what's with all those counties like Cottle, TX or Harlan, KY

[freepcrusher]

they were very loyal democratic counties for most of the 20th century, then in the 2000 election those counties I mentioned along with many others instantly turned republican. Why do you think that is? One would think it would be because of gays gods and guns but that was an issue far before 2000 in fact it was probably a bigger issue in the 1980s then it is now. If those counties could vote for Walt Mondale or Mike Dukakis why the hell couldn't they vote for Gore, Kerry, or Obama?

[Person Man]

Demographic changes?

["'Oeps!' De blunders van Rick Perry Indicted"]

Clinton scandals, plus Bush was a much better fit for those areas than almost any past Republican.

[phk]

Clinton scandals, plus Bush was a much better fit for those areas than almost any past Republican.

[minionofmidas]

Clinton economic policies.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Clinton economic policies.

^^^

You need something to cut ties like that, and...

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Could the environment have been a factor? I can't imagine all those coal counties would be happy with Gore's status as an outspoken environmentalist.

[Person Man]

Could the environment have been a factor? I can't imagine all those coal counties would be happy with Gore's status as an outspoken environmentalist.

That is the best answer so far but its still probably not a good answer. West Virginia went from the Democratic staple to unwinnable almost overnight around the time Gore ran.

[CitizenX]

they were very loyal democratic counties for most of the 20th century, then in the 2000 election those counties I mentioned along with many others instantly turned republican. Why do you think that is? One would think it would be because of gays gods and guns but that was an issue far before 2000 in fact it was probably a bigger issue in the 1980s then it is now. If those counties could vote for Walt Mondale or Mike Dukakis why the hell couldn't they vote for Gore, Kerry, or Obama?

Racism.  Might as well ask why you never see black Republicans.

The reason Southern counties voted for Democrats for most of the twentieth century was because Lincoln freed the slaves, pure and simple.  Ever heard of Dixiecrats?  Ever heard of the solid South?

Don't believe that Republican party of Lincoln cr@p.  Lincoln destroyed the Republican party in the South when he freed the slaves.  To this day there are still some Democrats in the South because of this single act.

The only reason Southern states migrated back towards the Republicans was because LBJ signed the civil rights bill into law.  Ever heard of the Southern Strategy?  Why do you think Reagan used code words like "welfare queens."  He knew the type of red meat Republicans like.

When LBJ signed the civil rights bill into law he famously said he was, "signing away the south for 50 years."  Some Democrats remained loyal even after opposing the Civil Rights Act.  Robert Byrd who was a former Clansman filibustered it.  He lived long enough to endorse Obama for President.

Speaking of Al Gore.  His dad was a senator from Tennessee and he opposed the Civil Rights Act.

Anyway the racists in the Democratic party either came around or they left and became Republicans.  Some communities throughout the south still have the last vestiges of their Democratic past.  I've seen numerous Democrats run unopposed in local elections in plenty of conservative rural communities in the South.  Being a Democrat is just a tradition down there.  Plus most of the recent Democratic presidents came from the South.  Clinton, Carter, LBJ.  But if you throw in a black guy from Hawaii/Chicago you're going to have problems in the South.

If they voted on pure economics then most of the South would be Democratic.  But you throw in religion, abortion, gays, blacks, Mexicans, guns, etc. then you end up with the perfect Sarah Palin voter.

[freepcrusher]

If they voted on pure economics then most of the South would be Democratic.  But you throw in religion, abortion, gays, blacks, Mexicans, guns, etc. then you end up with the perfect Sarah Palin voter.

okay, but if those counties would have voted on those issues, they probably would have started voted republican much earlier than 2000. If they were voting on those issues they would have started voted republican either in 1964/1968 or 1980.

[CitizenX]

If they voted on pure economics then most of the South would be Democratic.  But you throw in religion, abortion, gays, blacks, Mexicans, guns, etc. then you end up with the perfect Sarah Palin voter.

okay, but if those counties would have voted on those issues, they probably would have started voted republican much earlier than 2000. If they were voting on those issues they would have started voted republican either in 1964/1968 or 1980.

