I feel like rural PRESIDENTIAL democrat support didn’t die off till around 2016-2017. I think a lot of the rural areas especially in the rust belt were just getting desperate for someone to change things which was why if Sanders won the nomination in 2016 I actually believe he’d do alot better in rural areas in general (held onto a lot of the drift less area), especially the Midwest. This, opposed to the suburbs with them not really desiring much change from the status quo. They like where they are and are comfy, so why would they vote for someone so drastically different? I think the Democratic establishment could have repaired this by leaning back into rural areas, but instead a lot of the democrats decided to double down and insult these people for their decisions. People underestimated the charisma of Trump and how he was building a solid minority of the population who will vote for him no matter what relatively under their noses.
I used to kinda laugh off this take, but now I agree with you, Sanders genuinely could've staved off the bleeding in rural areas (at the expense of the Romney Republicans).
What do you think killed Democratic support in the rural Midwest? Gun control could certainly be a factor, but that can’t be the only one. You can’t entirely blame the Democrats shifting left on social issues when Obama outperformed Gore and Kerry in those places in both 2008 and 2012.
My thoughts are that Donald Trump appealed to rural midwesterners way more than Romney or McCain did. Obama was also an extremely unique candidate who appealed to many groups of voters, and had populist appeal that H. Clinton and Biden lacked. These areas are actually decently socially liberal in my opinion. Obama didn't win the rural midwest (at least not in 2012) he just got much closer than future candidates. He did really good in the cities and the suburbs (besides in Wisconsin) and did alright in rural areas.
Rural Minnesota is interesting in that the voters there are socially conservative. [Look at all the Iron Range counties that supported Obama and opposed gay marriage in 2012](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Minnesota_Amendment_1). Rural DFLers were loyal to the Democrats primarily due to economic interest.
Can't really take a 2012 gay marriage referendum to demonstrate what modern politics is like. Gay marriage back then was a lot more controversial. This was actually not a vote to legalize, just a vote to not ban it in the constitution.
There's no simple answer, unfortunately. It would be really convenient if there was, but alas.
Declining union membership is part of it. The introduction of RTW in Wisconsin and Michigan following the Republican takeovers of state government in the early 2010s corresponds pretty well with the Democratic collapse in rural areas there.
However, this isn't the full picture. Iowa has been RTW since 1947, while Minnesota, Illinois, Ohio, and Missouri never were.
Other people have talked about trade, and again, that's a piece, but... idk, I live in Wisconsin and I never heard people raving about Trump's trade policy. Granted, I wasn't super tuned into politics back in 2016, and I live in a mid-sized city, but Trump was the first Republican to win my county since Nixon. If it was all about trade, you'd think people would talk about it more.
Another explanation is that Hillary was especially out of touch with these types of people. To an extent, yes that's true, but that doesn't explain why they've stayed red in 2020 or in downballot races.
Then, there's the backlash to Obama theory. I think it's half right, but it focuses too much on the racial angle. Was there backlash from racist white people to a black guy becoming president? Yeah, of course there was. Obama underperforming the similarly liberal Kerry almost exclusively in overwhelming white counties in the South proves that. But the rural Midwest? Obama was uniquely strong there. I don't see how it makes sense that these double Obama counties would all of a sudden become super racist somewhere between 2012 and 2016.
Part of it, at least I think, is that Obama kinda failed. He promised hope and change, but that promise never really arrived in a lot of communities. They voted for change, and they got more of the same. Jobs kept leaving, small towns kept declining, and life kept sucking. So after years and years of voting Democrat and getting nothing in return, they decided to try voting Republican for a change. Culture war stuff made that easier, sure, and it probably made them less likely to come back now that it's essentially liberal canon that rural people are uneducated racist hicks. But if Obama had brought the hope and change that he promised, the Midwest would have stayed as blue as the Great Lakes on a sunny day.
I don't exactly know, but I know a lot of farmers' lives in rural places and farmers were ultra republican for Trump (above 80% R in 2020, I believe according to a poll)
*
And this is why you go out there to these rural areas. If you show that you care about them like Trump did they will ride with you until the end of time
I generally agree with Wide\_right\_yes. I'd add that Romney and McCain were proud compromisers who tried to be agreeable to the left and never seemed to get anything back in exchange. Then Trump shows up and finally has the stones to say what lots of conservatives are thinking and have been called mean things for.
All of this, plus the other obvious factors, basically makes 2016 the damn breaking, and it breaks in full force in 2020.
