NJ 9th most dem state this year
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 12:46:40 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Dereich)
  NJ 9th most dem state this year
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: NJ 9th most dem state this year  (Read 2989 times)
Fusionmunster
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,483


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: November 26, 2016, 02:04:12 AM »

New Jersey passed Delaware. Why didn't NJ swing hard like its neighboring states? I know we're diverse but NJ seems like a good fit for Trump.
Logged
P123
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 326


Political Matrix
E: 3.64, S: 3.20

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: November 26, 2016, 03:56:10 AM »

Rich people in the North. And several of the GOP wealthy strongholds trended Clinton.
Logged
hopper
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,414
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: November 26, 2016, 05:17:32 PM »

Rich people in the North. And several of the GOP wealthy strongholds trended Clinton.
Well Southern Jersey(except for Mercer County) trended and swung towards Trump while most of the Northern Half of NJ swung and trended towards Clinton except for Hunterdon, Sussex, Union, Hudson and Passaic Counties.
Logged
GOP732
Rookie
**
Posts: 116


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: November 28, 2016, 03:01:29 PM »

Ocean County has long been a GOP stronghold, but the margin this year is pretty stunning.
Logged
zorkpolitics
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,188
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: November 28, 2016, 04:35:31 PM »

Maybe it was all those illegal votes Trump tweeted about kept NJ from swinging more towards the GOP....

However, according to the    2016 National Popular Vote Tracker, NJ was actually the 10th most democratic state (11th if you count DC).  The US had a 2.2% swing from Democratic in 2012 to Republican in 2016, but NJ actually swung further with a 3.7% shift.

Neighboring CT also shifted 3.7%, while NY and DE shifted  about 7.0%, while PA swung a bit less than NY or DE, 6.5%.
Logged
Tintrlvr
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,286


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: November 28, 2016, 04:45:37 PM »
« Edited: November 28, 2016, 05:34:52 PM by Tintrlvr »

NJ is deceptively diverse, much more so than people typically give it credit for. And it is also a wealthy, highly educated state, especially in the north, that demographically seems like a poor fit for Trump in retrospect.* The more downmarket, whiter south of the state moved towards Trump but was largely canceled out by the wealthier, more diverse areas in the north-central areas of the state. Trump still did well in more downmarket white areas in north Jersey, like SW Bergen County (especially relative to Romney, who did terribly there; e.g., Trump got 56% of the vote in Wallington, which had voted for Obama twice), but those areas aren't very representative of north Jersey as a whole.

*Just how strongly this is the case in the super-wealthy areas of North Jersey: Millburn, New Jersey voted 66% for Hillary Clinton (up from 55% for Obama four years ago), and even Alpine, New Jersey voted for the Democrat for the first time in... maybe forever, definitely a very long time. Same for Berkeley Heights, New Providence, Verona, Watchung, Bridgewater, Randolph, Bernards Township, Chatham Township (which was 62% Romney!)...
Logged
elcorazon
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,402


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: November 28, 2016, 05:17:47 PM »

10th - Delaware is 12th.
Logged
AGA
Atlas Politician
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,267
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -5.39

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: November 28, 2016, 05:59:42 PM »

New Jersey has a lot of wealthy college-educated people in the north, especially in Bergen County. Many of whom switched from Romney to Clinton. Trump did quite well in South Jersey, however.
Logged
hopper
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,414
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: November 29, 2016, 01:32:34 PM »
« Edited: November 29, 2016, 01:42:42 PM by hopper »

NJ is deceptively diverse, much more so than people typically give it credit for. And it is also a wealthy, highly educated state, especially in the north, that demographically seems like a poor fit for Trump in retrospect.* The more downmarket, whiter south of the state moved towards Trump but was largely canceled out by the wealthier, more diverse areas in the north-central areas of the state. Trump still did well in more downmarket white areas in north Jersey, like SW Bergen County (especially relative to Romney, who did terribly there; e.g., Trump got 56% of the vote in Wallington, which had voted for Obama twice), but those areas aren't very representative of north Jersey as a whole.

*Just how strongly this is the case in the super-wealthy areas of North Jersey: Millburn, New Jersey voted 66% for Hillary Clinton (up from 55% for Obama four years ago), and even Alpine, New Jersey voted for the Democrat for the first time in... maybe forever, definitely a very long time. Same for Berkeley Heights, New Providence, Verona, Watchung, Bridgewater, Randolph, Bernards Township, Chatham Township (which was 62% Romney!)...

Yeah Essex, Hudson, Passaic, Union, and Bergen and even the county where I live in Somerset County is a bad fit for Trump. Somerset County is now 17% Asian which as a stat I was shocked to see on the US Census's "Quickfacts" which updates yearly demographic state and county demographics.

On the second paragraph on your post I wonder if those towns trend back R to where they previously were in 2012 once Trump is not on the ballot anymore after 2020 and in 2024. If the candidate was Rubio than maybe yes.

Verona did vote for Obama in 2012 50-49% over Romney.

Logged
pikachu
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,180
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: November 30, 2016, 08:15:05 PM »

NJ is deceptively diverse, much more so than people typically give it credit for. And it is also a wealthy, highly educated state, especially in the north, that demographically seems like a poor fit for Trump in retrospect.* The more downmarket, whiter south of the state moved towards Trump but was largely canceled out by the wealthier, more diverse areas in the north-central areas of the state. Trump still did well in more downmarket white areas in north Jersey, like SW Bergen County (especially relative to Romney, who did terribly there; e.g., Trump got 56% of the vote in Wallington, which had voted for Obama twice), but those areas aren't very representative of north Jersey as a whole.

*Just how strongly this is the case in the super-wealthy areas of North Jersey: Millburn, New Jersey voted 66% for Hillary Clinton (up from 55% for Obama four years ago), and even Alpine, New Jersey voted for the Democrat for the first time in... maybe forever, definitely a very long time. Same for Berkeley Heights, New Providence, Verona, Watchung, Bridgewater, Randolph, Bernards Township, Chatham Township (which was 62% Romney!)...


I think this post gets it correct, though I disagree that Trump's weakness in NJ is only evident in retrospect. The state's combination of rich white people+high minority population has always made it a place where Trump was going to do poorly, and it was pretty noticible to anyone who didn't hold the stereotype of NJ being full of working-class Italians or whatnot.

Anyway, here's a map of municipal results.

I was pretty surprised by Trump's showing in Middlesex County. He did a lot better than Romney which you wouldn't really expect given the county's demographics, and it looks like he was able to turnout a lot of voters who didn't show up in 2012.
Logged
LabourJersey
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,145
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: December 01, 2016, 06:39:58 PM »

NJ is deceptively diverse, much more so than people typically give it credit for. And it is also a wealthy, highly educated state, especially in the north, that demographically seems like a poor fit for Trump in retrospect.* The more downmarket, whiter south of the state moved towards Trump but was largely canceled out by the wealthier, more diverse areas in the north-central areas of the state. Trump still did well in more downmarket white areas in north Jersey, like SW Bergen County (especially relative to Romney, who did terribly there; e.g., Trump got 56% of the vote in Wallington, which had voted for Obama twice), but those areas aren't very representative of north Jersey as a whole.

*Just how strongly this is the case in the super-wealthy areas of North Jersey: Millburn, New Jersey voted 66% for Hillary Clinton (up from 55% for Obama four years ago), and even Alpine, New Jersey voted for the Democrat for the first time in... maybe forever, definitely a very long time. Same for Berkeley Heights, New Providence, Verona, Watchung, Bridgewater, Randolph, Bernards Township, Chatham Township (which was 62% Romney!)...


This is exactly right. People outside NJ typically underestimate how diverse and well-educated the state is, especially northern NJ. The Asian-American and Latino populations are both sizable, and both communities turned out for Clinton in strong numbers, though I do know Trump is apparently popular among some Hindu Indians for his supposed support of Modi,. My town is typically republican--voted for Christie twice-- but has a sizable Indian and Jewish population and is pretty well-educated, and went for Clinton 57-38.

I'm really interested by the stark divide between Northern and Southern NJ in terms of swing to trump/clinton. It seems that almost all northern countries sans Warren swung toward Clinton, while Trump ran up really surprising margins in Ocean, Cumberland, Salem Cape May and other. This could signal yet another major divide between North and South Jersey!
Logged
pikachu
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,180
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: December 01, 2016, 09:13:47 PM »

This is exactly right. People outside NJ typically underestimate how diverse and well-educated the state is, especially northern NJ. The Asian-American and Latino populations are both sizable, and both communities turned out for Clinton in strong numbers, though I do know Trump is apparently popular among some Hindu Indians for his supposed support of Modi,. My town is typically republican--voted for Christie twice-- but has a sizable Indian and Jewish population and is pretty well-educated, and went for Clinton 57-38.

I'm really interested by the stark divide between Northern and Southern NJ in terms of swing to trump/clinton. It seems that almost all northern countries sans Warren swung toward Clinton, while Trump ran up really surprising margins in Ocean, Cumberland, Salem Cape May and other. This could signal yet another major divide between North and South Jersey!

Trump managed to get a swing in Passaic, Middlesex, and the three NW counties. The first two did surprise me a little. If I had some time and the right maps, it'd actually be fun to make some town maps...
Logged
Sprouts Farmers Market ✘
Sprouts
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,751
Italy


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: 1.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: December 01, 2016, 09:50:10 PM »

This is exactly right. People outside NJ typically underestimate how diverse and well-educated the state is, especially northern NJ. The Asian-American and Latino populations are both sizable, and both communities turned out for Clinton in strong numbers, though I do know Trump is apparently popular among some Hindu Indians for his supposed support of Modi,. My town is typically republican--voted for Christie twice-- but has a sizable Indian and Jewish population and is pretty well-educated, and went for Clinton 57-38.

I'm really interested by the stark divide between Northern and Southern NJ in terms of swing to trump/clinton. It seems that almost all northern countries sans Warren swung toward Clinton, while Trump ran up really surprising margins in Ocean, Cumberland, Salem Cape May and other. This could signal yet another major divide between North and South Jersey!

Trump managed to get a swing in Passaic, Middlesex, and the three NW counties. The first two did surprise me a little. If I had some time and the right maps, it'd actually be fun to make some town maps...

Similar to Long Island. Educated Republicans who still care about law-and-order nearly more than anything else - as a Middlesex/Monmouth County resident.
Logged
RINO Tom
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,002
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: December 06, 2016, 12:12:15 PM »

NJ seems like a tailor made state for the new Democratic coalition.

Lots of educated upper class whites + lots of minorities + in a socially liberal region of the country. 

If Cruz or a typical conservative was on the ballot he would have done even worse than Trump here, probably shockingly worse (e.g., Hillary by 65-35 margin).  Trump probably fared a little better because he doesn't come off as a homophobe or war monger.  But nevertheless, it's a democratic state with a growing minority population.

Dude, your coalition can't contain a group that you LOST, haha.
Logged
vtred
Rookie
**
Posts: 82


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: December 06, 2016, 12:24:06 PM »

75 towns/cities in NJ out of about 570 switched sides this election:

53 switched to GOP
22 switched to DEM

Largest city to switch to GOP (based on vote totals): Old Bridge
Largest city to switch to DEM (based on vote totals): Bridgewater
Logged
pikachu
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,180
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: December 06, 2016, 05:57:07 PM »

NJ seems like a tailor made state for the new Democratic coalition.

Lots of educated upper class whites + lots of minorities + in a socially liberal region of the country. 

If Cruz or a typical conservative was on the ballot he would have done even worse than Trump here, probably shockingly worse (e.g., Hillary by 65-35 margin).  Trump probably fared a little better because he doesn't come off as a homophobe or war monger.  But nevertheless, it's a democratic state with a growing minority population.

Dude, your coalition can't contain a group that you LOST, haha.

Considering the map, it's not that unreasonable to think that they won them in NJ.
Logged
RINO Tom
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,002
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: December 07, 2016, 10:57:44 AM »

NJ seems like a tailor made state for the new Democratic coalition.

Lots of educated upper class whites + lots of minorities + in a socially liberal region of the country. 

If Cruz or a typical conservative was on the ballot he would have done even worse than Trump here, probably shockingly worse (e.g., Hillary by 65-35 margin).  Trump probably fared a little better because he doesn't come off as a homophobe or war monger.  But nevertheless, it's a democratic state with a growing minority population.

Dude, your coalition can't contain a group that you LOST, haha.

Considering the map, it's not that unreasonable to think that they won them in NJ.

Fair enough, though he certainly worded it in terms of a national coalition going forward, at least IMO.
Logged
Tintrlvr
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,286


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: December 07, 2016, 12:18:47 PM »
« Edited: December 07, 2016, 12:20:59 PM by Tintrlvr »

NJ is deceptively diverse, much more so than people typically give it credit for. And it is also a wealthy, highly educated state, especially in the north, that demographically seems like a poor fit for Trump in retrospect.* The more downmarket, whiter south of the state moved towards Trump but was largely canceled out by the wealthier, more diverse areas in the north-central areas of the state. Trump still did well in more downmarket white areas in north Jersey, like SW Bergen County (especially relative to Romney, who did terribly there; e.g., Trump got 56% of the vote in Wallington, which had voted for Obama twice), but those areas aren't very representative of north Jersey as a whole.

*Just how strongly this is the case in the super-wealthy areas of North Jersey: Millburn, New Jersey voted 66% for Hillary Clinton (up from 55% for Obama four years ago), and even Alpine, New Jersey voted for the Democrat for the first time in... maybe forever, definitely a very long time. Same for Berkeley Heights, New Providence, Verona, Watchung, Bridgewater, Randolph, Bernards Township, Chatham Township (which was 62% Romney!)...

Yeah Essex, Hudson, Passaic, Union, and Bergen and even the county where I live in Somerset County is a bad fit for Trump. Somerset County is now 17% Asian which as a stat I was shocked to see on the US Census's "Quickfacts" which updates yearly demographic state and county demographics.

On the second paragraph on your post I wonder if those towns trend back R to where they previously were in 2012 once Trump is not on the ballot anymore after 2020 and in 2024. If the candidate was Rubio than maybe yes.

