US with French parties

[Hash]

What's interesting is to simulate how the US would vote with French political parties. I know that American politics are as unique to the US and French politics are to France, but it's an interesting exercise and of course, all US simulations with more than two parties are much fun.

Which is what I'll try to do. Simulate, say, the 2007 presidential results in the United States without changing any major from French parties.

First problem, the UDF. The UDF is, at its base, a Catholic-Christian democratic party. Obviously, the US is one of the last countries where a Christian democratic party could develop. Still, the UDF had the PR (neoliberals) and the PRV (middle-class bourgeois seculars), but its vote represented more the implantation of Catholicism than it did that of neoliberalism. I will simulate the UDF as it was, though with Bayrou's latest discourse, that of radical centrism and moderate social liberalism.

The UMP can be kept as is, intact. It is obviously much less socially conservative than the Republican Party.

The MPF, renamed MPA, will potentially play a greater role due to its social conservatism (imagining that de Villiers was a Evangelical right rather than Catholic right man) and also its moderate protectionist attitudes.

The FN will kept as is, obviously, potentially placing more emphasis on its social conservatism. And its Pieds-Noirs base will be replaced by something else, you'll see.

The Socialists can be kept intact, though more social democratic. Of course, if the US *did* have French parties, then socialism wouldn't be as much of a swearword as it is today. And as you'll see, there is plenty of room in the US for a social democratic party.

The Greens will play a role, though they'll be less hippie.

PCF less relevant, though more moderate.

CPNT, LO-LCR, MNR and all others are not relevant, even less so than in France.

And I don't want stupid ideological hackish debates or anything of the like in this. It's a fun project.

[Hash]

And what about DLR ?

It would have a role to play and not a marginal one, mutatis mutandis:
almost nationalist, protectionist, a bit "monroeist", some notes of "social-populism".

Villiers isn't enough to take the place of GOP's diverse right wing.

Gaullism would undoubtedly play well in some parts of the United States, and I've already figured out a number of those places.

Of course, I never meant to suggest that the MPF-type party would be the sole to take the place of the Republican Party's right wing.

[Hash]

Let's start.

This post will be revised upon completion of the project

Maine

The north has a populist feel to it and is more working-class, from what I gather, so it would generally vote Socialist. The UDF could carry Aroostook, though the Socialists would do well there too. The UMP wins rural areas, potato country, and wealthy areas on the coast. The Greens are quite strong along the coast and in Portland, and would have probably come second in the 2009 'Euro' elections (presumably a North-Central American Parliament here!). Portland would probably be PS now, though right-wing in the past.

Overall: Lean UMP, and Sarkozy would have carried in 2007.

New Hampshire

The UMP is strong in wealthy communities with a strong number of Boston emigres and what's left of rural NH. The Socialists would win communities developed on the textile industry. Coos County is a UDF stronghold, though with a rising PS.

Overall: Lean UMP, and Sarkozy would have carried in 2007.

[Hash]

Fine.
Do you intend to give us an overall trend for each State ?

Ah, yes. That. Anyways, nice to see interest in this project.

This post will be revised upon completion of the project

Vermont

A hard state to pin down in terms of French parties. Vermont is rather homogeneous (very muchso in terms of race, less so in terms of ethnic origins nowadays). It has a strong independent, slightly libertarian streak, which makes it hard to pin down in the 3rd and 4th Republic eras. It would probably have been a ARD stronghold during the Third Republic, though the Radicals would have polled well and it would have been a Republican strongholds in the 1870s-1880s. In the Fourth Republic era, it would likely have been a strong state for the CNI, Radicals and perhaps the MRP. That being said, the old SFIO, with its rural anti-centralist appeal, would have always had a base in Vermont though I doubt the Programme Commun would have helped the PS in 1973-1981. The right's shift to the harder right and Sarkozyst sabre-rattling on immigration and other issues of that type and the PS' gains with middle-class white voters would have given the PS the edge starting in 1988 and solidifying throughout the 90s and the 2000s.

