Twenty Years

[Grad Students are the Worst]

Swing since 1988, in progress:

[Tender Branson]

Dukakis did really well in some of the Western/Plain states.

But it should be interesting if your map extends to the Northeast/Mid-Atlantic-Coast ...

[Husker]

Dukakis did somewhat better than normal in states like IA, SD, KS, NE, ND because of the terrible drought that summer and because of the farm crisis. Thus, a republican trend in these areas might be skewed a bit. Nevertheless, I look forward to seeing results from the entire U.S.

Any chance you could do this for 1976? :-)

[Sibboleth]

A good idea, though people should be careful what they draw out from this sort of comparison.

[Bro-mentum]

This is looking pretty damn rad so far.. Great stuff

[Vasall des Midas]

1988 is not a very good year to compare anything with. Sorry.

[Sibboleth]

1988 is not a very good year to compare anything with. Sorry.

As there's a good chance that 2008 won't be either, maybe they fit

[NOVA Green]

1988 is not a very good year to compare anything with. Sorry.

As there's a good chance that 2008 won't be either, maybe they fit

This may well be the case on both counts.

However this does demonstrate some longer term structural trends throughout the West....

Shift of suburban West Coast regions to the Democratic Party in Seattle, Portland, SF, and metro LA. Also, shifts around the urban centers of the SouthWest in CO, NV and NM, are likely to last. We'll see how Phoenix trends over the next few cycles, but obviously '08 was an anomoly.

Trends against the Dems in some of the natural resource counties of OR, WA, and CA shows, as well as the ranching and mining areas of the Mountain West. The jury is still out on some of the more urban areas in MT, and I think the Eastern Plains trend towards the Dems is likely temporary.... the map would look even redder if it wasn't '88, when Dukakis did exceptionally well in this region for reasons previously mentioned.

I think this map does have some validity, but it is important to point out trends that are real, versus trends that are more transitory.

[Grad Students are the Worst]

Update

[Grad Students are the Worst]

National map (a good indicator of the flaws going on here, but also the patterns):

[bgwah]

1988 is not a very good year to compare anything with. Sorry.

And what would be?

[NOVA Green]

Update

Trending looking pretty strong in NE.... especially NH & ME of course.

MN suburban swing looks sustainable as well.

[Grad Students are the Worst]

I wonder if anyone has a good explanation for the swing around NE Iowa/SE Minnesota (Rochester and surroundings) -- I also wonder whether it extends into Wisconsin.

[NOVA Green]

I wonder if anyone has a good explanation for the swing around NE Iowa/SE Minnesota (Rochester and surroundings) -- I also wonder whether it extends into Wisconsin.

I'm not totally sure, but I seem to recall Dukakis not doing as well in SE MN, and NE IA as the other regions of both states.

Maybe the drought didn't extend as far, or average farm size wasn't as optimal as in some regions of both states?

[Lief]

Is this equalized for national margin? Because the national swing between 1988 and 2008 is like 15 points.

[Husker]

I wonder if anyone has a good explanation for the swing around NE Iowa/SE Minnesota (Rochester and surroundings) -- I also wonder whether it extends into Wisconsin.

I'm not totally sure, but I seem to recall Dukakis not doing as well in SE MN, and NE IA as the other regions of both states.

Maybe the drought didn't extend as far, or average farm size wasn't as optimal as in some regions of both states?

No, the drought was bad there too. The swing looks stronger there primarily because Bush Sr. did a little better in that part of IA and MN and because Obama did much better than Dukakis (which is stating the obvious). It's also possible that there were less foreclosures on farms in that area or maybe the democratic party just didn't have as strong of a presence there.

[Husker]

1988 is not a very good year to compare anything with. Sorry.

As there's a good chance that 2008 won't be either, maybe they fit

This may well be the case on both counts.

However this does demonstrate some longer term structural trends throughout the West....

Shift of suburban West Coast regions to the Democratic Party in Seattle, Portland, SF, and metro LA. Also, shifts around the urban centers of the SouthWest in CO, NV and NM, are likely to last. We'll see how Phoenix trends over the next few cycles, but obviously '08 was an anomoly.

Trends against the Dems in some of the natural resource counties of OR, WA, and CA shows, as well as the ranching and mining areas of the Mountain West. The jury is still out on some of the more urban areas in MT, and I think the Eastern Plains trend towards the Dems is likely temporary.... the map would look even redder if it wasn't '88, when Dukakis did exceptionally well in this region for reasons previously mentioned.

I think this map does have some validity, but it is important to point out trends that are real, versus trends that are more transitory.

Actually I think we will see the western Corn Belt (eastern Plains) become more competitive in upcoming elections. I attribute some of the democratic problems there to the lack of attention the democratic party has shown in recent decades. Actually the swing toward dems in this region was somewhat remarkable given that the economy isn't all that bad in this area and given that labor unions are a non-factor (unlike eastern IA, IL, WI, MN, and MI). I know many people who voted democrat for their first time this election cycle and as long as the republican party stays somewhat far to the right, they will look elsewhere. Yes republicans have dominated this region for many, many years but it historically it was a blend of moderate and conservative republicans. With the continued push to the right by the GOP, many moderates in this area finally have had enough and are looking at other options.

[nclib]

It is interesting how Idaho swung Democratic while a solid majority of its counties swung Republican.

[So the Heroes Fall]

Rochester is rapidly trending Dem. As the city grows it attracts more Democrats, and also the Religious Right is scaring off more moderate Republicans.

[pbrower2a]

So far it looks as if urbanization favors the Democrats -- because suburbanization is a form of urbanization.  Suburbia needs much the same services as do big cities to make them livable: expressways, schools, sewers... and those aren't cheap. Suburbanites used to distinguish themselves from urban Democrats by voting Republican; that is over. 

Areas of farming, ranching, lumbering,  and resource extraction? Different story. Some might have been predominantly Democratic because of old patterns of settlement -- but that is over.

[memphis]

Suburbanites used to distinguish themselves from urban Democrats by voting Republican; that is over. 

Cities are still much more consistantly more Democratic than their suburbs. There has merely been some softenting in the suburbs.

[Verily]

Suburbanites used to distinguish themselves from urban Democrats by voting Republican; that is over. 

Cities are still much more consistantly more Democratic than their suburbs. There has merely been some softenting in the suburbs.

And only in places where other overriding factors--race, in particular--do not have an impact.

It is interesting how Idaho swung Democratic while a solid majority of its counties swung Republican.

Everyone in Idaho lives in Ada County

[Sibboleth]

It's also worth pointing out that electoral history didn't begin in 1980 or 1984. HHH came pretty close to taking (by way of example) Nassau county. Suburban voting patterns are far more volatile than we like to think.

[Husker]

Any chance we could see the complete U.S. map Alcon?