Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 20, 2017, 06:49:48 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Be sure to enable your "Ultimate Profile" for even more goodies on your profile page!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  U.S. Presidential Election Results
| | |-+  2016 U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderators: TexasGurl, Torie)
| | | |-+  Why was Rhode Island so close?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Print
Author Topic: Why was Rhode Island so close?  (Read 2064 times)
Fuzzy Bear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4712


View Profile WWW
« Reply #25 on: May 19, 2017, 06:53:44 am »
Ignore

Trump was the first Republican nominee since Ford or H.W Bush who was not a hard line Christian theocrat. This certainly helped in the Upper Midwest, West Coast, Northeast and especially New England, which have been disgusted by GOP social Conservatism.

This is not true.

Most socially liberal, well-educated areas trended Democratic.  Take a look at Massachusetts, the West Coast, the D.C. Metro, and numerous college towns.  Hillary also performed very well in traditionally Republican but socially moderate areas like suburban Chicago.

Trump meanwhile achieved record performance among white Evangelicals (never mind that Trump may not be sincerely religious himself).  He also overperformed among culturally conservative Democrats, which is why he turned so many rural counties Republican.

2016 clearly widened the urban-rural, social liberal-social conservative divide. 

Hillary Clinton, while not an economic progressive, personifies the concept of an "enemy of the church".  Christians recognized that Hillary's Justice Department would do everything it could to force churches to perform same-sex marriages and hire gays in ministry positions, regardless of what Scripture says.  Part of the WikiLeaks revelations included Podesta and Palmieri talking about a "Catholic Spring" where liberals would actually infiltrate the Catholic Church and seek to change its doctrines.  Her "deplorables" comment didn't help, either.  Trump is not my idea of a devout Christian, but he is willing to leave the Church alone and not force every secular doctrine on it.

New England as a whole has become the Solid Northeast because of the resistance to the Religious Right in the GOP.  Trump cooled this somewhat, but what made this worse for Democrats was the hostility Christians feel toward Hillary.  This is something Hillary brought on all by herself.
Logged

"The family cannot be constituted like the liberal state, nor can it be governed entirely by that state's principles. Yet the family serves as the seedbed for the virtues required by a liberal state. The family is responsible for teaching lessons of independence, self-restraint, responsibility, and right conduct, which are essential to a free, democratic society. If the family fails in these tasks, then the entire experiment in democratic self-rule is jeopardized."-Barbara Dafoe Whitehead
Beet
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21295


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: May 19, 2017, 10:16:10 am »
Ignore

Trump was the first Republican nominee since Ford or H.W Bush who was not a hard line Christian theocrat. This certainly helped in the Upper Midwest, West Coast, Northeast and especially New England, which have been disgusted by GOP social Conservatism.

This is not true.

Most socially liberal, well-educated areas trended Democratic.  Take a look at Massachusetts, the West Coast, the D.C. Metro, and numerous college towns.  Hillary also performed very well in traditionally Republican but socially moderate areas like suburban Chicago.

Trump meanwhile achieved record performance among white Evangelicals (never mind that Trump may not be sincerely religious himself).  He also overperformed among culturally conservative Democrats, which is why he turned so many rural counties Republican.

2016 clearly widened the urban-rural, social liberal-social conservative divide.  

Hillary Clinton, while not an economic progressive, personifies the concept of an "enemy of the church".  Christians recognized that Hillary's Justice Department would do everything it could to force churches to perform same-sex marriages and hire gays in ministry positions, regardless of what Scripture says.  Part of the WikiLeaks revelations included Podesta and Palmieri talking about a "Catholic Spring" where liberals would actually infiltrate the Catholic Church and seek to change its doctrines.  Her "deplorables" comment didn't help, either.  Trump is not my idea of a devout Christian, but he is willing to leave the Church alone and not force every secular doctrine on it.

New England as a whole has become the Solid Northeast because of the resistance to the Religious Right in the GOP.  Trump cooled this somewhat, but what made this worse for Democrats was the hostility Christians feel toward Hillary.  This is something Hillary brought on all by herself.

The ironic thing is Hillary was criticized from the left during the primaries of being insufficiently pro-gay, and not coming out for gay marriage until 2013.

Hillary's a middle class girl whose entire interest in politics 50 years ago started with her pastor, and has remained in the same denomination ever since that time. The religious right rejected her for a son of wealth and privilege who makes a mockery of Christian values, largely out of an obsession with abortion, a word that is not even mentioned in the Bible and even implicitly condoned, and is only mentioned in the apocrypha.
« Last Edit: May 19, 2017, 10:19:09 am by Beet »Logged

But everything was fine when Bush spent $250 million of taxpayer money for pro war propaganda on all the media for a $2 trillion war that created ISIS?
No, who said it was?
hopper
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3474
United States


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: May 21, 2017, 12:50:37 pm »
Ignore

Been a lurker here for a while. Thought I'd comment (although it's mostly been answered)!
RI has similar demographics to Massachusetts but with more Italians, Catholics (more socially conservative) and fewer wealthy areas (meaning it was more receptive of Trump's economic populism). Extremely Italian mid-size middle/working class towns like Johnston and West Warwick managed to vote for Trump after voting for Obama by huge margins because of this. Then there's the WASP factor (White anglo-saxon protestant, think ME-02 or eastern Connecticut) that voted for Trump in huge margins, that you don't see too much in Massachusetts but is common in western and southern Rhode Island.
These differences are also why RI voted for Bernie in the primary while Mass voted for Hillary.

Comparing RI to MA Italian vs Irish descent according to Wikipedia last demographic demographics(not sure if the demographic breakdowns in the Wikipedia article are from 2010 or 2014.)

MA(% of ancestry group)

Irish: 23% of the Population
Italian: 14% of the Population

RI:(% of ancestry group)

Irish: 19% of the population
Italian 19% of the population
Logged
DPKdebator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 701
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.58, S: 2.26

View Profile
« Reply #28 on: May 28, 2017, 12:58:00 pm »
Ignore

Been a lurker here for a while. Thought I'd comment (although it's mostly been answered)!
RI has similar demographics to Massachusetts but with more Italians, Catholics (more socially conservative) and fewer wealthy areas (meaning it was more receptive of Trump's economic populism). Extremely Italian mid-size middle/working class towns like Johnston and West Warwick managed to vote for Trump after voting for Obama by huge margins because of this. Then there's the WASP factor (White anglo-saxon protestant, think ME-02 or eastern Connecticut) that voted for Trump in huge margins, that you don't see too much in Massachusetts but is common in western and southern Rhode Island.
These differences are also why RI voted for Bernie in the primary while Mass voted for Hillary.

Comparing RI to MA Italian vs Irish descent according to Wikipedia last demographic demographics(not sure if the demographic breakdowns in the Wikipedia article are from 2010 or 2014.)

MA(% of ancestry group)

Irish: 23% of the Population
Italian: 14% of the Population

RI:(% of ancestry group)

Irish: 19% of the population
Italian 19% of the population


The major ancestry groups in RI seem to be a bit more distributed across the state compared to MA (except the Irish, and the English outside of the inner Boston metro). In MA, southern Bristol is a Portuguese stronghold, Italians are a plurality in a few north of Boston towns, west-central MA has a lot of French, the eastern Cape and western Mass have lots of English, the Springfield area has quite a few Poles, and the South Shore is arguably the most Irish area in the country. In RI, the overall county percentages for ancestry are lower (no counties over 30% for a single ethnic group), and most towns are 10-25% Irish/Italian/French/English, much (several MA towns are over 40% Irish/Italian).
Logged

Political Matrix score: Economic +2.58, Social +2.26

Political Typology Quiz: Young Outsider

Political Compass score: Economic Left/Right .13, Social Libertarian/Authoritarian .82

Political Spectrum score: Right 2.27, Libertarian 2.31

"Every child in America should be able to play outside without fear." - President Donald J. Trump
The Govanah Jake
Jake Jewvinivisk
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 942


Political Matrix
E: -3.61, S: -7.48

View Profile
« Reply #29 on: June 10, 2017, 08:49:47 am »
Ignore

Trumps gain among-st Non Educated Whites and Working Class Whites and Poor Whites. You can see this can trend across New England as a Matter of Fact. Just look at Essex County in Vermont
Logged

