Talk Elections

For everyone's viewing enjoyment:


()

Fascinating. Great job.

Wow.  So it's basically Appalachia, the majority white parts of the South, and weirdly, the outer suburbs of the Northeast going massively R while majority-minority areas go massively D and the rest of the country goes mildly D in almost uniform fashion.  Fascinating.

^ Yep, here's the state version of this map:

()

With the exception of the western AZ/UT/WY cluster, all the Republican states are contiguous and sprawl out from Appalachia.

Interesting that Arizona has trended Republican. So much for demographic changes turning the state Democratic.

Looks like Romney really did help in the NE suburbs and Florida, but it just wasn't enough.

AZ sort of baffled me. This map skips over 2008, so its not like it was home state effected by McCain or anything.

Romney NE suburban strength, but only relative to long term decline in Republican vote in the region.  It carried over to Florida retirees even more so, but was somewhat offset by Hispanic growth.

Note that this strongly suggests Republican problems in CO, NH and about half of VA are actually understated by 2008 and 2012 due to Romney and McCain being non-Southern suburbanites.  Conversely, Republicans should be pretty enthused about Ohio going the way of Missouri the next time they nominate a populist.

Gore exaggerated the trend somewhat, but the '04-'12 version of this map (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=9326) was pretty severe as well.

You can pretty much see the outline of the old TN-04 with those dark navy counties.

04-12 seems to confirm a Romney suburban bounce in parts of the NE.  Of course it's overshadowed in NYC by 9/11 being compared against Sandy.

Thanks a lot, Miles! Both maps are very useful: one more on macro, another - on microlevel))))

Yeah, interesting things in the northeast. CT changes quite a bit between the maps. Its all blue in 00-12 but about evenly split in 04-12. Maine is pretty much the opposite, especially in the north.



I actually think CO looks a bit better than it actually is for Democrats. Yeah its good overall, but Nader was taking 10% or more in some of the (now) strongly D counties west of Denver. I'm not sure to what extent that influences things.

I think thats also why MT and ID, even AK, look so good for Democrats.


:D

Sort of expected. Romney played better than the typical Republican in NE suburbs and even the cities themselves.

It's easier for Northeasterners to get behind someone who's perceived as a fiscal conservative and (perceptively speaking) a social moderate than for a typical Republican candidate.

I'd like to see what Hillary vs. pre-Akin/Duggar Huckabee would look like.  Probably insane polarization like this?

()

Something close to that. Huckabee would not fly in Northeastern suburbs or urban areas. Hillary would probably easily surpass Gore's margins here.

The suburbs of the northeast, particularly in the triatate area have zigzagged the past few election cycles, in 2004 they swung to Bush because of fear of terrorism, in 08 to Obama because of the foreclosure crisis and in 2012 back to Romney slightly because I guess he appealed more to business types.

And here you have it with Atlas colors:


Why does nobody ever remember my thread? :(

American Suburbia moves towards the Democrats while the GOP continues to become the party of poor, rural, Southern Whites. 

Interesting that Mississippi stands out from its neighbors like that.  Of course, the larger black population has something to do with that.  Also, it became reliably Republican earlier than Arkansas, Louisiana, and Tennessee, so it didn't have as much room to trend right.

Vermont sticks out like a sore thumb even in the Northeast.

Simply amazing.

And every county bordering Vermont trended Democratic.

Al Gore did very well with urban white Northeasterners however.

Anybody who is shocked by Arizona obviously hasn't met that many southwestern whites.  They are some of the most cartoonist racist people ON THE PLANET.

What's going on in Idaho and Montana?

Lol @ the ability to count on one hand how many counties are trending Republican in California.

Gore made gun control a central part of his campaign.  Obama didn't touch it until 2013.

Quite an east/west contrast in North Dakota.  Probably the oil boom in the west. There's the reverse east/west difference in Montana.

*cough* *uploaded late 2012* *cough*

()

Yours was swing though, right?

Correct. Though, of course, you know, national swing of 3.5 points American style between those two elections. :P

Which mean that more than half or your light pink counties should probably be light blue instead. ;)

Still, I prefer your map just because of the color scale. :)

I saved all maps in this thread. All are useful. Thanks to all those, who made them)))

I knew you had a already done the swing map - thats what I did the trend map.

Only in your wildest wet dreams, pal.

And over my dead body.

Interesting. The IA-MO border certainly sticks out to me.

Yeah, the Democrats will just abandon fiscal liberalism (and therefore the vast majority of their votes), and the Republicans will just abandon fiscal conservatism (and therefore the vast majority of their votes) and this new reality where your dream of a GOP-branded resurrection of the spirit of the Southern Democrat will reign supreme!!

Poor, rural Southern Whites are a very small minority of GOP voters, dude.

His post was wrong, but this one is as well.

Poor, rural Southern Whites and those who vote like them are a rather sizeable number of the GOP base.

Likewise, Northeastern and Midwestern suburbs have moved and continue to move towards the Democrats. The exurbs, however, are becoming more Republican.

They're sizable, sure, but as I said in another thread, let's not forget the tens of millions of Republicans in New England, the upper Midwest and the West Coast who are virtually unrepresented in DC but are still registered Republicans.  Once you count all of them, every single Republican who lives outside of the South and middle-class to upper middle-class Republicans in the South, I stand by my comment that a group of people as specific as "poor, rural, Southern Whites" is a definite minority of Republicans...

And yes, many Northern suburbs have trended Democrat, but the reasons (which have been pointed out by other posters in several other threads) are obviously more complex than our Mississippi Republican friend (who seems to desperately want politics to be this battle between simple, hard working rural folks and these cosmopolitan elites) makes them out to be.  For example, the rich Whites in Orange County who have made it GOP ground for decades aren't becoming any less Republican, Orange County is just becoming less White.

Sure, if we count registered Republicans and registered Democrats, but we shouldn't truly count that as any indication. After all, the most registered party in West Virginia and Kentucky is the Democratic party.

Northern suburbs trending Democrat is also different from Western suburbs trending Democrat. Here in New York atleast, and probably throughout the rest of the upper I-95, it's two-fold: White suburbanites of all classes becoming repulsed from the modern Republican party over the course of 20 years, and an increase in minorities.

On the other hand, places like Orange County are trending mostly due to what you said. An increase of minorities.

I was just about to make such a map for New England. Bumping this for all the people who think NH has been trending Republican over the last years ::) And notice the strong Democratic trend despite the fact that Romney was a MUCH better fit for the state then George W. Bush.

^ Yeah, even with R-trending Rockingham/Hillsborough counties casting over half the state's votes, NH swung D at twice the national rate.

Yes, New Hampshire (like its neighbors) has trended significantly to the left over the years, and will likely continue to do so; but in all fairness, Nader's strong performance in northern New England obviously cut into Gore's margin and hence exaggerated these trends. Also, New Hampshire did trend slightly to the right in both 2008 and 2012.

I haven't seen anyone say it's "trending Republican" (very few places didn't after 2008).  That'd be stupid.

Almost as stupid as calling it a "Deep Blue State."

Great maps!

I see the shale boom in the North but am fascinated by the geographic inverse of the Dakotas.

No, few places didn't swing Republican after 2008, but lots of states trended Democratic. New Hampshire just happened to trend Republican in 2008 and 2012. 2004 is really the huge setback in New Hampshire's Republican trend. In the other 3 out of the last four elections (2000, 2008, 2012), New Hampshire trended Republican.

Are you going to make an argument that New Hampshire is becoming more Republican?

Except that these people deliver almost no electoral votes for the GOP. If you look at the people delivering those votes, they are poor rural whites and southern suburbs (ATL, Houston, Phoenix).

But aren't we talking about who makes up each party?  Republicans who "deliver no electoral votes" for the GOP are still Republicans, and they still shape the primary results, especially on Super Tuesday.

Sure, and we must realize that the numbers of Republicans in those regions have been waning fast and so has their influence been.

Okay, so it's waned from very influential in the '70s to not as influential today?  They still exist...