Tag: trends

Most people agree voters tend to get more conservative as they age, but the age gap in 2008 (and 2004 as well) was huge compared to previous elections like 2000 and the previous few.  In this diary, I’m going to examine the age gap in every state from the 2008 presidential election to see which states are trending towards us in future elections and which away from us.  This would help the Democratic party focus its resources on states like North Carolina, which we all know IS trending towards us, and away from states like West Virginia, which aren’t.  However, when examining the data, I found quite a few surprises as well.  I’m going to start with states with about an average age gap (the Obama percentage of those under 30 minus that of seniors).

17% Gap:

This is still quite large, but these states don’t seem to be trending either way:

Missouri and Arkansas

  As it turned out, this actually surprised me a lot.  So what seems to be happening in these states, which obviously ARE trending red in PVIs, is that older Democrats are voting Republican more so than younger people are more Republican than their parents/grandparents.  This seems to be a phenomenon in quite a few Upper South states.

18% Gap:

Tennessee

  See Missouri and Arkansas for an explanation.  It’s a “the party left me” scenario.

Illinois

  This states seems to be holding quite steady.  The nice thing about the age gap is there’s no need to account for home-state effect, since EVERY voter in Illinois had Obama as their home-state senator.

Massachusetts

  Another blue state that doesn’t seem to be moving much either direction.

Nebraska and Kansas

  Two extremely similar states.  Despite Omaha moving leftward relatively quickly, I guess the rest of Nebraska must be making up for it somehow.

16%:

Florida

  Whites are moving right, but Hispanics are moving left.  They cancel each other out, basically.

Pennsylvania

  The west is moving right more quickly than the east is moving left, but the east is more populous.  Neutral as well.

Michigan

  The Grand Rapids area is moving leftward slightly as the Detroit area shrinks in clout and the suburbs hold relatively steady or move slightly left.  FL, MI, and PA are big swingy states (Michigan is Lean D, PA Tilt D, FL Tilt R in an average year) that are here to stay in the battleground.

15%:

Wisconsin

  Another Tilt/Lean D state that doesn’t have much of a trend.  The Midwest generally seems to be exemplifying this

Maryland

  A strongly blue state that’s not moving anymore, although it moved quite a bit in the 60s/70s/80s.  

Virginia

  There are two possibilities here:

1–It turns out that the state is no longer moving, and while no longer safe for Republicans, won’t become Lean D anytime soon or

2–The new Democrats moving here are in their late 20s or 30s and so mostly don’t fit into this younger age group.  I’m not sure which is the case, but you’ll see this again when it comes to a couple other states.

14%:

Montana

 At this point, it could almost be called a slight red trend, since the age gap is quite small, and older people in Montana actually tend to be more Democratic.

19%:

New Mexico

 Possibly a slight Democratic trend, but this evidence seems to show that New Mexico won’t become Safe D anytime soon.

Ohio

 This one surprised me.  I consider this state to be trending Republican long-term, as is much of the Great Lakes Region, but I may be wrong.  Your thoughts?

13%:

Vermont

 This states seems to have gotten as blue as possible at this point, so maybe that’s the reason the age gap is small.  Or it’s because everyone’s a Democrat.

20%:

Delaware

 Basically in the same boat as Maryland, maybe still getting a bit bluer.

Louisiana?!?!

 One of my big WTF states.  I’m not sure if there are more Black young people than White or what’s going on here.  Is Darth Jeff still around? Or GOPVoter of course.

Slight R:

12%:

Colorado

 Another surprise.  But I think this is similar to the Virginia case, where many young professionals in their 30s or late 20s move here and are more liberal.

Kentucky

 Definitely trending GOP.  No surprise here.

Hawaii

 Seems to have maxed out it’s blue-ness.

10%:

Rhode Island

 Extremely white and religious for such a blue state.  Plus it’s not really growing.  Anyways, not so much of an Obama age gap.

Minnesota

 The older people are actually more liberal than the younger ones here.  Minnesota is basically a Tilt D state, and should be a true toss-up soon, in my opinion.

Slight D:

22%:

New Jersey

 Many young Hispanics who vote overwhelmingly for our side.  

23%:

Texas

 This was a popular number.  Texas is in the D-trending states, but it’s not moving as fast as many others, as Texas Hispanics are more conservative than their California or East Coast counterparts.

Washington

 Still moving leftward, and I’m not sure it’s even winnable for the GOP anymore barring a landslide.

New York

 More minorities and few young people in Upstate, which is basically hemorrhaging population as we speak.

South Carolina

 Same boat as Texas, slowly moving left, but it’ll take multiple decades, most likely.

Maine

 Much of the Northeast is still moving our way.

Strongly Moving GOP:

9%:

Arizona

 You can’t chalk this up to John McCain.  Arizona just doesn’t seem to be trending our way like everybody thinks.  A 9% age gap in a state known for conservative seniors isn’t good whatsoever.

8%:

Idaho

 Did we THINK it was moving our way?

7%:

Oklahoma

 Same here.

6%:

South Dakota

 Same.  Another small rural Republican state not moving our way.

Wyoming

 See South Dakota.

5%:

New Hampshire

 This one’s a shocker.  Anyone wanna explain, because I really don’t understand it.

4%:

Oregon

 I think this is an extreme young professionals example.  Because Oregon is certainly not trending Republican like Wyoming.

3%:

West Virginia

  No surprise.

2%:

Georgia

 Either another extreme young professional effect, or we’ve been wasting our energy.  Only three states have a smaller age gap.

1%:

North Dakota

 Maybe Kent Conrad just saved himself a loss.

-1%:

Alaska and Utah

 That’s right, older people are MORE liberal here than younger ones.

Strong Dem Trend:

Here they are.  

26%:

Indiana and Nevada

Both of these states had big swings leftward over the past three years or so, and while many people think Indiana is an anomaly, I’m not so sure.  It swung back right in 2010, which Nevada didn’t really, but the youth in both states are extremely liberal compared to older folks, and in Indiana, they’re still mostly white as well.

27%:

Connecticut

Long a bastion of Yankee Republicanism, I was surprised to see how this was the Northeastern state with the biggest age gap, as it’s held almost completely stable since Bush 41 left office.  But here it is.

28%:

California

This was the leading vote-getter, and while it’s quite liberal, the age gap isn’t quite as large.  While the youth are like 3/4 Obama supporters, the seniors just aren’t conservative enough for a large age gap

29%:

Alabama

This was possibly the biggest shocker.  A red state that seems to be trending redder every election, and yet such a large age gap.  What gives?  More Blacks?  I’m not sure, since I really don’t think there are more liberal whites here in large numbers.  Maybe Gradydem can explain?

and..the top 2 are:

31%:

North Carolina

A swing state to stay, with huge college centers in Chapel Hill, Durham, and to a smaller extent Asheville and Boone.  I wasn’t surprised at all, but by number one…

33%:

Mississippi

That’s right.  Mississippi.  Only one person guessed this, comment if it was you.  This is a state Obama should be contesting long before Texas and possibly before Georgia.  The only states he didn’t win he should be putting money into are Missouri, Montana, Arizona, South Carolina, Mississippi, and maybe Georgia, in my opinion.

By: Inoljt, http://thepolitikalblog.wordpr…

Last night’s election exhibited two trends: one positive for the country as a whole, and one more ominous for Democrats. Firstly, Americans rejected negative campaigning and extremism – whether it be in Virginia, New Jersey, NY-23, or Maine. Secondly, the electorate as a whole shifted quite profoundly to the right.



Negative Campaigning and Extremism

In the most-watched races, voters chose the side that espoused moderation and ran a positive message. The Democratic candidates in both Virginia and New Jersey focused on the negative: state congressman Creigh Deeds of Virginia spent most of his time attacking Attorney General Bob McDonnell’s college thesis, while Governor Jon Corzine of New Jersey launched a barrage of negative ads. Both candidates lost.

The other races featured the victory of moderate politics over extremism. In NY-23,  a Republican-represented district since the Civil War, conservatives sabotaged the moderate Republican candidate in favor of hard-line Doug Hoffman. Fortunately, voters in upstate New York rejected the Glenn Beck nominee and instead chose Democrat Bill Owens, an independent turned Democrat.

Thus the election results enforced a positive trend in politics – one of moderation and positive campaigning focused on the issues, rather than divisive personal attacks. For Democrats like myself, however, the other trend – a rightward shift – is more worrisome.

A Rightward Shift

For Democrats, the election’s most worrying result was not in Virginia, New Jersey, or Maine. It was the special election in CA-10.

At first glance, this might seem a bit puzzling. Democrats won that election, after all – and they won it by a comfortable 10% margin.

Yet, when compared to previous elections, this result is quite an underperformance. Barack Obama, for instance, won this congressional district by three times that margin. Since 2002, moreover, former Democratic congressman Ellen Tauscher had never polled below 65% of the vote.

Moreover, the election revealed more about the national mood than, say, Virginia or New Jersey. Those races were heavily dependent on local factors (e.g. the quality of the Deeds campaign, the unpopularity of Governor Jon Corzine). In CA-10, you had two low-recognition candidates and little publicity; it was closer to a generic ballot poll.

If  CA-10 could be characterized as a generic ballot poll, then Democrats should be extremely worried. In 2009, CA-10 went from a 30% Democratic victory to a 10% one: a 10-point shift to the right. Similar shifts were seen in New Jersey and Virginia; the electorate as a whole moved substantially to the right. The Democrats were very fortunate that Tuesday did not constitute a full-blown congressional election; they would have been crushed.

There is good news, however. Democratic weakness two days ago resulted more from an energized Republican base than a fundamental shift in the national mood. Republicans, motivated and unhappy, turned out; President Barack Obama’s coalition did not. The president still attains approval ratings in the low 50s – hardly the sign of an unpopular incumbent.

The bad news is that I am not sure if Mr. Obama’s coalition will turn out for the 2010 congressional elections. His voters have been curiously lethargic ever since his election; their low turn-out was how Senator Saxy Chambliss in Georgia went from a 3% general victory to a 14% run-off victory. Republicans, then, may do well next year.

In fact, I am not even sure Mr. Obama’s coalition will re-emerge in 2012, when he goes up for re-election. The president, after all, ran on a campaign of hope, change, and idealism. The difficult compromises forced by governing have tainted this brand, and it will inevitably continue to be diluted over the next three years. Obama’s 2008 coalition may go down as unique in American history, much like former President Jimmy Carter’s coalition.

I hope it will not. There is that word again.