How did the Republicans hang onto PA, IL and CA 1988?

[Husker]

I don't think Dukakis ran that great of a campaign and was seen as out of touch by many Americans. He shares a similar characteristic with John Kerry in that regard. Plus, Reagan was still popular in a lot of the country and the GOP wasn't as heavily influenced by the evangelical right and neoconservatives in 1988 either. So, it's probably a reasonable argument to say that many moderate swing voters probably just couldn't pull the lever for Dukakis. Had it not been for the Farm Crisis and a terrible drought in the Corn Belt, it is questionable whether Dukakis would have carried IA and WI. So perhaps a counter argument could be made that Dukakis could have done even worse?

PA seems to be getting more republican in the west and less republican in the east. My guess is that Bush Sr. still was winning a lot of the wealthy moderate vote in the suburbs that is now going to Obama. In IL, the republican party was much more formidable back then and Chicago wasn't trouncing out the rural vote as much. As Chicago has gained more minorities and seen an increase in minority voting, the democratic share has gone way up. As the suburban areas become more "urbanized" they have become more and more democratic as well. It is worth pointing out that Bush got a respectable 43.4 in Cook County back in 1988... kind of hard to imagine any republican getting anywhere near that now.

CA was also less urbanized and had far fewer minorities voting back in 1988, so a similar argument could be made for it too.