Red State, Blue City: How the Urban-Rural Divide is Splitting America

[muon2]

I just don't see 60% of the bay area voting for a economically conservative party. Look at ballot initiatives, ad the greatest support for economically liberal positions comes from the bay area. I know it might be a little hard to believe considering its income, but the bay area is just as fiscally liberal as LA county and way more than places such as San Bernardino County which have a much lower income.

Yes, and this goes back to the article in the OP. The party correlation for most of the population is with density. In high density areas the government is seen as the critical protector of services needed for that population. In low density areas the viewed need for government services to sustain their lifestyle is greatly reduced. That leads SF to prefer fiscal liberalism in order to fund government services.

In suburban areas in the Midwest the partisan alignment flips when the neighborhoods are built out and have aged for a generation. DuPage IL is an excellent example. It was historically one of the largest counties with a strong GOP vote. Now it has been essentially fully developed for over a decade. In the last few elections DuPage is seeing a clear shift to the Dems. The public's support for government services is a major factor.

Well... yeah. The suburban black vote and the suburban white vote are motivated by different political issues. Mainly, black voters agree with and approve of Democrats' policies and party image almost all of the time, so the primary goal there isn't to win over more black voters by changing policies or party image but rather to improve turnout (which to an extent involves image but rarely involves policy). The goal with suburban white voters, on the other hand, is to improve the party image and tweak policies (or images of policy views) for greater appeal.

Here's the difference: When you're competing in a mostly white suburban county in the North as a Democrat, you're probably devoting equal or close to equal resources across the county and really targeting everyone. There isn't a ton of polarization in a lot of these places. When you're competing in a racially mixed suburban county in the South as a Democrat, you're probably ignoring the white conservatives and campaigning primarily or exclusively in the black areas and maybe in the few areas where there might be a handful of white Democrats.

Minority voting patterns are often tied to other issues than just access to government services. The parties have different positions on justice and immigration, and that can either override or accentuate the natural split due to services for dense populations.

[muon2]

The countryside wants/needs the gov't just as much as everybody else. All those long highways connecting them to the outside world didn't fall out of the sky. Nor did farm subsidies, Social Security, or any other government force they depend on. The difference is a matter of ethnic background. White people in most metros don't vote much differently than those in the surrounding countryside.

In Chicagoland the white vote in Chicago proper is heavily D. The nonHisp white population of IL-6 and 9 were similar in the last Congress before the remap. Yet since IL-9 went into the inner suburbs and the city it voted far more D than IL-6. Again, it's not about the government used, it's the perception of the amount of service needed.

[muon2]

The countryside wants/needs the gov't just as much as everybody else. All those long highways connecting them to the outside world didn't fall out of the sky. Nor did farm subsidies, Social Security, or any other government force they depend on. The difference is a matter of ethnic background. White people in most metros don't vote much differently than those in the surrounding countryside.

In Chicagoland the white vote in Chicago proper is heavily D. The nonHisp white population of IL-6 and 9 were similar in the last Congress before the remap. Yet since IL-9 went into the inner suburbs and the city it voted far more D than IL-6. Again, it's not about the government used, it's the perception of the amount of service needed.

There will be a small Dem push in some white urban neighborhoods from Jews and gays, both of whom avoid the countryside like the plague. Still, it's not like Northern Illinois is some Republican bastion outside of Chicagoland. The counties along the MS River have a small Dem lean while those in the interior have a small GOP lean. Cook County is 44% non-Hispanic white and voted 74% Dem. Lee County, to pick a random N Illinois rural county, is 88% non-Hispanic white and voted 45% Dem. The racial math is not all that different.

Jews and gays do not alone account for the difference between IL-6 and IL-9. Your example of Lee is a very rural county and is not to my point about the shift as density decreases through the suburbs.

[muon2]

The countryside wants/needs the gov't just as much as everybody else. All those long highways connecting them to the outside world didn't fall out of the sky. Nor did farm subsidies, Social Security, or any other government force they depend on. The difference is a matter of ethnic background. White people in most metros don't vote much differently than those in the surrounding countryside.

In Chicagoland the white vote in Chicago proper is heavily D. The nonHisp white population of IL-6 and 9 were similar in the last Congress before the remap. Yet since IL-9 went into the inner suburbs and the city it voted far more D than IL-6. Again, it's not about the government used, it's the perception of the amount of service needed.

There will be a small Dem push in some white urban neighborhoods from Jews and gays, both of whom avoid the countryside like the plague. Still, it's not like Northern Illinois is some Republican bastion outside of Chicagoland. The counties along the MS River have a small Dem lean while those in the interior have a small GOP lean. Cook County is 44% non-Hispanic white and voted 74% Dem. Lee County, to pick a random N Illinois rural county, is 88% non-Hispanic white and voted 45% Dem. The racial math is not all that different.

Jews and gays do not alone account for the difference between IL-6 and IL-9. Your example of Lee is a very rural county and is not to my point about the shift as density decreases through the suburbs.

Chicago proper voted over 80% for Obama in 2012, no? It's about 30% non-Hispanic white. What percentage of Chicago's electorate was non-Hispanic white?

It's not about Chicago as a whole. I'm looking at the north side up through the immediate suburbs to the north. This area makes up a good portion of IL-9 and is mostly non-Hispanic white. It also overwhelmingly votes Dem at all levels. Contrast that with similar demographic mixes in the middle ring of mature suburbs west and north of the city. The votes tend to far more balanced between the parties. Race and ethnicity alone cannot explain the difference.

[muon2]

I sat down for a while and did some math regarding whites in Northern Illinois. Here's what I found. For my purposes, Northern Illinois includes the following counties: Boone, Bureau, Carroll, Cook, DeKalb, DuPage, Grundy, Henry, Jo Daviess, Kane, Kendall, Lake, LaSalle, Lee, McHenry, Ogle, Rock Island, Stephenson, Whiteside, Will, and Winnebago. Furthermore, I'm calling the following Northern Illinois counties Chicagoland: Cook, DeKalb, DuPage, Grundy, Kane, Kendall, Lake, McHenry, and Will.
A few points:
1. Whites in Chicagoland are almost exactly split in population between Cook County and the rest of the Chicagoland counties
2. About 67% of whites, who voted in Cook County, voted to reelect the President.
3. About 43% of whites who voted in the remaining Chicagoland counties voted to reelect the President.
4. About 55% of whites, who voted in all of Chicagoland, voted to re-elect the President.
4. About 10% of whites, who voted in both Cook and Lake Counties, self-identify as Jewish, about 2/3 of whom likely voted to reelect the President.
5. About 48% of whites who voted in Northern Illinois, outside of Chicagoland, voted to re-elect the President.
6. Only 43% of whites, who voted in Winnebago County, the largest county in Northern Illinois, outside of Chicagoland, voted to re-elect the President. Without the influence of Winnebago, the whites of Northern Illinois would have split their votes almost equally between the President and Mitt Romney.
7. Chicagoland's 55% vote for the President is roughly equal to Northern Illinois's 48%, once one takes Jews and gays into account. Any additional "urban effect" is limited to just a few points.
8. However, there is a great deal of polarization within Chicagoland with white Dems much more likely to live in Cook County and white Republicans much more likely to live in another Chicagoland County. This is clearly not merely the result of gays and Jews.

Whites voting to relect the President by Chicagoland county
1. Cook 67%
2.DeKalb 47%
3. Lake 46%
4. DuPage 43%
5. Will 43%
6. Grundy 42%
7.McHenry 41%
8. Kendall 40%
9. Kane 39%

You have to realize that in Cook County at least (less so in the other counties, but not entirely untrue), this is a bit of an apples/oranges comparison. It's like calculating the white vote in Brooklyn, you could do it and the number WOULD be interesting, but it doesn't really represent the "average white" in Brooklyn or any type of demographic there. Or to use another commonly used example in college textbooks, it's like calculating the average income of ten people on food stamps and one millionaire. The number doesn't represent anyone in the group.

I was not trying to find the "average person." I've stated many times that people do not average. We are not numbers. And even if a person were average on a number of metrics, he still would not be typical because it's very odd to be near the center of so many qualities. Most people are higher on one measure and lower on another. All I wanted to know was what percent of whites voted for the president in each county. Until I did the math, I very much underestimated Cook County whites. They are much more Democratic than I had expected, even discounting Jews and gays. I also did not realize that a slim majority of Chicagoland whites live outside Cook County, which helps to account for how Cook whites can been so Democratic. The Republicans have all fled to refugee camps in other counties.  I was wrong and I can admit it.

The interesting follow up would be to look at some of the other large northern cities to see if they show the same pattern as Chicago.