How did Vermont go from being the most Republican state to the most Democratic

[Dixie Reborn]

Something that I've always wondered about. Vermont has the makings of a Republican state, it is rural, agricultural, and over 95% white. Up until the 90's Vermont only voted for the Democratic nominee once. In fact, Vermont is one of the only two states in the union never to vote for Franklin Roosevelt (the other being Maine). But now, it gave Barack Obama and John Kerry some of their best performances, and of its two senators one is a Democrat, the other is an open socialist. So can anyone explain to me how/why this happened?

[H. Ross Peron]

The opposite process of the man in your signature.

[badgate]

The opposite process of the man in your signature.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Two main factors:

1. Liberal positions on social issues, especially after Bill Clinton's 1992 campaign.  Vermont consistently ranks as one of the least religious and most "un-churched" states in the Union, and so it was repelled by the influence of religious/social conservatives in the GOP (like moderate voters in general).

2. Changing demographics.  By the 90s, most of the Yankee voters who had made Vermont a Republican stronghold were aging and dying off, giving Democrats an opening with many younger voters who weren't as attached to the GOP.

Not to mention that New England as a whole is much more liberal than it used to be.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Two main factors:

1. Racism
2. Democrats

Fact.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Two main factors:

1. Racism
2. Democrats

Fact.

Huh?

[sg0508]

Changing social positions and the depletion of moderate republicanism.  Keep in mind, Dukakis was leading Bush in VT for much of the '88 campaign and Reagan ran behind his national average both times during his two electoral landslides.

The last time the "Old VT" showed through for what we knew it to be was '76 when the moderate Ford beat Carter there by 11 pts.

[Mr. Illini]

The same way that your state went from being so Democratic to so Republican. The ideologies of the parties began to shift, especially on racial and other social issues, the states became closer because of the deep partisan tendencies despite ideology changes, the states became very sympathetic to "liberal Republicans" and "conservative Democrats," and by the 90's and 2000's had completed the shift over to the other side.

Vermont may have become more liberal in recent years, but it has always been a liberal state. And keep in mind that being predominately white doesn't matter as much electorally in the northeast as it does in the south.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Keep in mind, Dukakis was leading Bush in VT for much of the '88 campaign and Reagan ran behind his national average both times during his two electoral landslides.

I'd like to see some of those polls.  And besides, much of the reason Reagan did worse in 1980 was because Vermont was one of John Anderson's best states.

[Maxwell]

It's much simpler than anyone is saying - Vermont was always liberal. When the liberal wing stopped having any sort of influence in the national party, Vermont went Democrat fast.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

It's much simpler than anyone is saying - Vermont was always liberal. When the liberal wing stopped having any sort of influence in the national party, Vermont went Democrat fast.

There was a period of conservative Republican dominance between roughly the 1880s and the 1940s, fading beginning in the 1930s and in some quarters continuing into the 1950s, roughly coinciding with and not unrelated to the ascendancy of the Proctor family (Redfield, Fletcher, Redfield Jr., and Mortimer, all Vermont Marble Company executives and Governors of Vermont and in the first Redfield's case also longtime Senator and US Secretary of War), but even during this time the Vermont Republican Party had a robust liberal wing, much as many of the Solid South state Democratic parties came to develop wings that were more moderate on race or whatever other issue.

[Free Bird]

So if, say Olympia Snowe was somehow the nominee, would she take it?

[Kristoffer]

(Long post coming up)


Vermont used to vote for Republican candidates in most elections for several reasons.

In indirect elections, like for the state legislature, it was because district drawing was biased towards the rural, more Republican counties with smaller communities. The state senate used to have district borders following county lines, giving large, populous counties (*cough* Chittenden *cough*) equal representation to places like Essex or Grand Isle.
This was not changed until the 1960's, with the SCOTUS ruling that the "one man, one vote" principle required district borders to not follow county lines unless representative of the inhabitants of the counties.

Another, much simpler way of explaining it is immigration. The 1980's and 1990's saw great migration from New York City, as well as the rest of the New England states, to Vermont. These people were from mostly liberal areas, shifting the state from the Republicans to the Democrats.

Yet another reason for the Green Mountain state to go blue (or for the sake of this site, red), is that Vermont have a history of social liberal Republicans, making the state more libertarian than most states controlled by the Republicans.

Even today, you can still see some Republicans winning elections. The lieutenant governor is a Republican (elected on a ballot separate from the governor's). Also, the last US congressmen from Vermont to be a Republican, left offices as late as 1991.
It's a bit more blurry with the US Senate, where Jim Jeffords took office as a Republican in 1989, became an independent in 2001, and finally left office in 2007. Ironically, the last national legislator from the Vermont Republican Party was replaced in 2007 by Bernie Sanders, a Democrat-backed, self-described democratic socialist.


Sources:
- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermont#Elections_to_federal_office
- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_congressional_delegations_from_Vermont

[Badger]

(Long post coming up)


Vermont used to vote for Republican candidates in most elections for several reasons.

