Alternate US States
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 04:44:54 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election What-ifs? (Moderator: Dereich)
  Alternate US States
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... 23
Author Topic: Alternate US States  (Read 154593 times)
JerryArkansas
jerryarkansas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,536
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #200 on: August 08, 2014, 11:28:25 AM »

Maybe I should make a spin-off thread in the Political Geography - Demographics board for redistricting stuff, what do you think?
For some states yeah, also I have some districts for ya.


The pink District would be a republican giveaway.



The red is a democratic sink.
The blue and green would both elect republican.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,959
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #201 on: August 08, 2014, 12:38:04 PM »

Nice job! Smiley I guess DRA will be badly needed though, especially in States where a sophisticated gerrymander will be attempted, like AD. Wink
Logged
JerryArkansas
jerryarkansas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,536
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #202 on: August 08, 2014, 12:39:31 PM »

Nice job! Smiley I guess DRA will be badly needed though, especially in States where a sophisticated gerrymander will be attempted, like AD. Wink
Yes it will.  Those took way to long using the old fashioned way.
Logged
Gass3268
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,478
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #203 on: August 08, 2014, 02:35:04 PM »

What are the populations of these new states (especially the ones you split)?
Logged
rpryor03
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,825
Bahamas


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #204 on: August 08, 2014, 04:45:03 PM »

YES!
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,959
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #205 on: August 08, 2014, 06:51:37 PM »

What are the populations of these new states (especially the ones you split)?

Here for you! Smiley


   1960   1970   1980   1990   2000   2010

NE   1966067   2174059   2556726   2899938   3119536   3270572

MA   6008066   6635895   6684191   7019889   7397416   7600196

NY   11086097   12072547   11385432   11723167   12689665   13038826

AD   5696207   6164420   6172640   6267288   6286792   6339276

PA   6293552   6709711   6729612   6951093   7317947   7773451

AY   5025814   5084198   5134283   4930550   4963107   4928928

MD   4310937   5227013   5449646   6054536   6652145   7273209

NF   2212729   2807236   3806408   5132107   6413795   7762275

SF   2738831   3982207   5939916   7805819   9568583   11039035
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,959
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #206 on: August 08, 2014, 06:53:14 PM »

Anyway, I got the redistricting thread started in the other board, if anyone is interested.
Logged
GAworth
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,755
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #207 on: August 08, 2014, 08:50:28 PM »

Anyway, I got the redistricting thread started in the other board, if anyone is interested.

Link? I am fascinated by this thread.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,959
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #208 on: August 09, 2014, 02:53:50 AM »

Anyway, I got the redistricting thread started in the other board, if anyone is interested.

Link? I am fascinated by this thread.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=196868.0
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,959
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #209 on: August 10, 2014, 12:01:18 PM »
« Edited: August 10, 2014, 12:11:25 PM by Scottish Robb Stark »

South Florida

This southern half (slightly more than half population-wise, slightly less area-wise) of Florida is mainly composed of the Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Palm Beach megalopolis, the sparsely populated Everglades counties in Southwestern FL, and the Tampa-St. Petersburg area. With the former being overwhelmingly (and increasingly) Democratic, the second solidly Republican, and the latter a swing area, the end result is a Democrat-leaning, but still competitive State. In modern US politics, that means a neutral election would result in the Democrats carrying a majority of OTL Florida's electoral votes, even though OTL Florida as a whole is Republican-leaning.

SF Presidential election results, 1960-2012:


Before the Great Southern Realignment, SF used to be the most Republican-friendly of the two States. Nixon carried it comfortably in 1960, where NF was a virtual tie. In 1968, Wallace's performance was less than half that of NF and he came a distant third. And in 1976, Ford was only 4 points behind Carter (which means he could have won the State had he prevailed nationally by a 2 or 3 points margin). On the other hand, in elections where the South went overwhelmingly for the GOP, South Florida resisted much better than its Northern counterpart. LBJ carried it easily in 1964, and McGovern managed to crack 30% there. By all these measures, in these chaotic elections of the 60s and 70s, SF could be said to be the less "Southern" of the two States.

This tendency further accentuated over the next decades. South Florida was solid-Republican country in the 1980s, but Reagan and Bush's margins of victory there remained reasonable, and from 1980 to 1988 the trend was essentially flat. Finally, under Clinton, the State realigned itself to the Democrats. In 1992, George Bush Sr. dropped 19 points to 39%, allowing Clinton to narrowly prevail. In 1996, Clinton's narrow lead expanded into a commanding one, which went beyond his national result. SF's PVI peaked in 2000, when Al Gore carried the State by 7.6 points in the extremely close national context. Considering that Florida's marginal Republican tilt is what delivered the White House to George W. Bush, this split could prove a huge game changer for that election. Since then, the State seems to have stabilized somewhere between D+3 and D+6. Nonetheless, significant trends have been ongoing within the State, as the 2000-2012 swing map highlights.



Over the past decade, it appears that the Democrats' power base in South Florida has gradually shifted, from Broward and Palm Beach counties to Miami-Dade county, whose trend alone has kept Democrats afloat in the State. In essence, it appears that the Eastern shore above Miami, as well as the sparsely populated western counties, have moved right, while Miami itself and the Tampa Bay area have moved left. Just like for NF, it's not easy to tell which of these trends will carry more weight in the long term. However, one can imagine that Hispanics' increasingly strong numbers, turnout, and Democratic voting patterns will be a key asset for the party in this State.

Capital: If we avoid Miami and Tampa, which seem too big and too far from each other, then Cape Coral seems like the best choice, being located right in between those two.

Governor: Alex Sink defeated Rick Scott by nearly 6 points IRL in this part of the State, so it's easy to see her in the Governor's mansion under this scenario.

Senators: Charlie Crist (class 1) and Debbie Wasserman Schultz (class 2) - Crist's path would be a bit chaotic, since he'd probably still face a conservative primary challenge in 2012, as well as dangerous Democratic opponents in 2006 and 2012, but I'd still think that the voters would be somewhat lenient toward him. Besides, I needed to compensate for giving the Democrats one seat in NF where they probably shouldn't have one. Tongue

Representatives: Republicans probably managed to sweep the State Legislature in 2010 (IRL, they hold a majority of seats in the area corresponding to this State), thus the redistricting would have to be at least somewhat bipartisan. It could either be a decent map, or an incumbent-protection gerrymander. If the latter, there's no way to know how the elections would turn out, since we can't know who the incumbents are. If the former, my guess would be that the delegation turns out 10D-6R, or maybe 9D-7R.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,959
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #210 on: August 12, 2014, 02:29:26 PM »

PVI comparison (FL / NF / SF)



This sums up what I've said so far about the Floridas. Before 1980, there was no clear partisan hierarchy between the two States. South Florida was the most Republican State in "normal" years, but in the elections when the South was swept in Republican landslides, SF resisted much better than NF. The gap between the two States only established itself from 1980 to 1988, when NF became a solid Republican State. Under Clinton, SF finally moved to the Democatic column, when it has remained since (though in 2008 Obama's advantage there was very narrow). Interestingly, the two States have always trended in the same direction (showing that there still is some commonality between the two Floridas). Still, that doesn't mean their movements have been similar: for example, in 1984 and 1988 SF basically stayed the same, whereas NF experienced a massive Republican trend.


Brace yourselves, because Texas is coming! Cheesy
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,959
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #211 on: August 20, 2014, 10:40:42 AM »

Texas

All right, let's finally split Texas! Cheesy We begin with the easternmost of the three States I've carved out of it, roughly based on Wikipedia's definition of East Texas. Since it was the State's earliest-settled region, it seems fair to let it keep its original name (even though it takes up the smallest portion of its area). This State would be dominated by the Houston metropolitan area, where over half of the State's inhabitants live. However, it's also clearly the most "Southern" of the three States, with clearer ties to neighboring States like Louisiana and Arkansas. Thus, it shouldn't come as a surprise that the State nowadays is solidly Republican.

