US with French parties

[Hashemite]

Ohio

Cincinnati-Dayton and suburbs

The city itself would obviously be Socialist, with its large black population and also more recently due to the gentrification of PS support. The UDF would have polled well in the past with German Catholics in the city, probably; and the UMP might poll 'decently' in the city compared to other major centres in the US.

Dayton would be a Socialist stronghold, an old one, with its blue-collar population and large black population.

The suburbs of both would be overwhelmingly UMP, but more rural disadvantaged places like Pike and Scioto County might lean Socialist, with an important FN vote (or maybe MPF).

Corn Belt

Solidly right-wing (UMP) territory, obviously. Odd outcrops of MPF protest votes once in a blue moon, and some Socialist strength in small college towns and that sort of stuff.

Rust Belt, Toledo and Cleveland

Solid PS area. Toledo and Cleveland are major Socialist strongholds in the region, with the cities' very important blue-collar working-class population - and in Cleveland's case - important black population - providing the base of the PS vote. There would be UMP strength in some rural areas as well as the most conservative and affluent suburbs of Toledo, Akron and Cleveland (Geauga County and parts of the 14th CD). Obviously, a good number of more liberal and racially diverse suburbs would lean PS (and Green in the Euros), and the PS machine in Cleveland would be exceptionally strong.

Further south, old steel mills in the Mahoning Valley would be solidly PS, but I suspect economically disadvantaged areas might see a large PCF or FN vote.

Ohio Valley and Appalachian Ohio

A generally Socialist area, though with a growing UMP base due to population decline in places like Canton in rural areas. Old coal mining and manufacturing areas in the Ohio Valley would be solidly Socialist, but a candidate like Sarkozy would play extremely well in these parts (in 2007) but the FN would be a very important factor here in 2002 and again in 2009/2010.

Athens County would be a PS stronghold in most elections, but unlike other PS areas in the region. It would also have voted Green in 2009.

Columbus and Central Ohio

Columbus itself is solidly Socialist, though not to the extent a city like, say, Cleveland, would be. The Greens would have polled well in the city in 2009, probably not win it due to a significant black population which would probably still have voted PS. But yeah, liberal white-collar workers and some blacks provide a strong PS lean, though the former demographic would be a 'swing' demographic but would have voted solidly against Sarko in 2007.

Suburbia is obviously solidly UMP and most rural areas in Central OH would be too. However, there might be PS support in some blue-collar cities and counties here and there.

Overall, Ohio would still be a swing state, but I suspect Royal would have managed a narrow win due to higher-than-average PS support in some suburban areas and inner city areas, which would probably offset Sarko's good performances in the Ohio Valley's industrial areas.

[big bad fab]

See, Xahar, it begins to be really fun: OH for Royal, while PA for Sarkozy !

A really great one, Hash, and not many things to add.

Maybe it's in Ohio rather than in KY that I may be able to find all the wings of the PS:
- Emmanuelli and Hamon in the Rust Belt and Dayton
- Aubry in Cincinnati
- Hollande in the Corn Belt ()
- DSK and Royal in Columbus.

Indiana will be fine to read !

[Χahar]

Indeed, I'm looking forward to Indiana.

[Californian Tony]

Yeah, it's back !
Please keep it up for sometime...

[Hashemite]

Indiana

Northwestern Indiana

Gary, East Chicago and all of the Rust Belt in NW Indiana is obviously a PS stronghold, and the historical base of the PS in Indiana. There might be some FN votes from white unemployed working-class voters, but it would not be anything extremely important.

The UMP would poll well in the wealthier suburbs and in more rural areas.

South Bend and Elkhart

South Bend would lean Socialist, due to its overall blue-collar ethnic nature and other surrounding blue-collar areas would also probably lean towards the PS. Elkhart is also rather blue-collar, but I suspect the Republican tradition there would carry over to the UMP. Sarkozy would have polled well in Elkhart, not so well in South Bend. In 2002, the FN would probably have carried the area in the first round. In 2009/2010, the UMP would be polling sh**t all over and specifically in areas with high unemployment - leading to a high FN and left-wing overall vote.

Fort Wayne and Corn Belt

Fort Wayne would be traditionally right-leaning, again because I suspect the Civil War Republicanism would carry over to the UMP and yadda yadda. The PS would be strong in blue-collar areas downtown, generally, but the city itself and the suburbs would be rather fertile ground for the UMP. Sarkozy would have polled very well here, even in traditionally PS areas. Now, in 2009/2010, the UMP's fall from grace here would be spectacular.

