Timeline for What is this line of counties voting for the Democratic party in the 2016 elections?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2020 at 9:20 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Nov 11, 2016 at 6:02 | vote | accept | isanae | ||
| Nov 10, 2016 at 18:07 | history | edited | isanae | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
note about lack of details on the NE region
|
| Nov 10, 2016 at 18:02 | comment | added | isanae | @Brythan It should probably be several books :) I don't have the time or knowledge to do research on voting patterns across the eastern US. I will however add a note to the NE section about the fact that it's not the focus of the answer and lacks detailed information. | |
| Nov 10, 2016 at 16:21 | comment | added | Brythan | This should be three (or more) parts. The "black belt" in the South; New England in the North; and three cities with urbanized suburbs in between (Washington, DC; Philadelphia; New York City). Maryland and New Jersey aren't that liberal outside the urban areas. It's just that the cities are big there and happen to make a link between the other two areas if you ignore the gaps. | |
| Nov 10, 2016 at 15:59 | comment | added | user1530 | @isanae I guess we see different things in that map. I clearly see the line through the south. | |
| Nov 10, 2016 at 13:34 | comment | added | David | I'm originally from the northeast US and IMHO the "counter-realignment among northeastern moderates" is too simplistic. In particular, it ignores the fact that large numbers of (predominantly left-leaning) urbanites have migrated to formerly rural areas, particularly in Vermont, but in New Hampshire as well; the influence of this "Ben & Jerrry" voting bloc far outweighs any realignment of moderates. This explanation also ignores the "snobbery" factor (people in the northeast commonly look down on people from the south). Still, excellent answer. | |
| Nov 10, 2016 at 5:02 | history | edited | isanae | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added note about southern strategy
|
| Nov 10, 2016 at 4:53 | history | edited | isanae | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
more freehand circles
|
| Nov 10, 2016 at 3:59 | comment | added | isanae | @blip This is a density map from 2010. It correlates with the NE region, plus a small area in Georgia, but has nothing to do with the black belt, which was the main focus of my answer. | |
| Nov 10, 2016 at 3:54 | comment | added | user1530 | the black belt refers to the south, for sure. But the main correlation with the OP's map (north to south) is population density. | |
| Nov 10, 2016 at 2:45 | history | edited | isanae | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
image descriptions
|
| Nov 10, 2016 at 2:39 | history | edited | isanae | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
typo
|
| Nov 10, 2016 at 2:35 | comment | added | isanae | @blip The point of the 1924 map is to show a uniform color in the south, without the black belt voting differently (or at all). Regardless of the "switch", I think the black population would still have voted differently. Please, do correct me if I'm wrong. As for population density, as far as I can tell, it is irrelevant for the black belt. It might be important for the northeastern region, but that was not the topic of my answer. | |
| Nov 9, 2016 at 22:02 | comment | added | user1530 | The last map is a red herring...the 1924 democrat party is an entirely different party than the democrat party of today (the black demographic would never have voted for that democratic party back then). The other info is good, but missing the major correlation...population density. | |
| Nov 9, 2016 at 21:52 | history | edited | isanae | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
c/e
|
| Nov 9, 2016 at 21:33 | history | edited | isanae | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 13 characters in body
|
| Nov 9, 2016 at 20:33 | history | edited | isanae | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
title, quote for northeastern
|
| Nov 9, 2016 at 20:26 | history | answered | isanae | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
