Acutally, most of New England was full of pacifist liberals who urged to let the south go in peace and kept trying to push for a caese-fire and armitace. New England has never liked wars, going back to 1812. It was the midwestern states that was the hotbed of unionism. Not that that matters to you.
As for Clinton, Indiana was the only "yankee" state not to vote for him if you pretend the rest of the midwest, such as North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas-- don't exist. If you're going to insist that's not "yankeeland" even though many of those states were around during the civil war supported the union (go to their state capitols some time and see who gets all the press in LINCOLN, Neb.) then be consistant for once and stop calling Californians "yankees" (can't get much further SOUTHwest than Califonia) I also see you've conviently forgotten the majority of southern states voted for Clinton (Missouri, Kentucky, West Virgina, Maryland, Tennesee, Georgia--home of the "Zell Miller is God" club of "conservatives"-- Arkansas, Louisiana, and Florida) and that little matter about Presidential elections in the 1st half of the 20th century. We've talked at length about the 1916 election results and you've insisted everyone is aware of it, but then you get amnesia yourself.
And I love your excuse about how FDR is not the south's fault because "yankees voted for him to". He got about 55% of the vote in most midwestern states, compared to about 80-90% of the vote in most of the former confederate states. And he didn't even bother to campaign in most of those one-party states. Gee, I wonder where all the opposition to him was? My grandpa NEVER voted for Franklin, did yours?
Finally, speaking of those evil yankees, I'm guess you have no clue where Phyllis Schalfy is from.
That's not what their elected representatives and government said. The Massachusetts delegation to Congress was arguably the most radical of the northerners. It was the midwestern states that was the hotbed of unionism.
The midwestern states - specifically Ohio, Illinois, and Indiana - were hotbeds of conflicts with the copperhead democrats. Their leader was from Ohio and most of their politicians came from those states, not massachusetts as you would have us believe.
As for Clinton, Indiana was the only "yankee" state not to vote for him if you pretend the rest of the midwest, such as North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas -- don't exist.
Try again. Those are the plains states per USDA designation and just about any reasonable classification of regions within in the United States. Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, Ohio and the sort are midwest.
If you're going to insist that's not "yankeeland" even though many of those states were around during the civil war supported the union
Politically, they were union as were Oregon and California. But go ask somebody from any of those states if they consider themselves yankees. Most likely, they associate that term with the northeast and find them as repulsive as the rest of us.
then be consistant for once and stop calling Californians "yankees" (can't get much further SOUTHwest than Califonia)
Correct me if I am wrong, but did you not just lash out at me for not considering Nebraska "yankeeland" on the grounds that it was part of the union side of the war? Hate to break it to ya, but California was part of that same union side. So was Oregon. In light of those facts it seems you have a choice to make - either all states on the union side are "yankeeland" because of that affiliation, or they are not. You can't have it both ways.
I also see you've conviently forgotten the majority of southern states voted for Clinton (Missouri, Kentucky, West Virgina, Maryland, Tennesee, Georgia--home of the "Zell Miller is God" club of "conservatives"-- Arkansas, Louisiana, and Florida)
Curious little list you got there, considering your earlier rule of thumb seems to have been whether or not they were with the USA or CSA in the war. It should not surprise you then to learn that West Virginia, Kentucky, Maryland, and Missouri all remained in the union (though some in part by force). Rather than sit by and allow you to play fast and loose with the numbers, I've taken the liberty of locating them and providing them for both 92 and 96:
1992:
CSA States for Bush: Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia
CSA States for Clinton: Arkansas, Tennessee, Louisiana, Georgia
CSA Electoral votes for Bush: 108
CSA Electoral votes for Clinton: 39
1996:
CSA States for Dole: Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia
CSA States for Clinton: Arkansas, Tennessee, Louisiana, Florida
CSA Electoral votes for Dole: 96
CSA Electoral votes for Clinton: 51
In other words, you are simply wrong. And go ahead and add in the border states if you like. Give Clinton Missouri, Maryland, Kentucky, and West Virginia for a total of 34 electoral votes. He still loses the south 108 to 73 in 1992 and 96 to 85 in 1996.
and that little matter about Presidential elections in the 1st half of the 20th century. We've talked at length about the 1916 election results and you've insisted everyone is aware of it, but then you get amnesia yourself.
History has amnesia about that election because it does not stand out as one of importance like 1896 or 1932 or even 1952 for that matter.
And I love your excuse about how FDR is not the south's fault because "yankees voted for him to".
Like it or not, it's a matter of history. The whole nation voted for the guy and, above all else, he was a yankee himself.
He got about 55% of the vote in most midwestern states, compared to about 80-90% of the vote in most of the former confederate states. And he didn't even bother to campaign in most of those one-party states. Gee, I wonder where all the opposition to him was?
The only congressman to vote against all the new deal spending programs was from Texas.
My grandpa NEVER voted for Franklin, did yours?
He always cursed FDR, so I take it he must not have.
Finally, speaking of those evil yankees, I'm guess you have no clue where Phyllis Schalfy is from.
So one good apple makes up for all the Kennedys, Hillary Clintons, Franklin Roosevelts, John Kerrys, Al Sharptons, Chuck Schumers, Carol Moseley Brauns, Pat Leahys, Robert Toricellis, Sheila Jackson Lees, and Charles Sumners that region has produced?