TX Presidential election results, 1960-2012:


In fact, the electoral history of this new Texas very closely matches that of OTL Texas, with the same candidate winning in every election. Since the two other States carved out of the western portion of Texas are either significantly more Democratic or Republican than the whole State, what's let when you take them out actually makes for a pretty good bellwether. Indeed, this Texas' political evolution follows the well-known pattern. Kennedy, Johnson and Humphrey all prevailed there with results slightly better than their RL ones (though Wallace won a very strong result in 1968). Following Nixon's 1972 sweep of the South (and despite Carter's narrow 1976 win) the State has realigned itself into a Republican stronghold. In 1992 Clinton actually came close to winning the State (he lost to Bush by 3.4 points, against 3.5 points in OTL Texas). Since 2000 however, Republican percentages there have remained substantially stable around 60%. In fact, whereas the OTL State's Republican alignment seems to have peaked in the Bush years, this Texas actually seems to have moved further to the right in the most recent election (Obama's 2012 percentage was equal to Al Gore's).

The State's rightward trend has mainly been fueled by the rural counties in the Northern and Central parts of the State, as this 1984-2012 comparison shows:



Both years saw Republican wins by 22 or 23 points, but while in 1984 Mondale made a decent showing in some counties in the north and center, Obama got absolutely destroyed there, generally winning less than 30%. On the other hand, the Houston area has experienced a slight democratic trend: Obama narrowly won Harris county in 2012, whereas Reagan had taken over 61% of the vote. Still, this success in the urban core isn't worth much in a State that remains overwhelmingly Republican.

Capital: If we want to avoid the Houston megalopolis, then Tyler seems like the only viable choice (even though it's a bit too northern).

Governor: Kay Bailey Hutchison could probably have won an open gubernatorial contest in 2006, before the Tea Party wave began raging. Dan Patrick or Steve Stockman could have mounted a challenge in 2010, but the benefit of incumbency might still save Hutchinson.

Senators: Ted Cruz (class 1) and David Dewhurst (class 2) - there would easily be room for both of them in this scenario Tongue

Representatives: Republicans would obviously control the State legislature, meaning that the seat distribution would be roughly the same as IRL. Thus, the most likely outcome is 9R-3D, with three Democratic vote sinks in Houston.
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #212 on: August 20, 2014, 11:10:25 AM »

Damn, I'm glad this great thread is still going on Smiley
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,959
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #213 on: August 20, 2014, 11:24:46 AM »
« Edited: August 20, 2014, 11:27:51 AM by Robb the Survivor »

Damn, I'm glad this great thread is still going on Smiley

"Going on" might not be the best way to put it, considering it's been at sleep for over 4 years. Say rather "back from the dead". Tongue

Anyway, it's great to see you guys are still interested in it! Smiley
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,959
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #214 on: August 23, 2014, 01:32:46 PM »
« Edited: August 27, 2014, 04:48:17 PM by Robb the Survivor »

Rio Grande

Aside from being the least populous (though the fastest growing since the 80s), this is probably the most interesting of the three States formed out of old Texas. It is probably the most diverse and complex, as it combines several disparate areas: the Hispanic-dominated lands along the river that gives its name to the State, but also the major cities of Austin and San Antonio and their metropolitan areas, and many suburban and rural counties around these cities and on the Gulf Coast. The importance of these (obviously conservative) areas should not be understated, as they make Rio Grande much less Democratic than one would assume. In fact, since 1996, the State has always been more Republican than the nation as a whole (at least in Presidential politics).