Verona did vote for Obama in 2012 50-49% over Romney.

I think most of those towns will move back somewhat but not all the way to 2012 once Trump is not on the ballot. Romney was also a uniquely strong candidate for a lot of those areas, many of which were dramatically better for Obama 2008 or even in some cases Kerry 2004 than Obama 2012. Part of it is natural demographic shift, too, since most of the new residents in places like New Providence are relocating from NYC so are more likely to be Democrats even if they are very wealthy. Long term, the trend is towards the Democrats in wealthy NYC suburbs with or without Trump. In the 80s and 90s, Republicans were getting 70+% in the vote in a lot of the places I named.

My mistake on Verona. It's definitely been moving towards the Democrats for years in any case due to spillover of white liberals from Montclair so not a huge shock that it flipped in 2012. It did vote for McCain in 2008 and Bush in 2004.
Logged
hopper
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,414
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: December 07, 2016, 02:20:32 PM »

NJ is deceptively diverse, much more so than people typically give it credit for. And it is also a wealthy, highly educated state, especially in the north, that demographically seems like a poor fit for Trump in retrospect.* The more downmarket, whiter south of the state moved towards Trump but was largely canceled out by the wealthier, more diverse areas in the north-central areas of the state. Trump still did well in more downmarket white areas in north Jersey, like SW Bergen County (especially relative to Romney, who did terribly there; e.g., Trump got 56% of the vote in Wallington, which had voted for Obama twice), but those areas aren't very representative of north Jersey as a whole.

*Just how strongly this is the case in the super-wealthy areas of North Jersey: Millburn, New Jersey voted 66% for Hillary Clinton (up from 55% for Obama four years ago), and even Alpine, New Jersey voted for the Democrat for the first time in... maybe forever, definitely a very long time. Same for Berkeley Heights, New Providence, Verona, Watchung, Bridgewater, Randolph, Bernards Township, Chatham Township (which was 62% Romney!)...

Yeah Essex, Hudson, Passaic, Union, and Bergen and even the county where I live in Somerset County is a bad fit for Trump. Somerset County is now 17% Asian which as a stat I was shocked to see on the US Census's "Quickfacts" which updates yearly demographic state and county demographics.

On the second paragraph on your post I wonder if those towns trend back R to where they previously were in 2012 once Trump is not on the ballot anymore after 2020 and in 2024. If the candidate was Rubio than maybe yes.

Verona did vote for Obama in 2012 50-49% over Romney.


My mistake on Verona. It's definitely been moving towards the Democrats for years in any case due to spillover of white liberals from Montclair so not a huge shock that it flipped in 2012. It did vote for McCain in 2008 and Bush in 2004.
Oh I didn't know there was a spillover going on of white liberals moving from Montclair to Verona. I thought people from Montclair are more upper-income and wouldn't want to move a middle-class town like Verona. I know that some people were moving from NYC to Montclair in the early to mid 2000's because NJ Transit has 3 train stations in Montclair and trains that go to Penn Station NYC. People can live in Jersey and take the train to work to New York City each day. There was a couple 8-10 years ago on HGTV that showed them doing the move from NYC to Montclair.
Logged
Intell
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,817
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: -6.71, S: -1.24

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: December 08, 2016, 07:45:13 AM »

NJ seems like a tailor made state for the new Democratic coalition.

Lots of educated upper class whites + lots of minorities + in a socially liberal region of the country. 

If Cruz or a typical conservative was on the ballot he would have done even worse than Trump here, probably shockingly worse (e.g., Hillary by 65-35 margin).  Trump probably fared a little better because he doesn't come off as a homophobe or war monger.  But nevertheless, it's a democratic state with a growing minority population.

Dude, your coalition can't contain a group that you LOST, haha.

Considering the map, it's not that unreasonable to think that they won them in NJ.

RINO Tom is simply a troll FYI.

No, you just don't have knowledge on politics or political history, as well as demographic coalitions.
Logged
White Trash
Southern Gothic
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,910


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: December 08, 2016, 08:28:35 AM »

NJ seems like a tailor made state for the new Democratic coalition.

Lots of educated upper class whites + lots of minorities + in a socially liberal region of the country. 

If Cruz or a typical conservative was on the ballot he would have done even worse than Trump here, probably shockingly worse (e.g., Hillary by 65-35 margin).  Trump probably fared a little better because he doesn't come off as a homophobe or war monger.  But nevertheless, it's a democratic state with a growing minority population.

Dude, your coalition can't contain a group that you LOST, haha.

Considering the map, it's not that unreasonable to think that they won them in NJ.

RINO Tom is simply a troll FYI.
Didn't realize that being correct about demographic coalitions makes you a troll.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.058 seconds with 14 queries.