Understanding how local contexts determine why white voters in America’s heartland are shifting to the right is the driving force behind Stephanie Ternullo’s first published book How the Heartland Went Red: Why Local Forces Matter in an Age of Nationalized Politics.
Stephanie Ternullo is an Assistant Professor of Government at Harvard, joining the department after receiving her PhD in sociology from the University of Chicago in 2022. Her research uses multiple methods to understand how place shapes political identity and behavior.
Her book – published by Princeton University Press – takes up one aspect of this puzzle, showing how place intersects with race, class, and religion in shaping the rightward turn across the industrial Heartland. We sat down with Stephanie to discuss publishing her first book and the topics it discusses.
You’re officially a published author – how does it feel?
It feels great! Nothing is ever perfect, and there are probably 12,000 other versions of this book I could have written. Maybe 11,000 would have been slightly better than this one – but I’m really proud of this version.
Why did this line of research interest you?
I went to graduate school because I was interested in understanding white, working-class politics. In particular, I wanted to understand variation in white, working-class politics. Because of this, I was always a little preoccupied with the New Deal – this is the implicit reference point for most conversations we have about “class politics” in the U.S. because it was the time when we came as close to a real class-based party politics (a la Europe) as we ever have in this country.
As I developed those research interests during graduate school, I wanted to better understand how the breakdown of the New Deal coalition had reverberated through to the present, in ways that could help us understand contemporary variation within white, working-class politics. That led me to this project: understanding the past and present politics of three white, working-class New Deal cities in the Midwest that took different political paths after the New Deal coalition broke down.
Tell us about these three cities and your research visits.
I started my research in the spring of 2019, and I spent most of my time through November of that year bouncing back and forth between Indiana, Minnesota, and Wisconsin.
During that time, I interviewed 86 “residents” – people not formally involved in local politics or government – and 91 “community leaders” – elected officials, pastors, labor leaders, and nonprofit workers. I also observed City Council and County Commission meetings, political party meetings and events, campaign fundraisers, and other events.
I made another visit to Minnesota in February/March 2020, but then the COVID-19 pandemic prevented me from continuing in-person research visits. From then until the November 2020 election, I continued re-interviewing those 86 residents over the phone – ultimately speaking to people four times over 18 months, for a total of 4.5 hours per person. This offered the opportunity to speak to people directly about their concerns for their communities and the country before the presidential campaign kicked off; just as the COVID-19 pandemic was beginning and as it accelerated; and as they made their final decisions in the 2020 election.
It’s been labeled the déjà vu election – what parallels can we draw between 2020 and now?
I could never have predicted quite how many parallels there would be between 2020 and 2024 – we’re even deciding between the same two candidates. But more importantly, we’re still in a world where the Electoral College empowers a handful of states to decide the presidency.
This year, like in 2020, three of those states will be Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. States where white voters in postindustrial cities will cast votes that matter much more for the presidency and the Senate compared to votes in states such as Massachusetts. It is therefore imperative to understand the politics of these postindustrial cities in order to comprehend how we got to this place in American politics and where we’re likely to go from here.
What is the one key point we should take away from your book?
Place matters for politics. Many of the things people worry about, the way they understand the political parties, and whether they think one party or the other might actually address their concerns, come from their lived experiences, rooted in their communities.
Can we expect to see anything else from you soon?
Yes! I’m currently working on a new book project, which is also about the relationship between local processes and political behavior. I’m shifting my focus now from Midwestern cities to coastal suburbs and from national politics to local issues.
You can find out more or buy a copy of Stephanie’s book How the Heartland Went Red: Why Local Forces Matter in an Age of Nationalized Politics here.