States Splitting Apart

[jimrtex]

These states have voted for the same presidential winner for several elections (in the case of Alabama and Mississippi more than a century and a half.    Some are neighbors, and others are the odd couple (California the most populous state and Vermont one of the least populous).  Which will go their separate ways soonest?

[Gabu]

I'd say DC and Minnesota.  DC will always be Democratic, so all we need is to have a reasonably moderate Republican to win Minnesota and there you go.

[MissCatholic]

Ohio will vote democrat in 2008. Tennesse wont.

[DanielX]

Ohio will vote democrat in 2008. Tennesse wont.

Ohio is very much a swing state for '08. And Tennessee might go Democrat (not likely, probably the only candidate who could win Tennessee is Bredesen).

[CARLHAYDEN]

Actually, in 1960, the Unpledged (Byrd) slate carried Mississippi while the Kennedy slate carried Alabama (although some of the electors voted for Byrd).

[minionofmidas]

...or rather, the Unpledged Democrat Slate (whoever) won Mississippi and a joint slate of Democrats and Unpledged Democrats won Alabama.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

IA and NM

[Defarge]

OH and TN or NY and Wisconsin. 

[12th Doctor]

Just going by the odds, I would have to say Minnesota and DC.

[Gabu]

Actually, in 1960, the Unpledged (Byrd) slate carried Mississippi while the Kennedy slate carried Alabama (although some of the electors voted for Byrd).

That's not really a split.  Both states voted Democrat.  It just happens to be the case that the electors didn't all vote for the same Democrat.

Plus, a majority of the electors in both Alabama and Mississippi voted for the same person.  Kennedy only got 5 out of 11 EVs in Alabama.

[dazzleman]

New York and Wisconsin

[CARLHAYDEN]

...or rather, the Unpledged Democrat Slate (whoever) won Mississippi and a joint slate of Democrats and Unpledged Democrats won Alabama.

Kennedy lost in Mississippi to the Unpledged slate (116.248 to 108,362) while the Alabama result was murky as there was a single Democrat slate, some of the electors voted for Kennedy, and some for Byrd.

[Gustaf]

But Minnesota is likely to vote Democrat. I'd say that Iowa and New Mexico are fairly good odds as soon as it's a close election.

[Alcon]

Let's go choice by choice.

Alabama-Mississippi (since 1844)
Short-term, this is obviously not the choice to make.  However, long-term, it depends.  Alabama is already more white than Mississippi, and I recall that the split is slowly growing.  I can see this split happening, but only in a total landslide.

Kansas-North Dakota (since 1900)
Although North Dakota has more libertarian-leaning farmers, they are still populists at heart, and match Kansas well.  This will be a hard bond to break.

Indiana-South Dakota (since 1916)
Although they vote similarly, Indiana and South Dakota are fundamentally different states.  Indiana is populist, with a conservative Christian tinge, while South Dakota is libertarian, with a Christian conscious.  If Dems go libertarian and Reps go populist, a landslide could find South Dakota comfortably in the Dem column, with Indiana comfortably in the Republican column.

Idaho-Utah (since 1916)
Beautiful land both (for the most part) and like-minded population (for the most part).  Idaho has more libertarians, but the non-Mormons in Utah make up for this by generally being heavily liberal on all issues.  These states are perhaps impossible to seperate.

Oklahoma-Virginia (since 1924)
Not a very strong bond, although both have fundamentally populist roots.  Virginia is trending libertarian thanks to Fairfax and Loudoun Counties, while the rest remains populist.  Oklahoma is trending Republican, and socially conservative, while voting less on economic issues than ever.  Virginia is much more in reach to the Dems than Oklahoma.

Connecticut-Michigan (since 1944)
Michigan may love government to keep its hands off, but it's hardly socially liberal, or even truly libertarian.  Connecticut is, for the most part, a socially liberal state.  It's also much more Democratic than swing state Michigan.  A top pick for a switch.

Colorado-Montana (since 1948)
Both states have seen a Democratic surge on the local level, and it would be fair to characterize Montana as Colorado with fewer Hispanics and no big cities.  Still, Colorado is much closer - a possible switch, although they should generally trend together.

Ohio-Tennessee (since 1948)
A screwed-up economy keeps Ohio very much in play.  If it doesn't improve, we're likely to see Ohio go Dem with GOP-trending Tennessee staying in the Republican column.  A fairly probable switch.

Illinois-New Jersey (since 1952)
Very different states, but remarkably similar voting patterns.  Illinois is slightly more solid than the Garden State, but both are within reasonable distance.  A careful balance though, since a landslide might take both.

California-Vermont (since 1952)
At this point, Vermont seems out of reach for the GOP, so it's a question of whenever California goes Republican next.  I'm not betting it will be any time soon.

Hawaii-Rhode Island (since 1960)
Pro-incumbent Hawaii could pull off a surprise, but both states have similar views, even if Hawaii is typically much closer.  A hard-ish bond to break, although certainly no danger of the GOP taking both states - Rhode Island is a stretch for them in any scenario.

North Carolina-South Carolina (since 1968)
North Carolina may be mentioned as more in play, but it's not really by much.  Very close states that would be hard to seperate.

I need to sleep, so going quickly through the rest:

Arkansas-Louisiana (since 1968)
Arkansas closer.  Both states similar.  Hard, but in reach enough to be possible.

Delaware-Pennsylvania (since 1972)
Pennsylvania on the brink.  Delaware not.  Very possible.

New York-Wisconsin (since 1972)
The Republicans probably won Wisconsin in 2004, but that's a different subject.  The easiest possibility.

Oregon-Washington (since 1972)
A small landslide could put Oregon into the GOP column but leave more Democratic Washington on the other side of the fence.  An unlikely, but possible event.

District of Columbia-Minnesota (since 1976)
Whenever Minnesota goes Republican, which could be very soon.  Second choice.

Arizona-Florida (since 1980)
If Florida doesn't get less GOP in 2008 compared to the national average, these two states could end up voting a lot like eachother.  Arizona will always be stronger, though.  Both libertarian-leaning.  Probable to happen with next Florida flip.

Iowa-New Mexico (since 1992)
Rather like-minded states.  Too close to sustain, though, but both should remain very close to eachother in voting.  Rather likely to split, although only in a close race.  Third choice.

My 3 AM "too tired to be doing this, and will regret my idiocy in the morning" rankings are:

1. New York/Wisconsin
2. District of Columbia/Minnesota
3. Iowa/New Mexico
4. Connecticut/Michigan
5. Ohio/Tennessee
6. Delaware/Pennsylvania
7. Arizona/Florida
8. Oregon/Washington
9. Colorado/Montana
10. Hawaii/Rhode Island
11. Oklahoma/Virginia
12. Arkansas/Louisiana
13. Illinois/New Jersey
14. California/Vermont
15. Indiana/South Dakota
16. North Carolina/South Carolina
17. Kansas/North Dakota
18. Alabama/Mississippi
19. Idaho/Utah

[Gustaf]

I think I voted for NY-WI, MT-CO, TN-OH, IA-NM...and some other... Probably either OK-VA or AZ-FL, I think the latter. These are the states that could split in a reasonably close election.

[jimrtex]

Alabama-Mississippi (since 1844)
The solidest of the solid South.  Went Democrat in first election after restoration of voting rights after Civil War and continued Democrat even against Eisenhower.    Voted Dixiecrat in 1948, 1960, and 1968, and for Goldwater in 1964.  Have been Republican ever since, except for the first Carter election (1976).

Kansas-North Dakota (since 1900)
Strongly Republican, voting against FDR's 3rd and 4th term and Truman, but did vote for Wilson in 1912 and 1916.  Nebraska would join them, except that the Cornhuskers went with favorite son Bryan in 1908.

Indiana-South Dakota (since 1916)
Mr. and Mrs. Republican.  Have voted Republican except in 1932, 1936, and 1940.  These two joined the Great Plains Republican bloc in 1920.

Idaho-Utah (since 1916)
Strongly Republican, but went with FDR 4 times, as well as Truman.

Oklahoma-Virginia (since 1924)
Also strongly Republican, but it took opposition to Rum and Rome to overcome their support for Rebellion.  These two have voted with Utah and Idaho since 1928.

Connecticut-Michigan (since 1944)
Formerly Republican that have switched to the Democrats since 1992.  An earlier flirtation with the Democrats from 1960-1968 sets these two apart from states such as Illinois, New Jersey, and California.  Maine joined the two in 1964.

Colorado-Montana (since 1948)
Would be members of the strongly Republican bloc, except that supported Clinton in 1992, but not in 1996.  If these two split, one may get together with Georgia.

Ohio-Tennessee (since 1948)
Part of the bellwether group of 7 states that have voted for at least the last 9 elections, Ohio and Tennessee have voted with the winner the past 11 times, last missing when they voted Nixon in 1960.  Kentucky joined these two in 1956, and Missouri in 1964.

Illinois-New Jersey (since 1952)
Republican states until 1992, but did vote for JFK in 1960.  That election sets them apart from California and Vermont.

California-Vermont (since 1952)
Republican states until 1992, having gone Democrat only in the LBJ landslide of 1964.  Join Illinois and New Jersey from 1968.

Hawaii-Rhode Island (since 1960)
Consistently Democrat, voting Republican only in 1972 and 1984.

North Carolina-South Carolina (since 1968)
Republican since 1968, having voted Democrat only for one Carter election.  Join with Texas and Alabama-Mississippi since 1972.

Arkansas-Louisiana (since 1968)
Two of seven states to side with the winner the past 9 elections.  A curiousity was that they voted for Wallace in the 10th (1968).

Delaware-Pennsylvania (since 1972)
Among the Republican group that has voted Democratic since 1992, they did support Carter in 1976.

New York-Wisconsin (since 1972)
Consistently Democratic, but did vote for Reagan in 1980 and 1984.  Joined by Massachusetts in 1980.

Oregon-Washington (since 1972)
Republican until voting for Dukakis in 1988.

District of Columbia-Minnesota (since 1976)
Strongly Democratic, stuck together in 1980 and 1984 with Mondale on the ticket.

Arizona-Florida (since 1980)
Basically Republican.  What sets these two apart is that they voted for Clinton in 1996, but not 1992.

If Florida doesn't get less GOP in 2008 compared to the national average, these two states could end up voting a lot like eachother.  Arizona will always be stronger, though.  Both libertarian-leaning.  Probable to happen with next Florida flip.

Iowa-New Mexico (since 1992)
Form a pair as the only two states to switch from Democratic to Republican in 2004.

[jimrtex]

Indiana-South Dakota (since 1916)
Although they vote similarly, Indiana and South Dakota are fundamentally different states.  Indiana is populist, with a conservative Christian tinge, while South Dakota is libertarian, with a Christian conscious.  If Dems go libertarian and Reps go populist, a landslide could find South Dakota comfortably in the Dem column, with Indiana comfortably in the Republican column.

How about a Bayh candidacy?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As the most consistently Republican Southern state (voting against both Carter and Clinton) it would be interesting if Virginia would vote Democratic.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It was the quirk of these two voting for Clinton in 1992 that puts them off by themselves.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Having voted with the loser only once in the past 15 elections (1960), which will vote with the winner?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Until 2000, Illinois and Nevada had voted together since 1920.  A gambling factor?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If Wisconsin, did vote for Bush, then Iowa and Wisconsin would be together since 1980, while New York and Massachusetts will have been together since 1976. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which is sort of what happened in 1968 when Humphrey hung on for a 2 point victory in Washington.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Form a pair because they flipped in 2004.