End of the Wisconsin Idea
Before starting this post (which won’t interest most people) let me just reiterate that the big question going forward is whether Trump will govern as a populist or a GOP supply-sider. The markets clearly expect the latter–they think he conned the blue-collar workers to get their votes. Since I’ve been wrong about Trump before, I won’t offer an opinion—just wait and see. Perhaps the funniest and most clueless headline I saw today is that markets are rising because they expect “infrastructure”. Will Keynesians ever give up? Like infrastructure is going to drive biotech 10% higher in 2 days. And that’s not even accounting for monetary offset.
The “Wisconsin Idea” is a progressive strand of politics that is usually attributed to immigrants from Germany and Scandinavia. Wisconsin was deeply involved in the progressive movement of the early 20th century (La Follette, etc.), and pioneered legislation like unemployment insurance. We abolished the death penalty 100 years before less civilized places like Britain and France. But in recent years the Wisconsin idea has been fading, and now I think it’s effectively gone. This election was the final nail in the coffin.
The story can be told in maps. Four years ago I did a post on the “Driftless Area”, where Wisconsin, Illinois, Iowa and Minnesota all meet up. It was the one white, rural agricultural area of the country that stayed blue, as other rural regions went for Romney:
Brian Donohue sent me a map showing counties that switched from blue to red in this election:
You can see that the Driftless Area stands out as moving to the GOP, delivering states like Iowa and Wisconsin to Trump.
BTW, don’t be fooled by the other blue rural areas on the first map, they are generally special cases, reflecting Indian reservations in the southwest, Hispanic areas on the Texas/Mexico border, the black belt along the ancient SE coastline of America, and the mining belt of northern Minnesota, etc.
The transformation of the GOP into the rural party and the Dems into the urban party is now almost complete. The suburbs are split, with suburbs in the more highly educated areas trending blue, and working class suburbs moving red.
Thomas Frank should write a book “What’s the Matter with White America”, as both the rich and poor (white) regions seem to be voting against their interests. (I’m not convinced by that hypothesis, I’m just saying that if you believe it, it applies to far more than Kansas.)
FYI, here is a map of the Driftless Area:
Tags:
10. November 2016 at 08:15
Interesting.
Re: infrastructure: Trump promised $1T in infrastructure spending, right?
WOW!!! I can only imagine how enraged that’s going to make the Tea Party (which will surely be born anew). Come Feb, 2017, there’ll be tri-cornered hats and Gadsten flags EVERYWHERE. Because we all know that … uh… “spending” is what the Tea Party was always about, right?
10. November 2016 at 08:52
Surely the more pressing question than whether trump is a populist or supplysider is whether trump will use the executive power in accord with the rule of law and decency, which would be contrary to everything he implied during the election.
10. November 2016 at 08:57
Vermont is the last remaining “Driftless Area”; the only rural white area that is still heavily progressive. And the spillover across the Connecticut River is the only thing keeping New Hampshire blue.
10. November 2016 at 09:03
“The markets clearly expect the latter–they think he conned the blue-collar workers to get their votes.”
Yes it seems that way, given the impression that Ryan, Pence, and McConnell will be the ones in charge of writing policy while Trump kicks backs and relaxes.
Lots of wildcards though. Maybe Trump will beat up on Yellen to Weimar-ize fiscal stimulus, which will implicitly tax capital.
Also possible Trump will make overtures to the Bernie voters and support bigger subsidies for health care. Maybe this would complete the transition and Trump-ize Vermont???
It’s going to be interesting to see if Trump cracks Republican heads, or lets the GOPe run the show.
10. November 2016 at 09:15
“The transformation of the GOP into the rural party and the Dems into the urban party is now almost complete.”
Good point. I don’t think enough commenters are focusing on this as the transition.
10. November 2016 at 10:02
Scott,
I’m with you on the impossibility of predicting what Trump will do, but I can’t help but think he will treat infrastructure as a vanity project, much like dictators do, and that he will want a plan to match the size of his ego.
It’s incredible to me that the Trump supporters want what will be the largest Keynesian program since FDR, assuming he follows through, but couldn’t condemn Obama’s stimulus plan enough, even in the midst of the worst downturn since the Great Depression.
The incoherence seems amazing, until it’s considered that almost no one votes based on consideration of numbers and highly developed policy ideas. They vote for people they like, trust, and who seem similar to them. They also vote for people who seem to like them in return. That’s the primary reason Hillary lost.
I was always amazed as a young stockbroker when about 8 out of 10 people would give me their money without ever asking about performance or fees.
It goes to primitive social judgement heuristics. People more similar, and who you think have affection for you are more likely to have common interests, and hence less likely to screw you.
10. November 2016 at 11:48
We’re becoming increasingly urban as a country. Per capita government spending is greater in rural areas than urban areas. Two of the last five presidential elections were decided by the electoral vote and not the popular vote.
It argues for two things to happen which seem to be happening:
– The rural party to continue outperforming their national popularity in presidential elections.
– The urban party to try hard to switch us from an electoral college to a popular vote for the presidency.
It argues for two things which are not happening:
– The urban party to turn more fiscally conservative.
– The rural party to turn more fiscally socialist.
I guess the cultural conservatism of the rural voter is simply outweighing financial interests for the time being. And the fiscally conservative city dweller is turned off by the cultural conservatism of the rural voter.
The Republicans will not be able to attract the fiscally conservative urbanite without risking their electoral college “trump” card.
Based on this extremely simplified model(e.g. it doesn’t include urban blue collar workers trending Republican), the best hope for a libertarian tilt to the Republican party would come from the Democrats’ successful nationalization of presidential elections.
10. November 2016 at 11:54
OK Scott, just stop the needling… you got more to own.
1. Tom et al… expect the $1T Infrastructure to come with repeal of Davis-Bacon and EPA fast-track. Maybe more aggressive… EPA has to provide ways to get to yes in 90 days.
2. Towards 1, if in fact Treasury is run by RE guy – HOW GREAT IS THAT? Imagine treasury YELLING at EPA and Congress to cut regs.
3. Towards Trump’s states… #1, should be provide tons of $12hr jobs to low skill men of any race. but HOPEFULLY Trump can figure out a way to put finger on scale for black populations: SOUTH + RUST BELT if trump can get 30% of black vote in he states in 2020 he is a LOCK.
4. Day 1, MX is ready to make sure more of NAFTA benefits flows to US. Thats means Mexico opening their markets up WIDE…
https://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/World/2016/Nov-10/380652-mexico-says-ready-to-modernize-nafta-with-trump.ashx
Scott, it’s time for you to start cheering Mexico adopt Property Rights and let American capital flow down there to buy and own their beaches.
Is it simply not being an entrepreneur that make you not see #newFlorida clearly?
I don’t get it… NGDP is not on table, you promote it. You could CHAMPION #NewFlorida – is there something I’m missing?
Remember that part of Thiel’s speech you missed? This can be your real mea culpa!
10. November 2016 at 12:03
This all also likely applies to the Iron Range in north central Minnesota too.
That said, I’m not sure yet whether this is a permanent shift to the GOP or a special apply of Trump’s racism and xenophobia to white, isolated areas. May that explicit racism and xenophobia will become a GOP staple, but it hasn’t in the past.
10. November 2016 at 12:06
Good post. Trumps $1T over 10 years more focused than Obamas plan that had little infrastructure and lots payments to people and states. Trump claims it will be deficit neutral through some magic public/private partnership. That kind of spending for such a long period might produce items that actually improve productivity. If nothing else, it should make it look like government can get things done. In the meantime deregulation and energy production can boost GDP.
Trump just needs to end ethanol mandates, so corn prices drop. Cheap energy/MtnDew/Doritos and legalized pot–millennial males will rejoice!
