As the night wore on, I watched with the world as the electoral map shifted. Here is what it looked like after the 2004 election:
Wow, that's a mighty sea of red, isn't it?
Once Ohio flipped to blue, the cards started falling. All told, nine stated shifted. (I'm giving Obama North Carolina, even though it may not be "official" yet.) These are the states Obama won that were Bush states in '04:
The final map looks like this:
Notice how the blue wave has spread out from the northeast and from the west coast. Another pattern of interest is that in several of the red states that remained red, the margin of victory for McCain was considerably smaller than that of Bush in 2004. For example, in Montana, Bush won by a margin of 21%, but McCain scraped by with 3.5%. In North Dakota, Bush enjoyed a 27.8% victory; McCain managed just under 9%. Back in June, I predicted (incorrectly) that Texas would flip over to blue in this election. That was wishful thinking, I guess. I still think it will, though, as the demographic shifts and the population becomes more urban (which is an overall trend that does not bode well for the republican party.) Bush won Texas by 23% back in 2004; Obama closed that gap to just under 12%.
Back then, my electoral map looked like this:
I was wrong on a few states, but I was only off by 10 electoral votes, giving Obama 354, so that's pretty good, I think. (If I do say so myself.)
So ultimately, does this election represent a fundamental shift in the voting pattern of America, or is it simply a reaction to Bush fatigue? It's difficult to say, but I have a feeling it's more of the former than the latter. The talk has already started about what the GOP needs to do to start winning national elections again. My advice to conservatives would be to use this opportunity to realign the party with its conservative roots, abandoning the radical neocon influence that has permeated it in recent years.
But then, I'm a liberal, so what do I know?
4 comments:
Mike, I have missed your posts! This is very interesting and I suspect these new blue states will indeed fluctuate in the future...America is sound and let's "hope" President Obama can accomplish only a small amount of things lol. Also I think you are right about the republican party. Though for me it is hard to find a place in either party because of how I view immigration and a few other things that do not tow the conservative line. The party is fractured because of certain elite republicans giving no room for more moderate independents and conservatives. I did a piece a while back on homeschooling only find out that I was a RINO and a liberal! What do you think about that? HA! Great to have you back...and you seem so much more chipper if I may say so! :)N
Hey, Nikki, good to be back. I'm interested in how the further urbanization of America will affect future elections, since urban areas vote heavily Democratic. The Republicans will have to devise some new strategies. Should be interesting.
It sounds like you need to start a third party for people who don't fit the Republican mold! :)
Texas a blue state? What were you smoking at the time you made that prediction? We are a RED state and we will ALWAYS be a RED state. We are not STUPID!
kingsmillblogs, ha ha, I wasn't smoking anything but hope at the time of that prediction. :P McCain was ahead by something like five points at that time. While Texas has been pretty solidly red as of late, they voted for the Democrat in 27 of the first 31 elections they participated in. So they used to be reliably blue. (Up until the Reagan revolution.) As I state in the post, "Bush won Texas by 23% back in 2004; Obama closed that gap to just under 12%." With the continued expansion of the areas around Dallas, Houston and Austin, plus the growing hispanic population along the southern border, I predict that I was not so much wrong in my prediction, as I was premature. But we shall see. Thanks for the comment!
Post a Comment