1 The Political Geography of America's Purple States: Five Trends - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
1
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

1 The Political Geography of America's Purple States: Five Trends - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Dec 20, 2022 157 likes •683 views

1 The Political Geography of America's Purple States: Five Trends That Will Decide the 2008 Election William H. Frey and Ruy Teixeira October 10, 2008 National Press Club Five Trends that will Decide the 2008 Election 1. The Declining

slide-1
SLIDE 1

1

The Political Geography

  • f America's Purple States:

Five Trends That Will Decide the 2008 Election

William H. Frey and Ruy Teixeira October 10, 2008 National Press Club

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Five Trends that will Decide the 2008 Election

1. The Declining White Working Class: Still Central to Election Outcomes in Purple States 2. White College Graduates: Growing and Trending Democratic, Especially in Purple States 3. New Minority Voters: Particularly Important in Fast Growing Purple States 4. It’s the Metros, Stupid 5 Growing Areas are Mostly Trending Democratic

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Five Trends that will Decide the 2008 Election

1. The Declining White Working Class: Still Central to Election Outcomes in Purple States 2. White College Graduates: Growing and Trending Democratic, Especially in Purple States

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Size of Working Age White Working Class among Eligible Voters, 10 Purple States, 2006

54 52 50 49 44 42 40 39 38 25 10 20 30 40 50 60 OH MO MI PA NV CO VA AZ FL NM

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Change in White Working Class Share among Eligible Voters, 10 Purple States, 2000-2006

  • 5.7
  • 3.1
  • 2.9
  • 2.8
  • 2.6
  • 2.3
  • 2.2
  • 1.9
  • 1.4
  • 1.3
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1

NV AZ VA NM FL CO PA MI OH MO

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Size of Working Age White College Graduates among Eligible Voters, 10 Purple States, 2006

26 21 18 17 17 17 16 14 14 14 5 10 15 20 25 30 CO VA PA MO MI AZ OH NV FL NM

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Change in White College Graduates Share among Eligible Voters, 10 Purple States, 2000-2006

1.8 1.5 1.5 1.2 1 1 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 PA NV MI CO AZ OH VA FL MO NM

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Change in Democratic Margin, White Working Class Vs. White College Graduates, 1988-2004

  • 3

9 4 17 9 11 19 21

  • 5

5 10 15 20 25 National Purple States Ohio Florida WWC WCG

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Change in Democratic Margin, White Working Class Vs. White College Graduates, 2004-2008

7 9 3 13 18 17 12 14 4 8 12 16 20 National Purple States Ohio Florida WWC WCG

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Democratic Margin, 2004 and 2004-2008 Shift, White Working Class, Intermountain West Vs. Midwest

  • 27

16

  • 9

4

  • 30
  • 25
  • 20
  • 15
  • 10
  • 5

5 10 15 20 2004 Dem Margin 2004-2008 Shift in Margin Intermountain West Midwest

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Democratic Margin, 2004 and 2004-2008 Shift, White College Graduates, Intermountain West Vs. Midwest

  • 5

4

  • 17

14

  • 20
  • 15
  • 10
  • 5

5 10 15 20 2004 Dem Margin 2004-2008 Shift in Margin Intermountain West Midwest

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Change in Democratic Margin, Whites with Some College Vs White Working Class as a Whole, 1988-2004

  • 3

9 1 17

  • 5

5 10 15 20 National Purple States WWC WSC

slide-13
SLIDE 13

National Democratic Margins, Whites with Some College, 1988-2008

  • 26
  • 25
  • 8
  • 30
  • 25
  • 20
  • 15
  • 10
  • 5

1988 2004 2008

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Five Trends that will Decide the 2008 Election

  • 3. New Minority Voters: Particularly Important in

Fast Growing Purple States

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Size of Minorities among Eligible Voters, 10 Purple States, 2006

50 30 28 27 27 20 19 14 14 14 10 20 30 40 50 60 NM FL NV VA AZ CO MI OH MO PA

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Change in Minorities Share among Eligible Voters, 10 Purple States, 2000-2006

4.7 3.6 2.6 2.5 1.9 1.4 1.2 1.1 0.7 0.4 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 NV FL NM AZ VA PA MO CO OH MI

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Democratic Margins, Blacks and Hispanics, 2004 and 2008

77 19 87 38 20 40 60 80 100 Black Hispanic 2004 2008

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Fast-Growing States: Growth of Eligible Voters by Race, 2000-7

  • 5.0

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 N e v a d a A r i z

  • n

a C

  • l
  • r

a d

  • F

l

  • r

i d a N e w M e x i c

  • V

i r g i n i a Percent Change White Asian/Other Black Hispanic

27% 9% 12% 13% 20% 6%

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Fast-Growing States: Minority Shares of Eligible Voters, 2007

