Why did Little River County, AR swung so hard to the Republicans in 2008? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 12, 2024, 04:58:30 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: 100% pro-life no matter what)
  Why did Little River County, AR swung so hard to the Republicans in 2008? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Why did Little River County, AR swung so hard to the Republicans in 2008?  (Read 15978 times)
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,467


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

« on: June 09, 2019, 11:35:05 PM »

Huh. I didn't even realize there was such a large bloc of Kerry-McCain voters. I thought that the financial meltdown would have prevented any WWC erosion in 2008, but I guess I was wrong.

Look at the raw vote change, its really not much. Around 800-900 voters had to change their mind to cause such a swing
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,467


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

« Reply #1 on: June 09, 2019, 11:57:21 PM »

Huh. I didn't even realize there was such a large bloc of Kerry-McCain voters. I thought that the financial meltdown would have prevented any WWC erosion in 2008, but I guess I was wrong.

Look at the raw vote change, its really not much. Around 800-900 voters had to change their mind to cause such a swing

Happened in numerous, contiguous counties in Appalachia and the South. But nowhere else, essentially. Yeah, we can all decipher the motivation — "economic anxiety." Hahahaha! 

Not what I was saying, what I was saying it isnt hard for huge swings to happen in counties like this lol
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,467


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

« Reply #2 on: June 10, 2019, 12:01:38 AM »

Huh. I didn't even realize there was such a large bloc of Kerry-McCain voters. I thought that the financial meltdown would have prevented any WWC erosion in 2008, but I guess I was wrong.

Look at the raw vote change, its really not much. Around 800-900 voters had to change their mind to cause such a swing

Happened in numerous, contiguous counties in Appalachia and the South. But nowhere else, essentially. Yeah, we can all decipher the motivation — "economic anxiety." Hahahaha! 

Not what I was saying, what I was saying it isnt hard for huge swings to happen in counties like this lol

LOL —  given the political environment, it only really happened in the South and Appalachia, because those folks are hardcore racists. Racism: LOL!

Im not disputing that lmao, im just saying why it was so easy for a huge shift to happen
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,467


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

« Reply #3 on: June 10, 2019, 04:18:26 PM »

LMAO @ Red Avs saying racism. Do you people ever get tired of bringing race into everything?

People don’t vote for what they want. They vote for who they are.

And who they are, are yellow dogs finally waking up to the democratic party being too socially liberal for their interests. Race was not in these peoples heads at the voting booth.

This is delusional. John Kerry was more socially liberal than Obama and he did pretty well with yellow dogs. keep in mind he was also painted as a "Massachusetts liberal", a "coastal elitist" and so on. as I said before, there are very few logical explanations for why so many voters would switch from Kerry to McCain other than racism.

You are missing the point. Sure, Kerry was more socially liberal than Obama, but it's all about the time and how long of a time trends take place over. 2000-2004 R swings were just as strong in these areas. It's not about race, it's about policy realignment.

Sure, it's just a coincidence that polls showed Hillary winning states like West Virginia and Arkansas vs McCain in 2008, and then they overwhelmingly rejected a black man - but surely not because he was black and had a scary sounding name.

LMAO, did you even pay attention to 90s and early 00s politics? Hillary was seen as similar to Bill on the issues which made southern dems more comfortable. Obama was different and was unarguably more socially liberal than Clinton was.

Except Obama and Hillary were virtually the same on every issue...

Thats true but voters then just believed she would be Bill's third term. So it was in a way more of a Bill Clinton(Albeit with far less charisma) vs Obama race more than Hillary vs Obama. In 2016 it in a way was more of an Obama (Albeit again with far less charisma) vs Bernie race.


Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,467


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

« Reply #4 on: July 16, 2019, 07:04:14 PM »

Ranking of Lincolns 1860 Performance in the border states:

1. NJ 48.13%
2. DE 23.72%
3. MO 10.28%
4. WV 03.63%
5. MD 02.48%
6. KY 00.93%
^. VA 00.08%



WV wasnt a state in 1860
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,467


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

« Reply #5 on: July 16, 2019, 09:09:51 PM »

Ranking of Lincolns 1860 Performance in the border states:

1. NJ 48.13%
2. DE 23.72%
3. MO 10.28%
4. WV 03.63%
5. MD 02.48%
6. KY 00.93%
^. VA 00.08%



WV wasnt a state in 1860

I separated the vote totals by 1868 state borders based on County data compiled by various sources to create this ranking.

Wow so WV swung massively then from 1860-1864 cause Lincoln won 68% of the vote there in 1864
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.022 seconds with 10 queries.