Well its like I said.  There was an act by each political party that turned racists against them.  Which is why the picture is so muddled.  You have to live in the South where they fly Confederate flags and restore old plantation mansions and watch Gone With the Wind.  LBJ did what he did in the 60's but you have to realize the disdain that Southerners had for the Republican party after Lincoln ensured there were holdouts.  Plus politics has gotten progressively worse over the years.  President Reagan would lose a Republican primary today.  Also there are older Southern Democrats who are dieing off.  Their kids don't remember grandpa talking about reconstruction.

[phk]

Clinton economic policies.

^^^

You need something to cut ties like that, and...

[Miles]

Ever heard of Dixiecrats?

Tell me about it....we tried to start a Dixiecrat party for Atlasia.

The Dixiecrats were good guys; its a shame Southern Dems like Huey Long and Blanche Lincoln are being replaced by Republicans like Bobby Jindal and John Boozman.

[JohnCA246]

Another thing to consider is that people with liberal outlooks tend to leave places like this after the staple industry is gone because they object less to living in cities and adapting lifestyles. Whose who value church, tradtional society, family, ect tend to stay come hell or high water. So Harlan county voters may be voting the same as they ever did but a good portion of the Dems are now in Louisville. This doesn't explain a jump in a year's time, but I think explains changes in tradtionally Democratic-depressed-rural-white counties.

Also coal mining in Appalachia is far different than it was since the adoption of mountaintop removal. Rather than being composed of unionized masses chipping at coal, they are more professionalized extractors, which tend to vote Republican and have less support for environmental regulation that may have actually supported traditional shaft mining.

[Jackson]

Bush was from Texas/Demographic changes

[phk]

A lot of it has to do with the direction that Bill Clinton took the party in.

Granted they weren't all Bill Clinton's policies, but the GOP congress limiting the extent of his economic liberalism certainly paved the way for "Clinton-era Republicans" and "Obamacans" later on to rise. Many non-Southern suburbs (including NoVA, Miami, Orlando, Research Triangle area) became increasingly D during the 1990s. This usually may not have to come fruition till after Clinton left.

Clinton's desire was to co-opt White suburbanites who traditionally voted GOP (after 1964) and did a host of things to do so (i.e. Welfare Reform) but was actually assisted in part by the GOP congress. Another desire was to maintain the White populist base in the Appalachian area.

Overall, Clinton had the charisma and charm to bring both into his camp, while later Democrats had to give up the lower class Whites for the upper middle class Whites. On balance though it is a net gain for the D's.

But it can stymie economic liberalism for the future. For example while Obama would prefer a marginal rate for the top higher than 39.6% he would have to concede that to maintain the current order of ~2/3's D in the suburbs that he can't go further than that.

[Person Man]

A lot of it has to do with the direction that Bill Clinton took the party in.

Granted they weren't all Bill Clinton's policies, but the GOP congress limiting the extent of his economic liberalism certainly paved the way for "Clinton-era Republicans" and "Obamacans" later on to rise. Many non-Southern suburbs (including NoVA, Miami, Orlando, Research Triangle area) became increasingly D during the 1990s. This usually may not have to come fruition till after Clinton left.

Clinton's desire was to co-opt White suburbanites who traditionally voted GOP (after 1964) and did a host of things to do so (i.e. Welfare Reform) but was actually assisted in part by the GOP congress. Another desire was to maintain the White populist base in the Appalachian area.

Overall, Clinton had the charisma and charm to bring both into his camp, while later Democrats had to give up the lower class Whites for the upper middle class Whites. On balance though it is a net gain for the D's.

But it can stymie economic liberalism for the future. For example while Obama would prefer a marginal rate for the top higher than 39.6% he would have to concede that to maintain the current order of ~2/3's D in the suburbs that he can't go further than that.

That's what I'm guessing. The activists in the party from the 60s have finally freed themselves of the "reactionary working class". The reasons a lot of old Democratic counties stoped voting for Democrats could simply be that new Democratic candidates think they don't need them and don't campaign or spend money there. They rather campaign in states that are adding EVs, not losing them. Its pretty useless to have Arkansas and Kentucy if you lose Florida and Virginia. The only real 600 pound Gorilla for Democrats right now is Texas. The Democrats have a lot of constituents there, but they are still less popular than cancer despite doing "better" in 2008...and if the enough Ds move out of the Great Lakes, they will need to make up the EVS by doing better in Texas lest they go back to the time when the Ds simply were too scattered electorally to run a decent national campaign (1968-1988).