Here - http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=18844.1250

2020 Democratic Primary - Sherrod Brown, Tulsi Gabbard, Steve Bullock

TL: Strong as a Bull Moose! - A Alternate 1912 Election and Beyond
http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=270726.0

RecoveringDem
recoveringdemocrat
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 87


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: August 28, 2017, 12:07:08 am »
Ignore

Here's a post I just made on this topic that might be interesting to those of you who were involved in this discussion. I look at swing toward Trump by town and then test the correlation with income (using race as a control): http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=271665.0
Logged
PragmaticPopulist
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 512
United States


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: August 28, 2017, 08:08:55 am »
Ignore

The people in this thread who have gotten the closest to understanding why Trump over-performed in RI have only scratched the surface. You guys are right that RI has a lot of non-college whites compared to other New England states, but Trump also did better there because a similar dynamic to what happened in the Midwest occurred there: Hillary Clinton was the worst fit for it as a Democratic nominee since Dukakis/Mondale. Bernie Sanders winning big in the primary there couldn't have helped Clinton either.
Logged

Progressive. Pragmatist. Strongly favors bringing back the big-tent.
Endorsements
AZ-SEN - Kyrsten Sinema
FL-SEN - Bill Nelson
FL-GOV - Gwen Graham
GA-GOV - Stacey Evans
MD-GOV - Kevin Kamenetz
NV-SEN - Jacky Rosen
NJ-GOV - Phil Murphy
NM-GOV - Michelle Lujan Grisham
OH-SEN - Sherrod Brown
VA-GOV - Ralph Northam
WI-SEN - Tammy Baldwin
WI-GOV - Kathleen Vinehout
Claude Trollo
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 47886


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: August 28, 2017, 01:48:12 pm »
Ignore

This one is a mystery to me. Trump even won a county there, which no Republican has been able to do since Reagan.

Trump won a county in every New England state aside of Massachusetts.
Logged

Kal is like Strache when he pushed Jorg Haider out of the FPO, and we all know how that ended Sad
NOVA Green
Oregon Progressive
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3282
United States


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: August 30, 2017, 02:02:19 am »
Ignore

This one is a mystery to me. Trump even won a county there, which no Republican has been able to do since Reagan.

Trump won a county in every New England state aside of Massachusetts.

Sure--- although honestly the whole concept of discussing Presidential election results in detail by County in New England can become an absurd proposition, since really NE county level discussion is frequently a much less fruitful endeavor than comparing cities/townships across the region (Precinct level results are always tough anywhere you go, especially in NE).

That Trump was appealing to many voters in RI, as in most parts of NE, "swing voter types" that might have voted along the following lines: Dukakis/Bush '88, Clinton/Perot '92, Clinton/Perot '96, Gore/W. '04, Obama '08, Obama/Romney '12....

Let's face it--- really we are talking about swings here, and elections aren't just a giant collection of   W & Ls like a football game.

Just because all of the EVs in NE have gone Dem since '08, with the exception of ME-02 ('16), doesn't mean that there won't be dramatic swings within given states.

Also, I might note that Trump only bagged only 38.7% of the vote in '16, hardly a definition of the provocative thread title: "Why was RI so close?".... Meanwhile Romney managed to capture an amazing 35.2% in '12, W. 35.2% in '04.

The key question should be where did the 3.5% of voters that hadn't voted Republican in '04 and '12 come from? They didn't just materialize from nowhere overnight, as a result of some random Russian election hacking gig unless that's what you choose to believe (rhetorical you---and def not shooting darts at you Bandit for realz).

Odds are these are voters that have generally voted Democratic at a Presidential level in the past, but for whatever reason felt that Trump alone was sufficient to change years of voting for Dem Pres candidates at the Pres level.

Now, the other question is why did HRC perform so poorly in RI (54.4% !), but I suspect we already know the multiple answers to that question.

RI isn't anywhere close to voting 'Pub Pres anytime in the near future, and it really looks like most of the Democratic drop-off were Millennials and WWC Bernie supporters voting to the Left as part of an "Anyone but Trump/Clinton Movement".



Logged

Pages: 1 [2] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines