Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 31, 2014, 04:58:10 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  U.S. Presidential Election Results
| | |-+  2008 U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: True Federalist)
| | | |-+  Why is/was President Obama so amazingly popular in Vermont?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Print
Author Topic: Why is/was President Obama so amazingly popular in Vermont?  (Read 7321 times)
Senator Libertas
Libertas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14781
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -7.48, S: -9.22

View Profile
« Reply #25 on: September 28, 2010, 02:08:27 pm »
Ignore

I still think it was social issues that swung VT to the Dems since 1992.

The main point is there : Vermont isn't a Dem State since 1992, but instead since 1980, when Reagan barely won the State while sweeping the country. Since then, Democrats have always done better there than nationwide. If its clear that the trend intensified in the 1990s, 1992 ceartainly isn't the tipping point.

Uh, yeah, Reagan won Vermont by a larger margin than he won many Southern states, so your argument pretty much fails. John Anderson's voters weren't going to vote for Carter.
Logged
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31252
France


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -4.87

P P P

View Profile
« Reply #26 on: September 29, 2010, 08:42:06 am »
Ignore

Uh, yeah, Reagan won Vermont by a larger margin than he won many Southern states, so your argument pretty much fails.

How the fact that Southern States were closer than Vermont has anything to do with my point exactly


Quote
John Anderson's voters weren't going to vote for Carter.

1. They certainly weren't going to vote massively for Carter, but certainly a fair share of them would have.
2. If you notice, Anderson's voting patterns are quite similar to those of the democrats today, so the fact he was so strong in VT is also a kind of hint of it becoming a democratic State.
Logged

Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

It really is.



"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
Sibboleth
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 56867
Saint Helena


View Profile WWW
« Reply #27 on: September 29, 2010, 09:13:52 am »
Ignore

2. If you notice, Anderson's voting patterns are quite similar to those of the democrats today

Not really. It's more that they correlate with the distribution patterns of certain parts of the electorate that have swung heavily to the Democrats in recent decades.
Logged

"I have become entangled in my own data, and my conclusion stands in direct contradiction to the initial idea from which I started. Proceeding from unlimited freedom, I end with unlimited despotism. I will add, however, that there can be no solution of the social formula except mine."
RIP Robert H Bork
officepark
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9466
Czech Republic


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: September 29, 2010, 07:51:04 pm »
Ignore

1. They certainly weren't going to vote massively for Carter, but certainly a fair share of them would have.
2. If you notice, Anderson's voting patterns are quite similar to those of the democrats today, so the fact he was so strong in VT is also a kind of hint of it becoming a democratic State.

I'm assuming Anderson's votes would have split evenly between Reagan and Carter, in which case Reagan would still have won by a 6 point margin, which is pretty good (considering the South was closer)

Tongue

In fact, Carter needed over 2/3rds of the Anderson vote to win Vermont, and I think that's pretty generous to Carter, even for such modern Democratic states like Vermont.
Logged

Clearly the solution is to privatize presidential elections.

So, in less than four years, get excited for the 2016 MetLife Financial U Pick The Prez Extravaganza. If you tweet a picture of your completed ballot with the hashtag #ivoted, you could win a trip for two to the inauguration or an iTunes gift card.
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31252
France


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -4.87

P P P

View Profile
« Reply #29 on: September 30, 2010, 02:58:32 am »
Ignore

1. They certainly weren't going to vote massively for Carter, but certainly a fair share of them would have.
2. If you notice, Anderson's voting patterns are quite similar to those of the democrats today, so the fact he was so strong in VT is also a kind of hint of it becoming a democratic State.
I'm assuming Anderson's votes would have split evenly between Reagan and Carter, in which case Reagan would still have won by a 6 point margin, which is pretty good (considering the South was closer)

That seems pretty reasonable indeed. Still, Reagan won by 10 points nationwide so that makes Vermont D+4. This was the second time (after 1964) that VT was more democratic than the country, and since this time it has always been so.
Logged

Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

It really is.



"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
Senator Libertas
Libertas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14781
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -7.48, S: -9.22

View Profile
« Reply #30 on: September 30, 2010, 03:11:53 am »
Ignore

1. They certainly weren't going to vote massively for Carter, but certainly a fair share of them would have.
2. If you notice, Anderson's voting patterns are quite similar to those of the democrats today, so the fact he was so strong in VT is also a kind of hint of it becoming a democratic State.

