Why does Iowa tilt D?

[Senator Snowstalker]

At first sight, it seems like a state that would be solidly Republican--and it was until the 1970's and 1980's. However, today it is a swing state that votes slightly more Democratic than the national average. Like the strongly Republican Great Plains states, it has more rural areas with heavy agriculture (even though the population is today somewhat more urban than rural); plains states have been Republican since Lincoln (other than a brief swing at the turn of the century).

Though I don't exactly mind Iowa leaning towards our side, it seems like it should be a more Republican state. So what's going on there?

[I Can't Get That Sound You Make, Out Of My Head]

Good question.

One theory I've heard is that Eastern Iowa has a lot in common with the cities being big enough to be Democratic but there not being much conservative suburbs.

[OC]

Because of Des Moines and Iowa City Warren County. As most populous cities in Iowa along with college towns it maximizes the youth and urban voters. Whereas during th e 70's dairy farmers were the ones that came out and it tilted to the GOP before the age of voters changed.

[freepcrusher]

the state has always had a populistic streak to if IIRC. Also, like Minnesota, the senior population tends to be unusually democratic.

[Gass3268]

Things seemed to change during the Farm Crisis during the 1980's. http://eightiesclub.tripod.com/id395.htm

You can view this change just by looking at the difference between 1984



and 1988.



Compare that to 2008.

[cope1989]

Check out Nate Silver's analysis of Iowa in his 538 blog, in the "Presidential Geography" series

I'm not going to try to regurgitate all that he said, but he did note that one of the main reasons Iowa shifted D is due to agriculture becoming a smaller part of the economy. The number of farms and farmers has shrunk and have been replaced by a lot of tech jobs in the cities.

[ModerateCoward]

Because it has 3 small/medium sized cities which have suburbs "on the other side of the river". Iowa has one Omaha suburb but that's not nearly enough to cancel out the effect.
tl; dr the rivers/state borders gerrymandered it for the democrats.

[Progressive Realist]

Check out Nate Silver's analysis of Iowa in his 538 blog, in the "Presidential Geography" series

I'm not going to try to regurgitate all that he said, but he did note that one of the main reasons Iowa shifted D is due to agriculture becoming a smaller part of the economy. The number of farms and farmers has shrunk and have been replaced by a lot of tech jobs in the cities.

That, and a lot of the farms in eastern Iowa tend to be smaller than the bigger corporate farms in western Iowa. Eastern Iowa is more populous than Western Iowa.

[Big Wiggly Style]

It's always really puzzled me. I've always thought of Iowa as one of the more Libertarian states in the US, but I guess it's more Libertarian Dem.

[Χahar]

It's always really puzzled me. I've always thought of Iowa as one of the more Libertarian states in the US, but I guess it's more Libertarian Dem.

There are no "Libertarian states".

[Big Wiggly Style]

It's always really puzzled me. I've always thought of Iowa as one of the more Libertarian states in the US, but I guess it's more Libertarian Dem.

There are no "Libertarian states".

Rather, one of the more Libertarian-leaning states. That's a stretch, however.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Vermont is a kind of interesting combination of libertarian and liberal. You've got all those rural pickup driving gun-toting folk who vote Bernie Sanders.

[Mr. Morden]

Things are kind of wacky in the Upper Midwest.  The "cities = Dems; rural areas = GOP" trend in most of the rest of the country doesn't hold in the same way.  Heck, look at the election maps for Wisconsin in the last few presidential election cycles.

[freepcrusher]

as someone who lived in the state until jr high and still have some relatives back home, here is what I will say about the political tinge to it:

The state republican party has two main factions. You have the old guard. Think of guys like Grassley Branstad Leach Ray etc. They are rank and file republicans and will vote with their party but will occasionally stray away (especially Leach). I would call these guys "Bob Michel Republicans".

Then you have the more conservative wing. It is a much newer arrival but has existed under different circumstances. In the mid 20th century, the state had somewhat of an isolationist streak to it (think Harold Gross). In the modern day this group is dominated by the dutch community who tend to be very religious and often have bircherlike antistatist attitudes and often homeschool their kids or send them to private schools like Des Moines Christian, Western Christian, Pella Christian, Unity Christian etc. Most of these types are at the lower offices. King is the only one in federal office that fits in with this group. He is essentially the best democratic party fundraiser and I hope that he gives his seat up to run against Harkin (which would net him in the low 40s at best).

The democrats were historically the minority party in the state until the 1960s so they have usually been a much more unified group. They tend to be of the populistic variety. They tend to range from slightly left of center (Neal Smith, Lenny Boswell) to extremely liberal democrats (but not of the Stark/Hinchey bombthrowing variety) such as Senators Clark, Hughes, Harkin, Culver and Rep Braley.

But the state is pretty nonideological in many ways too. The state has one republican and one democrat senator who have been around since before the rocks cooled and tend to easily get re-elected (especially Grassley) because they bring home millions of dollars in pork every year. Harkin himself represented a conservative leaning district in the southwest corner of the state in the 1970s that sent him to DC every two years because he could bring home the bacon. So Harkin had been able to win over a lot of otherwise conservative farmers. But they also vote for Grassley every six years because he comes across as "one of you" and tours all 99 counties each year.

[OC]

I think Iowa will replace Ohio as the bellweather of this election with Obama carrying CO,NV,IO, NH and PA. Just like MO got replaced.

[opebo]

I think Iowa will replace Ohio as the bellweather of this election with Obama carrying CO,NV,IO, NH and PA. Just like MO got replaced.

IO?  How many electoral votes there?

[OC]

6, IA, NH,NM,CO,NV and PA make up the 272 electoral votes needed for Obama to clinch. With a Rob Portman on the ticket Obama may lose OH and win Iowa or New Hamsphire to win the election.