What changed in Vermont over the past century?

[So the Heroes Fall]

The lack of large cities also means a lack of wealthy suburbs and Fundie exurbs, which are major sources of Republican support in other parts of the country. Look at Michele Bachmann's district vs the rest of Minnesota for a well-known example.

Wealthy suburbs are only major sources of Republican support in conservative areas.  In just about every area outside of Republican-leaning states (MN-6 being an exception), they are major sources of Democrat support because of social issues.

Uh yeah. Orange County is a Democratic vote source? Also look at places like the Collar Counties in Illinois before Obama. Funny you mention MN-6 because it's NOT a wealthy suburban district. The actual wealthy suburbs in Minnesota mostly did vote for Obama but are hardly consistent Democratic cities, one could hardly say this about Eden Prairie, Plymouth,  Maple Grove or Lakeville (the last one didn't even vote for Obama, didn't even come close) even not so uniformly affluent places like Woodbury and Eagan are marginally Democratic at best in a true close race.

BTW, is Edina in Michele Bachmann's district?

No, and it never has been. It's in MN-3 and will be evenly split between MN-3 and MN-5 in the new map.

That used to be the most Republican town in Minnesota, but I'm not sure how it is now.

No it wasn't. It was much more Republican than it is today though when it now voted for Obama by double digits. The stereotypes about Edina being so uniformly affluent though are about three decades outdated, in fact outside of one Census tract that has a median household income in the six digits it's significantly poorer than the parts of Minneapolis it borders. So basically outside of one specific area Edina is just a typical middle income middle class residential suburb.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Fun facts.

Number of Democrats ever elected Senator from Vermont: 1
Number of times Vermont voted Democratic for President before 1992: 1

[Oldiesfreak1854]

The lack of large cities also means a lack of wealthy suburbs and Fundie exurbs, which are major sources of Republican support in other parts of the country. Look at Michele Bachmann's district vs the rest of Minnesota for a well-known example.

Wealthy suburbs are only major sources of Republican support in conservative areas.  In just about every area outside of Republican-leaning states (MN-6 being an exception), they are major sources of Democrat support because of social issues.

Uh yeah. Orange County is a Democratic vote source? Also look at places like the Collar Counties in Illinois before Obama. Funny you mention MN-6 because it's NOT a wealthy suburban district. The actual wealthy suburbs in Minnesota mostly did vote for Obama but are hardly consistent Democratic cities, one could hardly say this about Eden Prairie, Plymouth,  Maple Grove or Lakeville (the last one didn't even vote for Obama, didn't even come close) even not so uniformly affluent places like Woodbury and Eagan are marginally Democratic at best in a true close race.

BTW, is Edina in Michele Bachmann's district?

No, and it never has been. It's in MN-3 and will be evenly split between MN-3 and MN-5 in the new map.

That used to be the most Republican town in Minnesota, but I'm not sure how it is now.

No it wasn't. It was much more Republican than it is today though when it now voted for Obama by double digits. The stereotypes about Edina being so uniformly affluent though are about three decades outdated, in fact outside of one Census tract that has a median household income in the six digits it's significantly poorer than the parts of Minneapolis it borders. So basically outside of one specific area Edina is just a typical middle income middle class residential suburb.

The Collar Counties may lean Republican, but the margins began to decline with the rise of Clinton in the 90s because of social issues.

[Mr. Morden]

Here's the 1916 electoral map:



Here's the 2000 electoral map:



41 out of 48 states flipped parties between those two elections.  So there's nothing remotely strange about Vermont flipping parties.  Most of the rest of the country did as well.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

BTW: The same is true of Orange County, although it still leans Republican.

Here's the 1916 electoral map:



Here's the 2000 electoral map:



41 out of 48 states flipped parties between those two elections.  So there's nothing remotely strange about Vermont flipping parties.  Most of the rest of the country did as well.

True, but Vermont was so Republican for so long.

[So the Heroes Fall]

The lack of large cities also means a lack of wealthy suburbs and Fundie exurbs, which are major sources of Republican support in other parts of the country. Look at Michele Bachmann's district vs the rest of Minnesota for a well-known example.

