Wednesday, February 01, 2017

Change in margin of victory in 2016 from 2012, by state

The following map and table show the change in the margin of victory in the 2016 presidential election relative to 2012, by state, with positive (negative) figures indicating an improvement (deterioration) in the margin for Republicans. That is, the colors do not indicate who won the state in 2016, but show how much better (worse) Trump did in 2016 relative to how Romney did in 2012:


StateMargin▲
North Dakota17
West Virginia16
Iowa16
Rhode Island12
Maine12
South Dakota12
Ohio12
Indiana10
Hawaii10
Michigan9
Missouri9
Wisconsin8
Kentucky8
Mississippi8
Delaware8
Montana8
Vermont8
Wyoming7
Minnesota7
Tennessee6
Pennsylvania6
New Hampshire6
Alabama5
New York5
Nebraska4
New Jersey4
Connecticut4
Arkansas4
Nevada4
South Carolina3
Oklahoma2
Florida2
Colorado2
North Carolina2
Louisiana2
New Mexico2
Oregon1
Alaska1
Maryland1
Idaho1
Illinois0
Virginia(1)
Kansas(1)
Washington(1)
Georgia(1)
Massachusetts(3)
District of Columbia(5)
California(6)
Arizona(6)
Texas(7)
Utah(30)

Notice the similarities between the map above and this one, which shows Trump's electoral performance relative to pre-election polling. The states where Trump and Hillary beat polling
expectations tend to be the same places they beat their parties' 2012 candidates. The polls tended to assume that 2016 would look like 2012, but it didn't.

In other words, the primary failing of polling organizations--beyond their systematic oversampling of Democrats--was their refusal to grasp the political realignment that characterized the 2016 presidential election.

The oft-commented upon east-west divide--or more precisely, northeast-southwest divide--is salient. Trump's biggest relative gains came in the upper Midwest.

In the South the changes from 2012 were quite modest in the general election. The upper Midwest and even the Northeast shifted more dramatically.

However, the South is the area of the country where race and partisanship are most strongly correlated. The interesting dynamic here took place in the primaries, where not only did Trump dominate, but where his domination came as the biggest shock to the political and punditry classes.

The South, with an assist from Yankeedom, gave Trump the nomination; the Upper Midwest gave him the presidency.

On one hand, the Texas outcome is a worrisome one in an election that was otherwise almost universally good for Republicans. Trump's margin of victory was narrower in Texas than it was in Iowa, a blueish-purple state.

On the other hand, while I've previously warned that when Texas flips blue the GOP will be utterly finished, that admonition may be evidence for why my nom de guerre is fitting. Assuming no faithless electors, if Trump had lost Texas in November, Hillary would've only won by the narrowest Electoral College margin of victory possible, 270-268.

For those outside the US, a few notes on some of the seeming outliers:

- Utah -- Romney's heavily Mormon home state; additionally, the basket that failed spoiler Evan McMullin (also Mormon) put all of his eggs.

- Massachusetts -- Romney was governor from 2003 to 2006.

- Hawaii -- Obama spent most of his childhood here. While he's allegedly from Kansas, Hawaii and Illinois are his 'home states'.

- Iowa -- While Jeff Sessions was my VP favorite by a mile, one of the silver linings I saw in the Pence pick was that it would virtually guarantee Trump the state of Iowa. Pence was governor of Indiana but he is the archetypal Iowan Republican.

22 comments:

Derek said...

his is from an interview of Nate Cohn by the NYT:

Toni: What’s one fact — about a county or a particular demographic — that really turned your head?

Nate: Clinton swept all of the wealthy and white Protestant enclaves in Connecticut that always vote Republican. Clinton won Darien by 12 points — a 43-point improvement over 2012. She won New Canaan by 10 points, a 39-point gain.......

Nate: Clinton made huge gains in the enclaves of the liberal elite, places like Boston, Seattle, Washington, D.C., where there’s a large professional class of lawyers or scientists or professors. But she just did not make similar gains in middle-class suburbs, like Long Island or around Tampa, Fla.

Random Dude on the Internet said...

> Nate: Clinton made huge gains in the enclaves of the liberal elite, places like Boston, Seattle, Washington, D.C., where there’s a large professional class of lawyers or scientists or professors. But she just did not make similar gains in middle-class suburbs, like Long Island or around Tampa, Fla.

This election was the high and low vs. the middle. Professionals broke for Hillary because if you're already making high five figures into the low six figures, the MAGA message is far less likely to resonate if you're already doing great.

