Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 26, 2017, 01:59:58 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Cast your Ballot in the 2016 Mock Election

+  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 994 times)
Fuzzy Bear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4391


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: 20142


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



Emails&Benghazi were totally bs

We fought for feminism, and got Trumpism instead.

Brianna Wu 2018
hopper
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3351


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
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