10. November 2016 at 12:25
Yes, biotech stocks are up, but the elites had it coming. Serves them right for their arrogance.
10. November 2016 at 12:33
Not that it outweighs my dissapointment…but I’m relly excited about how conservatism is going to own the slow motion train wreck that will be the unified republican government… pretty sick. right ?
It’s kinda like Schadenfreude.
Is there a German word for shameful excitement…? One of the neo-fascists around here should know…right ? j
10. November 2016 at 12:36
Morgan says. “…it’s time for you to start cheering Mexico adopt Property Rights and let American capital flow down there to buy and own their beaches.”
I’m all for that…just as soon as we let labor flow as freely as capital…It would be one of the single best things we could do for both our economies…
10. November 2016 at 12:41
Clinton won poor urban white males…
So more fuel for the… “The transformation of the GOP into the rural party and the Dems into the urban party is now almost complete. ” ….fire.
10. November 2016 at 13:07
Hi Scott … Nothing is going to make sense unless one accepts that whites are catching on to the “anti-racist” scam. Whites’ “interest” is in … defending white interests against lefties who use anti-racism as a tactic to siphon off political, economic and social capital from those who produced it.
This is so obvious even the Wisconsinites see it now!
10. November 2016 at 13:22
Kgaard is a living justification for left-wing identity politics.
10. November 2016 at 13:32
Just as a reminder, richer demographics voted GOP again this election. Trump won all the income brackets above $40k or so, all the way and including $250k and above; while Hillary won big the lower income brackets.
So I would be careful in drawing an urban vs rural divide here. Unless “urban” means low-income low-educated ghettos.
The divide seems to be still in terms of income and SES: GOP still wins more educated and more affluent people.
Sure, Trump was able to turn a portion of the electorate towards the GOP, but this is different from assuming some shift in the underlying party support.
10. November 2016 at 13:39
@Bill Ellis
I think what you got is just “Weltschmerz” and “Himmelhoch jauchzend, zu Tode betrübt”, because the election did not turn out as you wanted it to. Or in English: You are extremely butthurt.
10. November 2016 at 14:13
Scott Freelander … Think about what you just said. It is a self-reinforcing dynamic that will result in white ethnic cleansing. Did you see the Tim Kaine speech Monday? It was all about Latino pride in the fact that America was soon to become a non-white majority country. Kaine promised to naturalize all 11m illegals plus basically open the border with Mexico. What is THAT other than a race strategy by the democrats? This is the hypocritical standard that white Americans have said “enough” to.
10. November 2016 at 14:19
Trump would probably prefer to govern as a populist, but Congress already hates him, his popular vote loss leaves him without a mandate. and he has little base of support outside of his own campaign anyway.
Really, if he doesn’t nuke anyone, his election is probably a big win for the hated GOP establishment because they still control Congress. Had Congress gone Democrat we’d probably already be bankrupt two days after his election 🙂
10. November 2016 at 14:23
BTW, this is a major reason why American democracy has avoided many of the problems in Europe and elsewhere — our system is designed to thwart populists by dividing power between competing groups. Trump’s election doesn’t bring with him a whole new slate of legislators who are his people, unlike a parliamentary system.
10. November 2016 at 14:39
“Scott Freelander … Think about what you just said. It is a self-reinforcing dynamic that will result in white ethnic cleansing. Did you see the Tim Kaine speech Monday? It was all about Latino pride in the fact that America was soon to become a non-white majority country. Kaine promised to naturalize all 11m illegals plus basically open the border with Mexico. What is THAT other than a race strategy by the democrats? This is the hypocritical standard that white Americans have said “enough” to.”
Pretty much this is what the election was about. The Dem strategy was to alienate 75% of the electorate by telling them that they are irrelevant, and the Dems will do everything in their power to change the demographics of this country. Identity politics at its basest.
But then they claim that Trump’s supporters are the racist ones. People don’t respond to tell to a party that has such contempt for them. Who would have guessed?
