Maps!

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Scott has a point and while it may make sense for our urban performance to be slipping as such, due to various factors, I don't think it equates to being Trump levels of city performance as such either. This goes double so for the suburbs, where RL GOP performance has been hindered on the national level since 1992 in the more secular ones due to a coinciding of the rise of baby boomer voters to prominence at the same time the GOP was become more defined by the Evangelical Right.

There is hardly any Evangelical presence in Atlasia, and the right has historically been much more Catholic than Evangelical in Atlasia.

Not only is there less of a religious identity for the right and thus less of a geographic polarization of the educated vote, there is also less intense racial polarization since we lack the GOP's history in the Civil Rights Era and subsequent period.

This would be slipping now with the global trends and realignment on education taking an impact (think Britain in the last five to six years), but it still shouldn't give you the 2020 county map either.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I will add that while Atlasia ‘diverged’ from RL America 17 years ago in real time, on an equivalent Atlasian political time scale it has been essentially over 200 years for new political patterns to develop (since our political cycles are 12x faster yet still as volatile as those IRL). Thus it is to be expected for patterns to diverge completely from RL. Again, one look at Atlasian presidential state win maps will tell you that translating over RL demographic trends on their own is untenable.

I am not fond of the expedited election based time scale (not least because it makes me over 150 years old ) but when you consider the near non-existance of the Evangelical right, the collapse of anything resembling the Republican Party in 2005 (with a short revival in 2006) and the dominance of the right by broad based coalitions united solely on limiting the power of the Nyman Gov't for  75% of its existence, you are going to have a divergence and substantially so with appeal. With a right not defined by the same pressure groups, influences and identities that define the situation in real life and instead governed by support/hostility towards say the TNF Era, things like Cottonfield, things like the Radical Movement in 2015 and the collapse then revival of the left in 2017, the map is going to look much different.

The result would be a checkerboard pattern of people voting on various legacies.

There are a couple of mistakes that S019 is making.

1. Our voting system is different, we don't have issues with voting/gerrymandering or the history in recent times that goes along with it. The Federalist Party lacks the legacy of betrayal and disappointment that the Republican Party has towards Civil Rights (having gone from champion, to indifferent, to hostile). Furthermore, the Federalist Party has long promoted a more economically moderate and some cases populist position, which when marketed right would have appeal to minorities (look at the gains Trump made for instance as it was, then consider the possibility with a more serious effort, different backdrop and legacy). Lastly, the Federalists have had far more representation of diverse leadership at the top from JoMCar and Clark Kent (I seem to recall he was Asian, might be mistaken) to the 2017 Fhtagn, to Joseph Cao, in contrast to the Republican Party in RL.

So while Sev/LT would push trends towards RL, the baseline for the Feds with the minority vote would be substantially much higher. So a shift from say 40% to 30% or 35% to 25% depending on the community or group in question. That has a substantial impact on the urban baseline and while I don't think winning Manhattan is realistic, I don't think coming away with 18% of the vote is either and I would say that Federalists probably perform rather well with middle class minority voters and less so with working class ones. Especially when you consider the other factors.

2. There is a much longer history of Federalists championing causes that would win them favors from or at least get them in the conversation in terms of winning voters that the Republicans would not ever dream off. Healthcare, the 2016 LGBT Civil Rights bill, the Glass Steagal bill, the embrace of education and science, and Fhtagn's signing of the Carbon Tax, would all put the Federalist Party in a substantially better position with regards to educated middle class voters relative to the Republican Party IRL. This would improve the baselines as well in both suburbs and urban enclaves.

3. We don't know what the movement of people and location of various voting groups are necessarily relative to RL, or the impact that the devastation caused by rebellions in say New Mexico, the Midwest or 2014 Atlasian Civil War would have had on a given community. Perhaps there is a generation of Atlasian suburbanites that associate Labor with chaotic government and rebellion and vote as they shot. Perhaps there are voters who still blame the Feds for the war in Korea. Perhaps there are prairie mountain leftists who this day secretly adore the legacy of TNF and see the Labor Party as their champion, or maybe in some towns and villages as traitors of not supporting him in his rebellion. Maybe Kansas unites in horror at the prospect of being absorbed into the land of Mountain and Prairie Commies and votes rocked ribbed Federalist as a result in reaction to Fremontian saber rattling over the place. Perhaps there are Southern towns and counties that regard Labor as invaders from 2012 or places that regard Adam Griffin as a hero for what he did and has done alternatively. Maybe you have an older generation of voters in a patchwork of Appalachian counties that liked the leftist politics of Al but that has faded with time.

