Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 23, 2014, 07:06:14 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: True Federalist)
| | |-+  Anti-region states
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Anti-region states  (Read 7165 times)
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26581


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

View Profile
« on: January 24, 2004, 11:31:46 am »
Ignore

OK, there are certain states that seem to often go against their regions, regardless of pary preferences, like New Hampshire in the Northeast, Tennessee in the South, or Montana in the West.

Why would that be?




Logged

This place really has become a cesspool of degenerate whores...

Economic score: +0.9
Social score: -2.61

In MN for fantasy stuff, member of the most recently dissolved centrist party.
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26581


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

View Profile
« Reply #1 on: January 24, 2004, 11:37:00 am »
Ignore

New Hampshire was the only Northeastern state to vote for Bush in 2000 and Wilson in 1916. Together with Maine and Vermont it has often formed its own enclave, voting differently compared to the rest of the northeast.  
Logged

This place really has become a cesspool of degenerate whores...

Economic score: +0.9
Social score: -2.61

In MN for fantasy stuff, member of the most recently dissolved centrist party.
opebo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 47646


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: January 24, 2004, 12:47:33 pm »
Ignore

OK, there are certain states that seem to often go against their regions, regardless of pary preferences, like New Hampshire in the Northeast, Tennessee in the South, or Montana in the West.

Why would that be?


About this and your other thread - some states are just very similar to one another, like the Dakotas or Wyoming and Idaho.  Or Kansas and Nebraska.  In fact I should've thought all the above mentioned pretty much vote alike.  As far as states that don't fit their region, New Hampshire is the prime example.  It is the last refuge of the freedom-minded New England Republican.  I think this may be partly because Republicans have actually fled there from high-tax Massachusetts.  I don't think Tennessee really falls outside its reagion politically, its just less extreme - more like Arkansas or Louisana than Mississipi and Kentucky.  As for Montana, when did it break outof the usual Republican pattern?
Logged

The essence of democracy at its purest is a lynch mob

Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26581


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

View Profile
« Reply #3 on: January 24, 2004, 12:52:53 pm »
Ignore

OK, there are certain states that seem to often go against their regions, regardless of pary preferences, like New Hampshire in the Northeast, Tennessee in the South, or Montana in the West.

Why would that be?


About this and your other thread - some states are just very similar to one another, like the Dakotas or Wyoming and Idaho.  Or Kansas and Nebraska.  In fact I should've thought all the above mentioned pretty much vote alike.  As far as states that don't fit their region, New Hampshire is the prime example.  It is the last refuge of the freedom-minded New England Republican.  I think this may be partly because Republicans have actually fled there from high-tax Massachusetts.  I don't think Tennessee really falls outside its reagion politically, its just less extreme - more like Arkansas or Louisana than Mississipi and Kentucky.  As for Montana, when did it break outof the usual Republican pattern?

The last time was in 1992. Remember, i am taking a long term view, so the fact that Montana voted Dem from 1932-1948 means something here. It also voted Dem in 1900, 1912 and 1916. Overall, that means it gone Dem in 9 out of the last 26 elections. I hadn't checked carefully, I just had a feeling that Montana is less Republican than neighbouring states, but it wasn't as true as I thought.
Logged

This place really has become a cesspool of degenerate whores...

Economic score: +0.9
Social score: -2.61

In MN for fantasy stuff, member of the most recently dissolved centrist party.
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26581


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

View Profile
« Reply #4 on: January 24, 2004, 12:54:58 pm »
Ignore

Bush won Idaho and Wyoming 67-27, but Montana was "only" 58-33, so it seems a little different than other similar states. But it isn't that good an example, I agree, there is probably a better one somewhere.
Logged

This place really has become a cesspool of degenerate whores...

Economic score: +0.9
Social score: -2.61

In MN for fantasy stuff, member of the most recently dissolved centrist party.
opebo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 47646


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: January 24, 2004, 01:24:33 pm »
Ignore

Bush won Idaho and Wyoming 67-27, but Montana was "only" 58-33, so it seems a little different than other similar states. But it isn't that good an example, I agree, there is probably a better one somewhere.

