Chapter 10

North Carolina: Hunt and Helms Usher in Competitive Two-Party State

North Carolina is a more typical Rim South state than is Arkansas. Not only does it contain a smaller percentage of African Americans than do the Deep South states, but it is able to boast higher household incomes, higher teacher salaries, and a population more likely to be college educated than are Deep South populations. The smaller African American population historically resulted in less white obsession with maintaining white supremacy and therefore less onerous discriminatory voting devices than in the Deep South. Consequently, as in other Rim South states, Republican gains were more evident at an earlier time, and the two parties realigned along ideological lines more rapidly than in many Deep South states. Yet as in all southern states, prior to the Civil Rights movement the Democrats were the dominant party, encompassing progressive modernizers as well as traditionalistic conservatives.

Somewhat unique about North Carolina is how the ideological realignment of the two parties is reflected in the repeated election of one prominent figure in each of the parties. Republicans elected Jesse Helms as U.S. Senator in 1972, where he served for thirty years until the 2002 election. Democrats elected Jim Hunt to the first of four non-consecutive gubernatorial terms that extended from 1976 through the 2000 election. Their nearly fifty years of combined service illustrated how many conservatives and traditionalists were now found within the Republican party, while more progressive and modernizing elements were more likely to remain in the Democratic party. While Helms and Hunt each reflected their party’s dominant political philosophy, neither were the kind of unbeatable leaders found in the Rim South state of Arkansas. Unlike the two Arkansas governors who were able to move up to the U.S. Senate, Hunt lost a U.S. senate race. And unlike the Arkansas Democratic senators who won reelection by landslides, Senator Helms was repeatedly reelected by 55% or less of the two-party vote. The North Carolina case illustrates the difficulty in Rim South states for any political figure to dominate the political system, because of their more competitive two-party systems.

Dominant Democrats Reflect Progressive and Traditionalistic Elements

As with other Rim South states having a smaller black population compared to the Deep South, less invidious discriminatory voting devices were used in North Carolina, therefore more African Americans were able to vote even before the Civil Rights movement. Throughout the 1950s and early 1960s, the percentage of African Americans in the Tar Heel state registered to vote equaled or exceeded the percentage in the entire southern region. By 1964, 47% of voting-age blacks were registered to vote in the state, slightly higher than the 11-state regional average of 43% (Garrow 1978: 11, 19). One unique aspect of North Carolina politics is its historically more progressive nature compared to most southern states, characterized by greater citizen interest in politics which heightened voter turnout in gubernatorial and presidential elections (Key 1949: 495, 503). Turnout in general elections was also higher compared to the Democratic primary because unlike some southern states, two-party competition was greater, and unlike all other southern states, state elections for governor and other statewide offices were held in high-turnout presidential election years (Key 1949: 494).

Despite a more progressive nature, North Carolina was not able to completely escape the South’s repression of its African American citizens. After a coalition of Republicans and Populists captured the state legislature in 1894 and the governorship two years later, Democrats campaigned on the need for white supremacy in order to recapture these offices, and in 1900 the state approved a literacy “read and write” test, a poll tax, and extended residency requirements (Key 1949: 208, 539, 558). However, North Carolina was the first southern state (in 1920) to repeal the poll tax (Key 1949: 578). And while African Americans were most likely to be disfranchised in rural counties in the east with high black populations, blacks as early as the 1930s were participating in the Democratic primaries in some western counties (Key 1949; 565, 620).

Before the 1970s the broad-tent governing Democratic Party represented diverse ideological elements and programs ranging from progressivism on education and health care to fiscal conservatism and racist sentiment, sometimes combined in the same officeholder. Charles Aycock, elected in 1900 as a segregationist, was most known as the “Education Governor” for supporting a longer school year and more spending on school construction benefiting both races, which he viewed as helping to promote economic development (Luebke 1990: 7-8). Other governors in the first six decades of the 20^th century who were most aggressive in improving public education included Robert Glenn, Locke Craig, Thomas Bickett, Clyde Hoey, J. Melville Broughton, R. Gregg Cherry, and W. Kerr Scott (see Website: http://ncpedia.org/biography/governors/). Improved public health care programs were also associated with governors Glenn, Bickett, and Cherry. Some North Carolina governors stressed the need for more and improved roads, such as Cameron Morrison, businessman Luther Hodges, former agriculture commissioner W. Kerr Scott, and governors Hoey and Cherry (Luebke 1990: 9; Edsall and Williams 1972: 371, 380; Website: http://ncpedia.org/biography/governors/).

Some of these and other governors also took a more conservative and traditionalistic approach on some issues, such as backing anti-labor policies or fiscal conservatism. Governors Oliver Max Gardner and John Ehringhaus, as well as Morrison and Hodges, called out the National Guard during labor strikes at textile mills, often breaking the strikes by helping strikebreakers to enter the mills (Luebke 1990: 14-15). Governor Angus McLean was most known for "sound fiscal management" and "conservative management of the revenue," leaving office with a budgetary surplus (http://ncpedia.org/biography/governors/mclean). Indeed, observers of state government have concluded that while North Carolina’s state policies relative to other southern states have been “progressive, forward-looking,” they have nevertheless provided a “sound, conservative government” which has been favored by “the big investor, the big employer” (Key 1949: 214). Yet the “economic oligarchy” that was so successful throughout the 20^th century in elevating to office “persons fundamentally in harmony with its viewpoint” was an enlightened group that “exhibited a sense of responsibility in community matters” (Key 1949: 211).

Geographically, North Carolina is divided into the eastern coastal plains, the western mountain counties, and the central Piedmont counties, which also contain the Piedmont Crescent which is more urbanized and ranges from Raleigh in the east to Charlotte in the southwest (Edsall and Williams 1972: 396, 400). The western mountains were the most rural part of the state, also having the smallest black population, and historically this land of small farmers provided the most support for Republican party candidates, such as the gubernatorial and presidential candidates in 1948 and 1952. The eastern coastal plains, being the land of large plantations, has the highest black population, and historically provided the strongest support for Democratic party candidates, reflected in the presidential and gubernatorial elections from 1948 thru 1968 (Edsall and Williams 1972: 397, 399, 404). The more urbanized Piedmont Crescent grew rapidly in the 1960s, and during that decade rivaled the western mountains in its support for Republican presidential candidates and was generally the most loyal Republican region in gubernatorial voting. The decade of the 1960s witnessed gains in Republican vote totals, as GOP gubernatorial candidates increased their popular vote totals from their usual one-third of the vote to 46% in 1960 and 47% in 1968. Indeed, North Carolina even went Republican (narrowly) in the 1968 presidential race for the only time (besides 1928) since Reconstruction (Edsall and Williams 1972: 397, 399, 403, 404).

As Republicans gained electoral strength, prominent state Democrats made some effort to appeal to the progressive sentiments of many state residents. Most notable was Terry Sanford, a John Kennedy rather than Lyndon Johnson supporter, who was elected governor in 1960 with the support of the AFL-CIO, blacks, civil rights advocates, and academicians (Edsall and Williams 1972: 383). As governor, Sanford was credited with enhancing funding for public education by instituting a sales tax on food, creating programs for the gifted, high school dropouts, and the mentally retarded, raising the minimum wage, and enlisting private foundations in a local war on poverty (Edsall and Williams 1972: 386-387). His successor as governor, Dan Moore, was most known for promoting economic development by working with regional commissions and passing a major road bond bill (Edsall and Williams 1972: 390; see Website http://ncpedia.org/biography/governors/moore-dan). Robert Scott, elected governor in 1968, raised the cigarette tax to help fund education, hiked the gasoline tax for highways, raised the minimum wage, reorganized and consolidated state government, and established a unified university system (Edsall and Williams 1972: 392, 395; Bass and DeVries 1977: 232). Promoting racial reconciliation, Democratic governors Sanford had breakfast meetings in the governor’s mansion with civil rights leaders and Moore appointed blacks to state government positions (Bass and DeVries 1977: 231-232).