RG Presidential election results, 1960-2012:


Of course, even a quick look at this chart makes it clear that RG is consistently the most Democratic-leaning of the three States. In fact, only three Republicans carried it over the observed period, all of whom prevailed in the Electoral College (Nixon, Reagan twice, and W. Bush twice). In the 1960s, this lean was particularly evident: Kennedy trounced Nixon, LBJ won over two thirds of the vote, and even HHH managed to win an absolute majority (and Wallace's very low percentage makes it very clear that there's nothing Southern about this State). Carter still distanced Ford by a double-digit margin and performed somewhat decently against Reagan, but his former VP got more or less crushed by the latter in 1984. Rio Grande's last Democratic bravado was narrowly voting for Dukakis, certainly thanks to his running mate Lloyd Bentsen, a favorite son of the area. However, since the 1990s, the State has actually experienced a pronounced Republican trend. Clinton carried it both times, but his margins of victory were far from exceptional, and in the early 2000s Rio Grande backed Bush decisively. It is only under Obama that the trend has apparently begun reversing itself, but even today the State can best be characterized as a swing State.

In 2012, Obama beat Romney by 3.2 points in the State, slightly less than his 3.9 national margin of victory. The election map provides a pretty good illustration of the geographic contrast that structures Rio Grande's politics:



Unsurprisingly, Obama's narrow victory rests heavily on the Hispanic border counties, a growing and increasingly crucial constituency which now regularly gives more than 70% of its votes to the Democrats. However, despite appearances, this border region is too sparsely populated to alone sway the State's politics. Instead, the tip of the balance is generally provided by the urban areas of San Antonio and Austin. While RG isn't utterly dominated by a huge megalopolis like Texas and (spoiler alert!) Jefferson are, these two areas together nonetheless contain about 40% of the State's population. Massive Democratic trends in both these areas (especially Austin's) is what allowed Democrats to come back into the game in the Obama years. In 2000, Bush won 47% in Austin's Travis County (Nader took over 10% there, allowing Bush to prevail) and 52% in San Antonio's Bexar County. Twelve years later, Obama beat Romney 60-36 in the former and 51-47 in the latter. The two cities have clearly realigned themselves toward the Democrats, making up for the lost ground among white rural or suburban voters. Still, these trends have so far produced only narrow Democratic leads, which could easily be reversed in a more Republican-leaning environment (or in State-level politics, when turnout may be lower and Democratic candidates less appealing).

Capital: For once the most populous city, San Antonio, works perfectly, being located fairly close to the population center.

Governor: Lamar Smith isn't a perfect choice, but he's the most fitting pick I can think of. In a year like 2010, the GOP would only need to field a half-decent candidate to win. However, he's probably looking up to a tough challenge in 2014.

Senators: Julian Castro (class 1) and John Cornyn (class 3)

Representatives: Unsurprisingly for a State of such tradition, local Democratic strength in Rio Grande far surpasses their national results. In fact, extrapolating from Texas HoR districts, it appears that Democrats would hold something like a 2/3 majority in the RG State Legislature. With a Republican governor, this means a fair redistricting would be possible (though again, incumbent protection or other sorts of awful deals have an equal chance of happening). However, it's hard to see in which direction things would change. Under the current (presumably R-gerrymandered) map, Democrats hold 7 seats in a State that would have 11. One could again credit the strength of local Democrats, but in fact, Obama won 6 districts as well. Does that mean that Dems would hold even more seats under a fair map? Or did the TXGOP draw a dummymander? Only some toying with DRA could give us the answer (and it's up to you guys!). Still, I will conservatively settle for the status quo, namely a 7D-4R split.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,959
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #215 on: August 24, 2014, 05:23:10 AM »

Are people still following this? Just checking. Wink
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #216 on: August 24, 2014, 05:42:19 AM »

Are people still following this? Just checking. Wink
Yes! Great work! Smiley
Logged
Niemeyerite
JulioMadrid
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,803
Spain


Political Matrix
E: -8.65, S: -9.04

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #217 on: August 24, 2014, 06:18:45 AM »