Yeah Montana is a little less conservative than Idaho-Wyoming-Utah.  
Logged

The essence of democracy at its purest is a lynch mob

Comrade Sibboleth
Realpolitik
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 55486
Saint Helena


View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: January 24, 2004, 01:28:51 pm »
Ignore

...Although that's not very difficult...
Logged



Richard Hoggart 1918-2014
Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon
htmldon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8847
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.03, S: -2.26

View Profile
« Reply #7 on: January 24, 2004, 01:58:12 pm »
Ignore

The problem in Montana is the Missoula area.

Bush won Idaho and Wyoming 67-27, but Montana was "only" 58-33, so it seems a little different than other similar states. But it isn't that good an example, I agree, there is probably a better one somewhere.

Yeah Montana is a little less conservative than Idaho-Wyoming-Utah.  
Logged
opebo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 47646


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: January 24, 2004, 02:03:14 pm »
Ignore

The problem in Montana is the Missoula area.

Bush won Idaho and Wyoming 67-27, but Montana was "only" 58-33, so it seems a little different than other similar states. But it isn't that good an example, I agree, there is probably a better one somewhere.

Yeah Montana is a little less conservative than Idaho-Wyoming-Utah.  

Is that where you find Hollywood liberals buying ranch land like Robert Redford, etc.?
Logged

The essence of democracy at its purest is a lynch mob

12th Doctor
supersoulty
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20702
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: 1.38, S: -1.74

View Profile
« Reply #9 on: January 24, 2004, 02:03:23 pm »
Ignore

Bush won Idaho and Wyoming 67-27, but Montana was "only" 58-33, so it seems a little different than other similar states. But it isn't that good an example, I agree, there is probably a better one somewhere.

Yeah Montana is a little less conservative than Idaho-Wyoming-Utah.  

That could be because more of it's population is consentrated closer to Canada.  Just a thought.
Logged

zorkpolitics
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1032
United States


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: January 24, 2004, 05:28:09 pm »
Ignore

OK, there are certain states that seem to often go against their regions, regardless of pary preferences, like New Hampshire in the Northeast, Tennessee in the South, or Montana in the West.

Why would that be?

Regardless of why, these examples show that the US still is a federal republic, a collection of different states.   In my opnion, this provides a reasonable rationale to continue with the current method of electing a President.  An electoral college that requires the winner to win many different states, rather than go to a popular vote winner in a single national election .
Logged

"Scientists are treacherous allies on committees, for they are apt to change their minds in response to arguments" C.M. Bowra

The only way to reverse the failed polices of the past is OMG: Obama Must Go!
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26581


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

View Profile
« Reply #11 on: January 24, 2004, 06:28:03 pm »
Ignore

OK, there are certain states that seem to often go against their regions, regardless of pary preferences, like New Hampshire in the Northeast, Tennessee in the South, or Montana in the West.

Why would that be?

Regardless of why, these examples show that the US still is a federal republic, a collection of different states.   In my opnion, this provides a reasonable rationale to continue with the current method of electing a President.  An electoral college that requires the winner to win many different states, rather than go to a popular vote winner in a single national election .

Lol...this is my thread, I don't want it to turn into a debate on the EC... Sad
Logged

This place really has become a cesspool of degenerate whores...

Economic score: +0.9
Social score: -2.61

In MN for fantasy stuff, member of the most recently dissolved centrist party.
farewell
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58527
India


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: January 24, 2004, 10:01:31 pm »
Ignore

Bush won Idaho and Wyoming 67-27, but Montana was "only" 58-33, so it seems a little different than other similar states. But it isn't that good an example, I agree, there is probably a better one somewhere.

Yeah Montana is a little less conservative than Idaho-Wyoming-Utah.  

That could be because more of it's population is consentrated closer to Canada.  Just a thought.
It could also be because of the very high Native American population. Three of the five counties Gore carried there are Native American areas. The others are actually in the decaying, ex-mining Butte area, not the Missoula area as claimed elsewhere.
Oh, and rich liberal areas being the most Dem places is true in Idaho (that county Gore carries there is Sun Valley) and Wyoming, but not as far as I can see in Montana.
Logged

I may conceivably reconsider.

Knowing me it's more likely than not.
Comrade Sibboleth
Realpolitik
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 55486
Saint Helena


View Profile WWW
« Reply #13 on: January 25, 2004, 01:50:46 pm »
Ignore

There are two counties in the Butte area that have voted Democrat since... ever as far as I can tell...
Logged



Richard Hoggart 1918-2014
Huckleberry Finn
Finn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1821


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: February 07, 2004, 05:40:40 pm »
Ignore

I comprehend Indiana as anti-region state. It is only state in Rustbelt where Republicans are very strong.   They have won every presidential election since 1968 and Bush got there almost 57 percent of vote.

Indiana's democratic senator Evan Bayh is fairly conservative also.
Logged

I live in Finland. I vote Conservatives (National Coalition Party) in Finnish elections, but consider myself as moderate Democrat in the USA.

In New York for the purpose of Fantasy Elections.
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26581


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

View Profile
« Reply #15 on: February 07, 2004, 06:00:59 pm »
Ignore

I comprehend Indiana as anti-region state. It is only state in Rustbelt where Republicans are very strong.   They have won every presidential election since 1968 and Bush got there almost 57 percent of vote.

Indiana's democratic senator Evan Bayh is fairly conservative also.

Yeah, in that sense, yes. But it's only b/c they're so strongly Republican. Why is that, btw? Why is Indiana so different?
Logged

This place really has become a cesspool of degenerate whores...

Economic score: +0.9
Social score: -2.61

In MN for fantasy stuff, member of the most recently dissolved centrist party.
Huckleberry Finn
Finn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1821


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: February 07, 2004, 06:58:40 pm »
Ignore

Evan Bayh is of course tactician-conservative, at least partly.
Logged

I live in Finland. I vote Conservatives (National Coalition Party) in Finnish elections, but consider myself as moderate Democrat in the USA.

In New York for the purpose of Fantasy Elections.
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35356
United States
View Profile
« Reply #17 on: February 08, 2004, 08:24:59 am »
Ignore

New Hampshire is a good one.
Logged
dazzleman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13821
Political Matrix
E: 1.88, S: 1.59

View Profile
« Reply #18 on: February 08, 2004, 11:59:04 am »
Ignore

New Hampshire actually has a much shorter history as an anti-region state than Indiana.  Indiana has voted consistenly Republican for the entire post-WW II period except for 1964.

New Hampshire used to vote in a similar manner to Vermont and Maine, but has not become as liberal as Vermont and Maine as quickly.  But it appears to be moving in that direction, so I don't know how much longer it can be continued an anti-region state.
Logged
Ethelberth
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1217
Suriname


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: February 10, 2004, 06:27:54 am »
Ignore

I have understood that Montana belongs still more to same group with WA and OR.  It is more German - Scandinavian than for exmple ID, UT and WY.  The Montana has had democrat congressmen and senators.
Logged
opebo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 47646


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: February 10, 2004, 10:12:11 am »
Ignore

Indiana is fairly unique, but then again it is very similar to western/central Ohio, Kentucky to the south, and IL outside Chicago.  In other words it is typical of broad swathes of the 'rustbelt', it just lacks other more democrat leaning aspects.  Btw I dislike the term rustbelt - I think its outdated as those industries are so outdated they rusted away years ago and have little relevance to the area today.  On the other hand has anyone else heard about the boom in the steel industry worldwide due to the enormous demand in China?
Logged

The essence of democracy at its purest is a lynch mob

Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26581


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

View Profile
« Reply #21 on: February 10, 2004, 12:20:21 pm »
Ignore

Indiana is fairly unique, but then again it is very similar to western/central Ohio, Kentucky to the south, and IL outside Chicago.  In other words it is typical of broad swathes of the 'rustbelt', it just lacks other more democrat leaning aspects.  Btw I dislike the term rustbelt - I think its outdated as those industries are so outdated they rusted away years ago and have little relevance to the area today.  On the other hand has anyone else heard about the boom in the steel industry worldwide due to the enormous demand in China?

The Swedish steel industry is doing pretty well I think...before the EU-US trade wars at least... Sad
Logged

This place really has become a cesspool of degenerate whores...

Economic score: +0.9
Social score: -2.61

In MN for fantasy stuff, member of the most recently dissolved centrist party.
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines