Which state is the heart and soul of the Democratic/Republican Party?

[RINO Tom]

Dems: Maryland
Republicans: Wyoming

[RINO Tom]

California is, without question, the heart and soul of the Democratic Party. It's one of the most diverse and increasingly diversifying states; has a large liberal, college educated White population; its economy is dominated by industries and sectors that favor higher education and globalization; and it's both socially and economically liberal.

Maryland is the runner-up as it is a highly diverse state with a large, liberal, college educated White population and dominated by globalized industries and governmental agencies. It's not as socially liberal as California, but it is highly supportive of the federal government and globalization.

Choosing a single state for Republicans is difficult. During the Bush II years I would've chosen a Southern state, such as Texas. But today, under Trump, the party is more Rust Belt oriented. I'd say Indiana is the heart and soul of the present GOP. It's a de-industrialized state that has been negatively effected by globalization; socially conservative, but not fundamentalist; highly skeptical of coastal elite and outsiders; and composed largely of white, conservative, working class types.

Agreed about Cali and Indiana.

I'd support Indiana, but not because it's SO "working class."  It's not like the college educated, wealthy professionals around Indianapolis aren't Republicans, too.

[RINO Tom]

If we just went by "region" for the "heart and soul" (or, if I'm reading it correctly, basic *feel* of the party and what its goals are), I think it's obvious that the Northeast still holds that place for the Democrats, and the Mountain West and Great Plains (that hilarious shape of states that go around Colorado and would likely be the last holdouts ... think the first to abandon FDR in the inland) for the GOP, as has been the case since FDR.

[RINO Tom]

Why is everyone choosing states either with so many registered Dems (Oklahoma; GOP registration only surpassed Dem in 2014 and it did not vote for Trump in the primary), states that did not go for Trump in the primary (Idaho, Wyoming, Kansas) and states that went for WJC or Barack Obama (Indiana, Missouri, Tennessee, West Virginia, Arkansas) as the heart and soul of the GOP? The heart and soul of the GOP should be a state that did not go Dem for at least a quarter of a century, that went for Trump in the primary, that trended Republican this year, and that has a reasonable number of WJC92-Trump and HRC08-Trump voters. Alabama fits all the check boxes.

Trump isn't the entire GOP, friend.

[RINO Tom]

Why is everyone choosing states either with so many registered Dems (Oklahoma; GOP registration only surpassed Dem in 2014 and it did not vote for Trump in the primary), states that did not go for Trump in the primary (Idaho, Wyoming, Kansas) and states that went for WJC or Barack Obama (Indiana, Missouri, Tennessee, West Virginia, Arkansas) as the heart and soul of the GOP? The heart and soul of the GOP should be a state that did not go Dem for at least a quarter of a century, that went for Trump in the primary, that trended Republican this year, and that has a reasonable number of WJC92-Trump and HRC08-Trump voters. Alabama fits all the check boxes.

Trump isn't the entire GOP, friend.

For better or worse, he is now.

No, he's not.  He has an entire Congress and a plethora of GOP governors across the country to help him make up what it "means" to be a Republican.  If Trump puts forth anti-trade deals or a big infrastructure spending package, he won't be getting the votes he needs from his own party, he'll be getting crossover support.

[RINO Tom]

Texas most definitely does not fit the Republican Party.

It has a huge educated population, is quite urban, very diverse, and benefits greatly from globalization.

There are way too many factors in the modern day that makes Texas an outlier in today's Republican Party.   10-15 years ago it probably would've been perfect though.

I'd probably say either West Virginia or Arkansas perfectly fits the modern day Republican Party.

Jesus Christ, this is a bad post.  Yes, Texas is an educated, populated and diverse state with mostly free trade conservatives.  None of that insinuates it's anything but a red state ... which it is.

[RINO Tom]

Actually it makes it almost a complete exception to the rule of states that vote Republican.

Reiterating your post doesn't make it any less awful. Using your logic, Vermont should be a solid Republican state because RURALS.

...and no one in their right mind would call Vermont the "Heart and Soul" of the Democratic Party.

Just like no one should call Texas the "Heart and Soul" of the Republican Party.

It's not that complicated here.

Texas is socially conservative, has a very conservative suburban AND rural population, is a very religious state, has a good chunk of wealthy Whites and has a large business community.  Whether you like it or not, all of those represent a very significant faction of the GOP, pal.

[RINO Tom]

Actually it makes it almost a complete exception to the rule of states that vote Republican.

Reiterating your post doesn't make it any less awful. Using your logic, Vermont should be a solid Republican state because RURALS.

...and no one in their right mind would call Vermont the "Heart and Soul" of the Democratic Party.

Just like no one should call Texas the "Heart and Soul" of the Republican Party.

It's not that complicated here.

Texas is socially conservative, has a very conservative suburban AND rural population, is a very religious state, has a good chunk of wealthy Whites and has a large business community.  Whether you like it or not, all of those represent a very significant faction of the GOP, pal.

Wealth isn't a good indicator of being Republican or Democratic.    Texas is more Urban than the country as a whole, and has some of the biggest cities in the country.

The only thing you really have there is the religious part, but that alone isn't enough.

Considering there was a direct correlation between higher household income and voting for Trump (and an even steeper one for Congressional Republicans), I'd say it at the very least is a soft indicator of being more Republican.

[RINO Tom]

Actually it makes it almost a complete exception to the rule of states that vote Republican.

Reiterating your post doesn't make it any less awful. Using your logic, Vermont should be a solid Republican state because RURALS.

...and no one in their right mind would call Vermont the "Heart and Soul" of the Democratic Party.

Just like no one should call Texas the "Heart and Soul" of the Republican Party.

It's not that complicated here.

Texas is socially conservative, has a very conservative suburban AND rural population, is a very religious state, has a good chunk of wealthy Whites and has a large business community.  Whether you like it or not, all of those represent a very significant faction of the GOP, pal.

Wealth isn't a good indicator of being Republican or Democratic.    Texas is more Urban than the country as a whole, and has some of the biggest cities in the country.

The only thing you really have there is the religious part, but that alone isn't enough.

Considering there was a direct correlation between higher household income and voting for Trump (and an even steeper one for Congressional Republicans), I'd say it at the very least is a soft indicator of being more Republican.

-Within each race, income was a non-factor in Trump vote. Marriage and education were infinitely more important.

Uh, who gives a  about what color AMERICAN voters are?  I know all you Trumpists want to think of the GOP as a bunch of God-fearin' folks strugglin' to get by vs. the rich liberals, but it's pure fantasy.

[RINO Tom]

Dems: Maryland
Republicans: Wyoming

Actually sticking with this ... MD gets the nod over California due to the large Black population, and Wyoming is still the obvious GOP answer, IMO.

[RINO Tom]

For all y'all saying Wyoming - it doesn't have suburbanites or Evangelicals, which are two major constituents for the GOP nationally.

California is more representative of the national GOP than Wyoming; at least the Golden State has a non-negligible number of Evangelicals and suburban voters.

I was under the impression that there were a lot of evangelicals in Wyoming (if you ever spent time in Cheyenne you would understand why) but apparently it's only a quarter of the population? Is it because something about evangelical worship requires going to a large church or something?

survey

Northern Virginia is a better reflection of the Democratic Party than CA.

Nah.  Its too rich and too Asian, not enough Blacks or Hispanics.

Not sure where you're getting the idea that NoVA is lacking in AAs or Hispanics from... here's Fairfax County demographic info from 2010 (per Wikipedia)

62.68%    White
9.17%    Black or African American
0.36%    Native American
17.53%    Asian
0.07%    Pacific Islander
4.54%    other races
3.65%    two or more races.
15.58%    Hispanics or Latinos of any race.

Fairfax is definitely wealthier than nearly any other suburban county in the US but in that sense I'd say it pretty much proves the rule. More wealth tends to mean more educated, more educated tends to mean more Democratic. Fairfax's proportion of Asians is definitely higher than the nation on average but of course non-white voters tend to be Democratic.

Right, but more income ALSO means LESS Democratic, even with Trump and the 2018 midterms.  So, I think for "heart and soul" type places, you would want an area that is extremely educated but not overly wealthy.