Different Political Map

[Intell]

I roughly made a map, on how third party left-wing candidates would do. How would this political map, of red states voting for a leftist progressive candidate, and blue states voting for more conservative candidates occur?

[TJ in Oregon]

I roughly made a map, on how third party left-wing candidates would do. How would this political map, of red states voting for a leftist progressive candidate, and blue states voting for more conservative candidates occur?

It's difficult to imagine the Upper Midwest voting as lopsidedly for the left as shown here while the eastern Midwestern states are solidly Republican. Yes, places like Wisconsin and Minnesota have strong support for left-of-the-Democrats progressives, but both also have sizable conservative factions, large enough that it's hard to see them voting Democrat before, say, Illinois.

[DC Al Fine]

I'm having a hard time coming up with the cleavages that would make this map work. Too many similar states are voting against each other (e.g. Hispanics voting D = Why is New Mexico GOP?, Evangelicals voting R, why is Arkansas red?)

The only strain I can pick out is that there is some sort of left wing prairie populist thing going on, that somehow either doesn't affect or turns off rural New England and the South.

[Tintrlvr]

This map looks very late 19th century, other than the Deep South. So, maybe if the whole country time warps back to the Gilded Age but forgets about the Civil War?

[Intell]

It's basically a map of where, leftist, socialist, populist, progressive third party candidates were stronges in a presidnetial election, if they managed to be viable, and be one of the two major parties in a political system, how the map would look. The red is not the Democratic Party, instead a third party leftish party that managed to be one of the two major party,while the blue is a Conservative party, made out conservatives that were in both the Democratic and Republican Party.

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

I don't think a third party leftists performance in a state relative to other states is indicative enough of a states potential for that party. Getting 10% in Idaho means you got a third of the liberals. It doesn't mean that you have a chance to get a significant chunk of the conservatives.

[Intell]

I don't think a third party leftists performance in a state relative to other states is indicative enough of a states potential for that party. Getting 10% in Idaho means you got a third of the liberals. It doesn't mean that you have a chance to get a significant chunk of the conservatives.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1924

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1892

Western Prairie Progressivism existed in the US, until about 1948 or so. They were also strongest for the socialist party, and in many cases had progressive senators, in either party elected at a higher rate than in the east.

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

I don't think a third party leftists performance in a state relative to other states is indicative enough of a states potential for that party. Getting 10% in Idaho means you got a third of the liberals. It doesn't mean that you have a chance to get a significant chunk of the conservatives.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1924

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1892

Western Prairie Progressivism existed in the US, until about 1948 or so. They were also strongest for the socialist party, and in many cases had progressive senators, in either party elected at a higher rate than in the east.

Until about 1948 being the key word. They aren't anywhere near as progressive today. Vermont was one of the most staunchly republican states in the union back then.

[Intell]

I don't think a third party leftists performance in a state relative to other states is indicative enough of a states potential for that party. Getting 10% in Idaho means you got a third of the liberals. It doesn't mean that you have a chance to get a significant chunk of the conservatives.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1924

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1892

Western Prairie Progressivism existed in the US, until about 1948 or so. They were also strongest for the socialist party, and in many cases had progressive senators, in either party elected at a higher rate than in the east.

Until about 1948 being the key word. They aren't anywhere near as progressive today. Vermont was one of the most staunchly republican states in the union back then.

I'm considering, this political demographics to be created in the early 1910's, in where a progressive with some socialistic tendencies overtakes a major party, while conservatives from the democratic/republican party, combine to form such a party. Such demographic factors, and who vote leftist from the 1910's or so remain the same. I don't think I explained that, and was what I meant to say.

Because once there are ingrained leftist parties, into the west, it'll remain that way, while conservative  states will fear socialism, and will continue to vote for conservative parties, till this day.

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

I don't think a third party leftists performance in a state relative to other states is indicative enough of a states potential for that party. Getting 10% in Idaho means you got a third of the liberals. It doesn't mean that you have a chance to get a significant chunk of the conservatives.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1924

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1892

Western Prairie Progressivism existed in the US, until about 1948 or so. They were also strongest for the socialist party, and in many cases had progressive senators, in either party elected at a higher rate than in the east.

Until about 1948 being the key word. They aren't anywhere near as progressive today. Vermont was one of the most staunchly republican states in the union back then.

I'm considering, this political demographics to be created in the early 1910's, in where a progressive with some socialistic tendencies overtakes a major party, while conservatives from the democratic/republican party, combine to form such a party. Such demographic factors, and who vote leftist from the 1910's or so remain the same. I don't think I explained that, and was what I meant to say.

So this is under voting patterns not found today?

[Intell]

I don't think a third party leftists performance in a state relative to other states is indicative enough of a states potential for that party. Getting 10% in Idaho means you got a third of the liberals. It doesn't mean that you have a chance to get a significant chunk of the conservatives.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1924

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1892

Western Prairie Progressivism existed in the US, until about 1948 or so. They were also strongest for the socialist party, and in many cases had progressive senators, in either party elected at a higher rate than in the east.

Until about 1948 being the key word. They aren't anywhere near as progressive today. Vermont was one of the most staunchly republican states in the union back then.

I'm considering, this political demographics to be created in the early 1910's, in where a progressive with some socialistic tendencies overtakes a major party, while conservatives from the democratic/republican party, combine to form such a party. Such demographic factors, and who vote leftist from the 1910's or so remain the same. I don't think I explained that, and was what I meant to say.

So this is under voting patterns not found today?

Basically, it's under voting patterns, found in the early 19th, and mid 19th century, and which states had a progressive and in very few cases socialist traditions, a mix of the democratic vote FDR and post FDR-era, in more eastern states were also taken into account, because in these areas, progressivism arose from the democratic party, along with how strong minor leftist parties would do.

These voting patterns are not found today, and since I have nothing better to do, I'll probably make a county map.

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

I don't think a third party leftists performance in a state relative to other states is indicative enough of a states potential for that party. Getting 10% in Idaho means you got a third of the liberals. It doesn't mean that you have a chance to get a significant chunk of the conservatives.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1924

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1892

Western Prairie Progressivism existed in the US, until about 1948 or so. They were also strongest for the socialist party, and in many cases had progressive senators, in either party elected at a higher rate than in the east.

Until about 1948 being the key word. They aren't anywhere near as progressive today. Vermont was one of the most staunchly republican states in the union back then.

I'm considering, this political demographics to be created in the early 1910's, in where a progressive with some socialistic tendencies overtakes a major party, while conservatives from the democratic/republican party, combine to form such a party. Such demographic factors, and who vote leftist from the 1910's or so remain the same. I don't think I explained that, and was what I meant to say.

So this is under voting patterns not found today?

Basically, it's under voting patterns, found in the early 19th, and mid 19th century, and which states had a progressive and in very few cases socialist traditions, a mix of the democratic vote FDR and post FDR-era, in more eastern states were also taken into account, because in these areas, progressivism arose from the democratic party, along with how strong minor leftist parties would do.

These voting patterns are not found today, and since I have nothing better to do, I'll probably make a county map.

Ah.