Oregon and Minnesota were trending Repub in presidential elections

[skipos]

In the the Presidential elections of 88, 92, 96, 00 both Oregon and Minnesota were the only typically blue states that were steadily trending away from Democrats. But in 04 both of them reversed the trend and went significantly more for the Democrats. Anyone have any thoughts on has been happening? Was 04 a reverse in the trend, or just a temporary spike?

And just so you can understand the data, "12d" means the state voted 12% more for the Democrats than the national popular vote, "1r" means the state voted 1% more for the Republicans than the national popular vote. Here is the info (rounded) on 88, 92, 96, 00 and 04:

Oregon: 12d, 4d, 1r, 1r, 7d
Minnesota: 15d, 6d, 8d, 2d, 6d

[kikiek]

1. My opinion is that here in MN we have more independents. More of the real ones who aren't just

saying that. I feel that MN is coming back to the Dems thanks to at least one very strong Democratic woman our new Senator Amy Klobuchar. She has good name recognition and common sense that she can articulate. Our voters like that. They don't care if it is a male or female as long as they believe they are talking sense. Strongest democratic candidate we have since Paul Wellstone. I don't believe a candidates race or religion is as much of a factor here either.

[ButterflyBlood]

2. We were strongly losing ground in rural areas here in MN

But that's largely been reversed. The GOP was pretty much wiped out in most rural areas last election in the state leg. They're basically just a suburban party now.

We also now have almost veto-proof majorities in both chambers. Minnesota is back to solid blue.

[RL3AO]

3. Don't know what effect the RNC will have in MN in '08.

[kikiek]

4. The bad taste of Bush will still be there convention or not. Besides it won't impress.

[WCGreen]

7. Isn't suburban minneapolis growing real fast with a whole bunch

of sales oriented upper level management type who vote GOP for economic reasons....

[ISUGRADIA]

5. I'm not sure your numbers are right for MN

http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/

88 MN Dem 52.91%, nationwide 45.65% so 7d
92 MN Dem 43.48%, nationwide 43.01% so .5d
96 MN Dem 51.10%, nationwide 49.23% so 2d
00 MN Dem 47.91%, nationwide 48.38% so .5r
92 MN Dem 51.09%, nationwide 48.27% so 3d

1- 68, 76, 80, 84 A Minnesotan was on the ticket inflating the D vote
2- 92, 96 Perot did much better than nationally in MN, 00 a big Nader vote
3- MN 90s on, slight Dem tilt, 08 I think that will be maintained though still could be competitive. 06 was a big setback here for the repubs.

[skipos]

9. The data I use compares the margin of the national

to the margin of the state, not the percent of the national to the percent of the state (as you did).

Regardless, both methods show the same trend I am wondering about. I think the MN attraction to independent candidates is an interesting angle.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

6. Most Oregon Republicans are really libertarians

and the state as a whole is very secularized.

That's why you have the odd situation of people winning elections by calling for tax cuts while at the same time, the electorate votes for things like assisted suicide and decriminalization of marijuana.

Basically, Oregon Republicans want to do what they want to do, when they want to do it without any pesky taxes, land use laws, health and safety laws, minimum wage laws, anti-suicide laws, anti-drug laws, or anti-abortion laws.

[pdxmike]

8. Oregon repubs are libertarians? Say what?

Do you live here? Your characterization of the state as a whole is accurate enough (it is the least church-going of states). But the Oregon GOP has morphed into the right wing monster that we know and loathe in so many other states. That is the source of their current weakness. As long as Packwood, Hatfield, McCall, et al were the face of the GOP, they did well in this state. But that's ancient history.

I moved here in 1990. The gubernatorial election that year pitted the last of the old style repubs- a classy guy named Dave Frohnmayer(sp?) against Barbara Roberts. She barely beat him. That was the moderate's last hurrah. Since then, to the best of my recollection, only Norma Paulus and Jack Roberts have been elected state wide as repubs. And they are both moderates.

The reason that the GOP national ticket does reasonably well is that they tend to run as old style repubs, and are relatively palatable to independents and repubs. But as the right wing has taken over the state party, the GOP has lost the independents and have been marginalized. They ran a relative moderate in '06, Ron Saxton. But he had to run to the right to shore up his base. As a result, he got stomped by a relatively unpopular and ineffectual incumbent, Kulongoski.