Funny enough, they got less Hispanics or blacks to support their identity politics this time around, despite tailoring their entire campaign around race and identity.
10. November 2016 at 14:47
Something people might be missing: the GOP has out-performed Trump. Virtually every Senate candidate ran ahead of Trump. In the popular vote for Congress, the GOP right now has a 5% advantage.
I’m inclined to believe a different Republican nominee would win by a far larger margin than Trump.
And this wasn’t a seismic shift – it’s a continuation of what was apparent in midterms but Obama great self-promoting skills had hidden. Actually, this is exactly how Scott Walker won re-election after re-election in Wisconsin in spite of sky high Democrat turnout in Madison/Milwaukee.
10. November 2016 at 14:50
–“I saw today is that markets are rising because they expect “infrastructure”. Will Keynesians ever give up? Like infrastructure is going to drive biotech 10% higher in 2 days. And that’s not even accounting for monetary offset.”–
Trump wants to lower business taxes (meaning a potentially substantial boost to corporate net income) and reduce regulation (bank stocks surged much like biotech did). The guy who attributed it all to infrastructure spending is being lazy.
–“But in recent years the Wisconsin idea has been fading, and now I think it’s effectively gone. This election was the final nail in the coffin.”–
I’m not sure it’s gone. Trump isn’t a traditional conservative politician. On many issues he takes a relatively leftist position, including:
– Infrastructure spending
– Pro-LGBT (on a personal basis, yes I agree a Democrat wouldn’t have picked Mike Pence)
– Trade (closer to the Bernie Sanders wing of the party)
– Against entitlement cuts
– Raising the minimum wage (to $10)
– Family leave plan
On the conservative side, he has the following (though it’s not clear how committed he is to all of these):
– Marginal tax rates
– Gun rights
– Cutting regulation
– Law and order
– Immigration (though his emphasis is on fighting illegal immigration, he’s hardly a nativist)
– Pro-life
– Religious freedom
His particular mix of left and right wing policies might well appeal to people in the driftless area who lean liberal but maybe like guns and also, perhaps, take Bernie’s view on trade. Hillary Clinton’s personal corruption and cozyness with Wall Street might well have put off voters who would have readily flocked to Bernie had he been the nominee.
10. November 2016 at 15:21
Kgaard,
Just curious, this white (me) dates a black woman. In your opinion is that a problem for me or my “white interests” or white interests in general?
Would your answer change if she were Asian? Hispanic?
10. November 2016 at 15:23
You’re assuming people voted for Trump because of any policies he professed during the campaign.
It could just as easily be attributed to people voting against Hillary Clinton and the Dem’s platform of alienating 75% of this country’s population. The Dems just found out what the limits of their racial-based identity politics are.
Those voters would not have gone for Bernie. Bernie is far more extreme on racial-based identity politics than Hillary. He would have lost in a landslide.
That being said, Generic Republican would have won even more than Trump against Hillary.
10. November 2016 at 15:24
“Kgaard,
Just curious, this white (me) dates a black woman. In your opinion is that a problem for me or my “white interests” or white interests in general?
Would your answer change if she were Asian? Hispanic?”
A non sequitor from his point. Nice try though.
10. November 2016 at 15:27
AIG I’m part of that 75%. I didn’t notice or feel any contempt directed at me from the Dems. I’m not the only one either. In your opinion why do you suppose some of us whites feel that contempt you speak of and others don’t?
10. November 2016 at 15:32
Nice try? What is it you think I’m trying to do?
10. November 2016 at 15:45
Scott Freelander, AIG, you’re missing the point. ‘Anti-racist’ is NOT in fact “a code-word for anti-white” as some people like to say, but anyone who engages in so-called ‘identity politics’ – of which there are many on the left – is in fact behaving as if it was exactly that. This was a non-trivial factor in the present campaign, and Kgaard has a point as far as that goes.
10. November 2016 at 16:15
The good news is…and also the bad news…
“Donald Trump was an unconventional candidate, but now that he’s been elected president he’s assembling a fairly conventional Cabinet of key economic advisers plucked right from the Republican mainstream, the Fox Business Network has learned.”
Conventional GOP policies probably. The biggest remaining question is monetary policy.
Reagan appointed three money-easers to the Fed Board in an effort to outflank Volcker. They famously outvoted Volcker one day only to have Volcker threaten to quit.
Volcker was huge then so the trio backed down, probably on White House orders.
I sense Trimp won’t care if Yellen quits.
Time for the Mercatus Center to visit the Oval Office?
10. November 2016 at 16:19
Christian List…..
very funny
True… when you win the popular vote but lose the election….that totally feels like getting butt raped… and that hurts…
But that makes the need for redemption all the more important…
IT HURTS LIKE F”N HELL !!!! It’s not something people will forget…
And that means that it’s on 24 /7…Election season never ends now….and NEVER in our history will more Americans want their president’s policies to fail…
Trumpers talked real big… Now We are going to plaster Trump’s name over everything that happens…. What will “trump care” look like ? ” “What the fuck is Trumponomics ? ” What will be the First Trumpgazi ?
It would have been better fro the right if trump had lost… You needed to redefine yourselfs… Now Trump and the T party IS YOU…hahahaha…
We need to redefine ourselves too… But our messed up left wing Ideas would have made a better transition to where we will end up…Trump just sets us back…years ? decades ?
Honestly….It feels great not to have to own any of it anymore…Its all on the conservatives…
I CAN”T WAIT FOR THE COMMING TRUMPOPIA !!!
10. November 2016 at 17:41
“We abolished the death penalty 100 years before less civilized places like Britain and France.”
So what? We abolished it de facto in the 1860s and de jure in 1891 and no one hears me gloating about it. We overthrew two Emperors and never occured to us shoot them or behead them as the English, the French and the Russians did/would do.
10. November 2016 at 18:45
“True… when you win the popular vote but lose the election….that totally feels like getting butt raped… and that hurts…”–Bill Ellis
I would probably not use such blue language, but I would add that probably both major orifices (or all three for women) are violently and forcibly penetrated when the popular vote is subverted.
I will assume that is painful and humiliating, but I cannot speak from experience.
Major Freedom and Art Deco may offer some more experienced insights.
BTW, I am more open-minded to Trump than most of the commenters here. He lost my support through consistently erratic behavior and commentary. He lacks gravitas, perhaps like a helium balloon in a light zephyr.
Still, it is demented that the “winner” is the loser in the popular vote column.
10. November 2016 at 19:26
Here’s my broad look at the primary and general election results in the rust belt -2016 and 2012.
https://goo.gl/DSGWGQ
Apparently, maize agriculture is desirous of protection of industry and some kind of populism, and, just like I do, saw $hillary exactly the same way I saw Willard Sh*t Rmoney.
10. November 2016 at 19:39
maize agriculture is desirous of protection of industry–Harding.
Well, duh. Most of our nation’s corn goes into the federally mandated and subsidized corn ethanol program.
Not a popular topic in right-wing circles. Like property zoning. Much more fun to talk about the minimum wage.
10. November 2016 at 19:44
The most amazing fact of Sumner’s map is this: while we all know Michigan is shaped like a hand, and Detroit is in the Eastern Time Zone, how many of you that’s never lived in MI (as I haven’t) knew that Michigan wraps around one of the Great Lakes and ends up stealing Wisconsin’s land?! That’s incredible. In fact the most incredible part of the post.
As for the rest of the post: lots of speculation, learned name dropping, and the infamous “monetary offset” offhand phrase by Sumner. What dat? Bogus metaphysics that has no basis in reality, see: http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2014/01/16/full_monetary_offset_fed_officials_say_it_s_not_there.html
It’s hard to even find in Google what “monetary offset” means, except the vague belief in strong money neutrality that can somehow magically affect AG, AS, notwithstanding the evidence (FAVAR, Bernanke et al, 2002) that the Fed only has a 3.2% to 13.2% effect on real variables using monetary policy. In short, “monetary offset” is like the Loch Ness monster or Big Foot. True believers believe they exist, but there’s no evidence.
10. November 2016 at 20:05
Don, Trump is not trying to boost economic efficiency, so why would he end ethanol subsidies (I hope I’m wrong).
Bill, Thank God Trump’s not a Libertarian, at least we’ll escape blame for this big government fiasco.
AIG, I said Hillary won all the rich cities. Places like DC and the Bay Area are the richest parts of America, and they went overwhelmingly Democratic. There’s a difference between cities and individuals.
Ray, And so you didn’t even know about the UP? I guess geography is also your weak suit. What isn’t?
10. November 2016 at 20:32
Scott,
Any comment on Lars Christensen’s post “Make America Keynesian Again” (https://marketmonetarist.com/2016/11/09/make-america-keynesian-again/)?
10. November 2016 at 20:33
Ray Woepez:
Oh dear. You see, sometimes political jurisdictions hop over water and even land.
Do you know the history of Bangladesh? Remember George Harrison (Beatles) trying to save Bengalis? With his guitar and meaningful lyrics?
I do not know much about Greece. Are all those islands little states?
10. November 2016 at 20:35
“I hope I’m wrong”
-Literally every presidential candidate except Cruz and Paul supported continuing ethanol subsidies. And, ultimately, that’s what won Trump the election.
10. November 2016 at 22:35
Is it my imagination, or has Donald Trump morphed from Adolf Hitler to Ronald Reagan in just a few days (at least on the broadly defined center-right- to right)?
“Shares of independent broker-dealers, wirehouses get boost from Trump victory”
Mario Gabelli, Gabelli Asset fund
“Trump will have to deal with certain fundamental issues: infrastructure, student loans, income equality, corporate taxes. But both Trump and Clinton were talking about infrastrucuture, so you wanted to own anything to do with infrastructure. And we knew there would be a rebuilding of the military, so we added in that area.”
I have to say, Americans, including orthodox macroeconomists and money managers, suffer from innumeracy.
The US spends $1 trillion a year on “national security.” We spend now doubt what Reagan spent, and in real terms.
So Trump’s $1 trillion infrastructure programs is a waste?
I would prefer a reverse ratio. $8 trillion on infrastructure in the Trump years and $1 trillion on “national security.”
No one will invade the US anyway, and we might have clean air, and clean water, pleasant urban transportation systems, and airports better than 3rd World nations.
Yes, such a level of infrastructure spending would be wasteful. But in classic macroeconomic terms, less wasteful than the “national security” spending.
Sheesh, the Los Angeles River alone could soak up $5 billion in improvements. Maybe $10 billion.
11. November 2016 at 01:03
Bill Ellis said: “Not that it outweighs my disappointment…but I’m really excited about how conservatism is going to own the slow motion train wreck that will be the unified republican government… pretty sick. right ?
It’s kinda like Schadenfreude.”
I feel a bit same way, I mean it will be funny to again see that it’s actually GOP that’s the big government/deficit party (as we’ve seen many many times before). It will also be slightly funny to see GOP leaders try to justify that (they will blame Obama and also they’ve never been at war with Eurasia).
(of course none of this will actually be funny as Trump administration will be a global tragedy)
11. November 2016 at 03:06
Stanley Druckenmiller says loose monetary policy helped elect Donald Trump
CNBC.com
The Federal Reserve’s loose monetary policy helped Donald Trump win the presidential election, billionaire investor Stanley Druckenmiller told CNBC on Thursday.
“It was just a small part of it, but of course it did,” Druckenmiller said on “Squawk Box.” “Because it caused a massive reallocation of wealth from what I would call the middle class to people like me.”
—30—
I guess anybody can say anything.
11. November 2016 at 06:09
Anand, I already did a post on it.
Ben, You said:
“Is it my imagination, or has Donald Trump morphed from Adolf Hitler to Ronald Reagan in just a few days (at least on the broadly defined center-right- to right)?”
He was nothing like Hitler before the election, and he’s nothing like Reagan now. Reagan was actually someone who told us what he wanted to do.
Your comments on defense spending are totally wrong, we spent more under reagan, as a share of GDP. Also, Trump wants to raise defense spending. You really need to get the facts before commenting
11. November 2016 at 09:47
“AIG, I said Hillary won all the rich cities. Places like DC and the Bay Area are the richest parts of America, and they went overwhelmingly Democratic. There’s a difference between cities and individuals.”
This is another reason we need LVT + VAT instead of 16A…
Rich people grow liberal in markets where they have unearned rents created by population growth with increases in housing.
Inbreds (rich poodle kids) are the only kind of rational rich liberal…
IF you see a bunch of them that earn their money – FOR SURE they live ina place where their property values and rents they extract are always increasing.
11. November 2016 at 13:23
I can’t believe I’m defending Reagan here, because I never liked him, but it’s an insult to compare Trump to Reagan. Reagan, like every other President of which I’m aware, had far more smarts, decency, and self-control than Trump. Even Nixon had some decency compared to Trump, and as dangerous a crook and autocrat as he was, I would take him in a heartbeat over Trump.
11. November 2016 at 14:14
Scott, Yup.
12. November 2016 at 06:59
Maybe it’s just my parochialism showing (I grew up in Illinois and lived in Cleveland for a while), but it seems to me that voters in the Midwest care more about honesty in their politicians than voters in general do. Politicians running for statewide offices in Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin and Ohio seem to lie a bit less than pols in many other areas. Illinois is the exception, for whatever reason. I remember even as a kid that Illinois politics, and Chicago politics in particular, was pretty dirty.
At any rate, I suspect that at least one of the reasons those counties changed color was the overwhelming disgust with the dishonesty of Clinton. Yes, Trump is no angel either, but Hillary’s dishonesty has been in our face for 24 years now.
12. November 2016 at 08:03
I think that the voting patterns of the driftless area and the so-called Wisconsin idea are two separate topics.
Four years ago, when Mr. Sumner first raised the issue of driftless voting, I wrote a comment that I think still applies. At the risk of being accused of runaway vanity, I’ve copied my four-year-old comment below.
Basically, my view is that the driftless area’s population is a mix of local families and newcomers. The local families have been there for at least a hundred years. The area was never good for farming, and the local farming population has been going down for many years. The locals tend to vote Republican, but many were attracted to Obama’s message of hope and change. Looking back, these were probably votes of desperation, and this time, most of the desperate voted for Trump.
The newcomers are mostly from large and medium cities of the surrounding states, especially the Chicago area. This is a gentrification story, much like the one that gets told about Vermont. The newcomers are mostly very liberal/progressive. I’d guess that most of them liked Sanders and barely tolerated Hillary.
So, the locals were disappointed by Obama, and many voted for Trump. The newcomers were disappointed with Hillary, and fewer of them voted for her. The result is a red map.
To me, this sounds an awful lot like the shallow Trump tide that swept overs lots of other places, rather than the death of the “Wisconsin idea.”
COMMENT FROM FOUR YEARS AGO:
I don’t have the numbers at hand, but I’m an ex-geologist who grew up in Iowa, so I have some observations that aren’t entirely imaginary.
It’s already been noted that Rochester and the Quad Cities are on the edges of the driftless area, and have their own stories. For the rural part, this is a gentrification story.
The driftless area is very pretty country, and by Midwestern standards, the climate isn’t too bad. It was always poor land for farming, and earlier generations ran small hog and dairy farms. These were never very competitive, and don’t survive in large numbers. Starting in the 1960’s, back-to-the-land people started buying land and lived (some still living) a vaguely hippie lifestyle. Later migrants were more middle class, or even wealthy. They started B&B’s, organic dairy farms, organic apple orchards, goat farms, restaurants, etc. A few are artists and craftsmen. There are quite a few hobby farms. Most of these people have come from the Chicago area and are very liberal. A very small number of them are conservatives of the “crunchy con” sort.
