Why did Gore do so well in the Lower Northeast (RI, CT, NY, NJ)? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 30, 2024, 02:37:13 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results
  2000 U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Dereich)
  Why did Gore do so well in the Lower Northeast (RI, CT, NY, NJ)? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Why did Gore do so well in the Lower Northeast (RI, CT, NY, NJ)?  (Read 3014 times)
Alben Barkley
KYWildman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,284
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.97, S: -5.74

P P
« on: November 29, 2023, 08:44:59 PM »

Gun control and environmentalism. It's the same reason why Gore lost TN, AR, MO and WV. In the 90s gun control and environmentalism became hot button issues and the Mid Atlantic backed both. The NYC/NJ/CT suburbs back gun control.

The Clinton/Gore administration also signed the environmental agreement, the Kyoto Protocol which also was popular in the region.

I think it's more to do with just the fact that Dubya was seen as a hick and Clinton was very popular in the Northeast, than it is to do with these specific issues.
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 14 queries.