In the turbulent 1960s even some Republicans offered progressive ideas, with Robert Gavin, the GOP gubernatorial nominee in 1960 and 1964, pledging a highway bond bill, a higher minimum wage, and a comprehensive civil service system (Edsall and Williams 1972: 404). However, with the 1971 state Democratic platform promising “guaranteed health care and public housing, to end various forms of discrimination, and to liberalize state laws and attitudes toward labor relations,” conservatives and traditionalists began to feel more at home in the Republican party of Barry Goldwater and Richard Nixon, and would elect their champion to the U.S. Senate the very next year (Edsall and Williams 1972: 416).

Traditionalistic Republicans and Progressive Democrats: Helms vs. Hunt

North Carolina Republicans in 1972 won their first U.S. senate race since Reconstruction with conservative radio and television commentator Jesse Helms. A division among Democrats helped the GOP, as Congressman Nick Galifianakis of Greek ancestry upset 76-year old Senator B. Everett Jordan in the primary. Galifianakis was viewed as the more “liberal” Democrat, as he had reputedly favored national health care, had come to oppose the Vietnam War before Senator Jordan, and his overall roll call record was more moderate than Jordan’s moderate conservative record (Barone, Ujifusa, and Matthews 1972: 583, 586, 591, 592; Lamis 1990: 135). Republican Helms was viewed as an economic traditionalist who favored limited government, few business regulations, low taxes, and a balanced federal budget, and who was popular with business. Helms expanded his popular appeal beyond economics by embracing a social traditionalism that included opposition to court-ordered busing and world communism, and support for national defense spending. With a campaign slogan of “He’s one of us,” Helms proceeded to defeat his Greek-American opponent by 54% of the vote, after repeatedly trying to link Galifianakis with liberal Democratic presidential candidate George McGovern, a wise strategy given Nixon’s 71% popular vote sweep of the state (Luebke 1990: 26). In the process, Helms accused his Democratic opponent of being “soft on drug abuse and a profligate spender” and favoring “amnesty for Vietnam draft evaders,” and implied that Galifianakis was “namby-pamby on forced busing” and “extravagant federal spending” (Lamis 1990: 135).

Building a national reputation as an outspoken conservative, Helms entered his first 1978 reelection with a massive $7 million war chest. Democrats were again a divided party with the more liberal candidate, state insurance commissioner John Ingram upsetting Charlotte banker and son of former governor Luther Hodges in the primary. As Ingram stressed his record of opposition to insurance rate increases to paint himself as a populist who cared about the average worker, Helms combined his strong support in the business community with his image of being “a Christian gentleman” who was “working for you in Washington” to win reelection with 54.5% of the vote (Lamis 1990: 140 quote; 139). Indeed, political observers indicate that Senator Helms was viewed by “thousands of North Carolinians” as “a champion of small-town values” such as “fiscal constraint,” “free enterprise,” and other “verities learned at the knees of parents,” and acknowledge that his senate office ran a “crackerjack constituent services operation that has helped thousands of Tar Heel residents” (Christensen and Fleer 1999: 83). Helms also generally had strong support from the textile and tobacco industries, did well with the blue-collar, “gun-rack vote,” and was also strong in the historically Democratic eastern portion of the state and among Christian evangelicals who opposed abortion (Christensen and Fleer 1999: 84 quote, 83; Barone, Ujifusa, and Matthews 1979: 646).

Republicans in the 1972 Nixon landslide year would also win their first gubernatorial race since Reconstruction with James Holshouser, the six-year Republican state party chairman and a former legislator who had served as house minority leader, who won a narrow 51% popular vote victory. Democrats again suffered from a divisive primary, as businessman Hargrove “Skipper” Bowles using a modern media campaign upset the “heir-apparent,” Lieutenant Governor Pat Taylor and then depressed his own party’s turnout in November by failing to reach out to his Democratic rivals (Bass and DeVries 1977: 232, 235). Unlike the conservative traditionalist Helms, Holshouser campaigned as a more progressive GOP modernizer. A lifelong “’Mountain’ Republican,” Holshouser argued that voters should break with the “political oligarchies of the past” and the “inefficiencies of one-party Democratic rule,” and promised to “modernize the state through both government efficiency and expenditures” (Luebke 1990: 24). As governor, the moderate Holshouser appointed blacks and women to high level state positions, supported black business enterprises, provided increased funding for education and mental health, and expanded state kindergartens (Bass and DeVries 1977: 235, 238). His record on economic development was more mixed, as he supported state-backed bonds to attract higher wage industries to North Carolina while permitting local businessmen to torpedo the efforts of outside companies to locate unionized plants in the state (Bass and DeVries 1977: 239).

Democrats roared back with victories for the U.S. senate and governorship in the next two election years, and their landslide victories of over 60% of the vote showed how their party despite some GOP gains remained the dominant party in North Carolina. In 1974 Democrats retained the seat of retiring U.S. Senator Sam Ervin, a conservative and civil rights opponent. Ervin was nevertheless respected in the senate for his devotion to the Constitution and to people’s first amendment free speech rights, and was liked by North Carolinians for his humble “country lawyer” persona and his extensive hand-shaking campaigns in the state’s small towns (Barone, Ujifusa, and Matthews 1973: 739 quote; 741).

Rejecting Galifianakis’ comeback effort, Democrats in 1974 nominated Robert Morgan for the senate, a native of east North Carolina who as two-term attorney general had appointed black staff members and been a consumer advocate fighting against higher milk and utility prices. The more moderate Morgan had also backed Nixon’s Vietnam policy, defended a state law banning communists from speaking on college campuses, and in 1960 had managed a segregationist Democrat’s losing gubernatorial bid (Lamis 1990: 136). Benefiting from the national economic recession occurring under Republican President Ford, Morgan skillfully assembled a populist black-white coalition attracted by economic issues. He blasted some wealthy people for paying no taxes, attacked corporations who paid a lower percentage of their income in taxes than did middle income families, and warned voters that inflation under Ford had become so great that most homebuyers could not afford candidate Morgan’s own modest six-room house (Bass and DeVries 1977: 233). With the minority Republicans offering a furniture company executive having no government experience and Morgan stressing his Democratic party label, east North Carolina returned to its Democratic roots and helped elect Morgan with a landslide 63% of the vote (Bass and DeVries 1977: 233-234).

Most noteworthy was Democrats’ recapture of the governorship in 1976 with Jim Hunt, a modernizer who had been elected lieutenant governor four years earlier with a county-by-county personal network of supporters and by sharing traditionalists’ values on social issues by being a non-drinker and opposing abortion (Luebke 1990: 28-29). Hunt’s father, who had worked for the U.S. Agriculture Department during the 1930s, had been a “populist-leaning New Dealer” who had “inculcated in him the idea of the FDR Democrats, portraying the party as the friend of poor farmers and workers” (Luebke 1998: 32 quote; Grimsley 2002: 27). Hunt’s parents had also instilled in him “good Christian” values which included long hours of hard work on the family farm and abstaining from using alcohol and tobacco products (Grimsley 2002: 33 quote, 34). An “outstanding campaigner based on his long experience in state politics” as a campaign worker for gubernatorial hopefuls, Hunt had won the lieutenant governorship by effectively appealing “to conservatives on morality and crime while retaining liberal constituencies by emphasizing race, gender, and education” issues (Grimsley 2002: 144).

Hunt assembled an ideologically inclusive biracial coalition in his first gubernatorial campaign with his “liberal” views on civil rights and support for the Equal Rights Amendment for women, his “conservative” law-and-order approach to “locking up” the criminals and his personal abstention from alcohol, and his pro-business backing of business investment and recruitment of more higher wage jobs (Luebke 1990: 29). Hunt’s 66% landslide victory swamped Republican human resources secretary under governor Holshouser, David Flaherty (Lamis 1990: 138). With a similar broad coalition ranging from business to the AFL-CIO, Hunt won reelection in 1980 (after a gubernatorial succession amendment was adopted) with 62% of the vote over Republican I. Beverly Lake, whose segregationist father had unsuccessfully sought the Democratic gubernatorial nomination in 1960 and 1964 (Luebke 1990: 31).

