Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 01, 2014, 01:07:47 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 228
51  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: City of Hudson's weighed voting system under scrutiny on: September 29, 2014, 08:23:59 am


Where do the number of units for the split block come from.  There are in identical proportion to what I had guessed from the satellite view, but 50% greater.

I had guess 40 and 72, while you have 60 and 108.   I think the allocation makes a lot of sense.

The problem is that if we take the 463 which I count in Ward 1, exclusive of the split block, then the population of Ward 1 is 593, which is way below 770.

I would rearrange the 2nd spreadsheet.  I would start out with the version that would exclude adjustments for the council president.  There are two reasons for this.   (1) That is the basis on  which Dr.Papa+ determined the voting weights.  His calculation of voting power share excludes the combinations where the council president is a critical vote; (2) In general, courts have separated district members from at-large members in determining equal protection violations.  This avoids the need to develop a mathematical formula to combine the contributions of the two types of members (insert quote about mathematical quagmire here); and recognizes that a voter has an equal protection right to elect different types of officers.  An alderman might be expected to be more parochial with regard to their ward; while the council president may have a broader citywide interest, along with management and organization of the council.   That is, they are more than mere votes on council motions.

An exception to this is in Hawaii, where the senate and house members are apportioned among the four island units, which results in rather large deviations between districts.  (eg Maui might be entitled to 1.3 senators and 2.6 representatives; they would be given one oversized senate district; and 3 undersized house districts).   There is a formula that in effect determines a voters "legislative" influence.

I would include the actual voting weights.  In Roxbury Taxpayers vs Delaware County Board of Supervisors, the equal protection test was based on the voting weight share vs. population, rather than power share; even though the voting weights had been calculated so as making voting power and population proportional.

My order of rows would be:

1) Ward populations;
2) Ward population share;
3) Voting weights (eg 256, 456, 392, 256, 864)
4) Voting weight share.
5) Difference between voting weight share and population share.
6) Discrepancy between voting weight share and population share.
7) Critical combinations.
8) Voting power share (excluding council president)
9) Difference between voting power share and population share.
10) Discrepancy between voting power share and population share.

I don't understand what Line 4 (Error Factor From Line 12 Below ...) represents.

I'm not sure how you are calculating discrepancy (line 7 and line 19), the numbers that I calculate are similar but not exact.

11+) I would then make the calculations that include an adjustment for the council president.

The way I calculated the discrepancy for the council president was to assume he represented 640.3 persons (the average for the 10 alderman 6403/10).  In effect, each person received a 0.1 bonus that was used to support the president.   The president would thus represent 1/11 of the adjusted population and expected to have 1/11 of the voting power, just as he would have if the 10 aldermen were elected from equal-population districts.

I can't say that your approach is better or worse.   Your approach will make the proportionality between ward voting power and ward population slightly better because you are distributing the president's voting power in precise proportion.

Neither may be necessary.  Dr.Papa+ didn't have an apparent constraint on the voting weight or voting power of the president.  However, the voting power of the president varied between 9.26% and 10.53% in the plans presented to the council.   9.09% is 1/11.   But there would be no legal distinction between a mixed-member council that had 10 district members and one at-large member, or 10 district members and three at-large members, or five-at large, etc, at least as far as equal protection for district voters (there might be issues with the number of at-large members if it interfered with representation of racial or political minorities).

Arguably, a role of the council president is to regulate council business.  Giving him a bit more or less voting power in order that the political power of the alderman is (more) proportionate to the population of their wards, is consistent with that role.

I don't understand where the numbers on Lines 21,22 are coming from.
52  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: City of Hudson's weighed voting system under scrutiny on: September 28, 2014, 05:40:12 pm
I added the block census numbers on your map sheet and found that they tied to the numbers for the 3rd Ward and 5th Ward, and as my spreadsheet shows, close for the 4th Ward (a different split was used for what you call the great northern block). So if there is an error, it must be in the blocks for the second and first wards. Are you worried that you copied and pasted the wrong census blocks or something? Is there a way that you could email to me the applicable portion of the spreadsheets that you downloaded for those two wards? swdunn1@gmail.com
Done.

I get 455 for Ward 4, exclusive of the Great Northern block (Tract 12, Census Block 1000).  To get to the total of 725, this requires a a 270:19 split of the block.
53  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: City of Hudson's weighed voting system under scrutiny on: September 28, 2014, 02:54:10 pm
Carole Osterlink who lives in the most depopulated census block in the First Ward tells me a lot of triplexes (and more) on her block were converted into single family homes between 2000 and 2010. It was one of the most premier Hudson "hubs" of gentrification, and is now a very desirable hood. It seems also some residences were torn down to make a parking area across the tracks from the train station as well.
Do many NYC people have weekend houses in Hudson?  The train schedules are such that commuting to NYC would be possible, but grueling, especially when making allowance to make sure that you don't miss a train when the next train is an hour or two later.   There is a very early southbound train and a fairly late northbound train.

But someone might have an efficiency in NYC, where they sleep during the week and a house in Hudson mainly for weekends.   Commuting on Monday morning and Friday afternoon is plausible.  Since they live most of the time in Manhattan, that is likely where they were counted for the census, even though they might have considered their house in Hudson as a main residence.  This would make the house in Hudson, unoccupied for census purposes.   They might be able to use the house in Hudson for tax and voting purposes.
54  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: City of Hudson's weighed voting system under scrutiny on: September 28, 2014, 02:27:56 pm
By independently check the populations for Ward 1, you mean just go over the census block numbers that you entered? Would you post those please?
Someone needs to get the LATFOR numbers

2010 Amended Population
(Prisoner Adjustment)


On that page there is a link to a zip file that contains several csv files which can be read into a  spreadsheet, along with a link to documentation.

The relevant file is pl_adjusted_DOJ_block.CSV which has one line for each census block in the state (State_ID 36).   You want the blocks that are in Columbia County (County_ID 21), Census Tracts 12 (Tract_ID 1200) and Tract_ID 1300).   These two tracts cover Hudson, and together are coincident with the Hudson city limits.

I created the map of population numbers transferring from the spreadsheet to the map.  I (just now) recalculated the populations of the wards using both the map, and the spreadsheet.  While I match the numbers that Papayonopoulos used for Wards 3 and 5, the splits of the two census blocks to match the Papayonopoulos ward totals would appear to require almost all of the Front Street block in Ward 1.

When I had first come across the Papayonopoulos numbers, I had concluded that it required a split of the Front Street block almost identical to your first spreadsheet, but with wards reversed.

But now I can't figure out how I came to such a conclusion.  I'm either doing something stupid or careless OR Hudson is way off on their base population numbers.  That's why I need someone to check independently not trusting my map.

Quote
Where did you get the 292-73 split for the Front Street census block, and the 257-32 split for the Howard-Mill Street census block in your prior map, that you are now varying slightly?  Papayonopoulos seemed to have also had a different figure for the Mill-Howard Street as well. In any event, my analysis of the numbers is reflected below, based off of yours. If you see an error somewhere, please let me know.
The census gives a population of 362 for the Front Street block.  The LATFOR numbers increase this to 365.  The prison adjustment includes both (a) deleting prisoners from the location of their prisons; and (b) adding them back to the location where they lived prior to incarceration (prisoners who were resident out of state, or whose prior address is unknown, or were in federal prisons) disappear from the counts for legislative and local redistricting.

The spreadsheet you had posted from the Hofstra report implied a 290:72 split.  I simply added the three prisoners maintaining the proportionality of that split.   290+2:72+1.  There were no prisoners added to the Great Northern block, so I was using the maps implied by the Hofstra report.  Since the Hofstra spreadsheet didn't have the prison adjustment, I would totally disregard their block splits - and thus should be disregarded from my map.

Quote
Oh, and how does the City Charter map description vary from what the map shows, as to the ward boundaries, to which you allude above?
Hudson City Charter/Code Book

Ward boundaries are in Section C1-4.

Ward 1: Warren Street and 3rd Street (extended to west boundary, and south boundary)

It is the extension of Warren Street that splits the Front Street Block.

Ward 2: Warren Street and 3rd Street (extended to west boundary and north boundary)

It is the extension of 3rd Street that splits the Mill St-Howard Great Northern block.

