Why Indiana is so conservative ?

[Gustaf]

Indiana is a Northern conservative state. That's odd...

No it isn't.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Because GOP loyalties stretch back to the Civil War

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not true

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not true. Besides Lincoln was quite conservative (whereas Robert E. Lee was a liberal)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sure... the Corn Belt is very conservative... but that extends into Illinois, Ohio, etc.
The Gary-Hammond area is strongly Democrat BTW

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Civil War+Cornbelt=GOP

The Republicans weren't that conservative:

They introduced the progressive tax, arguing that 'a tax properly levied, upon incomes...is an equitable and just tax'. Or as the Chicago Tribune put it: 'the rich should be taxed more than the poor'. Another Republican claimed that 'the universal cry of this people is to be taxed'.

Basically the GOP of Lincoln and the Civil War favoured a stronger central government, higher taxes and equal rights for blacks. That's fairly liberal.

[Gustaf]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I agree on the first two, the third one I could strongly debate you on. Yes the North wanted higher taxes on the south. The south was paying the north and getting nothing back. Compare the roads, railroads and waterway systems just before 1860. The Northerners were sucking the south dry of profits and giving them nothing in return. One of the MAIN reasons for the war. Abolition was a minority. On the high end 10% of the north was in favor of abolition. Most Northern businessman couldn't condemn slavery because they were in the process of enslaving the Irish in their factories and factory towns. Robert Gould Shaw who led the 54th Mass., a black regiment, was a very very wealthy man. And you want to guess how his father made his money? You guessed, the slave trade. The slave trade made Massachusetts a wealthy state.

Indiana had strong southern sympathies in the southern part of the state. Indiana actually sent a Confederate regiment south. Many Indianans consider themselves southern before mid-western.

My point wasn't necessarily that the North wanted higher taxes on the SOUth, they wanted it in general. And even though racism was sadly strong even in the North, I do think that it's undisputable that a strong faction of Radical Republicans with a fairly strong amount of support among Northerners, were against slavery. And the Irish weren't enslaved, the formalia here makes a large difference, imo.

[Gustaf]

Working 15 hours a day locked in a enclosed warehouse when you were 8 years old isn't slavery?

There is a difference between someone owning you and someone not owning you...I'm not saying that working conditions were right at that time, but I wouldn't call it slavery or equal it with that.

[Gustaf]

Indiana used to be more Democratic in the old days. It voted for Cleveland in 1892 and was close in 1896, 1900 and 1908, to name a few. Wilson won it clearly in 1912 and only lost there by a small margin in 1916.

To me it seems like Indiana is basically more Southern than most other Northern states, and thus more likely to vote with the South. That means GOP nowadfays.

[Gustaf]

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?

[Gustaf]

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

[Gustaf]

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

That Populist Al.

Ouch.

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