Why did CA, IL, NJ, CT, and VT vote Republican before 1992?

[The Arizonan]

Were these states lean-Republican states before Bill Clinton finally won them?

[Matty]

Were these states lean-Republican states before Bill Clinton finally won them?

California was a "wild west" state with a white population with a "live free or die" mentality before immigration and tech revolution changed it for good. It's white population simply became less influential politically. trump won aruond 47% of the CA white vote.

Illinois and CT were states where the suburbs were overwhelmingly republican, and it carrried them to the finish line in the 80s.

[Hydera]

Illinois and Connecticut had suburbs that leaned GOP. However after the GOP drifted rightward on social and religious issues, combined with immigration and a growing minority population they become democratic leaning. Bill Clinton won these states by changing some stances on economic issues . Instead of raising taxes on everybody aka: Mondale 1984. it became lowering taxes for the middle class and raising them on the wealthy.  This allowed the democrats to win white suburbanites in states like Illinois and Connecticut which previously were strongly GOP leaning.

Vermont is an interesting case of a state without much immigration as those other states but shifted towards the Democrats. But its the same social factors with many in vermont disagreeing with the rightward social shift of the GOP after the 1970s growth of evangelicals participation in politics when before they either didnt vote or didnt vote based on social/religious issues, that made the GOP become a socially evangelical minded party to capture those voters.

Plus vermont had influx of out of state residents in North-East that brought with them a more left leaning minded politics.


https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/08/13/upshot/where-people-in-each-state-were-born.html#Vermont

in 1960 27% of vermonters  were born in another state. by 2010s it was 48%.

As for why vermont didnt go democrat until 1992.  Vermont benefited from the 80s economic growth that was credited to Reagan and that made the GOP win the state in 1984 and 1988 much less strongly as those Anderson voters who voted for Reagan in 1984 started switching to the democrats. Then the state was hit in the 1992 recession which allowed for Bill Clinton to win a plurality. And when the economy was in good shape by 1996 a lot of voters that once voted GOP decided that they liked the Democrats better and joined with the growing liberal base in the state made it strongly democratic leaning after 1992.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

2016 was the first time that Vermont trended Republican since 1984 (except for 2000, barely).

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

VT was ancestrally Republican. Prior to the mid 20th century, if you were a white, Anglo-Saxon protestant in the Northern states, you were likely a Republican. Vermont was 99% white, 70% or so Congregationalist and therefore very Republican. The state was historically protectionist and often supported anti-immigrant Republicans.


In the mid 20th century you had several factors change the makeup of the state. You had an extensive in-migration of people into the state. You had the decline of religious affiliation, the rise of environmentalism as a political force and of course, generational change. By the late 1950's the state's Conservative wing was pretty much demolished, and only the moderate to liberal Republicans were able to secure victory thereafter. The state continue to vote Republican for President except for 1964, but the margins dropped every cycle until in 1992, it flipped and then never went back.

The other states had massive suburban populations that were heavily Republican and lower middle class that were swing voters that people like Nixon, Reagan and Bush 41 could sway. The Republican margins among the former degraded in the late 1980's and the 1991-1992 recession hammered white collar professionals, who had previously been largely untouched by recessions. Diversification, generational change/decline in religiosity within those suburbs, also meant that newer voters within the same areas were far less inclined to be Republican and in some areas were far left liberals. This came to a head in 1992, as Bill Clinton was a perfect fit to win all these groups and cause them to flip.

[Hydera]

VT was ancestrally Republican. Prior to the mid 20th century, if you were a white, Anglo-Saxon protestant in the Northern states, you were likely a Republican. Vermont was 99% white, 70% or so Congregationalist and therefore very Republican. The state was historically protectionist and often supported anti-immigrant Republicans.


In the mid 20th century you had several factors change the makeup of the state. You had an extensive in-migration of people into the state. You had the decline of religious affiliation, the rise of environmentalism as a political force and of course, generational change. By the late 1950's the state's Conservative wing was pretty much demolished, and only the moderate to liberal Republicans were able to secure victory thereafter. The state continue to vote Republican for President except for 1964, but the margins dropped every cycle until in 1992, it flipped and then never went back.

The other states had massive suburban populations that were heavily Republican and lower middle class that were swing voters that people like Nixon, Reagan and Bush 41 could sway. The Republican margins among the former degraded in the late 1980's and the 1991-1992 recession hammered white collar professionals, who had previously been largely untouched by recessions. Diversification, generational change/decline in religiosity within those suburbs, also meant that newer voters within the same areas were far less inclined to be Republican and in some areas were far left liberals. This came to a head in 1992, as Bill Clinton was a perfect fit to win all these groups and cause them to flip.

Oh yes forgot to mention about the 1991-1992 recession.

