What makes Ohio so [damn] stable (inelastic) in its voting patterns?

[eric82oslo]

In presidential elections going all the way back to 1980, no other state has even come remotely close to the stability which the state of Ohio has possessed. At second place comes Michigan, having produced less than half of Ohio's remarkable stability. What can the reason be for this incredible stability over such an extensive period of time, encompassing no less than 9 elections? Within this time frame, Ohio has always been within 4.1% of the national popular vote, usually on the Republican side. Only once, in 2004, did Ohio vote slightly more Democratic than the popular vote.

Here's an illustration of the long term stability (1980-2012) of all 50 states + D.C (the darker the color, the less stable):

And here are the actual raw numbers for each state, showing the difference between the Republican and Democratic extremes in each state:

1. Ohio: 4.38% (by far the most stable)
2. Michigan: 9.97%
3. Pennsylvania: 10.19%
4. Wisconsin: 10.25%
5. Indiana: 12.45%
6. Virginia: 12.78%
7. Oregon: 12.83%
8. Washington: 13.61%
9. Florida: 14.1%
10. Colorado: 15.94%
11. Illinois: 16.06%
12. Rhode Island: 16.1%
13. Maine: 16.17%
14. New Mexico: 16.3%
15. Arizona: 16.32%
16. Minnesota: 16.52%
17. Alaska: 16.74%
18. Maryland: 17.04%
19. New York: 17.39%
20. Nebraska: 17.53%
21. Texas: 17.72%
22. Missouri: 17.83%
23. Massachusetts: 18.03%
24. Connecticut: 20.63%
25. Iowa: 20.91%

26. New Jersey: 21.22% (median)

27. North Carolina: 21.7%
28. Idaho: 21.71%
29. Delaware: 22.4%
30. Washington D.C.: 22.55%
31. North Dakota: 22.9%
32. New Hampshire: 23.48%
33. South Dakota: 24.64%
34. South Carolina: 24.67%
35. California: 26.3%
36. Montana: 27.45%
37. Mississippi: 28.86%
38. Oklahoma: 29.64%
39. Louisiana: 30.19%
40. Utah: 30.31%
41. Vermont: 30.63%
42. Nevada: 31.12%
43. Kansas: 32.23%
44. Hawaii: 33.01%
45. Wyoming: 33.52%
46. Tennessee: 33.71%
47. Kentucky: 34.83%
48. Alabama: 37.29%
49. Georgia: 38.69%
50. Arkansas: 39.71%
51. West Virginia: 40.87% (least stable)

Notice that the top 5 most stable states are all bordering states surrounding the Great Lakes/Rust Belt industrial area, while the bottom 6 states are all southern/Appalachian states.

4 of the 5 most populous states are all (slightly) more stable than the national average, while the fifth and biggest one - California - has been a lot less stable than the median state.

Thoughts?

[pbrower2a]

Ohio is close to a microcosm of America. The state has some gritty urban areas (Cleveland, Akron, Toledo, Dayton), stable rural areas, and coal country. It is close to the national average in ethnic mix. It has little high-flying  high tech.  It straddles regions, including well-defined parts of the Rust Belt and Appalachia.

Ohio has not offered a Favorite Son nominee for President since it offered both Cox and Harding -- in 1920.  Even Michigan had Gerald Ford.

So let's look at who the Favorite Sons were since 1972:

1972  Nixon CA              McGovern SD
1976  Ford  MI               Carter GA
1980  Reagan CA           Carter GA
1984  Reagan CA           Mondale MN
1988  GHW Bush TX       Dukakis MA
1992  GHW Bush TX       Clinton AR
1996  Dole KS                Clinton AR
2000  GW Bush TX         Gore  TN
2004  GW Bush TX         Kerry MA
2008  McCain AZ            Obama IL
2012  Romney  ??          Obama IL

It's hard for me to figure what state has Romney as a Favorite Son.               

Many of the states have undergone some transition from being strongly Democratic to being strongly Republican or vice-versa (think of West Virginia and  Vermont). Republicans have effectively won the fundamentalist Protestant vote while offending the secularist moderates that used to be "liberal Republicans".

I'm tempted to show a contrast map; 1976 and 2012 suggest themselves. 

[Vosem]

It's hard for me to figure what state has Romney as a Favorite Son.               

Romney was registered to vote in and held office in Massachusetts. It's very simple. He's not exactly Sam Houston.

