A Lot of Red To Challenge So Little Blue
Looking at this breakdown, Indiana would appear to be a strong and vibrant red state. But what went against us in this last election was just how poorly John McCain did in the blue counties. Of Indiana’s 92 counties, McCain won 77 and still lost 49.9% to 49%. Just think, there is enough GOP voting population in those 77 counties to come close to matching the DEM voting population of the 15 counties that Obama won.
Now take into consideration how many in those red counties who voted Republican in 2004, voted for Obama this year or voted third party out of distaste for either John McCain or Barack Obama (we’re looking at the Bob Barr and Chuck Baldwin voters - Note to 3rd party voters, I’m not pinning McCain’s loss of Indiana on you).
By contrast, consider the breakdown for Governor Daniels.
(Read more after the leap)
He won 79 of 92 counties and the percentages were 57.8% to Jill Long Thompson’s 40% (the echoes of Linley Pearson’s run against Evan Bayh in ‘92 ring loud and clear). To Mitch’s credit, he was able to pull a major victory in Marion County with 57% of the vote. It’s especially a major victory considering he lost Marion County by a decent margin 2004.
It’s interesting to look at the breakdown. Mitch obviously did very well with ticket splitters (again challenging the notion that Indiana is a hard core Red State). Does this mean that Indiana will always be in play now im presidential elections? I’m not willing to cede that yet, but a lot will depend on Barack Obama’s first term and his handling of the economy.
November 10th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Kudos to Governor Daniels for listening to the citizens of Indiana on property tax reforms. His proposal to cap residential rates most certainly won him Marion County and increased his percentages in blue counties in the Region as well.
Without this strong support for the Governor I have no doubt that we would have lost AG and Superintendent and Obama would have won much more convincingly. The Daniels coat tails were almost strong enough to win back the Indiana house even in a Democrat landslide election.
November 10th, 2008 at 12:27 pm
Very true Steve. In fact, in doing the election night webcast in conjunction with the Indiana Chamber, we saw numbers coming in all night. Essentially, the Republicans were just a few hundred votes shy of tying the Indiana House and thus giving the Republicans control of the House and Senate (due to Governor Daniels victory).
It still remains, however, that Indiana is not the solid red state it once was. I would venture that it’s solidly conservative, but in these tough economic times, more people are thinking w/their wallets.
November 10th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
I wouldn’t, however, ignore the softening of Republican support that happened in Red counties. In 2004, Bush won Hamilton county by over 51,000 votes. McCain still won Hamilton county, but only by 28,700 votes (60+% of the vote). Hamilton is still solidly Red, but that was 23,000 vote difference!
By the way, Daniels won Hamilton County by 87,000 votes. Wow! That was 83% of the vote.
November 10th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
This is a separate issue, but there is no better time than the present to start considering where we need to be targeting to win the Indiana House in 2010. What do the election numbers reveal for initial targets for takeover and were we need to shore up support?
November 10th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
On all matters but our own rights, the gay population is distributed across all demographics of age, race, education and income, yet voted overwhelmingly for Obama/Biden, who favor equality under law as regards practical civic matters, and who oppose amendments banning same sex marriage no matter what their personal views on the topic. As we play the “If only” game, one “if only” is “If only McCain/Palin had expressed the same concern for the Constitution that Obama/Biden had, they might have denied Obama/Biden a near-monopoly of glbt voters, their friends and family and won Indiana.”
November 10th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
Funny Chris, in the VP debate I watched, Palin and Biden were on the same if not similar sides of the gay rights issue.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9ZYWY3UnNk
November 10th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
First, Chris–wrong thread. We have two other posts on this subject going, not here.
Second, it seems to me that Obama came out strongly against homosexual marriage. In fact, I’m not sure that there was a distinguishable difference between the Obama campaign and the McCain campaign on this issue at all–at least regarding what the campaigns actually said.
November 10th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
Joel, to your issue of retaking the state house, that has to be a major groundswell for our party. 2010 is big time of course due to re-apportionment.
The Lake County Ron Paul people took a swing at a house district there, and I’m hoping they will again. This is a terrific use of their organizing skills and time as opposed to fighting over shutting down the UN or Federal Reserve.
I’d be very interested to see some preliminary analysis of seats that need to be protected, and seats that could be gained as well.
November 10th, 2008 at 1:36 pm
I’m curious as to what Joel, Josh and anyone else thinks about how major Democratic strongholds seem to develop in our cities and urban areas.
Why is it that we have vast swaths of more conservative folks between major metro areas, but once you cram a bunch of us together in a city it increasingly, overwhelmingly and with eventual financial catastrophe becomes a Democratic stronghold?
I have some thoughts on this, some are more PC than others, but without doing a bunch of research on the subject thought I would see what everyone thinks (or knows).
