Skip to comments.GOP Plants Flag on New Voting Frontier
Posted on 11/22/2004 9:23:16 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Bush's huge victory in the fast-growing areas beyond the suburbs alters the political map.
WASHINGTON The center of the Republican presidential coalition is moving toward the distant edges of suburbia.
In this month's election, President Bush carried 97 of the nation's 100 fastest-growing counties, most of them "exurban" communities that are rapidly transforming farmland into subdivisions and shopping malls on the periphery of major metropolitan areas.
Together, these fast-growing communities provided Bush a punishing 1.72 million vote advantage over Democrat John F. Kerry, according to a Times analysis of election results. That was almost half the president's total margin of victory.
"These exurban counties are the new Republican areas, and they will become increasingly important to Republican candidates," said Terry Nelson, the political director for Bush's reelection campaign. "This is where a lot of our vote is."
These growing areas, filled largely with younger families fleeing urban centers in search of affordable homes, are providing the GOP a foothold in blue Democratic-leaning states and solidifying the party's control over red Republican-leaning states.
They also represent a compounding asset whose value for the Republican Party has increased with each election: Bush's edge in these 100 counties was almost four times greater than the advantage they provided Bob Dole, the Republican presidential nominee eight years ago.
In states like Ohio, Minnesota and Virginia, Republican strength in these outer suburbs is offsetting Democratic gains over the last decade in more established and often more affluent inner-tier suburbs. As Democrats analyze a demoralizing defeat in this month's presidential election, one key question they face is whether they can reduce the expanding Republican advantage on the new frontier between suburbs and countryside.
"When any party is losing a growing group of voters, that's a problem
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
That just sounds good!
The Democrats can solve this problem by moving further left. :-p
Pinal AZ had a GOP vote margin of 9161....where is that?
And we own the areas where the young families are rearing the next generation of voters....Love it!
The DemonicRats have a problem....Hehehehe!
And he still got the second largest amount of votes for President ever.
I'd like to think 2004 was the libs' high water mark - but I said the same thing about 2000.
Agreed. And in the spirit of "wanting to keep the Democrat Party viable", let me offer this suggestion. Keep Terry Mcauliffe!!!
Thankfully, that generation is receeding quickly for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that we are SICK TO DEATH OF THEM and we're not going to take their PC bullcrap any longer when it comes to making laws and raising our kids.
Does that mean Mass will be turning Republican sometime in the next decade....that would be good news.
We have a son/dil and several nephews/nieces with their spouses who have moved into one of these areas across the nation in the last 4+ years.
They are well educated and hard working young people. They pay a lot of taxes and want to pay less. They have zero compassion for whiners, losers and the victim mentality losers.
They love their families and country (even more since 9/11). They have flag decals on their suvs, vans and pickups. Many fly flags at their home. So when some left winger like Whoopi, Moore or Follywooder makes fun of America, those left wingers become losers to these young people.
They have 401k s or IRA's. When a lib mouths the anti business mantras, that lib becomes an enemy to them.
They don't use cable tv, they use one of the satellite systems which means they get Fox. They don't buy the big Fishwraps and local fishwraps which push the left wing lies/mantras. This makes them fairly immune to the lies of the MSM.
They are growing in numbers and the areas where they live are growing. Contrast that to the Goron/Kerry inner cities which are losing population due to abortion, gang wars, drug deaths and other liberal malady's.
The trends for the lunatic left are the opposite. The Slave/Death party is dropping in numbers and not expanding.
The Rise Of The Exurbs. This is the story that legacy media neglected all year. They played a big role in 2004 and will play increasingly bigger roles in future elections as they continue their explosive growth. The Democrats look like they are hemmed in to dominate the cities and inner-tier suburbs that cast an increasingly declining share of the nation's vote. Its a formula for permanent minority party status.
I think it depends on the labor racket. Younger members grew up under Reagan, and they resent commie-anything. Culturally, they use the term "fag" freely and despise big city lights. Unfortunately, the older members are still in charge and hold murderous power (literally) to win government contracts and fix elections. They are desperately trying to recruit younger voters ala Michael-Moore style political appeal.
The hispanics who invaded in the 70s have either A) died or gone to prison B) built themselves into respectable, religious-based communities (mostly catholic) and have become a slightly conservative middle class.
The current wave of Indian immigrants are mostly legal and highly professional, but I'm not sure about their politics. I fear some of them are social liberals.
The old Boston politicians are toppling fast thanks to the Howie Carrs of the world who are merciless in calling them on corruption and basic poor values. (Think- Billy Bulger, Mayor Meninno, and even John F'ing Kerry. These crooked men live under a microscope that didn't exist 20 years ago.)
