Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 22, 2014, 05:48:49 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: True Federalist)
| | |-+  1984 and 1988 Pennsylvania/New York results
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: 1984 and 1988 Pennsylvania/New York results  (Read 619 times)
sg0508
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1310
United States


View Profile
« on: November 02, 2011, 10:54:45 am »
Ignore

1984- We know that minorities had issues with Reagan's policies and trickle-down economics and that was probably the reason why PA was a weak Reagan win (53%-46%).  Ironically, NY was a bit stronger for Reagan (by 1%).  My guess is that Reagan's overwhelming margins on my native Long Island and enough white collar business folks in the boroughs were enough in NY.  I'm just interested in how NY could have been a stronger GOP win that year.

1988- The gun/crime issue seemed to hamper Dukakis all along, but how in the heck did he lose PA consider that he ran a relatively blue collar-type campaign given Reagan's weak result in 1984? Also, NY went back to being democratic by 4%, which was standard when the state's GOP was relatively moderate (Nixon in '60 and Ford in '76 lost by similar margins).  It's just interesting to see the Democrats lose PA that year after Mondale gave Reagan a good fight there in '84, yet NY jumped back into the democratic column despite the stronger Reagan showing in '84.  Cuomo maybe? I doubt it.
Logged

SJG
Your Cynical GM
Dr. Cynic
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12031
United States


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: November 02, 2011, 11:00:52 am »
Ignore

Well, in 1988, Dukakis did win pro-gun western PA by a fairly decent margin. I think though that PA probably got in a stink over his opposition to the death penalty and the Willie Horton ad probably tipped the balance against him in the state, whereas NY might be a bit more socially liberal.

In 1984, Mondale's strong showing is the obvious answer. Many PA Democrats are "Humphrey Democrats". Pro-Labor and heavily union. Mondale was a good candidate for PA. A better VP nominee, and he may have added the state and a couple of others.
Logged

only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58775
India


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: November 02, 2011, 12:04:43 pm »
Ignore

Basically, your classification of '84 is more accurate re '88 and vice versa.
Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
rbt48
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 818


View Profile WWW
« Reply #3 on: November 02, 2011, 09:55:46 pm »
Ignore

New York seems to have a hankering for supporting incumbent Presidents more strongly.  Ike in 56, Nixon in 72, Clinton in 96, and Bush in 04, as well as Reagan in 84.
Logged

Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines