Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 23, 2019, 03:32:27 pm
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Atlas Forum
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Torie)
  Dukakis won very white states
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Dukakis won very white states  (Read 330 times)
buritobr
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,150


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: August 13, 2019, 10:10:14 pm »

Except DC, Hawai and New York, the states Dukakis won were >80% non-hispanic white.


It is very hard nowadays a democrat have a large national defeat and win very white states, some of them by not so small margins
Logged
Oh Jeremy Corbyn
ShadowOfTheWave
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6,583
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: August 13, 2019, 10:14:13 pm »

Because they didn't have the suburban vs urban racial tension that existed in more diverse states. Bush's biggest issue was crime.
Logged
darklordoftech
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,832
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: August 13, 2019, 10:15:56 pm »

Most of the states Dukakis won have voted Democratic in every election since.
Logged
Truth Hurts
tara gilesbie
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,724
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: August 13, 2019, 11:29:02 pm »

Dukakis vote was correlated heavily with the rates of union membership, which in those days was 16 percent. The rate of private-sector union membership was still as high as 12.7 percent (today that number is only 6.4 percent).

http://unionstats.gsu.edu/Private-Sector-workers.htm
Logged
marty
boshembechle
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,223


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: August 14, 2019, 12:01:26 am »

The 1988 election was weird.

Dukakis did remarkably well (for a dem) in a bunch of plain states and upper midwest in a year where bush did well nationally. This was due to farm crisis.

IIRC, dems were actually fairly giddy sfter election night because, even though they lost, dukakis had built a new, strong base for dem party. Clinton built on that base and extended it.
Logged
Lfromnj stands with Sanchez.
lfromnj
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5,113


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: August 14, 2019, 02:39:48 pm »

The 1988 election was weird.

Dukakis did remarkably well (for a dem) in a bunch of plain states and upper midwest in a year where bush did well nationally. This was due to farm crisis.

IIRC, dems were actually fairly giddy sfter election night because, even though they lost, dukakis had built a new, strong base for dem party. Clinton built on that base and extended it.

Yeah this base basically held pretty strong through 2012 in general, See those driftless counties.
Logged
Stranger in a strange land
strangeland
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8,394
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: August 14, 2019, 02:43:39 pm »

Because they didn't have the suburban vs urban racial tension that existed in more diverse states. Bush's biggest issue was crime.
Also, crime wasn't a major issue in rural areas then, but the farm crisis was: this also explains why Dukakis won or came close in a lot of farm states (which also tend to be heavily white) despite doing poorly nationally.
Logged
Mopolis
MOPolitico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,108
United States


Political Matrix
E: -3.03, S: 1.13

P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: August 14, 2019, 04:00:40 pm »

Every state was very white back then.
Logged
North Fulton Swing
mollybecky
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 935


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: August 14, 2019, 05:12:11 pm »

The 1988 election was weird.

Dukakis did remarkably well (for a dem) in a bunch of plain states and upper midwest in a year where bush did well nationally. This was due to farm crisis.

IIRC, dems were actually fairly giddy sfter election night because, even though they lost, dukakis had built a new, strong base for dem party. Clinton built on that base and extended it.

The Democrats weren't giddy after winning a pathetic 10 states--especially when in July 1988 they thought they were going to defeat Bush rather handily.  I was in Atlanta during the DNC that summer, and many Dem operatives were serious about winning 300-350 electoral votes by putting states like Colorado and New Jersey in play (these states hadn't gone Democratic in 24 years).  But you are correct that Dukakis did establish a base in the Northeast, Midwest, and West Coast that Clinton expanded (plus his Southern states) very effectively in 1992 and 1996.
Logged
NOVA Green
Oregon Progressive
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,826
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: August 14, 2019, 09:36:32 pm »

The 1988 election was weird.

Dukakis did remarkably well (for a dem) in a bunch of plain states and upper midwest in a year where bush did well nationally. This was due to farm crisis.

IIRC, dems were actually fairly giddy sfter election night because, even though they lost, dukakis had built a new, strong base for dem party. Clinton built on that base and extended it.

The Democrats weren't giddy after winning a pathetic 10 states--especially when in July 1988 they thought they were going to defeat Bush rather handily.  I was in Atlanta during the DNC that summer, and many Dem operatives were serious about winning 300-350 electoral votes by putting states like Colorado and New Jersey in play (these states hadn't gone Democratic in 24 years).  But you are correct that Dukakis did establish a base in the Northeast, Midwest, and West Coast that Clinton expanded (plus his Southern states) very effectively in 1992 and 1996.

You must have 5-10 Years on me there.... I remember digesting the Weekly state tracking polls in Newsweek or US News & World Report for the final stretch of the campaign post convention, and watching what looked like a landslide turn into a solid Republican EC (as well as PV win).

Even the national polling numbers indicated the election might be closer than it was in my recollection even down the final 30 Day stretch, with significant numbers of undecided voters....

I also remember going to the University Library and getting the closest thing to County level returns and analysis that you could get back in the days, where Congressional Quarterly ran a weekly series for 4-6 weeks after the election, where they would break down election results by type of county....

The massive swings in the Midwest farming region really stood out on the DEM side.

Logged
NOVA Green
Oregon Progressive
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,826
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: August 14, 2019, 10:03:04 pm »
« Edited: August 14, 2019, 11:19:46 pm by NOVA Green »

Dukakis vote was correlated heavily with the rates of union membership, which in those days was 16 percent. The rate of private-sector union membership was still as high as 12.7 percent (today that number is only 6.4 percent).

http://unionstats.gsu.edu/Private-Sector-workers.htm

Truth Hurts brings up a good point, especially considering the Pacific Northwest....

Oregon was traditionally a Center-Right State in Presidential Elections for decades....

1948: 46-50 R (+4 R)
1960: 47-53 R (+6 R)
1968: 44-50 R (+6 R) plus 6% voting for George Wallace
1972: 42-52 R (+10 R)
1976: 47.6-47.7 R (+0.1% R)------    Here is where we start to see Oregon start to shift
1980: 39-48 R (+9 R)----- Now John Anderson captured about 9.5% of the Vote here.
1984: 44-56 R (+12 R)----   So "Morning in America" and recovery from the Reagan recession, but Oregon is now to the left of the Nation.

1988: 47-51 D (+4 D)----   Oregon is now some 11% to the "Left of the Nation"

Now observe what we see here..... Democrats obtain > 50% for the first time since '64. Republicans have their lowest level, in what was essentially a State settled by White Protestants, many of New England backgrounds in the Northern Part of the State, and in the Southern part of Oregon and up roughly to the Linn/Benton > Marion County Line by Southerners that migrated up in heavy numbers starting at the time of California Gold Rush....

The Union Pulp and Timber Mills in Oregon traditionally tended to reside in the Northern parts of Oregon, AND a disproportionate sector of Timber Industry Workers statewide (Not even going into the history of the logging sector in the PacNW at this time).

Oregon suffered one of the highest rates of unemployment in the nation at the time of the Reagan Recession, which impacted workers throughout the state, because of the forced austerity program to manipulate interest rates, which collapsed the US Housing Market.

"When the American Economy has a Recession, Oregon has a Depression" is an often-heard phrase around here from back in the days.

Additionally, the collapse of the Timber Industry because of Reagan Administration policies caused a massive fiscal crisis in State, County, and School District budgets, that expanded the Fiscal Austerity regime of the former FBI Hoover agent President Ronald Reagan, which started in the late '40s and extended all the way into the early 1970s.

Also, Reagan Administration Foreign Policy platforms weren't particularly popular in a working-class state like Oregon, where many draftees fought, served, and died in Vietnam.

After the Iran-Contra hearings of '87 and all of the revelations of CIA activities in Central America, orchestrated by the President and his inner circle, it looked objectively to many of us like Bush Senior would continue to operate under shadowy circumstances and cause yet another war, where many of us were already were aware of the massacres being committed in Central America by Fascist regimes, fully funded by US Taxpayer dollars.....

Bush Sr not popular in the Pacific Northwest on Foreign Policy.

Bush Sr not popular in the PacNW on Economic Policy.

Hell--- wouldn't be surprised if Jesse Jackson had beat Bush Sr in Oregon had he been the candidate in the 1988 GE.

Was at a Jesse Jackson rally a week or two before the '88 OR-DEM-PRIM and an estimated 13-17k folks showed up in a City of 35k Pop.....

Jesse walked the picket line with striking Union pulp workers at a large facility, which was a major high $$$ employer in the area.....

Downstate OR-DEMs grooved his vibe....

Metro PDX was tougher for Jesse.

Logged
morgankingsley
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,697
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: August 15, 2019, 06:20:15 am »


And that my friends is the 1988 election in a nutshell if I ever become a teacher
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC