I'll quible with PA. There is no way the north would vote on economic issues and still go for the Republicans. The poorest township in my county went 65% for Bush. Also, the Southeast would still vote Republican and the Southwest would vote for the Democrats.
Also, NM is poor from what I've gathered and would vote overwhelmingly Democrat if they voted on economic issues.
A few states like MD, FL, and NH are definite mixes. Hispanics vote on social issues and so do the northern transplants, whites vote on economic issues. Most of Maryland's population is clustered in Baltimore and Prince Georges/Montgomery County. Large black populations that vote on economic issues and large suburban population that votes on social issues.
I think a lot of your points are valid...this is a very interesting question...so on the Presidential level, here's my map... Blue= social issue states, red=econ issues
5&DC=1;3;8&FL=2;27;5&GA=2;15;5&HI=
Some explanation:
Poor white social conservatives: obviously blue
Suburban Republican business-leaning voters (like NH or SWest suburbs): red
Poor dem voters (union, some poor minorities etc): obviously red
Dem suburban social voters found on manhattan, La's westside/sf/nova/philly: blue
Pacific:
HI: Econ voters definitely...
AK: They vote Republican partly because of oil! Is that an econ question? But considering leave-me-alone attitude is kinda part of social divide, it stays blue..
CA: This is definitely a questionable call but because whites are more active voters than the hispanic econ voters, i'll put it in the social voter category thanks to san fran/L.A. liberals and social conservatives in inland empire/central valley. Close & questionable call, though.
OR: Granola voters v. eastern oregonians...definite social divide...
WA: Okay, i made a mistake in my map...this should be blue, too, like oregon except a little less blue because of more blue collar dems and, perhaps more suburban republicans...
West:
NV: Huge econ divide of unions v. libertarianish suburban republicans...
AZ: Ditto, except with fewer Dem econ voters
CO: Well, here there are a few more dem social liberal voters, but lots of econ conservatives as well...
Rest of Mtn west: Mormons and cultural divide are key to republican success
Midwest:
Plains: okay, obviously...what's the matter with kansas territory
Texas: Hmmm...lots of suburban Republcian voters who vote rep for both econ/social reasons... but because of rural voters and others who vote rep, its blue...but i think kind of questionably because dem voters there are pretty much all econ voters (outside of austin)
LA/AR/MO: would be dem if social issues weren't dominant, though nearly all dem voters are economic in LA and AR, making them, perhaps questionable when combined with wealthy reps. In Mo, though, there are some Dem social voters...
IA/MN/WI: home to liberal populism.... suburban reps especially in milwaukee, twin suburbs...
IL: close call because of chicago suburban social voters and downstate republcians...still the city's poor liberals and dupage conservatives make it econ voting...
IN: defitiely republican for social reasons..
OH/MI: econ issues with dems getting unions and reps getting hardcore suburban/exurban support....
South: Republican for social reasons...race also acts as a kinda social issue here that solidifies dem support among blacks...
FL: Let's see, social voters in south florida go dem and most Rep voters are probably also social voters (Cubans, also, I'd consider social voters)...
PA: definitely a social issue divide... Republicans win the T and are competitive in SE and NW because of social issues! Dems win philly suburbs becaue of social issues...
DE/CT: Go dem for social reasons...
NY/NJ/RI: Dem for econ reasons/significant rep. econ conservatives...
MA/VT: social issues make it hardcore dem, though theres a significant econ base for dems, too...
NH: some working class dems here, combined with large libertarianish republican voter group make it largely economic....
ME: Overall, it votes dem for social reasons, but the northern district votes dem for econ reasons...
