County Swing Map

[BaldEagle1991]

Did military areas swing more to Romney a lot more than anywhere else? Perhaps more than Coal and Mormon counties?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Aside from the Mormons, this seems to have nothing to do with any personal appeal or lack thereof of Mitt Romney. It's just a combination of: the appeal or lack thereof of Barack Obama + which states were contested + demographic changes. To the extent that many of us (including, occasionally, me) on the forum were wrong about our sense of the swing in certain regions (and social classes), it had to do with not predicting this. It's as if maybe Romney, after all his contortions, just didn't stand for anything distinctive in the minds of voters except generic R/not-Obama.

Nailed it, I think.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Good map. Interesting how unlike 2008, 2004, 2000, and 1996, the county swing map isn't that ideological. More a question of race, region, and "correction" of 2008 performance.

I assume the Conn. map is based on the early Atlas figures, rather than the actual 58-41 result?

No, that shows a five point swing toward Romney, which is correct.

Hard Romney Swing Areas
1. Appalachia/Coal
2. Mormons/Utah
3. Corn areas of IL, IN, MO
4. Oil in ND, MT, TX
5. NE WI. I have no idea why.

Obama swing areas:
1. Black Belt
2. Sandy-hit areas (NYC, Jersey Shore)
3. Miami and Orlando areas (non-Cuban latin@ growth)
4. Mexican border areas, from the Rio Grande valley to Imperial county
5. Upstate NY (no idea why)

I was rather surprised by the swing to Obama in the black counties of the South. What was going on there? Is it a turnout thing, with Republican-voting whites in the area not showing up to vote, while blacks maintained their support, or did Obama manage to convince whites who voted for McCain to vote for him this time around? I just thought the black community was so enthused last election, it would be difficult for Obama to pick up any swing there this time.

I was also surprised that the swing in eastern Idaho wasn't larger - that area has a large number of Mormons, doesn't it? I guess it's perhaps already so Republican, that there wasn't much room for it to swing (rather like San Fransisco or DC last election, which both trended Republican, because they couldn't really pick up any more Democrat voters).

Rural white flight perhaps?

Not that so much as just demographic change in general -  the black population is growing much faster than the whites.  Plus, turnout.  I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of blacks felt truly enfranchised politically for the first time with Obama as President, rather than just aspiring to it. Or it may just be to a large degree that blacks didn't decrease in their turnout from 2008 as much as whites there did - McCain being a better fit for the region than Romney.

[minionofmidas]

Also --- what happened in Plaquemines Parish?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_Horizon_oil_spill

With Sandy perhaps reenforcing memories, also of Katrina.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

St. Bernard had an even bigger swing towards Obama than Plaquemines. Since it's 88% white, it means Obama actually did fairly well with whites here.

[minionofmidas]

St Bernard is mostly quite dense, quite inner suburbia. It's also still casting just half the vote it did in 2004, the whole place was submerged during Katrina and some areas are not going to be resettled due to the flooding risk. (New Orleans' vote is up 10k since 2008 btw, accounting for much of the statewide swing.)

[The Free North]

Good map. Interesting how unlike 2008, 2004, 2000, and 1996, the county swing map isn't that ideological. More a question of race, region, and "correction" of 2008 performance.

I assume the Conn. map is based on the early Atlas figures, rather than the actual 58-41 result?

No, that shows a five point swing toward Romney, which is correct.

Hard Romney Swing Areas
1. Appalachia/Coal
2. Mormons/Utah
3. Corn areas of IL, IN, MO
4. Oil in ND, MT, TX
5. NE WI. I have no idea why.

Obama swing areas:
1. Black Belt
2. Sandy-hit areas (NYC, Jersey Shore)
3. Miami and Orlando areas (non-Cuban latin@ growth)
4. Mexican border areas, from the Rio Grande valley to Imperial county
5. Upstate NY (no idea why)

I was rather surprised by the swing to Obama in the black counties of the South. What was going on there? Is it a turnout thing, with Republican-voting whites in the area not showing up to vote, while blacks maintained their support, or did Obama manage to convince whites who voted for McCain to vote for him this time around? I just thought the black community was so enthused last election, it would be difficult for Obama to pick up any swing there this time.

I was also surprised that the swing in eastern Idaho wasn't larger - that area has a large number of Mormons, doesn't it? I guess it's perhaps already so Republican, that there wasn't much room for it to swing (rather like San Fransisco or DC last election, which both trended Republican, because they couldn't really pick up any more Democrat voters).

Rural white flight perhaps?

