris Coons won with 57 percent of the 00:13:36.419 --> 00:13:38.179 vote against Republican Christine O'Donnell. 00:13:38.620 --> 00:13:40.820 Coons has dominated that seat. The margins just 00:13:40.820 --> 00:13:44.299 stay wide. They do. In his 2020 reelection, Coons 00:13:44.299 --> 00:13:47.600 pulled in over 290 ,000 votes to his challengers, 00:13:47.600 --> 00:13:51.570 roughly 186 ,000. The data paints a picture of 00:13:51.570 --> 00:13:53.830 a solid structural shift to democratic control 00:13:53.830 --> 00:13:56.350 in recent decades. It is a remarkable consolidation 00:13:56.350 --> 00:13:58.309 of voting behavior when you compare it to the 00:13:58.309 --> 00:14:01.889 fractured 60 vote margins of the 1920s. The state's 00:14:01.889 --> 00:14:04.149 political baseline has fundamentally moved. But 00:14:04.149 --> 00:14:05.750 before we finish up, I want to pivot away from 00:14:05.750 --> 00:14:07.769 the giants and the modern sweeps and look at 00:14:07.769 --> 00:14:09.629 the tiny print at the bottom of the page. The 00:14:09.629 --> 00:14:12.850 footnotes and asterisks. Yes. If you really want 00:14:12.850 --> 00:14:15.070 to understand the texture of a democracy, look 00:14:15.070 --> 00:14:17.870 at the bizarre, highly persistent third -party 00:14:17.870 --> 00:14:20.590 runs hidden in the footnotes of a Wikipedia table. 00:14:20.950 --> 00:14:24.210 For instance, in 1970, the main event was William 00:14:24.210 --> 00:14:27.750 Roth versus Jacob W. Zimmerman. But if you check 00:14:27.750 --> 00:14:29.830 Footnote H, you see a gentleman named Donald 00:14:29.830 --> 00:14:33.730 G. Guise. He managed to secure 1 ,720 votes. 00:14:33.970 --> 00:14:36.610 And he clearly felt he had more to say. Oh, definitely. 00:14:36.870 --> 00:14:40.169 Because if you look at the 1972 election, that 00:14:40.169 --> 00:14:44.580 famous Biden Boggs upset footnote T shows Donald 00:14:44.580 --> 00:14:46.840 G. Geese pops right back up again on the ballot, 00:14:46.940 --> 00:14:49.279 this time securing one thousand six hundred and 00:14:49.279 --> 00:14:51.759 sixty three votes. You also see footnotes C and 00:14:51.759 --> 00:14:54.659 D from the 1920s, where a candidate named Frank 00:14:54.659 --> 00:14:57.360 Stevens pulled around 600 votes in both the special 00:14:57.360 --> 00:14:59.840 election and the regular election. Just hanging 00:14:59.840 --> 00:15:01.840 in there on the margins. What's fascinating here 00:15:01.840 --> 00:15:03.600 is that while these minor candidates virtually 00:15:03.600 --> 00:15:06.080 never swing the modern elections, they are a 00:15:06.080 --> 00:15:08.220 vital part of the data ecosystem. They represent 00:15:08.220 --> 00:15:11.759 the persistent, quirky. stubborn nature of local 00:15:11.759 --> 00:15:13.779 democracy. That's a great way to put it. They 00:15:13.779 --> 00:15:16.440 are a reminder that behind every single one of 00:15:16.440 --> 00:15:19.620 those digits is a citizen making a very specific, 00:15:19.820 --> 00:15:22.919 deliberate choice, even if it defies the major 00:15:22.919 --> 00:15:26.299 party binary. It's just brilliant. Let's summarize 00:15:26.299 --> 00:15:28.419 the journey we've just been on through this single 00:15:28.419 --> 00:15:31.299 web page. We've traced the timeline from an area 00:15:31.299 --> 00:15:33.659 where state legislatures pick senators and closed 00:15:33.659 --> 00:15:36.440 -door General Assembly meetings all the way to 00:15:36.440 --> 00:15:38.559 the dawn of the public vote through the 17th 00:15:38.559 --> 00:15:40.899 Amendment. A massive shift in power. And then 00:15:40.899 --> 00:15:43.399 we've seen an entire United States Senate seat 00:15:43.399 --> 00:15:46.179 decided by a margin of just 60 people out of 00:15:46.179 --> 00:15:49.419 73 ,000 cast ballots. We've watched political 00:15:49.419 --> 00:15:52.000 giants build absolute dynasties holding onto 00:15:52.000 --> 00:15:54.960 power for decades at a time. only to be suddenly 00:15:54.960 --> 00:15:57.120 unseated by challengers who rewrite the rules. 00:15:57.220 --> 00:15:59.179 And hopefully this deep dive reminds you that 00:15:59.179 --> 00:16:01.659 a simple table of data is never just a table. 00:16:01.700 --> 00:16:04.840 It is the numerical footprint of a society's 00:16:04.840 --> 00:16:07.929 changing mind. Every single row represents millions 00:16:07.929 --> 00:16:09.789 of collective decisions made over a century. 00:16:10.009 --> 00:16:12.889 Exactly. Every single vote you cast is a tiny 00:16:12.889 --> 00:16:15.049 piece of data that future generations will look 00:16:15.049 --> 00:16:17.789 back on trying to analyze and understand our 00:16:17.789 --> 00:16:20.470 era, just like we are doing right now with 1922 00:16:20.470 --> 00:16:23.529 and 1972. It really makes you look at a spreadsheet 00:16:23.529 --> 00:16:25.950 differently. It does. And as we wrap up, I want 00:16:25.950 --> 00:16:27.889 to leave you with a final thought to mull over, 00:16:28.070 --> 00:16:30.149 drawing back on one of the chronological rules 00:16:30.149 --> 00:16:33.039 we discussed earlier. Think back to that rule 00:16:33.039 --> 00:16:36.000 change we mentioned, the fact that before 1935, 00:16:36.379 --> 00:16:39.019 terms started on March 4th instead of January 00:16:39.019 --> 00:16:41.620 3rd. Right. The lame duck period. I want you 00:16:41.620 --> 00:16:44.620 to just imagine the reality of that lame duck 00:16:44.620 --> 00:16:48.279 period. Imagine four full months passing between 00:16:48.279 --> 00:16:50.820 an incumbent senator losing their election in 00:16:50.820 --> 00:16:53.179 early November and the victorious challenger 00:16:53.179 --> 00:16:55.539 finally taking over in March. That is a long 00:16:55.539 --> 00:16:57.980 time to just be sitting there. What kind of frantic 00:16:57.980 --> 00:17:00.399 political maneuvering, what kind of quiet deals 00:17:00.399 --> 00:17:03.440 or total. grinding gridlock happened in those 00:17:03.440 --> 00:17:05.740 dark winter months before the Constitution was 00:17:05.740 --> 00:17:08.200 changed to tighten that window. It makes you 00:17:08.200 --> 00:17:10.680 wonder how much unrecorded history was written 00:17:10.680 --> 00:17:12.940 in the agonizing gap between the vote and the 00:17:12.940 --> 00:17:16.039 inauguration. A fascinating mystery to end on. 00:17:16.140 --> 00:17:17.980 Thank you so much for joining us for this deep 00:17:17.980 --> 00:17:20.119 dive. Until next time, keep looking past the 00:17:20.119 --> 00:17:20.299 numbers.