Why did Trump do better among Northern surburban voters, worse among southern?

[super6646]

This is something I noticed in the election results. Trump did far worse in the suburbs in Colorado, Texas, Georgia, Virginia, and marginally worse in North Carolina, Florida, and even South Carolina compared to Romney. But he did better with suburban voters in Ohio, Michigan, New York, New Jersey, and performed on par with Romney in Pennsylvania. Can anyone explain why this shift occured?

[uti2]

This is something I noticed in the election results. Trump did far worse in the suburbs in Colorado, Texas, Georgia, Virginia, and marginally worse in North Carolina, Florida, and even South Carolina. But he did better with suburban voters in Ohio, Michigan, New York, New Jersey, and performed on performed on par in Pennsylvania. Can anyone explain why this shift occured?

Northeastern regional appeal.

[uti2]

Religion is likely a big issue here when it comes to northern whites vs. southern whites. I don't think it's regional appeal since Clinton and Trump were both New Yorkers and the fact that the Northeast didn't trend towards the GOP in 2012 for the most part (Romney was Governor of Massachusetts after all).

Trump ran a very secular campaign compared to past GOP presidents. When he started talking about God during his inauguration it me about just how little he spoke about God, Jesus, or family values on the campaign trail when compared to Romney, McCain, or Bush. This was likely a pretty big plus to whites in the northeast and upper Midwest who are much more secular than whites in the South; and also helps to explain why he did worse with suburban whites in the south vs. suburban whites in the north.

Romney is technically the former governor of MA, but he shifted further to the right in 2012 vs. 2008. Romney was also simultaneously seen to some extent as a quasi-utah candidate, rather than a proper northeasterner.

Hillary is not really seen as a New Yorker. She is just known for being associated with Bill Clinton.

[uti2]

Religion is likely a big issue here when it comes to northern whites vs. southern whites. I don't think it's regional appeal since Clinton and Trump were both New Yorkers and the fact that the Northeast didn't trend towards the GOP in 2012 for the most part (Romney was Governor of Massachusetts after all).

Trump ran a very secular campaign compared to past GOP presidents. When he started talking about God during his inauguration it me about just how little he spoke about God, Jesus, or family values on the campaign trail when compared to Romney, McCain, or Bush. This was likely a pretty big plus to whites in the northeast and upper Midwest who are much more secular than whites in the South; and also helps to explain why he did worse with suburban whites in the south vs. suburban whites in the north.

Romney is technically the former governor of MA, but he shifted further to the right in 2012 vs. 2008. Romney was also simultaneously seen to some extent as a quasi-utah candidate, rather than a proper northeasterner.

Hillary is not really seen as a New Yorker. She is just known for being associated with Bill Clinton.

She was senator of New York for nearly an entire decade.

She bought a house in NY in 1999, became a senator from NY state in 2000 and lived in DC for 8 years. After that, she took another DC job as SOS. If she had stayed on as senator rather than taking the SOS job, or had become governor, she would have been more of a New Yorker.

Clintonism as an ideology just happens to be popular in the northeast. There are many 'Democrats for social reasons'.

Romney, as I mentioned, was seen as a sort of Utah candidate.

[This is Eharding, guys]

In 2012, there was a huge gap in presidential preference between northern and southern districts with the same racial and educational composition. That gap shrunk somewhat (but still remained very large) in 2016 due to Trump having more non-college Obama voters to win and fewer college Romney voters to lose in the North and more college Romney voters to lose and fewer non-college Obama voters to win in the South. Simple enough.

Romney was a sort of Utah candidate. Look at the 2012 trend tables.

[uti2]

Religion is likely a big issue here when it comes to northern whites vs. southern whites. I don't think it's regional appeal since Clinton and Trump were both New Yorkers and the fact that the Northeast didn't trend towards the GOP in 2012 for the most part (Romney was Governor of Massachusetts after all).