Overall: Would have certainly voted heavily (60+) for Royal in 2007, with the right registering a big swing against her in 2007. While there's room for local UMP strength even today, Vermont would be solidly PS in 2010-2012.

Massachusetts

Massachusetts, due to its very high percentage of Catholics, would have been a UDF stronghold. The UDF would have been strong quasi-universally, taking Irish voters in Boston, rural voters, and working-class voters. Nowadays, the UDF's strength is much reduced, maybe 30-35% for Bayrou in 2007, concentrated in solidly UDF rural MA. The UMP wins in affluent Boston suburbia and affluent coastal communities in Cape Cod and so forth. The Socialists would have gained a ground in minority areas (Boston, mostly. Probably gained the local govt from the UDF-CDS in 1989 or so) and in liberal areas. It's actually a tricky state to work with.

My estimate for CDs gives the UDF 4, the PS 4 and the UMP 2.

Overall: Bayrou's voters in the first round vote Socialist in the runoff by a decent margin, giving Royal an important margin here in the runoff.

[Hash]

Massachusetts

Massachusetts, due to its very high percentage of Catholics, would have been a UDF stronghold. The UDF would have been strong quasi-universally, taking Irish voters in Boston, rural voters, and working-class voters. Nowadays, the UDF's strength is much reduced, maybe 25-30% for Bayrou in 2007. The UMP wins in affluent Boston suburbia and affluent coastal communities in Cape Cod and so forth. The Socialists would have gained a lot of ground in Catholic working class territory, and even 'champagne' type socialism. Greenies also do well in liberal yuppie land, wherever that may be.

Overall: Bayrou's voters in the first round vote Socialist in the runoff by a large margin, giving Royal a very big margin here in the runoff.

Don't you think on the contrary that MoDem would do better than the UDF, preventing the PS to rise in MA ? And would be on par with UMP in Boston suburbs (but not in Cape Cod and the coast, though).

Not really, though you're right the UDF would be stronger in the Boston suburbia - quite Catholic areas, though they would be hurt by the big fall in church attendance in MA.

[Hash]

This post will be revised upon completion of the project

Rhode Island

Catholic working-class stronghold. Would have been a UDF stronghold for a long time, though with decline in church attendance, you would see the Socialists making some important gains and UDF voters would be more likely to vote for Socialists in runoffs after, say, 1980 or 1984. The UMP is limited to some very wealthy towns and that's it.

Overall: Royal would have won the runoff in 2007, and Bayrou would have won the state in the first round.

Connecticut

Would be an important swing state. The UMP does well in wealthy New York suburbia and other wealthy places, the PS does well in inner city Hartford (minorities) and also surrounding areas which used to be industrial textile towns. Also does well in Bridgeport, obviously. The UDF would be worth around 15-25% depending on the election and would be relatively stable and geographically equally distributed. Greens do well in Litchfield etc.

Overall: Sarkozy narrowly wins in 2007.

Here's how I see it up to now in the 2007 runoff:

[Hash]

Please continue this. Southern states should be interesting.

Not really : MPF strongholds.

Wait and see, please.

[Hash]

This post will be revised upon completion of the project

New York

An interesting state... let's break it down by region:

New York City proper (the 5 boroughs)

NYC would probably be a reliably Socialist city and I see the Socialist local administration in NYC being very similar to the (in)famous Socialist administrations in Marseille (you know, the deals with the mafia).

PS probably breaks 60% by the first round in black areas and would have gotten a sizeable share of the middle-class vote, obviously. Manhattan's West Side and NY-8 is Bobo land and there's a big gay community, though the UMP would have gotten a 9/11 boost (presumably, depending on the storyline this adopts) and they would get the Jewish vote. NY-8 is also the FN's best district and the UMP does well in the Brooklyn parts of it (Bensonhurst, Borough Park). The 1997 runoff in NY-8 would have been PS-FN, maybe the RPR makes it in.

