Why are IA & MO Whites trending so fast in different directions ...

[Tender Branson]

when they are neighbouring states ?

IA Whites 2000: 48-49-3 Bush (B+1)
IA Whites 2004: 49-50-1 Bush (B+1)
IA Whites 2008: 51-47-2 Obama (O+4)
IA Whites 2012: 51-47-2 Obama (O+4)

MO Whites 2000: 42-55-3 Bush (B+13)
MO Whites 2004: 42-57-1 Bush (B+15)
MO Whites 2008: 42-57-1 McCain (M+15)
MO Whites 2012: 32-65-3 Romney (R+33)

US Whites 2000: 42-54-4 Bush (B+12)
US Whites 2004: 41-58-1 Bush (B+17)
US Whites 2008: 43-55-2 McCain (M+12)
US Whites 2012: 39-59-2 Romney (R+20)

...

So, comparison for IA & MO Whites with US Whites:

2000: Iowa -> D+11, Missouri -> R+1 (Spread: 12)
2004: Iowa -> D+16, Missouri -> R-2 (Spread: 14)
2008: Iowa -> D+16, Missouri -> R+3 (Spread: 19)
2012: Iowa -> D+24, Missouri -> R+13 (Spread: 37)

So, Iowa Whites went from being 11 points more Democratic than the National Whites in 2000 to being 24 points more Democratic in 2012.

Neighbouring Missouri on the other hand went from being 1 point more Republican than the National Whites in 2000 to being 13 points more Republican in 2012.

What is the big difference between those 2 largely rural states ?

[Franzl]

I think Missouri has far more Southern Baptists.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Yeah.  Culturally, Missouri is a southern state, not a northern state.

[Tender Branson]

Did Obama actually do something in the past 4 years that could have pissed off MO Whites and made him more attractive to IA Whites ?

[opebo]

What is the big difference between those 2 largely rural states ?

I'd just like to point out that Missouri is nowhere near as rural as Iowa, and does contain two large traditional (minority core/white flight suburbs) cities. 

[memphis]

In addition to what others have said about Bible Belt and such, Missouri is also seeing a lot of GOP growth in the Ozarks. Iowa never had the blue dog dems to lose. Like most uber white states, Dems in Iowa have always been progressive.

[minionofmidas]

Iowa is not very rural either. Missouri has two large conurbations, and, like, two, maybe three more settlements large enough to be described as in all respects urban (Springfield, Columbia, maybe Joplin). The problem with Iowa's cities is not that they are too few but that there are too many of them, about 8 to 10, and none can claim supremacy.
Some of them even have their Colored Downtown Section, Ope.

[White Cloud]

Iowa and Missouri are not that much alike, even though they share a border. But a big part of it was the candidate. Iowa was the state that gave Obama his first major victory as a presidential candidate. Iowans probably felt more loyalty to Obama than Missourians did, due to the connection that Obama had with Iowa.

[HAnnA MArin County]

Population shifts/changes can explain it. The two fastest growing counties, according to the 2010 U.S. Census, were Christian (south of Springfield) and St. Charles, both of which are GOP strongholds. St. Louis and Kansas City/Jackson County both lost population, and the rural areas of the state continue to vote with their Bibles over their pocketbooks, and yes, many of the rural areas of the state are predominantly Southern Baptist.

[Zanas]

Iowa and Missouri are not that much alike, even though they share a border. But a big part of it was the candidate. Iowa was the state that gave Obama his first major victory as a presidential candidate. Iowans probably felt more loyalty to Obama than Missourians did, due to the connection that Obama had with Iowa.

I don't think the result of the primary of 2008 has anything to do with the result of this year's presidential race, and loyalty and connection is not something very much shared among the broad load of voters...

[milhouse24]

Iowa has lower unemployment in 2012.
Iowa is closer to Chicago.
Obama loaded up buses of volunteers from Chicago to Iowa to vote in the primaries and GOTV in Iowa. 

[dspNY]

Missouri joined the SEC? (j/k)

[White Cloud]

Iowa and Missouri are not that much alike, even though they share a border. But a big part of it was the candidate. Iowa was the state that gave Obama his first major victory as a presidential candidate. Iowans probably felt more loyalty to Obama than Missourians did, due to the connection that Obama had with Iowa.

I don't think the result of the primary of 2008 has anything to do with the result of this year's presidential race, and loyalty and connection is not something very much shared among the broad load of voters...

I would pretty much completely disagree with you on that. I'm from Iowa. Iowa was the state that "made" Barack Obama into a legitimate contender for the Democratic presidential nomination. People forget quickly just how important his Iowa caucus victory was, how much it changed the entire discussion about his candidacy and his ability to appeal to "middle-American" (white) voters. A great many Iowans take pride in the fact that they "launched him" into the national consciousness through his caucus victory. There is without any doubt whatsoever more of a connection between Iowa voters and Barack Obama than between voters in Missouri or any other state besides perhaps Hawaii or Illinois.

And besides, I didn't say that the loyalty and connection that Iowa voters have with Obama is the only, or even the primary reason, why white Iowans were more likely than white Missourians to vote for him. The other reasons have already been stated in this thread. White Iowans are more progressive, less religious, and less racist than white Missourians. White Missourians probably vote a lot like white southerners. White Iowans vote more like white Minnesotans or white Wisconsinites. But Obama did better among white Iowans than even among white Minnesotans or white Wisconsinites. Why? Because Obama has a stronger connection with Iowa than he does with Minnesota or Wisconsin.