The Corn Belt is solidly UMP, fairly obviously. However, since its also fairly redneck-y type of place, the MPF would do well in some areas.

Manufacturing and/or union places like Muncie and Anderson would lean Socialist generally.

Indianapolis and suburbs

Indianapolis is a PS stronghold, though the PS' domination of the city would be more recent. The Greens would do well in more middle-class white-collar areas of the city, while black and older blue-collar areas would have be solidly Socialist. The PS would also be strong around Lafayette and West Lafayette in Tippecanoe County.

The suburbs are UMP to a level that is almost unhealthy.

Western Indiana and the Coalfields

Western Indiana would be a swing region split between UMP/MPF farming-rural areas and old Socialist bases in the old coalfield of western IN but most notably in Terre Haute and Evansville. Terre Haute, a traditionally populist area, might see some FN and PCF protest votes once in a while.

Evansville suburbia would obviously be solidly UMP.

Ohio Valley

Yet another swing area, though the traditionally blue-collar 'populist' nature would probably result in a traditionally Socialist lean though prone to massive swings as the area usually sees. However, the Ohio Valley is usually socially conservative, therefore there might be a strong FN vote in the past. Sarkozy would have polled above-average here in 2007.

Bloomington would be a lone outpost of unusual progressivism in the area, and, as a result would lean PS/Green.

I suspect Indiana would actually be traditionally PS ('old' PS) overall, but Sarkozy would have been a perfect candidate for the right in many PS areas in 2007 (in 2009, obviously, the UMP would be polling absolute crap). He would have carried it narrowly.

[Hashemite]

Michigan

Detroit and suburbs

Detroit, with its low-income black-majority population would obviously be a very strong Socialist stronghold. The UMP would poll well only in white affluent communities such as Grosse Pointe and whereabouts. I suspect there might be a strong FN vote in Detroit proper from the few whites there as a law-and-order and anti-black type of vote. Not that it matters, because the PS would have no trouble clearing 65-70% by the first round probably.

The PS would also be strong in the blue-collar auto manufacturing suburbs, though they might have been PCF areas not so long ago. They would also be strong traditionally in other blue-collar type cities (too many to list, you know them), or places like Dearborn with minorities. Ann Arbor, lastly, as well as Ypsilanti, would be reliably PS though maybe one of the few places in the general area to vote Green in 2009. In addition, the PS would have built up lasting strength in more affluent professional-liberal areas like the suburbs of Ann Arbor and Detroit, though most of that vote would have bled to the Greenies in 2009.

The UMP would have declined a lot in recent years, and would continue to do so now obviously. They would be limited to kinda rural areas and affluent white exurbs like Bloomfield Hills and places in Oakland and Macomb Counties.

Tri Cities and the Thumb

The Thumb itself, excluding the Tri Cities, would still lean UMP due to agriculture and some Detroit/Flint white exurbia propping up. However, Port Huron and the last outskirts of Macomb County would lean Socialist.

The Tri City area, poor (especially Flint) and blue-collar manufacturing type areas, would be old PS-PCF strongholds. I could very well see there being a lot of old PCF strength in manufacturing areas and crumbling inner-city places like Flint and Saginaw.

Mid-Michigan

Rural Mid-Michigan, as well as far-far affluent exurbia from Detroit and Flint, would be solidly UMP territory. Lansing, an old blue-collar area; East Lansing, a very liberal college-uni town; Battle Creek and Jackson would all be rather solidly Socialist.

Western Michigan

An overall UMP-leaning region, with a strong base in rural areas and good performances in Grand Rapids and its suburbs (though the city itself, legally, would still vote PS). Apart from the batsh**t crazy Dutch areas which would vote MPF if they could, the UMP would be rather moderate and the electorate wouldn't be very receptive to Sarkozy's populism in 2007, leading to a strong PS vote even in rural areas (except the Dutch loonies).

The only reliably PS areas of sort would be blue-collar Kalamazoo and Muskegon, as well as black Benton Harbor. Parts of Grand Rapids (downtown mostly) would also be rather safe PS.

Northern Michigan

A predominantly rural area, northern mainland Michigan would be relatively solid UMP territory, though again of a brand similar to the non-Dutch UMP vote in western Michigan. In addition, there may be a growing PS and Green vote in areas which get more tourists.