CDs like 15, 16 - poor Hispanic (Catholic) areas could be especially interesting. They would probably have been solid UDF-CDS in the distant past (16 especially, not 15, it used to be black-land), but I get the impression that they would vote PS due to the UDF's alliance with the mainstream right and because it's very low-income. Plus, they would probably have been the top target of the Socialist machine and there's also a significant black  I could see legislative runoffs in CDs like 

The UMP would be strong in the affluent parts of Manhattan (Upper East Side) and Queens (I think NY-5 would actually be UMP), the Brooklyn parts of NY-8 (see above. Sarkozy would have done very well for a right-wing candidate there), NY-9 (a lean UMP district, quite safe. Also a large UDF vote in the Irish areas - Breezy Point) and Staten Island (see below). CD-14 and that area would have been UMP land until very recently, but it would have switched Socialist (champagne socialist) in 2007 probably - it reminds me of that very wealthy professional Grenoble district which elected a Socialist in 2007.

You could see a rump FN vote in some areas in Brooklyn (think those areas which swung from Kerry to McCain in '08), concentrated in Orthodox Jewish areas.

I'm not a specialist on Staten Island, but I have the feel it could be interesting. Probably UMP nationally and even locally where the UMP would lead the law-and-order campaign which, IIRC, works well there. The Socialists are of course strong with African-Americans (though it's a small base), and depending on the candidate and the year, they do well with white working-class voters. Staten Island is a big Italian place, very Catholic, but I think the UDF would do rather poorly compared to other Catholic areas, being too moderate socially and the right's law-and-order stuff would work well. Also, probably one of the only areas in the regions where the MPF is semi-relevant (as opposed to being a complete joke).

Congressional districts 2007:

All Socialist except: 4, 5, 9, 13 (UMP)

Outer Long Island

Ultra-solid UMP strongholds. Think Neuilly-sur-Seine, Saint-Cloud and so forth. The Socialists are 'strong' (relative term) in the poorer areas and black parts of NY-4 (which is also NYC, whatever, sue me), the unionized areas of the 3rd, the 2nd (the least solid of the UMP districts). Still ultra-safe UMP, overall. FN polls okayish.

NYC suburbia

Generally solid UMP, but the Socialists would always have had some strength in what working class/racial minority enclaves there are. Since I seem to analyzing by CD an awful lot, the 17th through 19th are UMP, 18 and 19 being solid UMP and the 17th less so due to it including black parts of the Bronx (solidly PS).

Upstate

Overall, lean UMP area. Agricultural areas and white-collar wealthy suburbs of various cities are obviously UMP, while the PS would have a relatively solid base in the manufacturing-dependent areas in Albany, Rochester, Buffalo, Troy and also poll well in places like Ithaca (Cornell U). The Socialists would hold, quite narrowly, the 25th and 27th though I suppose they would have gained the 27th in 2007 after losing it in 2002. The 28th, of course, is Socialist country.

OVERALL, New York would have voted Royal narrowly in 2007, because Sarkozy would have been a rather poor candidate Upstate (though better in Brooklyn etc). I would say, however, by my estimate, that 15 of the CDs are UMP-held.

MA write-up has been revised, btw.

[Hash]

- don't you think that in Harlem and some parts of Bronx, the PCF would have some good results ?
I mean, the PCF of feudalties, of clans, of "families", as in Bouches-du-Rhône or in Valenciennois.

Yeah, you make a good point which I conveniently forgot It all depends on the PCF candidate, o/c.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The agricultural areas upstate are either quite Catholic (remember, the MPF is an evangelical Protestant party here) or Yankee Republicans. Doesn't strike me as socially conservative and evangelical conservatism doesn't seem to play well.

[Hash]

New Jersey

A UMP stronghold, surprisingly. The UMP does best in rural areas, the affluent NYC suburbia (and suburbia in general, few exceptions o/c) and the wealthy coastal communities. The PS would be rather confined to Newark, Camden, parts of Atlantic City, Paterson, Trenton and various towns with an industrial tradition.

