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?
You will find this site most interesting:
http://www.uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/
You can see a state by state breakdown going back to 1789.
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.
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”.
And I realize after I submitted that last post that you weren’t necessarily talking about any one year’s electoral fallout…sorry! :smack:
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.
Interesting. I never realized that the Southern states were once liberal and Vermont conservative! Who woulda thunk?
Very interesting website, BTW, Scruloose. Thanks!
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. In fact, in Phoenix they named a high school after him.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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.