Why Indiana is so conservative ?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 04:49:03 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Dereich)
  Why Indiana is so conservative ?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Author Topic: Why Indiana is so conservative ?  (Read 21172 times)
Kghadial
Rookie
**
Posts: 223


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: March 24, 2004, 05:50:58 PM »
« edited: March 24, 2004, 07:12:21 PM by Kghadial »

the southern part of the state is more democratic because it has generally been poor. also coal mining and limestone quarries are in the southern part of the state and they skew democratic as well.  Its the mining interests that caused Gore to do worse in Southern Indiana than Dukakis or Carter '80 .  With Evan Bayh's senate reelection plenty of those southern Hoosiers are going to come out for Kerry, Kerry just might break a million votes here, which no Dem has done other than Johnson. Even without Evan as VP, i think the networks might have to wait a few minutes to call us Smiley .

Logged
ilikeverin
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,410
Timor-Leste


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: March 24, 2004, 06:03:37 PM »

Even without Evan as VP, i think the networks might have to wait a few minutes to call us Smiley .

Woohoo!  It's a new record Smiley
Logged
Kghadial
Rookie
**
Posts: 223


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: March 24, 2004, 07:18:58 PM »

Even without Evan as VP, i think the networks might have to wait a few minutes to call us Smiley .

Woohoo!  It's a new record Smiley

Hey progress is progress. Its important for Kerry to make some sort of inroads here , assuming Bayh gets the nomination in the future then Indiana will be much more ripe for the picking if Kerry does well.
Logged
nclib
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,300
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: March 24, 2004, 09:10:48 PM »

Indiana is so conservative for one simple reason:

It's the south, without the African-Americans.

Admittedly the northern lake area counties are part of the North and thus make Indiana a little closer to the center than the deep south (Carolinas, Georgia minus Atlanta, ala. , miss. , etc. ) if they all of a sudden lost all their African Americans.

Ohio and Illinois is much the same but they have far larger areas where the white folk are northern white folk, rather than southern white folk. Sorry if that seems offensive, but there really isn't a better way to put it, each minority type varies somewhat by region but caucasians vary wildly by region, some whites are new england liberals, and some are bible belt conservatives and the midwest is where they mix .

My theory on the Klan being so strong in Indiana is that they found it to be a haven of like minded people without too many of the people they hated (er ... still hate) being around.

This sounds about right. There certainly are southern whites who live in the North, and visa versa. The suburbs of Chicago fit in with the North, but most of the state fits in with the South.

What I find interesting is why is the Fort Wayne area so conservative. I've never been there, but I didn't think it was at all southern.

I don't think Ill. (w/o Chicago) and Ind. are comparable politically. Gore would have still won Illinois without Chicago.
Logged
Kghadial
Rookie
**
Posts: 223


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: March 25, 2004, 01:11:19 AM »

Indiana is so conservative for one simple reason:

It's the south, without the African-Americans.

Admittedly the northern lake area counties are part of the North and thus make Indiana a little closer to the center than the deep south (Carolinas, Georgia minus Atlanta, ala. , miss. , etc. ) if they all of a sudden lost all their African Americans.

Ohio and Illinois is much the same but they have far larger areas where the white folk are northern white folk, rather than southern white folk. Sorry if that seems offensive, but there really isn't a better way to put it, each minority type varies somewhat by region but caucasians vary wildly by region, some whites are new england liberals, and some are bible belt conservatives and the midwest is where they mix .

My theory on the Klan being so strong in Indiana is that they found it to be a haven of like minded people without too many of the people they hated (er ... still hate) being around.

This sounds about right. There certainly are southern whites who live in the North, and visa versa. The suburbs of Chicago fit in with the North, but most of the state fits in with the South.

What I find interesting is why is the Fort Wayne area so conservative. I've never been there, but I didn't think it was at all southern.

I don't think Ill. (w/o Chicago) and Ind. are comparable politically. Gore would have still won Illinois without Chicago.

Indiana doesn't make much sense.  The guys who work at the factory in Elkhart county with my dad, are a bunch union workers a third of which are from WV. They seem like they should be rather democratic, They were pretty reasonably heavy Bush in '00. Now they seem to fall closer to the northern union worker average. They made fun of my dad for supporting the environut anti-gun Gore, now they tell him he was right all along.

Elkhart County used to be more dependent on factory jobs than any other county in the nation. It still voted 2 to 1 for Bush, its in the North, it borders Michigan and it was still more Republican than the state average.  The city of Ft. Wayne is a little more democratic, but Wayne county is much more conservative. I'm not sure what to say about it but the fact that the northern two/thirds of Indiana away from the lake and not in the city of indy proper is all staunchly Republican.

Gore would have lost Illinois if you took Cook county (Chicago's county) out of the state. Bush beat him by like 150,000 in the rest of the state. The reason the rest of Illinois would be more moderate than Indiana is because there are more Northern whites in Illinois.  Look at the counties on the Iowa border.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: March 25, 2004, 06:20:46 AM »

Indiana can be (roughly) divided into:

1. Gary-Hammond (part of "Chicagoland" and the biggest steel producing area in the US)=Strong Democrat
2. South Bend and surrounds=Tossup
3. Indianapolis=leans Democrat
4. Southern Indiana=leans Democrat
5. Corn Belt=Very strong GOP (est. 1856)

Dunno where to put Muncie though...
Logged
Reaganfan
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,239
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: March 25, 2004, 11:00:01 AM »

Dan Quayle brought that state over to us. LOL
Logged
muon2
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,787


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: March 25, 2004, 05:01:39 PM »

Indiana is so conservative for one simple reason:

It's the south, without the African-Americans.

Admittedly the northern lake area counties are part of the North and thus make Indiana a little closer to the center than the deep south (Carolinas, Georgia minus Atlanta, ala. , miss. , etc. ) if they all of a sudden lost all their African Americans.

Ohio and Illinois is much the same but they have far larger areas where the white folk are northern white folk, rather than southern white folk. Sorry if that seems offensive, but there really isn't a better way to put it, each minority type varies somewhat by region but caucasians vary wildly by region, some whites are new england liberals, and some are bible belt conservatives and the midwest is where they mix .

My theory on the Klan being so strong in Indiana is that they found it to be a haven of like minded people without too many of the people they hated (er ... still hate) being around.

This sounds about right. There certainly are southern whites who live in the North, and visa versa. The suburbs of Chicago fit in with the North, but most of the state fits in with the South.

What I find interesting is why is the Fort Wayne area so conservative. I've never been there, but I didn't think it was at all southern.

I don't think Ill. (w/o Chicago) and Ind. are comparable politically. Gore would have still won Illinois without Chicago.

As Kghadial said, IL goes to Bush in 2000 without Chicago or Cook Co. Without Cook, Bush wins 1,484,591 to 1,308,041, a comfortable margin. If only the city of Chicago is removed, Bush still wins by 1,862,189 to 1,834,305. All Democrats know they need a big margin in Cook (Gore was +750,000) to offset the rest of the state.
Logged
Jyrki
Rookie
**
Posts: 22
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: April 01, 2004, 04:03:08 PM »

There were a lot of very interesting replies : I really learned a lot from this thread.
I'd like to thank siege40, muon2, kghadial, gustaf and staterights for their input. I'm impressed.

To summarize, there are two big explanations :
Indiana = Illinois - Chicago
Indiana is more Southern than the other Northern states

They're good explanations and they work well together.
Although, I'm not 100 % satisfied.
The border states like Kentucky and Missouri are more Southern than Indiana. They voted more "progressive" in recent elections (more Gore, less Bush, less Dole, more Dukakis, more Mondale, less Reagan,...)
Actually, the margin between the republican candidate and the democratic candidate has been higher for Indiana since 1912 !
If you look at the demographics, the black vote and the big cities are not significantly different.
So........................... Why ?
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: April 01, 2004, 04:10:57 PM »

There were a lot of very interesting replies : I really learned a lot from this thread.
I'd like to thank siege40, muon2, kghadial, gustaf and staterights for their input. I'm impressed.

