Indiana - why so Republican?

[merseysider]

I have been looking through some past results and have noticed just how Republican Indiana is. Last voted Dem for President for LBJ in '64; carried 60-40 by Bush in 04.

Many of the nearby states are Democratic bankers (Illinois), or swing states (Ohio, Michigan etc) and even Kentucky has voted Democrat for President (for Clinton in 92 and 96 IIRC).

Why is Indiana so Republican? I have never been there so would not know.

[True Democrat]

It troubles me too actually.  Illinois is different because it has Chicago (without Chicago it votes about 53-47 for Bush).  But why is Iowa a swing state but Indiana isn't even close?

[nclib]

But why is Iowa a swing state but Indiana isn't even close?

Yeah, although Indiana is more rural than its surrounding states, many states (such as Iowa) are more rural than Indiana yet are less Republican in Presidential elections than Indiana.

My guess is that Indiana is pretty Republican partially because it has few ethnic whites, few blacks, and few recent immigrants.

[elcorazon]

Indiana's a strange state.  Most of it is more like rural Illinois than any other state.  Southern Indiana though is more like the rural south than anywhere else, I think.  It's got the combination of the rural AND southern conservative vote.  And because it's been Republican so long, the one big city is more conservative than similar cities in the midwest.  Repubs dominate state politics, and as a result their machine is stronger, etc.  Add to that that the dems know they can't win it, and ultimately it trends even further to the right.

All that said, I think it's going to moderate a bit.  Still right of center, but not as far right as it is now.  Kinda how NH is beginning to act like the other states in it's region.  Hard to see Indiana not acting more like Illinois, Michigan, Iowa and Ohio, as well as Kentucky.

[Adlai Stevenson]

I was thinking that the economic woes in Indiana could push them towards the left in 2008 and the likely defeats of Republican Congressmen in IN-2, IN-8 and IN-9 mean that it could be considered competetive in 2008 in some circumstances. 

[memphis]

I was thinking that the economic woes in Indiana could push them towards the left in 2008 and the likely defeats of Republican Congressmen in IN-2, IN-8 and IN-9 mean that it could be considered competetive in 2008 in some circumstances. 

No way will IN be competitive in 2008, unless Bayh is the candidate.

[Adlai Stevenson]

I'm going out on a limb and saying that Indiana will be more competetive than it was in 2004.  We have no idea what 2008 will be like but the Republican collapse this year doesn't bode well for the party's prospects in two years time.  I think we can underestimate the unpopularity of President Bush and the Republicans in general, conservative politics has been the dominant force since 1980 at least and arguably, in progression since 1968.  Its clearly time for a new wind and I think 2008 could be an election which forges a new alignment; I have no idea what it will be but I think states like Indiana will not neccessarily be untouched or unchanged by it. 

[12th Doctor]

As compared to Indiana:

Iowa

Has more traditionally Irish Democrats.  The economy is acctually more dependent apon farming as well... had Bush Sr. not screwed up with farm aid back in the day, Iowa woudl probably be more reliably for us.  FEMA is another big issue... Iowa has a lot of floods, and past Republican attempts to gut FEMA are not looked upon kindly by the people in the Mississippi Valley.

I am not certain, but I think the Indiana acctually has a higher black population, but the blacks in Indiana are acctually more Republcian than the national average as well.

Illinois

This is easy... Chicago and East St. Louis, take these away and they are pretty much the same state.

Ohio

Cleveland,  Toledo, and the rust belt are the two factors that make Ohio decidedly more Democratic.  East Ohio is probably the only place in the country that could still acctually be classified as "Rust Belt".  Unlike Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Erie, etc it has been totally unable to rebound and forge a new identity for itself.  The area around Youngstown, Akron, Sharon and Warren is probably one of the most dpressing places in the United States... I know from epxirience, I have been there many times.

Michigan

Detroit and Flint... that pretty much takes care of it.

Kentucky

The main reason Kentucky went Clinton in 92 and 96 was because it was Clinton, bottom line.  However, the state does have large areas of rural poverty, which is often times much worse than urban poverty, because there is no opportunity or outlet.  It also has large rural black populations... not as much so as Alabama... but they are still there.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Take a look at the national county map, and ignore state lines. You'll see it makes sense. Indiana isn't that different from the parts of Illinois, Michigan and Ohio it borders. Just that those areas have also Democratic areas to balance it out. Indiana doesn't, Indianapolis is quite conservative for a city of its size. But the #1 factor really are the suburban Indianapolis counties, some of the most solidly GOP in the area. Took at look at all the counties surrounding Indianapolis.

Worth nothing that Indiana has a higher black percentage of its population than Kentucky though (as does Ohio)