The South is Solid Once More -and This Time, It's Republican

[Frodo]

If there's any consolation for Democrats (particularly liberals and progressives), it's that the old Blue Dog strategy pursued by Kay Hagan, Michelle Nunn, Jason Carter, Allison Lundergan Grimes, Mark Pryor, Mike Ross, Mark Warner, Mary Landrieu, etc., will no longer suffice if you seek public office in the region.  With the voters there no longer recognizing the separation between national and local Democrats, you can't campaign on being the less extreme version of Republicans anymore:

The South: Solid once again _ for Republicans

By BILL BARROW, AP
6 hours ago

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[IceSpear]

The question is whether or not Blue Dogs are dead for good, or only dead as long as Obama (or a non-Southern Democrat) is in the White House. If we get an unpopular Republican president in the future I could see them making a resurgence.

[Indy Texas]

The Democrats need to figure out who their "marginal voters" are in the South: the ones who will be the first to choose a Democrat over a Republican in a sufficiently anti-GOP climate or with a really good Democratic candidate and a really poor GOP one.

The old formula was that those marginal voters were the rural white voters with some ancestral Democratic ties due to family or geography or local politics. I don't think that's where the Democrats should be concentrating their efforts anymore.

They should do what Republicans did when piecing together their own winning coalition in the South: go after non-rural white middle class households in large and mid-size cities. They're going to have to find something to offer them, though. A higher minimum wage isn't going to move the needle with those people. Neither will contraception and reproductive rights.

[Mr. Smith]

They should stop worrying about the South and just completely and utterly take over the Northeast and every Mexican Border state except Texas.

Make it so that if the Kay Hagans and Carters are useless, then the Susan Collins and LePages and Christie's too have no credence.

The GOP managed just fine for 100 years ignoring the South (with only Hoover and Eisenhower ever making any actual attempts down there, Goldwater hit the place mostly by accident).

As is John Kerry was literally 2% away from being the first Democrat to win without the South, Obama's 2012 map almost flips 1976 completely in that region (Florida is shared), the right campaign could definitely do that.

[KCDem]

Time to exterminate the Blue State Republicans!

[Landslide Lyndon]

I guess Virginia seceded from the South.

[Mehmentum]

The south is solid for the GOP, only if you don't count Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida as a part of the south.  If the only reason your excluding those states is that they are states where Democrats are competitive in, then your really only saying 'the southern states that only vote for Republicans are solid GOP.'

[Frodo]

The south is solid for the GOP, only if you don't count Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida as a part of the south.  If the only reason your excluding those states is that they are states where Democrats are competitive in, then your really only saying 'the southern states that only vote for Republicans are solid GOP.'

Where are you reading that in this article?  The author stated in the first paragraph that only a handful of Democrats will still hold statewide office in the South next year, and presumably that handful includes Mark Warner, Tim Kaine, Terry McAulife, Bill Nelson, and Steve Beshear.  Republicans hold the majority of the House delegation in every state, as well as nearly every state legislature (with the exception of the Kentucky House) and governor's mansion (with the exception of Kentucky and Virginia) in the region is Republican.  Looks solid enough to me.

Unless you're primarily referring to presidential elections, that is.  

[Mehmentum]

The south is solid for the GOP, only if you don't count Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida as a part of the south.  If the only reason your excluding those states is that they are states where Democrats are competitive in, then your really only saying 'the southern states that only vote for Republicans are solid GOP.'

Where are you reading that in this article?  The author stated in the first paragraph that only a handful of Democrats will still hold statewide office in the South next year, and presumably that handful includes Mark Warner, Tim Kaine, Terry McAulife, Bill Nelson, and Steve Beshear.  Republicans hold the majority of the House delegation in every state, as well as nearly every state legislature (with the exception of the Kentucky House) and governor's mansion (with the exception of Kentucky and Virginia) in the region is Republican.  Looks solid enough to me.

Unless you're primarily referring to presidential elections, that is.  

Virginia: Two Democratic senators, a Democratic Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General, and it voted for Obama in the last 2 presidential elections.  It does have a Republican House and Senate, but its hardly a solid GOP state.