Ward 3: From the southern boundary and 3rd Street Extended to Warren Street to 7th Street, diagonally across Public Square (now 7th Street Park) to the intersection of Gifford Place (now Park Place?) and Columbia Street, thence along Columbia Street and Columbia Turnpike to the eastern limits.

It appears that elections are now conducted using Columbia Street to the eastern boundary, shifting the triangle between Columbia Street and Columbia Turnpike from the 5th Ward to the 3rd Ward.   Columbia Turnpike was chartered in 1799.  It would not surprise me if it at one time included the portion of Columbia Street beginning at 7th street, where Columbia Street angles off from the main street grid, and that Columbia Street was later extended to the east.

Following the 2000 Census, the Common Council passed a resolution declaring the ward populations.  Hudson had not bothered to update the voting weights since they were first introduced in 1974.  It was some time after the resolution was passed that the weights were actually implemented.  Based on the numbers in the resolution, and the 2000 census block populations, the triangle between Columbia Street and Columbia Turnpike was included in Ward 5 in 2000, but in Ward 3 in 2010.

It is quite possible that the Common Council (or the clerk who prepared the numbers) used the charter, even though elections were conducted based on the use of Columbia Street.

Ward 4: From the northern boundary and 3rd street extended, to Warren Street to 5th Street, extended to the northern boundary.

The apparent current electoral boundary jogs west from 5th Street on Prospect to Short Street
and thence on out Harry Howard.  This has the effect of moving the population in the Short-Washington-5th-Prospect block; the Short-(Clinton)-5th-Washington block; and on the south side of Harry Howard north of Underhill Pond from the 4th Ward to the 5th Ward.  Note that Clinton does not actually go through between 5th and Short, but appears to exist as a utility easement, foot path, and possible jeep trail-short cut. 

It appears that the council resolution followed the charter, but the 2010 numbers are based on the jog.

I'll comment on your spreadsheets in a separate post.

55  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: City of Hudson's weighed voting system under scrutiny on: September 27, 2014, 10:32:00 pm
Dr. Papayonopoulos Analysis For Hudson Voting Weights 2013

Papayonopoulos gives the following voting weights:

Ward 1  770
Ward 2  1,281
Ward 3  1,142
Ward 4   725
Ward 5   2,485

Along with the footnote: "Populations based on the decennial census, adjusted to exclude institutional inmates and to reconcile overlapping election districts."

Since the total population of 6403 clearly reflects the exclusion of the prison population less  prisoners allocated to census blocks based on their residence prior to imprisonment, it must be those used in calculating the voting weights.  The spreadsheet from the Hofstra report does not show such a prison adjustment.

Two census blocks are split by ward boundaries:

New York, Columbia County, Tract 13, Block 1002
GEOID10=360210013001002

This is the long block to the west of Front Street.  The boundary between Wards 1 and 2 is Warren Street extended to the west, along the walkway to the river overlook.  There are apartment units to both the north and south of this line.  The population is 365.

New York, Columbia County, Tract 12, Block 1000
GEOID10=360210012001000

This is a large block (275 acres) in the northern part of the city between 2nd Street and Harry Howard, north of the defined street grid.  The boundary between Wards 2 and 4 is 3rd Street extended to the northern boundary of the city.  Most of the population is along the edges of  the block.  It includes the Firemen's Home.  The population is 289.

Wards 3 and 5 do not split any census blocks, and their populations match the total of their constituent blocks.  Note: For the moment I'll ignore that the current electoral boundaries do not appear to conform with those specified in the city charter.

Since there us only one split census block in Ward 1, we can determine that Block 13/1002 was allocated Ward 1:307, Ward 2: 58.   And similarly we can determine that Block 12/1000 was allocated Ward 2: 19, Ward 4: 270.

HELP!!!

Can someone independently check the block populations for 2010?   Is it conceivable that there was a 38% decline in the population of Ward 1, outside the Front Street block.

How did Dr. Papayonopoulos determine the ward populations on which the voting weights were calculated?

Was it someone for the city?   Someone from the county board of elections?  Papayonopoulos?

