mississippi and massachusetts

[WalterMitty]

will they ever vote the same way in a presidential election again?

[bullmoose88]

They *could* for a guy like McCain...but it would take a break down of party loyalty.

[Beet]

yes. the same melodramatic question could have been asked in 1908-- with more conviction,too.

[WalterMitty]

they did vote the same for 3 elections in a row not too terribly long ago 1976-84.

[dazzleman]

they did vote the same for 3 elections in a row not too terribly long ago 1976-84.

They did for a long time, during the Roosevelt-Truman eras.  That was the time when northern liberals were aligned de-facto with southern rejectionists.

1976 was the last gasp of that old political alignment, revived one last time by the southern support for Jimmy Carter for the superficial reason of his roots there.  Today, though, if Jimmy Carter ever ran again, he'd have his a&$ handed to him in the south.

1980 and 1984 were in an intermediate phase of the realignment, when Democrats had driven away a lot of their old support, but Republicans still held on to much of their old support, which would start becoming Democratic after the end of the Cold War.

Under the current political alignment, it's hard to imagine those two states voting the same.  But the one constant in life is change, and it is very likely that at some time in the future, when another political realignment takes place, these two states could once again find themselves on the same side politically.

[7,052,770]

If Ray Mabus were to upset Barbour next year and then run for president in 2012 (during his first term in the 80's he was rumored to have presidential ambitions), it could happen.

That's the most plausible scenario I can think of.

[MaC]

when Harry wins the presidency

[© tweed]

will they ever vote the same way in a presidential election again?

The word "ever" covers a long period of time (unless Jesus or that Imam beams down soon) so they probably will at least once until the world ends, Mitty.

[merseysider]

I very much doubt it, unless there's a 'Reagan 84' type election where the R's sweep everything in sight.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

They *could* for a guy like McCain...but it would take a break down of party loyalty.

McCain wouldn't win Massachusetts. He's a crazy who is against abortion even in the case of rape or incest. He just plays a maverick on TV, he's no maverick. Feingold is the maverick Senator.

[adam]

They *could* for a guy like McCain...but it would take a break down of party loyalty.

McCain wouldn't win Massachusetts. He's a crazy who is against abortion even in the case of rape or incest. He just plays a maverick on TV, he's no maverick. Feingold is the maverick Senator.

http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Russell_Feingold.htm

What is so maverick like about him? He fits the mold of your basic northern liberal.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

They *could* for a guy like McCain...but it would take a break down of party loyalty.

McCain wouldn't win Massachusetts. He's a crazy who is against abortion even in the case of rape or incest. He just plays a maverick on TV, he's no maverick. Feingold is the maverick Senator.

http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Russell_Feingold.htm

What is so maverick like about him? He fits the mold of your basic northern liberal.

He's on the losing side of a lot of 99-1 votes. His votes seem more principled than other liberals.

[adam]

They *could* for a guy like McCain...but it would take a break down of party loyalty.

McCain wouldn't win Massachusetts. He's a crazy who is against abortion even in the case of rape or incest. He just plays a maverick on TV, he's no maverick. Feingold is the maverick Senator.

http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Russell_Feingold.htm

What is so maverick like about him? He fits the mold of your basic northern liberal.

He's on the losing side of a lot of 99-1 votes. His votes seem more principled than other liberals.

I fail to make the connection between being the odd man out and being principled. Why is it that by being on the losing end of a 99-1 vote can be counted as a positive? This would imply that even BARBARA BOXER voted on the side opposite of Feingold. Why is it that Feingold could be considered a "Maverick" rather than an obstructionist?

[bullmoose88]

They *could* for a guy like McCain...but it would take a break down of party loyalty.

McCain wouldn't win Massachusetts. He's a crazy who is against abortion even in the case of rape or incest. He just plays a maverick on TV, he's no maverick. Feingold is the maverick Senator.

http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Russell_Feingold.htm

What is so maverick like about him? He fits the mold of your basic northern liberal.

He's on the losing side of a lot of 99-1 votes. His votes seem more principled than other liberals.

I fail to make the connection between being the odd man out and being principled. Why is it that by being on the losing end of a 99-1 vote can be counted as a positive? This would imply that even BARBARA BOXER voted on the side opposite of Feingold. Why is it that Feingold could be considered a "Maverick" rather than an obstructionist?

How much obstruction could the loser of a 99-1 vote cause?

His filabusters would be clotured, his hostile amendments shot down...

[opebo]

No, a McCain would definitely not cause this - in fact no normal political situation would cause MS and MA to vote together.

Only another sudden and severe economic collapse would do so.  In that case it would be easy to see starving Mississippians voting with starving Massachussets.

[Nym90]

1976 was the last gasp of that old political alignment, revived one last time by the southern support for Jimmy Carter for the superficial reason of his roots there.

Hmm, so much for your hatred of northern elitism towards the south. I guess that only applies when Democrats do it?

In all seriousness, I don't think it's fair to say the south was being superficial by voting for Carter, at least no more than to say they were voting for Bush for the superficial reason that he was from the south. In both cases, they voted for the candidate who they agreed with more. Ford wasn't very popular in 1976, and the south identified with Carter. Even in 1980 he did pretty well for a Democrat in the south, especially considering how poorly he did nationwide. This doesn't really show up easily on an electoral map since Reagan won so many southern states by narrow margins.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It shows up on the county map:

[opebo]

What shows up Al?

[Nym90]

What shows up Al?

The map he linked to is for the 1980 Presidential Election. I believe he's referring to how well Carter did in the south even that year, despite losing by a large margin nationally.

[Ban my account ffs!]

I'd vote for Russ Feingold in a heartbeat.  The man is trying hard to fill the spot that Paul Wellstone held, but that doesn't matter.  We need a lot more Paul Wellstones in congress.. not just because he was a good liberal, but because he was principled.  People could identify with him.. I think Russ Feingold could win the presidency, even against John McCain with enough oomph.

[WalterMitty]

a follow-up question would be:  if these two states vote the same in the near future, will it be for a democrat or a republican?

[RJ]

I believe Mississippi has a sizable portion of Democratic politicians at the state level. I'd say Democrat myself especially if there's a candidate with an economic agenda.

By the way, I think Mark Warner could have carried both of these states against more Republican candidates than you might think.

[7,052,770]

a follow-up question would be:  if these two states vote the same in the near future, will it be for a democrat or a republican?

If someone could inspire blacks to get off their asses and vote, Mississippi would be a swing state, thanks only to demographics, so I'm guessing Democratic.

Ray Mabus 2012 is the only possible (and that's a pretty unlikely scenario) that I can think of in the next few elections though.