How Long-Term Political Data Helped a Consulting Firm Rethink Strategy
What We Did
We conducted a longitudinal analysis of Congressional elections from 1980 through 2022. The research focused on win-loss margins, turnout shifts, regional changes, and ideological movements within both major parties. The dataset included general and midterm cycles, with a breakdown of competitive and non-competitive districts, rural versus urban patterns, and shifts in voter demographics.
We paid special attention to post-2016 cycles, mapping Republican performance with and without Trump on the ballot. We also tracked correlations between presidential approval ratings, partisan turnout patterns, and congressional flips. This allowed us to position Trump’s influence in the context of long-term voter behavior, not just media cycles.
The research was translated into clear narratives and visualizations that connected data trends to practical strategic decisions.
Strategic Impact
This project gave the client a historically grounded view of political change. By moving beyond one-cycle data, they positioned themselves to help clients navigate uncertainty with more precision, offering strategic clarity in a political environment where identity, ideology, and affiliation are increasingly fluid.
The Client
A political consulting firm advising campaigns, PACs, and policy organizations on long-term electoral strategy. They sought to understand how Donald Trump’s entrance into politics had affected voting behavior and Republican performance beyond the presidential level.
The Challenge
The firm wanted to go beyond short-term polling or election-cycle takeaways. They needed to understand the structural effects of Trump’s presence on party alignment, voter loyalty, and Congressional outcomes over time. This included analyzing whether shifts were unique to his candidacy or indicative of broader realignments across regions, voter blocs, and offices down the ballot.
The Outcome
The findings gave the client a new framework for advising stakeholders. They were able to better forecast where party dynamics might shift and which coalitions were becoming more or less stable. The analysis also challenged internal assumptions about where Trump had helped or hurt Republican candidates—especially in regions with mixed ideological signals.
The report informed both short-term messaging and long-term planning, helping the firm develop strategy playbooks that accounted for ideological volatility and voter re-alignment.
