Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 24, 2014, 01:29:30 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections (Moderator: Joe Republic)
| | |-+  Wrong-party governors?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Print
Author Topic: Wrong-party governors?  (Read 14766 times)
nonluddite
Newbie
*
Posts: 9


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: January 07, 2004, 11:05:06 am »
Ignore


Also, I think the question was more about why voters changed their minds, than the technical aspects of which offices the GOP took over... Wink

But I could be wrong, it feels kind of arrogant to explain other people's intentions, but I suppose I'm a busy body... Wink

That's exactly what I was referring to.  How did MN go from a Massachusetts to a swing state, since they voted Dem in every election from 1960 to now, except for Nixon's landslide in 1972?
Logged

The American Civil Liberties Union—Protecting the Bill of Rights…except for Amendments 2, 9, and 10!
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26762


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

View Profile
« Reply #26 on: January 07, 2004, 11:17:22 am »
Ignore


Also, I think the question was more about why voters changed their minds, than the technical aspects of which offices the GOP took over... Wink

But I could be wrong, it feels kind of arrogant to explain other people's intentions, but I suppose I'm a busy body... Wink

That's exactly what I was referring to.  How did MN go from a Massachusetts to a swing state, since they voted Dem in every election from 1960 to now, except for Nixon's landslide in 1972?

Hah! Once again, I read someone's mind, lol Smiley Wink
Logged

This place really has become a cesspool of degenerate whores...

Economic score: +0.9
Social score: -2.61

In MN for fantasy stuff, member of the most recently dissolved centrist party.
jravnsbo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1898


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: January 07, 2004, 02:59:16 pm »
Ignore

Well one the parties shifted their policies.  Dems seem to care a lot more about the elite ideas than as they were seen for years as a party of the labor unions.  Unions are still there, but they don't seem to be the focus of the party.

Plus some migration has been happening here.  A number of factors really.



Also, I think the question was more about why voters changed their minds, than the technical aspects of which offices the GOP took over... Wink

But I could be wrong, it feels kind of arrogant to explain other people's intentions, but I suppose I'm a busy body... Wink

That's exactly what I was referring to.  How did MN go from a Massachusetts to a swing state, since they voted Dem in every election from 1960 to now, except for Nixon's landslide in 1972?
Logged

Currently in Iraq, risking my butt to protect yours!

Republicans think every day is July 4, Democarts think every day is April 15
President Reagan

Well I can hear you and soon the whole world will hear all of us. President George Bush
Sibboleth Bist
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 56201
Saint Helena


View Profile WWW
« Reply #28 on: January 09, 2004, 09:49:37 am »
Ignore

Also Minnesota never really gave the Dems the huge wins they get in Massachusetts.
In 1980 and 1984 it only went Dem because of Mondale.
The state has always had an independent streak anyways.
Logged

NHPolitico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2304


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: January 09, 2004, 07:37:50 pm »
Ignore

And John Ashcroft in Missouri, after losing his Senate race in 2000.
Yeah, it is kind of ironic in a way that losing an election can actually make you more powerful. Bush probably wouldn't have chosen Ashcroft or Abraham for his cabinet if they had won reelection, especially Ashcroft since Missouri has a Dem governor so he would've been handing the seat to the Dems. Likewise Clinton probably wouldn't have appointed Moseley-Braun since with a GOP governor he'd be giving away a Senate seat as well.

Ashcroft wanted to be the only Missouri politician to serve two terms as state AG, two terms as governor and two terms as senator.  I guess it's possible he could still do it, but he's said that he's done with elected office now.

My guess is that Bush would have chosen Racicot even though the right wasn't crazy about him. Hatch or Hyde would have been another two options, I guess.

Abraham wouldn't have been in the Cabinet either. The state needed a GOP figure like him to act as a foundation should they lose the governorship, which they did.
Logged

"I like to help old ladies across the street. Sometimes they don't want to be helped. It's terrible." -- Barry Seinfeld
Don't tell me we can't change.
NHPolitico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2304


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: January 09, 2004, 07:50:10 pm »
Ignore


I object to putting Coleman on this list. I am of the belief that MN is really heading toward a realignment.

