It seems plainly obvious to any politically engaged American that the nation is undergoing a geographic split. As urban areas and their college-educated suburban surroundings continue their drift towards the Democratic Party, so too do rural and exurban areas drift to the Republican Party. It seems ubiquitous. It seems…inevitable.
But things weren’t always this way. In fact, this trend of geographic polarization is rather recent, only having really started in the 1990s, with the 1994 midterm elections (commonly known as the “Republican Revolution”) being the starting point. But it wasn’t until the 2000s and especially 2010 that we see the familiar rural-area-equals-Republican and urban-area-equals-Democrat. For reference, here is a map of the 2008 US House of Representatives Election by county (made by me).
The 2008 US House of Representatives Election by county. This map was created by me using data from each state’s respective election commissions. (Note: the results in Alaska are approximate).
If one analyzes presidential elections, the familiar electoral trends started much earlier than 2010. But to fully grasp this change, down-ballot races must also reflect them. That’s where the House elections comes into play, and judging from the map above, there were plenty of rural (and majority white) areas that voted Democratic. Of particular note is of course the South, namely northern Florida, Tennessee, Arkansas, western North Carolina, and Mississippi. Outside the South, there are North and South Dakota, Utah, Missouri, Minnesota, and so much more.
The 2008 US Presidential Election map, where Sen. Barack Obama (D) defeated Sen. John McCain (R). Note the differences between this and the House of Representatives map, especially with ticket-splitting regions. Courtesy Inqvisitor and used under Creative Commons.
In the 2008 Congressional map, it also seems that the Democrats have won in heavily urban areas as well. For example, they won New York City, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and Dallas by large margins. But what is harder to notice is that the GOP won in numerous suburban areas, even in the 2008 rout. Examples include Orange County, CA, Loudoun County, VA, and Chester County right here in Pennsylvania. But as each party’s bases and platforms changed, thus too did the map. Here is the 2018 US House of Representatives Election by county map:
The 2018 US House of Representatives election by county. The nationalization of American politics and its ongoing trends can clearly be seen on this map, which look increasingly like presidential election maps. This map was also created by me, using data from each state’s election commission. (Note: Alaska reports their results weirdly, so take it with a grain of salt and just note that the incumbent representative won with just over 50% of the vote statewide).
The most obvious change is that the nation as a whole seemed to have gotten a whole lot more red. But of course, we recognize that those counties are mainly rural areas. But a significant amount of them aren’t necessarily rural, but are instead populated by white working-class people, such as Macomb County, MI, just north of Detroit, and in the northeast of Pennsylvania and Ohio. During the ensuing 10 years from 2008, these areas have also gotten noticeably redder, as they grow more receptive towards the socially conservative and populist tendencies of the Republican Party.
Conversely, the suburban areas surrounding major cities have drifted leftward. The aforementioned Orange, Loudoun, and Chester Counties all changed allegiances regarding the party of their Congresspeople. As younger, college-educated people – a strong member of the Democratic Party coalition – have moved into these areas, so have suburbs elected more Democrats, who are of a more moderate ideology than many of their more liberal members.
As the nation heads into uncertain times with a volatile political system, the dominating parties of the US can expect this trend to continue unabated. Already, during this year’s Democratic presidential primary, suburban areas have seen their turnout rates spike, while some rural areas have fallen from 2016. 2020 has definitely started off the decade with a bang.
The reason that rural areas might be out of participation this year is that they only have one Republican candidate to vote for. Rural areas tend to be more right than left, so they do not have much say in the Democratic primaries. Not to mention that their only option against Trump now is Joe Biden, who is more of a corporate democrat than Bernie Sanders. I look forward to seeing the future of voter distribution as the younger generation matures.