The PCF would do well in Essex County's working-class and minority population areas. NJ-10 is probably a Communist-held seat!

As in New York City proper, the Hispanic Catholic population in Hudson County, despite the apperances, would probably have been the target of Socialist machines (Newark would of course be a PS stronghold municipally) in the past and would vote Socialist, though not so much PCF - though I imagine Hudson County electing PCF deputies in the '50's or so. Maybe.

The FN polls well in Camden and the crime-ridden cities. I imagine a number of cantons in Camden, Newark would have been PCF-FN or PS-FN runoffs in the past, less so now.

Overall: One of Sarkozy's best states in 2007, but doesn't break 60%. One of the FN's worst results in memory.

Delaware

The UMP does well in Dover and Wilmington suburbia and wealthier inner-city areas if such things exists, as well as all the rural areas of the state. Overall, this gives DE a narrow UMP lean but the Socialists are a sizeable electorate with strength in inner-city Wilmington and Dover, cities that either have a union tradition or industrial tradition (plus a small but important minority population). The PS probably would have won the seat in 1997.

Overall: Sarkozy does surprisingly well for a rightist in a state which is quite polarized electorally, probably due to gains in old blue-collar areas.

[Hash]

Pennsylvania

An interesting state... let's break it down by region:

Philadelphia City

Hardcore Socialist city, in Communist hands until the '70's or so. The Socialists strong quasi-universally, especially in industrial areas and minority areas (here too, the Hispanics would have entered the very powerful PS-PCF machine). The UDF would be the second party, probably, strong in what remains of inner-city Irish and Italian neighborhoods in Philly. The UMP would limited to 'wealthy' areas in the city limits, though that would be a very weak base and probably wouldn't even win that. The 1st and 2nd are very safe left-wing seats, with the PCF probably holding or having held in the recent past the 1st.

Philadelphia suburbia

Swing region between Socialists and UMP-UDF, though the gentrification of the Socialists would be particularly pronounced here. While in, say, 1978 or 1988, the suburbia would have been mostly UDF-RPR, today it would lean Socialist. The UMP remains strong in rural and white-collar (white) wealthier suburbia, the UDF is the main right-wing party in Italian Catholic areas (mostly the 7th). The Socialists would have made gains in the middle-class suburbia in addition to their traditional base in blue-collar areas (Coatesville, Delaware County municipalities close to the river and Philly proper, old steel communities in Bucks County).

Good ol' PA-13 would be a real swing district in our scenario, with a narrow Socialist advantage, but most of the inner suburban constituencies would be swing districts with the PS sweeping them up (possibly) in a year like 1997 and the right (UMP, UDF or RPR) sweeping them up in a year like 1993 or 2002.

Exurbs are strongly UMP with the MPF doing very well too (especially in the batsh**t crazy Dutch areas - probably holds the 16th district). The Socialists would manage to get into runoffs due to Reading, though the UDF does well in Reading too (Hispanic Catholic pop)

Lehigh Valley

Generally working-class industrial area, so Socialist advantage, but with a social conservative lean means that the MPF is also strong and takes a fair share of Socialists votes, though the PS wins here, provided their candidate is more socially conservative and isn't an inner-city liberal.

Sarkozy is a great candidate for the Lehigh Valley. Le Pen also probably did well here since 1988 or so, or whenever industrial areas declined.

Rural Pennsylvania

Strongly UMP areas, though not so much MPF as it doesn't strike me as batsh**t insane socially conservative areas like Dutch Country does. In terms of districts, the 9th is one of the UMP's safest seats nationally, but the 5th is much more competitive. The UDF is very strong in Elk County (Catholic enclave) and the Socialists have residue strength in Centre County (students) and some manufacturing enclaves in a district which is still very blue-collar.