Trump ran a very secular campaign compared to past GOP presidents. When he started talking about God during his inauguration it me about just how little he spoke about God, Jesus, or family values on the campaign trail when compared to Romney, McCain, or Bush. This was likely a pretty big plus to whites in the northeast and upper Midwest who are much more secular than whites in the South; and also helps to explain why he did worse with suburban whites in the south vs. suburban whites in the north.

Romney is technically the former governor of MA, but he shifted further to the right in 2012 vs. 2008. Romney was also simultaneously seen to some extent as a quasi-utah candidate, rather than a proper northeasterner.

Hillary is not really seen as a New Yorker. She is just known for being associated with Bill Clinton.

She was senator of New York for nearly an entire decade.

She bought a house in NY in 1999, became a senator from NY state in 2000 and lived in DC for 8 years. After that, she took another DC job as SOS. If she had stayed on as senator rather than taking the SOS job, or had become governor, she would have been more of a New Yorker.

Clintonism as an ideology just happens to be popular in the northeast. There are many 'Democrats for social reasons'.

Romney, as I mentioned, was seen as a sort of Utah candidate.

A Utah candidate who got a lower percentage of the vote than the non-Mormon George Bush did in 2004 in Utah itself.

It's pretty clear that "regional appeal" wasn't as big of a factor here as you're making it out to be. The Northeast trended Republican from 2000-2016 (two southern candidates in 2000 vs. two northeastern candidates in 2016) while the southwest and parts of the south trended Democrat from 2000-2016. Regional appeal didn't have some big effect.

Actually, Romney got a higher percentage in Utah.

You mentioned religion as an issue, that's part of how northeastern culture operates. Romney wasn't really seen as a part of that culture.

[Bismarck]

Trump did reasonably bad in the Indy suburbs.

[hopper]

This is something I noticed in the election results. Trump did far worse in the suburbs in Colorado, Texas, Georgia, Virginia, and marginally worse in North Carolina, Florida, and even South Carolina. But he did better with suburban voters in Ohio, Michigan, New York, New Jersey, and performed on performed on par in Pennsylvania. Can anyone explain why this shift occured?

New York-That's true Trump did win the 18th Congressional District in New York in the Hudson Valley area of the state. He performed as well as a generic Republican Presidential Candidate would in Nassau County and he did win Suffolk County.

New Jersey-He did well in Southern Jersey(Jersey Shore/Philly Burb's) for the most part but not so well in the Northern Half of the state especially the Northeastern part of the state. I do wonder if he overperformed a bit in the Southern half of the state because of his business presence in Atlantic City for a number of years.

Michigan-That's true he did do well in Detroit Burb's but didn't do so well in Ann Arbor where "The University of Michigan" is. He did performed as well as a generic Republican Presidential Candidate would in Oakland County. He won Macomb and Saginaw Counties.

Ohio-He did well in counties around Franklin County(but not in) where "Ohio State University" is located. He nearly won Lorain County(a suburb of Cleveland.)

Pennsylvania-He was close to winning Buck County but didn't win it in the Philly Burb's. He didn't win Chester County which has only gone D in Presidential Elections 4 times since 1888. He did good in counties that surrounded Allegheny County(home of Pittsburgh.) I think he didn't do as bad as a Generic Republican Candidate would in Delaware and Montgomery Counties I don't think in the Philly Burb's.

[Kingpoleon]

I believe that's normal. Our urban areas and rural areas are more Republican than the North's, but our suburban areas are decidedly more Democratic than the North's.

[NOVA Green]

This is something I noticed in the election results. Trump did far worse in the suburbs in Colorado, Texas, Georgia, Virginia, and marginally worse in North Carolina, Florida, and even South Carolina. But he did better with suburban voters in Ohio, Michigan, New York, New Jersey, and performed on performed on par in Pennsylvania. Can anyone explain why this shift occured?

Wait--- what?

I don't think Trump performed better among Northern suburban voters than among Southern suburban voters overall....

I believe there was a greater swing towards Trump among Upper-Income Southern suburban voters than among Northern suburban voters.

Maybe we should clarify what we mean by "suburban voters" so we can all discuss with a common understanding, as well as better/worse. Are we talking swings or overall Rep vote % / Margins?