Not that so much as just demographic change in general -  the black population is growing much faster than the whites.  Plus, turnout.  I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of blacks felt truly enfranchised politically for the first time with Obama as President, rather than just aspiring to it. Or it may just be to a large degree that blacks didn't decrease in their turnout from 2008 as much as whites there did - McCain being a better fit for the region than Romney.

Black population has, and is predicted to remain stagnant over the upcoming years. They are around 11-12% of the population right now and nearly every demographic prediction ive seen has them staying that way for the next 50+ years. More a question of turnout that birthrate

[minionofmidas]

That's nationally. In the rural Deep South, Black population has since the end of the Great Migration (and that was in the 70s) been creeping back up again.

Of course, it's risen by less over that period than it used to fall by per decade for fifty years, so...

[Kitteh]

Good map. Interesting how unlike 2008, 2004, 2000, and 1996, the county swing map isn't that ideological. More a question of race, region, and "correction" of 2008 performance.

I assume the Conn. map is based on the early Atlas figures, rather than the actual 58-41 result?

No, that shows a five point swing toward Romney, which is correct.

Hard Romney Swing Areas
1. Appalachia/Coal
2. Mormons/Utah
3. Corn areas of IL, IN, MO
4. Oil in ND, MT, TX
5. NE WI. I have no idea why.

Obama swing areas:
1. Black Belt
2. Sandy-hit areas (NYC, Jersey Shore)
3. Miami and Orlando areas (non-Cuban latin@ growth)
4. Mexican border areas, from the Rio Grande valley to Imperial county
5. Upstate NY (no idea why)

I was rather surprised by the swing to Obama in the black counties of the South. What was going on there? Is it a turnout thing, with Republican-voting whites in the area not showing up to vote, while blacks maintained their support, or did Obama manage to convince whites who voted for McCain to vote for him this time around? I just thought the black community was so enthused last election, it would be difficult for Obama to pick up any swing there this time.

I was also surprised that the swing in eastern Idaho wasn't larger - that area has a large number of Mormons, doesn't it? I guess it's perhaps already so Republican, that there wasn't much room for it to swing (rather like San Fransisco or DC last election, which both trended Republican, because they couldn't really pick up any more Democrat voters).

Rural white flight perhaps?

Not that so much as just demographic change in general -  the black population is growing much faster than the whites.  Plus, turnout.  I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of blacks felt truly enfranchised politically for the first time with Obama as President, rather than just aspiring to it. Or it may just be to a large degree that blacks didn't decrease in their turnout from 2008 as much as whites there did - McCain being a better fit for the region than Romney.

Black population has, and is predicted to remain stagnant over the upcoming years. They are around 11-12% of the population right now and nearly every demographic prediction ive seen has them staying that way for the next 50+ years. More a question of turnout that birthrate

Nationally, the Latin@ and Asian population is projected to grow, the black population is projected to remain constant, and the white population is projected to shrink (% wise, of course). That means that in a place that's largely black vs white, the percentage of blacks compared to whites will rise, more due to a decline in the white % than a rise in the black %.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Here's a stunner: Obama won Harrison County IN by 23 points, after losing it in 2008.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

Here's a stunner: Obama won Harrison County IN by 23 points, after losing it in 2008.

What the hell happened there?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Most likely an error.

[RI]

Yeah, it looks like they flipped Obama and Romney's numbers in Harrison County.

[nclib]

Good map. Interesting how unlike 2008, 2004, 2000, and 1996, the county swing map isn't that ideological. More a question of race, region, and "correction" of 2008 performance.

I assume the Conn. map is based on the early Atlas figures, rather than the actual 58-41 result?

No, that shows a five point swing toward Romney, which is correct.

Hard Romney Swing Areas
1. Appalachia/Coal
2. Mormons/Utah
3. Corn areas of IL, IN, MO
4. Oil in ND, MT, TX
5. NE WI. I have no idea why.

Obama swing areas:
1. Black Belt
2. Sandy-hit areas (NYC, Jersey Shore)
3. Miami and Orlando areas (non-Cuban latin@ growth)
4. Mexican border areas, from the Rio Grande valley to Imperial county
5. Upstate NY (no idea why)

I was rather surprised by the swing to Obama in the black counties of the South. What was going on there? Is it a turnout thing, with Republican-voting whites in the area not showing up to vote, while blacks maintained their support, or did Obama manage to convince whites who voted for McCain to vote for him this time around? I just thought the black community was so enthused last election, it would be difficult for Obama to pick up any swing there this time.

I was also surprised that the swing in eastern Idaho wasn't larger - that area has a large number of Mormons, doesn't it? I guess it's perhaps already so Republican, that there wasn't much room for it to swing (rather like San Fransisco or DC last election, which both trended Republican, because they couldn't really pick up any more Democrat voters).

Rural white flight perhaps?

Not that so much as just demographic change in general -  the black population is growing much faster than the whites.  Plus, turnout.  I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of blacks felt truly enfranchised politically for the first time with Obama as President, rather than just aspiring to it. Or it may just be to a large degree that blacks didn't decrease in their turnout from 2008 as much as whites there did - McCain being a better fit for the region than Romney.

Black population has, and is predicted to remain stagnant over the upcoming years. They are around 11-12% of the population right now and nearly every demographic prediction ive seen has them staying that way for the next 50+ years. More a question of turnout that birthrate

Perhaps it's a question of black vs. white turnout, though in the Deep South, counties with higher black % were more likely to swing towards Obama.

[Badger]

An explanation for Southern Ohio?

I live close enough to southern Ohio to know that folks there are sick of Tea Party nonsense. That's why the GOP is doing worse there.

There more/less than anywhere else in OH? I doubt it. It is a manufacturing area, and many of these counties Obama did reasonably well in (mid to high 40's) last time. I'm not sure offhand if there is much auto-related employment in that region. I haven't heard of much.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

There more/less than anywhere else in OH? I doubt it. It is a manufacturing area, and many of these counties Obama did reasonably well in (mid to high 40's) last time. I'm not sure offhand if there is much auto-related employment in that region. I haven't heard of much.

The region is largely made up of industrial workers in the cities who work their asses off, plus rich Tea Party types in the exurbs who attack them for not working hard enough. The urban areas voted for Obama, the rural or exurban areas for Romney.

[Badger]

There more/less than anywhere else in OH? I doubt it. It is a manufacturing area, and many of these counties Obama did reasonably well in (mid to high 40's) last time. I'm not sure offhand if there is much auto-related employment in that region. I haven't heard of much.

The region is largely made up of industrial workers in the cities who work their asses off, plus rich Tea Party types in the exurbs who attack them for not working hard enough. The urban areas voted for Obama, the rural or exurban areas for Romney.

That is a grotesque oversimplification. See (e.g.) Pike County.

EDIT: Hocking and Perry, among others, also wreck your strawman.

[Benj]

Did military areas swing more to Romney a lot more than anywhere else? Perhaps more than Coal and Mormon counties?

I don't know why you'd think that. The Florida Panhandle and the Hampton Roads area of Virginia are the two biggest military regions in the country, and both were pretty steady.

[Smid]

Did military areas swing more to Romney a lot more than anywhere else? Perhaps more than Coal and Mormon counties?

I don't know why you'd think that. The Florida Panhandle and the Hampton Roads area of Virginia are the two biggest military regions in the country, and both were pretty steady.

I looked also for San Diego and Annapolis, which seem to have swung only lightly. McCain possibly outperformed last time, though, with his veteran background.

[bgwah]

The lack of data in this thread regarding racial demographics in the South is very annoying. Here, let me fix it:

Biggest Obama swings in MS:

Humphreys County
2000: 71.0-26.8 black
2010: 74.1-22.8 black

Black change: -12.6%
White change: -29.0%

Leflore County
2000: 67.3-29.6 black
2010: 71.9-24.5 black

Black change: -8.9%
White change: -29.4%

Yazoo County
2000: 53.6-41.1 black
2010: 56.6-37.3 black

Black change: +5.4%
White change: -9.4%

[Benj]

Did military areas swing more to Romney a lot more than anywhere else? Perhaps more than Coal and Mormon counties?

I don't know why you'd think that. The Florida Panhandle and the Hampton Roads area of Virginia are the two biggest military regions in the country, and both were pretty steady.

I looked also for San Diego and Annapolis, which seem to have swung only lightly. McCain possibly outperformed last time, though, with his veteran background.

True, though of those four areas there was a significant swing/trend to McCain only in the Florida Panhandle (where obviously other ...things... were going on in 2008).

[RBH]

St. Bernard had an even bigger swing towards Obama than Plaquemines. Since it's 88% white, it means Obama actually did fairly well with whites here.

Copying my post from another site

"Also, St. Bernard Parish went from 71/26 McCain to 61/36 Romney. I checked and the percentage of registered voters who were African American went from just under 10% in 2008 to just under 15% in 2012. Plus St. Bernard Parish has kept growing after the 2010 Census and appears to be netting a few hundred people a year from Orleans Parish ( http://www.forbes.com/special-report/2011/migration.html )"

[big bad fab]

Oklahoma is so funny in this swing map

[minionofmidas]

How so? In that Obama at least didn't think sink much further, and even got a bit of a dead cat bounce in places?

EDIT: LOL Typo.

[RI]

Updated map taking into account further votes, corrections, etc.