4. S019 was a Federalist himself and since he left, he cannot imagine anything remotely resembling his culture continuing as a Federalist after that time beyond. To ask him to see a world beyond himself or contemplate anything other than his world ending with him, seems to be rather difficult. Its a matter of self validation.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

To expand on point 3 some, you then have to factor in how that interacts with groups into its own tribalistic warfare.

Federalist have historically had enclaves in NJ, ME, VT or NH in Lincoln, add to that the possibility that for a large number of Tri-State suburbanites, the legacy of radicalism might be less with Southern Evangelicals (which don't exist in game and most so con activity has been from Northern Catholics) and instead rests with the long legacy of Prairie/Mountain Commies, 48er and Scandinavian Leftists and Appalachian Radicals, thus creating a push towards the Federalists in that area.

I mentioned how Kansas might have reacted in horror to Fremontian Saber rattling.

In PA you had Federalist dominance, replaced by Labor dominance in the Labor revival period. Factors involved here could be local union activity (pulling historical Fed defectors into the core of the revived labor), anti-war sentiment finally coming home to roost with younger voters, and Federalists shedding some ground with suburban professionals (though nothing compared to the rl collapse here since 1992). Areas of Federalist strength would remain with the Yankee bow tie/hour glass, traditionalist Catholics, middle class surburbanites and some percentage of minorities (maybe 25% to 35%) depending on the election. Scott is pretty close but I would flip Union/Snyder to the Feds and maybe Chester as well and give the Laborites more strength in Lehigh, Monroe and Carbon. Bucks being the swing county makes sense and the map looks very mid 20th century.

Something like this with blue and light red colored Orange and the dark red and maroon counties, well maroon.

Leip Atlas of US elections, 1964 PA county map

You can chisel into Berks and Schuylkill and make that "hand to hand combat" territory and this would certainly be a pro-Fed trend area in LT-Sev race.

Federalists should have deep strength in the traditionalist Catholic areas of Ohio and Indiana.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

4. S019 was a Federalist himself and since he left, he cannot imagine anything remotely resembling his culture continuing as a Federalist after that time beyond. To ask him to see a world beyond himself or contemplate anything other than his world ending with him, seems to be rather difficult. Its a matter of self validation.

To be fair, S019's politics have changed quite a lot since he stopped being a Fed, even if he is still quite uh, peculiar? Or motivated by "orange man bad"

Though I do wonder how much "Federalist culture" has changed over the past 2 years or so, especially given the multiple election defeats.

The Federalist Party has seen in the past right through to now a constant stream of people who have migrated to the left as they have aged. However, the basic composition and presence of a moderate wing of the party remains even when faced with third party competition for some of the same votes and space as such.

The fact is that Federalist culture has always been more broad based and inclusive even with slip ups in 2019 to such an extent that while these issues would cause problems and did so and reflect dips in support, the continued activism of others and new generations of Federalist moderates would tend to maintain a stronger baseline than what exists presently IRL. We don't have the same push for conformity, the same interest/pressure groups or the same cancel culture that exists IRL. The right has had to be this way to survive past the mid 2000s in this game, and this would reflect in the maps.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

On a site where discuss with maps is the primary purpose, you would thing this would be the place where we could actually sustain a forum based conversation for once.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

That feel when the three major parties essentially agree on everything except maybe abortion, gun control, and approach to environmental conservation, with mavericks on both sides of two of those issues.

Makes me wish there was a Trumpian or far-right movement in Atlasia to make things interesting, but they would lose a national election very badly.

As Truman can attest to from certain arguments on a certain other board with a certain other poster, I generally am not fond of the whole notion of the "parties agreed on everything except Tariffs, booze and Romanism", in the context of the 19th century. It is dismissive of the issues that did in fact dominate the political space and the importance thereof.

I would generally feel the same applies here in this context.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

June 2021 county map. Compare to June 2019 map on page 1.

I'd make a swing map but I am a little lazy.

Discuss #trends and such!

Why Susquehanna for Labor? My same question applies to the previous map you made.

It has history always voted with the rural counties to the West more so than with Lackawanna or with Broome, despite being sandwiched in between.

1. Most of Susquehanna looks more towards the Binghamton Metro and you can actually get Binghamton TV and radio stations in, the same cannot be said for those broadcasting out of Scranton.

My mom's family were stereotypical WASP middle class types. A lot of the homes in Hallstead were owned by White Collar types who worked in the Binghamton area, be it for IBM or various other industries. Those industries have declined obviously, leaving what can only be described as a Trumpist demographic. Most pro-Labor demographics left as a result of the collapse of coal in the county in the Depression.

2. The population demographic has just been right for it to have been a rather Republican County in almost every period of the Party's existence. From the days of Lincoln to the days of Trump.

I see no reason why a Federalist Party that wins Bradford, Tioga and Wayne, would not win Susquehanna.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Bumping my PA analysis.

In PA you had Federalist dominance, replaced by Labor dominance in the Labor revival period. Factors involved here could be local union activity (pulling historical Fed defectors into the core of the revived labor), anti-war sentiment finally coming home to roost with younger voters, and Federalists shedding some ground with suburban professionals (though nothing compared to the rl collapse here since 1992). Areas of Federalist strength would remain with the Yankee bow tie/hour glass, traditionalist Catholics, middle class surburbanites and some percentage of minorities (maybe 25% to 35%) depending on the election. Scott is pretty close but I would flip Union/Snyder to the Feds and maybe Chester as well and give the Laborites more strength in Lehigh, Monroe and Carbon. Bucks being the swing county makes sense and the map looks very mid 20th century.

Something like this with blue and light red colored Orange and the dark red and maroon counties, well maroon.

Leip Atlas of US elections, 1964 PA county map

You can chisel into Berks and Schuylkill and make that "hand to hand combat" territory and this would certainly be a pro-Fed trend area in LT-Sev race.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

There is a historic cultural dividing line that cuts between Lackwanna and Susequehanna and through on into upstate New York towards Albany. Kevin Phillips discusses this and even in spite of various realignments since, Susquehanna has almost exclusively voted with the counties to the West reliably, regardless of situation. I get what HCP is going for, but there are various factors that would break that grouping of counties at the PA border and resume it in Lackawanna.

The Western Part of the county, is an extension of the vast Germanified Yankee hinterland that that extents all the way to Warren County, tracing the length of the New York border. These people are not on any I81 corridor and thus isolated from the influences North or South that it would bring. The same can arguably said for the town of Susquehanna itself and the areas to the east.

As for the areas along the I81 corridor, Hallstead (along with Great Bend just North of it) are just across the NY border into PA and have a very middle to upper middle class vibe and while you can make a case this would cause it to shift Dem IRL, I don't see any motivation for that to apply here and since the country trended Republican with Trump and heavily so, I don't think this is a viable scenario.


As for the areas in the Southern part of the county, these are ex coal mining areas and while these would have been of some help to the Laborites were they still a thing, coal died here in the 1930s. Even in the 1990s, you could clearly see torn up rail beds along the highway, though some of them were made into the highway itself during the 50s and afterwards.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

To be fair Yankee, I think harder to argue the point on Susquehanna in 2019 since Adam (iirc) broke 70% statewide. Even for Biden this past year, it was only about 22% redder than the state. Factor in that Adam probably does comparatively worse than Biden in the Philly burbs, he has to make it up elsewhere.

There are other counties on the 2019 map that are colored as Fed that make no sense for a 70% Labor win in the state.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

To be fair Yankee, I think harder to argue the point on Susquehanna in 2019 since Adam (iirc) broke 70% statewide. Even for Biden this past year, it was only about 22% redder than the state. Factor in that Adam probably does comparatively worse than Biden in the Philly burbs, he has to make it up elsewhere.

There are other counties on the 2019 map that are colored as Fed that make no sense for a 70% Labor win in the state.

The map's hypothetical. It assumes that the margins aren't as extreme as they actually were since an actual Atlasian presidential election would have more than just one or two voters in these states. So some creative liberties were taken.

Then that makes Susquehanna for Labor even more dubious.