The graph above, from Sean Trende and David Byer’s analysis at RealClearPolitics of the 2016 election in the Midwest, was so dramatic I wanted to highlight it. It illustrates the Democratic vote in Michigan in four presidential elections: upper left—1996;upper right—2004;lower left—2012;lower right—2016. There are similar maps for Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Ohio.
I don’t agree with their interpretation, however. I continue to think that these results can be explained by people moving and people dying.
I’m not sure your theory necessarily conflicts with what they are saying. They don’t provide an explanation for why their categories (rural, small/large town, small/large city, megacity) changed and people moving and dying could be a big part of that.
Whatever the case, the trend doesn’t look good for Democrats.
I’ve only had time to skim, rather than closely read, the Sean Trende article. However, looking at the multiple maps, illustrating the changes in various area throughout the Midwest, it appears that alterations in voting patterns can’t simply be attributed to death and people moving.
Also, Trende describes the map changes as “creeping redness,” indicating more a gradual increment of these changes, rather than a sudden, impulsive one. It continues to be the dense metropolitan areas where Dems are the strongest. Of significance, though, it the following observation: “Dem coalition pushed gradually eastward before retreating almost entirely to a few small cities and college towns.”
Generally, I think the social progressive model of governance has created discontent in middle American, even as it continues to be embraced by Dem elites and their shiny decorative Hollywood friends. If the administration now coming in can satisfactorily address ordinary people’s grievances and concerns the hues of such maps may grow more crimson.
Interesting to note that the reddest county in the first three maps is where New Holland is located, one of the highest concentrations of Dutch-Americans in the country and it hasn’t voted for a Democratic President since Lincoln was in office. I wonder if it softened a bit for reasons analogous to why Mormon areas softened a bit w/ Trump on the top of the ticket. Local political cultures can be persistent.
I agree w/ Trende if his point is that Democratic strength in the Midwest was tied to the largest cities and those votes were not there this election, but also that there were shifts from Democrats to Republican outside the largest cities that were important.
Trende is wrong in stating that the Minneapolis & Iron Range coalition is “sufficient for statewide elections” for the Minnesota Democratic–Farmer–Labor Party. The Republicans took control of the state legislature for the first since the 1970s. This appears to be a Republican state as of right now.
The three Upper Midwest states are described as having a “moral political culture,” unlike for example the states stretching from Illinois to New York, which are categorized as having individualistic political cultures or some of the deep south states, which have traditional political cultures. Maybe there is no moral political culture anymore.