Upper Peninsula

The UP would be traditionally a Socialist-leaning area, due to logging and copper mining in an important part of the UP, but that strength, like in real life, would be quickly declining in favour of the right.

Historically, the Communists did well with Finnish people and loggers in part of the UP, so I suppose that could carry over to provide some old (but mostly evaporated) PCF support in the area.

Overall, Royal would have maintained the PS' traditional control of Michigan. Good showings by Sarkozy in blue-collar 'Reagan Democrat' places in Macomb County and the like would be cancelled out by lower-than-average performance in rural moderate centre-right Michigan, where Bayrou would have polled well in the first round despite the relative absence of Catholic strongholds.

[Χahar]

Given how well the CPUSA did in the Lake Superior region, I would think it would be very good for the PCF even today.

[Hashemite]

Given how well the CPUSA did in the Lake Superior region, I would think it would be very good for the PCF even today.

Strongholds don't last forever, especially those with that kind of evolving social and professional demographics.

[Californian Tony]

Really great. BTW, do you plan to make a 1st Round map ? I guess it would be even more interesting.

[Hashemite]

Really great. BTW, do you plan to make a 1st Round map ? I guess it would be even more interesting.

At first, I just color the map according to the runoff result, because it's easier for me to think in those terms at first, but after all is done, I'll post maps of 2007 first round, 2002 first round, 1995, 1988, 1981, 1974, 1969 and 1965...

[Californian Tony]

Really great. BTW, do you plan to make a 1st Round map ? I guess it would be even more interesting.

At first, I just color the map according to the runoff result, because it's easier for me to think in those terms at first, but after all is done, I'll post maps of 2007 first round, 2002 first round, 1995, 1988, 1981, 1974, 1969 and 1965...

Oh, well... sorry.
Great news anyways.

[big bad fab]

I'm really FOND of it.
Upper Peninsula was exquisite to read !

Illinois will be better than with US parties. Minnesota, Wisconsin (ah !) and Missouri will be very fine too, I'm sure...

You were right to begin with the NE, because the rest is far more interesting than this too European New England (and yet, it was already very interesting to read !).

[Hashemite]

Illinois

Chicago

Chicago is an overwhelmingly Socialist city, fairly obviously. There would be a very strong and feared PS machine in the city, probably operating in a way similar to the old SFIO-PS machines in Marseille under Gaston Defferre.

Black areas (south and downtown) in the city would be solidly PS, probably the most solid PS areas in the city. The PCF might poll relatively well in these poor inner-city areas, depending on candidate and strength of the PS machine. I have little doubt that all levels of government in this area would be dominated by the PS. The UMP might poll 'well' in more white middle-class areas, but even those would be solidly PS (as would white working-class areas) and some wealthy areas downtown (not that they're plentiful) but that is more likely to be Green.

Hispanic areas in the south, and throughout the city as a whole, would also be solidly PS (no UDF vote here...) as well, though the PCF vote would be significantly less important. Old European ethnic areas would also be solidly PS, with the FN potentially making an impact in these areas.

The liberal, more affluent, and gentrifying areas up north (Uptown, far north and so forth) would still be solidly PS, but would be one of the few areas in the actual city where the Greens would be strong. A more moderate UMP might poll well, as might the UDF-MoDem, but that is rather unlikely.

Outside of that area, the Greenies would be weak in the rest of the city except around DuPage University and condos on the lake whose inhabitants are perfect Green demographic. The FN might poll well in old ethnic working-class areas and parts of the western Bungalow Belt.

Chicago Suburbs

Northern Chicago suburbs, including Wilmette, Kenilworth and Winnetka would have been UMP-RPR areas until not so long ago, but the general social liberalism of the area and gentrification would have turned the area into a generally PS-leaning area. In addition, the PS would be traditionally strong in more blue-collar and ethnically diverse Waukegan. The UMP would still be very competitive with a moderate candidate, but Sarkozy wouldn't have played well here. Bayrou, otoh, might have done well in 2007 and the Greenies would have polled very well in the Euros.

Northern suburbs-exurbs in Lake and McHenry County would still lean UMP, but the PS would have made important gains in the area in the last few years.

Western Chicagoland would still lean UMP, because it's more suburban and less liberal than northern areas of Chicago. However, even here the PS would have made important gains in the past and Sarkozy's populist tone might alienate some in these parts. The Greens would also be strong, especially in the Euros and the MoDem would be weakening from better days in 2007.