As governor, the centrist Hunt was skilled at retaining the support of his broad coalition of “corporate CEOs and labor leaders, and liberal urban blacks and conservative rural whites” (Christensen and Fleer 1999: 83). Liberals praised his speeches urging racial harmony, his appointments of blacks to important state positions including judgeships, and his stress on improving public education which included reducing class sizes and establishing minimum graduation standards for high school seniors. Conservatives liked his tough law-and-order stances, such as his refusal to pardon the prominent Wilmington Ten (civil rights activists convicted of a 1971 firebombing) and his backing for uniform criminal sentencing. Residents of diverse ideological views praised his work for economic development, which resulted in more highway construction and increased support for recruiting high wage employers to the state (Lamis 1990: 138-139; Luebke 1990: 30, 113).

Despite losing the governorship contest for two consecutive times, the minority Republicans were able to pull off a stunning upset of Democratic Senator Morgan in 1980. Though Morgan had compiled a moderate roll call voting record as Senator, being middle-of-the-road on economic issues and favoring defense spending yet criticizing Pentagon abuses (Barone, Ujifusa, and Matthews 1979: 647, 649), conservative Republican and political science professor at East Carolina University John East relentlessly blasted the Democrat as a “liberal.” Accusing Morgan of being a “big spender on social welfare programs but tight-fisted when it comes to defense,” East blasted the Democratic incumbent for opposing the B-1 bomber, “giving away” the Panama Canal, and giving aid to the Nicaraguan communists (Lamis 1990: 141; Luebke 1990: 135). Jesse Helms’ National Congressional Club, which raised money nationally for Helms and his conservative causes, also waged a negative campaign branding Morgan as a “liberal” and stressed these same roll call votes as well as the incumbent’s support for financially bailing-out bankrupt New York City (Luebke 1990: 135). The intensely close Senate contest with Republican East elected with only 50.3% of the vote illustrated how competitive elections had become between the two parties. Political observers eagerly awaited the 1984 elections, when the moderate and popular term-limited Hunt would likely challenge the controversial conservative Senator Helms, and an open race for governor would provide further insight into the contemporary strengths of the two parties.

Helms wasted little time taking advantage of the national Democrats’ nomination of northern liberal Walter Mondale as their presidential candidate, repeating the slogan, “Jim Hunt-a Mondale liberal” in many ads (Luebke 1990: 147). Helms proceeded to paint a picture of a Democratic opponent who was “soft on abortion, blacks, and Christianity,” as well as being a “tax-and-spend liberal” (Luebke 1990: 140). One GOP television ad listed the numerous labor union contributions by name and amount given to Hunt, and closed with the slogan, “Look for the union label” (Luebke 1990: 85). The conservative Helms warned his campaign supporters that numerous liberal national groups were trying to defeat him, including “the homosexuals, labor unions, those militant feminists, all of them” (Luebke 1990: 131). Hunt countered by reciting his own conservative views, such as support for the death penalty, prayer in public schools, and defense spending, but as governor he had supported a state fund that paid for abortions for poor women (Luebke 1990: 143). Furthermore, while Helms had opposed a federal Martin Luther King holiday, Governor Hunt had met in the governor’s office with liberal civil rights activist Jesse Jackson, prompting the Helms campaign to distribute a picture of the two Democrats meeting together (Luebke 1990: 141).

Helms’ effort to “nationalize” the election may indeed have paid off, as President Reagan swept North Carolina with 62% of the vote, and state pre-election polls had shown a strong linkage between voters’ assessments of Reagan’s job performance and their support for Helms’ reelection (Fleer, Lowery, and Prysby 1988: 106). Helms may also have been advantaged by his folksy demeanor when meeting constituents and attending campaign rallies, leading many to view him as “gentlemanly, courteous, and humorous,” and by his stress on his senate seniority and his support for the state’s agricultural industry (Luebke 1990: 131 quote, 132; Lamis 1990: 251). The Republican senator nevertheless won reelection with only 52% of the vote, reflecting his controversial image and how competitive two-party politics had become in North Carolina.

Republicans scored a more easy victory of 54% of the popular vote with a less controversial candidate in the open governor’s race. Six-term congressman James Martin also had a conservative voting record in Congress that satisfied traditionalists, as he had voted against the Martin Luther King federal holiday and pledged to fight to eliminate the state abortion fund for poor women (Luebke 1990: 33; Ehrenhalt 1983: 1141). But Martin’s media campaign portrayed the Republican as “an urbane, pragmatic modernizer” who would focus on promoting economic growth and lowering taxes, much like former GOP governor Holshouser (Luebke 1990: 33 quote; Lamis 1990: 251). Indeed, Martin sought to unite businessmen from such traditional industries as textiles, furniture, and apparel with the more modern banking industry (Luebke 1990: 32). Democrats were disadvantaged by a bitter party primary, where Attorney General Rufus Edmisten, who had run on his record of being a pro-consumer who had fought utility rate hikes, narrowly defeated former Charlotte mayor Eddie Knox, who was a Reagan supporter who after the election ended up working in Martin’s administration (Lamis 1990: 251).

As North Carolina’s second Republican governor, James Martin was most known for backing an increased gasoline tax to shore up the state highway fund, traveling abroad to recruit business to the state, and opposing labor unions and appointing conservatives to state commissions. Such conservative appointees were pro-management in workers’ compensation cases, fought for corporal punishment in day care centers, and sought to limit state funded abortions in social services (Luebke 1990: 34; Luebke 1998: 99). Martin won reelection in 1988 with a larger 56% of the vote, as his television ads showed white and black school children together and related his record of support for more economic development, better schools and highways, and a cleaner environment (Luebke 1990: 207; Luebke 1998: 204). Martin’s Democratic opponent Bob Jordan, who as lieutenant governor had angered the pro-life lobby by voting to break a tie to preserve the state’s abortion fund, was never able to close the gap with the popular governor (Luebke 1990: 209; Prysby 1991: 193). Republicans also picked up their first statewide elected office below the governorship for the first time in thirty years, when former congressman Jim Gardner narrowly defeated state legislator Tony Rand for the open lieutenant governor’s position (Prysby 1991: 193; Christensen and Fleer 1999: 103). The Democratic-controlled state senate proceeded to strip the new lieutenant governor of his powers to appoint committee members, committee chairs, and to assign bills to committees (Christensen and Fleer 1999: 419).

Meanwhile, Democrats had regained a U.S. senate seat in 1986 after former governor Terry Sanford unseated Republican James Broyhill, a 12-term conservative congressman who had been appointed to the vacancy caused by Senator East’s death (Ehrenhalt 1985: 1161). In this case, it was the Republicans who suffered a divisive primary, as Broyhill had edged out a GOP challenger backed by Helms’ National Congressional Club, who had been angered by Broyhill’s few non-conservative actions such as his support for the Martin Luther King holiday and his failure to oppose abortion in every circumstance (Luebke 1990: 161). Sanford proceeded to paint himself as a “friend of the farmer and factory worker,” who was drawn from a party that cared for the “little guy,” and to mock his Republican opponent’s upper-class background (Luebke 1990: 162). Sanford, running particularly well in the east, unseated the Republican appointee with 52% of the vote (Lamis 1990: 287). Reflecting how North Carolina’s party politics had come to resemble the ideological divide between the parties at the national level, as senator Terry Sanford over the next four years compiled a “liberal” ADA voting record that never fell below 65 and a “conservative” ACU record that never exceeded 20. Yet, the Democrat’s “moderate liberal” record was a far cry from Republican East’s roll call record of near perfect conservatism (Duncan 1991: 1091; Ehrenhalt 1985: 1132). The competitiveness of the two parties in North Carolina was also reflected in this senate seat of Sam Ervin’s switching party hands for the second consecutive time.

