Non Partisan Discussion-1976 vs 2008 Election

[jasonxctf]

So I was reading an article earlier today that said that Obama was the first Democrat to win the White House with 50%+ of the vote since LBJ. I knew that with Ross Perot involved, that Clinton didn't, but couldn't believe that there was a strong 3rd party in 76 with Jimmy Carter. Well my hunch was close as Carter won 50.1% of the vote. Anyway, looking at the electoral college map from that election, its amazing to see the shift in American politics.

 

In 1976, the Republicans won what is now solid Democrat states. (California, Oregon, Washington, Michigan, New Jersey, Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine)

 

In 1976 the Democrats won what is now solid Republican states. (Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee, West Virgina and South Carolina)

 

Interesting to see a dramatic shift (nationally) for 19 states over the 7 elections in between Carter and Obama.

[Balta1701]

I think that the dramatic shift in states used to be much more the norm. The "Constant 5 swing state" situation we're currently in where the same states are key in every election is, IIRC, much more unusual historically.

[Chet Lemon]

I think that in the '70's many people in the south identified themselves as Democrats, while many northeastern and midwestern states had a lot more self-described Republicans. A lot of those same people and their children have switched their parties since.

[jasonxctf]

Wow.. check out the two county results map.

 

[jasonxctf]

Its funny, if you didn't know any better and were asked to pick which map represented Blue winning 53-46 and which one winning 50-48, i'm sure you'd get it wrong.

[NorthSideSox72]

I think that in the '70's many people in the south identified themselves as Democrats, while many northeastern and midwestern states had a lot more self-described Republicans. A lot of those same people and their children have switched their parties since.

Those were farm democrats and small-government republicans. Both of which are now dying breeds. The new Republican party (the current core of it) is much less about small government and individual rights, still about big military infrastructure, and much more about social crusades and xenophobia. The democrats are now much less about rural communities and the common man, still a lot about subsidies and government involvement, and more about xenophilia. Neither are particularly interested in fiscal discipline or anything that could be remotely construed as governmental conservatism. Neither are particularly interested in individual rights, either.

 

But this will change over time, as will the map, as history shows.

 

[Balta1701]

But this will change over time, as will the map, as history shows.

The interesting thing though is...the change from cycle to cycle seems to be decreasing somewhat, as people seem to cluster more with "Their own kind". It's not a hard and fast rule, but people who are left leaning keep tending to find ways to move to cities, California, NY, etc., people who are right leaning are finding suburban communities in the south to move to. The only trend that really seems to plausibly change that is the growing latino community.

[NorthSideSox72]

The interesting thing though is...the change from cycle to cycle seems to be decreasing somewhat, as people seem to cluster more with "Their own kind". It's not a hard and fast rule, but people who are left leaning keep tending to find ways to move to cities, California, NY, etc., people who are right leaning are finding suburban communities in the south to move to. The only trend that really seems to plausibly change that is the growing latino community.

You couldn't really have predicted the change in the 70's to now (at least not all of it). You also can't predict the new ones. Too many dynamics, too many things we cannot anticipate.

 

[lostfan]

Those were farm democrats and small-government republicans. Both of which are now dying breeds. The new Republican party (the current core of it) is much less about small government and individual rights, still about big military infrastructure, and much more about social crusades and xenophobia. The democrats are now much less about rural communities and the common man, still a lot about subsidies and government involvement, and more about xenophilia. Neither are particularly interested in fiscal discipline or anything that could be remotely construed as governmental conservatism. Neither are particularly interested in individual rights, either.

 

But this will change over time, as will the map, as history shows.

This is close to 100% of what my own analysis would've been if I typed this.

[bmags]

Its funny, if you didn't know any better and were asked to pick which map represented Blue winning 53-46 and which one winning 50-48, i'm sure you'd get it wrong.

 

Well, I mean if you knew where the high populace areas were I bet you could figure it out.