Coal Country

Strongly Socialist working-class areas with a very weakened PCF still somewhat relevant. Somewhat socially conservative, so the MPF is a definite factor in this region. Rural regions in the Poconos are more UMP and the UMP does well in new New York City/Philly exurbs, though the MPF is also strong and the Socialists can win districts like the 10th in landslide victories nationally.

Monongahela and Alleghany Coalfields

Socialist stronghold, though the FN would have done well in areas hurt by the decline of coal mining and heavy industry. UMP stronger in areas where there has been gentrification and post-recession economic development.

Pittsburgh and suburbia

Generally Socialist-leaning city, since I suppose the Irish Catholic working-class would be more likely to vote left-wing due to strong unionization here. The UDF, though, is the second party here and the UMP is basically a non-factor here. Communists weak due to high Catholic tradition here. The FN probably does relatively well.

UMP and of course the MPF, however, are strong in socially conservative Pittsburgh suburbia, and the MPF probably holds the 18th district.

In terms of districts, it's pretty straightforward, with the 4th being the only real swing district. Historically Socialist land, do to steel mills and industrial Mercer County, the UMP is a relevant force in newer white-collar and wealthy Pittsburgh suburbia.

Erie

Erie County itself is obviously a Socialist stronghold, due to an industrial and minority history. The suburbs and surrounding rural areas are obviously UMP.

OVERALL, Sarkozy probably narrowly wins the state in 2007 with a very good result for the right (Jospin probably won here in 1995, Mitterrand obviously won in 1988) due to inroads in blue-collar conservative Lehigh Valley and western PA industrial area/the coalfield. PA remains, of course, a major swing state and a crucial state in any election.

[Hash]

YEAH ! Just YEAH !

Thanks!

[Hash]

Maryland

Maryland would have been old RadSoc land in the past, though mostly of right-wing stock, meaning that it would currently lean UMP as a whole. The Eastern Shore would now be UMP, after having been the base of the Radicals in the past. And western MD would be generally UMP except for maybe what remains of manufacturing and industry in places like Allegany County and maybe some suburban areas.

Baltimore City would, however, be a PS stronghold due to minorities and its higher poverty rate, though Baltimore County (the suburbia) would be UMP strongholds: old wealthy suburban communities with some Jewish communities (Jews, moderate ones, would vote UMP strongly) and communities with national defense concerns.

What is interesting is that the UMP would still maintain a good share of the middle-class and more well-off black vote in places like Baltimore suburbia (and even some parts of the city) and Prince George County. However, the gentrification of the PS and its suburban growth would have made big inroads into this relatively volatile right-wing demographic.

What is also interesting is that many CDs I would classify to be 'swing' districts, meaning that you could have a very lopsided margin for either left or right in a landslide year. For example, the right could have been reduced to 1 or 2 seats in 1997.

OVERALL, Sarkozy does average for a UMP candidate with, say, around 52-53% of the vote.

[Hash]

West Virginia

Socialist stronghold, predictably enough, and probably Mitterrand's old electoral base. The UMP might poll well in wealthier urban centres, growing DC suburbia and rural places not influenced by heavy industry and coal mining. However, it's likely the MPF is the largest right-wing party, especially in mining areas.

Overall: Royal's best state in the runoff.

[Hash]

West Virginia

Socialist stronghold, predictably enough, and probably Mitterrand's old electoral base. The UMP might poll well in wealthier urban centres, growing DC suburbia and rural places not influenced by heavy industry and coal mining. However, it's likely the MPF is the largest right-wing party, especially in mining areas.

Overall: Royal's best state in the runoff.

I tend to disagree with this one. I couldn't see the PS even close to be competitive in a so socially conservatve state. Even if WV is quite economically liberal, it wouldn't be enough to vote for PS.

Anybody would disagree with your assessment. Anybody would tell you that WV is a stronghold for any left-wing social democratic party. Ask Al, afleitch, Alcon, anybody.

(on a side not, economics far outweigh societal junk in WV)

And please stop using the term 'economically liberal'.