I'm assuming Anderson's votes would have split evenly between Reagan and Carter, in which case Reagan would still have won by a 6 point margin, which is pretty good (considering the South was closer)

Tongue

In fact, Carter needed over 2/3rds of the Anderson vote to win Vermont, and I think that's pretty generous to Carter, even for such modern Democratic states like Vermont.
It's unlikely that Carter, losing nationally by 10 points, would have done better than the 43.14% he got in Vermont in a winning election in 1976.

So even if you generously assume that there would be absolutely no swing away from the Democrats (highly unlikely), Carter should only have picked up about 4.73% from Anderson. Give the rest to Reagan, and Reagan narrowly outperforms Ford, winning Vermont by 11.4%.

Of course, considering that election was largely a referendum on Carter and his unpopularity, even giving him that much is probably too generous.


Antonio's claims fail on so many levels. You seriously didn't get how the Southern states' results totally undermined your "Vermont is Democratic since 1980 because Reagan barely won the State while sweeping the country" argument?
Logged
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31252
France


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -4.87

P P P

View Profile
« Reply #31 on: September 30, 2010, 03:26:31 am »
Ignore

Antonio's claims fail on so many levels. You seriously didn't get how the Southern states' results totally undermined your "Vermont is Democratic since 1980 because Reagan barely won the State while sweeping the country" argument?

No, I still fail to see how Vermont is anyhow related with the South and how you can use that to deduce that my argument is "undermined". However, I'm not surprised you claim that.
Logged

Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

It really is.



"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14143
Jamaica


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: September 30, 2010, 10:53:06 am »
Ignore

Antonio's claims fail on so many levels. You seriously didn't get how the Southern states' results totally undermined your "Vermont is Democratic since 1980 because Reagan barely won the State while sweeping the country" argument?

No, I still fail to see how Vermont is anyhow related with the South and how you can use that to deduce that my argument is "undermined". However, I'm not surprised you claim that.

I think what Libertas argument is that the margins in some of the Southern states were a bit too close for comfort while the margin in Vermont was by a bit more comfortable of a margin (between Carter and Reagan) undermines your thesis statement that "Vermont is Democratic since 1980 because Reagan barely won the state while sweeping the country".
I mean I really don't like Libertas abrasive style Antonio, but I think he kind of has a point here.  Reagan did win Vermont by almost 6% over Carter, I wouldn't call a victory margin of six points "barely winning" the state.  Sure, Reagan won more nationally than he did in the state, but SIX PERCENTAGE POINTS and 12,700 votes or so over your opponent in a state with a population a little bit above 500,000 is not "barely winning it".  I believe the correct wording would be that "Since 1980 the traditionally Republican state of Vermont has been shifting Democratic", to imply it was a Democratic state since 1980 is a bit well misleading.  And although Reagan was conservative, I can't see Vermont shifting towards the Southerner Carter, especially considering that the Election of 1980 was pretty much a referendum on Carter.  I hate to throw demographics in here, but somehow I doubt a New England state would decide to vote for the unpopular Southern incumbent in 1980 without the presence of Anderson.  Just because moderate Republicans disagreed with Reagan doesn't mean that they would jump ship and support the unpopular Democratic President Jimmy Carter.
Just a few thoughts, don't get mad.
Logged



17:20   bore   the point of atlasia is to achieve things which you can then use as pick up lines
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31252
France


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -4.87

P P P

View Profile
« Reply #33 on: September 30, 2010, 01:13:53 pm »
Ignore

Probably "barely" wasn't the right word, but my point remains.

Everybody can make any conjecture on what the results have been if Anderson hadn't run. It would be stupid to think Reagan would have won 59/38, and equally stupid to think it would have been a 53/44 Carter win. Besides that, almost everything is possible.

Now the point is that he ran, that the election ended up the way it ended up, and that Reagan's margin of victory was 6 against 10 for the country overall. Draw the conclusion you want to draw, but whether you like it or not, Vermont was a democratic State in 1980 relatively speaking. This is math.
Logged

Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

It really is.



"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
Senator Libertas
Libertas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14781
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -7.48, S: -9.22

View Profile
« Reply #34 on: September 30, 2010, 01:24:53 pm »
Ignore

Probably "barely" wasn't the right word, but my point remains.

Everybody can make any conjecture on what the results have been if Anderson hadn't run. It would be stupid to think Reagan would have won 59/38, and equally stupid to think it would have been a 53/44 Carter win. Besides that, almost everything is possible.

In no Northeastern state did Carter 1980 outperform or even match his 1976 performance. You are seriously arguing that without Anderson, Carter would have lost none of the 43% of the vote he got in 1976, despite a 12-point national swing away from the Dems?

The way you're arguing it sounds like you think Carter would have done even better than the 43% he got when he won nationally in 1976. There's just no reason to believe Vermont would have bucked the national trend that hard. Anderson voters were just as unhappy with the Carter administration as Reagan voters. They were more likely to vote for Reagan or just stay home than to vote for Carter.

Quote
Now the point is that he ran, that the election ended up the way it ended up, and that Reagan's margin of victory was 6 against 10 for the country overall. Draw the conclusion you want to draw, but whether you like it or not, Vermont was a democratic State in 1980 relatively speaking. This is math.

No, that's you deliberately misinterpreting math without putting things into context. Massachusetts and Washington D.C. trended Republican in 2008 relative to the national swing, I guess they're going to be GOP states now.

Logged
Jbrase
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5927
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.32, S: -5.74


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: October 01, 2010, 12:08:31 am »
Ignore

Probably "barely" wasn't the right word, but my point remains.

Everybody can make any conjecture on what the results have been if Anderson hadn't run. It would be stupid to think Reagan would have won 59/38, and equally stupid to think it would have been a 53/44 Carter win. Besides that, almost everything is possible.

Now the point is that he ran, that the election ended up the way it ended up, and that Reagan's margin of victory was 6 against 10 for the country overall. Draw the conclusion you want to draw, but whether you like it or not, Vermont was a democratic State in 1980 relatively speaking. This is math.
Ok, by your logic, Ohio, Indiana, North Carolina, Virginia, and Florida were Republican in 2008, relatively speaking?
« Last Edit: October 01, 2010, 12:17:53 am by Jbrase »Logged
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31252
France


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -4.87

P P P

View Profile
« Reply #36 on: October 01, 2010, 07:31:06 am »
Ignore

In no Northeastern state did Carter 1980 outperform or even match his 1976 performance.

Indeed, how comes Vermont was the only State swinging to Carter in 1980 despite Anderson got similar scores in several other State ?


Quote
You are seriously arguing that without Anderson, Carter would have lost none of the 43% of the vote he got in 1976, despite a 12-point national swing away from the Dems?

That's actually quite likely considering he would need to get only a third of Anderson voters. I don't know why you are so obstinated in considering that 100% of Anderson voters would have backed Reagan, but that's pretty ridiculous.
 

Quote
No, that's you deliberately misinterpreting math without putting things into context. Massachusetts and Washington D.C. trended Republican in 2008 relative to the national swing, I guess they're going to be GOP states now.

The one who is unable to understand the difference between a trend and a relative margin, the one who (voluntarily or not) misinterprets my reasoning, is you.


Ok, by your logic, Ohio, Indiana, North Carolina, Virginia, and Florida were Republican in 2008, relatively speaking?

Of course they were. You disagree ?
Logged

Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

It really is.



"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
Senator Libertas
Libertas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14781
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -7.48, S: -9.22

View Profile
« Reply #37 on: October 01, 2010, 04:53:58 pm »
Ignore

In no Northeastern state did Carter 1980 outperform or even match his 1976 performance.

Indeed, how comes Vermont was the only State swinging to Carter in 1980 despite Anderson got similar scores in several other State ?

You have to put statistics into context. Carter lost Vermont by double digits in 1976. That same election he won Massachusetts and Rhode Island, came very close in Maine, and fairly close in Connecticut. Obviously it's going to be a lot easier to cause a swing in Vermont with a candidate splitting the GOP vote. The Republican Party lost votes, but they didn't go to the Democrats. It didn't "swing to Carter".

You can't just look at a swing map and immediately draw conclusions. Every state is red on the 1976 swing map, but that wasn't because Carter was an excessively popular candidate.


Also it's worth noting that Vermont was still Carter's worst state in the Northeast in terms of vote share.

(Excepting New Hampshire, of course, which is not really comparable considering it's voting patterns have a long history of being at odds with the rest of New England.)

Quote
That's actually quite likely considering he would need to get only a third of Anderson voters. I don't know why you are so obstinated in considering that 100% of Anderson voters would have backed Reagan, but that's pretty ridiculous.
The question isn't whether they would have backed Reagan. The question is whether they would have voted for Carter. And the answer to that question is no.

