City strategy and the midwest.
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 03:32:29 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: 15 Down, 35 To Go)
  City strategy and the midwest.
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: City strategy and the midwest.  (Read 1534 times)
The_Texas_Libertarian
TXMichael
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 825
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: August 06, 2017, 07:32:43 AM »
« edited: August 06, 2017, 11:23:18 AM by TXMichael »

A rather standard strategy for the Democrats appears to be run up the vote in the cities while making inroads in the suburbs and basically ignoring the rural areas.  Populations in major counties with sizable populations have either been shrinking or growing at a rate slower than the state as a whole across the midwest.  Wayne, Cook, Cuyahoga, Allegheny, Milwaukwee, and Hamilton Counties along with Philadelphia have had their populations either shrink dramatically, e.g. Wayne County, or exhibit growth that is slower than the state as a whole, e.g. Milwaukee.

How bad does this hurt the Dems?  Does it simply off-set rural population loss?  Wayne County has lost almost a million residents since 1970 and that is with a Michigan population that has seen an increase.  Since Dems are so reliant on city voters, how bad could this hurt the Dems in Michigan in the future where the population loss of Detroit is poised to continue?
Logged
Keep cool-idge
Benjamin Harrison he is w
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,770
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: August 06, 2017, 08:25:05 PM »

A rather standard strategy for the Democrats appears to be run up the vote in the cities while making inroads in the suburbs and basically ignoring the rural areas.  Populations in major counties with sizable populations have either been shrinking or growing at a rate slower than the state as a whole across the midwest.  Wayne, Cook, Cuyahoga, Allegheny, Milwaukwee, and Hamilton Counties along with Philadelphia have had their populations either shrink dramatically, e.g. Wayne County, or exhibit growth that is slower than the state as a whole, e.g. Milwaukee.

How bad does this hurt the Dems?  Does it simply off-set rural population loss?  Wayne County has lost almost a million residents since 1970 and that is with a Michigan population that has seen an increase.  Since Dems are so reliant on city voters, how bad could this hurt the Dems in Michigan in the future where the population loss of Detroit is poised to continue?
Well if the trump wins Michigan in 2020 by 2.5 points then we can safely say that Wayne county is what will kill the democrats in Michigan same in Ohio and Illinois
Logged
Nyvin
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,623
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: August 07, 2017, 12:14:12 PM »

Most of the midwest is losing population except some of the suburbs around the big cities, or certain growth hubs like Dane WI, Washtenaw MI, or Franklin OH.

If anything the suburbs continuing to trend Democratic will be what causes problems for the Republicans with the rural areas losing people.
Logged
PragmaticPopulist
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,234
Ireland, Republic of


Political Matrix
E: -7.61, S: -5.57

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: August 07, 2017, 08:28:03 PM »

Most of the midwest is losing population except some of the suburbs around the big cities, or certain growth hubs like Dane WI, Washtenaw MI, or Franklin OH.

If anything the suburbs continuing to trend Democratic will be what causes problems for the Republicans with the rural areas losing people.
Yeah. Places like Oakland County, MI do seem to be trending D as places outside metros are becoming more Republican. I kind of doubt though that Democrats will continue to perform as badly as they did outside cities and suburbs in 2016. After the 2004 election, the common narrative was that Democrats are doomed in rural America, but 4 years later, Obama did pretty well in the rural midwest.
Logged
RINO Tom
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,999
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: August 07, 2017, 08:56:21 PM »

Most of the midwest is losing population except some of the suburbs around the big cities, or certain growth hubs like Dane WI, Washtenaw MI, or Franklin OH.

If anything the suburbs continuing to trend Democratic will be what causes problems for the Republicans with the rural areas losing people.
Yeah. Places like Oakland County, MI do seem to be trending D as places outside metros are becoming more Republican. I kind of doubt though that Democrats will continue to perform as badly as they did outside cities and suburbs in 2016. After the 2004 election, the common narrative was that Democrats are doomed in rural America, but 4 years later, Obama did pretty well in the rural midwest.

And after Goldwater's disastrous campaign in 1964, the GOP recovered magnificently with suburban voters, so I'd say it's very shortsighted to say these trends will continue forever.
Logged
TJ in Oregon
TJ in Cleve
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,952
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: August 08, 2017, 09:18:14 PM »

Part of the shrinking urban center/D-trending suburb phenomenon is simply that people who previously lived in the city and voted Democratic have since moved to the suburbs while continuing to vote Democratic. It's not the whole thing. But part (and in the case of Detroit/Oakland County a really big part) of it.
Logged
Young Conservative
youngconservative
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,029
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: August 09, 2017, 03:31:16 AM »

If the Democrats keep moving farther left they will lose all suburban gains...the Sanders/Ellison wing will hurt their party.
Logged
The_Texas_Libertarian
TXMichael
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 825
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: August 09, 2017, 08:29:20 AM »

Part of the shrinking urban center/D-trending suburb phenomenon is simply that people who previously lived in the city and voted Democratic have since moved to the suburbs while continuing to vote Democratic. It's not the whole thing. But part (and in the case of Detroit/Oakland County a really big part) of it.

That is a great point, I never thought of it like that. 
Logged
RINO Tom
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,999
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: August 09, 2017, 09:54:46 AM »

Part of the shrinking urban center/D-trending suburb phenomenon is simply that people who previously lived in the city and voted Democratic have since moved to the suburbs while continuing to vote Democratic. It's not the whole thing. But part (and in the case of Detroit/Oakland County a really big part) of it.

