The 2008 Presidential Campaign: What Happened and Why?

[Túrin Turambar]

Now that we know a bit more, we can put the 2008 election in its long-term context.

Obama was the first candidate to win without Missouri since 1956, and the first since 1960 to win without Tennessee, Arkansas and Kentucky. This suggests that the Appalachian region and the upper south is losing its bellwether status and drifting Republican. Ohio, won by every winning candidate since 1960, is the new ultimate swing state.

Obama was the first Democrat in history to win without carrying Missouri and Arkansas, the first Democrat to win without West Virginia since 1916, and the first Democrat to win without Kentucky and Tennessee since 1960. His performance across the south and in these states in particular was sub-par. In West Virginia, the Democrats did worse in only four elections since the state’s first election in 1864, and two of those were the elections of 1864 and 1868. On the whole, Obama was the first Democrat ever to win without the support of working-class white southerners.

Obama’s performance in New England, by contrast, was near record-setting. He won a higher percentage of the popular vote in Vermont than any Democratic candidate ever, and was beaten out in the region overall only by LBJ in 1964. New England is now more or less solidly Democratic.

In the west, Obama also did very well for a Democrat. He won a higher percentage of the popular vote in Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, Nevada, Montana, Nebraska, Oregon and Washington than any Democrat since 1964. He was the first Democrat to win 60% of the popular vote in California since 1936, and he won the third-highest percentage of the Californian popular vote after Hoover in 1928 and FDR in 1936. The west coast is now solidly Democratic, and most of the rest of the west seems to be changing from safe Republican territory to swing states.

[Holbytla]

New England is now more or less solidly Democratic.

There is one thing I can't figure out about NH. It is long known that the counties bordering Massachusetts have leaned towards the democrats over the last x amount of years. Starting in the 80's, many residents of Massachusetts flocked to the bordering cities like Manchester to avoid Massachusetts taxes and still be within an hour's drive of Boston. The northern and central portions of NH remained largely republican. The funny thing about this election is that three of the bordering counties are the ones in which Obama had the closest races. He won by one, two and three percent in those counties. The rest of the state's counties that have been known to lean heavily conservative are the counties in which Obama had his biggest victories. It seems almost backwards.

The rest of the region doesn't surprise me much. Other than New England has no republican reps. Which is astounding.

edit:
Obama lost one county in Maine 4785 to 4430. A very rural part of the state with a large state park and a logging industry. He won every other county in New England which makes up over 13 million people.

[Túrin Turambar]

New England is now more or less solidly Democratic.

There is one thing I can't figure out about NH. It is long known that the counties bordering Massachusetts have leaned towards the democrats over the last x amount of years. Starting in the 80's, many residents of Massachusetts flocked to the bordering cities like Manchester to avoid Massachusetts taxes and still be within an hour's drive of Boston. The northern and central portions of NH remained largely republican. The funny thing about this election is that three of the bordering counties are the ones in which Obama had the closest races. He won by one, two and three percent in those counties. The rest of the state's counties that have been known to lean heavily conservative are the counties in which Obama had his biggest victories. It seems almost backwards.

There's been big political changes in NH recently. In 2006, both Republican Reps lost their seats, and the Republicans lost control of both houses of the state legislature for the first time since about 1912. At that point, the state basically flipped from leaning red to leaning blue. The entire New England region used to be very solid for the Republican party, but has been changing. New Hampshire was basically the last state to change, and has only done so in the last four years or so.

[Lidless]

Who would have thought that when the history books are written, the only positive legacy Bush will have left is making it easy for a Black President to be elected.

[sauronsfinger]

The entire concept of bellweather states, or even counties, is probably going to have to be scrapped eventually due to America being such a mobile country. Once upon a time people pretty much stayed put in one place for most of their lives. Counties and states maintained a character, a feel, a certain make-up that stayed fairly constant over decades. All that changed in the post WW2 years when the suburbs grew and cities shrank. However, even then migration was from city to suburbs and often withing the same county or just one over. In the last five decades all that has changed tremendously.

One big reason why states are changing their voting patterns is that they are now made up of different populations than they used to be.

In addition to that, America is evolving and changing as generations age and replace each other in positions of power and influence. America is not any more the America of 1980 Reagan than it is the America of JFK or LBJ. That ship has sailed.

Various internal crisises have made a majority of people more disposed to government, its power and what it can do for them and the nation.

Regarding Palin: the Obama campaign did NOT have to attack her very much because someone was out there doing far more damage to the Alaskan governor than they could ever hope to do with ads and speeches. The person who most destroyed Sarah Palin was...... Sarah Palin. She completely changed the landscape when she gave those interviews with Charles Gibson of ABC and then Katie Couric of CBS. She showed herself to be intellectually shallow and not well informed about events that a politician in that position should be well informed about. She demonstrated that she was in over her head. She was simply out of her league and did not belong in that position because of her own intellectual and knowledge weaknesses.

Enoough people recognized that and it killed her.

When Tina Fey can get laughs repeating word for word Palins answers in interviews, then you know there is something very very wrong with the candidate herself.

Yes, she is a very attractive person with lots of folksy charm. She did a great job energizing the right wing base of the party and brought in lots of money and people at rallies. But in the end, her own limitations hurt her with the people in the middle that the Party needed to win. If McCain had been a 50 year old man, who knows if people would have let it slide and allowed her to grow into the job as VP? But given his age and health, it was just too big of a chance to take on somebody clearly not up to the task intellectually.

... and this today from Politico.com making the case that it was those at the upper income levels who put Obama over the top

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15471.html

[Teremia]

Have you all seen the map where the counties that went MORE Democratic since the last election are colored blue, and the counties that went more Republican are colored red?

The whole country looks quite incredibly blue except for this streak of red across certain parts of the south.

Well, the New York Times did a story on these sections today and suggests that those places (where Obama significantly underperformed compared to Kerry) were the ones still very affected by racial considerations. ("I don't want a black man over me," says one woman in the article.)

So that map (the Times is suggesting) paints a picture of racism in the United States: where old-style racism still hangs on. Interesting!

I felt bad for the guy whose picture was in the paper, though. He's a barber who reported the general tenor of conversations with clients -- mind you, he didn't out and out say he AGREED with those clients. But there he is on his couch under his hunting trophies: the image of lingering racism in America. Seemed a little hard on him.

[Mrs.Underhill]

Starting in the 80's, many residents of Massachusetts flocked to the bordering cities like Manchester to avoid Massachusetts taxes and still be within an hour's drive of Boston.

Could it be the answer? That folks fleeing Taxachussettss to low-tax NH would be more likely to support Republicans? I.e. it was mostly the Republican flight?
Anyway, NH was always very close, as far as I remember. So those border counties going only 1-2-3 points to Obama would reflect the state averages of the previous campaigns. Do we have data from previous elections for those counties, to compare?
But the turn towards Obama in the rest of NH is amazing indeed! NH went to Obama by 9%, unheard of!
I went to do canvassing in Nashua after work, on election day, as I work there. It was fun - I only got to do a one sweep with a guy named Richard who sells HP storage systems, we spent about an hour going door-to-door on one street, checking folks who hadn't voted yet, and then it was 7:40 when we re done, with polls closing at 8. Everyone eligible on that street voted, apparently, and for Obama. But one guy told us that he voted for McCain, but that "let the force be with you". And we told him thank you and that we are all Americans. Everyone was cheerful that night, not minding us bothering them. Not a big sample, I know.

[Holbytla]

Here is the 2000 NH presidential results by county. While the race was close, you can see that the counties have changed a lot since then.

LINK

Yeah and I suppose the exodus of people could have been mainly republican.

[Lidless]

Red/blue cartograms.

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/2008/

[Teremia]

The red-blue cartogram I was talking about has shown up in the NYT a couple of times: it is almost entirely blue because almost everywhere went MORE Democratic than four years ago (even the places that voted Republican overall). I can't find a link to that map, for some reason. I clearly haven't mastered the online NYT.

[Lidless]

Alas 'New York Times' is an anagram of 'Monkeys Write'.

[axordil]

The link you want

[Teremia]

Thank you, Ax!

[sauronsfinger]

Flashback to SCHINDLERS LIST ...... from Amon Goeth - "I pardon you".

President-elect Barack Obama has endorsed keeping Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) in the Democratic caucus, suggesting to leadership that the two sides reach a compromise in the conflict over the former Democratic vice presidential nominee's future, sources said today.

In a phone conversation last week with Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), Obama said that expulsion of Lieberman for his support of the Republican presidential ticket would send the wrong signal after Obama's promises to set partisanship aside, according to a Senate Democratic aide familiar with the conversation.

Obama "didn't get into the minutiae. It was more along the lines of, 'let's find a way to put the campaign behind us'," the aide said.

Things are getting very interesting in Washington.

[Lidless]

Bye partisanship.

[Padme]

Bye partisanship.

WASHINGTON – President-elect Obama has told Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid he's not interested in seeing Democrats oust Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman from their ranks over his endorsement of Republican John McCain.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081111/ap_ ... _lieberman



Well it looks like Obama maybe trying to reach across the table a bit. At least he is trying to not toss Lieberman under the bus.

[Primula Baggins]

Or, he would rather Harry Reid did it.

[Cenedril_Gildinaur]

It's obvious what happened.

By electing Obama instead of McCain, the voters completely repudiated big government.

[sauronsfinger]

By electing Obama instead of McCain, the voters completely repudiated big government.

An explaination would go much further than a mere assertion.

[Cenedril_Gildinaur]

Are you trying to suggest that the last eight years, with record deficits and the vast expansion of the security state are any reflection of small government?

The voters clearly repudiated Bush. Bush is big government. Therefore the voters repudiated big government.