[barfbag]

It sounds very simplistic while at the same time it's complex. Ohio has everything. In the northeastern part of the state there are unions and minorities who make up a significant portion of the population. A lot of labor jobs have gone overseas in recent decades. This makes for a very reliable Democratic region from Toledo to Youngstown going along the northern and eastern borders of the Buckeye State. We're talking Vermont numbers. Central Ohio is very rural and flat where farms are very critical to the region's political structure. This makes for a very purple area which will vote based on the nature of the times. I believe Franklin County has never voted for the loser of a Presidential Election? I'd like to see the fine print on it. However, Obama has won by 20+ in each of the last two elections to my knowledge. Southwestern Ohio is very comparable to the south, in particular Appalachia. There are social conservatives and yet more farms to be found so it averages out to a solid Republican region. Basically, you have the northeastern demographics in northeastern Ohio, Midwestern demographics in central Ohio, and southern demographics in southwestern Ohio. A field day is to be had by candidates in what is arguably the political center of our nation.

[stevekamp]

If you check the Atlas, will note Franklin (Columbus) voted for Kerry 2004, Gore 2000 (NPV winner EC loser), both Clintons, but before 1992 only Democrats LBJ 1964, FDR 1936-1940 (but not 1932), both Woodrow Wilson, and every D 1872-1892 (NPV losers in 1872, 1880, 1888, EC loser 1876). Per Burnham Presidential Ballots, D in 1868 (loser Horatio Seymour), 1864 (McClellan), North D 1860 (Douglas), D winners 1856-1852, Whigs 1848 back to 1836. Per Michael Dubin, Clay in 1832, Adams in 1828, Clay plurality in 1824. So, it has voted for losers Kerry, Nixon, Hoover 1932, Dewey 1944-1948, Hancock 1880, Greeley 1872, Seymour 1868, McClellan 1864, Douglas 1860.

  Between 2004 and 2012, the D raw vote in Franklin rose 60,572, including a 2008-2012 increase of 11,664, with the D margin rising from 48,548 to 116,223 to 130,376.  Franklin and the largely unnoticed D 2004-2012 raw vote gains in the 8 suburban Columbus counties are driving the D winning margin in Ohio -- Columbus rocks!  Between 2004 and 2012, D raw number up statewide up 86,542, R down 198,331.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Hmm...Ohio has voted for the winner of every presidential election starting with 1964.  That would mean that since 1980, it's voted for Reagan twice, George H. W. Bush once, Clinton twice, George W. Bush twice, and Obama twice.  I wouldn't quite call that inelastic, if you ask me.

Then again, I don't exactly know what you mean by "inelastic."

[Space7]

Hmm...Ohio has voted for the winner of every presidential election starting with 1964.  That would mean that since 1980, it's voted for Reagan twice, George H. W. Bush once, Clinton twice, George W. Bush twice, and Obama twice.  I wouldn't quite call that inelastic, if you ask me.

Then again, I don't exactly know what you mean by "inelastic."

Nate silver coined the political use of the word "elastic" in this article:

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/21/swing-voters-and-elastic-states/?_r=0

Summed up, "inelasticity" means that the state isn't very sensitive to change in the political environment. This is referring to each election's individual PVI index, not the results of the election.

I think "stable" might have been a better word to use than "inelastic", because they have slightly different meanings.

[pbrower2a]

I'm tempted to show a contrast map; 1976 and 2012 suggest themselves. 

OK -- here we go:

Obama 2008 and  2012, Carter 1976
Obama 2008, Romney 2012, Carter 1976
Obama 2008 and 2012, Ford 1976
Obama 2008, Romney 2012, Ford 1976
McCain 2008, Romney 2012, Carter 1976
McCain 2008, Romney 2012, Ford 1976

(The two Congressional districts, which should appear in orange, do not show.

It is amazing that fully 322 electoral votes that went for Carter in 1976 or for Obama in 2012 completely shifted. 