Something is totally messed up.  It would appear that the actual population of Ward 1 is closer to 600 than 800?

2000 block populations:



2010 block populations (ignore divisions of census block).




IGNORE THE FOLLOWING FOR NOW

There are relatively few houses in Ward 2 within Block 12/100: a few northwest of 2nd Street and on the portion of Mill Street east of 2nd Street (since Mill Street dead-ends it does not divide the census block).   This is the area west of Third Street extended.  Within Ward 4, there are houses on the east side of Third St north of Rope Alley; on the north side of Rope Alley east of 3rd Street; on the north side of State Street east of its intersection with Rope Alley; on the north(west) side of Carroll Street (some of these may be commercial, but most have back yards); on the west side of Short Street north of its intersection with Carroll Street; and on the west of Harry Hopkins, including the house along Lucille Drive, and the eastern segment of Mill Street; and the Firemen's Home.  Given the large differences in number of houses between the two wards, the 51:238 split is quite plausible.   Note, the Census Bureau does provide census counts within blocks for "group quarters".  From this, it should be possible to determine the census population for Firemen's Home.  If the allocation did not take this in to account, it may be somewhat off, but probably by no more than a dozen or so persons.
56  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: City of Hudson's weighed voting system under scrutiny on: September 27, 2014, 01:47:00 pm
The issue of weighted voting was discussed by the Legal Committee of the Common Council of Hudson. Yours truly had a cameo role. Jimtex's incredible spadework on this, is going to have the effect of changing the system, and consigning it to history I think. Kudos to him.
The article implied that the committee's attorney (Tuczinski) was going to investigate the issue of whether the block along Front Street had been properly allocated.  I'll present my analysis below.

The article says that Hudson was divided into wards in 1921.  Hudson had two wards in 1850, and 4 wards since before 1860, the 5th ward was added by 1890.   Based on the racial composition, I suspect that the split in 1850 was a east/west split, and I would guess along 3rd Street.

In 1860, the 2nd and 4th wards had a notably larger black population share, just as they still do.  Presumably this is related to proximity to the port.  By 1880, the 4th ward had 35% of the population, that was recognized by creation of the 5th ward.  The split in 1890 was reasonable for the era: (1) 17.6%. (2) 24.0%. (3) 22.9%, (4) 17.0%, (5) 18.5%.

Hudson fell below the threshold used by the Census Bureau for reporting population by ward, and this may have contributed to the lack of updating between 1970 and 2000.  In 1990, the Census Bureau began producing data for census blocks, which permitted a city to define arbitrary configurations of population for election districts.   It is possible that the Census Bureau did generate data, but simply did not publish it.  Hudson may simply have been lackadaisical.  The fact that they did not bother to switch to weighted voting until 1974 suggests some disregard for the issue.

The article says that the fact that Hudson is the only city in the US to use weighted voting raises constitutional questions.  That may not be true, or is over-simplistic.   New York states grants cities a great level of home rule authority, including determining how they are governed.  Home rule would be meaningless if a city could not determine a different method of conducting elections.  They are of course subject to broader standards such as equal protection; and in New York, since 2010, the counting of prison populations.

There are SCOTUS opinions that ruled (not un-)constitutional the weighting of representation for towns within a county, on their board of supervisors.  In those instances, each town had multiple representatives, apportioned on the basis of their population.  But it does not follow that having one representative casting five votes is necessarily different in an constitutional sense from five representatives elected at-large each casting one vote.

The SCOTUS said that the nature of the relationship between towns and counties in New York, and the dual service of town supervisors on town boards and county boards of supervisors provided justification for a greater population deviation, than might be legitimate with equal-population single-member districts.  Rockland County had a very fortuitous population distribution such that the population of its towns were roughly integer multiples of the smallest.

The SCOTUS does not make rulings as to what is constitutional, but rather what is unconstitutional or not unconstitutional.  It appears that those who are suggesting that Hudson's system is unconstitutional because it is a town rather than a county, and the units of representation are wards rather than towns, are making the erroneous conclusion that because wards are simply lines on a map, and not themselves functioning units of government, that there is not, and can not be, any justification for keeping the wards fixed and using weighted voting.  But this is a hypothetical that the SCOTUS simply has not addressed.

