Election Results
| US House election, 2010: Connecticut District 3 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
| Democratic | Rosa DeLauro (inc.) | 134,544 | 60.97 | -7.89 | |
| Republican | Jerry Labriola, Jr. | 74,107 | 33.58 | +13.88 | |
| Working Families | Rosa DeLauro (inc.) | 9,021 | 4.09 | -4.46 | |
| Green | Charles A. Pillsbury | 2,984 | 1.35 | -1.55 | |
| Democratic hold | Swing | -13.12 | |||
| Turnout | 220,656 | ||||
| US House election, 2008: Connecticut District 3 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
| Democratic | Rosa DeLauro (inc.) | 204,761 | 68.86 | -7.15 | |
| Republican | Boaz Itshaky | 58,583 | 19.70 | -2.73 | |
| Working Families | Rosa DeLauro (inc.) | 25,411 | 8.55 | +8.55 | |
| Green | Ralph A. Ferrucci | 8,613 | 2.90 | +1.34 | |
| Democratic hold | Swing | +2.07 | |||
| Turnout | 297,368 | ||||
| US House election, 2006: Connecticut District 3 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
| Democratic | Rosa DeLauro (inc.) | 150,436 | 76.01 | +3.57 | |
| Republican | Joseph Vollano | 44,386 | 22.43 | -2.54 | |
| Green | Daniel G. Sumrall | 3,089 | 1.56 | -1.03 | |
| Democratic hold | Swing | +3.06 | |||
| Turnout | 197,911 | ||||
| US House election, 2004: Connecticut District 3 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
| Democratic | Rosa DeLauro (inc.) | 200,638 | 72.44 | +6.86 | |
| Republican | Richard Elser | 69,160 | 24.97 | -4.57 | |
| Green | Ralph A. Ferrucci | 7,182 | 2.59 | -2.29 | |
| Democratic hold | Swing | +5.72 | |||
| Turnout | 276,980 | ||||
| US House election, 2002: Connecticut District 3 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
| Democratic | Rosa DeLauro (inc.) | 121,557 | 65.58 | -5.33 | |
| Republican | Richard Elser | 54,757 | 29.54 | +2.03 | |
| Green | Charles A. Pillsbury | 9,050 | 4.88 | +4.88 | |
| Democratic hold | Swing | -3.68 | |||
| Turnout | 185,364 | ||||
| US House election, 2000: Connecticut District 3 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
| Democratic | Rosa DeLauro (inc.) | 156,910 | 71.91 | +0.59 | |
| Republican | June M. Gold | 60,037 | 27.51 | +0.15 | |
| Natural Law | Gail Dalby | 1,258 | 0.58 | +0.18 | |
| Democratic hold | Swing | +0.37 | |||
| Turnout | 218,205 | ||||
| US House election, 1998: Connecticut District 3 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
| Democratic | Rosa DeLauro (inc.) | 109,726 | 71.32 | +6.45 | |
| Republican | Martin T. Reust | 42,090 | 27.36 | -0.71 | |
| Term Limits | Kristen J. Abbatiello | 739 | 0.48 | +0.48 | |
| Reform | David P. Cole | 676 | 0.44 | +0.44 | |
| Natural Law | Gail Dalby | 620 | 0.40 | -0.18 | |
| Democratic hold | Swing | +0.36 | |||
| Turnout | 153,851 | ||||
| US House election, 1996: Connecticut District 3 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
| Democratic | Rosa DeLauro (inc.) | 137,108 | 64.87 | +1.43 | |
| Republican | John Coppola | 59,335 | 28.07 | -2.22 | |
| A Connecticut Party | Rosa DeLauro (inc.) | 13,690 | 6.48 | +0.22 | |
| Natural Law | Gail Dalby | 1,219 | 0.58 | +0.58 | |
| Democratic hold | Swing | +8.19 | |||
| Turnout | 211,352 | ||||
| US House election, 1994: Connecticut District 3 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
| Democratic | Rosa DeLauro (inc.) | 111,261 | 63.45 | ||
| Republican | Susan Johnson | 53,110 | 30.29 | ||
| A Connecticut Party | Susan Johnson | 10,984 | 6.26 | ||
| Democratic hold | Swing | ||||
| Turnout | 175,355 | ||||
Read more about this topic: Connecticut's 3rd Congressional District
Famous quotes containing the words election and/or results:
“Well, I am chiefly interested in the renomination, so don’t get disconsolate over that. If we lost the election I shall feel that the party is rejected, whereas if I fail to secure the renomination it will be a personal defeat.”
—William Howard Taft (1857–1930)
“The chief benefit, which results from philosophy, arises in an indirect manner, and proceeds more from its secret, insensible influence, than from its immediate application.”
—David Hume (1711–1776)