November 10th, 2008 at 2:11 pm
I will start with the caveat that these are “thinks” not “knows”.
1. People in rural areas tend to be people who are used to doing everything for themselves. They tend to be “leave me alone” type people–which is a conservative or libertarian type thought process.
2. Maybe this is your non-PC thought. Major metro areas tend to have a higher population of African-American voters, who in a good year for the Republicans only get 10-15% of their vote.
3. Another fairly non-PC thought. There is probably a very high disparity of economic status (stati?) in urban areas–you are either very poor or very rich with very little middle class. The poor tend to vote Democrat because the Dems are for “the little guy”. I have a thought on the rich that stay in urban areas, but I can’t figure out how to say it right now.
That is very incomplete. I hope you have some other ideas on that–these are merely off the top of my head.
November 10th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
Joel, the threads are not so distinct. The Republican Party as a Party has been fairly hostile to the sort of diversity which is increasingly necessary to achieving a majority. It can pummel minorities… whether racial, religious, or sexual… by insisting that government grant civic priority to Christian, ethnocentric, and anti-gay perspectives, but it comes at an increasing cost at the polls. The young, the educated, and the higher income all cross the lines to vote Democrat in part as a repudiation of the perceived intolerance of the Republican Party towards minorities. Gays in particular would just as easily vote Republican as any if the Party consistently embraced small-, get the-government’s-nose-out-of-everyone’s-life values. Even a respectable share of the gay vote, not even the majority of it, would have swung Indiana to McCain.
And that brings me to the next point.
-I am utterly opposed to Louis Farrakhan and a great deal he has to say.
Further,
November 10th, 2008 at 6:51 pm
Whoops! accidentally hit submit!
To continue:
-I am utterly opposed to Louis Farrakhan. I do not support anything he has to say.
-I oppose amending the Constitution to deny him his freedom, and I oppose any law that would have that effect.
-These are not contradictory sentiments, and Louis Farrakhan, however much I might dislike him, would find me an ally in the protection of his rights as a citizen.
With regard to Obama/Biden and McCain/Palin,
- Obama/Biden do not support same sex marriage. They also do not support amendments which would deny citizens their rights. Obama/Biden argue for a strong equivalency under the law for same sex couples.
- McCain/Palin do not support same sex marriage. They do support (or did) amendments which would deny citizens their rights.
- These are not remotely the same positions, which is why gays, even defense- and fiscally-conservative oriented gays, overwhelmingly voted for Obama/Biden. Obama/Biden seem to be allies with regard to civic equality; McCain/Palin seem to be opponents.
November 10th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
Chris, your silence on the church attack post is deafening.
November 10th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
I missed the connection to Farrakhan. Is that just setting up an example of someone very different or hateful that you don’t want to make Constitutional amendments to shut down?
Regarding McCain on the marriage amendment. He was against (according to McCain, he voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment twice), but he supports DOMA.
http://www.washblade.com/thelatest/thelatest.cfm?blog_id=21367
So I believe that puts his support about where Obama’s was/is. (Who knows, really). Granted you will probably see deeper support for items like hate crimes legislation and military service, but that doesn’t seem to be the issues that are predominantly brought up.
There are several points that can be made–among which is McCain’s inability to get his message out; the ability of Obama to get his out; the ability of Obama to sucker people into having an incorrect idea of where McCain stands on issues; and the inability of the gay community to see support where it is.
So here are my questions for you, Chris. I agree that there are many in the homosexual community who would in most aspects be comfortable in the Republican or conservative political community. You argue credibly that at least the perceived position of the conservatives drives them away from the Republican Party. SO:
1. Why is homosexual marriage (rather than protection of various rights) the litmus test for support of a candidate?
2. If the individual is really conservative, why must these issues be fought at the Federal level rather than being relegated to the States? (As an area of comparison, social conservatives are against abortion, yet many–not all–conservatives believe that these issues should be sent back to the states as they were before Roe v Wade.)
November 11th, 2008 at 9:10 am
Even more intersting is that some of the key players from Mitches 2004 run were in leadership of the regional McCain campaign. Mitch did better without them…
November 11th, 2008 at 9:40 am
Debate and discuss til we turn blue in the face. Marion County losing 60-40 all around will be hard to overcome no matter how many other counties we win. That said, then the change needs to be made in Marion County GOP to the philosophy and the personnel. Tom John has no support and has pissed off both the voter and the electd officials: Ballard, Brizzi, Ricketts, Zoeller to name a few. Someone said he was captain of titanic in this election. I beg to differ. he was guy pushing kids aside to save himself.
November 11th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
Josh, I will be pleased to comment on the Church attack post later this evening.