Not all of the local people have left, but they are now called “the locals.” It’s the newcomers who swing votes to Democrats like Obama, but not necessarily to more old-fashioned local Democrats. For those with Midwestern myopia, think of New York and Vermont a generation earlier.
12. November 2016 at 22:42
[…] in this post Scott […]
13. November 2016 at 07:20
Jeff, You may well be right, but why can’t voters see that Trump is 10 times more dishonest than Hillary? Is he really that good a con man? Doesn’t seem that way to me. His lies seem almost laughable.
Cornflour, I’m pretty sure the Driftless area has been Democratic for a long time. But the new voters entering the area because of the scenery does make sense.
13. November 2016 at 11:06
Scott Sumner:
http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/index.html
That’s a link to some Democrat vs. Republican maps for Wisconsin. The data is for presidential elections back to 1856, but the maps and county data only go back to 1960. Data is also available for adjacent driftless counties in other states.
For each election, there’s a lot going on that maps don’t capture, but I don’t think that the maps of driftless counties support the position that the area has been Democratic for a long time, or that the “Wisconsin idea” is over. Your view may differ. Looks as if “further research is needed.”
13. November 2016 at 11:25
Cornflour, Thanks, I stand corrected. It clearly goes back only to 2000, and maybe to 1992, but not before. I should not have relied on memory.
I still think the Wisconsin Idea is ending, as seen in moves on issues such as right to work. It’s a very different state politically from when lived there. But the change is probably not linked to the Driftless Area in the way I assumed. A bigger factor may be the switch of industrial cities in the eastern part of the state away from the Democrats. Milwaukee is still Democratic, but other parts of eastern Wisconsin are pretty Republican now.
13. November 2016 at 11:26
Just to make clear, it’s different from 1988, when it was one of only ten states to support Dukakis. That now seems eons ago.
14. November 2016 at 12:18
If a lefty runs for WI Governor on a positive, populist platform (perhaps a tagline of #MWGA), they will likely win in 2018. The last 2 candidates the Dems have nominated for the governor’s race were quite uninspiring.
A pro-business, african american Democrat candidate would be interesting.
Although Baldwin winning in 2018 is going to be difficult if the Republicans come up with a decent candidate.
iow, I haven’t given up on a shade of blue for WI just yet.
14. November 2016 at 12:33
I can’t believe I’m defending Reagan here, because I never liked him, but it’s an insult to compare Trump to Reagan. Reagan, like every other President of which I’m aware, had far more smarts, decency, and self-control than Trump. Even Nixon had some decency compared to Trump, and as dangerous a crook and autocrat as he was, I would take him in a heartbeat over Trump.
Nixon was never an autocrat, nor was he a crook (bar taking a set of tax deductions he did not merit). Nor was he indecent in any sphere bar a corner of his professional life. Nixon’s problem was a certain vindictiveness conjoined to managerial incompetence. He ended up with a rogues gallery working for him (John Ehrlichman more than any other) and then fertilized them. Truth be told, though, Lewis Fielding was likely the only innocent ever injured by Nixon’s minions.
I find it amusing that sumner acolytes fancy an unintelligent man can build and maintain a business which employs 22,000 people and has $9.5 bn in turnover every year.
26. December 2016 at 11:49
the Driftless Area is very White, as are most of the other Obama-to-Trump areas. Lesson for Democrats, as long as they stand as the “kill whitey” party, cheering the destruction of White demographics and insisting hate crimes against Whites can never happen, even moderate-to-liberal Whites will get fed up and say they’re done with you. By the way, the Iron Range will vote for Trump in 2020 if his first term is even somewhat accomplished.