A challenger would still have the burden of showing that the Hudson system violated equal protection.  This would be particularly hard since the deviation between voting weight and population is not very large (unlike systems where effective voting weights are restricted to small integers).

Quote from: Registar-Star
It is so bloody confusing,” Moore said. “We were accepting on faith if a computer scientist understands the constitutional background.”

He was referring to the fact that, every 10 years, the city pays Prof. Lee Papayonopoulos of the Rutgers University Business School $1,800 to calculate how much of the vote should go to each ward under the Banzhaf system, a complicated procedure whose validity has been called into question, according to the Hofstra Report.
In the 1960s, Dr. Papayonopoulos was working for IBM in New York.   An early court decision on weighted voting (simple population-based weighting), said that weighting should be based on the voting power, such that the voting power was proportional to population, but that it was much too complicated to calculate.  In a subsequent case in a different county, Papayonopoulos demonstrate that the voting power for a given set of voting weights could be calculated.  At the time, it required use of an IBM 360, and it was apparently part of Papayonopoulos's job to find applications for which the computer was suitable.  At least for a body as small a Hudson's council, it can easily be computed with a spreadsheet on a garden variety PC.  It is simply not a complicated or complex calculation.

In the same case, Papayonopoulos then generated a set of voting weights that the court ordered to be implemented.  I suspect he understands the legal background of weighted voting as much as anyone.

A fault in the method is that it appears that there is no systematic method of generating voting weights.  In the case of Hudson, he generated nearly a million plans, and selected those which had the least deviation between voting power and population.

Note that underlying the whole discussion is that Hudson has twice considered equal population districts, which have been rejected by the voters.  Though Hudson may exercise home rule in how it is governed, it is subject to referendum.

Those who want equal-population districts would prefer to go to the electorate claiming that they were only trying to comply with the 14th Amendment and SCOTUS rulings; rather than we know you've rejected this change twice before, but we are going to keep forcing it down your throat until you vote for it.  Alternatively, they are hoping for a lawsuit, that Hudson would decide not defend against, claiming that it was not constitutionally defensible.

The problem is that weighted voting is clearly not unconstitutional per se.
57  Questions and Answers / Electoral Reform / Re: Top two primary AFTER party primaries (Duverger's dream): Would this be legal? on: September 27, 2014, 07:53:57 am
Actually, the system you propose makes it likelier that centrist candidates would decide to ditch the two major parties.  The top two primary eliminates one of the major barriers for third party/independent candidates, the wasted vote syndrome.

A centrist who thinks ey has a poor chance in eir party's primary can run as an independent and if ey can make the runoff, ey'll likely win.  At most tough rules for party (de)registration would force them to decide whether to take their chances inside or outside the party sooner, but I would expect to see more decide to do that, and more to win when they do run than would be the case with the ordinary everybody runs jungle primary.
In Caliifornia, Lucy Killea had to get the law changed to permit her to run as an independent in the general election.  Killea had been elected as a Democrat in a special election, but becoming frustrated with the partisanship in Sacramento, had changed her registration to independent.  She then found she could not run for re-election because the deadline for party switching was one year before the primary.  She was able to get a law passed that made the deadline for running as an independent one year before the general election.

It is conceivable that rules could be tough enough for party registration that they would derail a candidacy.

What you are saying about an independent candidate preferring to bypass the partisan primary, but having only to finish 2nd in the open primary may be born out by the candidacy of Marianne Williamson in CA-33, which had 10 Democrats, 3 Republicans, 1 Green, 1 Libertarian, and 3 independents.  Williamson finished 4th behind two Democrats and 1 Republican, with 13.2% of the vote, but the Top 2 only had 21.6% and 18.8%.  There was too many choices to identify her as a viable candidate.  The Green and Libertarian candidates also had the poorest performance for their parties in a congressional race.
58  Questions and Answers / Presidential Election Process / Re: What happens if the candidates get the EXACT same number of votes in a state? on: September 26, 2014, 11:39:18 am
It is basically impossible, but let's say the candidates in a state both get 3,454,573 votes or something. Who does the state go to and how is it decided? This has always bothered me, especially since it came so close to happening in Florida and New Mexico in 2000.
In Missouri, electors are elected by congressional district based on the statewide vote.  In case of tie, the legislature determines the elector from each district.