The states mentioned in the title were hit pretty hard by that recession. A lot of white collar professionals who did thought they were immune because past recessions usually hit the manufacturing, retail and construction sector more-so than white collar professions were finally hurt just as bad.

[The Govanah Jake]

California before the mass Hispanic immigration and the emergence of the Bay Area as a tech superpower was a classic western state. It had some traditional conservative/libertarian leanings in south California and also had a large suburban population. Before the Religious right these areas were prime for the Republican and made the republicans have a great shot at carrying the state. Counties like Marin back then were these types of suburban counties. Things started to change during the late 50s, 60s, and 70s as immigration started to take off, the republicans moving away from liberal republicanism, and people like Barry Goldwater changed the state from a slight pub state to a swing state which can be seen in 68. It was also during this time when San Francisco became unwinnable for a national republican. The state republicans were briefly revived under Reagan however with the republicans quickly embracing the religious right, by 1988 Bush the Senior was only able to narrowly won it and by 1992 a unpopular republican ousted the republicans from control

Illinois was only so republican because the republicans used to dominate the collar counties and get into the 40% range in cook. This combined with usually republican central IL was able to make the state winnable for republicans. Again the Republicans shift to the religious right and away from moderation shifted the state to the democrats

New Jersey like the previous was very republican prior to 1992. It used to be a lean republican state and only barely went Roosevelt over Hoover. This like the others was due to the republicans strength in the suburbs and north jersey. New Jersey is a pretty suburban state which made it so republican. And it shifted like the above

Connecticut due to the republican suburbs

Vermont used to be the most republican state having voted for a democrat only once since 1856 in 1964. It was a holdout state and voted for Landon too. It was a Yankee republican state with centrist to slight conservative views fiscally and moderate to slight liberal on social issues. This was a perfect fit for the republicans for a long time. However Reagan and the religious right and the republicans embrace of social conservatism changed this. Also influx of liberal new englanders and New Yorkers also did it.

Also not to mention the 1991-2 recession speeded up a lot of this.

[MarkD]

Before 1992, there was still a Cold War going on, and the USSR was the United States's mortal enemy. The GOP had a carefully-cultivated reputation of being tough on Communism and spendthrifts on national defense, and the Democratic Party had a reputation for being weak on national defense. States like CA, CT, IL, and NJ still had lots of job tied to high levels of spending on national defense.

[Tekken_Guy]

Outside the south (which was shifting to the GOP), the Democratic Party's appeal was mostly limited to inner city population and blacks. The Pete Wilson immigration backlash sent all the California Hispanics fleeing to the Democrats. Then, many wealthy and highly-educated suburban voters started to turn much more liberal on social issues. Plus, many more Democratic-leaning minorities started to head up into those states.

[Mr. Smith]

CA was always a swing state after JFK opened it up.

Part I:

But Nixon was a native son which just barely got him over the line with Humphrey, Carter was a bad fit [Frank Church, Scoop Jackson, or Jerry Brown could've overcome the Orange County meter by flipping then Rocky GOP county Contra Costa and solidifying the Dixie Inland].

Part II:

Reagan managed to flip over a lot of the Dixie North that were Solid D thanks to the Water Wars, while the Rocky GOP parts of the Bay Area, like Vermont...were still glacially moving over.

But Dukakis, while an excellent fit, ran a horrible campaign.

Moral of the Story: Should've given the South the middle finger and nominated a liberal and competent Westerner with an environmental streak and no taste for war.  LBJ was the only one who ran on any sort of Western cred.

[AndyHogan14]

Why California left the Republican Party (for good)? Two words: Religious Right.

It's actually quite sad...I do not like that California has become a one party state. I do not think that it is good for democracy, but the Republican party needs to transform into a European-style conservative party in order to become competitive in California again.

[Mr. Smith]

Why California left the Republican Party (for good)? Two words: Religious Right.

It's actually quite sad...I do not like that California has become a one party state. I do not think that it is good for democracy, but the Republican party needs to transform into a European-style conservative party in order to become competitive in California again.

That's why it really trended away. But the shift would've come a lot sooner if the correct type of Democrat for the state took the nomination.

P.S. The Dixie North/Gold Country counties became more Republican because of that same element.

[hopper]

Outside the south (which was shifting to the GOP), the Democratic Party's appeal was mostly limited to inner city population and blacks. The Pete Wilson immigration backlash sent all the California Hispanics fleeing to the Democrats. Then, many wealthy and highly-educated suburban voters started to turn much more liberal on social issues. Plus, many more Democratic-leaning minorities started to head up into those states.

Actually no I saw an article where yes up to 1990 California Hispanics identified as 23% Republican but in 1992 California Hispanics only identified as 12% Republican. Its not all about Pete Wilson that CA Hispanics fled the Republican Party its more about Bill Clinton probably. According to Sean Trende  1/3 of CA Hispanics voted in favor of Prop 187 in 1994.