Why has Oklahoma been so red for so long?
Orser67:
Looking at it in regional terms at the presidential level, it voted like a border state from 1908 into the 1950s, as it generally joined KY, MD, and TN in going for Republicans in landslides (1920, 1928, and 1952-1956, it was also fairly competitive in 1908 and 1924) and voting Democratic otherwise. Starting in the 1960s, it started voting like a plains state, going Republican in every election except 1964, joining KS, NE, ND, and SD in doing so.
While I'm sure there was a lot more going on in Oklahoma than merely following national trends, I think its voting patterns do reflect how presidential elections moved away from a North-South divide (and somewhat more towards an East-West divide) during the second half of the 20th century, before moving back towards more of a North-South divide in 2000/2004.
If my soul was made of stone:
Quote from: Calthrina950 on October 09, 2022, 08:24:35 AM
Quote from: Asenath Waite on October 09, 2022, 04:11:18 AM
Quote from: Calthrina950 on October 08, 2022, 11:51:52 PM
Quote from: Asenath Waite on October 08, 2022, 01:35:57 PM
Quote from: Many, Many Nested Layers of Hauntology on October 08, 2022, 10:28:35 AM
Quote from: Zebulan9003 on October 08, 2022, 08:56:47 AM
Quote from: Asenath Waite on September 27, 2022, 10:55:02 AM
Oklahoma is a weird state politically to me. In 1948 Truman won it handedly yet then it inexplicably swung hard to Eisenhower in 52 and other then LBJ the only Democrat that’s come within striking distance since was Carter.
Maybe in some ways it was similar to West Virginia in terms of being a southern border state with its own distinct political history and one that seemingly abruptly swung hard from being one of the most consistently reliable Democratic states to one of the most Republican.
It started out with Tulsa county which provided a huge Republican margin along with OKC. In fact, Ford barely won OK because of them. However, as Dems have gained ground there, they absolutely got obliterated in the rurals after Bill Clinton and Al Gore (the last Dem to win any counties). And they just got more Republican after that.
Before 2000, there was also a clear North-Republican South-Democratic divide.
Goldwater won Tulsa County by double digits! It's voted for every GOP nominee since Willkie!
With the violent end of its "Black Wall Street" era, it quickly became the regional center for oil+gas and Evangelicalism that it more or less still is, with racial tensions of course still highly magnified.
The state as a whole's anomalously averse reaction to JFK points towards both classical Papist-bashing and a distaste for the increasingly urban and Northern party base and machinery, as continued via Wallace eating heavily into the state's Democratic constituencies and Jimmy Peanuts and Bubba being the only Democrats since to perform respectably. The last Democrat to win any counties here was of course Gore, an upland Southerner with some remaining goodwill from the Clinton administration.
The states results in 1928 which seem unfathomable for a southern border state in that era suggest that the anti-Catholicism runs pretty deep.
Hoover won Oklahoma by nearly 30% that year. It was his best Southern state, and the result there was certainly because of strong anti-Catholicism. In each of the subsequent elections (1932 and 1964), Oklahoma swung back to the Democrats, particularly to Franklin Roosevelt, who improved upon Smith in the state by 38 percentage points. Johnson, on his part, won Oklahoma by about the same margin Eisenhower did in 1956 (56-44%).
I wonder if Johnson’s ties to the oil business helped him because otherwise there’s no reason Goldwater shouldn’t have won it.
I would say that Johnson being a Southerner from neighboring Texas helped him in Oklahoma, as it did throughout the Upper South (although obviously not in the Deep South). In 1988, Michael Dukakis overperformed in Oklahoma with help from Lloyd Bentsen, although George H.W. Bush still won the state easily.
Dukakis campaign don't just spam the Texas button challenge [IMPOSSIBLE] [COPS CAME]
The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ:
Quote from: Orser67 on October 09, 2022, 11:30:29 AM
Looking at it in regional terms at the presidential level, it voted like a border state from 1908 into the 1950s, as it generally joined KY, MD, and TN in going for Republicans in landslides (1920, 1928, and 1952-1956, it was also fairly competitive in 1908 and 1924) and voting Democratic otherwise. Starting in the 1960s, it started voting like a plains state, going Republican in every election except 1964, joining KS, NE, ND, and SD in doing so.
While I'm sure there was a lot more going on in Oklahoma than merely following national trends, I think its voting patterns do reflect how presidential elections moved away from a North-South divide (and somewhat more towards an East-West divide) during the second half of the 20th century, before moving back towards more of a North-South divide in 2000/2004.
I think you're generally correct about the state as a whole, but the partisan difference between "Little Dixie" and "plains" parts of Oklahoma persisted until 2000 at the presidential level, and even later in some state elections.