Florida: 1 GOP Senator and 1 Democratic Senator.  Republican Governor and legislature.  Voted for Obama in the last 2 elections.  Republicans entirely control the state government, but its not like Democrats aren't competitive and haven't recently won statewide races as recently as 2 years ago.  Part of the problem here is that the Florida Democratic Party is a mess.

North Carolina: Yeah, we just lost the senate race here, but it was by a very close margin in a heavily Republican year.  It was also very close in 2012.  Democrats can win races in this state, though its definitely still Republican leaning.     

[Landslide Lyndon]

Isn't it curious that you never see articles about the Solide Northeast or the Solid West Coast?

[KCDem]

Isn't it curious that you never see articles about the Solide Northeast or the Solid West Coast?

Nope. Because the media is obsessed with #Demsindisarray

[Consciously Unconscious]

Isn't it curious that you never see articles about the Solide Northeast or the Solid West Coast?

Nope. Because the media is obsessed with #Demsindisarray

Which is a bit ridiculous considering they were saying the exact same stuff about Republicans two years ago.

[Bigby]

Isn't it curious that you never see articles about the Solide Northeast or the Solid West Coast?

Nope. Because the media is obsessed with #Demsindisarray

Which is a bit ridiculous considering they were saying the exact same stuff about Republicans two years ago.

Ever heard that "doom and gloom sells?"

[Vega]

Isn't it curious that you never see articles about the Solide Northeast or the Solid West Coast?

Nope. Because the media is obsessed with #Demsindisarray

Which is a bit ridiculous considering they were saying the exact same stuff about Republicans two years ago.

Ever heard that "doom and gloom sells?"

Yeah, gotta love it when you hear John King say "America is increasingly becoming a center-right country".

Having 38% voter turnout isn't really indicative of anything.

[KCDem]

Isn't it curious that you never see articles about the Solide Northeast or the Solid West Coast?

Nope. Because the media is obsessed with #Demsindisarray

Which is a bit ridiculous considering they were saying the exact same stuff about Republicans two years ago.

Ever heard that "doom and gloom sells?"

Yeah, gotta love it when you hear John King say "America is increasingly becoming a center-right country".

Having 38% voter turnout isn't really indicative of anything.

He said that? Haha the media really is clueless.

[Vega]

Isn't it curious that you never see articles about the Solide Northeast or the Solid West Coast?

Nope. Because the media is obsessed with #Demsindisarray

Which is a bit ridiculous considering they were saying the exact same stuff about Republicans two years ago.

Ever heard that "doom and gloom sells?"

Yeah, gotta love it when you hear John King say "America is increasingly becoming a center-right country".

Having 38% voter turnout isn't really indicative of anything.

He said that? Haha the media really is clueless.

Yup, he sure did. Wolf Blitzer was saying something similar.

[KCDem]

Isn't it curious that you never see articles about the Solide Northeast or the Solid West Coast?

Nope. Because the media is obsessed with #Demsindisarray

Which is a bit ridiculous considering they were saying the exact same stuff about Republicans two years ago.

Ever heard that "doom and gloom sells?"

Yeah, gotta love it when you hear John King say "America is increasingly becoming a center-right country".

Having 38% voter turnout isn't really indicative of anything.

He said that? Haha the media really is clueless.

Yup, he sure did. Wolf Blitzer was saying something similar.

JOKE NETWORK!

[Dixie Reborn]

All of you calm the f*** down. Turnout in the south was a joke this cycle and (unfortunately) is no way representative of the actual trends and politics of the region.

[H. Ross Peron]

The problems with the Blue Dogs is that they were not economically populist enough while obviously being eclipsed in socially conservative populism by the Republicans-causing many voters to vote for the "real thing" who at least was loudly pro-life and pro "traditional marriage". What if the Blue Dogs had been calling for expanding vocational education rather than voting to repeal the estate tax?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Yes, please do concede VA, NC and FL.

[smoltchanov]

The question is whether or not Blue Dogs are dead for good, or only dead as long as Obama (or a non-Southern Democrat) is in the White House. If we get an unpopular Republican president in the future I could see them making a resurgence.

Agree. Right now for vast majority of Southern whites a very simple identity holds: "Democratic party" = "Obama". And vast majority of southern whites not simply dislikes, but viscerally hates Obama. Hence - the results. In fact - part of the former Democratic "Blue Dog appeal" still exist in the South: Carter and Nunn, for example, essentially got Obama's 2012 numbers in Georgia with substantially more white, older and  conservative electorate. Just not enough.. Though obviously South became much more partisan since 2008 - no more Bright's and Taylor's..

[publicunofficial]

Isn't it curious that you never see articles about the Solide Northeast or the Solid West Coast?

Nope. Because the media is obsessed with #Demsindisarray

Which is a bit ridiculous considering they were saying the exact same stuff about Republicans two years ago.

Ever heard that "doom and gloom sells?"

Yeah, gotta love it when you hear John King say "America is increasingly becoming a center-right country".

Having 38% voter turnout isn't really indicative of anything.

He said that? Haha the media really is clueless.

Yup, he sure did. Wolf Blitzer was saying something similar.

Chuck Todd declares the Democratic Party dead the moment he sees a bad poll.

[Indy Texas]

The problems with the Blue Dogs is that they were not economically populist enough while obviously being eclipsed in socially conservative populism by the Republicans-causing many voters to vote for the "real thing" who at least was loudly pro-life and pro "traditional marriage". What if the Blue Dogs had been calling for expanding vocational education rather than voting to repeal the estate tax?

The Blue Dogs' economic polices were incoherent. In the "old days" of the Solid South, the Democrats were first and foremost advocates for their local economies; the liberal and conservative Democrats split on how forcefully to advocate for the welfare state and how much money should be allocated to it.

It boggles my mind that you had Democrats in the Deep South voting against financial regulation post-2008. It makes sense to do so if you're a NY/NJ/CT Democrat from a silk stocking district. But the people of Alabama have nothing to gain from leaving derivatives markets unregulated. They don't work on Wall Street. Their local industry isn't sinking or swimming based on that.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The problems with the Blue Dogs is that they were not economically populist enough while obviously being eclipsed in socially conservative populism by the Republicans-causing many voters to vote for the "real thing" who at least was loudly pro-life and pro "traditional marriage". What if the Blue Dogs had been calling for expanding vocational education rather than voting to repeal the estate tax?

The Blue Dogs' economic polices were incoherent. In the "old days" of the Solid South, the Democrats were first and foremost advocates for their local economies; the liberal and conservative Democrats split on how forcefully to advocate for the welfare state and how much money should be allocated to it.

It boggles my mind that you had Democrats in the Deep South voting against financial regulation post-2008. It makes sense to do so if you're a NY/NJ/CT Democrat from a silk stocking district. But the people of Alabama have nothing to gain from leaving derivatives markets unregulated. They don't work on Wall Street. Their local industry isn't sinking or swimming based on that.

Blue Dog just meant Republican-lite. And Republican-lite is a loser.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

- Harry Truman

[H. Ross Peron]

The problems with the Blue Dogs is that they were not economically populist enough while obviously being eclipsed in socially conservative populism by the Republicans-causing many voters to vote for the "real thing" who at least was loudly pro-life and pro "traditional marriage". What if the Blue Dogs had been calling for expanding vocational education rather than voting to repeal the estate tax?

The Blue Dogs' economic polices were incoherent. In the "old days" of the Solid South, the Democrats were first and foremost advocates for their local economies; the liberal and conservative Democrats split on how forcefully to advocate for the welfare state and how much money should be allocated to it.

It boggles my mind that you had Democrats in the Deep South voting against financial regulation post-2008. It makes sense to do so if you're a NY/NJ/CT Democrat from a silk stocking district. But the people of Alabama have nothing to gain from leaving derivatives markets unregulated. They don't work on Wall Street. Their local industry isn't sinking or swimming based on that.

Precisely my point. If both candidates are pro Wall Street you might as well go with the pro-life one or the one endorsed by the NRA.