Nearing the Turn of the Century: An Even More Competitive Two Party System

With Republicans narrowly holding on to one U.S. senate seat with controversial conservative Jesse Helms and the other seat and the governorship regularly switching between the two parties, the 1970s and 1980s were an era of an increasingly competitive Republican Party that was aggressively challenging the historically dominant Democratic Party (Table 10-1). The 1990s would be a decade when Republicans approached parity with the Democrats on the fundamental political indicator of the public’s partisan identifications (Table 10-2). The national GOP landslide year of 1994 would be associated with big Republican gains in the state legislature, culminating in GOP control of the state house for four years, and a more lasting capture of a majority of U.S. house seats. The near parity of political strength between the two parties extending into the new century would be reflected in Sam Ervin’s old seat switching between the two parties three more times after Terry Sanford’s single term, and the two parties dividing the spoils of the governorship (which was won back and retained three times by Democrats) and Helms’ seat at first (retained by Republican Elizabeth Dole but then lost to Democrats).

The 1990s saw Senator Jesse Helms reelected twice over Harvey Gantt, each time with only 53% of the vote. Gantt, a respected MIT trained architect and city planner, had been the first African American to attend Clemson University, and had twice been elected mayor of majority white Charlotte. In both the 1990 and 1996 elections, Gantt had won less than 57% of the vote in the Democratic primary in beating white moderates who were viewed by even some liberals as more electable- a small-town district attorney Mike Easley in 1990 and businessman Charlie Sanders in 1996 (Christensen and Fleer 1999: 84).

Helms most clearly raised the race issue in 1990 by charging that Gantt had used his minority racial status to get a television station license, and by running a television commercial that showed two white hands crumbling an employment application with the announcer claiming that the white had lost the job to a less qualified black merely because of a racial quota (Christensen and Fleer 1999: 81, 84). Helms’ ad makers were also accused of darkening their African American opponent’s on-screen image and of slowing his voice, evoking an image among some viewers of a “stupid” “black” (Jamieson 1992: 96 quotes, 95). Gantt, who was indeed pro-choice and anti-death penalty, was also blasted by the staunch conservative Helms as being an “extreme liberal,” who supported abortion and was backed by “gay and lesbian political groups” (Duncan 1991: 1087 quote, 1088). Helms’ controversial ads appeared to be most effective in pushing undecided white men with lower education levels into the Republican’s camp (Luebke 1998: 183, 187; Jamieson 1992: 99-100).

Both Helms and Gantt made more efforts to conduct a less ideologically oriented campaign in 1996. Helms put out more press releases, granted more interviews with the media, and often appeared in the state with nationally known GOP leaders, and his television ads stressed his position as a senior statesman and chair of the important Foreign Relations Committee (Christensen and Fleer 1999: 86; Duncan and Lawrence 1997: 1059). Helms’ ads were also specific to each of the state’s media markets, as he recounted what federal help he had brought to Charlotte, Winston-Salem, and the Research Triangle (Luebke 1998: 235). Gantt called for a return to traditional values such as hard work and classroom discipline, backed welfare reform, and wanted to eliminate parole for violent criminals, while also criticizing Helms for cutting popular programs like education and Medicare (Christensen and Fleer 1999: 86). The 75-year-old Helms nevertheless could not resist some raising of the ideology issue, accusing Gantt of being “more liberal than Bill Clinton” and charging that Gantt supported such gay rights causes as same-sex marriage and permitting gay teachers in the classroom (Prysby 1997: 173 quote; Christensen and Fleer 1999: 85). The Christian Coalition also got into the act with a voter guide that depicted Gantt with a darkened face and accused him of being for homosexual rights (Luebke 1998: 233). Republican presidential candidate Dole’s 5% popular vote victory over Clinton may have contributed to Helms’ narrow 53% margin, as voting patterns in both contests were very similar with both Republicans winning over 80% of the white conservative vote and attracting over one-fifth of white Democrats (Prysby 1997: 171, 174).

Democrats meanwhile dominated the governor’s office in the last decade of the 20^th century, electing Jim Hunt to a third and fourth term. Backed by the state’s business leaders and major banks, Hunt in 1992 won a 53% to 45% victory over GOP Lieutenant Governor Jim Gardner, a businessman hurt by allegations of business failures and non-payment of business debts (Christensen and Fleer 1999: 92; Prysby 1994: 144). In his third term, Governor Hunt continued to stress increased funding for education including his pre-school program Smart Start. After the 1994 GOP landslide that gave Republicans control of the state house of representatives, the pragmatic Democrat dismayed some liberals by backing welfare reform, a large tax cut, and “punitive” anti-crime measures (Luebke 1998: 42 quote; Prysby 1997: 176; Prysby 2003a: 163). Hunt also expanded the use of tax credits as investment subsidies to lure new businesses to all counties in the state, not merely to the most economically distressed areas (Luebke 1998: 103).

In 1996 the popular and moderate Hunt, benefiting from an economic boom, won reelection with 56% of the vote to 43% for state legislator Robin Hayes. Hayes was a religious right candidate who was so socially conservative that he had blasted his own party’s primary opponent for supporting the pro-choice Planned Parenthood organization (Prysby 1997: 176; Christensen and Fleer 1999: 93; Prysby 2003a: 163). Hunt also appeared to benefit from a GOP legislative action that shutdown state government after Republicans opposed funding bills for teacher salaries and school construction, leading the governor to call a special legislative session to enact a revised budget, and permitting the governor and legislative Democrats to campaign as opponents of Republicans who wanted to cut popular state programs (Luebke 1998: 215-216). Hunt’s political moderation was rewarded by exit polls showing him drawing 67% of the votes of self-styled moderates and 50% of the votes of whites, and Democrats regained some state house and senate seats that they had lost in the 1994 national GOP landslide (Prysby 2007: 169; Luebke 1998: 216). The year after his last reelection, Hunt won legislative approval for his Excellent Schools Act, which provided significant teacher pay raises as well as even higher raises for those teachers with masters degrees or who passed the national teacher certification examination. He also backed a conservative measure that would place low-performing schools, measured by changes in students’ test scores, under state government control with the schools’ principals subject to replacement (Luebke 1998: 69).

Meanwhile, during the 1990s Sam Ervin’s old U.S. senate seat managed to switch party hands twice more, reflecting the competitiveness of party politics in North Carolina. In 1992, Republican businessman Lauch Faircloth, a former Democrat and former highway commissioner and commerce secretary under three Democratic governors, unseated Democratic Senator Terry Sanford with 50% to 46% of the popular vote. Faircloth, who had promised to back welfare reform, had blasted the liberal Sanford for opposing Desert Storm and for having as liberal a voting record as Teddy Kennedy’s. The vigor and health of 75-year-old Sanford also became an issue, as Faircloth ran an ad in October wishing the incumbent a speedy recovery from heart surgery (Christiansen and Fleer 1999: 87-88; Prysby 1994: 145; Duncan 1993: 1119). As senator Faircloth proceeded to compile a conservative voting record usually rated 100% by the conservative ACU and below 10% by the liberal ADA (Duncan and Lawrence 1997: 1061). Faircloth nevertheless fought for federal funds that benefited North Carolina, as he delivered funds for parklands in the western part of the state, supported the construction of new buildings in the Research Triangle Park, and introduced a bill for research into an organism that had killed fish in the Neuse River (Luebke 1998: 235).

Republican Faircloth was himself narrowly unseated in 1998 by wealthy Democratic trial lawyer John Edwards with a 51-47% vote margin. Using his own money and refusing contributions from political action committees, Edwards painted himself as a political outsider. When blasted by Faircloth as a trial lawyer who was helping to drive up health care costs through frivolous lawsuits, Edwards responded that he had been “an advocate for people, mostly children, and mostly families,” and promised to be an “advocate” for North Carolina (Duncan and Nutting 1999: 999). Faircloth, a hog farm owner, was also hurt when Edwards stressed environmental issues, and the incumbent sealed his own doom by refusing to debate his challenger (Duncan and Nutting 1999: 999). As U.S. senator, Edwards proceeded to vote in a fairly liberal manner, earning liberal ADA scores above 80 and conservative ACU ratings below 20 in his first three years, though he did vote for war with Iraq (Hawkings and Nutting 2003: 743).

