The New Democratic Majority -- It's Realignment (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2024, 04:04:43 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: 100% pro-life no matter what)
  The New Democratic Majority -- It's Realignment (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: The New Democratic Majority -- It's Realignment  (Read 3489 times)
BaconBacon96
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,678
Ireland, Republic of


« on: February 26, 2014, 02:11:00 AM »

I don't see any realignment. In terms of how regions vote, the 2012 map is roughly similar to the 2000 map.
Logged
BaconBacon96
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,678
Ireland, Republic of


« Reply #1 on: February 27, 2014, 02:37:08 AM »

Flawless Victory:  I said, and it was my intent to say, that 1896 was a realignment.  I was responding to someone who said it was not.

BaconBacon96: compared to 2004, in 2008 Ohio, Virginia, Florida, Iowa, New Mexico, Nevada and Colorado moved, and in 2012, they all stayed with 95% or more of their 2008 margins. 2004 was the all time peak Republican raw number, nationally and in the key states (especially Ohio, but not in Virginia). 

In the New Deal Cycle, much of the FDR-Truman states in the West and Outer South moved to Eisenhower, and stayed with a losing Nixon in 1960.  They became the core of the Emerging Republican Majority in 1968.  In 1992, the western half of the ERM flipped away, and the ERM became dominated by the South (instead of suburbia as in 1968-1988). 

Oh that makes sense.
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 0.017 seconds with 12 queries.