Atlas Forum

General Politics => Political Geography & Demographics => Topic started by: darklordoftech on October 11, 2017, 12:41:23 am



Title: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: darklordoftech on October 11, 2017, 12:41:23 am
Which states tend to have more "establishment-friendly" populations, cultures, voters, voting patterns, state governments, representatives and Senators, etc.? Which states tend to have more "populist" populations, cultures, voters, voting patterns, state governments, representatives and Senators, etc.?


Title: Re: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: King of Kensington on October 11, 2017, 01:07:54 am
Massachusetts and Maryland strike me as the most "establishment" states.


Title: Re: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: SamTilden2020 on October 11, 2017, 07:45:02 am
In terms of 'populist' states, West Virginia comes to mind


Title: Re: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: RINO Tom on October 11, 2017, 09:24:55 am
I think you would have to specify by party ... for example, Ohio's Republican Party seems to have somewhat of an "Establishment" feel, while it's Democratic Party seems pretty populist.  Additionally, due to the closed primary status, actual registered Democrats in West Virginia (who outnumber Republicans by a huge margin) are probably very populist while registered Republicans (who enjoy their biggest registration advantages by the DC exurbs) are fairly establishment, even though that is not very intuitive.


Title: Re: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: VPH on October 11, 2017, 09:27:01 am
In terms of 'populist' states, West Virginia comes to mind
I'm tempted to say the same but they elected Jay Rockefeller


Title: Re: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: Nyvin on October 11, 2017, 09:39:58 am
Establishment states would be the larger states that can have the biggest influence, like California and New York for Democrats, and Texas and Ohio for Republicans.

That's why you see so many congressional leaders from those states, that's also where a lot of the money comes from as well for both parties.  

The populist states would be the smaller states where grassroots connections and local ideas are a bigger issue.


Title: Re: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: RINO Tom on October 11, 2017, 09:40:17 am
In terms of 'populist' states, West Virginia comes to mind
I'm tempted to say the same but they elected Jay Rockefeller

There is a certain amount of populism you retain simply by having a D next to your name.  Jay Rockefeller wasn't in DC all of those years arguing for cutting taxes and freeing up markets.


Title: Re: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: Calm NH Lib on October 11, 2017, 02:09:15 pm
Solidly establishment "liberal"
Connecticut
New Jersey
New York
Maryland

Borderline establishment/populist liberal
Massachusetts (Western Mass. is more populist, Eastern Mass. is more establishment, generally)
California (heavily dependent on region, think Humboldt County vs. Silicon Valley)
Illinois (both elements exist in Chicago depending on neighborhood; rest of the state tends to be populist)

Populist liberal
Vermont
Oregon
Washington
Hawaii
Minnesota

Establishment conservative
Utah
Most of the Deep South
Texas
Great Plains

Populist conservative
Conservative portions of the Rockies (Wyoming, Montana, etc.)
West Virginia


Title: Re: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: Skill and Chance on October 11, 2017, 08:15:57 pm
()

Establishment: large cities, lots of federal employees, large retiree populations, or organized religion still near mid 20th century strength (Mormons in UT, Baptists in TX, etc.)

Populist: rural, young, disconnected, limited federal presence, less connected



Title: Re: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: Lechasseur on October 27, 2017, 05:45:11 pm
()

Establishment: large cities, lots of federal employees, large retiree populations, or organized religion still near mid 20th century strength (Mormons in UT, Baptists in TX, etc.)

Populist: rural, young, disconnected, limited federal presence, less connected



I agree with this map.

To fill in the blanks:
Establishment: North Carolina, South Carolina, Washington
Populist: Mississippi, Oklahoma, Kansas, Colorado, Idaho


Title: Re: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: Lechasseur on October 27, 2017, 05:46:45 pm
I think you would have to specify by party ... for example, Ohio's Republican Party seems to have somewhat of an "Establishment" feel, while it's Democratic Party seems pretty populist.  Additionally, due to the closed primary status, actual registered Democrats in West Virginia (who outnumber Republicans by a huge margin) are probably very populist while registered Republicans (who enjoy their biggest registration advantages by the DC exurbs) are fairly establishment, even though that is not very intuitive.

That's true


Title: Re: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: Bismarck on October 28, 2017, 10:23:56 am
Indiana is populist for democrats and establishment for GOP. Our most recent republican governors are Holcomb, Pence, and Daniels, and our most recent GOP senators are Lugar, Coates, and Young. All very establishment.


Title: Re: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: MB on October 28, 2017, 05:11:02 pm
Establishment: The big states (California, Texas, Florida, New York, Illinois), and all of the Eastern Seaboard south of New York. The upper West, including Pacific Northwest, is populist, while the southwest is fairly establishment.

Plains states and New England are populist. The South is a mix; the coastal south is fairly establishment while the upper and western deep south are more populist. Any state that has elected a major 3rd-party or independent statewide official recently is populist.


Title: Re: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: King of Kensington on October 29, 2017, 09:05:08 pm
In what states do "country club Republicans" outnumber "religious right" Republicans?  Or can religious right be establishment too?

It seems the constituency for establishment Republicanism (i.e. more focused on orthodox conservative economics and on foreign policy than on social issues and populist issues like abortion or immigration) is pretty small in the US, but establishment liberalism is powerful enough to set the tone in Massachusetts, Maryland, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Illinois etc.


Title: Re: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: darklordoftech on October 29, 2017, 09:23:41 pm
In what states do "country club Republicans" outnumber "religious right" Republicans?  Or can religious right be establishment too?

It seems the constituency for establishment Republicanism (i.e. more focused on orthodox conservative economics and on foreign policy than on social issues and populist issues like abortion or immigration) is pretty small in the US, but establishment liberalism is powerful enough to set the tone in Massachusetts, Maryland, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Illinois etc.
I think religious right can be establishment. For example, Dubya. Trade and isolationism are the issues that distinguish populist Republicans from establishment Republicans.


Title: Re: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: King of Kensington on October 29, 2017, 10:17:39 pm
Fair enough.  I guess in the South, in Texas, Utah etc. there really isn't much of a tension as even the "establishment" is rather socially conservative and religious even if they don't emphasize it enough for a lot of the base.


Title: Re: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: Del Tachi on October 30, 2017, 01:02:00 pm
()


Title: Re: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: heatcharger on October 30, 2017, 03:07:34 pm
The whiter the state the less satisfied they are with government.


Title: Re: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: Young Conservative on October 31, 2017, 11:18:53 pm
The state about to elect Roy Moore is an establishment state?


Title: Re: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: Pro-Life Single Issue Voter on October 31, 2017, 11:41:29 pm
"Establishment" and "populist" are really vague terms and terrible ways to understand intraparty divides.  More moderate versus more ideologically extreme might be a better divide, because it's possible to be very far right/left ideologically but friendly to the establishment (eg. Pence) or ideologically moderate but very populist (eg. Trump, at least in his campaign).

An example of an ideologically extreme but establishment state is Wisconsin, especially on the GOP side.  Its Republican and Democratic bases are both fairly ideologically extreme, but are just there in relatively equal numbers (hence Senators Ron Johnson and Tammy Baldwin and Governor Scott Walker).  But, it went strongly for Cruz (who was the "establishment" candidate- but also quite conservative- at that point) in the primary and none of its elected officials seem to be in the Trumpist populist wing of the party, even if all their Republicans are quite conservative.


Title: Re: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: RINO Tom on November 01, 2017, 09:15:01 am
I know TN voted for Clinton twice, but 1) most of those voters that pushed Slick Willy over the edge are dead now and 2) it seems to have some of the most establishment Republicans in the country...


Title: Re: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: Del Tachi on November 01, 2017, 10:23:21 am

Blacks are very establishment, combined with the establishment Whites they make over 50% of the electorate in the Deep South.


Title: Re: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: darklordoftech on November 01, 2017, 06:20:38 pm
An "establishment" voter is more likely to re-elect an incumbant while a "populist" voter is more likely to vote for a primary challenger.


Title: Re: "Establishment" states and "populist" states
Post by: Pro-Life Single Issue Voter on November 01, 2017, 06:27:27 pm
An "establishment" voter is more likely to re-elect an incumbant while a "populist" voter is more likely to vote for a primary challenger.

I don't like that definition either.  Assuming he wins, does Roy Moore become establishment?  What about a hypothetical Kasich primary challenge to Trump?