The Oregon Republican party is a dead man walking

[Lydia Leftcoast]

11. See my last paragraph

I'm talking about the rural voters, not the party itself.

The combination of low taxes and no government regulations PLUS medical marijuana and assisted suicide is libertarian, not current Bush-style GOP, since the national party plays to the Puritan contingent.

I lived in small towns in Oregon from 1984 to 1993 and then in Portland from 1993 to 2003. Now I'm in Minnesota, where the Republicans are more strongly tinged with Christian fundamentalism and happily borrow to fund the state or pass costs on to local governments. For example, there's a commuter rail project proposed for the northwestern suburbs of Minneapolis. The Republicans are okay with it, probably because they can see possibilities for their friends to make money. Contrast that with the steady opposition of Oregon Republicans to expanding MAX.

Quite a different approach and more typical of the nation as a whole.

I was living in a small town in Oregon when the first OCA-sponsored anti-gay legislation was narrowly defeated (1991, was it?), and my impression was that the anti-gay sentiments were inspired not by religion (since religious people were a minority, although what religious people existed tended to be more in the Mormon/fundie vein than in the mainstream Protestant or Catholic vein) but by lumberjack or cowboy machismo being whipped up by the fundies. The OCA's line for general public consumption was "Prevent gays and lesbians from molesting or recruiting your children," not "Leviticus condemns it."

Living in rural Oregon, I thought for sure that the 1991 measure was going to pass. Fortunately, Portland and the college towns defeated it, as they did the 1994 measure. Frankly, I was surprised that the most recent measure passed.

[Greyhound]

10. IMO, the reason these traditionally blue states moved toward the

re:puke:s was a general feeling that Democrats were not carrying out our purported agenda. As the Democratic party came more and more under the influence of corporatism in the name improving the economy, the citizens of these areas have been hard hit by the largest transfer of wealth in world history and are, understandably a little cranky about it. The Re:puke:s are the only option, so...

[skipos]

12. But that doesn't explain why other states haven't behaved this way

MI has been slowly but steadily trending Dem, and the economy here horrible. NH, NV, CO and VA are all trending Dem. MO is about the only other state that is trending Repub that isn't already deep red.


Michigan:
'88: Bush (53.57 - 45.67) = + 0.18% Republican
'92: Clinton (43.77 - 36.38) = + 1.83% Democratic
'96: Clinton (51.69 - 38.48) = + 4.68% Democratic
'00: Gore (51.28 - 46.14) = + 4.63% Democratic
'04: Kerry (51.23 - 47.81) = + 5.88% Democratic

New Hampshire:
'88: Bush (62.41 - 36.29) = + 18.40% Republican
'92: Clinton (38.86 - 37.64) = + 4.34% Republican
'96: Clinton (49.32 - 39.37) = + 1.42% Democratic
'00: Bush (48.07 - 46.80) = + 1.78% Republican
'04: Kerry (50.24 - 48.87) = + 3.83% Democratic

Nevada:
'88: Bush (58.86 - 37.92) = + 13.22% Republican
'92: Clinton (37.36 - 34.73) = + 2.93% Republican
'96: Clinton (43.93 - 42.91) = + 7.51% Republican
'00: Bush (49.52 - 45.98) = + 4.05% Republican
'04: Bush (50.47 - 47.88) = + 0.13% Republican

Colorado:
'88: Bush (53.06 - 45.28) = + 0.06% Republican
'92: Clinton (40.13 - 35.87) = + 1.30% Republican
'96: Dole (45.80 - 44.43) = + 9.90% Republican
'00: Bush (50.75 - 42.39) = + 8.87% Republican
'04: Bush (51.69 - 47.02) = + 2.21% Republican

Virginia:
'88: Bush (59.74 - 39.23) = + 12.79% Republican
'92: Bush (44.97 - 40.59) = + 9.94% Republican
'96: Dole (47.10 - 45.15) = + 10.48% Republican
'00: Bush (52.47 - 44.44) = + 8.54% Republican
'04: Bush (53.68 - 45.48) = + 5.74% Republican

Missouri:
'88: Bush (51.82 - 47.84) = + 3.74% Democratic
'92: Clinton (44.07 - 33.92) = + 4.59% Democrat
'96: Clinton (47.54 - 41.24) = + 2.23% Republican
'00: Bush (50.42 - 47.08) = + 3.85% Republican
'04: Bush (53.30 - 46.10) = + 4.74% Republican