Talk Elections

Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion => U.S. Presidential Election Results => Topic started by: Adlai Stevenson on August 17, 2006, 07:20:05 am



Title: Massachusetts in 1988
Post by: Adlai Stevenson on August 17, 2006, 07:20:05 am
Looking at the 1988 Presidential Election Results why is it that Dukakis carried his home state by less than 8%?  Dukakis was Governor at the time and was known for the 'Massachusetts Miracle'; the Republicans also made a lot of attacking his state.  He won Rhode Island by a greater margin and also won New York but that election was the last year the GOP could count on winning a majority of support from the East Coast.  I know that Reagan was popular with Irish and Italian Catholics and Blue Collar voters in Massachusetts, did his support carry over to Bush? 


Title: Re: Massachusetts in 1988
Post by: minionofmidas - supplemental forum account on August 17, 2006, 07:22:43 am
Probably.


Title: Re: Massachusetts in 1988
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on August 17, 2006, 07:27:27 am
Dukakis certainly did better in white, working class areas than Mondale though:

()

()

Bush's best CD was the 5th; so the answer to your question, would seem to be yes.


Title: Re: Massachusetts in 1988
Post by: WalterMitty on August 17, 2006, 11:08:47 am
i think dukakis popularity in massachusetts was certainly on the wane by 1988.  dont forget, in just two years he would be out of office (and the democrats havent won the governorship since) 


Title: Re: Massachusetts in 1988
Post by: Nym90 on August 17, 2006, 11:18:17 am
Bush 41 was the kind of Republican who appealed to the Northeast, and the Northeast overall was much less Democratic then than it is now.

Kerry also didn't really get much of any of a home state boost, either. Maybe it's just not a big deal to folks in Massachusetts.


Title: Re: Massachusetts in 1988
Post by: WalterMitty on August 17, 2006, 11:24:47 am
also, dukakis was never overly popular with the blue collars in massachusetts.

let's not forget, after only one term as governor, in 1978 dukakis was defeated in the democrat primary by the very conservative edward king (chelsea native)

also, for what it is worth, hw bush was born in massachusetts.


Title: Re: Massachusetts in 1988
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on August 17, 2006, 11:28:34 am
also, dukakis was never overly popular with the blue collars in massachusetts.

let's not forget, after only one term as governor, in 1978 dukakis was defeated in the democrat primary by the very conservative edward king (chelsea native)

True, that.

Kerry doesn't seem to have been very popular in working class areas either:

()

'96 Senate map


Title: Re: Massachusetts in 1988
Post by: WalterMitty on August 17, 2006, 11:46:39 am
also, dukakis was never overly popular with the blue collars in massachusetts.

let's not forget, after only one term as governor, in 1978 dukakis was defeated in the democrat primary by the very conservative edward king (chelsea native)

True, that.

Kerry doesn't seem to have been very popular in working class areas either:

()

'96 Senate map

yeah.  i dont think kerry has ever been too popular with the working class. 

in 1982, kerry was elected lt. governor with dukakis at the top of the ticket.  most considered kerry to be *more* liberal than dukakis.

i  think most americans have the wrong idea about massachusetts.  they think of it as a pinko-liberal state.  yes, there are portions of the state that are infested with pinkos--cambridge, boston, the berkshires...  but the rest of the state is suburban and working and middle class.  and one cannot underestimate the influence of catholicism in massachusetts politics.

the democrats are fixing to lose another governor's race, because they are going to nominate a guy the pinkos like (deval patrick), instead of nominating a guy that can do well among the working class (tom reilly)


Title: Re: Massachusetts in 1988
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on August 17, 2006, 12:01:25 pm
yeah.  i dont think kerry has ever been too popular with the working class.

He was the last Democratic candidate to fall to get elected 5th district (which is basically Lawrence, Lowell and their suburbs). I think that was in 1972 and I'm pretty sure that McGovern, just about, led in it in the Presidential election... 

Quote
i  think most americans have the wrong idea about massachusetts.  they think of it as a pinko-liberal state.  yes, there are portions of the state that are infested with pinkos--cambridge, boston, the berkshires...  but the rest of the state is suburban and working and middle class.  and one cannot underestimate the influence of catholicism in massachusetts politics.

Agree


Title: Re: Massachusetts in 1988
Post by: afleitch on August 17, 2006, 01:29:59 pm
Kennedy also polled worse in some counties than Humphrey would do 8 years later. Humphrey took Plymouth and Kennedy didn't (Johnson took every county, but that of course was an exceptional election)


Title: Re: Massachusetts in 1988
Post by: CPT MikeyMike on August 17, 2006, 01:45:54 pm
Dukakis certainly did better in white, working class areas than Mondale though:

()

()

Bush's best CD was the 5th; so the answer to your question, would seem to be yes.

It's nice to see my hometown voted Republican in both of those election!


Title: Re: Massachusetts in 1988
Post by: Rob on August 17, 2006, 03:53:34 pm
Walter is correct- the Massachusetts economy was starting to slump and Dukakis's popularity was falling.

I also wonder if Bush's ads hitting Dukakis for supposedly failing to clean up Boston Harbor hurt him.


Title: Re: Massachusetts in 1988
Post by: Nym90 on August 17, 2006, 07:48:45 pm
Kennedy also polled worse in some counties than Humphrey would do 8 years later. Humphrey took Plymouth and Kennedy didn't (Johnson took every county, but that of course was an exceptional election)

I assume these counties were disproportionately Protestant areas (by Massachusetts standards)? The 1960 results had a heavy Catholic for Kennedy/Protestant for Nixon split, moreso than pretty much any election ever (1928 as well, possibly even greater than 1960).


Title: Re: Massachusetts in 1988
Post by: minionofmidas - supplemental forum account on August 18, 2006, 07:23:47 am
Kennedy also polled worse in some counties than Humphrey would do 8 years later. Humphrey took Plymouth and Kennedy didn't (Johnson took every county, but that of course was an exceptional election)

I assume these counties were disproportionately Protestant areas (by Massachusetts standards)? The 1960 results had a heavy Catholic for Kennedy/Protestant for Nixon split, moreso than pretty much any election ever (1928 as well, possibly even greater than 1960).
Plymouth and Barnstaple were Protestant, rich, and very traditionally Republican back then.


Title: Re: Massachusetts in 1988
Post by: WalterMitty on August 18, 2006, 02:00:52 pm
Kennedy also polled worse in some counties than Humphrey would do 8 years later. Humphrey took Plymouth and Kennedy didn't (Johnson took every county, but that of course was an exceptional election)

I assume these counties were disproportionately Protestant areas (by Massachusetts standards)? The 1960 results had a heavy Catholic for Kennedy/Protestant for Nixon split, moreso than pretty much any election ever (1928 as well, possibly even greater than 1960).
Plymouth and Barnstaple were Protestant, rich, and very traditionally Republican back then.

they still are, lewis.  of course their republicanism is relative.  those two counties are the two most republican in the state.  from what i understand, plymouth county is heavily suburban.


Title: Re: Massachusetts in 1988
Post by: minionofmidas - supplemental forum account on August 18, 2006, 04:07:00 pm
Kennedy also polled worse in some counties than Humphrey would do 8 years later. Humphrey took Plymouth and Kennedy didn't (Johnson took every county, but that of course was an exceptional election)

I assume these counties were disproportionately Protestant areas (by Massachusetts standards)? The 1960 results had a heavy Catholic for Kennedy/Protestant for Nixon split, moreso than pretty much any election ever (1928 as well, possibly even greater than 1960).
Plymouth and Barnstaple were Protestant, rich, and very traditionally Republican back then.

they still are, lewis.  of course their republicanism is relative.  those two counties are the two most republican in the state. 
True of course. Well, most of the time anyways (as far as presidentials are concerned. They may be more dependable in state politics, I don't know about that.)
Quote
from what i understand, plymouth county is heavily suburban.
The northern end of it is run-of-the-mill suburban.
Both counties also have a very long-established rural/exurban/touristic/wealthy peoples' second homes mix. (Kennedy voted in Barnstable County.)


Title: Re: Massachusetts in 1988
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on August 18, 2006, 04:57:48 pm
Both counties voted strongly Republican in the '98 and '02 Gubernatorial elections, and both still have quite a few Republican State Reps.


Title: Re: Massachusetts in 1988
Post by: WalterMitty on August 18, 2006, 07:01:29 pm
Both counties voted strongly Republican in the '98 and '02 Gubernatorial elections, and both still have quite a few Republican State Reps.

hey, al, didnt middlesex vote republican in 02?  that is hard to believe.  middlesex hasnt gone democrat in presidential elections in 4 decades or more (it even went relatively strongly for mcgovern), yet a conservative mormon (romney) carries it in the election of 02.


Title: Re: Massachusetts in 1988
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on August 18, 2006, 07:38:09 pm
Yes it did; by about 4.7%. It was very close in 1998 though.

Quite a few towns changed between the two elections:

()

Light blue = R gain, Pink = D gain


Title: Re: Massachusetts in 1988
Post by: WalterMitty on August 18, 2006, 08:24:33 pm
Yes it did; by about 4.7%. It was very close in 1998 though.

Quite a few towns changed between the two elections:

()

Light blue = R gain, Pink = D gain


im still amazed middlesex voted for a conservative romney while it didnt vote for a very moderate paul celluci in 1998.

that should go to show that mitt romney has some serious political skills.


Title: Re: Massachusetts in 1988
Post by: Cubby on August 27, 2006, 01:01:45 am
the democrats are fixing to lose another governor's race, because they are going to nominate a guy the pinkos like (deval patrick), instead of nominating a guy that can do well among the working class (tom reilly)

In this context do you mean pinko as in gay or pinko as in commie? Its a hard word to define.

I would like whats-her-face to win (Healy) but it would be hysterical if (IF!) Patrick won and the desperate GOP ploy of Steele/Swann/Blackwell all lost.