GA-Landmark Communications (R): Obama defeats Romney by 4 points

[old timey villain]

Georgia is undergoing a political realignment as we speak. It's not one that will make the state Blue by any means, but much more moderate. Think of Illinois, pre Obama or Clinton. The rural areas were solidly Republican, but Democratic strength in Cook county and some of the suburbs kept it moderate. This is not a perfect comparison, but close.

  The Suburban counties like Cobb, Gwinnett and Henry are trending dem while the core counties (Fulton, Dekalb) are more firmly dem than ever before. People look at the south as a very distinct and unique political region (which it is) but metro Atlanta is subject to political trends that are more national in nature. Atlanta and its suburbs are becoming more Democratic just like other metro areas.

   I think the biggest reason for this is the growing disparity between Atlanta and more rural areas of the state. The Metro has always been culturally different from the rest of the state and voting patterns reflected that. In the Clinton era, Georgia Dems won by winning rural Georgia while Repubs dominated in the metro. In the past decade, Repubs gained amazing traction in rural Georgia while the suburbs of Atlanta also remained Republican. But there is now a transition occuring: The rural areas are solidly red while the metro is trending blue which will change things in the near future.

[old timey villain]

Georgia is undergoing a political realignment as we speak. It's not one that will make the state Blue by any means, but much more moderate. Think of Illinois, pre Obama or Clinton. The rural areas were solidly Republican, but Democratic strength in Cook county and some of the suburbs kept it moderate. This is not a perfect comparison, but close.

  The Suburban counties like Cobb, Gwinnett and Henry are trending dem while the core counties (Fulton, Dekalb) are more firmly dem than ever before. People look at the south as a very distinct and unique political region (which it is) but metro Atlanta is subject to political trends that are more national in nature. Atlanta and its suburbs are becoming more Democratic just like other metro areas.

   I think the biggest reason for this is the growing disparity between Atlanta and more rural areas of the state. The Metro has always been culturally different from the rest of the state and voting patterns reflected that. In the Clinton era, Georgia Dems won by winning rural Georgia while Repubs dominated in the metro. In the past decade, Repubs gained amazing traction in rural Georgia while the suburbs of Atlanta also remained Republican. But there is now a transition occuring: The rural areas are solidly red while the metro is trending blue which will change things in the near future.

That sounds like a good explanation. Suburbia was reliably R until recently. Suburbanites voted with their bosses perhaps because of the good will long engendered between executives and the middle class. In recent years, that has vanished. Suburbia is also legitimately urban in its problems -- like costly infrastructure. Barack Obama was one of the first nationwide politicians to recognize this reality -- and to demonstrate that states with fast-growing Suburbia would no longer vote only for lower taxes and less regulation.

The urban/rural divide is huge in America -- except in Mormon Country (Utah has its population concentrated in a narrow strip of land from Logan to Provo) and in New England (Vermont was one of President Obama's strongest states, and it is one of the most rural).

Sarah Palin appealed to an idealized "Real America" in 2008 -- an America still rural, where people still go to Church on Sunday and to Wednesday prayer meetings, where the cost of public infrastructure is still cheap (two-lane blacktops are still adequate in much of rural America and schools rarely have to be expanded), teachers and cops don't have to be paid much because there is little real competition for their skills,  and of course, taxes can remain low. That America still exists, but it is not the one in which most Americans live. People are where the concrete is, and not where the cattle are plentiful. Sarah Palin had a message that would have resonated in America in the 1920s --  but it now rings hollow.

I remember one such incident. She was in rural Ohio, about 50 miles from Columbus. She made her spiel into some microphones with the markings for TV channels 4, 6, and 10. TV broadcasts typically go about 80 miles into the countryside, and so do TV news reporters when something gets interesting within the radius of their coverage. But broadcast channels 4, 6, and 10 in Ohio are the network affiliates of Columbus -- a huge city in its own right and home of one of the biggest universities in the US.

These days, the votes are where the concrete is, and not where the cattle and cotton are. Sarah Palin blundered badly.     

 

Very true. It's the south, and Atlanta certainly isn't ultra liberal, but I think a day of reckoning is approaching for the region. Many voters will soon have to realize that a vote for low taxes and limited infrastructure doesn't really help things in a city of over 5 million people and growing. Next year, the 10 counties that make up the Atlanta Regional Commission will vote on a referendum that will increase the sales tax to fund transportation projects such as light rail and other forms of public transit. Supporters of the referendum have conducted polls and have found that about half of the voters are in favor of it. Anybody from metro Atlanta or familiar with it knows this is huge. Most suburbanites in metro Atlanta have fought tooth and nail against public transit for years, and to see this much support for it truly signifies a change in the biggest city in the deep South.

[old timey villain]

The difference is that New Jersey at least has the means to do that. Historically, there has been literally no money allocated toward public transit in this state, except for the few bucks that keep MARTA afloat

[old timey villain]

Georgia's supposed "realignment" is pretty overstated, IMO. Sure, places like Gwinnett and Cobb are only voting ~55% R instead of ~65% R now, but that's just because of white flight from minorities moving into the suburbs. White Republicans from those counties have been moving further out of the city, to places like Cherokee, Forsyth, Barrow, etc which have always voted something like ~75% GOP, but now have twice as many voters as before.

These voters are the GOP's base in the state; heavily motivated by cultural issues and taxation. And they hate Obama.

The only reason 2008 was so close was due to the greatly increased black turnout that happened everywhere across the South. Sure, that'll happen again, but Obama in Georgia really doesn't have much room for improvement at all.

  This is kind of short sighted in my opinion. Cobb and Gwinnett going for McCain by only 9 points in 2008 was huge, and you can't overlook it as if it doesn't mean something. The GOP clawed their way to the top of Georgia on the backs of Gwinnett and Cobb, and the fact that they are losing their grip on these two counties means they are losing their grip on Georgia. I believe that the Republicans hit their wall in Georgia in 2010. I expect Demographic changes and a suburban realignment will help make the Democrats more competitive than they have been lately.

  I heard someone say once that the path to recovery for a party has to occur after a devastating defeat. Well, 2010 was certainly devastating for Dems in this state, but Republicans shouldn't think that every subsequent election will be a repeat of that. Expect changes in Georgia in the next 5-10 years.