I'm not disagreeing with you in asking this question, but how did socialist MN go over to the Republicans?

In addition to what's been said, The MNGOP also picked up the state auditor's office in addition to the 15 legislature seats. And, MN had the highest voter turnout of the states last year-- 60.65%-- so these results are likely more similar to how the state will vote in a high-turnout presidential race. Last year, 78% of independent Twin City suburban voters voted GOP. Dem strength in the state senate has fallen 7 seats since 1998.  Also, these Republicans are much more conservative as a group than the ones from the 90s (more pro-life, more anti-tax).

Logged

"I like to help old ladies across the street. Sometimes they don't want to be helped. It's terrible." -- Barry Seinfeld
Don't tell me we can't change.
acsenray
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 51


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: July 13, 2004, 03:17:17 pm »
Ignore

Likewise Clinton probably wouldn't have appointed Moseley-Braun since with a GOP governor he'd be giving away a Senate seat as well.

Well, Clinton did do it with Lloyd Bentsen, giving away a Senate seat to the Republicans.
Logged

Support the S.A.P.C.C.! - Switch the Atlas Party Colours Coalition - Jive with the contemporary cultural lexicon of D=Blue and R=Red
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35385
United States
View Profile
« Reply #32 on: July 13, 2004, 05:39:47 pm »
Ignore

I'll make a list:

Arizona- Janet Napoliotano (D)
California- Arnold Schwarzenegger (R)
Connecticut- Whoever Replaced Rowland (R)
Hawaii- Linda Lingle (R)
Indiana- Whoever Replace O'Bannon (is it Kernan)?  (D)
Kansas- Kathleen Sebelius (D)
Louisiana- Kathleen Banineaux Blanco (D)
Maryland- Robert Elrich (R)
Massachuetts- Mitt Romney (R)
Minnesota- Tim Pawlenty (R)
Missouri- Bob Holden (D)
New York- george pataki (r)
North Carolina- Mike Easley (D)

More later
Logged
KEmperor
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8533
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.00, S: -0.05

View Profile
« Reply #33 on: July 13, 2004, 07:47:20 pm »
Ignore

It's a combination of local politics, and the fact that a Republican in New York is not the same as a Republican in Texas.  A Democrat in Georgia is not the same as a Democrat in Massachusetts.  There are regional variations within the parties.  The two major parties are basically national alliances of several factions.

Democrats run the wide gamut from the near democratic-socialist left (Dennis Kucinich) and traditional liberals (Hillary Clinton) to the center-right (Joe Lieberman).

Republicans also consist of several factions: Traditional Conservatives (George W. Bush), the Religious Right (Trent Lott), the old Nixon/Rockefeller "centrist" or "moderate" wing (George Pataki), and Libertarians (Ron Paul).
Logged
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35385
United States
View Profile
« Reply #34 on: July 13, 2004, 08:50:16 pm »
Ignore

to the center-right (Joe Lieberman).

You got almost everyline from that post from politics1.

But still, you gotta downright explain to me how Joe Lieberman is center-right!
Logged
KEmperor
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8533
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.00, S: -0.05

View Profile
« Reply #35 on: July 13, 2004, 10:34:25 pm »
Ignore

to the center-right (Joe Lieberman).

You got almost everyline from that post from politics1.

But still, you gotta downright explain to me how Joe Lieberman is center-right!

Yes, I most certainly did.  They put it quite well enough.  And Lieberman is rather conservative, pushing for censorship laws and such.
Logged
Keystone Phil
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 51539


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: July 13, 2004, 10:46:19 pm »
Ignore

to the center-right (Joe Lieberman).


You got almost everyline from that post from politics1.

But still, you gotta downright explain to me how Joe Lieberman is center-right!


Yes, I most certainly did.  They put it quite well enough.  And Lieberman is rather conservative, pushing for censorship laws and such.

Yes but look at his views on aborition, affirmative action, taxes...he's not the conservative Dem that people make him out to be.
Logged

KEmperor
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8533
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.00, S: -0.05

View Profile
« Reply #37 on: July 13, 2004, 10:57:37 pm »
Ignore

to the center-right (Joe Lieberman).


You got almost everyline from that post from politics1.

But still, you gotta downright explain to me how Joe Lieberman is center-right!


Yes, I most certainly did.  They put it quite well enough.  And Lieberman is rather conservative, pushing for censorship laws and such.

Yes but look at his views on aborition, affirmative action, taxes...he's not the conservative Dem that people make him out to be.

Those are what make him a Dem in the first place.
Logged
cwelsch
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 678


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: July 14, 2004, 06:08:42 am »
Ignore

Lieberman is just an example of typical interventionist politics.  The government should do something here, and there, and over there, and more here, and another law here, throw more spending here, etc.  The difference between him and the common title "populist" is that Lieberman appeals to middle class interventionists and the conventional "populists" prefer a more working class interventionism - which is usually a much more involved brand (both socially and economically).  I'd say center-right isn't a horrible definition, but on social views, yeah, he's not moderate at all - he's pro partial-birth abortion, not just pro-choice.


You've got two huge big tents, that's how they hold power across such a diverse country.  We have more than 100 million voters, they're gonna want different things.  But ultimately if a Utah Democrat (hah) or Massachusetts Republican ran for office, they'd be too weird a fit for their own parties.
Logged

Libertarians For Life my blog

Economic Right: 9.75
Social Libertarian: -6.46
English
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1188


View Profile WWW
« Reply #39 on: July 14, 2004, 06:10:48 am »
Ignore

I quite like the idea of vote splitting. Monopolies are invariable bad news, they just lead to corruption and stagnation.
I always split my vote, Labour in general elections, anyone but Labour in local elections.
Logged

I live in the UK and regard myself as a socially liberal, economic centrist. I vote for the British Labour party and support the Canadian NDP and US Democratic parties.


Economic -2.38
Social -1.74
ijohn57s
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 450


View Profile
« Reply #40 on: July 14, 2004, 09:31:08 am »
Ignore

New York and Massachusetts, states which voted over 60% for Gore, have Republican governors. Mississippi elected a Democratic governor in '99, then went on to vote 58% for Gore. (All according to the main site, of course.) What's going on here?

I believe you mean Mississippi went 58% for Bush Wink

As for Mississippi having a Democrat governor: a Mississippi Democrat politician is not your average national Democrat politician. Mississippi Democrats are a lot more conservative.
Logged

For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die. But God commendeth his love toward us, in that,  while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Romans 5:6-8
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35385
United States
View Profile
« Reply #41 on: July 14, 2004, 01:25:58 pm »
Ignore

Lieberman is a foreign issue moderate but is a liberal on social and economic liberal.
Logged
Nym90
nym90
Modadmin
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15178
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -2.96

P P P

View Profile
« Reply #42 on: July 15, 2004, 11:49:46 pm »
Ignore

Likewise Clinton probably wouldn't have appointed Moseley-Braun since with a GOP governor he'd be giving away a Senate seat as well.

Well, Clinton did do it with Lloyd Bentsen, giving away a Senate seat to the Republicans.

No, because Texas had a Democratic Governor at the time who appointed a Democrat to the seat. The GOP did go on to win the Special Election for the seat, but Clinton had no way of knowing at the time that they would.
Logged
bullmoose88
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14473


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: July 16, 2004, 02:07:51 pm »
Ignore

Yeah. Bensen became secretary of the treasury in what 1993?

W didn't win the governorship until Nov 1994...

Ann Richards (D) appointed his replacement.
Logged

A Socially Liberal, Fiscally Conservative NE Republican with some Left-Libertarian/3rd Way Leanings. Simply, a Rockefeller Republican.

