Louisiana From 1988-2004
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 29, 2024, 12:35:30 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Dereich)
  Louisiana From 1988-2004
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Louisiana From 1988-2004  (Read 1009 times)
Fuzzy Bear
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,734
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: April 29, 2023, 08:40:36 AM »

In 1992 and 1996, Louisiana carried for the Democrats and carried ABOVE the national average for the ticket.  In 1992, Clinton won the state 46-41.  In 1996, Clinton won the state 51-40.  Yet, somehow, this did not become a trend.  Bush won Louisiana in 2000 and he won it  above his national average. 

What happened here to stop the progress of the national Democrats so abruptly.?
Logged
Mr. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 33,204
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: April 29, 2023, 09:50:13 AM »

In 1992 and 1996, Louisiana carried for the Democrats and carried ABOVE the national average for the ticket.  In 1992, Clinton won the state 46-41.  In 1996, Clinton won the state 51-40.  Yet, somehow, this did not become a trend.  Bush won Louisiana in 2000 and he won it  above his national average. 

What happened here to stop the progress of the national Democrats so abruptly.?

Probably has something to do with Gore's environmentalism and Bush Jr's oil addiction. Louisiana is a petro-state after all.
Logged
Blow by blow, the passion dies
LeonelBrizola
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,517
Brazil


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: April 29, 2023, 02:46:18 PM »

Bill Clinton won LA by double digits both times due to high black turnout and the state's large (at the time) population of white conservative Democrats
Logged
Vosem
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,634
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.13, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: April 29, 2023, 04:06:52 PM »

It's kind of underrated that, relative to white turnout, 1988/1992 both had strangely poor black turnout rates, before 1996 went back to normal. LA and MS, two of the blackest states, therefore had weird anomalous left-wing trends in 1996, but while this didn't cause anything too weird in MS, this together with some sort of regional bonus for Clinton and a Democratic landslide nationally resulted in a fluke double-digit Democratic victory in Louisiana in 1996. (Also, Louisiana elected a Republican Governor in Mike Foster in 1995, and he might've initially been very unpopular; while he was easily reelected in 1999, he came in with many pretty radical changes, like abolishing affirmative action in the state, and I can see the 1996 election being timed at a trough of his unpopularity.) Here's Louisiana relative to the US at elections from 1988-2000:

Louisiana/US/Louisiana-lean:
1988: R+11/R+7/R+4
1992: D+5/D+5/R+0 (LA was actually a little right of the US)
1996: D+12/D+8/D+4
2000: R+8/D+0/R+8

...1996 does look kind of weird. (The 1996/2000 trend looks very large, but it's mostly in line with Arkansas's. Louisiana tends to behave like Mississippi when black turnout is doing something weird, and behave like Arkansas when it isn't -- and those are actually already both pretty weird states).

~~

For something different but related, here's, as measured by Statista, black voter turnout and non-Hispanic white voter turnout compared to each other at elections from 1976 to the present. (For 1976, "white" includes Hispanic whites, but this hopefully shouldn't affect the numbers too much.)

I start at 1976 because it is a trough -- during the voter registration runs of the 1960s and 1970s, the number of registered black voters grew, but many didn't initially have a habit of voting, even though they were registered. From 1976 until the 2010s black turnout as a percentage of white turnout tends to rise -- except at the elections of 1988 and 1992.

Black voter turnout/(except 1976 non-Hispanic) white voter turnout/Black voter turnout as fraction of white voter turnout:
1976: 48.7%/60.9%/0.80
1980: 50.5%/62.8%/0.80
1984: 55.8%/63.3%/0.88 -- Mondale was very good at getting out the black vote!
1988: 51.5%/61.8%/0.83 -- Dukakis less so
1992: 54.1%/66.9%/0.81 -- black turnout rises, but less so than white turnout
1996: 50.6%/59.6%/0.85 -- white turnout crashes; black turnout much less so
2000: 53.5%/60.4%/0.89 -- black turnout keeps rising in the 2000s, but outweighed by white conservative trend
2004: 56.3%/65.8%/0.86
2008: 60.8%/64.8%/0.94 -- OBAMA
2012: 62.0%/63.0%/0.98 -- !!!!; higher black than "white" turnout, slightly lower than NHW though
2016: 55.9%/64.1%/0.87 -- the Trump electorate is a different world from the Obama electorate!
2020: 58.7%/69.8%/0.84 -- and it doesn't look like Obama's coming back

Anyway, fun bonus conclusion: non-Hispanic white turnout outright fell between 2004 and 2008. The whole surge in turnout was entirely a minority phenomenon (in addition to black turnout Asian and Hispanic turnout also surged). Also, "ratio of black turnout to white turnout" is a number that changes quite a bit between cycles and whose importance to American politics is underrated. (Though it might be more meaningful if I included a multiplier for 'fraction of the population' -- the NHW fraction of the population is falling faster than the black one, so 0.84 today actually reflects somewhat greater black influence than 0.84 would've in the 1990s.)
Logged
Vosem
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,634
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.13, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: April 29, 2023, 04:29:26 PM »

Ehh, let's add some midterms to those numbers. Midterms italicized.

Black voter turnout/(except 1976 non-Hispanic) white voter turnout/Black voter turnout as fraction of white voter turnout:
1976: 48.7%/60.9%/0.80
1978: 37.2%/48.6%/0.77
1980: 50.5%/62.8%/0.80
1982: 43.0%/51.5%/0.83
1984: 55.8%/63.3%/0.88 -- Mondale was very good at getting out the black vote!
1986: 43.2%/48.9%/0.88
1988: 51.5%/61.8%/0.83 -- Dukakis less so
1990: 39.2%/46.7%/0.84
1992: 54.1%/66.9%/0.81 -- black turnout rises, but less so than white turnout
1994: 37.1%/47.3%/0.78
1996: 50.6%/59.6%/0.85 -- white turnout crashes; black turnout much less so
1998: 39.6%/46.5%/0.85
2000: 53.5%/60.4%/0.89 -- black turnout keeps rising in the 2000s, but outweighed by white conservative trend
2002: 39.7%/48.0%/0.83
2004: 56.3%/65.8%/0.86
2006: 38.6%/50.5%/0.76 -- pre-Obama figure here actually both dire and impressive for Democrats
2008: 60.8%/64.8%/0.94 -- OBAMA
2010: 40.7%/47.8%/0.85
2012: 62.0%/63.0%/0.98 -- !!!!; higher black than "white" turnout, slightly lower than NHW though
2014: 37.3%/45.0%/0.83
2016: 55.9%/64.1%/0.87 -- the Trump electorate is a different world from the Obama electorate!
2018: 48.0%/56.5%/0.85
2020: 58.7%/69.8%/0.84 -- and it doesn't look like Obama's coming back

I couldn't find 2022 statistics separated out by race. Adding midterms isn't too weird, though the frankly really bad black turnout in 2006 feels very strange to me, since presidential-level black turnout was pretty consistently rising pre-Obama; the relatively high turnout in 2006 was actually disproportionately white, which makes it fascinating that the Democratic Party did so well; at least by this metric the 2006 midterm was actually the worst year for black turnout (...as a percentage of white turnout) in the 21st century.
Logged
Frozen Sky Ever Why
ShadowOfTheWave
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,641
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: April 29, 2023, 05:27:09 PM »

LA's large white catholic population, while very socially conservative, was not part of the "religious right", and therefore less organized to vote on single issues like abortion and gays. This is why LA voted more Democratic than largely protestant SC/GA/AL/MS/TX for so long. I am aware TX has a large catholic population, but I believe it is mostly Hispanic, if I'm not mistaken.
Logged
TDAS04
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,527
Bhutan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: April 29, 2023, 06:35:45 PM »

Cajun Country in southwestern Louisiana seems to vote a lot like West Virginia.  It voted for Dukakis and for Clinton twice before flipping against Gore in a huge way, only to sharply swing further to the right each time since.