In the past, some states have required majority election for electors.  In those cases, the legislature chose the electors, but there is nothing in the constitution that would preclude a runoff.
59  Questions and Answers / Electoral Reform / Re: Top two primary AFTER party primaries (Duverger's dream): Would this be legal? on: September 26, 2014, 11:33:55 am
Hello.  This idea is pretty simple.  Have normal party primaries (open or closed, with a runoff or without one), allow Independents or members of parties that don't hold primaries to file (of course), but then, after the primaries for those parties that have them but before the General Election, hold a "top two primary" or "qualifying primary" like in California or Washington State whereby the top two finishers would advance to the general election.
I don't see why it would be illegal.

The version of Top 2 that is on the Oregon ballot this November permits parties to have their endorsement appear on the ballot.  That is, the ballot contains two pieces of information.  The political beliefs of the candidate, and the preferred candidate of the party.   There is no provision for a state-sponsored nominating procedure, leaving that up to the parties as a private matter.

In California, parties may make endorsements that appear in the sample ballot/voter's pamphlet sent to every voter.  The Republicans did not make any endorsements this year, citing timing problems, and not wanting to interfere in intraparty contests.  The Democrats have endorsement procedures, but they might not be triggered unless there is supermajority support for one candidate.

What would be the legal basis for keeping a loser in a partisan nominating contest off the Open Primary ballot?  Should a Lisa Murkowski be prohibited from seeking the votes of all Alaskans, simply because Republicans preferred another candidate?

California does not permit write-ins in the general election.  It does permit write-ins in the primary for declared write-in candidates (they must petition, but they avoid the filing fee).   There is no threshold for nomination.

Washington permits write-in votes in both the primary and general election.  It does but permit a loser in the primary to be a declared write-in candidate, but it does not require a candidate to be a declared write-in candidate.  It does have a threshold for nomination (I think it is 2%).  Washington presumes that undervotes and overvotes might be valid votes, but does not examine them unless it could cause a change in outcome.

The 2% threshold is partially to avoid counting write-in ballots when there is only one candidate on the ballot.  In 2010, a Socialist Alternative candidate ran for both representative positions in a legislative district (Washington has two representatives and one senator per legislative district, with the representatives running by position - Position 1 and Position 2).   Since she couldn't formally run for both positions, even as a write-in candidate, she urged her supporters to write in her name for the position where she was not a formal candidate.  She advanced to the general election for both positions, but then had to choose which position, since she could not appear on the balance twice.
60  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Were there any big cities in the South pre-1860? on: September 25, 2014, 07:45:11 pm
1880

Top 20 USA cities have 100K+.  Top 50 more than 35,000.  Top 100 more than 19,700.  For each state or territory, top 3 are shown, along with additional cities in USA Top 50.  Top 20 in bold, New to list in italics.  Cities not in Top 10 in red.

First appearance of Brattleboro(VT), Pawtucket(RI), Dover(DE), Charlotte(NC), Bay City(MI), Jackson(MS), Des Moines(IA), Eureka Springs(AR), Deadwood(DK), Fargo(DK), Topeka(KS), Butte(MT), Fort Benton(MT), Laramie(MT), Rawlins(MT), Leadville(CO), Silver Cliff(CO), Silver City(NM), Prescott(AZ), Phoenix(AZ), East Portland(OR), Astoria(OR)

MA (7), NY(7), NJ(4), PA(5), and OH(5) have more than 3 cities in Top 50.

VT, NC, FL, MS, AR, KS, NV and OR have no cities in Top 100.  Kansas is added to the list, as Leavenworth falters, and threshold increases.

Portland 34K
Lewiston 19K
Bangor 10K

Manchester 33K
Concord14K
Nashua 13K

Burlington 12K
Rutland 8K
Brattleboro 4K

Boston 363K
Lowell 59K
Worcester 58K
Cambridge 53K
Fall River 49K
Lawrence 39K
Lynn 38K

Boston annexes Charlestown, Brighton, and West Roxbury.

Providence 105K
Pawtucket 20K
Woonsocket 17K

New Haven 63K
Hartford 42K
Bridgewater 28K

New York 1206K
Brooklyn 567K
Buffalo 155K
Albany 91K
Rochester 89K
Troy 57K
Syracuse 52K

New York City becomes first million plus American city.

Newark 137K
Jersey City 121K
Paterson 51K
Camden 42K

Philadelphia 847K
Pittsburgh 156K (235K with Allegheny)
Allegheny 79K
Scranton 46K
Reading 43K

Wilmington 42K
New Castle 4K
Dover 3K

Baltimore 332K
Cumberland 11K
Frederick 9K

Washington 147K
Georgetown 13K

Richmond 64K
Norfolk 22K
Petersburg 22K

Wilmington 17K
Raleigh 9K
Charlotte 7K

Charleston 50K
Columbia 10K
Greenville 6K

Atlanta 37K
Savannah 30K
Augusta 22K

Key West 10K
Jacksonville 8K
Pensacola 7K

Detroit 116K
Grand Rapids 32K
Bay City 21K

Milwaukee 116K
Racine 16K
Oshkosh 15K

Cincinnati 255K
Cleveland 160K
Columbus 52K
Toledo 50K
Dayton 39K

Indianapolis 75K
Evansville 29K
Fort Wayne 27K

Chicago 503K
Peoria 29K
Quincy 27K

Chicago is 3rd largest city in country.

Wheeling 31K
Parkersburg 7K
Martinsburg 6K

Louisville 124K
Covington 30K
Newport 20K

Nashville 43K
Memphis 34k
Chattanooga 13K

Mobile 29K
Montgomery 17K
Selma 8K

Vicksburg 12K
Natchez 7K
Jackson 5K

Minneapolis 47K
St.Paul 41K
Winona 10K

Des Moines 22K
Dubuque 22K
Davenport 22K

St.Louis 351K
Kansas City 56K
St.Joseph 32K

Little Rock 13K
Eureka Springs 4K
Helena 4K

New Orleans 216K
Shreveport 8K
Baton Rouge 7K

Deadwood 4K
Fargo 3K
Yankton 3K

Omaha 31K
Lincoln 13K
Nebraska City 4K

Leavenworth 17K
Topeka 15K
Atchison 15K

It is interesting that at the time, it made sense to have railroad companies with names like Atchison, Burlington, and Quincy as part of their names.

Galveston 22K
San Antonio 20K
Houston 17K

Helena 4K
Butte 3K
Fort Benton 3K

Cheyenne 3K
Laramie 2K
Rawlins 1K

Denver 36K
Leadville 14K
Silver Cliff 5K

Santa Fe 7K
Albuquerque 3K
Silver City 2K

Boise City 2K

Virginia City 11K
Gold Hill 4K
Carson City 4K

Salt Lake City 21K
Ogden 6K
Provo 3K

Salt Lake City becomes second Top 100 city in a territory, sharing that honor along with the Jazz with New Orleans.

Tucson 7K
Prescott 2K
Phoenix 2K

Walla Walla 4K
Seattle 4K
Olympia 1K

Portland 18K
East Portland 3K
Astoria 3K

San Francisco 234K
Oakland 35K
Sacramento 21K
61  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Were there any big cities in the South pre-1860? on: September 24, 2014, 09:25:35 pm
1870

Top 3 in each state or territory, plus all cities in Top 50 in USA (greater than 26,766).
Top 20 USA in bold, cities not in Top 100 in Red (less than 14,030).  Cities making first appearance in italics.

VT, NC, FL, MS, TX, AR, NV, and OR had no Top 100 cities.

Portland 31K
Bangor 18K
Lewiston 14K

Manchester 24K
Concord 12K
Nashua 11K

I had always thought Concord to be an out of the way place, but it was a significant town by New Hampshire standards, having moved past the early leader Portsmouth, but falling behind the mill towns.