Little Dixie has basically always voted like Arkansas, except in 1928 and 1960 when anti-Catholicism probably did the Dems in. Johnson won this part of the state in 1964, which may not seem very "southern", but keep in mind that Goldwater only swept the deepest of the deep south - Johnson still won Arkansas. 1968 was a bit of an aberration, Arkansas preferred Wallace across the board but only won two Little Dixie counties, with Humphrey largely holding on to the southern Democratic vote here. From 1972 through 1984, Little Dixie and Arkansas voted alike. In 1988, Dukakis did better in the former. In the Bill Clinton elections, obviously his margins were much bigger in Arkansas, but he did carry the Little Dixie as well. 2000 is when the realignment really gels in southeastern Oklahoma, and Republicans only continue getting stronger there, like in Arkansas. Obama's unique unpopularity in the upper south is reflected in both Little Dixie and Arkansas.
The more "plains" parts of Oklahoma usually voted like western Kansas. Strongly Republican for generations, with the exception of the FDR/Truman elections, and a respectable Johnson performance (Goldwater did do better in northern Oklahoma than in Kansas though, possibly indicative of the greater southern influence). But that's basically the biggest exception in presidential elections. The other is 1912, but TR wasn't on the ballot in Oklahoma so it's not a fair comparison with Kansas, where he was on the ballot. Basically, the "plains" parts of OK vote like a plains state and always have.
Since the 2000 election though, the upper south and great plains have basically voted identically, which is to say, heavily Republican. There's not a meaningful partisan difference between rural (white) Arkansas and rural Kansas, and that's reflected in how Republicans sweep Oklahoma across the board now. The only partisan gap in Oklahoma these days is between Oklahoma City and rural OK, but that's the same urban/rural divide as anywhere else in the country.
clever but short:
Quote from: Average Melissa Lantsman Enjoyer on October 22, 2022, 05:53:24 AM
Quote from: Orser67 on October 09, 2022, 11:30:29 AM
Looking at it in regional terms at the presidential level, it voted like a border state from 1908 into the 1950s, as it generally joined KY, MD, and TN in going for Republicans in landslides (1920, 1928, and 1952-1956, it was also fairly competitive in 1908 and 1924) and voting Democratic otherwise. Starting in the 1960s, it started voting like a plains state, going Republican in every election except 1964, joining KS, NE, ND, and SD in doing so.
While I'm sure there was a lot more going on in Oklahoma than merely following national trends, I think its voting patterns do reflect how presidential elections moved away from a North-South divide (and somewhat more towards an East-West divide) during the second half of the 20th century, before moving back towards more of a North-South divide in 2000/2004.
I think you're generally correct about the state as a whole, but the partisan difference between "Little Dixie" and "plains" parts of Oklahoma persisted until 2000 at the presidential level, and even later in some state elections.
Little Dixie has basically always voted like Arkansas, except in 1928 and 1960 when anti-Catholicism probably did the Dems in. Johnson won this part of the state in 1964, which may not seem very "southern", but keep in mind that Goldwater only swept the deepest of the deep south - Johnson still won Arkansas. 1968 was a bit of an aberration, Arkansas preferred Wallace across the board but only won two Little Dixie counties, with Humphrey largely holding on to the southern Democratic vote here. From 1972 through 1984, Little Dixie and Arkansas voted alike. In 1988, Dukakis did better in the former. In the Bill Clinton elections, obviously his margins were much bigger in Arkansas, but he did carry the Little Dixie as well. 2000 is when the realignment really gels in southeastern Oklahoma, and Republicans only continue getting stronger there, like in Arkansas. Obama's unique unpopularity in the upper south is reflected in both Little Dixie and Arkansas.
The more "plains" parts of Oklahoma usually voted like western Kansas. Strongly Republican for generations, with the exception of the FDR/Truman elections, and a respectable Johnson performance (Goldwater did do better in northern Oklahoma than in Kansas though, possibly indicative of the greater southern influence). But that's basically the biggest exception in presidential elections. The other is 1912, but TR wasn't on the ballot in Oklahoma so it's not a fair comparison with Kansas, where he was on the ballot. Basically, the "plains" parts of OK vote like a plains state and always have.
Since the 2000 election though, the upper south and great plains have basically voted identically, which is to say, heavily Republican. There's not a meaningful partisan difference between rural (white) Arkansas and rural Kansas, and that's reflected in how Republicans sweep Oklahoma across the board now. The only partisan gap in Oklahoma these days is between Oklahoma City and rural OK, but that's the same urban/rural divide as anywhere else in the country.
This is a pretty detailed analysis between the two of you, so thank you for that. I think what I'll add to it, is that it seems that the main difference between early 19th century Oklahoma voting like a border state, and late 19th century voting like a Great Plains state, is the OKC area shifted majorly Republican. I'm not sure why this trend happened exactly, but between 1948 and 1952, Eisenhower nearly flipped the D winning margin in Oklahoma County on its head to a strong GOP win, and (except LBJ's landslide) the county has never looked back. Jimmy Carter's narrow 1976 loss is illustrative: he did well in all the rural areas except the northeast, but Ford won Oklahoma County healthily. On top of the usual Tulsa GOP landslide, that did it.
Edit: I suppose the heart of OP's question, which is why it switched to being to the right of the nation exactly after the 1950s, out of step with the rest of the Southern states' idiosyncratic party switch, remains unanswered. But I think the key is likely urban/suburban central Oklahoma.
President Punxsutawney Phil:
Quote from: clever but short on October 23, 2022, 12:17:52 AM
Quote from: Average Melissa Lantsman Enjoyer on October 22, 2022, 05:53:24 AM
Quote from: Orser67 on October 09, 2022, 11:30:29 AM
Looking at it in regional terms at the presidential level, it voted like a border state from 1908 into the 1950s, as it generally joined KY, MD, and TN in going for Republicans in landslides (1920, 1928, and 1952-1956, it was also fairly competitive in 1908 and 1924) and voting Democratic otherwise. Starting in the 1960s, it started voting like a plains state, going Republican in every election except 1964, joining KS, NE, ND, and SD in doing so.
While I'm sure there was a lot more going on in Oklahoma than merely following national trends, I think its voting patterns do reflect how presidential elections moved away from a North-South divide (and somewhat more towards an East-West divide) during the second half of the 20th century, before moving back towards more of a North-South divide in 2000/2004.
I think you're generally correct about the state as a whole, but the partisan difference between "Little Dixie" and "plains" parts of Oklahoma persisted until 2000 at the presidential level, and even later in some state elections.
Little Dixie has basically always voted like Arkansas, except in 1928 and 1960 when anti-Catholicism probably did the Dems in. Johnson won this part of the state in 1964, which may not seem very "southern", but keep in mind that Goldwater only swept the deepest of the deep south - Johnson still won Arkansas. 1968 was a bit of an aberration, Arkansas preferred Wallace across the board but only won two Little Dixie counties, with Humphrey largely holding on to the southern Democratic vote here. From 1972 through 1984, Little Dixie and Arkansas voted alike. In 1988, Dukakis did better in the former. In the Bill Clinton elections, obviously his margins were much bigger in Arkansas, but he did carry the Little Dixie as well. 2000 is when the realignment really gels in southeastern Oklahoma, and Republicans only continue getting stronger there, like in Arkansas. Obama's unique unpopularity in the upper south is reflected in both Little Dixie and Arkansas.
The more "plains" parts of Oklahoma usually voted like western Kansas. Strongly Republican for generations, with the exception of the FDR/Truman elections, and a respectable Johnson performance (Goldwater did do better in northern Oklahoma than in Kansas though, possibly indicative of the greater southern influence). But that's basically the biggest exception in presidential elections. The other is 1912, but TR wasn't on the ballot in Oklahoma so it's not a fair comparison with Kansas, where he was on the ballot. Basically, the "plains" parts of OK vote like a plains state and always have.
Since the 2000 election though, the upper south and great plains have basically voted identically, which is to say, heavily Republican. There's not a meaningful partisan difference between rural (white) Arkansas and rural Kansas, and that's reflected in how Republicans sweep Oklahoma across the board now. The only partisan gap in Oklahoma these days is between Oklahoma City and rural OK, but that's the same urban/rural divide as anywhere else in the country.
This is a pretty detailed analysis between the two of you, so thank you for that. I think what I'll add to it, is that it seems that the main difference between early 19th century Oklahoma voting like a border state, and late 19th century voting like a Great Plains state, is the OKC area shifted majorly Republican. I'm not sure why this trend happened exactly, but between 1948 and 1952, Eisenhower nearly flipped the D winning margin in Oklahoma County on its head to a strong GOP win, and (except LBJ's landslide) the county has never looked back. Jimmy Carter's narrow 1976 loss is illustrative: he did well in all the rural areas except the northeast, but Ford won Oklahoma County healthily. On top of the usual Tulsa GOP landslide, that did it.
In 2002, the Democratic candidate winning big in the Little Dixie helped vault him to a win. The difference between the two regions continued into the 2010s on state legislative level.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page