What states have changed sides (politically) in the last 50 years?

[Hostile Dialect]

As traditionally conservative states in the southwestern corner of the U.S., such as Arizona, New Mexico and Nevada, gradually shift leftward (perhaps Arizona more so than the other two?), I wonder: What other examples have there been in recent history of states or communities changing their political alliances, as it were?

[Scruloose]

You will find this site most interesting:

http://www.uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/

You can see a state by state breakdown going back to 1789.

[Little Nemo]

One big shift was the move in the South from Democrats to Republicans. This is generally said to have begun in 1968 as part of Nixon's "southern strategy" when the Republicans managed to convince Southern voters to put aside lingering resentment dating back to the civil war era and acknowlege that the Republican party better reflected their current values.

[jayjay]

And you have to remember that all but one state went Republican in 1984 (20 years ago), so any state that went Democrat thereafter (except Minnesota) would count as "changed sides".

[jayjay]

And I realize after I submitted that last post that you weren't necessarily talking about any one year's electoral fallout...sorry! :smack:

[astorian]

Best example? Vermont! Today, it's widely regarded as the most left-leaning state in the Union, but it was dominated by rock-ribbed Republicans not so long ago. Heck, Vermont even went for Alf Landon in 1936, when the rest of the country went for FDR.

[Hostile Dialect]

Interesting. I never realized that the Southern states were once liberal and Vermont conservative! Who woulda thunk?

Very interesting website, BTW, Scruloose. Thanks!

[RealityChuck]

If you go further back, some people opposed the entry of Utah into the Union because it was Mormon and thus strongly Democratic.

Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont were pretty reliably Republican (Maine and Vermont were the only states to go for Goldwater in 1964). Ohio was a big Republican state; this year it was considered a swing state.

[Hostile Dialect]

If you go further back, some people opposed the entry of Utah into the Union because it was Mormon and thus strongly Democratic.

Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont were pretty reliably Republican (Maine and Vermont were the only states to go for Goldwater in 1964). Ohio was a big Republican state; this year it was considered a swing state.

Arizona went for Goldwater as well (come on now! :wally: Oh man I've always wanted to use that smiley), although by a surprisingly short margin. Cite (http://www.uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/state.php?year=1964&fips=4). In fact, in Phoenix they named a high school (http://bghs.dvusd.org/) after him.

[qubed]

Interesting. I never realized that the Southern states were once liberal


Well, that's not really true. Southern states were once heavily Democratic. Now they are heavily Republican. But I don't think they were ever really liberal - they just shifted sides. Remember, it's not always been the case that Democrat = Liberal (and even saying that today would cause many people to scream.)

[Hostile Dialect]

Well, that's not really true. Southern states were once heavily Democratic. Now they are heavily Republican. But I don't think they were ever really liberal - they just shifted sides. Remember, it's not always been the case that Democrat = Liberal (and even saying that today would cause many people to scream.)

Makes sense. I actually only said liberal because I find it something of a word trap to call certain states Democratic and others not -- are the other ones dictatorships? -- but point taken.

[Martin Hyde]

I don't think I'd call Vermont liberal, at least in the American sense. I sort of consider Vermont a "classically liberal" or "libertarian" state. Which makes them sort of an anomaly in this country.

New Hampshire is also weird but not quite so much as Vermont.

The change I've noticed in the last few elections is West Virginia, which was once more Democratic than California or New York, and now appears to be firmly Republican.

[BobT]

If you go further back, some people opposed the entry of Utah into the Union because it was Mormon and thus strongly Democratic.

Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont were pretty reliably Republican (Maine and Vermont were the only states to go for Goldwater in 1964). Ohio was a big Republican state; this year it was considered a swing state.

In 1964 Goldwater carried five states in the Deep South (Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, and South Carolina) and his home state of Arizona.

He didn't win any state in New England.

The change over of the South from Democratic to Republican started in 1964 with Goldwater, not with Nixon in 1968.

Nixon was just successful, but Goldwater got the ball rolling.

[BobT]

I don't think I'd call Vermont liberal, at least in the American sense. I sort of consider Vermont a "classically liberal" or "libertarian" state. Which makes them sort of an anomaly in this country.

New Hampshire is also weird but not quite so much as Vermont.

The change I've noticed in the last few elections is West Virginia, which was once more Democratic than California or New York, and now appears to be firmly Republican.

Not being an expert on West Virginia politics, but I would think that the decline in the influence of organized labor, such as the UMW, is partly responsible for that.

[cornflakes]

The Southern states were never liberal, but they were Democratic.

The Republicans won the Civil War and Republicans held office throughout the South during Reconstruction, when those loyal to the Confederacy were prohibited from holding office. Southerners, beaten in war and starved and disenfranchised during Reconstruction, refused to join the party of the opposition and stayed Democrats. The "Solid South" existed until the 1970s, with most state and local races being decided during the Democratic primary; any Republican candidates received a handful of votes at best.

That said, the South has pretty much always been conservative, with an agricultural bent. I'm no expert, but it seems to me that government spending was limited to infrastructure, such as roads and other public works. Even then, the roads were built in the 1930s or later and may have been part of Roosevelt's New Deal.

[XT]

I'm not so sure the states have switch sides as that the parties have changed their relative platforms which have caused states to become Republican or Democrat. As has been pointed out, Democrat hasn't always equaled liberal...nor has Republican always equaled conservative. At least not as we define it today anyway.

And as the parties continue to shift or further refine their positions I think the states will stabilize for a time on either Dem or Pub...until the parties shift again. If the Dems pursue the strategy laid out by many Dopers in GD for instance and further run left I see them mainly continuing to hold sway (at the national level) in the North East and North West and California...and perhaps one or two of the Great Lakes states...and pretty much writing off much of the rest of the nation. If the Pubs continue the trend they seemed to be setting before GW became president and running more towards the center and marginalizing their own right wing extremists that might even change and they may make inroads into even those Dem states.

Or maybe the country will shift left. :)

-XT

[Martin Hyde]

Not being an expert on West Virginia politics, but I would think that the decline in the influence of organized labor, such as the UMW, is partly responsible for that.

West Virginia is still extremely Democratic, State Democratic officials at all levels (municipal, county, state) still outnumber Republicans 2-1. But nationally the state is solidly Republican now.

I think the big issue may be gun control which is a hot button issue with a huge number of West Virginians.

Of course as the mining companies move out the UMW loses influence because they have fewer members in state so that is also a large factor.

[twickster]

If you go further back, some people opposed the entry of Utah into the Union because it was Mormon and thus strongly Democratic.

Cite? It is my understanding that the problem with Utah being Mormon was that, well, it was Mormon. They got statehood only after their head honcho got that fortuitously timed revelation that they should give up polygamy. I realize you say "some" -- what kind of numbers? and who?

twicks, who once upon a time taught a lot of Religion in America

[astorian]

As has been noted, not all SOuthern Democrats were liberal, by any means. But some were- some were EXTREMELY liberal on most issues. How did they get away with it? Well, sadly, by being even MORE racist than their opponents!

J. William Fulbright is a good example. Fulbright stood on the far left of almost every issue that wasn't related to race. But Arkansas voters re-elected him every 6 years because Fulbright baited niggers like nobody else!

Whether Fulbright was truly a vile racist in his heart or just played the role to get votes, I can't say.

[flurb]

Texas in 1992:

Of the 12 offices elected by state-wide vote (U.S. Senators, Gov, Lt Gov, Ag Comissioner, etc), 10 are held by Democrats. 21 of 30 Congressional seats are held by Democrats. Democrats controls both chambers of the Texas Legislature by strong majorities.

Texas in 2004:

All state-wide offices are held by Republicans. As a result of the November election, 21 of 32 Congressional seats will be held by Republicans. Republicans control both chambers of the Texas Legislature by strong majorities.

[Governor Quinn]

In the mid-1950's, Hawaii was regarded as being a Republican territory, and Alaska as being a Democratic territory.

Now, Hawaii is one of the most Democratic states in the Union, and Alaska is almost as solidly Republican.

[Argo84]

IMHO the shift of the South toward the Republican party was due to the following among others:

The economic rise of the South. Evangelical Christians in the South found themselves with increased financial power thus enabling them to become political players. The Republican party has done an excellent job of pitching itself to the Evangelicals.

