Are The Yellow Dog Democrat Counties Gone Forever?

Looking at the county returns from the 2008 Presidential election, Obama made impressive gains almost across the board.  The one exception to the trend, as we’re all aware of around here, is in the Yellow Dog Democrat counties of the southern Midwest, Deep South, and Appalachia.  While these counties have been trending against the Democrats for decades, and particularly since the Clinton years, the Yellow Dog realignment into the waiting hands of Republicans was almost 100% completed in the 2008 election.  The question is….can we ever get them back in national elections?

Not everyone’s definition of Yellow Dog Democrats is the same, but I usually classify them as the conservative Democrats of the three aforementioned regions (Appalachia, southern Midwest, Deep South) in majority-white jurisdictions.  On the surface, Obama’s 29 county victories in Mississippi suggest a continued presence of Yellow Dog-ism, but nearly all of those 29 counties are majority-black.  One of the last-standing Mississippi counties that could be generously classified as a Yellow Dog County is Benton County in the north-central part of the state, and that was the only 2004 Kerry county in the state to swing to Bush this year.

As a rule, the smaller the minority population in a given county, the more likely they were to see a seismic movement towards McCain this year compared to past Presidential elections.  The Mondale-McCain counties chart on this website outlined this realignment quite effectively, but the role race played in harming Democratic chances in many of these counties is likely quite substantial.  Had Hillary Clinton been the nominee, it’s probably a safe bet that the Mondale-McCain county list would have fewer entries, particularly in states like Kentucky and Tennessee.

Kerry took a substantial hit in the Yellow Dog Democrat counties four years ago as well, but I’m struck how many of the now seemingly long-gone Yellow Dog counties were still onboard for Al Gore, even outside of Gore’s home state of Tennessee.  There were two counties in southern Illinois (Franklin and Perry) where Gore was victorious but favorite son Barack Obama couldn’t even pull out a win.  The same is true in a handful of counties in western Kentucky and northern Alabama.  It’s hard to imagine that any high-profile national Democratic figure could emerge victorious in 2008 in Gore counties like Ballard County, Kentucky; Jackson County, Alabama; and Hughes County, Oklahoma.

It strikes me that the significance of so many of these counties holding on through the 2000 Gore v. Bush election can be at least somewhat connected to that election being more senior-centric than any campaign in recent memory (“putting Social Security in an ironclad lock box”).  It can be safely assumed that it was the oldsters in these mostly rural Yellow Dog counties who were most likely to stick with Gore in 2000 and who have dying off in years since.  Those still alive are statistically the demographic most likely to be repelled by the prospect of an African-American for President.  But in some cases, the shift away from Obama was so dramatic this year that it leaves me wondering if the Democratic proclivity in the Yellow Dog counties has been completely abandoned by younger generations of residents.  Are the allegedly more tolerant 20-somethings of Letcher County, Kentucky, just as likely to forfeit their Democratic heritage as their grandfathers over race?  Or has the Democratic heritage been diluted over the generations to the point that the 20-somethings have no emotional or familial ties to the Democratic Party.

Interestingly, at the time I thought Gore’s 2000 showing represented the Democratic trough as it pertained to the Yellow Dog regions, at least in northern Appalachain Clinton strongholds like eastern Ohio, western Pennsylvania, and West Virginia.  Certainly, I thought, the squishy Gore margins in this region merely represented a one-time flirtation with a “compassionate conservative” that was produced by Clinton exhaustion.  I felt the same about the Upper Midwest after Gore’s soft showing in that region, and went into 2004 expecting Kerry to vastly overperform Gore everywhere from Aberdeen, South Dakota, to Decatur, Illinois, to Steubenville, Ohio.  I ended up being stunned to see many of these areas actually got redder in 2004.  And then of course in 2008, the trajectory of the two pro-Bush regions split.  Obama saw considerable gains in the Upper Midwest and Corn Belt while the Yellow Dog strongholds continued their drift towards Republicans.

With that in mind, looking forward to 2012, the question begs itself….can these people be won over?  If Obama gets as high of marks for governing in the next four years as he has for organizing his campaign and transition team in the last two, will the voters of Hope, Arkansas, be less afraid than they are now of “blacks taking over the levers of power in the country” after attaining the White House?  If the insane fears of Obama’s “Muslim background” are proven fruitless in the next four years, will Al Gore’s former neighbors in Carthage, Tennessee, resume their long-standing tradition of instinctively voting Democratic in future election cycles?  If serious efforts are undertaken (and ideally delivered) to reverse the decline of the lower-middle class, will the voters of Weirton, West Virginia, reconnect with the Democratic Party they were so solidly aligned with in the past century?  Or is the drift towards Republicanism in these areas irreversible for the foreseeable future now matter how well Obama performs in office?

81 thoughts on “Are The Yellow Dog Democrat Counties Gone Forever?”

  1. since the night of the election.

    My answer is a provisional yes: these counties can and will come back if Obama is generally perceived to have done a good job. Here’s why I say that: at the local level, even during concurrent elections, Democrats did better-than-fine everywhere buy Tennessee.

    Just look at the statewide results for other Democrats running in Pennsylvania. The candidates for Treasurer and Auditor ran quite well in places Fayette, Washington, Greene, and Beaver counties. There was a similar picture in West Virginia, where Democrats appear to have swept the ticket, other than at the Presidential level.  

    Now, this could all be issue-based. Maybe these folks generally don’t want to vote for candidates they know to be pro-choice.

    Time will tell.  

  2. I just know that the entire formula for Democratic victory has changed. Not that long ago, no Democrat could win without Tennessee & Louisiana while no Republican would ever worry about losing Virginia or Colorado. But with the aging, “de-union-ized”, and “culture wars” polarized population of Appalachia & The Deep South, it just seems like this region is moving away from us. Perhaps if we can find another “Bill/Hillary Cinton-esque” candidate who can connect with these voters on economic issues, perhaps we can win these areas again. But since the population of these areas continues to shrink, perhaps these areas will no longer be necessary for us to win.

    Meanwhile, I have to give Barack Obama credit for putting together an urban + suburban, black + Latino + young + “Rockefeller Republican” + newly registered Democrats + white-collar Independent coalition that could win us the Southern Coast states Virginia, North Carolina, & Florida, along with the Southwestern states Colorado, New Mexico, & Nevada. If these demographic trends continue, all of these states will be firmly in our column.

    Honestly, it may be tough for us to find a coherent message that can appeal both to the “Old Coalition” states in Appalachia & The Deep South and the “New Coalition” states along The South Coast & in The Southwest. How can cultural & economic populism mesh with inclusivity & diversity? What can we do to appeal to both crowds?

  3. the candidate who can win us Appalachia and the Inland South (I say that because we seem to be doing well in the coastal south; Virginia; Carolinas, Florida) are the same candidates who will probably lose us Colorado, Nevada, New Hampshire, put perhaps the Upper Midwest in play.

    Just as the GOP learned running candidates who win the south lose them places like Connecticut, New Jersey and California, we may realize running candidates who wins us the Rockies, Coastal South and Union states loses us traditionally Democratic Appalachia, Inland South.

    I don’t know if it’s possible to win everything anymore, tand if it is, then it’s going to be in a reelection  campaign.

  4. The perfect example was an open Florida state house seat in north Florida where democrats had a top-tier candidate (a popular rural county sheriff) running.  The district is overwhelmingly democratic in registration, yet our guy still lost in a blowout, something like 60-40.

    This seems to be the case in the entire panhandle of Florida.  Voters are still heavily democratic, yet despite the big democratic wins nationwide they still drifted towards republicans at ALL levels of government.  Aside from a couple black majority state house districts in north Florida, elected democrats are almost nonexistent.

    Overall I’d say it’s more a good thing than bad.  Let them go and let us form a democratic party more representative of the country.  In Florida the panhandle is the only region of the state with stagnant to declining population, so it’s effect will have a minimal effect on the party in the longrun.  This region has a mere two congressional districts left (1st and 2nd) and we still hold one of them.  Come redistricting those lines will stretch even further.

    The future of Florida is in the urban in suburban Central and South Florida, not North Florida.  Obama made huge gains in Central Florida and big gains in South FL.  The only problem we still have is breaking up the republican gerrymander at the local level.  Try as we might we made almost no gains in the state house and no gains in the state senate.

Comments are closed.