According to one poster, I represent a...

Dying bread of Americans.
RomneyGekko Situation Hairgel
Flyers2004
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10527


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.87

View Profile
« Reply #44 on: July 16, 2004, 04:20:00 pm »
Ignore



   The Democrats were quite competitive in local Utah elections up till the 80s. The populist William Jennings Bryan style Democrats held sawy among many rural and small town voters in Utah for quite a long time.

  As for PA, I would not consider it a Northeastren State, despite its location. Even the area that Gore did best in, Philadelphia, does not share the zeal for social liberalism that the rest of the area has, also the Philadelphia metro area is the biggest metro area to have the least amount of demographic changes in the last 20 years. Excellent Democratic GOTV efforts in the Philadelphia area combined with Bush DUI stink in the weekend before election drove up Gore performance there.

Contrary to what you just said Philadelphia is socially liberal.  Maybe not as much as NYC or Boston, but still FAR greater than the rest of PA where abortion is very unpopular and guns are popular.
Logged


DOUCHEBAGGERY AT ITS FINEST!
Keystone Phil
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 51539


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: July 16, 2004, 04:25:01 pm »
Ignore



   The Democrats were quite competitive in local Utah elections up till the 80s. The populist William Jennings Bryan style Democrats held sawy among many rural and small town voters in Utah for quite a long time.

  As for PA, I would not consider it a Northeastren State, despite its location. Even the area that Gore did best in, Philadelphia, does not share the zeal for social liberalism that the rest of the area has, also the Philadelphia metro area is the biggest metro area to have the least amount of demographic changes in the last 20 years. Excellent Democratic GOTV efforts in the Philadelphia area combined with Bush DUI stink in the weekend before election drove up Gore performance there.

Contrary to what you just said Philadelphia is socially liberal.  Maybe not as much as NYC or Boston, but still FAR greater than the rest of PA where abortion is very unpopular and guns are popular.

I agree. We are the most liberal part of the state (unfortunatley) but we are no San Fransisco.
Logged

nclib
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8761


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: July 16, 2004, 09:08:37 pm »
Ignore

New York and Massachusetts, states which voted over 60% for Gore, have Republican governors. Mississippi elected a Democratic governor in '99, then went on to vote 58% for Gore. (All according to the main site, of course.) What's going on here?

Local politics.

In conservative areas Democrats run to the right of the presidential nominee (and Republicans in liberal areas run to the left of the nominee), so "wrong-party governors" and congresspeople can easily happen.

But many "wrong-party" politicians are not moderates. They include...

Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA)
Sen. Peter Fitzgerald (R-IL)
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA)
Rep. Jim Nussle (R-IA)
Rep. Dennis Moore (D-KS)
Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR)
Rep. Pat Toomey (R-PA)
Rep. Jim Matheson (D-UT)

Does anybody know of any others like these....
Logged



[George W. Bush] has shattered the myth of white supremacy once and for all. -- Congressman Charles Rangel (D-NY)

"George Bush supports abstinence. Lucky Laura."
- sign seen at the March for Women's Lives, 4/25/04

Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35385
United States
View Profile
« Reply #47 on: July 16, 2004, 09:38:17 pm »
Ignore

Nclib,

I would disagree and say Fitzgerald and Matheson are indeed moderates.
Logged
classical liberal
RightWingNut
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1761


Political Matrix
E: 9.35, S: -8.26

View Profile
« Reply #48 on: July 20, 2004, 06:27:12 pm »
Ignore

Add Coleman to the list and keep Fitzgerald on it.
Logged

"As for me, I'd rather live in a free country than a 'fair' one." --David Harsanyi

"What passes for optimism is most often the effect of an intellectual error." --Raymond Claud Ferdinan Aron

"The world is a rough and nasty place. Absent a change in human nature, it will remain so." --Robert M. Gates
Pages: 1 [2] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines