The red-blue state delineation has been referenced by researchers exploring political behavior across the states. Gelman et. al. (2007, 365) point out that “states have real, significant cultural and political differences…..and that regional differences seem, if anything, to be getting more pronounced in the last decade or two.” However, they show that the media’s simplification of the red-blue delineation can be “somewhat misguided” (p.365). For example, they note that when it comes to the role of income in political preferences, income matters more in red states than in blue. They find rich people in poor states are more likely to support Republicans but in rich states income does not explain voter preference. Lax and Phillips (2012) show that the distinction can correlate with real policy effects in state houses. Typically liberal states have more liberal policies and conservative states have more conservative policies. However, when policy is incongruent with the majority of public opinion, states have a tendency towards moving beyond median voter preferences leading to policy that is more “polarized…relative to less polarized (ideologically mixed) opinion majorities (p. 164).” In the third edition of Culture Wars: The Myth of a Polarized America, Fiorina continues to show that the masses are not as divided along the red-blue lines as so often touted in the media. Rather the differences that exist are at the elite level where polarization has become entrenched. Along a similar vein, Klinker (2004) argues that mostly Americans are still living in districts where electoral politics is competitive and in counties where there is considerable mixing of political parties. Gimpel and Karnes (2006, 467) note that recent elections show that the red-blue maps really “mask a rural-urban divide within states.” Others describe the geographical delineation as metropolitan and non-metropolitan and find it helpful in understanding presidential election outcomes (Morrill, Knopp, and Brown, 2011). The rural-urban divide became a national blue
Nebraska’s population is increasingly located in three counties in the southeastern part of the states (which include the cities of Omaha and Lincoln) that account for over half of the state’s population (Nebraska Blue Book, p.44). While nearly 70% of Nebraska counties lost population from 2000 to 2010, the two largest metropolitan areas and their suburbs experienced the fastest growth in the state with Omaha and Lincoln growing at double-digit rates (Cauchon 2011). The question is whether or not the changing nature of the rural-urban demographics in Nebraska will change the political culture of the state. Unfortunately there has been little research in recent history on the political culture of Nebraska so we are left to assume that red means conservative politics and policy in the state and that there is little difference across geographical or socio-economic characteristics. Consequently, it is assumed by many that Nebraska has little to add to our understanding of the red-blue typology because its dynamics are typical of any red state. That assumption is infrequently tested. While there is not much recent literature on the political landscape of Nebraska, Duffin (2011) examines how changes in population patterns, movement from rural to urban, affect elections to the U.S. Senate in the state. She finds that while Republicans hold a statewide advantage over Democrats, counties that are increasing in population show more support for Democratic candidates and counties with declining populations are more supportive of Republican candidates. She expects that in spite of Nebraska being tagged a red state changing population dynamics will likely insure a competitive two party system in Nebraska moving forward. Duffin (2011) describes demographic changes in Nebraska as they inform us about the changing party affiliation between counties increasing and decreasing in population. However, this paper focuses on political attitudes of Nebraskans over time, place, party, and demographics
Klinkner, Philip. 2004. Red and blue scare: The continuing diversity of the American electoral landscape The Forum 2(2):1-7. Lax, Jeffrey R. and Justin H Phillips. 2012. The Democratic deficit in the states. American Journal of Political Science 56: 148-166. http://www.columbia.edu/~jrl2124/democratic%20deficit.pdf (accessed December 29, 2013). Maynard, Melissa and Pamela Prah. 2013. Median income in the states 2012. Stateline: The Daily News Service of the Pew Charitable Trust, September 19, 2013. Morrill, Richard, Larry Knopp and Michael Brown. Anomalies in Red and Blue II: Towards and understanding of the roles of setting, values, and demography in the 2004 and 2008 U.S. presidential elections Political Geography 30: 153:168. Nebraska Legislature. The Nebraska Bluebook. nebraskalegislature.gov/pdf/bluebook/85-96.pd (accessed on July 26, 2011). Tysver, Robynn and Paul Goodsell. 2012. Rural power base fueled Fischer’s Senate victory. Omaha-World Herald, November 8. USDA/Economic Research Service. 2011. State Fact Sheets: Nebraska. http://www.ers.usda.gov/statefacts/NE.htm (accessed September 20, 2011). Walsh, Katherine. 2012. Putting inequality in its place: Rural consciousness and the power of perspective. American Political Science Review 106: 517-532.