Monday, November 23, 2009

2008 Presidential election electoral maps, circa 1870

If my mom has ever voted for a Democrat, it was before I'd become a twinkle in my dad's eye. She's not especially political, but was so disgusted by McCain's "rush back to Washington" that she sold her vote to me (vote 199,314 for Baldwin/Castle). Yet at the Republican caucus last February, she reacted as viscerally as I expected she would to my extending a hand toward the people filing into the auditorium* and remarking to a friend, "This is why the Republican party should do whatever it can to keep this country as white as possible".

As embarrassed as she was by her son's gross impropriety, the visual spoke for itself. In the same spirit, here for consideration are some hypothetical electoral maps for the 2008 Presidential election:

If adjustments are made to reflect only white state populations, McCain handily beats Obama, 325-213. Based on the contemporary electoral count, he wins 316-222. In the worst Presidential election for the GOP since Clinton's first term, and the worst election for the right since Goldwater's defeat, the Republican candidate obliterates his Democratic opponent by 100 electoral votes.

If the US looked like Nebraska, it wouldn't necessarily follow that we'd have a two-party system consisting of a perpetual majority and an ever-defeated opposition. Instead, general election campaigns would be as competitive as they are today. But they'd look like Republican primaries do now. The demographic transformation the US is currently undergoing is driving a stake through the heart of political conservatism. Indeed, we are doomed.

So Euros are incorrigibly bigoted. Unless you stepped out of a time machine from the 1950s, this is surely not news! The truly interesting stories, of course, are found among the vibrantly diverse political ideas of the vibrantly diverse segments of our society. While white America looks straight ahead, marching along in the solidarity inherent in its groupthink, the rest of the citizenry eagerly darts this way and that, leaving no thought or idea unturned across the vast plane of modern political discourse:

Well, hope and change runs the entire gamut, doesn't it? Under the current electoral distribution, Obama wins 538-0. If population adjustments are made to exclude whites from state population counts, Obama comes out on top, uh, 538-0.

Various thinkers on the right have explored how female suffrage has steadily pushed the US leftward. Men and women vote similarly by ancestry, geographic position, and station in life, with the latter being shifted five or six points to the left. This matters in setting the parameters and deciding outcomes at the margins, but it's not nearly as determinative as race is:

Banishing the double-Xs would not have been nearly enough to keep the country's first community organizing President out of the White House. Had the 19th amendment been revoked last November, Obama would have still easily won, 325-213. If Xanth's harpies ruled the roost, with the rare males serving as cultural princes, he would've won 393-145.

What if the worst of both worlds were the only ones granted the ballot, as had been the case when the country elected slave owners to the Presidency?

What a hideous cartographic image that makes! For sadistic pleasure, I awarded Minnesota, Iowa, and Rhode Island to McCain, though exit polling showed their voting white men to be evenly split. With population adjustments, the vet wins by some margin between 416-122 and 441-97, depending on how the three toss-up states go. As the electoral map is currently comprised, McCain wins by somewhere between 408-130 and 429-109.

And so the progress takes away what forever took to find.

* Kansas' caucus process allows representatives for each candidate to give a short speech prior to ballots being handed out to those in attendance at the designated voting locations.


blue said...

While you are at it, how about property owners?

OneSTDV said...

Did you make those maps? If so, great idea. Damn, I wish I had come up with it first.

silly girl said...

blue beat me to it!

The Undiscovered Jew said...

The absolute number of Hispanic births in Colorado fell by 7.9% from 2007 to 2008:

Jokah Macpherson said...

This post is hilarious. I wonder how many variables you would have to add to get an all-red map (versus one for an all-blue)...maybe if suffrage were only extended to white male church-attending land-owning gun-owning HBD-bloggers over the age of 55, but I've heard this demographic trends slightly progressive in Vermont.

Data Massager said...

More ingenious ideas to whip those nine recalcitrant states into shape: limit the sample to age 21+ (feel free to overlook the fact that the elderly constituted a smaller proportion of the voting population in 1870), limit it to those of WASP stock, literacy tests, grandfather clauses (preferably the exclusive type rather than the illiteracy-compensating type), and last but not least, make sure to exclude felons (and while you’re at it, why not misdemeanors too).

The competition in the HBD-osphere to beat each other to the bigotry punch is quite amusing to watch, beats any spectator sport, that’s for sure. Which brings me to my next point. Republican men suffer a drop in testosterone levels after the GOP loses an election. This salve would have been even more rejuvenating if you had concocted it last year.

Anonymous said...

"The absolute number of Hispanic births in Colorado fell by 7.9% from 2007 to 2008"

Wait till their unemployment benefits run out and they start filling the "jobs Americans won't do".

Anonymous said...

It's clear that something must be done to rid our country of all these white people who are standing in the way of "progress".

Audacious Epigone said...

Blue and Silly Girl,

Exit polling data give us voting patterns by income bracket, but not by home ownership rates.


Yes. I'd meant to do so several months ago, but was frustrated trying to find an electoral map generator. So I ended up just using, capturing the screen shot, and photo shopping the maps.


That is three straight years of absolute declines in Hispanic births in Arizona, right?


Heh, yeah, next to DC (which just isn't going to happen) Vermont will be the hardest to give a red hue to--white men voted in Obama's favor 2 to 1.

Data Massager,

And our critics fall all over each other trying to be first up the moral posturing tower. Democratic pols want to extend suffrage to marginal, dependent, impoverished groups to increase their own electoral share. Why should it be objectionable for Republicans to consider pushing in the opposite direction for their own political well-being (as well as for quality of life reasons)?


Be patient. Rome wasn't unbuilt in a day.

The Undiscovered Jew said...


That is three straight years of absolute declines in Hispanic births in Arizona, right?

The numbers I posted above are for Colorado in 2007 to 2008, not Arizona. California also saw a decline in Hispanic births in 2008.

The CDC is going to report a national drop in the number of births for 2008 compared to 2007.

As for Arizona, there looks like there will be a YOY decrease in Hispanic births again in 2009, which will make for two straight years of decline:

Stopped Clock said...

When I lived in Vermont it was my impression that Baptists and Pentecostals were just as Republican as they were elsewhere in the country; there just weren't very many of them. I suspect a US in which only Baptists and Pentecostals and Mormons can vote would be red in all 50 states ... maybe even DC.

silly girl said...

For you data junkies, you know who you are, D. Merkel reviews a new book on financial crises, This Time is Different.


"This book is not for everyone. If you tire looking at tables, and prefer more discursive arguments giving anecdotes rather than facts, this book is not for you.

Who could benefit: if you want intellectual confidence that sovereign defaults /currency failures can happen even in the US (note we have had two so far, in addition to many other financial crises), this will give you confidence that you are not a nut. If you want to educate one of your friends who thinks that such disasters are impossible, this is the book for him. Just make sure he is willing to endure a semi-academic book."

Anonymous said...

Very rich vein of ore here. Keep digging, it will be worth it.

Moralist said...

The map showing the states that would have gone to the GOP had only women voted could serve your male readership well as a guide to finding a good wife.

Awesome post.

Audacious Epigone said...


Convert the heathens by taking one as your wife! Nice.

Steve Sailer said...

Great graphs!

jimlinn88 said...

That all blue non-whites only electoral map is the TRULY Hideous map. That map = turd world banana republic. America would be forever gone!

Anonymous said...

That's horrible....I really hope in the future we support equal rights and equality...

Beer Babble said... make sure I understand this. It's OK for non-whites to be racists and vote "Blue" but racists if whites vote "Red". Once again proves you lefties have no clue about running a country, only a clue of how to nanny. Idiots!