That is a great point, I never thought of it like that. 

It's underrated.  We see study after study that shows political allegiances are largely static, yet we almost always assume a county trending one way is because its existing voters are just changing their minds.
Logged
GGSETTER
Rookie
**
Posts: 40
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: August 12, 2017, 04:18:57 PM »

Most of the midwest is losing population except some of the suburbs around the big cities, or certain growth hubs like Dane WI, Washtenaw MI, or Franklin OH.

If anything the suburbs continuing to trend Democratic will be what causes problems for the Republicans with the rural areas losing people.

Except is there any evidence that the Suburbs are actually trending Democrat? I know that here in Pennsylvania Suburban Pittsburgh is becoming very Republican very quickly and Suburban Philadelphia started to Trend Democrat from 2004 to 2008 but since has stopped.
Logged
Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself
omegascarlet
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,969


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: August 15, 2017, 10:40:24 PM »

Most of the midwest is losing population except some of the suburbs around the big cities, or certain growth hubs like Dane WI, Washtenaw MI, or Franklin OH.

If anything the suburbs continuing to trend Democratic will be what causes problems for the Republicans with the rural areas losing people.
Yeah. Places like Oakland County, MI do seem to be trending D as places outside metros are becoming more Republican. I kind of doubt though that Democrats will continue to perform as badly as they did outside cities and suburbs in 2016. After the 2004 election, the common narrative was that Democrats are doomed in rural America, but 4 years later, Obama did pretty well in the rural midwest.

And after Goldwater's disastrous campaign in 1964, the GOP recovered magnificently with suburban voters, so I'd say it's very shortsighted to say these trends will continue forever.

Goldwater lost basically everyone.
Logged
Jeppe
Bosse
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,806
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -4.13, S: -4.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: August 16, 2017, 07:58:06 AM »

Most of the midwest is losing population except some of the suburbs around the big cities, or certain growth hubs like Dane WI, Washtenaw MI, or Franklin OH.

If anything the suburbs continuing to trend Democratic will be what causes problems for the Republicans with the rural areas losing people.

Except is there any evidence that the Suburbs are actually trending Democrat? I know that here in Pennsylvania Suburban Pittsburgh is becoming very Republican very quickly and Suburban Philadelphia started to Trend Democrat from 2004 to 2008 but since has stopped.

Hillary did better than Obama in the Philly suburbs, reclaiming Chester county and putting up better margins in Delco and etc.
Logged
RINO Tom
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,999
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: August 16, 2017, 11:08:39 AM »

Most of the midwest is losing population except some of the suburbs around the big cities, or certain growth hubs like Dane WI, Washtenaw MI, or Franklin OH.

If anything the suburbs continuing to trend Democratic will be what causes problems for the Republicans with the rural areas losing people.
Yeah. Places like Oakland County, MI do seem to be trending D as places outside metros are becoming more Republican. I kind of doubt though that Democrats will continue to perform as badly as they did outside cities and suburbs in 2016. After the 2004 election, the common narrative was that Democrats are doomed in rural America, but 4 years later, Obama did pretty well in the rural midwest.

And after Goldwater's disastrous campaign in 1964, the GOP recovered magnificently with suburban voters, so I'd say it's very shortsighted to say these trends will continue forever.

Goldwater lost basically everyone.

And Reagan won basically everyone.  These trends just simply aren't going to slowly morph the EC a state or two every four years; there will be bigger changes along the way.
Logged
TJ in Oregon
TJ in Cleve
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,952
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: August 17, 2017, 09:46:01 PM »

Most of the midwest is losing population except some of the suburbs around the big cities, or certain growth hubs like Dane WI, Washtenaw MI, or Franklin OH.

If anything the suburbs continuing to trend Democratic will be what causes problems for the Republicans with the rural areas losing people.

Except is there any evidence that the Suburbs are actually trending Democrat? I know that here in Pennsylvania Suburban Pittsburgh is becoming very Republican very quickly and Suburban Philadelphia started to Trend Democrat from 2004 to 2008 but since has stopped.

Hillary did better than Obama in the Philly suburbs, reclaiming Chester county and putting up better margins in Delco and etc.

I vaguely remember seeing a data (I can't find the source though) that said Romney won American suburbs 51-48 while Trump won them 49-45. So basically a wash. Hillary almost certainly improved over Obama in upscale suburbs while underperforming in working class suburbs (which are an underrated contributor to the total).
Logged
Nyvin
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,623
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: August 18, 2017, 09:49:26 AM »

Most of the midwest is losing population except some of the suburbs around the big cities, or certain growth hubs like Dane WI, Washtenaw MI, or Franklin OH.

If anything the suburbs continuing to trend Democratic will be what causes problems for the Republicans with the rural areas losing people.

Except is there any evidence that the Suburbs are actually trending Democrat? I know that here in Pennsylvania Suburban Pittsburgh is becoming very Republican very quickly and Suburban Philadelphia started to Trend Democrat from 2004 to 2008 but since has stopped.

The growing parts of Pittsburgh, namely Alleghany and Butler counties, are both trending dem from 2012 to 2016.   Also most of the growing parts of PA in the east trended Dem as well,  except maybe Lehigh county.  

Areas that are losing population and then "trend" Republican could just mean the Dem voters are leaving the area, not that Republicans are really adding many new voters.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
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 0.046 seconds with 11 queries.