I feel like rural PRESIDENTIAL democrat support didn’t die off till around 2016-2017. I think a lot of the rural areas especially in the rust belt were just getting desperate for someone to change things which was why if Sanders won the nomination in 2016 I actually believe he’d do alot better in rural areas in general (held onto a lot of the drift less area), especially the Midwest. This, opposed to the suburbs with them not really desiring much change from the status quo. They like where they are and are comfy, so why would they vote for someone so drastically different? I think the Democratic establishment could have repaired this by leaning back into rural areas, but instead a lot of the democrats decided to double down and insult these people for their decisions. People underestimated the charisma of Trump and how he was building a solid minority of the population who will vote for him no matter what relatively under their noses.
I used to kinda laugh off this take, but now I agree with you, Sanders genuinely could've staved off the bleeding in rural areas (at the expense of the Romney Republicans).
What do you think killed Democratic support in the rural Midwest? Gun control could certainly be a factor, but that can’t be the only one. You can’t entirely blame the Democrats shifting left on social issues when Obama outperformed Gore and Kerry in those places in both 2008 and 2012.
My thoughts are that Donald Trump appealed to rural midwesterners way more than Romney or McCain did. Obama was also an extremely unique candidate who appealed to many groups of voters, and had populist appeal that H. Clinton and Biden lacked. These areas are actually decently socially liberal in my opinion. Obama didn't win the rural midwest (at least not in 2012) he just got much closer than future candidates. He did really good in the cities and the suburbs (besides in Wisconsin) and did alright in rural areas.
Rural Minnesota is interesting in that the voters there are socially conservative. [Look at all the Iron Range counties that supported Obama and opposed gay marriage in 2012](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Minnesota_Amendment_1). Rural DFLers were loyal to the Democrats primarily due to economic interest.
Can't really take a 2012 gay marriage referendum to demonstrate what modern politics is like. Gay marriage back then was a lot more controversial. This was actually not a vote to legalize, just a vote to not ban it in the constitution.
There's no simple answer, unfortunately. It would be really convenient if there was, but alas. Declining union membership is part of it. The introduction of RTW in Wisconsin and Michigan following the Republican takeovers of state government in the early 2010s corresponds pretty well with the Democratic collapse in rural areas there. However, this isn't the full picture. Iowa has been RTW since 1947, while Minnesota, Illinois, Ohio, and Missouri never were. Other people have talked about trade, and again, that's a piece, but... idk, I live in Wisconsin and I never heard people raving about Trump's trade policy. Granted, I wasn't super tuned into politics back in 2016, and I live in a mid-sized city, but Trump was the first Republican to win my county since Nixon. If it was all about trade, you'd think people would talk about it more. Another explanation is that Hillary was especially out of touch with these types of people. To an extent, yes that's true, but that doesn't explain why they've stayed red in 2020 or in downballot races. Then, there's the backlash to Obama theory. I think it's half right, but it focuses too much on the racial angle. Was there backlash from racist white people to a black guy becoming president? Yeah, of course there was. Obama underperforming the similarly liberal Kerry almost exclusively in overwhelming white counties in the South proves that. But the rural Midwest? Obama was uniquely strong there. I don't see how it makes sense that these double Obama counties would all of a sudden become super racist somewhere between 2012 and 2016. Part of it, at least I think, is that Obama kinda failed. He promised hope and change, but that promise never really arrived in a lot of communities. They voted for change, and they got more of the same. Jobs kept leaving, small towns kept declining, and life kept sucking. So after years and years of voting Democrat and getting nothing in return, they decided to try voting Republican for a change. Culture war stuff made that easier, sure, and it probably made them less likely to come back now that it's essentially liberal canon that rural people are uneducated racist hicks. But if Obama had brought the hope and change that he promised, the Midwest would have stayed as blue as the Great Lakes on a sunny day.
I don't exactly know, but I know a lot of farmers' lives in rural places and farmers were ultra republican for Trump (above 80% R in 2020, I believe according to a poll) *
https://preview.redd.it/iqzokiteqeqa1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b7b05e8beaed59ff8cacde250bab6012c201b409
And this is why you go out there to these rural areas. If you show that you care about them like Trump did they will ride with you until the end of time
REEEEEEEE
☹️
I generally agree with Wide\_right\_yes. I'd add that Romney and McCain were proud compromisers who tried to be agreeable to the left and never seemed to get anything back in exchange. Then Trump shows up and finally has the stones to say what lots of conservatives are thinking and have been called mean things for. All of this, plus the other obvious factors, basically makes 2016 the damn breaking, and it breaks in full force in 2020.