As political junkies know, Missourians are very good at picking presidents. From 1904 to 2004, they sided with the winner in every race except 1956. That record explains why presidential candidates often visit Missouri, and why their campaigns spend heavily in the state.
Of course, all of that is now at risk. The 2008 election ended November 4, but it was not until yesterday that multiple media organizations finally called Missouri for John McCain.
This delayed outcome means nothing for the nation, but it will surely prompt the chattering class to ponder if Missouri’s 2008 vote was like its 1956 vote, an isolated blemish — or is it the start of a new and far less accurate voting trend?
According to Emory University’s Alan Abramowitz, the ranks of the Republican Party have become more traditional and less diverse than the U.S. population. Census Bureau and other data suggest Missouri has also become more traditional and less diverse.
Does that mean Missouri could, in 2012 and beyond, be a more reliable bellwether for the Republican Party than for the attitudes of a nation? I certainly hope not — and I say that as someone who has voted for more Republicans than Democrats. I’d much rather my home state be a microcosm of the richness of the country’s teeming masses than a mimic of any political party, right or left. But for that to happen — for Missouri to reclaim its bellwether crown — the state’s cities (in particular, the cities in the state’s interior, outside its east- and west-border urban centers) will need to get serious, and soon, about efforts to promote, welcome, and embrace more diverse populations.
Then again, I’m not convinced the entrenched civic leadership of those cities is willing to do that. From what I’ve observed, they are quite comfortable with the status quo — which is, of course, their prerogative. I only hope they appreciate the consequences: Diminished status every four years; fewer campaign dollars; fewer visits from presidential candidates.