Of coursse we are.
Logged
Enderman
Jack Enderman
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,380
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #218 on: August 24, 2014, 09:44:15 AM »


Yes we're eagerly awaiting North Texas! Cheesy
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,959
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #219 on: August 24, 2014, 01:04:24 PM »


Great to know! Smiley Sorry about the insecurity. Tongue

BTW, I've decided to rename North Texas Jefferson (as there was an actual attempt to create such a State from western TX) instead, as North Texas was pretty lame. The update on it is coming soon! Smiley
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,959
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #220 on: August 26, 2014, 10:56:08 AM »
« Edited: August 26, 2014, 12:55:43 PM by Robb the Survivor »

Jefferson

To complete the Texas trio, here is the State of Jefferson, which gets its name from a secession movement that sparked through Texas' western counties in late 19th and early 20th century (yes, I know this is also the proposed name for a more famous statehood movement in Northern California, but since I didn't find room for such a State in this scenario, it's not an issue). To describe it simply, this State combines the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area with the great ocean of nothingness that is Northwestern Texas. So yeah, this is the State that contains the famous Loving County and its 60some residents.

It's a bit unfortunate that, due to Texas' geography, I was forced to put one of America's largest metropolises in the same State as one of the most rural and sparsely populated regions. I've got to admit, in this case I mostly failed to create a reasonably homogeneous community of interest, and instead what I came with is best described as one big leftover. Big indeed, since this State is actually the most populous of the three (8.8 million people in 2010). Obviously these people don't live in Loving, King, Foard, Briscoe, Irion, or Glasscock (yeah...) counties. In fact, the Dallas-Fort Worth complex would utterly dominate Jefferson. Alone, the two core counties of Dallas and Tarrant contain almost half of the State's population.

JF Presidential election results, 1960-2012:


Democrats can consider themselves lucky that this is the case, considering that they seldom break 25% outside of the Dallas area, even this big population skew is far from enough to make them competitive statewide. As the chart above shows, Jefferson is, has been, and probably will be for the foreseeable future, a Republican stronghold. LBJ aside, no Democrat has ever won it in over 50 years (my guess is that you'd have to go back to Truman to find a victorious Democratic nominee in this State). The only one who came remotely close was Jimmy Carter in 1976. In the modern era, the best a Democrat has ever managed to reach was a 10-point loss in 1992. This was likely made possible by Ross Perot's very strong performance that year (Jefferson would be his 6th best State in this scenario). In many way, this State resembles neighboring Oklahoma (which Carter also nearly won in 1976). Republicans can safely count on it regardless of the circumstances (and not only at the Presidential level), although their victories are a tad less lopsided in Jefferson than in Oklahoma.

Although the basic picture has remained the same throughout decade, this doesn't mean the State's internal politics haven't experienced a shift. In fact, it is impressive how massive the trends have been when examined at the county level. If you go back to election years of the 1960s and 70s, you'll see that the Dallas area was the heart of Republican strength at that time. As a good poster once hilariously pointed out, Dallas county gave Nixon 62% of its vote in 1960. In 1976, it was still voting for Ford by a 14-points margin. Meanwhile, the rural plains counties looked nothing like the sea of navy-blue that we see today. In fact, if you take away Dallas and Tarrant counties, Carter actually wins Jefferson, and Kennedy comes very close. Some counties in the area (especially those just south of the Panhandle) were actually overwhelmingly Democratic, voting for Kennedy, LBJ or Carter by a more than 2 to 1 margin.