[Hash]

Anybody would disagree with your assessment. Anybody would tell you that WV is a stronghold for any left-wing social democratic party. Ask Al, afleitch, anybody.

Let's see.
Barack Obama, who can be considered as moderately leftist on economic issues and clearly progressive on social issues, was running against John McCain, who led a conservative campaign on economic issues but was quite moderate ( for the GOP standards at least ) on social issues. McCain killed Obama with a 13-points edge ( 20 points if we correct with the national margin ). So, what do you think that would happen with french political parties, which one is more or less social-democratic but also socially progressive ( how do you think WVers viewed things like the PACS ? ), and the other is, I would say, a bit less ridiculously conservative economically and socially moderate. Do you really think being "social-democratic" would be enough for a party like PS to win the State ? Maybe Al and afleithc agree with you, but that isn't enough to convince me.

Obama is a black inner city liberal.

Anyways, if you don't like my assessment, do your own. I frankly don't feel the need to convince anybody about this, nor do I feel the need to enter ideological debates for something designed to be a bit of fun.

Nobody is forcing you to agree with my assessment. It's my assessment, and I do what I please with it and what I think is right. If you don't like it, I'm not forcing you to like it or even read it if it's so woefully inaccurate. Please.

[Hash]

Could I ask you why you are getting so harsh ?

Because I'm cranky and because you're taking this as if it was something real.

I frankly don't really care if you disagree with my assessment, since this is all supposed to be a fun project for me and readers. And I already warned about a number of things like this in my OP

WV is Socialist and it will remain such until I die.

[Hash]

Virginia

NoVA

A swing region, since recently, between the UMP and Socialists. The Socialists poll well in Alexandria and Arlington, and that since quite some years (I'm not sure if this would have been RadSoc land in the past, probably not) and places with a high minority population. The UMP would poll well in the NoVA exurbs, the uber-rich parts and rural areas that extend to the WV border. Though a candidate like Sarkozy is crap for NoVA and there's the eternal gentrification of the PS...

The Greens sweep NoVA in the 2009 'Euros'

Shenandoah Valley

UMP stronghold. Socialists poll well in slightly more blue-collar and unionized Roanoke, and that's it. Roanoke suburbia, though, is uber-UMP.

Southwest VA

Socialist stronghold in mining country. The MPF would poll well, probably making it the second force here after the PS. The FN is also strong, UMP less so and based mostly in Roanoke exurbs and rural counties.

Southside VA

Would have been a Socialist place for a long time, but the growing progressivism and strong religious practice here would have turned it to the MPF, though the black areas in Emporia County, Brunswick County and so forth would be PS strongholds.

Hampton Roads

The Socialists are strong in Norfolk, which is poorer and has a higher minority population, and also in shipbuilding areas in Newport News, Hampton and also Norfolk. The UMP does well in military areas, Virginia Beach and the peninsula.

Richmond and suburbs

Richmond, with its very high black population, is a Socialist stronghold. The suburbs lean UMP, though the Greens and Radicals would poll well in Henrico County.

Eastern Shore

An old UMP stronghold, the UMP polls well in the far exurbs of DC/NoVA and in rural areas. However, growing suburbia nearer to NoVA would help the Socialists here (see above) which would already be strongish in the areas about the Hampton Roads.

OVERALL, Sarkozy wins in 2007 though Royal does very well in NoVA and that strength also swings VA-11 in the legislative elections. Similar runoff margin (and map, kind-of) to 2004.

[Hash]

Don't you think Bayrou and MoDem could have made some inroads in 2007 in the northern "Washingtonian" VA ?
A local base for Marielle de Sarnez, for example ?

Too few Catholics there, though NOVA would have been Bayrou's 'best' region, so to say.

[Hash]

WV is more Pas-de-Calais, though the WV 'prefecture' is more right-wing than the Pas-de-Calais' prefecture (mainly due to lack of Guy Mollet in WV )

I need to brush up my knowledge on Puy-de-Dôme voting patterns (I charge you with that!), but it doesn't really fit in well with WV, though Allier could be a nice comparison.

[Hash]

Even in France, working class areas are not socialist strongholds.

wtf

Doesn't FN poll also well in this sort of regions ?

Yes. But it doesn't make them less left-wing in the long run.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No. In the first round he got a plurality but just 'cause the Trots polled like 10% together.

[Hash]

A Note about the (Deep) South

However wrong it may be and not matter how many accusations of anti-socialism I get, this simulation will assume that the SFIO would have taken the place of the OTL Democratic Party in the South. You would see people like Déat, Doriot, and Chautemps became segregationists and Dixiecrats in the 1940s and 1950s. It is far from a perfect fit, but it is the best one imaginable. In addition, the quasi-racist and nationalist PCF of the 1970s would also have been a perfect fit in large areas of the South.

The role of the old Republican Party in the South (lol) is taken by the centre-right, nowadays the UMP, which is the party of the more affluent and suburban white Southerner while the poorer, more blue-collar Southerner is divided between the PS, MPF and FN (the FN being stronger with those in heavy industry).

Next: North Carolina

[Hash]

North Carolina

Coast and Coastal Plain

The areas directly on the Atlantic would lean UMP, though there would be pockets of Socialist support in the north and Wilmington (a more recent development, and it is highly plausible that it remains a UMP-leaning city) and the UMP would poll strongly in military areas. The Greens would have done well in Wilmington in 2009 and the MoDem would do decently.

Black areas, of course, are strongly Socialist.

Raleigh, Durham and suburbia

The centre of the 'boboisation' of the PS in recent years would be, of course, in Raleigh and Durham. Raleigh would be quite a swing city, and the most UMP of the major cities in NC though the Socialists would have done well picking up seats in Congress (NC-2, most notably) and in the NC General Council. Durham, with its high minority population, is strongly Socialist.

In districts like the 4th, the Greens and PRG would also poll very well. I could see a Radical, probably a LeftRad, holding the seat.

The suburban areas devoid of progressive yuppies would lean UMP, though.

Piedmont

Would lean UMP overall, though the PS maintains a relatively good showing in tobacco country and textile areas. But it certainly isn't what it used to be, and the FN would have made important gains in this area, especially with petit commerçants and artisans.

Triad

Greensboro city is Socialist, but Greensboro suburbia is UMP country. Same with Winston-Salem.

Charlotte

The city is Socialist, and the suburbia is UMP. Though the PS polls well-ish in Gastonia and textile areas.

Blue Ridge Mountains

An old Socialist stronghold, they would be tossup areas today, though maybe with a slight PS lean. The MPF does best here.

OVERALL, it's a swing state with a UMP advantage in recent years. Sarkozy pulls off a narrow win here in 2007.

Also...

District of Columbia

Surprise, surprise. Socialist stronghold. The UMP polls well in western DC.

[Hash]

South Carolina

The UMP polls well along the coast in Charleston (minus inner city), its suburbs, Columbia suburbia and other wealthy areas both inland and on the coast. The Socialists poll well in the black-majority areas, Charleston and Columbia inner cities and in poorer rural areas between Columbia and Charleston/Hilton Head Island.

The Piedmont would have been an old Socialist area that would have moved to the MPF (and, to a lesser extent, FN) in recent years. Perhaps the best guide here is to see in which areas of the region the Democrats survive locally (and maybe look at 1996). The MPF would pretty much dominate elsewhere. However, the UMP does well in areas of the Piedmont which has developed high-tech industries and also in parts of Greenville.

Way back when, early Gaullism would have done well too.

[Hash]

One question about NC, again with MoDem: in the "triangle" and Raleigh-Durham, don't you think that it may have done well in 2007, disturbing the UMP as well as the PS ?
Of course not the UDF (), but MoDem ?

Kind of.

I don't want to make the MoDem the social liberal party and turn this into a type of simulation with Brithsh political parties but also because the MoDem's electoral support is not purely a map of social liberalism or wealthy college kids...