81% 74% 72% 71% 71% 51% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Colorado Virginia Nevada Florida Arizona New Mexico White Hispanic Black Asian Other

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Slow-Growing States: Minority Shares of Eligible Voters, 2007

87% 87% 86% 82% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Pennsylvania Ohio Missouri Michigan White Hispanic Black Asian Other

slide-21
SLIDE 21

47% 46% 35% 26% 25% 12% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Virginia New M exico Colorado Arizona Florida Nevada

Fast-Growing States: Percent of Eligible Voters Born in Same State

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Slow-Growing States: Percent of Eligible Voters Born in Same State

76% 74% 72% 62% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Pennsylvania Michigan Ohio Missouri

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Five Trends that will Decide the 2008 Election

  • 4. It’s the Metros, Stupid
  • 5. Growing Areas are Mostly Trending

Democratic

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Large Metro Shares of State Populations

Albuquerque 42% New Mexico Detroit 45% Michigan Philadelphia, Pittsburgh 45% Pennsylvania Cleveland, Columbus, Cinn. 48% Ohio Denver 51% Colorado

  • St. Louis, Kansas City

56% Missouri Miami, Tampa, Orlando 56% Florida Phoenix 66% Arizona DC, Va. Beach, Richmond 68% Virginia Las Vegas 72% Nevada

slide-25
SLIDE 25

SOUTH NORTHEAST NORTHWEST COLUMBUS SUBURBS CINCINNATI METRO CLEVELAND SUBURBS FRANKLIN CO. CUYAHOGA CO.

Dayton Toledo Akron Wheeling Parkersburg Canton Lima Huntington Mansfield Springfield Weirton Sandusky Youngstown

Counties

REGIONS

Metropolitan areas

Ohio Metropolitan Areas and Regions

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Cleveland 18% Columbus 16% Rest of State 66%

Cleveland and Columbus Share of Ohio Population, 2007

slide-27
SLIDE 27
  • 6.9

5.9 4.3 16.3

  • 10.0
  • 5.0

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 Cuyahoga Co Suburbs Franklin Co Suburbs Cleveland Columbus

Cleveland and Columbus Growth, 2000-7

slide-28
SLIDE 28

Eligible Voters: Key Demographic Groups

33 9 23 7 15 16 18 23 21 35 57 43 59 14 11 17 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Cuyahoga Co Suburbs Franklin Co Suburbs

White Working Class Whites Coll Grads Whites 65+ Minorities

Cleveland Columbus

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Change in Eligible Voters, 2000-2006

  • 20,000
  • 10,000

10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 Minorities Whites 65+ Whites Coll Grads White Working Class Cleveland Columbus

slide-30
SLIDE 30

SOUTH NORTHEAST NORTHWEST COLUMBUS SUBURBS CINCINNATI METRO CLEVELAND SUBURBS FRANKLIN CO. CUYAHOGA CO.

Republican Margin Increase 10%+ Republican Margin Increase up to 10% Democrat Margin Increase up to 10% Democrat Margin Increase 10%+

Change in Presidential Voting Margin by County, 1988-2004

slide-31
SLIDE 31

SOUTH NORTHEAST NORTHWEST COLUMBUS SUBURBS CINCINNATI METRO CLEVELAND SUBURBS FRANKLIN CO. CUYAHOGA CO.

4%+ Decline Up to 4% Decline Up to 6% Growth 6%+ Growth

Ohio Population Change by County, 2000-7

slide-32
SLIDE 32

Greeley Pueblo Grand Junction Fort Collins- Loveland

WEST EAST CENTRAL AND SOUTHEAST COLORADO SPRINGS DENVER INNER SUBURBS DENVER OUTER SUBURBS DENVER OUTER SUBURBS BOULDER DENVER

Metropolitan areas Counties

REGIONS

Colorado Metropolitan Areas and Regions

slide-33
SLIDE 33

Denver and Suburbs Share of Colorado Population, 2007

Denver City 12% Denver InnerSuburbs 31% Denver Outer Suburbs 8% Rest of State 49%

slide-34
SLIDE 34

5.8 9.3 41.2 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 Denver City Denver InnerSuburbs Denver Outer Suburbs

Denver and Suburbs Growth, 2000-2007

slide-35
SLIDE 35

Eligible Voters in Denver: Key Demographic Groups

37 22 10 11 13 9 28 22 24 43 40 41 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Denver City Denner InnerSuburbs Denver Outer Suburbs

White Working Class Whites Coll Grads Whites 65+ Minorities

slide-36
SLIDE 36

Denver, Change in Eligible Voters, 2000-2006

  • 20,000
  • 10,000

10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 Minorities Whites 65+ Whites Coll Grads White Working Class

Denver city Denver Inner Suburbs Denver Outer Suburbs

slide-37
SLIDE 37

WEST EAST CENTRAL AND SOUTHEAST COLORADO SPRINGS DENVER INNER SUBURBS DENVER OUTER SUBURBS DENVER OUTER SUBURBS BOULDER DENVER

Republican Margin Increase 10%+ Republican Margin Increase up to 10% Democrat Margin Increase up to 10% Democrat Margin Increase 10%+

Change in Presidential Voting Margin by County, 1988-2004

slide-38
SLIDE 38

WEST EAST CENTRAL AND SOUTHEAST COLORADO SPRINGS DENVER INNER SUBURBS DENVER OUTER SUBURBS DENVER OUTER SUBURBS BOULDER DENVER

Decline Up to 9% Growth 10% to 19% Growth 20%+ Growth

Colorado Population Growth by County, 2000-7

slide-39
SLIDE 39

SOUTH AND WEST VIRGINIA BEACH NORTHERN VIRGINIA RICHMOND AND EAST Richmond Lynchburg Roanoke Washington-Arlington- Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV Charlottesville Danville Kingsport-Bristol- Bristol, TN-VA Winchester, VA-WV Harrisonburg Blacksburg

Counties

REGIONS

Metropolitan areas

Virginia Metropolitan Areas and Regions

slide-40
SLIDE 40

15.0 4.7 9.9 4.2 0.0 4.0 8.0 12.0 16.0 Northern VA VA Beach Richmond- East West

Northern Virginia and Other VA Region Growth, 2000-7

slide-41
SLIDE 41

Eligible Voters: Key Demographic Groups

23 27 10 14 35 15 33 44 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Northern VA Rest of State White Working Class Whites Coll Grads Whites 65+ Minorities

slide-42
SLIDE 42

40,000 80,000 120,000 Minorities Whites 65+ Whites Coll Grads White Working Class

Change in Eligible Voters, Northern VA, 2000-06

slide-43
SLIDE 43

82% 76% 64% 45% 20 40 60 80 100 West Richmond-East VA Beach Northern VA

Percent Born in South, Eligible Voters (2007?)

slide-44
SLIDE 44

SOUTH AND WEST

VIRGINIA BEACH NORTHERN VIRGINIA RICHMOND AND EAST

Republican Margin Increase 10%+ Republican Margin Increase up to 10% Democrat Margin Increase up to 10% Democrat Margin Increase 10%+

Change in Presidential Voting Margin by County, 1988-2004

slide-45
SLIDE 45

SOUTH AND WEST VIRGINIA BEACH NORTHERN VIRGINIA RICHMOND AND EAST

Decline Up to 9% Growth 10% to 19% Growth 20%+ Growth

Population Change by County in Virginia, 2000-07

slide-46
SLIDE 46

Florida Metropolitan Areas and Regions

Orlando Ocala Jacksonville T allahassee Lakeland Gainesville Naples Tampa-

  • St. Petersburg

Pensacola Punta Gorda Sarasota Port

  • St. Lucie

Vero Beach Palm Bay Deltona- Daytona Beach Cape Coral- Fort Myers Panama City Fort Walton Beach NORTH SOUTH I-4 CORRIDOR MIAMI METRO

Counties

REGIONS

Metropolitan areas

slide-47
SLIDE 47

Miami 30% I-4 Corridor 36% Rest of State 34%

Miami and I-4 Corridor Share of Florida Population, 2007

slide-48
SLIDE 48

Miami and I-4 Corridor Growth, 2000-7

7.7 16.6 0.0 4.0 8.0 12.0 16.0 20.0 Miami I-4 Corridor

slide-49
SLIDE 49

Eligible Voters: Key Demographic Groups

50 24 15 19 13 15 22 42 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Miami I-4 Corridor White Working Class Whites Coll Grads Whites 65+ Minorities

slide-50
SLIDE 50

Change in Eligible Voters, 2000-6

  • 75,000

75,000 150,000 225,000 300,000 375,000 Minorities Whites 65+ Whites Coll Grads White Working Class

Miami Metro I-4 Corridor

slide-51
SLIDE 51

Population Change by County in Florida, 2000-07

NORTH SOUTH I-4 CORRIDOR MIAMI METRO

Decline Up to 9% Growth 10% to 19% Growth 20%+ Growth

slide-52
SLIDE 52

NORTH SOUTH I-4 CORRIDOR MIAMI METRO

Change in Presidential Voting Margin, 1988-2004

Republican Margin Increase 10%+ Republican Margin Increase up to 10% Democrat Margin Increase up to 10% Democrat Margin Increase 10%+