Historical Alabama WAR

Alabama historical WAR

Race-residual performance for every modeled Alabama legislative election from 1994 through 2022, with the modern post-2016 structural relationship applied backward to earlier elections.

WAR is the race residual: the actual legislative-minus-ticket gap minus the fitted structural expected gap, in two-party margin points. The Democratic candidate receives the residual and the Republican its exact negative. One fixed reference model scores every cycle, so early-era Democrats show large positive WAR by construction.

How to read these scores

Every cycle is scored against the fixed 2018–24 reference model: the post-2016 Southern decaying_lag ridge fit, applied unchanged to 1994–2014 and identical to the published same-cycle residual for 2018 and 2022. Pre-2016 expectations are modern partisan expectations, so read early levels as distance from modern partisan gravity, not as a contemporaneous fit.

No pooled candidate effect, career average, fundraising, ideology, or committee identity enters WAR. A residual cannot uniquely divide credit between candidate strength, opponent weakness, and omitted local conditions.

Explore the results

Color shows which side ran ahead of expectation. It is not the district's partisan lean. Colors are capped at ±30 points; race details show uncapped values.

Chamber
View

Measure

Candidate-cycle WAR results

Each pair of candidate rows is one opposite-signed race residual. Pre-2016 cycles scored against the fixed reference model and published modern residuals are labeled separately.

Swipe sideways for every column.

CycleDistrictCandidateAlabama WARRaw ticket gapStructural expectationLag componentScoring methodBaseline marginActual marginVotes

Career cumulative WAR

Single-cycle WAR credits the first defiant cycle in full and later ones only net of the decayed prior gap, so sustained overperformance is spread thin. Career WAR sums a person’s scored cycles and is the measure of defying partisan gravity for longer than expected.

Largest Democratic-oriented careers
Richard Laird (D)2006–2010 · 2 cycles+116.5Richard Lindsey (D)2010–2014 · 2 cycles+110.8Steve Hurst (D)2006–2010 · 2 cycles+106.1Morrison (D)1994–1998 · 2 cycles+99.9Alan Harper (D)2006–2010 · 2 cycles+97.3Little (D)1994–1998 · 3 cycles+92.3McDaniel (D)1994–1998 · 2 cycles+89.7Phil Poole (D)2006–2014 · 3 cycles+89.1White (D)1994–1998 · 3 cycles+86.8Tommy Sherer (D)2006–2010 · 2 cycles+86.8
Largest Republican-oriented careers
Johnston (R)1994–1998 · 2 cycles-98.4Frank Chandler (R)2006–2010 · 2 cycles-97.3Bowen (R)1994–1998 · 2 cycles-94.4Holland (R)1998–1998 · 2 cycles-92.2Adams (R)1994–1998 · 2 cycles-80.6
Show these careers as a table
CandidatePartyCyclesScoredCareer WARMean cycle
Richard LairdD2006–20102+116.5+58.2
Richard LindseyD2010–20142+110.8+55.4
Steve HurstD2006–20102+106.1+53.1
MorrisonD1994–19982+99.9+49.9
Alan HarperD2006–20102+97.3+48.6
LittleD1994–19983+92.3+30.8
McDanielD1994–19982+89.7+44.8
Phil PooleD2006–20143+89.1+29.7
WhiteD1994–19983+86.8+28.9
Tommy ShererD2006–20102+86.8+43.4
JohnstonR1994–19982-98.4-49.2
Frank ChandlerR2006–20102-97.3-48.6
BowenR1994–19982-94.4-47.2
HollandR1998–19982-92.2-46.1
AdamsR1994–19982-80.6-40.3

839 scored people, 134 of them across more than one cycle. Pre-2016 cycles are scored against the fixed 2018–24 reference model, so long careers that began in the 1990s accumulate large positive values by construction. 55 2022 candidate-cycles carry a source identifier that cannot be linked to earlier cycles and are counted as single-cycle careers.

Historical scoring boundary

One reference model scores every cycle, and it is never trained on the elections it scores.

Extrapolation

1994–2014

The selected post-2016 Southern structural model is fit once on 3,658 strict modern races, then applied backward to 412 Alabama races. Negative years-since-2016 values make this an extrapolation outside the training era.

2018–2022

The 97 modern Alabama races exactly preserve the published same-cycle residual WAR values.

Historical WAR is descriptive. It cannot uniquely divide a race residual between candidate strength, opponent weakness, and omitted local conditions.

Data and provenance

Download the complete historical race residuals, candidate orientations, coverage, coefficients, and content-addressed manifest.

How to read historical WAR

Positive WAR means the candidate performed better than the fitted structural expectation; negative WAR means worse. The Democratic candidate receives the race residual and the Republican receives its exact negative.

Candidate display names come from election records, with archived election pages used only as a spelling cross-check. Names printed in capitals in the records are shown in title case. Finance provider and committee names are prohibited.

Read the full methodology or view the 2026 forecast.