As with many other political realignments, the shift of Republican strength from the city to the country began in the 1980s. 1984 was the year when Dallas county became more Democratic than the State as a whole, and since then, the trend only intensified. In both 2008 and 2012, breaking a 40-year-long Republican streak, it became the only county in the State to support Obama. Meanwhile, we all know what happened to these rural Democratic areas in the State's northwest. The 2004-2008 trend, below, expresses this movement quite powerfully:



Overall, the State trended to the Democrats by about 2 points, but what really happened is that the Dallas-Fort Worth metro (along with a largely irrelevant chunk of counties in JF's far west) moved left, while the State's rural heartland saw a massive Republican shift. A similar general picture can be found in all other trend maps of the past two decades, and there are good reasons to believe that the Dallas area will grow more Democratic as time goes on. This obviously won't be much of a threat for Republicans, considering how much they dominate the rest of the State.

Capital: No ideal choice, but Abilene can do the deal. Although geography aside, its frankly ridiculous to have the capital be anywhere outside of the Dallas metro. Fort Worth then.

Governor: Rick Perry would be the State's uncontested overlord.

Senators: There I'm completely lost. Unfortunately, most prominent Texas figures (especially GOP nutters like Steve Stockman, who would fit in perfectly) have no connection to this part of the State. I'll randomly go with Kay Granger (class 1) and Greg Abbott (class 3), but I appreciate if someone with better insights in this region's politics could correct me.

Representatives: Obviously the GOP would control the entire redistricting process. Assuming they already have done their worst in OTL Texas, that means we end up with a 10R-2D split.
Logged
Gass3268
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,478
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #221 on: August 26, 2014, 12:02:39 PM »
« Edited: August 26, 2014, 01:45:33 PM by Gass3268 »

Awesome work as usual! I'd personally go with Lubbock or Fort Worth as the state capitol. Fort Worth would be cool as it would make the Metroplex like the Twin Cities. Otherwise Lubbock is larger than Abilene and has a major University (Texas Tech), while still being in a somewhat centralized position.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,959
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #222 on: August 26, 2014, 12:56:10 PM »

Awesome work as usual! I'd personally go with Lubbock or Fort Worth as the state capitol. Fort Worth would be cool as it would make the Metroplex for like the Twin Cities. Otherwise Lubbock is larger than Abilene and has a major University (Texas Tech), while still being in a somewhat centralized position.

Yeah you're right, I'll go with Fort Worth. Wink
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,959
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #223 on: August 27, 2014, 02:03:51 PM »

PVI comparison



The partisan hierarchy among these three State is clear and constant throughout this time period. Rio Grande is the most Democratic, Jefferson the most Republican, and our Texas is the closest you get as a bellwether for the OTL State. There are of course significant variations in the degree to which the three States differ: from relatively limited variation in years like 1964, to a wide gap in years like 2000. Still, the general picture never really shifts. In terms of evolution, OTL Texas' prolonged shift toward the Republicans has been experienced by all three States. Over the 1976-2000 time span, RG went from being D+11 to R+10, TX from D+2 to R+21, and JF from R+6 to R+31. Slight variations in the strength of this trends reveal something about the changing electoral geography of OTL Texas. For example, it is interesting to note that this scenario's Texas used to be a couple points more Democratic than the OTL State, as late as in 1988. From 1992 to 2004, this eastern section matched the larger area almost perfectly. However, since 2008, the Texas of this scenario has become markedly more Republican than the RL one, entering boldly in "R stronghold" territory and almost matching Jefferson's levels of lopsidedness. Meanwhile, RG (which under Bush had become reliably Republican) actually experienced a major trend back toward the Democrats, making it a pure tossup again. Thus, over the last couple decades, what we see is a typically southern State which moves deeper and deeper to the right (Texas), a longtime Republican stronghold which remains so (Jefferson), and what looks like a poster child for the emerging Southwestern Democratic strength. Clearly, a State like OTL Texas is far too big to be examined at the macro level.
Logged
Mr. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 33,072
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #224 on: August 27, 2014, 07:43:51 PM »

Firstly, I haven't seen any of the California's here, what would the graphs look like?

And secondly what would all these divided/integrated states look like in 1988?

I imagine West Coast would go to Dukakis, but the other two would go to Bush.

Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... 23  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.138 seconds with 13 queries.