The emerging Democratic majority in Mississippi

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

I can see MS becoming competitive around the 2030s. Young white voters in MS today, having grown up listening to and watching Beyonce rather than listening to Merle Haggard, aren't as race conscious. Especially when it comes to flipping 6 lousy EVs, maybe not so much in a MS-only statewide race if race emerges as more than a "sleeper" issue.

Two senate seats.

[hopper]

Nate Cohn's Exit Polls 2012-

Mississippi Whites by age:

18-29: 38% voted, 16% Dem
30-44: 53% voted, 13% Dem
45-65: 63% voted, 12% Dem
65+: 69% voted, 12% Dem

In all: 57% voted, 13% Dem

Alabama Whites by age:

18-29: 38% voted, 20% Dem
30-44: 53% voted, 16% Dem
45-64: 63% voted, 16% Dem
65+: 67% voted, 16% Dem

In all: 57% voted, 16% Dem

Georgia Whites by Age:

18-29: 37% voted, 23% Dem
30-44: 53% voted, 20% Dem
45-64: 64% voted, 19% Dem
65+: 67% voted, 19% Dem

In all: 57% voted, 20% Dem

[OneJ]

According to Nate Silver's new FiveThirtyEight forecast model:

Polls-Plus:
-Trump has an 85.4% chance of winning and Hillary has a 14.6%. (His chance is decreasing very slowly.)
-Currently, the projected vote share is a 51.1%-42.7% lead for Trump.

Polls-Only:
-Trump has a 69.4% chance of winning and Hillary has a 30.5%. (His chance is decreasing here as well.)
-Currently, the projected vote share is a 48.3%-43.6% lead for Trump.
-This is the forecast that lists Mississippi as one of the closest states in the entire nation.

Now-Cast:
-Trump has an 81.8% chance of winning and Hillary has an 18.1%. (Trump's chances for the most part is also decreasing.
-Currently, the projected vote share is a 48.9%-42.3% lead for Trump.

[Shameless Lefty Hack]

Sorry to necro the thread, but does anyone have access to the original blogpost? The blog has since been made private.

I'd also be interested in discussing any recent developments. It doesn't appear that there was any MS exit polling for the general, which I find to be a shame.

[Young Conservative]

Stop assuming young people stay liberal when they get old.

[OneJ]

Unfortunately, no exit polling last year.

However, I think there's some interesting data to share anyway.

2012 Results:
Romney - 55.29% (710,746 votes)
Obama - 43.79% (562,949 votes)

2016 Results:
Trump - 57.86% (700,714 votes)
Clinton - 40.06% (485,131 votes)

There is a huge drop-off of votes from Obama '12 to Clinton '16. Interestingly, Trump also didn't get as many votes as Romney.

Here's Reaganate's % point difference in the white vote:

Screenshot of MS White vote swing:


*Red = swing of white vote towards Clinton
*Blue = swing of white vote towards Trump

According to the map above, it does seem that Clinton probably did better with White voters than Obama. Her problem was that she couldn't keep enthusiasm up with Black voters like Obama did (understandably) which mostly caused so many counties to swing toward Trump.

Look at Madison County for example (adjacent to Hinds County to the North). Madison County contains 3 larger suburban cities of Jackson. Those cities are Ridgeland (~53% non-hispanic white), Madison (~85% non-hispanic white), and Canton (~72% Black). This county has the highest median income in the state and the only County to have it's median income higher than the nation. Apparently, Madison County seems to have followed the "trend" in which suburban, well-to-do Whites swung against Trump. Neighboring Rankin County also swung towards Clinton although to a lesser extent (adjacent to Hind to the east and adjacent to Madison to the southeast). But it could be because Trump lost votes from Romney.

On the flip side, the White vote in the counties of the mostly Black Delta region swung towards Trump. NE MS did this as well. These areas are pretty rural so they follow the other "trend" of swinging against Clinton.

[Shameless Lefty Hack]

If Obama's black turnout was a one-time thing, MS will stay safe R in federal elections for a very long time.  I think a bunch of us may have jumped the gun with this state.

I mean, I think this is a problem with the left in general nationwide. I suspect the answer has to be boosting local organizing in black communities nationwide - you can't run the first black president more than twice .

For those in the know - is Jim Hood's popularity not a replicable path? He gets absurd crossover, I know, but he seems to have an entirely reasonable personality/portfolio.

[Shameless Lefty Hack]

Unfortunately, no exit polling last year.

However, I think there's some interesting data to share anyway.

<datasnip>

According to the map above, it does seem that Clinton probably did better with White voters than Obama. Her problem was that she couldn't keep enthusiasm up with Black voters like Obama did (understandably) which mostly caused so many counties to swing toward Trump.

Look at Madison County for example (adjacent to Hinds County to the North). Madison County contains 3 larger suburban cities of Jackson. Those cities are Ridgeland (~53% non-hispanic white), Madison (~85% non-hispanic white), and Canton (~72% Black). This county has the highest median income in the state and the only County to have it's median income higher than the nation. Apparently, Madison County seems to have followed the "trend" in which suburban, well-to-do Whites swung against Trump. Neighboring Rankin County also swung towards Clinton although to a lesser extent (adjacent to Hind to the east and adjacent to Madison to the southeast). But it could be because Trump lost votes from Romney.

On the flip side, the White vote in the counties of the mostly Black Delta region swung towards Trump. NE MS did this as well. These areas are pretty rural so they follow the other "trend" of swinging against Clinton.

This follows the general nationwide trend, right?

In general, I'm just not sure how useful 2016 is as a marker of Democratic fortunes. Clinton (God willing) is gonna be the most identifiably "Liberal" in the epithetic sense (aka limousine liberal etc etc) and Trump I'm ~fairly certain~ is sui generis.

[OneJ]

Unfortunately, no exit polling last year.

However, I think there's some interesting data to share anyway.

<datasnip>

According to the map above, it does seem that Clinton probably did better with White voters than Obama. Her problem was that she couldn't keep enthusiasm up with Black voters like Obama did (understandably) which mostly caused so many counties to swing toward Trump.

Look at Madison County for example (adjacent to Hinds County to the North). Madison County contains 3 larger suburban cities of Jackson. Those cities are Ridgeland (~53% non-hispanic white), Madison (~85% non-hispanic white), and Canton (~72% Black). This county has the highest median income in the state and the only County to have it's median income higher than the nation. Apparently, Madison County seems to have followed the "trend" in which suburban, well-to-do Whites swung against Trump. Neighboring Rankin County also swung towards Clinton although to a lesser extent (adjacent to Hind to the east and adjacent to Madison to the southeast). But it could be because Trump lost votes from Romney.

On the flip side, the White vote in the counties of the mostly Black Delta region swung towards Trump. NE MS did this as well. These areas are pretty rural so they follow the other "trend" of swinging against Clinton.

This follows the general nationwide trend, right?

In general, I'm just not sure how useful 2016 is as a marker of Democratic fortunes. Clinton (God willing) is gonna be the most identifiably "Liberal" in the epithetic sense (aka limousine liberal etc etc) and Trump I'm ~fairly certain~ is sui generis.

Overall, yes since the vast majority of counties (especially rural ones) swung towards Trump. But in terms of the White vote specifically, Mississippi pretty much buckled the trend because most of the rest of the nation's White voters (particularly rural Whites) swung against Clinton and quite a few rural MS counties' White vote did exactly the opposite.

Take Lawrence County for example. It's about 65% non-Hispanic White, fits the basic definition of "rural", and ~21% live in poverty. It would be expected for the White vote here to swing towards Trump, but it didn't. In 2012, 7% of Whites voted for Obama. Four years later, 12.5% were estimated to have voted for Clinton. But, the county overall still managed to swing against Clinton.