Wealthy suburbs are only major sources of Republican support in conservative areas.  In just about every area outside of Republican-leaning states (MN-6 being an exception), they are major sources of Democrat support because of social issues.

Uh yeah. Orange County is a Democratic vote source? Also look at places like the Collar Counties in Illinois before Obama. Funny you mention MN-6 because it's NOT a wealthy suburban district. The actual wealthy suburbs in Minnesota mostly did vote for Obama but are hardly consistent Democratic cities, one could hardly say this about Eden Prairie, Plymouth,  Maple Grove or Lakeville (the last one didn't even vote for Obama, didn't even come close) even not so uniformly affluent places like Woodbury and Eagan are marginally Democratic at best in a true close race.

BTW, is Edina in Michele Bachmann's district?

No, and it never has been. It's in MN-3 and will be evenly split between MN-3 and MN-5 in the new map.

That used to be the most Republican town in Minnesota, but I'm not sure how it is now.

No it wasn't. It was much more Republican than it is today though when it now voted for Obama by double digits. The stereotypes about Edina being so uniformly affluent though are about three decades outdated, in fact outside of one Census tract that has a median household income in the six digits it's significantly poorer than the parts of Minneapolis it borders. So basically outside of one specific area Edina is just a typical middle income middle class residential suburb.

The Collar Counties may lean Republican, but the margins began to decline with the rise of Clinton in the 90s because of social issues.

BTW: The same is true of Orange County, although it still leans Republican.

Oh geez...

OK first of all if this is all because of social issues why the hell is Clinton the guy who started the shift? Just four years earlier you had a far more socially liberal Democratic candidate who got destroyed. Actually the main reason why Clinton was far more popular was because he was much less liberal than Dukakis in regards to crime and "law and order" issues. His gun control laws might've been popular in suburbia, but Dukakis was basically the same in regards to gun control. Really what generally happened is suburbanites became less scared throughout the 90s.

And in fact the main reason why Clinton was so popular is basically the time, the economy was booming and while certain areas were hard hit despite all this (like tons of places affected by NAFTA), suburbia was not one of them. Clinton was called a "New Democrat" after all, and he wasn't seen as the type of Democrat who wanted to sell out the middle class to unions or tax them to death. And actually this brings up another big factor in the swing here: the realization that pre-Reagan tax rates were not coming back nor were the Democrats proposing this anymore.

But beyond all this, to look at individual candidates is kind of minor in comparison to the main reason for the shifts in these discussed areas, especially OC, demographics plain and simple. There's a reason Goldwater did better than McCain in OC, and it's not social issues. If the entire country had the same demographics in 1988 that it does today in fact, Dukakis would've won. As it is the suburban counties in question no longer were havens of white flight from people fleeing the scary minorities of the cities and gained many minorities themselves. You now have DuPage County as more than 20% non-white and OC is barely over 60% white. With demographics like that there is simply no way you are going to get the numbers those places got before the 90s.

[freepcrusher]

The lack of large cities also means a lack of wealthy suburbs and Fundie exurbs, which are major sources of Republican support in other parts of the country. Look at Michele Bachmann's district vs the rest of Minnesota for a well-known example.

Wealthy suburbs are only major sources of Republican support in conservative areas.  In just about every area outside of Republican-leaning states (MN-6 being an exception), they are major sources of Democrat support because of social issues.

Uh yeah. Orange County is a Democratic vote source? Also look at places like the Collar Counties in Illinois before Obama. Funny you mention MN-6 because it's NOT a wealthy suburban district. The actual wealthy suburbs in Minnesota mostly did vote for Obama but are hardly consistent Democratic cities, one could hardly say this about Eden Prairie, Plymouth,  Maple Grove or Lakeville (the last one didn't even vote for Obama, didn't even come close) even not so uniformly affluent places like Woodbury and Eagan are marginally Democratic at best in a true close race.

BTW, is Edina in Michele Bachmann's district?

No, and it never has been. It's in MN-3 and will be evenly split between MN-3 and MN-5 in the new map.

That used to be the most Republican town in Minnesota, but I'm not sure how it is now.