To summarize, there are two big explanations :
Indiana = Illinois - Chicago
Indiana is more Southern than the other Northern states

They're good explanations and they work well together.
Although, I'm not 100 % satisfied.
The border states like Kentucky and Missouri are more Southern than Indiana. They voted more "progressive" in recent elections (more Gore, less Bush, less Dole, more Dukakis, more Mondale, less Reagan,...)
Actually, the margin between the republican candidate and the democratic candidate has been higher for Indiana since 1912 !
If you look at the demographics, the black vote and the big cities are not significantly different.
So........................... Why ?

Well...you have to keep in mind though that the Dems used to have the South, so being more Southern worked for the Dems for a long time. Unless I'm mistaken the difference between Indiana and Kentucky wasn't very big last election?
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: April 01, 2004, 04:27:48 PM »

There were a lot of very interesting replies : I really learned a lot from this thread.
I'd like to thank siege40, muon2, kghadial, gustaf and staterights for their input. I'm impressed.

To summarize, there are two big explanations :
Indiana = Illinois - Chicago
Indiana is more Southern than the other Northern states

They're good explanations and they work well together.
Although, I'm not 100 % satisfied.
The border states like Kentucky and Missouri are more Southern than Indiana. They voted more "progressive" in recent elections (more Gore, less Bush, less Dole, more Dukakis, more Mondale, less Reagan,...)
Actually, the margin between the republican candidate and the democratic candidate has been higher for Indiana since 1912 !
If you look at the demographics, the black vote and the big cities are not significantly different.
So........................... Why ?

Well...you have to keep in mind though that the Dems used to have the South, so being more Southern worked for the Dems for a long time. Unless I'm mistaken the difference between Indiana and Kentucky wasn't very big last election?

No, they were very close - 56.65% IN and 56.5% KY for Bush.  I think KY is less 'Populist' than people think.  For example I think I would've won it in the Forum Four Way.  But IN is one of the main centers of the Conservative Party.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: April 01, 2004, 04:28:47 PM »

There were a lot of very interesting replies : I really learned a lot from this thread.
I'd like to thank siege40, muon2, kghadial, gustaf and staterights for their input. I'm impressed.

To summarize, there are two big explanations :
Indiana = Illinois - Chicago
Indiana is more Southern than the other Northern states

They're good explanations and they work well together.
Although, I'm not 100 % satisfied.
The border states like Kentucky and Missouri are more Southern than Indiana. They voted more "progressive" in recent elections (more Gore, less Bush, less Dole, more Dukakis, more Mondale, less Reagan,...)
Actually, the margin between the republican candidate and the democratic candidate has been higher for Indiana since 1912 !
If you look at the demographics, the black vote and the big cities are not significantly different.
So........................... Why ?

Well...you have to keep in mind though that the Dems used to have the South, so being more Southern worked for the Dems for a long time. Unless I'm mistaken the difference between Indiana and Kentucky wasn't very big last election?

No, they were very close - 56.65% IN and 56.5% KY for Bush.  I think KY is less 'Populist' than people think.  For example I think I would've won it in the Forum Four Way.  But IN is one of the main centers of the Conservative Party.


You wish. Smiley Who won KY in the four way, I don't remember?
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: April 01, 2004, 04:30:52 PM »

There were a lot of very interesting replies : I really learned a lot from this thread.
I'd like to thank siege40, muon2, kghadial, gustaf and staterights for their input. I'm impressed.

To summarize, there are two big explanations :
Indiana = Illinois - Chicago
Indiana is more Southern than the other Northern states

They're good explanations and they work well together.
Although, I'm not 100 % satisfied.
The border states like Kentucky and Missouri are more Southern than Indiana. They voted more "progressive" in recent elections (more Gore, less Bush, less Dole, more Dukakis, more Mondale, less Reagan,...)
Actually, the margin between the republican candidate and the democratic candidate has been higher for Indiana since 1912 !
If you look at the demographics, the black vote and the big cities are not significantly different.
So........................... Why ?

Well...you have to keep in mind though that the Dems used to have the South, so being more Southern worked for the Dems for a long time. Unless I'm mistaken the difference between Indiana and Kentucky wasn't very big last election?

No, they were very close - 56.65% IN and 56.5% KY for Bush.  I think KY is less 'Populist' than people think.  For example I think I would've won it in the Forum Four Way.  But IN is one of the main centers of the Conservative Party.


You wish. Smiley Who won KY in the four way, I don't remember?

