Dems Gaining Significant Ground Among Rural Voters

In 2000, Al Gore managed to receive the support of just 37 percent of rural voters. In 2004, John Kerry performed slightly better within this demographic, scoring 40 percent support. A study conducted by Democratic pollster Anna Greenberg and Republican pollster Bill Greener for The Center for Rural Strategies, however, shows that the Democrats have a great opportunity this year to win significantly more rural votes this year than in years past, potentially swinging key congressional races in their favor.

The rural vote is up for grabs, according to a poll of rural voters in contested congressional and Senate races released today by the Center for Rural Strategies.

And how well the parties do in rural America is likely to determine who controls Congress.

The poll of rural voters in 41 contested congressional districts with significant rural populations found Democratic and Republican candidates running a dead heat, with each party receiving 45 percent of the possible votes. In six contested Senate races in states with significant rural populations, rural voters favored Republican candidates 47 to 43 percent, but the gap falls within the poll's margin of error of 4.3 percentage points, making a statistical tie.

We are already seeing the effects of this new dynamic among rural voters playing out in a number of congressional races around the country. Currently, Democrats are competitive or potentially competitive in a number of mostly rural districts currently held by Republicans including: Arizona 1 (Renzi), Kentuck 2 (Lewis), Minnesota 1 (Gutknecht), New Hampshire 2 (Bass), New York 23 (McHugh), North Carolina 11 (Taylor), Ohio 18 (Ney), Pennsylvania 10 (Sherwood), and Wyoming At-Large (Cubin). Democrats' chances in mixed districts -- those in which a majority of the population neither lives in urban, suburban or rural areas -- are potentially even better. For instance, independent polling released today from one such district, Indiana's 8th district, shows Democratic nominee Brad Ellsworth trouncing Republican incumbent John Hostettler by 15 points.

If the Democrats' position among rural voters holds and they can manage to garner 45 percent of the rural vote -- or more -- in key congressional races this year, it's difficult for me to imagine the Republicans maintaining control of the House in January 2007.



Display:


Dems Gain Significant Ground Among Rural Voters (none / 0)

In addition to the short term implications in this November's elections, I can't help but think that a pro-Dem, anti-Repub shift among rural voters is an important long-term indicator of a fundamental shift in perceptions of the two parties...and one that should be built upon.  Rural communities have suffered mightily under the rule of Republican corporatism.  Of course, the Dems ultimately need to offer a better alternative.


by mitchipd on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 02:46:22 PM EST

NPR had this yesterday (none / 0)

NPR


"Once in a while you get shown the light In the strangest of places if you look at it right"
by molly bloom on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 03:15:04 PM EST

Re: NPR had this yesterday (3.00 / 1)

Friday, actually.  I had a diary about it that morning, didn't draw much attention.


by RT on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 09:01:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Dems Gaining Significant Ground Among Rural Vo (none / 0)

if the democrats take 45% of the rural vote...the gop will lose both the house and the senate...


by beachbum bob on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 03:18:40 PM EST

Re: Dems Gaining Significant Ground (none / 0)

I asked this in the last House Forecast update and never got an answer, but when did NY-23 become competitive?


by mlangenmayr on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 03:29:54 PM EST

Re: Dems Gaining Significant Ground Among Rurals (none / 0)

Two issues to highlight--Iraq and Social Security.  Rural areas contribute more than their share to the military and suffer more casualties.  They also rely more on Social Security for survival.  So hit those issues, and oppose Big Brother GOP rule.  There should be some surprises as the poll closings move west on nov. 7.


by Mimikatz on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 03:42:30 PM EST

Good news (none / 0)

This could be very good news for Claire McCaskill.


by Ryan Anderson on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 03:54:12 PM EST

Claire McCaskill (none / 0)

Claire McCaskill has been paying a lot of attention to rural (non-Kansas City and non-St. Louis) Missouri.


543,895 votes
by Michael Bersin on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 06:30:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Dems Gaining Significant Ground Among Rural Vo (none / 0)

Ellsworth leading by 15 points?  That poll stretches the limits of believability.


Swing State Project: Campaign & Election News - Covering Key Races Around the Country
by HellofaSandwich on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 04:35:49 PM EST

Re: Dems Gaining Significant Ground Among Rural Vo (none / 0)

It has twice as many women as men, so that has an impact.

I'd be interested to know the marital status of these women.  Married women tend to mirror their husbands in  rural Indiana.  Only very rarely do you have wives and husbands voting for different parties in rural Indiana.


by ManfromMiddletown on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 05:54:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Where does education fit? (none / 0)

[From a long-time lurker, first-time poster...]

This was definitely an interesting study. It gives me some hope for the dem challenger in my district (Callaghan-D taking on Capito-R in WV-02). And, it also helps explain something I've found perplexing. Both Callaghan and Bryd have been highlighting Education as a major issue.

This study didn't mention Education at all--I'm guessing respondents would view it under the category Jobs and Economy. Certainly here in WV a big economic issue is jobs diversification and the education needed for economic development. I don't know if voters realize how much the Republicans in Congress have (and will continue to) cut funding in those areas.

Now I'll just have to find the right census data for my district so I can see how high the rural percentage is... there's been no public polls in this district so any tea leaf is tasty!


---

Help Keep Wild, Wonderful, West Virginia Blue

by SLJ on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 08:32:26 PM EST

Look at OH-2 (none / 0)

Remember Paul Hackett's campaign?

He carried the rural counties and lost it in the suburbs. Although he lost, it was a close race for a supposedly "safe" district.

Vic Wulsin is polling well, so this could be even bigger than we originally thought.

If OH-2 goes blue, I think there will be a lot of happy Democrats on election night.


by wayward on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 11:00:05 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.