Is the definition of suburban based upon Exit Polling or Census based MSA type statistics?

[super6646]

This is something I noticed in the election results. Trump did far worse in the suburbs in Colorado, Texas, Georgia, Virginia, and marginally worse in North Carolina, Florida, and even South Carolina. But he did better with suburban voters in Ohio, Michigan, New York, New Jersey, and performed on performed on par in Pennsylvania. Can anyone explain why this shift occured?

Wait--- what?

I don't think Trump performed better among Northern suburban voters than among Southern suburban voters overall....

I believe there was a greater swing towards Trump among Upper-Income Southern suburban voters than among Northern suburban voters.

Maybe we should clarify what we mean by "suburban voters" so we can all discuss with a common understanding, as well as better/worse. Are we talking swings or overall Rep vote % / Margins?

Is the definition of suburban based upon Exit Polling or Census based MSA type statistics?

I mean compared to Romney. I couldn't fit it inside the title, so I had to stick with what I said. I'll add it to the OP.

[super6646]

This is something I noticed in the election results. Trump did far worse in the suburbs in Colorado, Texas, Georgia, Virginia, and marginally worse in North Carolina, Florida, and even South Carolina. But he did better with suburban voters in Ohio, Michigan, New York, New Jersey, and performed on performed on par in Pennsylvania. Can anyone explain why this shift occured?

New York-That's true Trump did win the 18th Congressional District in New York in the Hudson Valley area of the state. He performed as well as a generic Republican Presidential Candidate would in Nassau County and he did win Suffolk County.

New Jersey-He did well in Southern Jersey(Jersey Shore/Philly Burb's) for the most part but not so well in the Northern Half of the state especially the Northeastern part of the state. I do wonder if he overperformed a bit in the Southern half of the state because of his business presence in Atlantic City for a number of years.

Michigan-That's true he did do well in Detroit Burb's but didn't do so well in Ann Arbor where "The University of Michigan" is. He did performed as well as a generic Republican Presidential Candidate would in Oakland County. He won Macomb and Saginaw Counties.

Ohio-He did well in counties around Franklin County(but not in) where "Ohio State University" is located. He nearly won Lorain County(a suburb of Cleveland.)

Pennsylvania-He was close to winning Buck County but didn't win it in the Philly Burb's. He didn't win Chester County which has only gone D in Presidential Elections 4 times since 1888. He did good in counties that surrounded Allegheny County(home of Pittsburgh.) I think he didn't do as bad as a Generic Republican Candidate would in Delaware and Montgomery Counties I don't think in the Philly Burb's.

I mean't to say compared to Romney. Added that to the OP.

[NOVA Green]

This is something I noticed in the election results. Trump did far worse in the suburbs in Colorado, Texas, Georgia, Virginia, and marginally worse in North Carolina, Florida, and even South Carolina. But he did better with suburban voters in Ohio, Michigan, New York, New Jersey, and performed on performed on par in Pennsylvania. Can anyone explain why this shift occured?

Wait--- what?

I don't think Trump performed better among Northern suburban voters than among Southern suburban voters overall....

I believe there was a greater swing towards Trump among Upper-Income Southern suburban voters than among Northern suburban voters.

Maybe we should clarify what we mean by "suburban voters" so we can all discuss with a common understanding, as well as better/worse. Are we talking swings or overall Rep vote % / Margins?

Is the definition of suburban based upon Exit Polling or Census based MSA type statistics?

I mean compared to Romney. I couldn't fit it inside the title, so I had to stick with what I said. I'll add it to the OP.

Aaah... ok super6646, I think I get it now, and makes a bit more sense, if one compares it against Romney '12 numbers.

So in Atlas speak we have "swings" (Change in total % margin between the two major party candidates) and "trends" (How the state/county/city... etc) compares to the National/Statewide % margin.

Not trying to be condescending, just want to make sure everyone is discussing based upon the same data points.   

