Three important trends
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 02:22:36 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: 15 Down, 35 To Go)
  Three important trends
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Three important trends  (Read 8198 times)
Beefalow and the Consumer
Beef
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,123
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.77, S: -8.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: September 30, 2004, 01:03:31 PM »

As soon as it's ready, I'm going to post maps of all elections from 1968-2000, showing how states voted vs. the national popular vote.  It yields some cool visualization.  I'll also be making "trend" maps showing how these states are shifting relative to the nation.

Anyway, in doing this, I have encountered three important trends so far:

1. The Prairie Shift: WI, MN, IA, IL, ND, SD, NE, KS, MT
In the prairie states, the rural areas have shifted drastically to the right.  It has turned moderate states like SD and MT into heavily Republicans states, and heavily Democratic states like WI, IA, and MN into Moderate states.  In IL, the Prairie Shift is counterbalanced by the Metro Shift in Chicagoland.

2. The East Coast Shift: DE, NJ, CT, NH, ME
The non-urban East Coast, from the Mid-Atlantic through New England, has shifted drastically to the left.  DE and CT are now solidly Democrat, and NH and ME are now swing states.  The fate of NJ remains to be seen, as its shift to the left is very recent, and many polls are indicating a close race in 2004.  NY, RI, and MD have also been effected, although not as much.

3. The Metro Shift (nationwide):
Densely populated areas are becoming more and more Democratic, especially the suburbs.  The shift of the Chicago Suburbs from Republican to Democrat, for example, has kept IL safely in the hands of the Democrats.  Michigan is probably the state that is most dramatically affected by this shift.

Other oddball trends:
Pennsylvania.  This state has been getting steadily more Republican since 1984, and doesn't seem to be following any larger trends.

More on this will be posted later, when I have more time...
Logged
Beefalow and the Consumer
Beef
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,123
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.77, S: -8.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: September 30, 2004, 01:12:27 PM »

Come to think of it, the state that is even MORE dramatically affected by the Metro Shift is Florida.  It has become incrementally more Democratic each election.  If the current trends hold, FL should go to Kerry 3-5% better than the national PV.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: September 30, 2004, 01:15:51 PM »

Other oddball trends:
Pennsylvania.  This state has been getting steadily more Republican since 1984, and doesn't seem to be following any larger trends.

To a certain degree, that's a result of "the Politics of Abortion"
Logged
Beefalow and the Consumer
Beef
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,123
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.77, S: -8.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: September 30, 2004, 01:29:58 PM »
« Edited: September 30, 2004, 01:31:23 PM by Beef »

Other oddball trends:
Pennsylvania.  This state has been getting steadily more Republican since 1984, and doesn't seem to be following any larger trends.

To a certain degree, that's a result of "the Politics of Abortion"

I think Abortion may be a moderating influence on the Metro Shift, as urban Catholics are becoming less and less enthusiastic about Democrats.  But then, Abortion probably plays a role in all of these trends.  I think it's one of the main things driving the Prairie Shift.  Unless the Democrats moderate on Abortion, they will permamently lose their Midwestern strongholds.  Unless the Republicans do likewise, they can forget about the Northeast and California.
Logged
Bugs
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 574


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: September 30, 2004, 01:39:20 PM »

Are you referring to presidential elections or general politics as a whole?
Logged
Beefalow and the Consumer
Beef
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,123
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.77, S: -8.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: September 30, 2004, 10:04:28 PM »

Are you referring to presidential elections or general politics as a whole?

Presidential elections only.
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 01, 2004, 05:49:48 PM »

As soon as it's ready, I'm going to post maps of all elections from 1968-2000, showing how states voted vs. the national popular vote.  It yields some cool visualization.  I'll also be making "trend" maps showing how these states are shifting relative to the nation.

Anyway, in doing this, I have encountered three important trends so far:

1. The Prairie Shift: WI, MN, IA, IL, ND, SD, NE, KS, MT
In the prairie states, the rural areas have shifted drastically to the right.  It has turned moderate states like SD and MT into heavily Republicans states, and heavily Democratic states like WI, IA, and MN into Moderate states.  In IL, the Prairie Shift is counterbalanced by the Metro Shift in Chicagoland.

2. The East Coast Shift: DE, NJ, CT, NH, ME
The non-urban East Coast, from the Mid-Atlantic through New England, has shifted drastically to the left.  DE and CT are now solidly Democrat, and NH and ME are now swing states.  The fate of NJ remains to be seen, as its shift to the left is very recent, and many polls are indicating a close race in 2004.  NY, RI, and MD have also been effected, although not as much.

3. The Metro Shift (nationwide):
Densely populated areas are becoming more and more Democratic, especially the suburbs.  The shift of the Chicago Suburbs from Republican to Democrat, for example, has kept IL safely in the hands of the Democrats.  Michigan is probably the state that is most dramatically affected by this shift.

Other oddball trends:
Pennsylvania.  This state has been getting steadily more Republican since 1984, and doesn't seem to be following any larger trends.

More on this will be posted later, when I have more time...


Seems like, perversely, the areas that are experiencing economic decline are moving to the right politically, while the areas that are doing relatively better economically are moving left.  There must be something religious and social behind this, rather than economic.
Logged
Akno21
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,066
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 01, 2004, 09:21:32 PM »

Other oddball trends:
Pennsylvania.  This state has been getting steadily more Republican since 1984, and doesn't seem to be following any larger trends.

To a certain degree, that's a result of "the Politics of Abortion"

I think Abortion may be a moderating influence on the Metro Shift, as urban Catholics are becoming less and less enthusiastic about Democrats.  But then, Abortion probably plays a role in all of these trends.  I think it's one of the main things driving the Prairie Shift.  Unless the Democrats moderate on Abortion, they will permamently lose their Midwestern strongholds.  Unless the Republicans do likewise, they can forget about the Northeast and California.


The Democrats main problem with abortion IS losing voters, but not in the matter you talk about. If you agree that more than half of all abortions are had by women who would vote Demcratic, and then agree that in many cases, a child's political beliefs are similar to a parent's, the Democrats are losing a lot of votes, nationwide.
Logged
Democratic Hawk
LucysBeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,703
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: 2.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 02, 2004, 09:43:31 AM »

Very interesting trends Beef.

Dave
Logged
Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck
HockeyDude
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,376
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: October 02, 2004, 05:19:39 PM »

The fate of NJ remains to be seen, as its shift to the left is very recent, and many polls are indicating a close race in 2004.  

A high %-age of Jersey voters are left leaning independents.  As of right now, any decent democratic canidate will do very well here.  Gore in 2000 wasn't a great canidate, but it's not like he was the worst choice.  56% of NJ voted for Gore. (only NY, MA, RI, and MD gave Gore a higher percentage)  For the last several weeks, Kerry has looked like an idiot.  Jersey will rarely vote for an idiot anything.  We are also one big suburb, so we have alot of those middle class inner suburbs that are also largely republican.  That benefits Bush.  Our large black population of social liberalism among even those republican families is what helps democrats.

My overall view of my state is that security is the one thing that can benefit the GOP here.  Alot of security moms and the sort.  But almost every other issue helps the democrats.  If this election winds up close, Kerry wins easily.  

BTW, we are very much part of that left-swing going on in the northeastern suburbs.  I could see us giving democrats over 60% in fture presidential elections, especially ones where social issues play a bigger role.  
Logged
ATFFL
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,754
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: October 02, 2004, 09:38:25 PM »

The fate of NJ remains to be seen, as its shift to the left is very recent, and many polls are indicating a close race in 2004.  

A high %-age of Jersey voters are left leaning independents.  As of right now, any decent democratic canidate will do very well here.  Gore in 2000 wasn't a great canidate, but it's not like he was the worst choice.  56% of NJ voted for Gore. (only NY, MA, RI, and MD gave Gore a higher percentage)  For the last several weeks, Kerry has looked like an idiot.  Jersey will rarely vote for an idiot anything.  We are also one big suburb, so we have alot of those middle class inner suburbs that are also largely republican.  That benefits Bush.  Our large black population of social liberalism among even those republican families is what helps democrats.

My overall view of my state is that security is the one thing that can benefit the GOP here.  Alot of security moms and the sort.  But almost every other issue helps the democrats.  If this election winds up close, Kerry wins easily.  

BTW, we are very much part of that left-swing going on in the northeastern suburbs.  I could see us giving democrats over 60% in fture presidential elections, especially ones where social issues play a bigger role.  

That is about the best analysis of NJ I have ever read.  NJ is not a democrat state in the same sense of RI and MA.  They are not Kool-Aid drinkers.  Given a strong, moderate Republican and a loony left liberal, the Republican will likely win.

A major factor keeping northern NJ from going as far left as NY probably is the desire to be as little like the city as possible.
Logged
Platypus
hughento
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,478
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: October 03, 2004, 12:55:46 AM »

New Jersey, it seems to me,  has a few people we call "Doctors' Wives" in Australia.

Basically, rich women who normally would vote right wing but feel the right doesnt have enough compassion. They are expected to create a few problems for some blue-ribbon Coalition setas this election if enough decide to vote with their hearst rather then their heads, as they see it.
Logged
Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck
HockeyDude
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,376
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: October 03, 2004, 10:03:51 PM »

The fate of NJ remains to be seen, as its shift to the left is very recent, and many polls are indicating a close race in 2004.  

A high %-age of Jersey voters are left leaning independents.  As of right now, any decent democratic canidate will do very well here.  Gore in 2000 wasn't a great canidate, but it's not like he was the worst choice.  56% of NJ voted for Gore. (only NY, MA, RI, and MD gave Gore a higher percentage)  For the last several weeks, Kerry has looked like an idiot.  Jersey will rarely vote for an idiot anything.  We are also one big suburb, so we have alot of those middle class inner suburbs that are also largely republican.  That benefits Bush.  Our large black population of social liberalism among even those republican families is what helps democrats.

My overall view of my state is that security is the one thing that can benefit the GOP here.  Alot of security moms and the sort.  But almost every other issue helps the democrats.  If this election winds up close, Kerry wins easily.  

BTW, we are very much part of that left-swing going on in the northeastern suburbs.  I could see us giving democrats over 60% in fture presidential elections, especially ones where social issues play a bigger role.  

That is about the best analysis of NJ I have ever read.  NJ is not a democrat state in the same sense of RI and MA.  They are not Kool-Aid drinkers.  Given a strong, moderate Republican and a loony left liberal, the Republican will likely win.

A major factor keeping northern NJ from going as far left as NY probably is the desire to be as little like the city as possible.

That is why Bush cannot win here.  He is not a moderate.  A guy like Guiliani has a really good shot here, but I don't see how the conservative wing of the GOP would allow that.  You would basically need the match-up you described for the GOP to win in the current NJ. 
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: October 03, 2004, 10:05:41 PM »

Bush is pretty moderate, for sure
Logged
Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck
HockeyDude
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,376
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: October 04, 2004, 09:17:58 AM »


Yea...sure. 
Logged
ATFFL
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,754
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: October 04, 2004, 10:09:46 AM »

The fate of NJ remains to be seen, as its shift to the left is very recent, and many polls are indicating a close race in 2004. 

A high %-age of Jersey voters are left leaning independents.  As of right now, any decent democratic canidate will do very well here.  Gore in 2000 wasn't a great canidate, but it's not like he was the worst choice.  56% of NJ voted for Gore. (only NY, MA, RI, and MD gave Gore a higher percentage)  For the last several weeks, Kerry has looked like an idiot.  Jersey will rarely vote for an idiot anything.  We are also one big suburb, so we have alot of those middle class inner suburbs that are also largely republican.  That benefits Bush.  Our large black population of social liberalism among even those republican families is what helps democrats.

My overall view of my state is that security is the one thing that can benefit the GOP here.  Alot of security moms and the sort.  But almost every other issue helps the democrats.  If this election winds up close, Kerry wins easily. 

BTW, we are very much part of that left-swing going on in the northeastern suburbs.  I could see us giving democrats over 60% in fture presidential elections, especially ones where social issues play a bigger role. 

That is about the best analysis of NJ I have ever read.  NJ is not a democrat state in the same sense of RI and MA.  They are not Kool-Aid drinkers.  Given a strong, moderate Republican and a loony left liberal, the Republican will likely win.

A major factor keeping northern NJ from going as far left as NY probably is the desire to be as little like the city as possible.

That is why Bush cannot win here.  He is not a moderate.  A guy like Guiliani has a really good shot here, but I don't see how the conservative wing of the GOP would allow that.  You would basically need the match-up you described for the GOP to win in the current NJ. 

There is one other factor that does give Bush an outside shot at NJ.  Namely the collapse of the state democratic party with the McGreevey situation.  That situation has given the whole party something to work against this year, and possibly until the next gubenatorial election. 

It is not enough to give NJ to Bush alone, but with a poor Kerry campaign and a good Bush campaign, he could squeak out a win in NJ.  I would bet on it, but only because the payoff would be big enough and I love betting a good longshot.  THe NJ republican party needs to find a reasonable way to keep the McGreevey situation in the news though.
Logged
Donovan
Rookie
**
Posts: 235


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: October 05, 2004, 03:37:06 AM »

" THe NJ republican party needs to find a reasonable way to keep the McGreevey situation in the news though."

Actually Tedrick, I think that McGreevy has a pretty high approval rating. Higher than Bush's anyway I believe.

I also consider it pretty shallow to do that. But something Rove would probably try.

Logged
TeePee4Prez
Flyers2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,480


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: October 08, 2004, 08:05:34 AM »


Other oddball trends:
Pennsylvania.  This state has been getting steadily more Republican since 1984, and doesn't seem to be following any larger trends.

More on this will be posted later, when I have more time...


Stop smoking the supersoulty/KeystonePhil crackpipe.  If you're looking at Pittsburgh, you're right.  If you're looking at Philadelphia, you're wrong.  Which metro area is bigger?  My point exactly. 
Logged
ATFFL
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,754
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: October 08, 2004, 09:03:47 AM »

" THe NJ republican party needs to find a reasonable way to keep the McGreevey situation in the news though."

Actually Tedrick, I think that McGreevy has a pretty high approval rating. Higher than Bush's anyway I believe.

I also consider it pretty shallow to do that. But something Rove would probably try.



Someone can be doing a good job and have a high approval rating and still kill the party.  Look at Bill CLinton.  The Democrats lost power under him, even when his approval rating was good.

Is it pretty shallow?  Yep.  Is it good politics?  Yep.  Both parties do it all the time.
Logged
Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck
HockeyDude
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,376
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: October 08, 2004, 02:03:10 PM »

" THe NJ republican party needs to find a reasonable way to keep the McGreevey situation in the news though."

Actually Tedrick, I think that McGreevy has a pretty high approval rating. Higher than Bush's anyway I believe.

I also consider it pretty shallow to do that. But something Rove would probably try.



Someone can be doing a good job and have a high approval rating and still kill the party.  Look at Bill CLinton.  The Democrats lost power under him, even when his approval rating was good.

Is it pretty shallow?  Yep.  Is it good politics?  Yep.  Both parties do it all the time.

Jerseyites are smart enough to realize the whole fiasco was the fault of the governor.  Not the state Democratic party, and not John Kerry.  There will be no backlash. 
Logged
ATFFL
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,754
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: October 08, 2004, 05:46:32 PM »


Now there are words rarely seen in sequence.  <G>
Logged
Beefalow and the Consumer
Beef
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,123
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.77, S: -8.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: October 08, 2004, 06:02:00 PM »


Other oddball trends:
Pennsylvania.  This state has been getting steadily more Republican since 1984, and doesn't seem to be following any larger trends.

More on this will be posted later, when I have more time...


Stop smoking the supersoulty/KeystonePhil crackpipe.  If you're looking at Pittsburgh, you're right.  If you're looking at Philadelphia, you're wrong.  Which metro area is bigger?  My point exactly. 

I'm looking at the state as a whole.  Here's how PA has gone relative to the nation:

1984: 10.9% +Dem
1988: 5.4% +Dem
1992: 4.5% +Dem
1996: 0.7% +Dem

2000 actually saw a swing back to the Democrat side.  Don't know if that means the pendulum has swung the other way or not.  But from 84-96, PA was moving the opposite direction from the other states of the Northeast.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,611


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: October 08, 2004, 11:50:42 PM »


Other oddball trends:
Pennsylvania.  This state has been getting steadily more Republican since 1984, and doesn't seem to be following any larger trends.

More on this will be posted later, when I have more time...


Stop smoking the supersoulty/KeystonePhil crackpipe.  If you're looking at Pittsburgh, you're right.  If you're looking at Philadelphia, you're wrong.  Which metro area is bigger?  My point exactly. 

See how this guy gets when someone disagrees? Beef was clearly talking about PA as a whole, not just Philadelphia.
Logged
Redefeatbush04
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,504


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: October 11, 2004, 07:02:40 PM »


Tredrick, we have some of the better edicational atttainment levels in the united states. According to Morgan Quinto, we is 4th, behind only Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Conneticut.
Logged
ATFFL
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,754
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: October 11, 2004, 07:20:22 PM »


Tredrick, we have some of the better edicational atttainment levels in the united states. According to Morgan Quinto, we is 4th, behind only Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Conneticut.

This will explain everything:

I am originally from Long Island.

And when did you become a libertarian?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

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

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.069 seconds with 11 queries.