[barfbag]

If you check the Atlas, will note Franklin (Columbus) voted for Kerry 2004, Gore 2000 (NPV winner EC loser), both Clintons, but before 1992 only Democrats LBJ 1964, FDR 1936-1940 (but not 1932), both Woodrow Wilson, and every D 1872-1892 (NPV losers in 1872, 1880, 1888, EC loser 1876). Per Burnham Presidential Ballots, D in 1868 (loser Horatio Seymour), 1864 (McClellan), North D 1860 (Douglas), D winners 1856-1852, Whigs 1848 back to 1836. Per Michael Dubin, Clay in 1832, Adams in 1828, Clay plurality in 1824. So, it has voted for losers Kerry, Nixon, Hoover 1932, Dewey 1944-1948, Hancock 1880, Greeley 1872, Seymour 1868, McClellan 1864, Douglas 1860.

  Between 2004 and 2012, the D raw vote in Franklin rose 60,572, including a 2008-2012 increase of 11,664, with the D margin rising from 48,548 to 116,223 to 130,376.  Franklin and the largely unnoticed D 2004-2012 raw vote gains in the 8 suburban Columbus counties are driving the D winning margin in Ohio -- Columbus rocks!  Between 2004 and 2012, D raw number up statewide up 86,542, R down 198,331.

I knew Franklin County was losing Republicans and gaining Democrats but not aware it was so drastic. Ohio will continue to arguably be the most important state on the map for decades to come. What you're showing though is that the county has been 50/50 on winners and losers. I misunderstood it to be a hardcore purple county. Thank you for clarifying!

[TJ in Oregon]

The Ohio county that I would have normally called the hard-corest purple county in the state and the one to watch in an election would have been Lake County, except that after telling everyone all of last year that whoever wins Lake County would win Ohio and likely the election, like all Republicans making predictions I was wrong: Romney won Lake County.

[eric82oslo]

And these are the stability numbers going all the way back to the 1972 election (the difference between the Republican and Democratic extremes in each state, as ajusted to the popular vote):

1. Ohio: 5.62% (by far the most stable)
2. Michigan: 9.97%
3. Pennsylvania: 10.27%
4. Indiana: 12.45%
5. Virginia: 14.58%
6. Wisconsin: 15.03%
7. Oregon: 15.26%
8. Colorado: 15.94%
9. Maine: 16.17%
10. New Mexico: 16.3%
11. Arizona: 16.32%
12. Minnesota: 16.52%
13. Washington: 16.95%
14. Nebraska: 17.53%
15. Missouri: 17.83%
16. Rhode Island: 19.34%
17. Florida: 20.44%
18. Iowa: 21.02%
19. New Jersey: 21.22%
20. Illinois: 21.9%
21. Delaware: 22.4%
22. Massachusetts: 22.53%
23. Texas: 22.95%
24. Maryland: 22.97%
25. New Hampshire: 23.48%

26. Connecticut: 24.18% (median)

27. Idaho: 25%
28. North Dakota: 25.1%
29. California: 26.3%
30. North Carolina: 26.42%
31. Washington D.C.: 26.82%
32. New York: 26.83%
33. Montana: 28.66%
34. Louisiana: 30.19%
35. South Carolina: 30.49%
36. Alaska: 31.11%
37. Nevada: 31.12%
38. Kansas: 32.23%
39. Wyoming: 33.52%
40. Utah: 33.8%
41. Kentucky: 34.83%
42. Tennessee: 35.2%
43. Oklahoma: 35.29%
44. South Dakota: 37.77%
45. Alabama: 39.9%
46. Hawaii: 40.66%
47. Mississippi: 43.84%
48. West Virginia: 44.7%
49. Vermont: 45%
50. Arkansas: 55.5%
51. Georgia: 58.96% (least stable)

The top 3 didn't change! However, going all the way back to 1972, West Virginia is not longer the least stable state. However Georgia is, followed by Arkansas.

[Non Swing Voter]

Ohio is less transient than other swing states.  A majority of the population of Virginia was not born in the state, whereas a sizeable majority of the population of Ohio was.  Additionally, it seems to be a swing state because there is a good share of moderates, whereas other swing states are swing states because there are competing racial and/or ideological groups so if turnout among those groups is unstable it can create greater swings.  For instance, Colorado could go either way depending on who votes in larger numbers (super conservative whites or people from Boulder/Denver + Hispanics).  On the other hand, Ohio could go either way by convincing a lot of people in the middle to shift to their side. 

[pbrower2a]

Also worth noting: Ohio has not given America a nominee for President or Vice-President for a very long time.  The Favorite Son effect is strong, which explains how Ohio could be more D than Michigan in 1976 even though Michigan is usually more D in Presidential elections.