That Populist Al.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: April 01, 2004, 04:32:07 PM »

There were a lot of very interesting replies : I really learned a lot from this thread.
I'd like to thank siege40, muon2, kghadial, gustaf and staterights for their input. I'm impressed.

To summarize, there are two big explanations :
Indiana = Illinois - Chicago
Indiana is more Southern than the other Northern states

They're good explanations and they work well together.
Although, I'm not 100 % satisfied.
The border states like Kentucky and Missouri are more Southern than Indiana. They voted more "progressive" in recent elections (more Gore, less Bush, less Dole, more Dukakis, more Mondale, less Reagan,...)
Actually, the margin between the republican candidate and the democratic candidate has been higher for Indiana since 1912 !
If you look at the demographics, the black vote and the big cities are not significantly different.
So........................... Why ?

Well...you have to keep in mind though that the Dems used to have the South, so being more Southern worked for the Dems for a long time. Unless I'm mistaken the difference between Indiana and Kentucky wasn't very big last election?

No, they were very close - 56.65% IN and 56.5% KY for Bush.  I think KY is less 'Populist' than people think.  For example I think I would've won it in the Forum Four Way.  But IN is one of the main centers of the Conservative Party.


You wish. Smiley Who won KY in the four way, I don't remember?

That Populist Al.


Ouch. Wink

I think KY would be a bit of a swing state though, it did vote for Clinton once.
Logged
nclib
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,300
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: April 02, 2004, 12:44:04 AM »

There were a lot of very interesting replies : I really learned a lot from this thread.
I'd like to thank siege40, muon2, kghadial, gustaf and staterights for their input. I'm impressed.

To summarize, there are two big explanations :
Indiana = Illinois - Chicago
Indiana is more Southern than the other Northern states

They're good explanations and they work well together.
Although, I'm not 100 % satisfied.
The border states like Kentucky and Missouri are more Southern than Indiana. They voted more "progressive" in recent elections (more Gore, less Bush, less Dole, more Dukakis, more Mondale, less Reagan,...)
Actually, the margin between the republican candidate and the democratic candidate has been higher for Indiana since 1912 !
If you look at the demographics, the black vote and the big cities are not significantly different.
So........................... Why ?

Well...you have to keep in mind though that the Dems used to have the South, so being more Southern worked for the Dems for a long time. Unless I'm mistaken the difference between Indiana and Kentucky wasn't very big last election?

No, they were very close - 56.65% IN and 56.5% KY for Bush.  I think KY is less 'Populist' than people think.  For example I think I would've won it in the Forum Four Way.  But IN is one of the main centers of the Conservative Party.


You wish. Smiley Who won KY in the four way, I don't remember?

That Populist Al.


Ouch. Wink

I think KY would be a bit of a swing state though, it did vote for Clinton once.

Twice actually.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: April 02, 2004, 05:43:20 AM »

Bush's margin of victory in Kentucky was unusually large... it'll come down this year I'd guess.
Logged
Jyrki
Rookie
**
Posts: 22
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: April 04, 2004, 06:29:19 PM »

There were a lot of very interesting replies : I really learned a lot from this thread.
I'd like to thank siege40, muon2, kghadial, gustaf and staterights for their input. I'm impressed.

To summarize, there are two big explanations :
Indiana = Illinois - Chicago
Indiana is more Southern than the other Northern states

They're good explanations and they work well together.
Although, I'm not 100 % satisfied.
The border states like Kentucky and Missouri are more Southern than Indiana. They voted more "progressive" in recent elections (more Gore, less Bush, less Dole, more Dukakis, more Mondale, less Reagan,...)
Actually, the margin between the republican candidate and the democratic candidate has been higher for Indiana since 1912 !
If you look at the demographics, the black vote and the big cities are not significantly different.
So........................... Why ?

Well...you have to keep in mind though that the Dems used to have the South, so being more Southern worked for the Dems for a long time. Unless I'm mistaken the difference between Indiana and Kentucky wasn't very big last election?

You're right, the South voted for the Dems before 1964.
But the southern states (including the border state named Kentucky almost every time) voted more Bush jr, less Nader, less Gore, more Dole, less Clinton (96), less Perot (92 & 96), more Bush sr (92), less Dukakis and less Mondale than northern states did. While Indiana voted more like that than Kentucky (and Missouri), by a little margin in 2000 but usually by a big one in the previous elections.
You can check it on this site.

