×
TAP DEBATE! The other day, Paul Waldman argued that "lots of southerners seem to be reluctant to vote for people who don't share their drawl. Of course, this is never characterized as pathological regional xenophobia -- it's just how regular folks think, and there's not supposed to be anything wrong with it." In response, a reader writes in:
Ezra, while I know you didn't write the bit on Tapped about southerners voting for southerners, I still have to take issue with the the theory and I was wondering if you could comment on it. If you look at the last Presidential elections since Kennedy (who won the South btw) you see seven elections in which a southerner faced a northerner. Of those seven races there are only four in which the South voted for a southerner over a non southerner. Johnson over GoldwaterCarter over FordH.W. Bush over DukakisW. Bush over Kerry BUT there are 3 elections in which Southerners voted for non southern canidates over southern canidates. Nixon over Wallace (although he was a third party canidate he was the only southerner in the race)Reagan over CarterDole over Clinton I'd wager that this 4 to 3 split is no larger then for any other region in the country. Also, I think its a big stretch to call H.W. Bush- someone who was born in Massachusetts, and only lived his Adult life in Texas- a Southerner. If you take him out its a tie. This "southerners only vote for southerners" stuff is a myth.My hunch is that the media tends to spin Southerners not voting for Democrats as proof of cultural differences, rather than proof that the South is the most conservative region in the country, and the Democrats are the least conservative major party in the election. So the narrative is this weird mixture of regional chauvinism on the part of the voters and Northeastern elitism emanating from the politicians, when really the two sides just don't much agree on policy matters. But maybe Paul has more substantive thoughts.--Ezra Klein