The strongest liberal elements here in mass are the yuppies who graduated from Boston University et al., lived in the city for a few years, became successful, then bought a house in the suburbs (ie, the people this thread is about). They are LIBERTINES. They tend to start out liberals and gradually convert rightward. These folks often walk a fine line between smart and clueless ("a little education is a dangerous thing"). Usually between the husband and wife, at least one of them breaks conservative once they start having babies and paying bills. (Usually it's the man.)
Academia is the other great pillar of the left in MA. The best promising sign in years is that teachers today stay for about 2 years, then move on to other careers. No more b*tches who sit on a throne for 30 years and punish young kids for their own sexual frustrations and other neurotic failings in life.
Not only do I whole-heartedly agree with your take, I am living it (except I still have cable, but primarily for broadband internet access).
"It's not going to be long before the liberal areas of LA and SF aren't going to have to worry about secession, they're going to be kicked out."
I wish that were the case, but the Kerry margins over Pres. Bush in CA coastal counties were staggering. I live in Oakland, CA which is in Alameda County. Pres. Bush received only 23.5% of the vote in a county which turned out nearly 600,000 voters and gave Kerry a 287,000 vote margin. In SF County, where Pres. Bush rec'd just 15.3% of the vote, Kerry had a 241,000 vote margin over Pres. Bush. Other Bay Area counties were as follows: San Mateo Co. (Bush 29.4%, Kerry with a 114,000 vote margin); Santa Clara Co. (Bush 34.7%, Kerry with a 175,000 vote margin; Sonoma Co. (Bush 31%, Kerry with an 80,000 vote margin); Contra Costa Co. (Bush 36.7%, Kerry with a 101,000 vote margin; Marin Co. (Bush 25.9%, Kerry with a 57,000 vote margin).
Altogether, Bush lost these seven Bay Area counties by 1,055,000 votes. Added to Los Angeles County, which Kerry won by 800,000 votes, gives Kerry a 1.9 million vote cushion. The problem for Republicans is that most of these counties are still growing at a decent rate which offsets higher growth in smaller exurban CA counties.
The analysis of CA voting in Comment #16 does not include smaller CA coastal counties like Monterey, Santa Cruz, Humboldt, Mendocino, Solano, Napa (not quite on the Coast), and Santa Barbara, most of which Kerry won by very large majorities.
Thanks for the reply;
California is the exception to everything. The coastal counties may not be stagnant or declining in population here yet but the Democrats can't break through into interior "Red" California. When we revisit the state in 20 years, the picture may be entirely different.
This phenom is really interesting and amazing up here in N California. The result is like the article pointed out, the fast growing areas in many counties are people like you and our younger relatives and young friends we know.
So many customers have left our cable company to get FNC or never signed up for cable, now the cable company is now including FNC in its basic package. Many of these young people that we know are not even opting for the local channel packages with their satellite system.
If the trend of cancelling local channels grows, the negative impact on the Rat 527's will be tremendous. Our DIL in N. California said that several of her neighbors have cancelled their local tv option with their satellite providers. One nieghbor lady while cancelling it was asked if there was anything wrong with the reception, and she said no. Then, the lady with the satellite service asked, "Don't you want to know what is going on locally?"
Her neighbor responded, "Our local channels are from San Francisco, and I don't my kids being brainwashed with local Gay agenda!"
I would like to see Congress allow us to use E coast or Midwest Broadcasts to watch what few network shows we watch on Dish. That way we could watch them early and go to bed. These are a handful of shows: Navy CSI, Joan of Arcadia and Jag, which seems to be jumping the PC shark again. Then our local channels from Gay Frisco would not receive any money from us.
"When we revisit the state in 20 years, the picture may be entirely different."
It will take at least that long. The sad thing is that until recently, CA was a Republican state. Up to 1992, CA was almost always in the Republican column. A lot of Dems have moved to the urban counties from out of state. Because counties like Santa Clara, San Mateo, Contra Costa, Sonoma and Alameda are still experiencing job growth, these counties continue to grow in population which will make it very difficult for future Republican candidates. Also, many Californians are moving to ID, NV, AZ, NM and other mountain states which drains the state of conservatives.
Liberalism in a nutshell!
So these are the "rural" areas upon which the Legacy Media harps. Suburban subdivisions. You'd have thunk it was overall wearing, plow driving, turnip truck riding hayseeds providing Bush with this outsize margins in these "rural" counties.
Is there a link and story with that interesting Graphic?
The power of spinning blow away by the facts!
Is there a link and story with that interesting Graphic?