This helps to explain the swing in Texas in my opinion. Texas may be flooding with Hispanic immigrants but it's also flooding with professional transplants from California and New England. Also Trump was never really able to articulate how favorable he was towards the energy industry. If it was someone like Jeb Bush or Ted Cruz, it would have been implied and Texas could have went redder. Trump's energy policy tended to focus more on coal production, which means little or nothing to the oilmen of the Houston area. If it was readily known that Trump wanted to tap Rex Tillerson into a senior cabinet position, Texas could have turned out much different than what we saw.

The surge of the professional class also explains why Georgia shifted more towards the Democrats. The Sun Belt is rapidly ascending and with it comes the liberal professional class who can no longer find as many opportunities in places like California or New York. Georgia, Arizona, and Texas are going to be the most susceptible in my opinion. Florida seems to be largely spared from this development which bodes well for Trump's 2020 re-election.

Audacious Epigone said...

These damned people flee their states because they find better opportunities elsewhere but they bring the worldview of the states they're running away from with them. It's not unique to them of course, I know. Immigrants do it, too. Bring in more Mexicans, see your country become more like Mexico. Bring in more New Yorkers, see your Southern state become more like New York.

I think Trump's enormous presence in Florida, which I don't think was very well understood nationally, helped him. New York was considered his "home state" but Florida was almost just as much so.

Random Dude on the Internet said...

Colorado got ruined by California transplants as they began to flood the state in the 80s, 90s, and 2000s. As soon as they destroy a state, they flee to another state where they just recreate the same failed policies, destroy the state, and flee to yet another state. Progressives are like parasites that way.

Feryl said...

Something also to consider about Texas:

1. White Texans just aren't that racially aware compared to the South and lower Midwest (Texas has always had a substantial hispanic presence, unlike points further north and east)
2. Texas is strongly libertarian, thereby finding Trump's industrial strength sprotectionism and lack of big scary gubmint rhetoric worrisome (some TX "conservatives" threw their vote away on non-Trump candidates)
3. Western alienation. Trump may not be of the Eastern political establishment, but in other respects he does very much represent the East which includes not just D.C./New York but every place East of the Plains in the South, the Midwest, and Northeast. However, the further north you go in the Plains the more you draw from statist Nords who don't boogie on hating D.C. like Texans do (the voting shift gradient confirms what I suspected; the less racially aware and flakier Scots-Irish of the lower Plains have succumbed to liberaltarianism and blind hatred of Easterners while the more teutonic types on the Northern plains don't have either neurosis.

Notable: in the '96 election, Kansan Republican Bob Dole (a nominal Midwesterner) did better than Arkansas Dem Bill Clinton. BTW, had Ross Perot not run, Dole would've likely had a stronger victory in TX. For those saying, "But Bill was a hardcore Lefty loser!", let's remember that Clinton actually did pretty well for a Dem. in some real conservative areas of Appalaicha/the South, not so much the libertarian Plains and Mountain states. Clinton cobbled together a stronger floor of support than the likes of McGovern or Dukakis by running considerably to the right of those hapless losers.

I'm not sure Texas had a big enough influx of foreigners or yuppies in the last 4 years alone to explain the voting shift.

Noah Carl said...

Just from eyeballing your map, it looks like Republican deterioration is quite strongly correlated with the percentage of illegal immigrants in a state:

http://posnetres.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/what-would-electoral-college-have.html

Dan said...

Could Texas have done worse because of TrueCons upset about Ted Cruz staying home? Trump savaged Cruz pretty hard and stopped him from being the nominee.

Biotrekker said...

Agree with comments about Ted Cruz adherents in Texas either staying home or voting for Egg Macmuffin.

Langley said...

That shift from extreme Democrat to mid-range Democrat in Hawaii is interesting.

Hawaii has been a Democrat controlled state since 1954 when the 442nd used its military intelligence network to set up one of the best grass roots get out the vote systems in the US.

The Japanese Democrats knew they were losing control of the party in 2016 and tried to keep the Haole progressive faction from voting for Sanders by closing the poles early last year. Sanders won.

Tulsi Gabard was thrown off the DNC committee for her support of Sanders. Gabard is a Krishna whose father was a Republican who campaigned against gay marriage in Hawaii. She is also the most popular politicization in Hawaii today and a threat to the old guard in the party.

Hawaii has one newspaper, the Democrat controlled StarAdvertiser. That publication has been criticizing her for her meeting with Trump and her trip to Syria. Hawaii is unlikely to turn Republican.

It does seem to be changing.

