Why has Oklahoma been so red for so long?
The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ:
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.
I don't know why it was like that in OKC in particular, but the Republican rise in the south actually started in the urban areas, so it makes sense that a similar thing happened in Oklahoma too.
If my soul was made of stone:
Quote from: Average Melissa Lantsman Enjoyer on October 23, 2022, 12:25:34 AM
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.
I don't know why it was like that in OKC in particular, but the Republican rise in the south actually started in the urban areas, so it makes sense that a similar thing happened in Oklahoma too.
Many larger inland Southern cities, most notably Dallas, started attracting very hard-right emigrants from parts north in the mid-late 40s.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page