No it wasn't. It was much more Republican than it is today though when it now voted for Obama by double digits. The stereotypes about Edina being so uniformly affluent though are about three decades outdated, in fact outside of one Census tract that has a median household income in the six digits it's significantly poorer than the parts of Minneapolis it borders. So basically outside of one specific area Edina is just a typical middle income middle class residential suburb.

The Collar Counties may lean Republican, but the margins began to decline with the rise of Clinton in the 90s because of social issues.

BTW: The same is true of Orange County, although it still leans Republican.

Oh geez...

OK first of all if this is all because of social issues why the hell is Clinton the guy who started the shift? Just four years earlier you had a far more socially liberal Democratic candidate who got destroyed. Actually the main reason why Clinton was far more popular was because he was much less liberal than Dukakis in regards to crime and "law and order" issues. His gun control laws might've been popular in suburbia, but Dukakis was basically the same in regards to gun control. Really what generally happened is suburbanites became less scared throughout the 90s.

And in fact the main reason why Clinton was so popular is basically the time, the economy was booming and while certain areas were hard hit despite all this (like tons of places affected by NAFTA), suburbia was not one of them. Clinton was called a "New Democrat" after all, and he wasn't seen as the type of Democrat who wanted to sell out the middle class to unions or tax them to death. And actually this brings up another big factor in the swing here: the realization that pre-Reagan tax rates were not coming back nor were the Democrats proposing this anymore.

But beyond all this, to look at individual candidates is kind of minor in comparison to the main reason for the shifts in these discussed areas, especially OC, demographics plain and simple. There's a reason Goldwater did better than McCain in OC, and it's not social issues. If the entire country had the same demographics in 1988 that it does today in fact, Dukakis would've won. As it is the suburban counties in question no longer were havens of white flight from people fleeing the scary minorities of the cities and gained many minorities themselves. You now have DuPage County as more than 20% non-white and OC is barely over 60% white. With demographics like that there is simply no way you are going to get the numbers those places got before the 90s.

all very true. But some of it is a change in the attitude of its white residents. Obama held McCain to around 56-57 percent of the white vote in Orange County and Obama got around 51 percent of the white vote in DuPage. Both would have been unheard of twenty years ago. One of my theories is that many of the hardcore conservatives in those areas died off and their children often moved away to the IE or to Will County.

[muon2]

The Collar Counties may lean Republican, but the margins began to decline with the rise of Clinton in the 90s because of social issues.

BTW: The same is true of Orange County, although it still leans Republican.

Oh geez...

OK first of all if this is all because of social issues why the hell is Clinton the guy who started the shift? Just four years earlier you had a far more socially liberal Democratic candidate who got destroyed. Actually the main reason why Clinton was far more popular was because he was much less liberal than Dukakis in regards to crime and "law and order" issues. His gun control laws might've been popular in suburbia, but Dukakis was basically the same in regards to gun control. Really what generally happened is suburbanites became less scared throughout the 90s.

And in fact the main reason why Clinton was so popular is basically the time, the economy was booming and while certain areas were hard hit despite all this (like tons of places affected by NAFTA), suburbia was not one of them. Clinton was called a "New Democrat" after all, and he wasn't seen as the type of Democrat who wanted to sell out the middle class to unions or tax them to death. And actually this brings up another big factor in the swing here: the realization that pre-Reagan tax rates were not coming back nor were the Democrats proposing this anymore.

But beyond all this, to look at individual candidates is kind of minor in comparison to the main reason for the shifts in these discussed areas, especially OC, demographics plain and simple. There's a reason Goldwater did better than McCain in OC, and it's not social issues. If the entire country had the same demographics in 1988 that it does today in fact, Dukakis would've won. As it is the suburban counties in question no longer were havens of white flight from people fleeing the scary minorities of the cities and gained many minorities themselves. You now have DuPage County as more than 20% non-white and OC is barely over 60% white. With demographics like that there is simply no way you are going to get the numbers those places got before the 90s.

all very true. But some of it is a change in the attitude of its white residents. Obama held McCain to around 56-57 percent of the white vote in Orange County and Obama got around 51 percent of the white vote in DuPage. Both would have been unheard of twenty years ago. One of my theories is that many of the hardcore conservatives in those areas died off and their children often moved away to the IE or to Will County.

One change in DuPage is that it became mostly built out by the mid 90's. As before the population relocating there from elsewhere in the suburbs is from Cook, but that population isn't from GOP Cook suburbs, but from areas that are mostly Dem. In previous decades even the Dems would tend to flip once they got to DuPage, since they associated the quality of life with the GOP leadership there. The heavier use of cable and the internet has diminished local news so that party association for local issues isn't made as it once was.

To the extent I can tell, most the outflow from DuPage goes to Kane and Kendall, and only Will to a lesser degree (generally NW Will). The migration patterns in Chicagoland still largely follow spokes from the Loop outward. This has been true for generations, and still seems to be the case.

[Former Moderate]

A lot of the Republicans in Vermont were liberal enough to be Democrats, and as such, were quite popular with voters when the GOP had a significant moderate presence. But when the 1990s rolled around, this area — much like the old Manhattan district that re-elected its GOP congressman — suddenly had a mass realization that their views were out of step with the national GOP and stopped voting reflexively for the Republicans.

Republicans can still compete somewhat on a local basis. But nationally, they've become non-starters.

[Senator Kalwejt]

BTW: The same is true of Orange County, although it still leans Republican.

Here's the 1916 electoral map:



Here's the 2000 electoral map:



41 out of 48 states flipped parties between those two elections.  So there's nothing remotely strange about Vermont flipping parties.  Most of the rest of the country did as well.

True, but Vermont was so Republican for so long.

Vermont was a Republican Solid South. In addition to traditions, which are not fading so easily, the state Democratic Party as a viable political force is relatively a new thing up there, so lack of alternative was an important  factor too.

The Republican Party as a real force in the Deep South is also relatively a new thing. There was a saying that before 1960s, you could have Alabama Republican Convention held in a phone booth.

[jimrtex]

The same state that voted against FDR in each of his presidential campaigns and where Republican candidates consistently outperformed their national results gave Barack Obama nearly 70% of the vote in 2008, two years after they elected their at-large congressman, a self-identified democratic socialist, to the US Senate. Now the same state that couldn't stomach the New Deal is introducing universal health care.

What's changed in Vermont? It's still a mostly rural state and overwhelmingly white - two things that should make it low-hanging Republican fruit. No minorities. No remotely large cities. It hasn't had an influx of Boston commuters like New Hampshire, or New York City commuters like Connecticut.

Between 1830 and 1960 grew 39%, an annual rate of 0.25%.  Any children in a family beyond the 2nd had to leave the state.

Between 1960 and 2000, the rate jumped to 1.12% or 4.5 times as great.  The growth was actually higher in both percentage and numeric terms in the 1960s and 1970s.  The growth was focused on Burlington.  Chittenden County did not surpass Rutland County to become the state's largest until 1940.  By 1980 it had double the population.

From 1960 to 2010 Chittenden increased 110%.  Counties in the south and east typically increased around 35%.  The other high growth rate counties are all neighbors: Grand Isle 13%, Lamoille 122%, Addison 83%, and Franklin 62%.   The first two benefited from a small population base (Grand Isle had 2927 left in 1960).

If you look at the state of birth reports from the census for the time before the growth spurt, it was almost all outward, to states in New England and Northeast, but also throughout the country.  The only true two-way migration was to New Hampshire, and that was net towards New Hampshire.

By 2000, this had strongly reversed, with big inward flows from Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, but also further afield, such as Maryland, Ohio, and Illinois.  Even the relative flow to California had been reduced.  In most of destination states, Vermont-born had declined as people born decades before began to die off.

So you have a lot of life-style migrants who didn't move so they could milk cows or collect sap.  Only in those over 70 and the very young is there a Vermont-born majority.

[soniquemd21921]

Chittenden was a Democratic stronghold decades before the influx of new residents due to its large Catholic population. The city of Winooski really stuck out like a sore thumb in Vermont in the 30s, 40s and 50s: it was 85-90 percent Democratic at a time when nearly all of the other small towns were 80-90% Republican.

From looking at election returns, it appears that the first of the really heavily Republican counties to move in a leftward direction was Windham beginning in the 70s (note how it's Republican percentage got smaller and smaller after 1972).

Lamoille's Democratic drift has been in the last 15 years or so. I'm guessing it being the location of Stowe has contributed.