Audacious Epigone said...

Noah,

So is it a result of illegals illegally voting or a sign of white cuckery in those states, with SWPLs voting in especially strong Democrat solidarity on behalf of said illegals against Trump's wall/deportations?

Feryl/Dan/Biotrekker,

Yeah, I wondered if residual Cruz/Bush cuckery had something to do with it. I'm going to look at the 2012 and 2016 results in Texas more closely in the near future.

Langley,

Interesting, thanks. It's minority non-Hispanic white so its inconceivable that the state ever turns red. That isn't going to happen anywhere.

jjbees said...

The white professional class are traitorous scum. Their motto is "I've got mine!" They all want to ship brown people into your neighborhood to rape and murder you. Fuck them.

What makes Trump such a unique man is that, unlike the rest of the upper class scum in the US, he actually feels a sense of obligation to his fellow countrymen. A man for all seasons! How can you not love Trump?

The American upper class would see the majority of americans simply rot, and replace them with dumb brown people or cute asian women- both much easier to handle, and securing their oligarchy.

No matter what happens, if the demographic situation is not fixed in the USA, California is the future. Texas now shows us that this is the plain truth. Normal white people have no future in California except getting punched in the face or randomly murdered by hispanics, or jobs taken by some kind of asian on the upper end.

"This is not who we are!"

Random Dude on the Internet said...

The white professional class got told that the stock market was going to crash once Trump gets elected. Every stock analyst dong declared that the Dow was going to drop 10-20% the day of Trump's victory. Every Wall Street shyster declared that there was no choice but to go for Hillary and even Uncle Warren couldn't denounce Trump enough during the campaign.

"MUH 401K!" they cried as they pulled the lever for Clinton or Johnson. The surge of coastal transplants towards cities like Atlanta, Dallas, and Phoenix will likely scoff at the idea that California and New York are awful places to live because of decades of progressive policy but they will be sure to try their hardest to vote for a California-styled progressive in their local elections.

Noah Carl said...

Come to think of it, it's probably not so much illegals voting as the compositional increase in Hispanic population that explains the Trump underperformance in states like California, Arizona, Texas, and Georgia.

Mil-Tech Bard said...

The massive Black migration as a result of the Hurricane Katrina and it's affect on Houston, Dallas and Austin are often missed by non-Texans.

In 2004 Dallas county was hugely Republican.

By 2008, when the Katrina refugees from the 9th Ward of New Orleans were politically activated, The local Judges (county officals) went from 80/20 GOP to 80/20 Democrat.

This last election saw 1 million more Democratic votes than GOP in Dallas county because of the mogration of whites to McKenney, Denton, Mansfield and other growing North Texas exurbs.

The level of Democratic Party vote fraud in Dallas, Austin, Houston and San Antonio has gotten astronomical.

OTOH the votes in North Texas outside of the university town of Denton were amazingly GOP, on the order of 80/20.

Dan said...

"Yeah, I wondered if residual Cruz/Bush cuckery had something to do with it. I'm going to look at the 2012 and 2016 results in Texas more closely in the near future."

Yes, the Bushes too. Bushes Sr. and Jr. are Texans who account for all of the Republican presidency in the last 28 years. W. was also a massively popular two-term governor in Texas (giving up part of his second term to be pres.)They were NeverTrumpers to the end.

This makes a difference. Wisconsin's CuckPaul CuckRyan is frustrating but he went fully in for Trump at the end.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-updates-1478379024-htmlstory.html
Trump would certainly have lost Wisconsin without that. CuckPaul is very popular there as evidenced by his beating Paul Nehlen by almost dictator-like margins in the primary.




Feryl said...

Dan - as a matter of fact, Iowa's GOP establishment stood with Trump like you would expect in a traditional race. That paid off. With little of the globalist/multi cult. pressure associated with either large metro areas or yuppies, Iowa's populist sympathetic GOP leadership didn't shy away from Trump, making him more acceptable to voters there.

MN, though becoming much more GOP friendly out-state since the later 90's, still has a weaker and more defensive GOP compared to culturally similar Iowa and Wisconsin. Chalk it up to the sizable and trendy Twin Cities Metro area, which has drawn both domestic and foreign strivers. Milwaukee doesn't exert the same kind of influence on WI, and Iowa doesn't have any really big cities at all.