In indirect elections, like for the state legislature, it was because district drawing was biased towards the rural, more Republican counties with smaller communities. The state senate used to have district borders following county lines, giving large, populous counties (*cough* Chittenden *cough*) equal representation to places like Essex or Grand Isle.
This was not changed until the 1960's, with the SCOTUS ruling that the "one man, one vote" principle required district borders to not follow county lines unless representative of the inhabitants of the counties.

Another, much simpler way of explaining it is immigration. The 1980's and 1990's saw great migration from New York City, as well as the rest of the New England states, to Vermont. These people were from mostly liberal areas, shifting the state from the Republicans to the Democrats.

Yet another reason for the Green Mountain state to go blue (or for the sake of this site, red), is that Vermont have a history of social liberal Republicans, making the state more libertarian than most states controlled by the Republicans.

Even today, you can still see some Republicans winning elections. The lieutenant governor is a Republican (elected on a ballot separate from the governor's). Also, the last US congressmen from Vermont to be a Republican, left offices as late as 1991.
It's a bit more blurry with the US Senate, where Jim Jeffords took office as a Republican in 1989, became an independent in 2001, and finally left office in 2007. Ironically, the last national legislator from the Vermont Republican Party was replaced in 2007 by Bernie Sanders, a Democrat-backed, self-described democratic socialist.


Sources:
- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermont#Elections_to_federal_office
- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_congressional_delegations_from_Vermont

Finally! A smart, articulate, non-trollish newbie!

Sorry, we've had a bit of a drought lately. Or at least the loudest recent newbies have generally been god-awful.

Please post more.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

It's much simpler than anyone is saying - Vermont was always liberal. When the liberal wing stopped having any sort of influence in the national party, Vermont went Democrat fast.

This pretty much nails it.

[bobloblaw]

Invasion of liberals from NY and MA

[Figueira]

Invasion of liberals from NY and MA

This is indeed a big factor. However, since the "invasion" largely happened a generation or two ago, Vermont's population cannot be divided neatly into locals vs. foreigners like is often stated.

[RINO Tom]

Invasion of liberals from NY and MA

This is indeed a big factor. However, since the "invasion" largely happened a generation or two ago, Vermont's population cannot be divided neatly into locals vs. foreigners like is often stated.

There certainly is an element of long-time Republicans in VT being turned off by the Religious Right and becoming independents or even Democrats, but I've read things before about older Vermonters having signs for the "Take Back Vermont" movement, haha.  A mixture of both is the perfect combination to turn such a small state into a Democratic stronghold.

Then again, there are clearly enough people sympathetic enough to Republicans to do things like make the 2014 gubernatorial election pretty darn close.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

The same way that your state went from being so Democratic to so Republican. The ideologies of the parties began to shift, especially on racial and other social issues, the states became closer because of the deep partisan tendencies despite ideology changes, the states became very sympathetic to "liberal Republicans" and "conservative Democrats," and by the 90's and 2000's had completed the shift over to the other side.

Vermont may have become more liberal in recent years, but it has always been a liberal state. And keep in mind that being predominately white doesn't matter as much electorally in the northeast as it does in the south.

This is about right, except the two parties never "switched sides" on race

[Joe Republic]

The same way that your state went from being so Democratic to so Republican. The ideologies of the parties began to shift, especially on racial and other social issues, the states became closer because of the deep partisan tendencies despite ideology changes, the states became very sympathetic to "liberal Republicans" and "conservative Democrats," and by the 90's and 2000's had completed the shift over to the other side.

Vermont may have become more liberal in recent years, but it has always been a liberal state. And keep in mind that being predominately white doesn't matter as much electorally in the northeast as it does in the south.

This is about right, except the two parties never "switched sides" on race

You've been corrected on that many times.

[RINO Tom]

The same way that your state went from being so Democratic to so Republican. The ideologies of the parties began to shift, especially on racial and other social issues, the states became closer because of the deep partisan tendencies despite ideology changes, the states became very sympathetic to "liberal Republicans" and "conservative Democrats," and by the 90's and 2000's had completed the shift over to the other side.

Vermont may have become more liberal in recent years, but it has always been a liberal state. And keep in mind that being predominately white doesn't matter as much electorally in the northeast as it does in the south.

This is about right, except the two parties never "switched sides" on race

You've been corrected on that many times.

Do you know how simplistic and moronic it sounds to actually assert that two major political parties "switched" on anything at all?  LOL.

Democrats openly exploited the racial animosity in the South - without apology - from the party's foundation until the early 1920s.  Republicans openly advocated for curtailing that racial animosity - without apology - until the late 1800s.  By the 1920s, Blacks were INCREDIBLY frustrated with GOP leadership (many Black newspaper polls had findings of a slim majority of Blacks actually backing open segregationist Woodrow Wilson...), and all it took to dump the Party of Lincoln was some economic hardship that the Democrats were seen as fixers for.

