Places where Reagan 84 did better than Nixon 72

[christian peralta]

I've see some states in which they gave Reagan 84 a much better margin of victory than Nixon 72, including Idaho, Utah, Wyoming, both Dakotas, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Alaska, Arizona and Montana, any other states or counties in which this also happened?

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Michigan, I believe.

[Mr. Smith]

California, actually.

[SingingAnalyst]

Michigan, California, and Massachusetts are perhaps the most interesting examples. (Disclaimer: I have lived in MI or MA all my life).

In CA as a whole, Reagan did better than Nixon even though Reagan did worse in Los Angeles County and much worse in San Francisco. Reagan also did worse in Alameda County as compared to Nixon, while Reagan did better in Orange County. Thus, within the state there were geographic patterns, which reflect overall trends of the time.

MA is easily explained: The busing crisis of the mid-1970s ruined things for Dems in WWC Boston, which had strongly supported McGovern in 1972; this effect spilled over to Boston's suburbs. In the rest of the state, the Kennedy mystique had started to fade by 1984, resulting in Reagan doing better than Nixon in places like Waltham, Lowell, Worcester, and Springfield (though Reagan's defense buildup helped). Reagan, however, did worse than Nixon in some of the better-educated suburbs: Newton, Lexington, Wellesley; and Reagan did much worse than Nixon in Brookline.

MI is perhaps best explained by the decline in the 1970s and early 1980s of the influence of the UAW. Michiganders were as put off as anyone by the 1972 Democratic convention, but the UAW endorsed McGovern, which is probably the reason McGovern was even able to hold 35% in Macomb. Reagan's improvement over Nixon was felt across most of the state: he improved in Macomb, Oakland, Lapeer, St. Clair, Washtenaw, Livingston, and Monroe Counties; Reagan did worse in Wayne and Genesee where Blacks were a growing share of the population. On the west side of the state, Reagan improved in Kent and Ottawa Counties.

As for Arizona, Idaho and Utah (and probably southern California to an extent), American Party candidate John Schmitz in 1972 pulled conservative votes, largely from people upset with Nixon's opening up relations with China. Reagan in 1984 didn't have that issue.

New Hampshire in 1984 was full of people who fled Massachusetts' high taxes in the 1970s, so it's unsurprising that they would have particular affection for Reagan; NH may have been the state that cheered the most when Reagan said "Government is not the solution to our problems. Government is the problem."

[SingingAnalyst]

The primary difference between 1972 and 1984, however, is that Mondale made a more respectable showing in the South than McGovern, largely (though not exclusively) to increased Black turnout. The South was still Reagan's best region-- but not by much.

[buritobr]

MA is easily explained: The busing crisis of the mid-1970s ruined things for Dems in WWC Boston, which had strongly supported McGovern in 1972; this effect spilled over to Boston's suburbs. In the rest of the state, the Kennedy mystique had started to fade by 1984, resulting in Reagan doing better than Nixon in places like Waltham, Lowell, Worcester, and Springfield (though Reagan's defense buildup helped). Reagan, however, did worse than Nixon in some of the better-educated suburbs: Newton, Lexington, Wellesley; and Reagan did much worse than Nixon in Brookline.

Nice to have this information. I observed that in 1960, 1964, 1968, 1972, Massachusetts was much more D than the national vote, in 1980, 1984, 1988, 1992, Massachusetts was closer to the national vote, and since 1996, Massachusetts is much more D than the national vote again. I though it was something related to George H Bush being in the ticket, since he has roots in MA, he is not so texan like his son. But the results in MA in the 1980s are related to a crisis in the 1970s.

[SingingAnalyst]

MA is easily explained: The busing crisis of the mid-1970s ruined things for Dems in WWC Boston, which had strongly supported McGovern in 1972; this effect spilled over to Boston's suburbs. In the rest of the state, the Kennedy mystique had started to fade by 1984, resulting in Reagan doing better than Nixon in places like Waltham, Lowell, Worcester, and Springfield (though Reagan's defense buildup helped). Reagan, however, did worse than Nixon in some of the better-educated suburbs: Newton, Lexington, Wellesley; and Reagan did much worse than Nixon in Brookline.

Nice to have this information. I observed that in 1960, 1964, 1968, 1972, Massachusetts was much more D than the national vote, in 1980, 1984, 1988, 1992, Massachusetts was closer to the national vote, and since 1996, Massachusetts is much more D than the national vote again. I though it was something related to George H Bush being in the ticket, since he has roots in MA, he is not so texan like his son. But the results in MA in the 1980s are related to a crisis in the 1970s.

Ditto for Macomb County, where busing and fear of crime drove the vote from the 1970s through 1994. In 1996, and again in 2000, with crime down, these voters returned to voting Dem, at least temporarily. Increased diversity in these places has kept the Dems strong following 9/11, and helps to explain how Hillary was even able to reach 42% in Macomb.

[Thunder98 🇮🇱 🤝 🇵🇸]

Outagamie County

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Outagamie County

The entire Fox Valley, Kettle-Moraine, Eastern Lakeshore, and WOW.

Theory: Conservative Catholics finding a new home in the Republican Party. Though, why on God's green earth did only Brown, Manitowoc, and Kewaunee go for JFK?

I called Northeast Wisconsin home from 1989 to 2007, and I still don't get those people. The Friday fish fries are good, tho.