While we're waiting for the election returns

Frank Abate abatefr at EARTHLINK.NET
Mon Nov 13 21:21:20 UTC 2000

Replying to David Bergdahl's:

>>In the 20th-century the border states of WV, KY & TN have become
southern. <<

Those states have been "Southern" much further back into history, by several

>>I thought that in this first election of the 21st-century OH & IND had
joined them.<<

According to the Statistical Abstract of the US, OH electoral votes have
gone to the Republican presidential candidate in 7 of the past 11 national
elections (1956-1996), exceptions being 1964, 1976, 1992, and 1996.  OH has
been up for grabs at times, but tends to go for Republican presidents.  And
despite some pockets of southern OH dialect tendencies (mostly in less
populous counties), I would in no way characterize the whole state as
"Southern" by any stretch -- linguistically, socially, or geographically.

IN has long been staunchly Republican in national elections -- it voted
Democratic once (1964) in the past 11 elections.  So it is not at all
unusual for IN to go Republican.

Finally, I don't believe one can make a good case that national election
preferences break down on purely Northern vs. Southern grounds.  In
addition, while the Northeast and CA are now Democratic strongholds
(excepting New Hampshire), this has only recently become so.  CA voted for
Republican presidents in 8 of the past 11 national races (D in 64, 92, and
96).  And, of course, Reagan was governor there for 2 terms, and won the
state in both of his races.  VT and ME have recently gone Republican more
often than Democratic (8 for 11 and 7 for 11, respectively), and CT has
bounced back and forth (6 for R, 5 for D).

This latest election is anomalous in a number of ways.

Frank Abate

More information about the Ads-l mailing list