Republicans in the 1930s felt ridiculously betrayed by the Black community, constantly alleging that the Democrats had "bought and paid for" Black votes, and that the Black community still "owed" the GOP for its actions in the 1800s.  With the Great Depression and World War II taking center stage politically, both the GOP and the Democrats paid literally no attention to civil rights from the 1930s until the late 1950s.  After Republicans saw THEIR civil rights laws being passed against Southern Democratic opposition and THEIR President enforcing Brown v. Board and they STILL lost the Black vote to Stevenson and his openly segregationist runningmate, Republicans (probably correctly) assumed that the Black vote was a lost cause.  Democrats tried to play both sides well into the 1970s, despite the myth that they just had this "coming to" moment in the 1960s where they were now the party of the moral high ground.

I highly suggest you check out the book "Republicans and Race: The GOP's Frayed Relationship With African-Americans, 1944-1970."  It's a good read and very informative.

If you want to simplify it down to a "switch," all you can really say is that yes, now Blacks vote Democrat and Southern Whites vote Republican ... anything beyond that that involves the term "switch" is utterly sophomoric.

[Figueira]

The same way that your state went from being so Democratic to so Republican. The ideologies of the parties began to shift, especially on racial and other social issues, the states became closer because of the deep partisan tendencies despite ideology changes, the states became very sympathetic to "liberal Republicans" and "conservative Democrats," and by the 90's and 2000's had completed the shift over to the other side.

Vermont may have become more liberal in recent years, but it has always been a liberal state. And keep in mind that being predominately white doesn't matter as much electorally in the northeast as it does in the south.

This is about right, except the two parties never "switched sides" on race

You've been corrected on that many times.

Do you know how simplistic and moronic it sounds to actually assert that two major political parties "switched" on anything at all?  LOL.

Democrats openly exploited the racial animosity in the South - without apology - from the party's foundation until the early 1920s.  Republicans openly advocated for curtailing that racial animosity - without apology - until the late 1800s.  By the 1920s, Blacks were INCREDIBLY frustrated with GOP leadership (many Black newspaper polls had findings of a slim majority of Blacks actually backing open segregationist Woodrow Wilson...), and all it took to dump the Party of Lincoln was some economic hardship that the Democrats were seen as fixers for.

Republicans in the 1930s felt ridiculously betrayed by the Black community, constantly alleging that the Democrats had "bought and paid for" Black votes, and that the Black community still "owed" the GOP for its actions in the 1800s.  With the Great Depression and World War II taking center stage politically, both the GOP and the Democrats paid literally no attention to civil rights from the 1930s until the late 1950s.  After Republicans saw THEIR civil rights laws being passed against Southern Democratic opposition and THEIR President enforcing Brown v. Board and they STILL lost the Black vote to Stevenson and his openly segregationist runningmate, Republicans (probably correctly) assumed that the Black vote was a lost cause.  Democrats tried to play both sides well into the 1970s, despite the myth that they just had this "coming to" moment in the 1960s where they were now the party of the moral high ground.

I highly suggest you check out the book "Republicans and Race: The GOP's Frayed Relationship With African-Americans, 1944-1970."  It's a good read and very informative.

If you want to simplify it down to a "switch," all you can really say is that yes, now Blacks vote Democrat and Southern Whites vote Republican ... anything beyond that that involves the term "switch" is utterly sophomoric.

The point is, the Democrats were the more racist party before, and now the Republicans are the more racist party. So in that sense, they did switch sides.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

It was much more rural along with ME and alot of NE states. But it started voting its party stripes when Reagan was in power due to the shifting dynamics of abortions and other socially liberal issues like SSM.

[Goldwater]

The point is, the Democrats were the more racist party before, and now the Republicans are the more racist party. So in that sense, they did switch sides.

No, it's still not really that simple. For example, the Democrats of the 19th century might have been more racist against blacks, but you could easily argue that the GOP of the same time period was more racist against foreigners.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Vermont was a very "Yankee" state for a long time (centuries, actually), which meant heavily moralistic Protestantism and the kind of reformist public life and politics that followed from that. There was more than a tinge of anti-Catholicism in this Protestant moralism, in addition to being virulently opposed to Southern slavery/rebellion, or anything that sought (or was perceived as such) to undermine the Union. In that sense, Vermont and other strongholds of Yankee/New England Protestantism - perhaps more than anywhere else - identified their own values as being equivalent to the nation's values.

Today, Vermont is considerably more pluralistic and secularized than what it used to be, with plenty of Catholics, Jews, and other types who, in the 21st New England context, are very liberal (and who the remaining Protestants have accommodated, even as New England Protestantism has changed in many ways to be more pluralistic and less "evangelical" ), but it still retains a lot of that core Yankee/New England Protestant moralistic cultural influence on its politics. It's the interactions of Vermont's long-established cultural traditions with the added influx of newcomers that makes it, in contemporary terms, one of the most "liberal" places in the country.