I'm not entirely sure why that is, though.
Logged
TML
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,446


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: April 30, 2023, 12:05:29 AM »

Remember that this state still has many voters who are registered as Democrats out of tradition and/or convenience but who have voted Republican in recent elections because they think they are more ideologically aligned with the Republican party. The effects of this only became apparent in the 21st century due to most local Democrats being more socially conservative than national Democrats.
Logged
WalterWhite
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,990
United States
Political Matrix
E: -9.35, S: -9.83

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: April 30, 2023, 12:30:04 PM »

In 1992 and 1996, Louisiana carried for the Democrats and carried ABOVE the national average for the ticket.  In 1992, Clinton won the state 46-41.  In 1996, Clinton won the state 51-40.  Yet, somehow, this did not become a trend.  Bush won Louisiana in 2000 and he won it  above his national average. 

What happened here to stop the progress of the national Democrats so abruptly.?

Bill Clinton was from the neighboring state of Arkansas. He had Southern appeal not many other Democrats had.
Logged
Fuzzy Bear
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,734
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: April 30, 2023, 12:51:57 PM »

Cajun Country in southwestern Louisiana seems to vote a lot like West Virginia.  It voted for Dukakis and for Clinton twice before flipping against Gore in a huge way, only to sharply swing further to the right each time since.

I'm not entirely sure why that is, though.

They are Catholic, and the abortion stance of the Democratic Party has become progressively more uncompromising.  I'm not sure that this explains all, however.
Logged
the artist formerly known as catmusic
schnittdoodle
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,180
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.16, S: -7.91

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: April 30, 2023, 10:01:12 PM »

Cajun Country in southwestern Louisiana seems to vote a lot like West Virginia.  It voted for Dukakis and for Clinton twice before flipping against Gore in a huge way, only to sharply swing further to the right each time since.

I'm not entirely sure why that is, though.

They are Catholic, and the abortion stance of the Democratic Party has become progressively more uncompromising.  I'm not sure that this explains all, however.

Abortion and environmentalism likely turned them away initially. These are places that would likely support more left-wing economic packages but still want to keep their "way of life" so to speak.

I think with Gore, in addition to what I mentioned, initially there was a kind of anti-intellectual bias as well. Then after 9/11, there was a rally around the flag sentiment, and Kerry just wasn't seen as a strong enough candidate with wishy-washy stances on things like the Iraq war. Then came Obama, who was probably seen as too "progressive" on a lot of fronts, not to mention him being black. By 2016, Trump was a perfect candidate to solidify these areas with his more brash personality, populist messaging and a promise to still tow the party line with the religious right. It's been a generation now, and 20+ years later I just think they're exceptionally weary of the Democratic party as a whole on the federal level.
Logged
TheElectoralBoobyPrize
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,531


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: May 02, 2023, 03:47:07 PM »

The swing from 1992-1996 is most interesting. Most southern states swung R. Florida's the only southern state that had as big a D swing as Louisiana's. I guess Bush Sr. was just a better fit being from a border state.
Logged
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,516
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: May 04, 2023, 12:24:09 PM »

Hot take alert: David Duke gave the Democrats a boost in Louisiana in the 90s that they otherwise wouldn’t have had, and 2000 was when the decline caught up with them.
Logged
WalterWhite
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,990
United States
Political Matrix
E: -9.35, S: -9.83

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: May 04, 2023, 12:30:00 PM »

Hot take alert: David Duke gave the Democrats a boost in Louisiana in the 90s that they otherwise wouldn’t have had, and 2000 was when the decline caught up with them.


I think Bill Clinton had a greater impact; he was a well-known popular Democrat from a neighboring state.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.043 seconds with 11 queries.