Political Future of the Southeast

[BrandonTO416]

Some states have interesting trends, others have trends I'd rather throw up after reading. So here goes.

This list goes from generally more Democrat to the most Republican. Florida, North Carolina, Georgia, Arkansas, and Virginia hold promise for Democrats in the future. It may take a few years for elderly populations to die off as they tend to be staunch conservative Republicans more so then any other group.

Florida

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/res...0/epolls.0.html

Age - % for Bush, % for Kerry

18-29 - 41% Bush, 58% Kerry

30-44 - 53% Bush, 46% Kerry

45-59 - 57% Bush, 42% Kerry

60 and older - 52% Bush, 47% Kerry

North Carolina

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/res...0/epolls.0.html

Age - % for Bush, % for Kerry

18-29 - 43% Bush, 56% Kerry

30-44 - 61% Bush, 37% Kerry

45-59 - 57% Bush, 42% Kerry

60 and older - 57% Bush, 43% Kerry

Virginia

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/res...0/epolls.0.html

Age - % for Bush, % for Kerry

18-29 - 46% Bush, 54% Kerry

30-44 - 59% Bush, 40% Kerry

45-59 - 52% Bush, 47% Kerry

60 and older - 56% Bush, 44% Kerry

Arkansas

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/res...0/epolls.0.html

Age - % for Bush, % for Kerry

18-29 - 47% Bush, 51% Kerry

30-44 - 60% Bush, 39% Kerry

45-59 - 57% Bush, 42% Kerry

60 and older - 48% Bush, 52% Kerry

Georgia

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/res...0/epolls.0.html

Age - % for Bush, % for Kerry

18-29 - 52% Bush, 47% Kerry

30-44 - 57% Bush, 42% Kerry

45-59 - 62% Bush, 38% Kerry

60 and older - 64% Bush, 36% Kerry

South Carolina

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/res...0/epolls.0.html

Age - % for Bush, % for Kerry

18-29 - 51% Bush, 48% Kerry

30-44 - 58% Bush, 41% Kerry

45-59 - 60% Bush, 39% Kerry

60 and older - 61% Bush, 39% Kerry

Mississippi

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/res...0/epolls.0.html

Age - % for Bush, % for Kerry

18-29 - 37% Bush, 63% Kerry

30-44 - 58% Bush, 42% Kerry

45-59 - 67% Bush, 33% Kerry

60 and older - 69% Bush, 30% Kerry

Note: Mississippi was the only state to have only 14% of whites vote for a Democrat. It ranks as the most backwards state of the south in my book. Also, I didn't know where to put this state. Its obviously polarized between youth and older voters, and its polarized on race even more.

Louisiana

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/res...0/epolls.0.html

Age - % for Bush, % for Kerry

18-29 - 53% Bush, 45% Kerry

30-44 - 56% Bush, 42% Kerry

45-59 - 53% Bush, 47% Kerry

60 and older - 66% Bush, 34% Kerry

Kentucky

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/res...0/epolls.0.html

Age - % for Bush, % for Kerry

18-29 - 54% Bush, 45% Kerry

30-44 - 58% Bush, 41% Kerry

45-59 - 61% Bush, 39% Kerry

60 and older - 64% Bush, 36% Kerry

Tennessee

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/res...0/epolls.0.html

Age - % for Bush, % for Kerry

18-29 - 55% Bush, 44% Kerry

30-44 - 63% Bush, 36% Kerry

45-59 - 57% Bush, 43% Kerry

60 and older - 58% Bush, 41% Kerry

Note: My home state embarrassed me with how backwards it is. This is less about Bush and more about the evangelical Christian vote that turned out.

Alabama

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/res...0/epolls.0.html

Age - % for Bush, % for Kerry

18-29 - 57% Bush, 41% Kerry

30-44 - 58% Bush, 40% Kerry

45-59 - 62% Bush, 37% Kerry

60 and older - 70% Bush, 30% Kerry

[BrandonTO416]

North Carolina is a wonderful southern state with a bright future.

When Mississippi's youth proves to be more Democratic then Tennessee, that says something. Then again, I'm reminded of the racial divide. Interesting.

Tennessee = pimple on the south's ass

[monsoon]

[BrandonTO416]

Thanks for the comment, I do find age to be a good look at what the future holds. So these stats speak volumes.

The most progressive, growing, pro-urban areas in the south are the most promising for Democrats.

I live in, well, the not so wonderful part.

[Spartan]

many young people tend to be more liberal, but as they grow older and have families, and have more money they tend to switch over to the republicans. You'd think that with all the hippies in the 60s and 70s that there would be nothing but democrats everywhere these days..... but who knows

[BrandonTO416]

That's an overly generalized statement to make Spartan, but you are certainly free to have that opinion. 100,000 hippies marching against the war in the 60's doesn't even make up 1% of national voters.

[Spartan]

well, that was the point. people change as they get older.

[BrandonTO416]

Spartan, your point is too simplified and doesn't take any facts into consideration. I'm not even going to debate this with you, you are free to believe however you wish. But I'll laugh from the sidelines. The older people get doesn't make them more conservative, its the fact that the elderly in the south are different from the younger generation in ways far removed from your simplified hippie comment. These are pre-civil-rights generation people who are putting Bush in the whitehouse. That is with the exception of Tennessee, Alabama, and other backwards southern states.

[Spartan]

My hippie comment was not backed up by facts. so heckles, lets use your facts. They can be viewed in two ways if you consider them in terms of time.

1- People keep their politcal ideologies their whole life. This means that a person who is 18 and a democrat will be a democrat when he is 81.

2- People change as they get older. This means that a person who is 18 and a republican can either be a democrat at 81 or a republican. It works both ways.

What the facts support is number two. I don't have the numbers, but I do know for fact that the Domcratic Party was strong in the South for a long long time. Now, the trend has switched, and the Republican Party is gaining dominance in the South. These pre-Civil Rights era people were staunch democrats. I don't have the numbers, but its common knowledge these days. You can look at historic records to confirm this. These people obviously changed their party ideology if it is truely this group that voted Bush in again.

I would say that is not factual. Its a very general statement. What percentage of people that voted are 60+? What percentage is everyone else? If it was the Pre-Civil Rights generation who gave Bush the edge then they also facilitated the change to the Republican dominance.

The fact that the oldest generation and the youngest generation are so far removed is not relevant here.

My whole point is that people change, and their ideologies can change to. So its hard to predict the future of politics. The only thing that I believe can accurately be predicted is a significant change to the Democratic Party's politics. It will have to redifine itself somehow.

And like monsoon said, it has to be able to pick up some Southern electoral votes in order to win.

[monsoon]

[BrandonTO416]

Spartan, you may believe however you wish, but to ignore the fact that 18-30 year olds are not voting for Bush Republicans in states like North Carolina in numbers as high as 56% for Kerry spells trouble for Republicans in North Carolina in the near future.

In states like NC and Georgia where 60% of elderly vote conservative regardless of party, these people will be dying off in amazing numbers in the next 20 years. This is when the Reagan revolution will officially begin to end.

And age doesn't matter at all? Pre civil-rights era attitudes vs post civil rights attitudes don't matter? In the north the only reason states like Michigan go Democrat is because the elderly population is slightly more Democrat then Republican and the youth vote is completely Democrat like 70/40! Ohio's elderly is why that state went Republican this time around too!

But none of this matters?!? The youth vote statistics includes those all the way up until 30, that isn't exactly high school aged my friend.

What weed are you smoking my friend. Pass me the hit so I can live in your dream world! LOL

[Spartan]

What the hell are you talking about? Obviously I'm not up on my hippie trivia. As you may or may not know, I wasn't around then. Today, I associate hippies with the Green Party. Perhaps that is a just stereotype. Apparently I am wrong about past hippies.

I never said anything about the elderly not mattering. All I said, and the only thing I am trying to say is that the future is indeterminate. The elderly are not the majority, the 18-64 crowd is. It seems like you want to convince me that a smaller group of people are the deciding factor in this election.

Here is the statistic for Tennessee that I obtained from your link above:

VOTE BY AGE

----------------BUSH KERRY NADER

18-64 (83%) - 60% - 39% --1%

65 + (17%) -- 51% - 48% --0%

Here is the statistic for the South in general:

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/res...0/epolls.3.html

VOTE BY AGE

----------------BUSH -KERRY - NADER

18-64 (84%) - 59% - 40% -- 0%

65 + (16%) -- 54% - 45% -- 0%

Are you trying to convince me that the 65+ crowd that consists of 16% of the population in the South was the reason that Bush won, when clearly the 18-64 bunch, which consists of 84% of the population, had a larger majority than the elderly!? The elderly are very imporatant, and I am not trying to say that they aren't. Perhaps the Civil Rights era is imporatant to them, and how their views were shaped- But as a part of the total vote of the South, they are still a smaller percantage than those who are post-Civil Rights. Again, its not one group, but every group together (the 100%) that decided the election.

These are pre-civil-rights generation people who are putting Bush in the whitehouse.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It sounds to me like you are trying to find some group to blame for Kerry's loss. But hey, who am I to judge?

In states like NC and Georgia where 60% of elderly vote conservative regardless of party...

As much crap as you gave me about facts, Do you really expect me just to take that as truth? I'm not saying youre wong or anything- I'd like to see some facts on that.

Based solely on your data, and assuming the trend it shows will continue (and it may) then you are indeed correct. The Democrats will gain strength. I just think that there is more to it than those numbers. People can change with age and experience. Its not one group of people that is responsible for the Republican victory this year, it is everyone together.

[BrandonTO416]

Older means more then 65 or above, taking 18-64 out of context is not showing younger trends at all. I never made the statement the 65+ only crowd is the ONLY reason they are in the whitehouse, they are just a big factor. Older, but still far younger then "elderly" people such as those in the 50 year old group are still pre-civil-rights. My parents included, they are near 60 and grew up and graduated high school in the mid 60's. These people tend to be harshly conservative on social issues in the south.

That's the trend that is breaking when the youth replaces them. These people are the core of the Reagan Social Conservative movement that began in the 1980's.

There really isn't more for me to say, the stats speak for themselves.

[Brickell]

Heckles, I think you're dismissing the "conservatization" of people as they age too much. I don't have any hard proof, but I've always considered it common knowledge that people become more conservative as they get older, pay more taxes and make more money. That's not to say everybody does it, but I'd say it's more common than you're willing to admit.

Young people, especially the college crowd are always the domain of liberals and rabel rowsers. I don't find your data especially surprising. It might be more meaningful if you compared it by decade to the 90's, 80's, 70's etc.

It's an interesting take on things and you don't have to agree with me. I think you were to quick to bash Spartan though. Open your mind a little bit. I know you're capable.