So, if we look at Macomb County Michigan (Famous example of "Reagan Democrats")

2008: (53.3 D- 44.7 R)        + 8.6 D
2012: (51.3 D- 47.3 R)        + 4.0 D      (+ 4.6% R Swing)
2016: (42.1 D- 53.6 R)        +11.5 R     (+15.5% R Swing!)

Oakland County, Michigan

2008: (56.4 D- 41.9 R)        +14.5 D
2012: (53.4 D- 45.4 R)        +  8.0 D     (+ 6.5% R Swing)
2016: (51.3 D- 43.2 R)        +  8.1 D     (+ 0.1% D Swing)

Both are widely considered "suburban counties" of Detroit...

So for the examples of "Southern" suburban states that you use, the suburban counties of the major Cities of Texas, as well as Metro-Atlanta, and Northern Virginia (NoVA) definitely swung towards the Democrats in '16.

Still, the juxtaposition of North/South is a bit off, since the Suburban counties close to Philly swung towards HRC, as did Westchester County NY, and Bergen County NJ.

Maybe the real question is: "Why did suburban counties in Ohio (Delaware Co aside) and Michigan not swing towards HRC, compared to suburban counties elsewhere in the Country?"

[super6646]

This is something I noticed in the election results. Trump did far worse in the suburbs in Colorado, Texas, Georgia, Virginia, and marginally worse in North Carolina, Florida, and even South Carolina. But he did better with suburban voters in Ohio, Michigan, New York, New Jersey, and performed on performed on par in Pennsylvania. Can anyone explain why this shift occured?

Wait--- what?

I don't think Trump performed better among Northern suburban voters than among Southern suburban voters overall....

I believe there was a greater swing towards Trump among Upper-Income Southern suburban voters than among Northern suburban voters.

Maybe we should clarify what we mean by "suburban voters" so we can all discuss with a common understanding, as well as better/worse. Are we talking swings or overall Rep vote % / Margins?

Is the definition of suburban based upon Exit Polling or Census based MSA type statistics?

I mean compared to Romney. I couldn't fit it inside the title, so I had to stick with what I said. I'll add it to the OP.

Aaah... ok super6646, I think I get it now, and makes a bit more sense, if one compares it against Romney '12 numbers.

So in Atlas speak we have "swings" (Change in total % margin between the two major party candidates) and "trends" (How the state/county/city... etc) compares to the National/Statewide % margin.

Not trying to be condescending, just want to make sure everyone is discussing based upon the same data points.   

So, if we look at Macomb County Michigan (Famous example of "Reagan Democrats")

2008: (53.3 D- 44.7 R)        + 8.6 D
2012: (51.3 D- 47.3 R)        + 4.0 D      (+ 4.6% R Swing)
2016: (42.1 D- 53.6 R)        +11.5 R     (+15.5% R Swing!)

Oakland County, Michigan

2008: (56.4 D- 41.9 R)        +14.5 D
2012: (53.4 D- 45.4 R)        +  8.0 D     (+ 6.5% R Swing)
2016: (51.3 D- 43.2 R)        +  8.1 D     (+ 0.1% D Swing)

Both are widely considered "suburban counties" of Detroit...

So for the examples of "Southern" suburban states that you use, the suburban counties of the major Cities of Texas, as well as Metro-Atlanta, and Northern Virginia (NoVA) definitely swung towards the Democrats in '16.

Still, the juxtaposition of North/South is a bit off, since the Suburban counties close to Philly swung towards HRC, as did Westchester County NY, and Bergen County NJ.

Maybe the real question is: "Why did suburban counties in Ohio (Delaware Co aside) and Michigan not swing towards HRC, compared to suburban counties elsewhere in the Country?"

In Pennsylvania, Hillary did do better around Philly (except for Bucks), but she did worse around the Pittsburg suburbs. But would counties such as Lancaster and Berks be considered suburban?  Because my numbers could be off otherwise. I should've put NJ as on par with what Romney got (he did better in the south, worse in the north of the state), but Trump did win long island, which hasn't been done since 1988 for a Republican. Overall, I still think he did better in the north than Romney, but worse in the south.