It is from a rather long research type paper on welfare. Here is a summary:
The actual paper can be linked through it. Here are some more relevent excerpts - regarding Georgia in the above preposted graph - atlanta georigia is home to the largest black middle class in America:
Colbert King doesn't say where he got his data from, but just from this raw data I found here it is clear that, at minimum, more African Americans are on Welfare in New York and California then in any southern state. The greatest percentage of African Americans on Welfare is in the District of Colombia. His attempt to disparage the south, an area which, despite being historically poorer, has lower percentages of it's children on welfare and is becoming a growing bastion of African American prosperity (probably for this reason) and then to link this to the Confederacy shows complete ignorance. Even if the Southern States had higher percentages of African Americans on their welfare rolls than the national average (which might indeed be the case) then these states have the most to gain - not loose- from Welfare Reform!
I wonder what Colbert King would think of blackenterprise.com's analysis (170):
Survey respondents placed a high priority on income earnings potential, cost of living, housing prices, and entrepreneurial opportunities. When BE first published this list in 2001, four of the top 10 cities were in the South. This year seven out of 10 are below the Mason-Dixon Line. Five out of 10 have a black mayor, and all have a black population of at least 25%.
Atlanta, Georgia, ranks as the No. 1 city for African Americans, driven primarily by entrepreneurial opportunities, earnings potential, and cultural activities. Future job growth is strong at 23%, and Atlanta is home to a high number of black-owned businesses. African Americans make up 61% of Atlantas population. (170)
Colbert King is only right about one thing: that African Americans would be the group most affected by Welfare Reform. What about other black leaders in and out of Congress? There must have been a curious alliance of African Americans, who traditionally vote 90% Democratic, and Republicans over the issue of Welfare Reform? Surely no African American leader would echo the Democrat party line against progress for their own people and constituents? African American leaders must have experienced the scourge of Welfare firsthand in their districts and be absolutely livid at the poverty and family dissolution that accompanied Welfare dependency?
Sadly, the exact opposite occurred. Mainstream African American leaders fought in favor of the continued subjugation of their own people. Again, this is how dangerous some of the ideas of liberalism are. It can brainwash even the leaders of the very people who have had welfare stomped on them for over 60 years, to the point where even their caring, educated standard bearers don't believe in the strength and competence of their own people. These African American leaders believed that poorer African Americans needed government help to fight their way out of poverty - that they would be unable to do it themselves. Caught up in their condescending compassion, they could not bring themselves to believe that the very help that they fought to bring their constituents, was the hopelessness and despair they sought to alleviate.
This fringe suburbia thing has been going on since rocks cooled. It is NOT a new phenomena. You see, younger families like to move to new neighborhoods, with have lots of other parents with young children, and cheaper housing, and decent schools. That element tends these days to be very conservative in general, but then it always was right of center. The ring of new neighborhoods just keeps moving out from the center, like the rings of a tree.
Wait around a while, and JAG & Navy CSI will be on A&E, SpikeTV, or someother satellite/cable channel.
The numbers look particularly startling in mid-sized metro areas such as Charlotte and Nashville, which until fairly recently had the bulk of their suburban growth contained in the same county as the center city. Extreme southeastern (and suburban) Mecklenburg County, of which Charlotte is the seat, voted for President Bush by 60 to 70% margins. But those numbers were obscured to all but political junkies by inner city returns which tipped Mecklenburg as a whole to Kerry.
To those who hadn't been paying close attention, the percentages, especially when considered along with the explosive growth, of places such as Union County, are rather eye-popping.
It's not just politics, but demographics in general: I don't think the exurbs have been getting their due. In the Charlotte area, and I'm sure elsewhere, we're being bombarded by press praise of "new urbanism," the "back to the city" movement, and the supposed benefits of mass transit (rail in particular) and the high density zoning which accompanies it. Problem is (though one rarely sees it reported, at least in the Charlotte Observer), folks aren't buying it. The pejorative "sprawl" is invariably used when it is mentioned. To the urbanists, one acre-plus lots, old oak and beech trees, red-tailed hawks, deer, neighborhood schools, low property taxes, and solidly GOP voting patterns are some sort of sin. God, I hate it for them...
Yep. The figure I look at (and the only one worth looking at) is the trend in larger metro areas as a whole, including fringe areas. Bush got pounded in those in 2000 north of the Mason Dixon line in general, except Cincinnati, which is full of folks from the Appalacians, who brought their retro beliefs with them, the two fat belt metro areas, the Twin Cities and Milwaukee, and Indianapolis. Bush did better in 2004, in general, although not in the Philly metro area, and not much better in the Chicago area, and slid back a bit in the Twin Cities.
Phoenix is in Maricopa and Tucson is in Pima, Pinal is sort of between
Pima County always goes pretty heavily Democrat. I don't know why--perhaps the influence of the U of A.
My wife feels that they would be good PAX shows.
The Times-Standard carried the vote breakdown last week. I will try to post it.The Arcata council has a majority Green party make up...
