Macomb and Oakland counties (Michigan)

[MaC]

any one else notice the recent shift?  Oakland used to be one of the 'go to' spots for Republicans to get out the vote, to promote business, ect.  Macomb used to be the 'go to' spots for the Democrats to get out the vote for the factory and/or union workers, ect.

Looking recently though Oakland voted for Granholm in 2002 and Kerry in 2004.  Macomb voted for Posthumus in 2002 and Bush in 2004.  Now granted-it's no landslide-both seem to be 'close'.  But I'm wondering what changes in population demographics or ideological shifts took place for this to happen.

Any ideas? 

[Nym90]

Oakland seems to be more libertarian, and Macomb more populist. That would largely explain why the two have tended to switch parties in opposite directions, as social issues have become more prominent. Oakland is certainly much wealthier, and in fact is one of the wealthiest counties in the nation.

Another large factor is that many middle class and higher blacks have fled Detroit for areas like Southfield and other parts of southern Oakland County, and taken their Democratic votes with them. Oakland County also has a large Jewish population. Macomb also has more rural areas, with more farmers, who usually vote Republican. It seems as though suburban sprawl is growing much faster in Oakland County.

[bgwah]

Macomb doesn't look like it's been safely Democratic since the 60s...Had a few narrow Dem wins 1992-2000 though. Was Republican for a while before that.

Most of the towns in Oakland are still Republican, many over 60%. But like Nym said, a few of the larger towns like Southfield and Pontiac have huge enough Dem margins to give the county to Kerry.

[Republican Michigander]

I wouldn't call Oakland libertarian by any stretch of the imagination. It's a law and order center. Macomb actually has the bigger libertarian streak (Leon Drolet) and don't even think about taking guns away there. Oakland's much more anti-gun.

Oakland went for Kerry by about 3000 votes and Gore by 7000. Bush actually gained in 2004 over 2000.  Macomb went for Bush by about 6000 votes and Gore by 8000 votes. Macomb's Bush swing was due to his gains in the union areas, and due to John Kerry not being the right kind of person for the county.

In Oakland, Bush made big gains in Western and Northern Oakland, but lost a lot of ground in the black areas and "Ann Arbor type" areas there.

Southfield was the biggest reason it's gone democrat. Twice, the dems won it by 25000.  Pontiac gives the dems another 13000 vote spread. Oak Park gives the dems another 9000. Those are mostly black areas. Pontiac is a union area, and Southfield/Oak Park were once mostly Jewish and now mostly black. These areas are 80%+ democrat and put the GOP in almost a 50,000 vote hole just to start.

Most of them moved to West Bloomfield and Farmington Hills. (Novi's another spot to watch in the future) West Bloomfield has about a 4000 dem split and Farmington Hills 2000. Those were once Republican. That goes along with longtime democrat and/or liberal areas in SE Oakland County. Ferndale (Gay capital of Michigan), Huntington Woods, Royal Oak, and Pleasant Ridge. That has been mostly part of Sander Levin's district for years. (although Royal Oak was given to Knollenberg in exchange for Southfield).

To add to that, a lot of the 84 Reaganites in Oakland now live in North Macomb, Lapeer, or Livingston Counties which are all moving to the right.

[Alcon]

By libertarian, I think he meant economically conservative and socially left-of-centre.  There are plenty of anti-gun suburbs that are economically conservative.

[Nym90]

By libertarian, I think he meant economically conservative and socially left-of-centre.  There are plenty of anti-gun suburbs that are economically conservative.

Yeah, true. Macomb is pretty clearly more socially conservative than Oakland overall, and seems more economically liberal. I certainly wasn't saying Oakland was hardcore libertarian at all.

But both are changing a lot demographically, so this isn't entirely accurate necessarily. It's a broad generalization for both counties as both are large and diverse.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

If MaC can remember a time when Macomb was (in Presidential elections anyway) a Democratic stronghold, then he's a lot older than most other posters here... besides, during the '80's it voted very strongly for Reagan and Bush sr; classic Reagan Democrat terrority really.
And Oakland was only a GOP stronghold from the early '70's to the early '90's...

[MaC]

Massachusetts voted for Reagan in the 80s, Al.
Yes, I'll admit a lot of this is due to historical tendencies-ex. my parents telling me about past voting patterns.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Massachusetts voted for Reagan in the 80s, Al.

Yes, I do actually know that. Although Massachusetts certainly didn't vote for Reagan by 32pts did it?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Another factor in that, might be the fact that most of the area was represented by David Bonior for ages, until he was gerrymandered out of his seat.

[Central Lake]

Bump

[S019]

I thought this was a thread from modern times at first, but the analysis here seems to be spot on, and it explains why it won't be easy for Democrats to win back Obama/Trump voters, many of them were Republicans who voted for Obama. Of course, no one could have foreseen the shift in places like Bloomfield Hills, but it was the next logical step of the suburban realignment.

[OSR stands with Israel]

I thought this was a thread from modern times at first, but the analysis here seems to be spot on, and it explains why it won't be easy for Democrats to win back Obama/Trump voters, many of them were Republicans who voted for Obama. Of course, no one could have foreseen the shift in places like Bloomfield Hills, but it was the next logical step of the suburban realignment.

Yah Obama was a once in a generation candidate who also faced the republicans in their weakest state since the late 1970s which is probably why he did so well in those areas

[mileslunn]

Interesting that even back in 2006 discussion about shifts that have come to fruition since, just much more.  I think current fault lines of wealthy educated swinging Democrat was starting to appear even then but not near to extent today while blue collar were trending GOP as far back as Reagan, but again trend has accelerated since.  Obama was able to hold back the swing of WWC but after swung hard and midterms and 2020 seem to re-enforce it was not solely because Hillary Clinton was a bad candidate but rather larger trends.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I thought this was a thread from modern times at first, but the analysis here seems to be spot on, and it explains why it won't be easy for Democrats to win back Obama/Trump voters, many of them were Republicans who voted for Obama. Of course, no one could have foreseen the shift in places like Bloomfield Hills, but it was the next logical step of the suburban realignment.

I at first also thought this thread was recent.
Ultimately a lot of people had then-present day voting patterns in mind, patterns that themselves were rooted in the strength of Reaganite suburban conservativism. Of course, that could and did change.