You still have yet to put forth a compelling argument as to why Vermont would go against a 12 point national swing and give overwhelmingly unpopular Southern incumbent Carter a higher share of the vote than the 43% they gave him in 1976.
Logged
They call me PR
Progressive Realist
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5484
United States


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: October 25, 2010, 05:52:33 pm »
Ignore

Vermont is part latte liberal, part dairy farmer, part college town, with a few industrial areas like Burlington etc. So it's really an ideal Democratic state, except for the fact that there are relatively few minorities there.
Logged
shua
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11737
Russian Federation


View Profile WWW
« Reply #39 on: October 26, 2010, 07:51:07 am »
Ignore

Vermont is part latte liberal, part dairy farmer, part college town, with a few industrial areas like Burlington etc. So it's really an ideal Democratic state, except for the fact that there are relatively few minorities there.
why would a dairy farmer be more inclined to vote Democrat?
Logged

Nhoj
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6010
United States


View Profile
« Reply #40 on: November 06, 2010, 12:01:44 pm »
Ignore

Vermont is part latte liberal, part dairy farmer, part college town, with a few industrial areas like Burlington etc. So it's really an ideal Democratic state, except for the fact that there are relatively few minorities there.
why would a dairy farmer be more inclined to vote Democrat?
Why would one be inclined to vote republican? But to answer milk subsidies and other farm subsidies.
Logged

آزادی برای ایران


Vepres
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8103
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.26, S: -7.39

View Profile
« Reply #41 on: November 06, 2010, 12:31:23 pm »
Ignore

Vermont is part latte liberal, part dairy farmer, part college town, with a few industrial areas like Burlington etc. So it's really an ideal Democratic state, except for the fact that there are relatively few minorities there.
why would a dairy farmer be more inclined to vote Democrat?
Why would one be inclined to vote republican? But to answer milk subsidies and other farm subsidies.

How does that explain states like Nebraska, then. After all, on the state level you pretty much have to support farm subsidies to win there, from what I hear, but they also voted for emphatically anti-farm subsidies McCain.
Logged

LOL, Failure

Alright, if Republicans gain less than 75 seats, I'll prominently display my failure in my signature.
Nhoj
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6010
United States


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: November 06, 2010, 01:05:47 pm »
Ignore

Vermont is part latte liberal, part dairy farmer, part college town, with a few industrial areas like Burlington etc. So it's really an ideal Democratic state, except for the fact that there are relatively few minorities there.
why would a dairy farmer be more inclined to vote Democrat?
Why would one be inclined to vote republican? But to answer milk subsidies and other farm subsidies.

How does that explain states like Nebraska, then. After all, on the state level you pretty much have to support farm subsidies to win there, from what I hear, but they also voted for emphatically anti-farm subsidies McCain.
Well they do elect ben nelson. But i wasnt saying that farmers in general vote dem just that one reason why they do is indeed subsidies, of course in vermont reasons maybe just old political traditions of being more liberal on many things as the reason. Also for what its worth i see more democratic signs at farms in my area, well non farm homes in the country side seem more republican.
Logged

آزادی برای ایران


Sibboleth
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 56867
Saint Helena


View Profile WWW
« Reply #43 on: November 08, 2010, 05:05:12 pm »
Ignore

Most people who live in the countryside aren't farmers! I've often wondered if the sort of industrial dairying you see in the U.S creates a small rural proletariat that votes in the logical direction, given subsidies etc.
Logged

"I have become entangled in my own data, and my conclusion stands in direct contradiction to the initial idea from which I started. Proceeding from unlimited freedom, I end with unlimited despotism. I will add, however, that there can be no solution of the social formula except mine."
timothyinMD
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 441


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: March 26, 2011, 03:00:53 pm »
Ignore

Vermont is also 98% white. Voting for a black is exotic and makes Vermonters feel all warm and fuzzy and tolerant.

Yes but Vermont whites are neo-hippie liberals.  That's the difference. 
Logged
They call me PR
Progressive Realist
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5484
United States


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: March 29, 2011, 07:34:29 pm »
Ignore

Most people who live in the countryside aren't farmers! I've often wondered if the sort of industrial dairying you see in the U.S creates a small rural proletariat that votes in the logical direction, given subsidies etc.


Yeah, that would apply to Wisconsin as well.

Keep in mind, though..many of Vermont's  modern rural voters are certainly NOT proletariat. Tongue
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines