Why did Gore do so well in the Lower Northeast (RI, CT, NY, NJ)?

[Dead Parrot]

For all the talk of how 2000 was a realigning election that created our modern electoral map, one part of the country where that clearly wasn't the case was the four states named above. In all of them, Al Gore registered the strongest Democratic performance compared to the nationwide PV in modern times. In places like the Naugatuck Valley, Long Island, and the Jersey Shore, Gore did better than any subsequent Democratic presidential candidate to date, including Obama. This is all the more remarkable given that Gore's campaign is widely remembered as rather dull and uninspiring and was the second weakest Dem performance in the popular vote since 1992. Why was this? Did Lieberman give the campaign a boost in these states? Did 9/11 cause a permanent rightward shift in these states that prevented Obama and Biden from matching Gore's (relative) performance?

[Obama-Biden Democrat]

Gun control and environmentalism. It's the same reason why Gore lost TN, AR, MO and WV. In the 90s gun control and environmentalism became hot button issues and the Mid Atlantic backed both. The NYC/NJ/CT suburbs back gun control.

The Clinton/Gore administration also signed the environmental agreement, the Kyoto Protocol which also was popular in the region.

[Dead Parrot]

Gun control and environmentalism. It's the same reason why Gore lost TN, AR, MO and WV. In the 90s gun control and environmentalism became hot button issues and the Mid Atlantic backed both. The NYC/NJ/CT suburbs back gun control.

The Clinton/Gore administration also signed the environmental agreement, the Kyoto Protocol which also was popular in the region.

But it's not like Dems have softened on gun control and environmentalism relative to the GOP since 2000, and yet they've lost a lot of ground with WWC voters in these states. (And it didn't start with Trump; many of these towns swung substantially to Bush in 2004 and didn't really swing back to Obama in 2008.) This is why I hypothesize that 9/11 may have had some lasting effect, perhaps by reinforcing the GOP's image as the "macho" party and making issues like gun control lose salience.

[If my soul was made of stone]

Lieberman probably helped in this part of the world, especially among Jews, although Gore paid dearly for that pick elsewhere. Although Gore was reticent to tie himself too strongly to Clinton, there was much goodwill from that administration in the region (see the 92-96 swings in these states) that seems to have held over enough for Gore to pull off surprising wins in Bush-Bush-Clinton counties like Monmouth, NJ, and Richmond, NY.

[Calthrina950]

Lieberman probably helped in this part of the world, especially among Jews, although Gore paid dearly for that pick elsewhere. Although Gore was reticent to tie himself too strongly to Clinton, there was much goodwill from that administration in the region (see the 92-96 swings in these states) that seems to have held over enough for Gore to pull off surprising wins in Bush-Bush-Clinton counties like Monmouth, NJ, and Richmond, NY.

Gore is the last Democrat to have won Monmouth County, which has remained loyally Republican ever since. He won Richmond County by 7%, the widest margin of victory for a Democrat there since 1964, aside from Clinton's 10-pt. win in 1996 (helped by Perot). Gore is the last Democrat to have won upstate Montgomery County, New York. He lost Ocean County, New Jersey, by just over 1%, a county where every successive Democrat has gotten blown out. He also had the widest margin of victory for any Democrat since the turn of the millennium in Rhode Island.

Conversely, Gore had the weakest overall performance of any Democrat since the turn of the millennium in the Upper Northeast. He is the only Democrat after B. Clinton to have fallen under 60% in Massachusetts (thanks to Nader), the only Democrat after Clinton to have lost New Hampshire, and "only" won Vermont by 10%, the closest that state has come to voting Republican since Clinton. He did do better in Maine than H. Clinton, but still posted the second-weakest performance there overall. The Upper Northeast swung strongly towards Kerry in 2004 (due to Iraq War opposition and social issues), while the Lower Northeast swung strongly to Bush (due to 9/11).

[Dead Parrot]

Gore is the last Democrat to have won Monmouth County, which has remained loyally Republican ever since. [...] He lost Ocean County, New Jersey, by just over 1%, a county where every successive Democrat has gotten blown out.

This probably has to do with the Shore counties' large Jewish population. 2000 seems to have been the last election before a big lasting R trend in the Northeastern Jewish vote. Gore was the last Democrat to win places like Lakewood, NJ and Borough Park in Brooklyn, both of which went overwhelmingly for Trump. In Monmouth County towns like Manalapan and Marlboro with sizable Jewish communities, Gore broke 60% of the vote, which no Democrat since then has come close to doing.

[Calthrina950]

Gore is the last Democrat to have won Monmouth County, which has remained loyally Republican ever since. [...] He lost Ocean County, New Jersey, by just over 1%, a county where every successive Democrat has gotten blown out.

This probably has to do with the Shore counties' large Jewish population. 2000 seems to have been the last election before a big lasting R trend in the Northeastern Jewish vote. Gore was the last Democrat to win places like Lakewood, NJ and Borough Park in Brooklyn, both of which went overwhelmingly for Trump. In Monmouth County towns like Manalapan and Marlboro with sizable Jewish communities, Gore broke 60% of the vote, which no Democrat since then has come close to doing.

Gore's strong performance among Jewish voters, I assume, was thanks in part to Lieberman.

[Chips]

Gun control and environmentalism. It's the same reason why Gore lost TN, AR, MO and WV. In the 90s gun control and environmentalism became hot button issues and the Mid Atlantic backed both. The NYC/NJ/CT suburbs back gun control.

The Clinton/Gore administration also signed the environmental agreement, the Kyoto Protocol which also was popular in the region.

[Schiff for Senate]

Gun control and environmentalism. It's the same reason why Gore lost TN, AR, MO and WV. In the 90s gun control and environmentalism became hot button issues and the Mid Atlantic backed both. The NYC/NJ/CT suburbs back gun control.

The Clinton/Gore administration also signed the environmental agreement, the Kyoto Protocol which also was popular in the region.

But it's not like Dems have softened on gun control and environmentalism relative to the GOP since 2000, and yet they've lost a lot of ground with WWC voters in these states. (And it didn't start with Trump; many of these towns swung substantially to Bush in 2004 and didn't really swing back to Obama in 2008.) This is why I hypothesize that 9/11 may have had some lasting effect, perhaps by reinforcing the GOP's image as the "macho" party and making issues like gun control lose salience.

What he's saying is that environmental issues and gun control are less important issues today than they were in 2000 (though there are still two of the most important issues to me, and the two issues where I am most left-wing). It makes sense in some ways, since Gore was a known environmentalist. Still, overall I feel there might be something else at play here. CT at least should care more about gun control now than it did in 2000 after the Sandy Hook shooting, where first graders were killed, and the GOP declined to offer anything more meaningful or substantial than empty "thoughts and prayers." (Though CT probably voted blue partly because Liebermann was from there.)

[darklordoftech]

This might be relevant: https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jewish-voting-record-in-u-s-presidential-elections

[Suburbia]

I don't think Long Island cares for climate change despite the fact they are affected by it the most, since a lot of the Long Island people are climate deniers.

LI Republicans are pro-gun control, and pro-War on Drugs, so I guess Bush did not have any appeal there whatsoever.

[Sumner 1868]

The above posts are pretty accurate but here's something everyone is missing: Lower New England white-working-class voters usually are as anti-gun as their upscale counterparts. So the gun control backlash against Gore you saw in other parts of the nation didn't materialize out there and patterns pretty much stayed at 1996 levels.

[Vosem]

A mixture of unusually strong Jewish support as a result of the Lieberman nomination and this being part of the country where you really can (not sure about nowadays -- although possibly -- but certainly in the 1990s/2000s) get a substantial crossover vote from normally-Leans-R voters by emphasizing gun control really hard.

Lieberman probably helped in this part of the world, especially among Jews, although Gore paid dearly for that pick elsewhere.

Did he? Lieberman was probably part of what made Gore so relatively strong in FL too, after all. It's easy to suggest with hindsight that Gore might've won if he'd picked Shaheen or Graham, but it's tough to know what calculations the Gore team was making at that time.

These are the states where the 2000 election recorded the highest Democratic lean of any election of the 1992/1996/2000/2004/2008 stretch:

It doesn't look obvious to me that Lieberman was a terrible pick, necessarily.

[I Will Not Be Wrong]

Lieberman probably helped in this part of the world, especially among Jews, although Gore paid dearly for that pick elsewhere. Although Gore was reticent to tie himself too strongly to Clinton, there was much goodwill from that administration in the region (see the 92-96 swings in these states) that seems to have held over enough for Gore to pull off surprising wins in Bush-Bush-Clinton counties like Monmouth, NJ, and Richmond, NY.

Gore did not "pay dearly" for having Lieberman on the ticket. He was an asset at the time who nearly helped Gore win Florida.

[Mr. Smith]

Lieberman probably helped in this part of the world, especially among Jews, although Gore paid dearly for that pick elsewhere. Although Gore was reticent to tie himself too strongly to Clinton, there was much goodwill from that administration in the region (see the 92-96 swings in these states) that seems to have held over enough for Gore to pull off surprising wins in Bush-Bush-Clinton counties like Monmouth, NJ, and Richmond, NY.

Gore did not "pay dearly" for having Lieberman on the ticket. He was an asset at the time who nearly helped Gore win Florida.

Or he could've just gone with Bob Graham to actually secure Florida.

[King of Kensington]

This conception of the Lower Northeast vs Upper Northeast is an interesting one, where Massachusetts is grouped with northern New England and Rhode Island with the Tri-State area.

[Alben Barkley]

Gun control and environmentalism. It's the same reason why Gore lost TN, AR, MO and WV. In the 90s gun control and environmentalism became hot button issues and the Mid Atlantic backed both. The NYC/NJ/CT suburbs back gun control.

The Clinton/Gore administration also signed the environmental agreement, the Kyoto Protocol which also was popular in the region.

I think it's more to do with just the fact that Dubya was seen as a hick and Clinton was very popular in the Northeast, than it is to do with these specific issues.

[King of Kensington]

Gun control and environmentalism. It's the same reason why Gore lost TN, AR, MO and WV. In the 90s gun control and environmentalism became hot button issues and the Mid Atlantic backed both. The NYC/NJ/CT suburbs back gun control.

The Clinton/Gore administration also signed the environmental agreement, the Kyoto Protocol which also was popular in the region.

I think it's more to do with just the fact that Dubya was seen as a hick and Clinton was very popular in the Northeast, than it is to do with these specific issues.

Re: "hicks", Clinton was rather unique in his ability to appeal to Northeastern suburbanites (with his Yale Law/Rhodes Scholar pedigree) while retaining a good share of the "bubba" vote.