Aurora, an older industrial area would be traditionally Socialist as would university areas in DeKalb most notably.

Exurbs, primarily in southern Chicagoland, would be the most solid UMP areas in the suburbs, probably.

Rural Northern Illinois

Rural areas in northern Illinois, such as the corn-growing areas bordering Wisconsin would be solidly UMP. The UMP vote here would be rather moderate, and in the past, the UDF might have polled well. In northern Illinois, the PS' only strength would come from the old manufacturing-industrial centres of Rockford and Joliet, as well as the growth of Chicagoland exurbs.

Central Illinois

Similarly to rural northern Illinois, rural areas in central Illinois would generally lean UMP with the notable exception of Rock Island-Moline, the blue-collar cities of the Illinois portion of the Quad Cities. In addition, the capital of Springfield and Peoria (the latter more so) would lean PS or atleast be more divided. Rural areas along the Indiana border in eastern central Illinois would be even more solidly on the right, with the exception of Bloomington-Normal and Urbana-Champaign, which would lean PS-Greens.

Southern Illinois and St. Louis suburbs

Rural southern Illinois would be solidly on the right (shock!), but the PS might maintain strength in the old coal mining counties in the far south of the state, but I could see the FN polling well there since the late 80s.

East St. Louis would be similar in voting patterns to similarly heavily-black areas in Chicago, and Alton would lean PS as well.

Overall, Illinois would generally lean Socialist, and Royal would have won it by a good margin in 2007.
 

[Bro-mentum]

MOAR!

[Californian Tony]

Bump !

[Hashemite]

Wisconsin

Milwaukee

Milwaukee would obviously be a major historical PS stronghold, and the PS would likely have a big electoral machine here. I suppose the PCF would have been strong, relatively speaking, in the past but the city would have been one of the PS' earliest strongholds. The FN would have polled well in Milwaukee and declining manufacturing areas at various times in the past, especially in 2002, but not anymore.

Milwaukee's suburbs would be a big UMP stronghold. However, Racine, Rock and Kenosha counties; old manufacturing and ethnic areas; would be solidly or generally PS. Generally speaking, the areas south of Milwaukee would be more volatile, but the northern suburbs and western suburbs would be the strongest UMP areas in the state (as they are for Republicans).

Green Bay and Northeastern WI

Rural conservative areas along Lake Michigan and in the Eastern Ridges of Wisconsin would be generally right-leaning, though Indian reserves and parts of Green Bay would be more volatile (the Indian reserves being solidly on the left). I guess the UDF would have been strong in this area in the old days, since a large chunk of it is largely Catholic.

Western Wisconsin and Madison

Madison, with the gentrification of the PS base, be a major Socialist stronghold but the Greens would have won the city by an important margin in the 'European elections'. With its large student population and social liberal attitudes, I suppose it could be compared to Grenoble. The wealthy suburbs and rural areas surrounding Madison would lean UMP, but Sarkozy wouldn't have played well in these politically moderate areas and would likely have performed below Chirac's results.

Rural areas in southwestern Wisconsin would likely be Socialist as well, a sort of 'rural-Socialist' area which is rather rare. I guess some Scandinavians in the area and old rural progressivism would give the PS an old traditional vote. In addition, the PS would be strong in the isolated, old manufacturing and blue-collar communities around the region.

The suburban areas commuting to the Twin Cities would, however, lean UMP, and the UMP could still do well in the general area depending on candidate.

[Californian Tony]

Very nice. MN, IA and MO will be interesting to see.

[Hashemite]

Minnesota

Twin Cities and suburbs

Minneapolis would obviously be PS, though the Greens would probably have polled ahead of the PS in 2009. St. Paul would also be a PS stronghold, but with the Greens weaker than in Minneapolis. The UMP would still poll better than Republicans usually do, but it would require a moderate candidate who can appeal to wealthy, liberal whites.

The Minneapolis suburbs would be universally right-wing except for PS strength in blue-collar areas such in parts of Dakota, Anoka and Washington Counties. In the wealthy inner suburbs in Hennepin County, the Greens would poll well depending on circumstances and candidate.

The UMP would also be strong in St. Cloud, the northern suburbia and rural areas in the region; though the Greens wouldn't be strong in those areas, which are far more conservative.  I'm not sure on how conservative some of them are, but the MPF could be strong from time to time in those areas which are conservative and Protestant.