[Gay Republican]

This is something I noticed in the election results. Trump did far worse in the suburbs in Colorado, Texas, Georgia, Virginia, and marginally worse in North Carolina, Florida, and even South Carolina. But he did better with suburban voters in Ohio, Michigan, New York, New Jersey, and performed on performed on par in Pennsylvania. Can anyone explain why this shift occured?

Wait--- what?

I don't think Trump performed better among Northern suburban voters than among Southern suburban voters overall....

I believe there was a greater swing towards Trump among Upper-Income Southern suburban voters than among Northern suburban voters.

Maybe we should clarify what we mean by "suburban voters" so we can all discuss with a common understanding, as well as better/worse. Are we talking swings or overall Rep vote % / Margins?

Is the definition of suburban based upon Exit Polling or Census based MSA type statistics?

I mean compared to Romney. I couldn't fit it inside the title, so I had to stick with what I said. I'll add it to the OP.

Aaah... ok super6646, I think I get it now, and makes a bit more sense, if one compares it against Romney '12 numbers.

So in Atlas speak we have "swings" (Change in total % margin between the two major party candidates) and "trends" (How the state/county/city... etc) compares to the National/Statewide % margin.

Not trying to be condescending, just want to make sure everyone is discussing based upon the same data points.   

So, if we look at Macomb County Michigan (Famous example of "Reagan Democrats")

2008: (53.3 D- 44.7 R)        + 8.6 D
2012: (51.3 D- 47.3 R)        + 4.0 D      (+ 4.6% R Swing)
2016: (42.1 D- 53.6 R)        +11.5 R     (+15.5% R Swing!)

Oakland County, Michigan

2008: (56.4 D- 41.9 R)        +14.5 D
2012: (53.4 D- 45.4 R)        +  8.0 D     (+ 6.5% R Swing)
2016: (51.3 D- 43.2 R)        +  8.1 D     (+ 0.1% D Swing)

Both are widely considered "suburban counties" of Detroit...

So for the examples of "Southern" suburban states that you use, the suburban counties of the major Cities of Texas, as well as Metro-Atlanta, and Northern Virginia (NoVA) definitely swung towards the Democrats in '16.

Still, the juxtaposition of North/South is a bit off, since the Suburban counties close to Philly swung towards HRC, as did Westchester County NY, and Bergen County NJ.

Maybe the real question is: "Why did suburban counties in Ohio (Delaware Co aside) and Michigan not swing towards HRC, compared to suburban counties elsewhere in the Country?"

Because she spent five minutes there?

[Statilius the Epicurean]

Northern suburban voters respond more positively to racebaiting about crime than southern voters do.

[UWS]

Maybe he did worse in the south because of his past support to abortion and to Bill Clinton's gun control policies.

[Dr. Arch]

Northern suburban voters respond more positively to racebaiting about crime than southern voters do.

There's some evil irony behind all this.

[RINO Tom]

Because Northern suburbs are older than Souther ones, and most inner suburbs in the North more closely resemble the outskirts of Southern cities than they do inner suburbs in the South.

[Santander]

Northern suburban voters respond more positively to racebaiting about crime than southern voters do.

[RINO Tom]

Northern suburban voters respond more positively to racebaiting about crime than southern voters do.

Are you saying Trump, a candidate you proudly supported, engaged in face baiting?

[Santander]

Are you saying Trump, a candidate you proudly supported, engaged in face baiting?

Yes? So did every Republican candidate in the modern era?

[RINO Tom]

Are you saying Trump, a candidate you proudly supported, engaged in race baiting?

Yes? So did every Republican candidate in the modern era?

Disagree.  And why draw the line at "modern"?  If you think Mitt Romney engaged in race baiting, so did Eisenhower, Coolidge and Teddy Roosevelt.

[TheSaint250]

Are you saying Trump, a candidate you proudly supported, engaged in face baiting?

Yes? So did every Republican candidate in the modern era?

First of all: false.
Second of all: why would you support someone who you believe is a race-baiter?

[Tekken_Guy]

The northern suburbs tend to be more blue collar than the southern ones.