Bush 44637 - 59.14% Bush 58854 - 62.79%
Gore 28780 - 38.13% Kerry 33980 - 36.26%
Difference - 15857, 24874
Livingston is between Flint and Ann Arbor, and between Detroit and Lansing. Fastest Growing county in the state.
LAPEER COUNTY Bush 20351 - 54.66% Bush 25555 - 57.89%
Gore 15749 - 42.30% Kerry 18084 - 40.97%
Difference - 4602, 7471
Lapeer is the exurbs of Flint to the West, and also of Oakland County to the South. Rapidly going Republican. Used to have a democrat state rep.
SHIAWASSEE COUNTY (Has a 20 year dem state rep till 98)
Bush 15816 - 49.09% Bush 19405 - 52.94%
Gore 15520 - 48.17% Kerry 16881 - 46.05%
Difference - 296, 2524
Shiawassee has a dem tradtion(20 year state rep), and has been a swing county the last few elections. I think that's starting to break our way. The dems couldn't win the open state rep seat in the last race. Between Lansing and Flint.
ST CLAIR COUNTY (Historic Ticket Splitters)
Bush 33571 - 49.00% Bush 42739 - 53.60%
Gore 33002 - 48.17% Kerry 36174 - 45.36%
Difference - 569, 6565
St Clair is North of Macomb. Port Huron is a core city there and leans dem, but the fast growing areas are more Republican.
Both Wine Counties are in the same situation.
The rats don't even admit to being rats when they run for the city council. That has been part of their taking control plan for the past two decades.
Part of the problem are the left wing colleges and universities which attract and hold rats in our areas. Then we throw in left wing newspapers and the Gay Frisco TV channels, the result is 24/7/365 spewing of the left wing PC agendas.
From what I gathered after the election, California is the only state that actually went even more blue. Every other blue state voted less blue in 2004 than it did in 2000.
Why would one suppoese California turned even bluer, and bucked the trend? I've read that California is losing around 1 million+ Anglos annually.
I'm fairly certain, Vermont did as well. New Hampshire also flipped.
Well, then there now - get 'em all separated out and then give that Pacific Plate a good shake - and "Red" California will be on the coast...
sounds like a good plan for separating the wheat from the chaff?
Here's the list of the 100 fastest-growing counties from April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2003 (the last date for which the Census Bureau has an estimate): http://www.census.gov/popest/counties/CO-EST2003-09.html
I wanted to see which were the 3 counties that were among the 100 fastest growing but which voted for Senator Kerry over President Bush, and I must say that the answer makes it even more apparent that the GOP owns the exurbs. The 3 fastest-growing Kerry counties were:
Clark County, NV (#53 on the list): Clark County gave Kerry 51.7% of the vote, largely due to the fact that Las Vegas and some of its inner-ring suburbs (such as heavily black North Las Vegas) are in Clark County, but the fast-growing parts of the county vote Republican. If Clark County was split into three or four normal-sized counties instead of being a county that comprises 70% of Nevada's total population, only the inner-city county would have voted for Kerry.
Nantucket County, MA (#86 on the list): Nantucket County made the list because its small population grew by 1,204 people in the 3+ years in question, from 9,520 to 10,724. It is by no means an exurban county, and its growth comes from an increase in wealthy resort denizens who have chosen to make their "cottages" their primary home.
Chatham County, NC (#100 on the list): Chatham County is the only true exurban county carried by Kerry among the 100 fastest growing, but it is the exception that proves the rule, since (i) it barely made the list of the fastest-growing counties, (ii) a large chunk of its population growth came from Hispanic immigrants who moved there to work in the poultry industry, and most of them are not U.S. citizens and thus unable to vote, and (iii) Kerry's unofficial winning margin in the county was 5 votes, and it is quite possible that when they add all of the absentee votes to the official numbers it will turn out that President Bush actually carried the county in 2004.
So stating that in 2004 President Bush carried 97 of the 100 fastest-growing counties in America actually underestimates President Bush's dominance in fast-growing communities.
That is really good news. We should add the the Hispanic populations moving in that are not citizens and not allowed to vote, but may do so illegally. Ask Bob Doran about illegals voting...
Well, after the 2010 census, the red states may pick up 10+_ EV's from the blues after reapportionment..
Its been my experience in NY and NJ that its the Hispanic Evagelicals who are conservative. Most younger Hispanic "Catholics" (I'm talking about the PRs and Dominicans) don't attend Church and are far from conservative.
Chatham went to Gore as well. It's 17% black and about 10% Latino. (As of 2000)
Clark is 20% Latino and 9% black overall. (37% and 19% in North LV, 23% and 10% in Vegas itself)
dude, hopefully you're writing down some of your other observances and thoughts. at the rate we're loosing liberal journalists now, we're going to need some replacements.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.