Indiana is really a state like no other. It's strange...
KY has no big city and about the same percentage of black people. Why the northern folks of Indiana voted more "southern" than the southern folks of Kentucky ? Why Indiana voted more conservative than all the other northern states (with the possible exception of New Hampshire) ?
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: April 05, 2004, 11:20:22 AM »

The most conservative part of Indiana is the Corn Belt (which extends into Ohio) and has been loyally Republican for 140 years.

---
Doesn't Louisville count as a "big city"?
Logged
Jyrki
Rookie
**
Posts: 22
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: April 05, 2004, 02:04:20 PM »

The most conservative part of Indiana is the Corn Belt (which extends into Ohio) and has been loyally Republican for 140 years.

---
Doesn't Louisville count as a "big city"?

Not compared to Indianapolis. But you can count it... and you should count Fort Wayne for Indiana. It's a tie, at best.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: April 05, 2004, 02:20:33 PM »

It's got it's own Congressional District.

Kentucky is poorer than Indiania, BTW
Logged
Jyrki
Rookie
**
Posts: 22
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: April 06, 2004, 04:59:52 PM »

It's got it's own Congressional District.

Kentucky is poorer than Indiania, BTW

Where can I find a map on the web with states ranked by poverty (or by median income) ?
Do Poorer states vote always more democratic ?
Logged
Jyrki
Rookie
**
Posts: 22
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: April 07, 2004, 09:22:22 AM »

The most conservative part of Indiana is the Corn Belt (which extends into Ohio) and has been loyally Republican for 140 years.


Where can I find a map of the Corn Belt ? Thank you.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: April 07, 2004, 09:50:36 AM »

For income etc. try: http://nationalatlas.gov
For the "cornbelt" look at one of the national county maps on the Atlas (Western Ohio/Eastern Indiana... it's very easy to spot. Lots of dark blue)
Logged
Jyrki
Rookie
**
Posts: 22
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: April 10, 2004, 10:07:16 AM »

Indiana is so conservative for one simple reason:

It's the south, without the African-Americans.

Admittedly the northern lake area counties are part of the North and thus make Indiana a little closer to the center than the deep south (Carolinas, Georgia minus Atlanta, ala. , miss. , etc. ) if they all of a sudden lost all their African Americans.

Ohio and Illinois is much the same but they have far larger areas where the white folk are northern white folk, rather than southern white folk. Sorry if that seems offensive, but there really isn't a better way to put it, each minority type varies somewhat by region but caucasians vary wildly by region, some whites are new england liberals, and some are bible belt conservatives and the midwest is where they mix .

My theory on the Klan being so strong in Indiana is that they found it to be a haven of like minded people without too many of the people they hated (er ... still hate) being around.

This sounds about right. There certainly are southern whites who live in the North, and visa versa. The suburbs of Chicago fit in with the North, but most of the state fits in with the South.

What I find interesting is why is the Fort Wayne area so conservative. I've never been there, but I didn't think it was at all southern.

I don't think Ill. (w/o Chicago) and Ind. are comparable politically. Gore would have still won Illinois without Chicago.

As Kghadial said, IL goes to Bush in 2000 without Chicago or Cook Co. Without Cook, Bush wins 1,484,591 to 1,308,041, a comfortable margin. If only the city of Chicago is removed, Bush still wins by 1,862,189 to 1,834,305. All Democrats know they need a big margin in Cook (Gore was +750,000) to offset the rest of the state.


Where did you find these numbers ?

A lot of states vote republican outside their big cities. What would be New York without New York ? Republican ? (frightening)
If you take Philadelphia out of Pennsylvania, is Pennsylvania becoming "solid Bush country" ?

Thank god for the big cities  Wink
Logged
muon2
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,787


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: April 10, 2004, 01:24:13 PM »

I used the Illinois State Board of Elections, the Cook County Clerk (Cook County Election Department covers suburban Cook), and the Chicago Board of Election Commisioners (for the city).
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3  
« 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 0.063 seconds with 12 queries.