The civil rights movement. No, I'm not saying that today's Southern whites are racially biased, but the Democratic party lost lots of its appeal among an earlier generation of Southerners in the 60s and 70s when it became closely associated with the civil rights movement.

Great Society legislation during the 1960s. It seems that along with economic prosperity comes a propensity to want hold on to what one has earned. Economically advantaged Southerners came to see the wealth redistribution measures of the GS programs as threatening to their financial well being. Particularly troubling was the notion that their wealth was being distributed to those of other ethnic groups.

[twickster]

Texas in 1992:

Of the 12 offices elected by state-wide vote (U.S. Senators, Gov, Lt Gov, Ag Comissioner, etc), 10 are held by Democrats. 21 of 30 Congressional seats are held by Democrats. Democrats controls both chambers of the Texas Legislature by strong majorities.

Texas in 2004:

All state-wide offices are held by Republicans. As a result of the November election, 21 of 32 Congressional seats will be held by Republicans. Republicans control both chambers of the Texas Legislature by strong majorities.

Does Karl Rove do good work or what?

[BobT]

California is another state that has changed sides several times in the last 50 years. A lot of that is because the California Republican Party has always been on the moderate side. Even Ronald Reagan was relatively moderate as governor. But the state has had its share of liberal Democratic governors (the Browns), liberal Republican governors (Earl Warren), moderate Republican governors (Pete Wilson and Arnold Schwarzenegger) and somewhat conservative governors (Reagan and George Deukmejian).

But now the state has two Democratic senators, a moderate (Feinstein) and a liberal (Boxer). And with the exception of Schwarzenegger all the other statewide offices are held by Democrats. The Legislature is firmly in the hands of the Democrats and the Congressional delegation is predominantly Democratic.

But in the 1966 primary for governor, Regan's Republican opponent was George Cristopher, the mayor of SAN FRANCISCO. Cristopher was a fairly liberal Republican. Pat Brown's primary opponent was Sam Yorty, a conservative Democrat (he eventually switched over), but a politican who got his start as part of Upton Sinclair's EPIC campaign.

And how long after California's polls closed on Election Day this year was the state called for Kerry? 1 minute, 2 minutes, as long as it took for the newscaster to say "California...."

[Bob55]

You will find this site most interesting:

http://www.uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/

You can see a state by state breakdown going back to 1789.


A question from that site: why did most of the south vote for Ulysses S. Grant in 1868? I would have figured they'd vote for some southern candidate, or anyone but the general that beat them.

[RickJay]

Let's do this state by state. I'll list every state, and when they last voted for the party they did NOT vote for in 2004:

Alabama: 1976 (Carter, D)
Alaska: 1964 (Johnson, D)
Arizona: 1996 (Clinton, D)
Arkansas: 1996 (Clinton, D)
California: 1988 (Bush, R)
Colorado: 1992 (Clinton, D)
Connecticut: 1988 (Bush, R)
Delaware: 1988 (Bush, R)
Florida: 1996 (Clinton, D) (well, officially)
Georgia: 1992 (Clinton, D)
Hawaii: 1984 (Reagan, R)
Idaho: 1964 (Johnson, D)
Illinois: 1988 (Bush, R)
Indiana: 1964 (Johnson, D)
Iowa: 2000 (Gore)
Kansas: 1964 (Johnson, D)
Kentucky: 1996 (Clinton, D)
Louisiana: 1996 (Clinton, D)
Maine: 1988 (Bush, R)
Maryland: 1988 (Bush, R)
Massachusetts: 1984 (Reagan, R)
Michigan: 1988 (Bush, R)
Minnesota: 1972 (Nixon, R)
Mississippi: 1976 (Carter, D)
Missouri: 1996 (Clinton, D)
Montana: 1992 (Clinton, D)
Nebraska: 1964 (Johnson, D)
Nevada: 1996 (Clinton, D)
New Hampshire: 2000 (Bush, R)
New Jersey: 1988 (Bush, R)
New Mexico: 2000 (Gore, D)
New York: 1984 (Reagan, R)
North Carolina: 1976 (Carter, D)
North Dakota: 1964 (Johnson, D)
Ohio: 1996 (Clinton, D)
Oklahoma: 1964 (Johnson, D)
Oregon: 1984 (Reagan, R)
Pennsylvania: 1988 (Bush, R)
Rhode Island: 1984 (Reagan, R)
South Carolina: 1976 (Carter, D)
South Dakota: 1964 (Johnson, D)
Tennessee: 1996 (Clinton, D)
Texas: 1976 (Carter, D)
Utah: 1964 (Johnson, D)
Vermont: 1988 (Bush, R)
Virginia: 1964 (Johnson, D)
State of Washington: 1984 (Reagan, R)
Washington, DC: Always Democrat
West Virginia: 1996 (Clinton. D)
Wisconsin: 1984 (Reagan, R)
Wyoming: 1964 (Johnson, D)

As you can see, most states are pretty consistent. The longest a real state has gone without switching sides is the coterie of states that have voted Republican since 1968 but went with Johnson in 1964 basically because everyone felt bad about Kennedy.

Interestingly enough, the most lopsided election is most people's living memory is arguably not the Reagan massacre of Mondale in 1984, but Nixon's re-election in 1972, in which Nixon beat McGovern by over 23% in popular vote. That the American public didn't seem to mind electing a President who had happily kept sending American boys off to die in an unwinnable war is, perhaps, a chilling reminder or current events.

[Bob55]

Interestingly enough, the most lopsided election is most people's living memory is arguably not the Reagan massacre of Mondale in 1984, but Nixon's re-election in 1972, in which Nixon beat McGovern by over 23% in popular vote. That the American public didn't seem to mind electing a President who had happily kept sending American boys off to die in an unwinnable war is, perhaps, a chilling reminder or current events.


That is not needed in General Questions.

[pseudotriton ruber ruber]

A question from that site: why did most of the south vote for Ulysses S. Grant in 1868? I would have figured they'd vote for some southern candidate, or anyone but the general that beat them.

In 1868, former slaves could vote, and did in large numbers. (It wasn't until the late 1870s that Reconstruction came to a halt.) Guess how they felt about Grant?

[HMS Irruncible]

Interesting. I never realized that the Southern states were once liberal and Vermont conservative! Who woulda thunk?
Hold on there... "Liberalism" as we know it is a fairly new thing, as is its association with the Democratic party. The southern US has never been "liberal", at least not by any modern definition.

[Loopydude]

Which states have swung the most over the past fifty years? IOW, what are the most politically schizo states?

[stockton]

Which states have swung the most over the past fifty years? IOW, what are the most politically schizo states?

Well, go to this site:

http://uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/

On the drop-down menus, select GENERAL BY STATE and then choose Georgia.

Halfway down the page, choose "Compare State Maps by Year"

Look at 1960-present. Especially note 1968(!!!!!!!).

Sorry it's so convoluted, but the site is all frames and I can't link to the page directly.

Enjoy.

[Loopydude]

Cool, thanks. You can do with the natl. map what you did with Georgia, btw, though Georgia does look pretty schizo. Ahh, Wallace: I guess he didn't get outniggered there.

Interestingly, my home state of Maine looks pretty schizo since 1960. The place went to Perot in '92, which I completely forgot about, registered as I was in DC. So much for "As goes Maine, so goes the Nation".

[flurb]

Cool, thanks. You can do with the natl. map what you did with Georgia, btw, though Georgia does look pretty schizo. Ahh, Wallace: I guess he didn't get outniggered there.

Interestingly, my home state of Maine looks pretty schizo since 1960. The place went to Perot in '92, which I completely forgot about, registered as I was in DC. So much for "As goes Maine, so goes the Nation".

Although Maine gave Perot his highest vote percentage of any state, Bill Clinton carried Maine in 1992.

[InternetLegend]

As traditionally conservative states in the southwestern corner of the U.S., such as Arizona, New Mexico and Nevada, gradually shift leftward...I don't think you can call New Mexico "traditionally conservative." Even though we've gone both ways on Presidential elections, we are a traditionally Democratic state. The rural south and east has tended to be more conservative than the rest of the state, but they're also much more sparsely populated than the central corridor. It is only in recent years that New Mexicans (spurred on by a lot of activity by suspiciously non-native-looking Republican operatives) started voting more Republicans into office. We now have more Republican representatives than Democratic at the national level, but our state legislature is still staunchly Democratic. Even so, I'd say that New Mexico is becoming more conservative, not less.