Rural Minnesota

A general swing area between the PS and the UMP. The UMP would be favour due to the general right-leaning nature of most of the rural areas, but old traditions and more left-wing economic views in some areas would favour the PS. Rochester in southeastern MN would also be a swing city.

Iron Range

Old PS stronghold with some areas of PCF strength.

[Hashemite]

North Dakota

North Dakota would generally lean to the right, due to the rural and generally more conservative nature of the state. However, since the state is not steadfast partisan and farm issues play an important role, the PS could poll well from time to time. The PS would strong or stronger than average in Grand Forks, Fargo and Indian counties.

Sarkozy would have been a decent candidate for the state, and would have won in the runoff with around 53-56% of the vote. However, the trends of rural discontent seen in parts of France could happen here in ND.

[Senator Barnes]

This is really quite fantastic, Hashemite!

[Bo]

This is really quite fantastic, Hashemite!

[Californian Tony]

This is really quite fantastic, Hashemite!

[live free or die]

Love it.

[big bad fab]

Of course, there isn't a question of "souverainisme" in the US, but don't you think some rural areas would be a welcoming ground for MPF ?

That's just because I've just read your post on ND.

In fact, my question is more about NE, KS, inner Missouri, and also about Iowa, but SD and ND (and some Rocky states) might also qualify for a "defensive" farmer vote (against cuts in subsidies, e.g.).

BTW, very happy to see this restarted

PCF would be very resilient in Minnesota, I think.
And in Minnesota and some quarters of Wisconsin (and Michigan and Ohio), Mélenchon would be high but I know your topic is a 2007 one).

[Hashemite]

Iowa

Eastern Iowa and the Quad Cities

The Quad Cities area in Iowa would lean Socialist, notably the older blue-collar town of Dubuque (Davenport would be PS as well, though). The Socialists would also be strong in Waterloo and Cedar Falls (where there would be a sizable Green vote). Rural areas between those cities would be more right-wing, but the PS would maintain a fair rural vote. Catholic areas in northeastern Iowa would have been historically UDF, though the PS (and UMP) would have picked up that vote.

Further south, Cedar Rapids, Iowa City as well as smaller areas with blue-collar population would lean Socialist. Iowa City would have a large Green vote, the others less so.

Des Moines region

The capital Des Moines would lean Socialist, though the UMP would still poll relatively well in the city, owing to its smaller working-class population. The Greens would also poll well, and polled ahead of the PS in 2009.

The suburbs of Des Moines would be a growing UMP-leaning area. North of the city, the towns of Ames, Marshalltown, Mason City and a number of other towns in the region would lean Socialist, either due to the presence of education (Ames) or a more blue-collar vote. Rural areas would generally lean UMP in the region.

Western Iowa

The very conservative Corn Belt rural areas of western Iowa would be solidly UMP. The Dutch areas in the northwestern tip of Iowa would probably even lean MPF, because of their strong social conservatism.

However, the parties position on ethanol, which is big here (and also in other regions) would also have a big electoral effect.

Overall Iowa would lean to the left and Royal would have carried the state by a narrow margin, due in part to Sarkozy's appeal to blue-collar workers.


South Dakota (and a note on the Dakotas)

South Dakota would lean to the right, again, for the same reasons (mainly) as North Dakota. As in ND, the PS would poll well in the big cities (Sioux Falls, Rapid City) and in Indian counties (Shannon, Buffalo etc).

As for the Dakotas in general, Fabien's comment led me to note something which I had forgotten in my analysis of ND. The Dakotas, in general, are not as libertarian-leaning as other parts of the west, they like some subsidies and big government at times. Gaullism would have played very, very well - it is similar to Old Prairie Populism in some aspects. As a result, the Dakotas would have been amongst de Gaulle's best states in 1965, and this would be the only area where the DLR would register on the screen (except where thingee would be based). Yes, the MPF would also poll well but it would be more of a protest vote than a ideological vote. The Dakotas aren't as steadfast socially conservative as the MPF areas in the South. For example, in the 2009 vote in the Dakotas, I would see something like MPF 5-7% and DLR 3-6%.

Exception: The Badlands, which are quite libertarian, would probably be UMP as well, but the DLR and MPF wouldn't poll as well. DL would have polled well in its heyday, and they'd be left in the dark now.