Why is NH so different from neighbouring Vermont, Mass and RI in it's voting inclinations? It seems to be much more inclined to the GOP than the region as a whole. Why? Is it based purely on fiscal policy or is it more socially conservative?
Vermont would be more similar if not for the immigration of liberals from New York who wanted to turn the state into a flower power commune of goofy idealism.
One interesting trend is that the richer the state has become (the richer the residents have become), the more inclined they are to support more social spending and higher taxes-- the story of the rest of New England and the whole Yankee area of the country. So far, the desire hasn't really bubbled up with any vigor, but it's there. Maybe a case of guilty rich syndrome. Who knows?
The courts have gotten engaged in deciding how much should be spent on education and that puts pressure on low tax rates, too.
The state really embraced its identity of low taxes and individual liberty under Meldrim Thomson. Before then, the state was more Eisenhower Republicanism than Reagan Republicanism. Thomson came up with all sorts of pithy quotes that Reagan conservatives salivate over-- "Ax the tax," "Keep your guns," "Live free or die," "They are wrong: My beliefs [aren't rooted in the 19th-century as I've been accused, but instead] are rooted in the values of the 17th century, and I'm proud of it." He also thought the national guard should have access to nuclear weapons. Now, all of our statewide elected leaders are Reagan conservatives. Even Bradley and Bass are supportive of supply-side tax policy.
I will say that social conservatism isn't a big factor here. New England believes in Frost's "good fences make good neighbors" statement. New Hampshire pretty much does, too. There are far fewer churches in the region-- even in Republican New Hampshire-- than in Southern states. The churches we do have are dry and non-controversial. Even Yankee catholic churches aren't as strict as varieties elsewhere.
