I just got finished reading the diary by Laura Clawson, GOP congressman calls firing gay people one of the "freedoms we enjoy" ( source: http://www.dailykos.com/... ) and the first thing that came to mind was thinking -- just how clueless is this guy? (Well, the first thing was really something else, but I can't repeat it here …) I'm not sure that Pittenger realizes just how out of tune he is with his own constituents? and I'm not sure if many others who study North Carolina politics realize this also? This may seem surprising at first, but I would wager that in 2014 a good majority of the district he represents, NC-9, does not share Pittenger's views re. gay people.
The district is indeed still Republican (although steadily moving towards our side). Looking at "recent" history (last half-century or so), it's been one of the most Republican districts in the South, having been continuously represented by the GOP since the 1952 election (it's been numbered NC-10, NC-8 and NC-9 during this time, but has always been centered on Charlotte). However, a good portion of Republicans in NC-9 are quite different from those almost anywhere else in the South in that they are not the reflexively hard-right, socially-conservative kind. In fact, during the 2012 vote to ban same-sex marriage in North Carolina (Amendment 1, which passed state-wide by 61%), NC-9 only voted for the ban by a 53 – 47 margin. I'm including a few useful precinct maps of Mecklenburg Co. and NC-9 below which help to illustrate just how disconnected the following two factors are in this area (ie. factor 1 - voting GOP; and factor 2 - being "anti-gay")
(source: http://uselectionatlas.org/... )
As you can see, virtually all of the GOP precincts in south Charlotte (the geographic heart of NC-9) voted against the ban on same-sex marriage. In fact, in the entire portion of Mecklenburg Co. within NC-9, Amendment 1 lost by 54 – 46. The only reason the margin for the entire district still favored a ban was because of the inclusion of more conservative ex-urban areas in Iredell and Union Counties.
First, keep in mind that this vote was in May of 2012, more than a year before the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Windsor. The North Carolina vote also happened two days prior to President Obama coming out in support of same-sex marriage.
Second, the vote was re. same-sex marriage, not re. non-discrimination in employment policy and I would guess that many of the people who voted against same-sex marriage would, nevertheless, not support the "freedom" of an employer to indiscriminately fire someone just because they're gay.
Third, I'm pretty sure that this area continues to attract people who do not share Pittenger's bigoted viewpoint re. gays. Charlotte/Mecklenburg Co. has been clearly moving our way in the recent past. Now, it turns out that even some of the ex-urban areas here are beginning to follow. In a very interesting WSJ article, Politics Counts: Where Liberals and Conservatives are Moving, the aforementioned Union County is listed as #13 (out of the nation's 100 fastest-growing counties) in terms of "liberals" moving into the area (source: http://blogs.wsj.com/... )
NC-9 may still be a Republican area, but I would guess that even before the next round of redistricting, at the end of the decade, it might flip towards our side, especially with Pittenger as the Congressman here. The North Carolina GOP may have been too-clever-by-half when they redistricted in 2010. The voters here are still rather conservative on fiscal matters, but if Pittenger continues to emphasize his bigotry with re. to social issues the voters may decide that he has just gone too far and has overstayed his welcome.
Indeed, in 2012 Pittenger won here by only 52-46, against Jennifer Roberts who received virtually no national attention. Pittenger lost the Mecklenburg Co. portion of the district to Roberts, but won overall by his off-setting large margins in the two ex-urban counties. This year, unfortunately, he faces no opponent other than an unaffiliated write-in candidate. 2016, or perhaps a few years later down the road, might not be as kind to Robert Pittenger.