mmmm, lookit all that red

[bryanthompson]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/vote2004/countymap.htm

They have the 2000 map also.

[MikeCT]

This guy's a commie!!!!

[juanbenae]

i bet his middle name is richard......

[bryanthompson]

lol! didn't see that one coming!

[jyl]

Looks like this satellite image of the US at night, with the dark areas being low population and the bright areas being high population.



The similarity of the red-blue map to the dark-light map says something about the political rural-urban divide.

[Yargk]

Oh I get it, if you live out in the country and have little exposure to ideas different from your own, then you vote for Bush.

[Burnin' oil]

Originally posted by Yargk
Oh I get it, if you live out in the country and have little exposure to ideas different from your own, then you vote for Bush.

Exactly!!

[turbo6bar]

country living = NASCAR = low intelligence = Republican leanings & Democratic superiority of city dwellers

[Burnin' oil]

Originally posted by turbo6bar
country living = NASCAR = low intelligence = Republican leanings & Democratic superiority of city dwellers

Exactly!!

[928ram]

Those past 4 posts are exactly while this country took a huge turn to the right yesterday; keep on believing; lambs to the slaughter

[Yargk]

Originally posted by 928ram
Those past 4 posts are exactly while this country took a huge turn to the right yesterday; keep on believing; lambs to the slaughter

So we should lie to the middle of the country. It doesn't mean they have low intelligence. However it does say something if most urban areas support a different candidate than people who live in non urban areas. It's really easy to judge others when you know nothing about their lives because you aren't exposed to them and so we have the peculiar concept of morals in rural areas. No, this has more to do with ignorance than intelligence. If every Bush supporter had a close gay friend, god forbid, there would be no banning of gay marriages. The only part that has to do with intelligence is that the most intelligent will seek out knowledge where as regular people need to be shoved into a place full of a variety of ideas... like an urban setting. Ofcourse there are highly educated intelligent people who support Bush, they are just stubborn.

[onewhippedpuppy]

And you wonder why you lost?! Wow, Keith, where to begin? So many pearls of widom in your statement, perhaps I should print it and hang it on the wall in my Kansas outhouse? You know, ignorance can go both directions, something few democrats seem to realize. You sit on your intellectually superior plateau, looking down on the un-enlightened masses, dictating how they should think, act, and feel about the issues. Do you think there aren't any gay people in Kansas? I myself have known gay people, and don't treat them any differently, I just feel that "marriage" is between a man and a woman, I don't object to them getting tax breaks. Based on my morals, largely dictated by my christian/ catholic faith, I don't believe it is right. Or abortion. Or the push to remove personal responsibility from all aspects of life. One final point, in regards to your discussion of intelligence, intelligent people don't have to go around reminding others how intelligent they are.

[Yargk]

I knew someone would jump on the gay comment. Of course there are many people who have gay friends and don't support gay marriage and of course many of them live in rural areas. I never said anything contrary to this. What I did say is that gay marriages wouldn't be banned. This is because out of all the people who found gay friends many of them would change their minds or at least enough that the proposals of such a ban would never be passed. Don't jump to conclusions, I was speaking statistically.

Also much of what I said is taught in almost every high school that your children will attend. It's by no means radical. The fact that people who live in urban settings are exposed to more is part of any good civics class. So is the fact that they are in general more accepting of alternate life styles. So who makes a better decision? The rural group where a certain percentage has gay friends and knows what kind of people they are, or the urban group, where a much larger percentage has gay friends and knows what kind of people they are?

I have no gripes with you if you aren't against tax breaks nor are you prejudicist. The only people who annoy me are those who take away people's rights when it doesn't effect them. I'm now arguing for people's rights when I will never need a gay marriage myself (i like the grid girls posts as much as the next guy). I understand the idea of defining what marriage is, the problem is that history has shown that separate can't be equal and what do these people have if they don't have marriage. I don't think people choose to be gay so they should have something that is regarded with just has much respect as marriage is.

[onewhippedpuppy]

Soooooo, since you live in a urban area, I should just let you make my decisions for me? I don't object to gay people on a personal level, just so it doesn't negatively affect others, I could care less what kind of lifestyle others live. I object to it on a moral level, the Bible isn't real positive about homosexuality. So how does that translate to abortion, do you know more babies, therefore you can better make the decision to cheapen the value of their lives?

[onewhippedpuppy]

I can echo your sentiment in your edit, I don't mean this to be personal, it just constantly irritates me that those from more populated areas feel that the lifestyle that they live is right, and that therefore they should dictate that to the rest of the nation. It was essentially the approach of the democratic party during this election, and it didn't seem to go over too well.

[Serge914]

At least that map explain why the international community is so surprised. Most of the places that we know in America are blue, the East coast, the West coast and the big cities. Those are the place where we go for vacations. Those are also the places where most of the movies are made. We see only one side of the medal, we will need to understand the other side.

[Yargk]

Originally posted by onewhippedpuppy
Soooooo, since you live in a urban area, I should just let you make my decisions for me? I don't object to gay people on a personal level, just so it doesn't negatively affect others, I could care less what kind of lifestyle others live. I object to it on a moral level, the Bible isn't real positive about homosexuality. So how does that translate to abortion, do you know more babies, therefore you can better make the decision to cheapen the value of their lives?

You appear to be an intelligent fellow and your points are well made. It does sound insane to say that if you live in a city, that you know more than the next guy. It's more that those who are exposed to more will know more about how things really work. I don't think anyone believes that abortion is a good thing, but if you live in an area that has many of the factors that lead to a high teen pregnancy rate you may start to realize that women will get abortions whether it's legal or not. And then you might come to the conclusion that the moral thing to do is to keep it legal and provide it free so that these women won't die when they try to perform abortions on themselves. (many people might think letting them die is the moral thing, it's their choice) But you also educate them about family planning so you won't need nearly as many abortions anyway. So the problem is lessened by education and not by treating them as criminals.

[onewhippedpuppy]

I 100% agree with the point about providing education about abstinence, family planning, and birth control as a method to prevent abortion, avoiding an accidental pregnancy makes abortion a moot point. I just feel that by having it as a legal option, it makes it an acceptable alternative, at least in some circles. Sure, regardless there will be those who take the coathanger in the alley approach, but how many of them end up in a clinic anyway? It may seem like a callous comment, but should a child die for the parent's mistake? I just feel that there needs to be a greater emphasis on personal responsibility in our country, if you screw up and get pregnant, either take care of the baby you created, or give it up to the thousands who are awaiting adoption.

[Yargk]

Originally posted by onewhippedpuppy
I can echo your sentiment in your edit, I don't mean this to be personal, it just constantly irritates me that those from more populated areas feel that the lifestyle that they live is right, and that therefore they should dictate that to the rest of the nation. It was essentially the approach of the democratic party during this election, and it didn't seem to go over too well.

I'm really glad you said this. I try to really stress this whenever I talk to someone about these subjects. Abortion isn't right, children watching sex on TV isn't right, prostitution isn't right, and drug use isn't right. These lifestyles are more common in urban areas and it's sad that people get the impression that urbanites want to tell the nation that these things are ok. I disagree and I think that there is hardly anyone who actually thinks that these lifestyles are ok. However, those who live around these things might be in a better position to offer solutions which are usually more about rehabilitation instead of prosecution.

[onewhippedpuppy]

Believe it or not, Kansas is one of the top states in meth production, something to be proud of, huh? It's really suprising the drug use in small towns, even under 10,000. Also, I should have added this earlier, I HATE Nascar. I tell people I like the WRC, SCCA, and F1, I just get a blank stare.