In the aftermath of one of the more bewildering campaign seasons in recent memory, the results should give everyone pause. A look at the new electoral map may lead some to claim that Republicans were granted a “change” mandate akin to the one supposedly rewarded to Democrats in 2008. But a closer examination reveals some emerging patterns that, considering demographic and voting trends, should have been expected.

A sizable portion of the GOP’s gains in the House came from what Patchwork Nation deems “Christian Conservative” districts. These areas stretch south and west from Pennsylvania, through Appalachia, and into the Old South and lower Midwest. When controlling for open seat contests and races in which a Democrat was running for reelection, one will find that Republicans were tremendously successful in southeastern Ohio, central Tennessee, and northern Arkansas, among other locations.

The majority of these districts have favored Republican candidates in recent presidential elections and their electorates are typically more white and more elderly than the national average. It would seem that it was only a matter of time before these naturally conservative areas fell into the GOP’s congressional column. Does that mean that Democrats should disregard such districts? Of course not. But long-term trends appear to favor Republicans.

Arkansas’ 1st District was one of the Christian Conservative districts to fall to the GOP. Republican Rick Crawford defeated Democrat Chad Causey, 51.8 percent to 43.4 percent. The anti-incumbent wave that swept the nation had blown through Jonesboro, undoing the districts’ deep Democratic roots.

In the campaign’s final weeks, one of the Democrats’ central problems in 2010 was on full display when Causey and former President Bill Clinton shared a stage together. Clinton, campaigning for Causey, defended Democratic economic policies and voiced his support for what he saw as the accomplishments of the Obama administration.

When it was Causey’s turn to speak, the candidate pledged not to be a rubber stamp for Obama or party leaders. After saying that he would not have voted for either the cap-and-trade or health care bills, Causey noted: “The Constitution doesn’t say anything about Democrats and Republicans. It talks about representing constituents, regardless of who’s in control in Washington and carry their voice.” It says a lot that a Democratic candidate, while on the stump with a former president, went out of his way to avoid party labels and being associated with monumental pieces of legislation.

The story in Arkansas’ 1st District fit perfectly within the national narrative. The economy dominated coverage throughout the cycle, as the Great Recession took its toll on electoral politics.

Lessons learned from analyzing national political coverage in recent months focus on the broad narrative that job losses and festering economic struggles overshadowed the legislative triumphs of Obama and the Democratic Congress. While a number of New York Times political articles covered individual races and their candidates, the vast majority discussed the ongoing effort to pull the nation out of its recession and the political consequences of certain policies.

As Election Day drew closer, the coverage coalesced around the idea that Democrats were being stung by the perception that they wanted to revive the economy with additional stimulus legislation. Coverage of Republicans centered on the influx of secret campaign funds in their favor and the belief that they were committed to cutting the size of the federal government. Meanwhile, Talking Points Memo was geared toward a more Democratic- or liberal-leaning audience. Its coverage specialized in the politics of Capitol Hill and the site liked to emphasize national stories with a sensational appeal.

The local coverage in Arkansas, when covering the election at all, featured the economy front and center, just as the national media did.

Over the course of the semester, political coverage in The Jonesboro Sun was, at best, infrequent, while stories regarding the congressional election were even rarer. Indeed, there were several weeks in which The Sun did not feature a single article on the congressional election, and The Sun also failed to cover the first of two fundraisers that former president Bill Clinton held for local Democratic candidates.

The Sun’s paucity of congressional coverage was particularly surprising since a Republican House candidate (Rick Crawford) was poised to take control of the district for the first time since Reconstruction. The Sun didn’t even realize the historical significance of the local race until after the election.

When The Jonesboro Sun did feature political articles, many of them focused on economic issues—a trend that was also evident in The New York Times. The Sun featured several stories on local property tax increases, and many of its articles on candidate speeches highlighted the candidates’ remarks on the sluggish economy. Similarly, KAIT-TV, a television station based in Jonesboro, focused on the economy in much of its political coverage, including a story about local politicians’ comments at a newly opened factory in Marked Tree, Arkansas.

In its articles on local political speeches, The Sun relied heavily on quotes and generally provided minimal background information (e.g. its article on Bill Clinton’s second fundraiser and its story on Rick Crawford’s campaign event at the Kiwanis Club). The Sun’s quote-laden coverage lied in sharp contrast to that of The New York Times and other national outlets, which often provided analysis and delved into the political implications of a given event.

Arkansas 1, the last holdout for Democrats in the South, sunk silently, at least in local news coverage, into a Christian Conservative sea of red.