Turning to less prominent offices below the governorship and the U.S. senate, the 1994 national GOP tsunami had helped to usher in a Republican controlled U.S. house delegation and state house delegation for the first time in the 20^th century. State legislative Democrats had been handicapped by a split between their party’s white and black lawmakers over how “tough” to get on the crime issue, while legislative Republicans had been buoyed by their North Carolina version of GOP congressman Newt Gingrich’s Contract for America as well as by their campaign slogan that Democratic lawmakers had “spent it all,” all being the state’s budget surplus (Luebke 1998: 55 quote, 205). The 1994 elections also gave the GOP a temporary 8-4 majority of North Carolina’s U.S. House seats, as Republican congressional candidates upset two white Democratic incumbents and won two open seats vacated by two other white Democrats. Two years later, Democrats won back two of those seats with white Democrats unseating the freshman Republicans. Republicans regained a slight majority of House seats in 1998 by winning an open seat vacated by a white Democrat, but Democrats regained a narrow majority of seats in 2006 when they upset an incumbent.

African Americans, an important segment of the state Democratic party, had made some major gains just before the 1994 GOP landslide. Black Caucus members of the state house Daniel Blue and Milton Fitch were elected respectively House Speaker in 1990 and Majority Leader in 1992, though both lost their leadership positions after the GOP takeover of the state house, a Republican triumph that lasted for four years (Menifield, Shaffer, and Brassell 2005: 165). In 1992 African Americans Eva Clayton and Melvin Watt were elected to two new majority black U.S. House districts, and Ralph Campbell was elected state auditor to become the first black elected to a statewide, non-judicial office (Christensen and Fleer 1999: 94, 99). Though Campbell after three terms was defeated for reelection in 2004 by a white male Republican to eliminate the only African American from a statewide executive office, Democrats demonstrated diversity in other respects. Three of their six sub-gubernatorial executive officers after the 2004 elections were women- Lieutenant Governor Beverly Perdue, Secretary of State Elaine Marshall, and Superintendent of Public Instruction June Atkinson (http://www.state.nc.us/NCAgency.aspx).

By the close of the century, the racial composition of house districts appeared to exert a definite impact on the two parties’ fortunes. Both majority black districts were represented by African American Democrats who compiled liberal roll call voting records. All five districts where whites comprised over 80% of the population were represented by Republicans who rolled up conservative roll call voting records; four had been Republican before the 1994 election, and one seat switched to the GOP at that time. The five seats where whites comprised 71-77% of the district populations had been more competitive with all except one switching party control at least once in the 1990s. All five at one time were represented by white Democrats with moderate liberal to moderate voting records. At the turn of the century, two of these marginal districts were represented by moderate liberal white Democrats, one by a moderate white Democrat, and two by conservative Republicans (Duncan 1993; Duncan and Lawrence 1995, 1997; Duncan and Nutting 1999).

The first few years of the 21^st century continued to show how competitive the two parties were, as Democrats won three gubernatorial elections, and Republicans won two open U.S. senate contests but then lost one of those seats. In 2000 Democratic state attorney general Mike Easley, with an $11 million to $8.5 million spending advantage, defeated Republican and former Charlotte mayor Richard Vinroot by 52% to 46% of the vote. Though both were relatively moderate, they differed on several proposals. Republican Vinroot favored school vouchers and limiting the increases in state spending, while Democrat Easley favored a prescription drug plan for the elderly, a patient’s bill of rights, and legalized abortion (Prysby 2002: 176-177). Like popular former governor Hunt, Easley was viewed as a relatively moderate candidate, and exit polls found him drawing 60% of the votes of self-identified moderates as well as a substantial 43% of white votes (Prysby 2007: 169). As governor, Easley faced budgetary problems because of a weak state economy and high unemployment, and he supported a moderate strategy of some tax increases and some budget cuts (Prysby 2005: 196).

Facing Republican state senate minority leader Patrick Ballantine in his 2004 reelection bid, Easley traveled across the state talking about his accomplishments, such as an increase in student test scores. Resisting any possible liberal tag, the Democratic governor stressed his support for the death penalty and opposition to gay marriage. Easley also stressed his commitments to improving education and the state economy, and backed a lottery to better fund education (Prysby 2005: 197). Easley easily won reelection with 56% of the vote, winning 43% of whites and 31% of self-identified conservatives (Prysby 2005: 186, 189, 191). In 2005 he signed a lottery into law that earmarked all of its revenue for education programs, such as pre-kindergartens, smaller class sizes in early grades, school construction, and college scholarships (see Website: http://www.nc-educationlottery.org/).

Republicans proceeded to pick up both U.S. senate seats, vacated by Republican Helms in 2002 and Democrat Edwards in 2004. In the 2002 race, Republicans nominated Elizabeth Dole, a Duke University graduate and wife of 1996 GOP presidential candidate Bob Dole, whose long political resume included serving as national Secretary of Transportation and of Labor, while Democrats chose Erskine Bowles, whose claim to fame was serving as President Clinton’s Chief of Staff. As Bowles was preoccupied winning a tough nomination battle, Dole toured all of the state’s counties and won over many locals with her “folksy tone” (Hawkings and Nutting 2003: 745). Dole also related to North Carolina’s special economic needs, as she proposed higher federal payments to tobacco growers, a pro-trade program that would guarantee American workers a level playing field, and a state job creation plan based on tax cuts and reduced business regulations. Dole won the election with 54% of the vote, and proceeded to compile the usual conservative voting record for a southern Republican, though she gained seats on the Armed Services and Banking committees that permitted her to protect the state’s military bases and Charlotte’s important financial interests (Hawkings and Nutting 2003: 745; Koszczuk and Stern 2005: 755-756).

Democrat Bowles lost again in the 2004 senate race, as five-term congressman Richard Burr, another conservative Republican, won 52% of the vote (Hawkings and Nutting 2003: 754). Burr found it easy to relate to constituents as a “college football-playing son of a Presbyterian minister” who liked to “chauffeur himself and roll up his sleeves for jobs such as scooping ice cream on the campaign trail” (Koszczuk and Stern 2005: 757). The Republican also popularized a “take this job and try it” campaign technique, where he would work alongside his constituents as they worked at their own jobs (Koszczuk and Stern 2005: 758). During the campaign, Burr not only boasted of his role as congressman in enacting a tobacco buyout plan that provided billions of dollars to the state’s tobacco farmers, but also touted his conservative philosophy, blasting his opponent’s ties to Bill Clinton and benefiting from President Bush’s visits on his behalf (Prysby 2005: 193; Koszczuk and Stern 2005: 758). Republican Burr’s victory was presumably enhanced by President Bush’s 56% reelection victory in North Carolina, as the patterns of their support among demographic groups were very similar. Democrats Bowles and John Kerry won only 30% and 27% respectively of the white vote, and only 21% and 18% of self-identified conservatives (Prysby 2005: 189, 191, 194). In his term in the Senate, Burr compiled the usual conservative voting record for a North Carolina Republican, tempered by his record of protecting the interests of his state’s medical and drug industries and tobacco farmers (Koszczuk and Stern 2005: 757-758; Hawkings and Nutting 2003: 753; also see websites: http://www.adaction.org/ and http://www.conservative.org/congress-ratings/).

The 2008 national Democratic landslide was a good year for Democrats in North Carolina, as they retained the governorship, upset senate incumbent Dole, and saw Obama narrowly carry the state. Dole began her reelection campaign with Democrats and the major state newspaper calling her a "backbencher," and a "silent senator" who had accomplished little for the state (Barrett 2008a). A hilarious national Democratic ad took a swipe at her age, alleged ineffectiveness, and loyalty to the unpopular President Bush, with two elderly men on rocking chairs arguing over whether the 72 year old Dole was "92 or 93" in her effectiveness ranking and in her vote loyalty to Bush's proposals (Barrett 2008b). Democratic challenger Kay Hagan, a 10-year state senate veteran proceeded to relate to voters by describing herself as a "working mom" who would carpool her kids to soccer practice, and stressed the performance issue by boasting her three-time rating as one of the state's ten most effective senators by a non-partisan research center (see website: http://www.kayhagan.com/about/about-kay). Hagan received timely support from popular former Democratic governor Jim Hunt, who blasted the worst mess in Washington "since the Great Depression," and derided Dole as "a nice woman, but I have never seen anyone go to Washington and do as little as she's done" (Shaw 2008). Meanwhile, Dole continued to stumble, airing an ad accusing the sunday school teacher and presbyterian elder Hagan of taking "godless money" because of a fundraiser held for her by a member of a "Secular" group (Zagaroli 2008). With Democratic identifiers outnumbering Republicans among exit poll voters 42-31% and with Hagan beating Dole by a nearly two-to-one margin among moderates, the "soccer mom" challenger proceeded to polish off the consummate Washington insider (website: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#val=NCS01p1). Democrats also elected their two-term lieutenant governor, Beverly Perdue, as the first female governor in North Carolina's history. Outspending GOP Charlotte mayor Pat McCrory by a three-to-one margin (Johnson 2008), Perdue like Hagan also won moderates handily and was greatly benefitted by the Democratic party advantage among voters (http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#NCG00p1).

Republicans came roaring back in the 2010 elections, reelecting their one U.S. Senator and gaining control of both state legislative chambers for the first time in over one hundred years. Senator Richard Burr gained reelection by using his massive campaign warchest to run "positive" television ads (featuring children and college students talking about how government affected their future) across the state, while Democratic challenger Secretary of State Elaine Marshall lacked funds to adequately get her message out as the national Democratic party desperately directed its funds towards its endangered incumbents in other states (Christensen 2010). Political observers attributed the GOP takeover of the state legislature to Democratic misfortune of having control of both the state and federal government during a time of voter discontent and high unemployment, plus a high level of campaign-related spending by business and outside groups attacking Democrats (Bonner and Biesecker 2010)

The 2012 election year was good for Republicans, as they won the governorship, narrowly carried the state for Romney, and reached new highs of controlling roughly two thirds of U.S. House and state legislative seats, though Democrats continued to hold six of the nine subgubernatorial statewide offices. Former Charlotte mayor and narrow gubernatorial loser from 2008 Pat McCrory, benefitted from the weak economy and a big spending advantage to defeat Lieutenant Governor Walter Dalton. McCrory won 59% support among the 59% of exit poll voters who cited the economy as the most important issue facing the nation, as well as won 62% among Independents (website: http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/state/NC/governor).

The 2014 elections illustrated how competitive North Carolina was in terms of major party competition, as the parties differed by only 1% in terms of strength among voters (36% were Democrats and 35% Republicans) and the U.S. senate race was decided by 1.5% of the vote. Appealing to the 56% of voters who disapproved of Obama's job performance, businessman and state house speaker Republican Thom Tillis blasted President Obama and Democratic senator Kay Hagan: "Whether it's the IRS scandal, Benghazi, NSA, the Secret Service, it just really raises a question about this president's ability to lead... People can only absorb so much, so you really have to focus on her failure with jobs and economy, her failure on the safety and security issues" (Roarty 2014). Hagan fired back, blaming house speaker Tillis for "cutting income tax rates to benefit the wealthy, slashing public education funding and refusing to expand Medicaid to the working poor" (Robertson 2014). In this blitz of negative campaigning, the Republican had the edge and narrowly won the election, as 52% of voters believed that Hagan agreed with Obama too often, while only 42% felt that Tillis was too conservative (CNN exit poll).

The 2016 elections reinforced the competitive nature of modern North Carolina elections with the two major parties splitting the gubernatorial and senate elections. Democrats offered strong challengers to the two GOP incumbents. Their gubernatorial hopeful was four-term state attorney general Roy Cooper, who had also previously been a state legislator for fourteen years. The Democratic senate hopeful was Deborah Ross, a former state house member for ten years. One controversial issue in the governor's race was HB2, the bathroom bill, which prevented local governments from enacting anti-discrimination ordinances that permitted people to use public bathrooms based on their gender identity (rather than their biological gender stated on their birth certificates), which was signed into law by GOP governor McCrory. Democrat Cooper called the bill a "national embarrassment" and as attorney general refused to defend it in court (Stracqualursi 2016). With fully 65% of state voters opposing HB2 and 64% of them voting for Cooper, the Democrat narrowly unseated the Republican. Democrats were also advantaged by outnumbering Republicans 35% to 31% among voters (http://www.cnn.com/election/results/exit-polls/north-carolina/governor). Republicans were able to narrowly hang onto their senate seat, however. Though Democrat Ross tried to tie Senator Burr to the controversial Trump and the HB2 state issue, the Democrat had limited name visibility and was blasted by Burr for her support for the state ACLU chapter (Associated Press 2016b).

The 2020 elections reinforced the competitive nature of North Carolina politics, as Democrats re-elected Governor Roy Cooper while Republicans re-elected Senator Thom Tillis, both by narrow margins. The losing GOP gubernatorial nominee, Lieutenant Governor Dan Forest, campaigned on a quicker reopening of businesses and schools, but polls showed public approval of how the Democratic governor was handling COVID-19, and for requiring masks in public (https://spectrumlocalnews.com/nc/charlotte/politics/2020/10/21/exclusive-spectrum-news-ipsos-poll-finds-strong-support-for-cooper--mask-mandate). Cooper also campaigned on state issues such as raising teacher pay and expanding Medicaid, and explained that his veto of a measure requiring that the undocumented be turned over to federal agents was because he believed that it would just cost the state money in defending an unconstitutional measure (Dovere 2021). Republican Tillis won an even narrower race as a big Trump supporter, attending a White House event for Supreme Court justice Amy Coney Barrett, as he defeated retired military veteran Cal Cunningham who had limited his campaign appearances after apologizing for marital infidelity (Snell and Walsh 2020). Tillis was also helped by the GOP holding a 3% edge over Democrats among voters, but that GOP edge was not enough to help their party's gubernatorial candidate, as the Democratic governor won a majority of Independents and had a 5% edge among his own party identifiers (compared to the GOP's vote among Republicans)(CNN exit poll).

The 2022 Senate election was hotly contested in this competitive state with the incumbent Republican retiring. Democrats nominated Cheri Beasley, the former Chief Justice of the state Supreme Court, while Republicans nominated Trump-endorsed Congressman Ted Budd. Beasley aggressively campaigned across the state, even in more Republican small towns and rural areas and even outraised the Republican before Labor Day. Distancing herself from President Biden, the gutsy Democrat stressed "effectiveness over partisanship," with her "Standing Up for North Carolina tour" (Ross 2022). Beasley did focus on national Democratic issues, such as affordable health care, housing, college, and prescription drugs, however, while Republican Budd stressed the economy and blasted Biden and the Democrats for inflation and high gas prices (Narea 2022). Though Beasley won 51% of Independents and 65% of self-identified moderates, each candidate won a hefty 97% of their own party identifiers, giving Budd the victory as the GOP outnumbered Democrats among exit poll voters by a 37-32% margin.

A Modern Competitive Two-Party State

North Carolina is the second Rim South state that we have examined, and like Arkansas it has had a more progressive history than have most Deep South states. The state’s more diversified economy, a higher socioeconomic status populace, and a smaller black population than is found in the Deep South may have helped produce a more competitive two party system at an earlier time than occurred in many southern states. Beginning in 1980 one senate seat switched parties five straight times with five different senators, each of the four before the current senator able to serve for only one term, and in 2008 Republicans lost the lock they had had on the other senate seat since 1972 (Table 10-1). Beginning in 1978 U.S. senate elections were so competitive that even with incumbents running, victors were usually unable to exceed 55% of the vote. Democrats continued to win most gubernatorial elections, but beginning in 1984 those contests were also so competitive than even challengers to incumbents were able to garner at least 43% of the two-party vote (Table 10-2). Republicans carried North Carolina in every presidential race beginning in 1980 (except in 2008), but Democrats continue to win the great majority of statewide elected offices. Two-party competition has even come to the state legislature. Since 1994, Republicans have held an average of 40% of the seats in the state senate, and even gained control of both legislative chambers after the 2010 national GOP landslide.

It is evident that the historically majority Democratic party has often suffered from a divided party and divisive primaries beginning in 1972, with the victorious party nominee often viewed as the more “liberal” and less electable candidate. Republicans elected Jesse Helms senator in 1972 after a moderate conservative Democratic incumbent was upset in the primary by a more moderate challenger of Greek ancestry. The GOP then reelected Helms after another divisive Democratic primary where the son of a former governor was beaten by a more liberal candidate, a “populist” insurance commissioner (Table 10-3). Helms was reelected twice in the 1990s after Democrats twice nominated the same African American, a pro-choice and anti-death penalty candidate, over two different white moderates who were viewed as more electable. Both Republican governors were initially elected with the help of divisive Democratic primaries. Holshouser won in 1972 after a Democratic heir-apparent was defeated in the party primary and after the upset winner neglected to unify his party. Martin won the governorship in 1984 after a bitter Democratic party primary and the nomination of a pro-consumer Democrat over a pro-Reagan Democrat.

Sometimes Democrats have avoided divisive primaries, but have nevertheless nominated candidates who helped elect Republicans by being easy targets for the “liberal” label. Martin was reelected governor over a Democratic lieutenant governor who had cast a tie-breaking pro-choice vote. Though Democratic Senator Morgan voted as a moderate, his vote for the Panama Canal Treaty “giving away” the canal to the nation of Panama by the year 2000 gave Republican East an issue to help unseat him. Democratic Senator Terry Sanford compiled a liberal voting record on most issues and opposed the Gulf War, providing cannon fodder for Republican Faircloth to unseat him (Table 10-4). In the new century, Republicans elected Dole U.S. senator after a tough Democratic primary, and both Dole and Burr were elected U.S. senators over the same Democratic opponent, whose claim to fame was serving as President Clinton’s chief of staff.

With North Carolina politics increasingly resembling the divisive ideological battles being waged by the two parties in Washington D.C., North Carolina Republicans have also contributed their share of support to ideologically “pure” candidates who lacked electability. Democrat Hunt was reelected governor in 1996 after Republicans offered a candidate of the religious right who had blasted his primary opponent for supporting a pro-choice group. Democrat Terry Sanford was elected senator in 1986 after a bruising GOP primary battle where the more electable candidate had to battle for his political life after daring to vote for a Martin Luther King holiday and failing to be consistently pro-life (Table 10-3). Indeed, even victorious Republican candidates (for federal offices at least) have been so conservative that typically the only question is whether their voting record can be labeled “conservative” at least 80% of the time, or whether they are even more “consistently conservative” (Table 10-4). The conservatism of GOP members of Congress resembles the ideological orientations of the party’s county organization members, where in 2001 over 90% called themselves “conservative,” of which over half regarded themselves as “very conservative” (Prysby 2003b: 153). Democratic county party members have also become more ideologically extreme over the years, but in the same year less than 60% called themselves “liberal” and only about one-third of that group regarded themselves as “very liberal” (Prysby 2003b: 153).

Both parties can benefit electorally by taking lessons from their successful governors, who pursued ideologically inclusive goals that united the state. Four-term Democratic governor James Hunt is a model, with policies that stretched across the ideological divide. A pro-education governor who backed pre-schools and preached racial harmony, Hunt also enacted welfare reform, tax cuts, and was tough-on-crime. Republican Holshouser supported such popular progressive programs as mental health, black businesses, and public education that included kindergartens (Table 10-4). Governors of both parties united citizens of diverse views by aggressively promoting economic development. Democrat Scott and Republican Martin backed a tax hike for improved highways, while Democrat Hunt and Republican Holshouser both worked to attract industry to the state. Most recently, Democrat Mike Easley has successfully enacted a lottery that earmarks all of its funds for improvements in education.

Democrats continue to show a remarkable resilience with their biracial party and ideological pragmatism, despite GOP electoral gains. Democrats in the new century have furnished African Americans with important leadership positions in the state legislature. During the 2003-2006 sessions, African Americans held the Deputy President Pro Tempore and Majority Whip positions in the state senate and (over two sessions) three of the seven Democratic whip positions in the state house (Menifield, Shaffer, and Brassell 2005: 165; see Website: http://www.ncleg.net/homePage.pl).

Democrats after the 2004 elections continued to hold 6 of the state’s 13 U.S. house districts with ideologically pragmatic candidates, despite a Bush win in 9 of the districts. The four districts that backed John Kerry all had black populations over 20%, and were won by Democratic congress members who included quite logically one liberal African American, two liberal white males, and one moderate liberal white male. The three politically marginal districts that went for Bush but had black populations of over 20% were won by a moderate white male Democrat, a moderate liberal white male Democrat, and a conservative Republican. The six districts that went for Bush and had black populations under 20% all elected Republican congress members, four of whom had clear conservative roll call voting records and two of whom were newly elected. Democrats unseated one of these two longtime GOP congressmen in 2006, however, giving them a bare majority of the state’s U.S. house delegation for the first time since the 1994 national GOP tsunami, and picked up another seat in 2008, but lost a seat in 2010.

While North Carolina’s Democratic congressional delegation today is a far cry from the moderate conservatism or conservatism of old-time Democratic Senators B. Everett Jordan and Sam Ervin, even being able to offer “moderate” liberal candidates provides more electable candidates compared to the more consistent liberalism of a Senator Terry Sanford or John Edwards. And relative to the ideological narrowness of the state’s Republican party, North Carolina Democrats show every promise of remaining a party that is as electorally competitive as is the rising GOP.

Table 10-1

Governors and U.S. Senators and Their Parties in Modern North Carolina

	Democrats			Republicans
	Governors	Senators	Senators	Governors	Senators	Senators
1970	Scott	Jordan	Ervin
1972			Ervin	Holshouser*	Helms*
1974			Morgan*	Holshouser	Helms
1976	Hunt*		Morgan		Helms
1978	Hunt		Morgan		Helms*
1980	Hunt*				Helms	East*
1982	Hunt				Helms	East
1984				Martin*	Helms*	East
1986			Sanford*	Martin	Helms
1988			Sanford	Martin*	Helms
1990			Sanford	Martin	Helms*
1992	Hunt*				Helms	Faircloth*
1994	Hunt				Helms	Faircloth
1996	Hunt*				Helms*	Faircloth
1998	Hunt		Edwards*		Helms
2000	Easley*		Edwards		Helms
2002	Easley		Edwards		Dole*
2004	Easley*				Dole	Burr*
2006	Easley				Dole	Burr
2008	Perdue*	Hagan*				Burr
2010	Perdue	Hagan				Burr*
2012		Hagan		McCrory*		Burr
2014				McCrory	Tillis*	Burr
2016	Cooper*				Tillis	Burr*
2018	Cooper				Tillis	Burr
2020	Cooper*				Tillis*	Burr
2022	Cooper				Tillis	Budd*

Note: Cell entries indicate the governors and U.S. Senators elected in or serving during the years listed at the left.

* Indicates that the officeholder was elected in that year.