I think a good measure for disentangling the impact of blacks/browns from cucks in states like MN and TX is the 3rd party vote. No way Jose or Tyrone voted for pot head Johnson or McMuffin. Sure enough, TX and MN punched above their weight in the 3rd party vote. Western states in general are partial to 3rd party votes, but the enthusiasm in the Plains and Mountain states varied based on different factors. Number one, Mormon cucks (Utah primarily), and number two, the presence of cultural elites/yuppies in large and powerful cities (MN, Colorado, TX). Are ire shouldn't be focused at immivaders/hispanics alone, lest we forget the cucked trendy whites living in/near megaopolises who are the assholes who got us in our current predicament in the first place.

We need to hope that in elections with non-globalist candidates, voters Out West don't delude themselves into believing that "they all suck, might as well vote 3rd party or not vote at all". Yeah, for the time being strivers and wannabe Americans are going to tell you that Trump-type candidates are evil. You've just got to tune them out rather than utterly wasting your vote by apathy or false equivalence (ask yourself, is open borders/BLM/goodies for all advocate Clinton "just as bad" as Trump?). Fortunately, the Left's ongoing endless tantrum is nudging cynical independents that much closer to voting Trump next time, lest the they give the tantrum throwers what they want by voting against Trump and therefore boost the likes of fauxcahontas or some other commie nag. One can only wonder why some of these people weren't spurred by the pre-election agitation, but such is alienation and cosmopolitan peer pressure Out West.

Feryl said...

Amendment: Johnson actually had MOR performance in Texas. But that's still 283 thousand votes. In future elections, unless we evict or disenfranchise non-white voters in electorally important and heavily non-white states of the Mid-Atlantic and the Southern 1/3 or so of America, white people can't be naive enough to throw away their votes on the losertarians or weed party.

As long as we're on the subject, screw the "conservatives" who cost us Nevada, MN, and New Hampshire for sure. And a better shot at New Mexico and Colorado. You can bet the Leftists are paying attention to cuckery. Expect lotsa Dem dough to be thrown into the losertarian coffers next time.

Feryl said...

Cold reality: the Trump era isn't doing anything in terms of white appeal for the more populated (and hence electorally important) parts of the Mountain and Pacific states. And the more populated parts of the Plains states seem fairly inconclusive. We really don't have much choice but to impose strict voter ID. Either that or rely on the whites of these states to pull their heads out of their asses.

Pre-Trump, the GOP was clueless about appealing to New England, the Mid-Atlantic, the Upper Midwest, and the West Coast. Well, post-Trump, one out four ain't bad (and to be fair to the Mid-Atlantic, the remaining whites there did give Trump decent support, there just aren't many of them left). Golf clap to Maine for their sensible district system giving us New England's token EV for the GOP.

Audacious Epigone said...

jjbees,

As Steve's fond of saying, noblesse oblige has become nobless malice.

Audacious Epigone said...

Noah,

That's intuitive. Georgia's had an influx of immigrants, too. The trend in Travis and Dallas counties aren't much different from the state of Texas as a whole--Dallas shifted a bit more bluewards than the state as a whole, Travis was right in line--so it looks like things shifted pretty uniformly across the board.

Mil-Tech,

Dallas is stunning. In '04 the county went for Bush 50%-47%. In '08, it'd flipped to 42%-57% in favor of Obama--that's an 18 point swing, nearly double the swing in the national election. Some of that, though, is probably attributable to the "native" son in '04 and the ill will Bush backers had for McCain (their greatest quality!).

Feryl,

lest the they give the tantrum throwers what they want

The contrarian/dissident energy is now entirely on the right, even with Trump now in office. Forced onto the defensive culturally, they are trying to put us on the defensive physically.

Mil-Tech Bard said...

The doubling of the swing had to do with the African-American community being organized to the Nth Degree.

I moved between the primary and the general election from south Texas to Dallas, and saw during the South Texas GOP primary caucus after voting that in my mostly white area that the Democratic caucus outnumbered us 11 to one with mostly (90%) of the Democratic caucus being African-American.

The wipe out of the Dallas GOP judges was not a surprise.

What was a surprise is they didn't come back in 2010.

The rest of Texas swept GOP, but Dallas, Travis and Huston area county government stayed Democrat.

That was the Katrina effect.

Dan said...

The left will not play by the rules, perhaps because they imagine they have a moral high ground. This is why even one left-activist judge in America is a disaster.

That judge in Seattle had no legal basis and it did not matter. What do you do as a conservative in this situation? If Trump ignores the order than he is a tyrant. But this is judicial tyranny.

Too bad establishment "conservatives" would rather see the end of civilization itself than ever shoot left.

What now? What options are there for preserving a country?