Table 10-2. Republican Growth in North Carolina

Year of Election	Pres. Vote (% Rep of 2 pty)	U.S. Senate Seats* (% Rep of 2 pty)	Gov. Pty.* (% Rep of 2 pty)	Party Ident. (% Rep of 2 pty.)	U.S. House Seats (% Rep)	State Senate Seats (% Rep of 2 pty)	State House Seats (% Rep of 2 pty)	Sub-Gov. Office (% Rep)
1970	NA	0	Dem	26*	36	14	19	0
1972	71	50 (54)	R-51	24**	36	30	29	0
1974	NA	50 (37)	Rep	NA	18	2	8	0
1976	44	50	D-34	NA	18	6	5	0
1978	NA	50 (55)	Dem	29	18	12	12	0
1980	51	100 (50)	D-38	NA	36	20	20	0
1982	NA	100	Dem	36	18	12	15	0
1984	62	100 (52)	R-54	40	45	24	31	0
1986	NA	50 (48)	Rep	37	27	20	29	0
1988	58	50	R-56	40+	27	26	38	11
1990	NA	50 (53)	Rep	46	36	28	31	11
1992	50.5	100 (52)	D-46	47	33	22	35	0
1994	NA	100	Dem	50+	67	48	57	0
1996	53	100 (53)	D-43	51	50	40	51	0
1998	NA	50 (48)	Dem	53	58	30	46	0
2000	57	50	D-47	49+	58	30	48	11
2002	NA	50 (54)	Dem	50	54	44	50	11
2004	56	100 (52)	D-44	51	54	42	48	33
2006	NA	100	Dem	NA	46	38	43	33
2008	49.8	50 (46)	D-48	42	38	40	43	22
2010	NA	50 (56)	Dem	47	46	62	58	22
2012	51	50	R-56	46	69	66	64	33
2014	NA	100 (51)	Rep	49++	77	69	62	33
2016	52	100 (53)	D-50	47++	77	70	62	67
2018	NA	100	Dem	NA	77	58	54	67
2020	51	100 (51)	D- 48	53+++	62	56	58	67
2022	NA	100 (52)	Dem	54++	50	60	59	67

* Drawn from a 1968 poll cited in Fleer, Lowery, and Prysby (1988).

** Drawn from a 1971 poll available from the Odum Institute.

+ Denotes pooled results from two polls conducted that year.

++ Drawn from CNN exit poll.

+++ Fox poll, reported in Buchanan and Kapeluck, The 2020 Presidential Election in the South, p. 11..

Note: NA indicates not available or no election held.

Source: The Almanac of American Politics, 1972-1984; CQ=s Politics in America, 1986-2000; Lamis (1990); Christensen and Fleer (1999); Fleer, Lowery, and Prysby (1988); Wright, Erikson, and McIver (1985); Prysby (2007); Jones (2011); Bullock (2014, 2018); polls archived at the Odum Institute for Research in Social Science at UNC, Chapel Hill (website: http://152.2.32.107/odum/jsp/content_node.jsp?nodeid=210); and

state government website http://www.sboe.state.nc.us/.

Table 10-3

Factors Affecting Elections of North Carolina Governors and U.S. Senators

Officeholder (party-year 1^st, imp. elections)	Issues	Candidate Attributes	Party/Campaign Factors	Performance Factors
Governors
James Holshouser (R- 1972)	Modernizer GOP, not Dem. oligarchy		Divided Dems, lo Dem turnout	GOP legislative and party leader
James Hunt (D- 1976, ‘80)	Social conser., lib. civ. liberty, pro-bus. Dem/		Statewide personal net/ bus.-labor coal.	Lieut. gov. Dem./
James Martin (R- 1984, ’88)	Social conser., bus. modern./ progress. GOP	/popular GOP governor	Divided Dems./ Dem. angers pro-life lobby	6-term GOP congressman/
James Hunt (D- 1992, ’96)	Rep. bus. fail/ right-wing Rep	/popular, moderate Dem.	Business-Dem/ good economy	Dem. 2-term governor/
Mike Easley (D- 2000, ’04)	Mod. lib. vs. mod. cons./ Dem social cons, pro-educ.		Dem. spending advantage/ Dem. inroads among whites	Dem. atty. gen./
Beverly Perdue (D- 2008)			Dem. party id and spending advantage	Dem. 2 term lieut. gov./
Pat McCrory (R- 2012)	Weak economy hurts Dem admin.		Big GOP spending advantage	Rep popular Charlotte mayor
Roy Cooper (D- 2016, '20)	Dem blasts governor's anti-gay bathroom bill/Dem stressed education, health, covid rules		Dems outnumber Reps by 4 points/Dem wins Independents	Dem 4-term attorney general/Dem gov. beats GOP lieut. gov.
Senators
Jesse Helms (R- 1972, ’78. ’84, ’90, ’96)	“liberal” vs. conser./conser. vs. populist/ Dem. “liberal”/ “liberal” black Dem./ “liberal” black Dem.	/embodies small town values/ folksy Rep.//	Divided Dems/ divided Dems/ Reagan, Dem. unionism hurts/ divided Dems/ divided Dems, Dole win	/good constituent services/seniority, agri. helped// GOP press releases, state visits, chairs imp. committee
R. Morgan (D- 1974)	Mod. Dem, biracial econ.		Dem. label, GOP recession	Pro-consumer attorney gen.
John East (R- 1980)	Dem blasted as “liberal”		Helms’ PAC favors GOP
Terry Sanford (D- 1986)	Dem pro-worker, farmer		Divisive right-wing GOP race	Dem. former gov.
L. Faircloth (R- 1992)	“liberal” Dem. vs. Gulf War	Dem. old, ill		GOP former Dem. gov. work
John Edwards (D- 1998)	Outsider Dem., rejects PAC $	Dem. state and people fighter	Rep hog farmer, Rep not debate	Dem. wealthy trial lawyer
Elizabeth Dole (R- 2002)	Dem. Clinton’s chief of staff	“Folksy” GOP tour, state need	Dem. tough primary battle	Rep. cabinet positions
Richard Burr (R- 2004, 2010, '16)	GOP conser., tobacco helps/GOP ads blast fed. policy failures/Dem aided ACLU	People person, common jobs//	Bush visits/much GOP camp. $, ads feature young people/	5-term GOP cong.//
Kay Hagan (D- 2008)		Dem soccer mom, working mom	Gov Hunt backs Dem, Dem party id edge	Rep backbencher, ineffective
Thom Tillis (R- 2014, '20)	Dem too pro-Obama/Rep backs Trump	/Dem marital affair scandal	Obama job disapproved/GOP party edge	Rep state house speaker/Rep incumbent
Ted Budd (R- 2022)	liberal Dem vs. Trump conservative	Dem bipartisan unifier	GOP party edge	Rep Cong beats state court chief judge

Table 10-4

Programs of North Carolina Governors and U.S. Senators

Officeholder (party-year 1^st elected)	Progressive Policies	Neutral Policies	Conservative Policies
Governors
Robert Scott (D- 1968)	Education tax hike, minimum wage hike	Gov’t and university reorganization, road tax hike
James Holshouser (R- 1972)	Blacks-women appoints, educ, kindergartens, health	Bonds for attracting industry
James Hunt (D- 1976)	Racial harmony, pro-education	Roads built, recruit high wage busin.	Non-pardons, uniform sentencing
James Martin (R- 1984)		Road gas tax, recruit business abroad	Conservative appointments
James Hunt (D- 1992)	Pre-school program, teacher pay raises	New business tax credit	Welfare reform, tax cut, anti-crime
Mike Easley (D- 2000)	Education lottery	Tax hike and budget cuts
Beverly Perdue (D- 2008)	Expands Pre-K program
Pat McCrory (R- 2012)	Teacher pay raise		Anti-LGBT bathroom bill, cuts unemploy. insurance
Senators
Sam Ervin (D- 1954)	Pro-1^st amendment and constitution	Humble, country lawyer, handshaker	Conservative, anti-civil rights
B. Everett Jordan (D- 1958)		Moderate conservative record
Jesse Helms (R- 1972)			Consistently conservative
Robert Morgan (D- 1974)	Panama Canal treaty gives away canal	Moderate record
John East (R- 1980)			Consistent conservative record
Terry Sanford (D- 1986)	Liberal voting record
Lauch Faircloth (R- 1992)		Federal money for parks, buildings	Consistent conservative record
John Edwards (D- 1998)	Liberal voting record		For Iraq war
Elizabeth Dole (R- 2002)		Banking, Armed Services comm.	Conservative voting record
Richard Burr (R- 2004)		Protects state health, tobacco industries	Conservative voting record
Kay Hagan (D- 2008)	Liberal roll call vote record
Thom Tillis (R- 2014)			Conservative voting record