Burlington 14K
Rutland 10K
St Johnsbury 5K

Boston 251K (279K if Charlestown included)
Worcester 41K
Lowell 41K
Cambridge 40K
Lawrence 29K
Charlestown 28K
Lynn 28K
Fall River 27K

Boston annexed Roxbury and Dorchester during decade.

Providence 69K
North Providence 20K
Newport 13K

New Haven 51K
Hartford 37K
Bridgewater 19K

New York 942K
Brooklyn 396K
Buffalo 118K
Albany 69K
Rochester 62K
Troy 46K
Syracuse 43K
Utica 29K

Newark 105K
Jersey City 83K
Paterson 34K

Philadelphia 674K
Pittsburgh 86K (139K with Allegheny)
Allegheny 53K
Scranton 35K
Reading 34K

Wilmington 31K
Smyrna 2K
New Castle 2k

This is the first census for which urban areas were clearly delineated for Delaware.

Baltimore 267K
Frederick 9K
Cumberland 8K

Washington 109K
Georgetown 11K

Richmond 51K
Norfolk 19K
Petersburg 19K

Wilmington 13K
Raleigh 8k
New Bern(e) 6k

Charleston 49K
Columbia 9K
Greenville 3K

Savannah 28K
Atlanta 22K
Augusta 15K

Jacksonville 7K
Key West 5K
Pensacola 3K

Detroit 80K
Grand Rapids 17K
Jackson 11K

Milwaukee 71K
Fond du Lac 13K
Oshkosh 13K

Cincinnati 216K
Cleveland 93K
Toledo 32K
Columbus 31K
Dayton 30K

Indianapolis 48K
Evansville 22K
Fort Wayne 18K

Chicago 299K
Quincy 24K
Peoria 23K

Chicago not quite the largest city in the West.

Wheeling 19K
Parkersburg 6K
Martinsburg 5K

Wheeling would have been second largest city in Virginia.

Louisville 101K
Covington 25K
Newport 15K

Memphis 40K
Nashville 26K
Knoxville 9K

Mobile 32K
Montgomery 11K
Selma 6K

Vicksburg 12K
Natchez 9K
Columbus 5K

St Paul 20K
Minneapolis 13K (18K with St.Anthony)
Winona 7K

Davenport 20K
Dubuque 18K
Burlington 15K

St.Louis 311K
Kansas City 32K
St.Joseph 20K

Little Rock 12K
Van Buren 3K
Helena 2K

New Orleans 191K
Baton Rouge 6K
Shreveport 5k

Yankton 4K

Omaha 16K
Nebraska City 6K
Lincoln 2K

Leavenworth 18K
Lawrence 8K
Atchison 7K

Galveston 14K
San Antonio 12K
Houston 9K

Helena 3K

Cheyenne 1K

Denver 5K
Central City 2K
Black Hawk 1K

Santa Fe 5K
Mesilla 2K
Albuquerque 1K

Boise City 1K

Virginia City 7K
Gold Hill 4K
Carson City 3K

Salt Lake City 13K
Ogden 3K
Provo 2K

Tucson 3K
Arizona City 1K

Walla Walla 1K
Olympia1K
Seattle 1K

Portland 8K
Oregon City 1K
Eugene 1K

San Francisco 149K
Sacramento 16K
Oakland 10K
62  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Were there any big cities in the South pre-1860? on: September 24, 2014, 11:04:21 am
1860

For 1860, I've listed the three largest cities, plus any others in the USA Top 50 (greater than 18,266).  Top 20 USA in Bold.

Portland 26K
Bangor 16K
Bath 8K

Manchester 20K
Concord 11K
Nashua 10K

Burlington 8K
Rutland 8K
Bennington 4K

Boston 178K (239K if Roxbury, Charlestown, and Dorchester included)
Lowell 37K
Cambridge 26K
Roxbury 25K
Charlestown 25K
Worcester 25K
New Bedford 22K
Salem 22K
Lynn 19K

Providence 51K
North Providence 12K
Newport 11K

New Haven 39K
Hartford 27K
Norwich 14K

New York 814K
Brooklyn 266K (annexed Williamsburgh, but not all of Kings County)
Buffalo 81K
Albany 62K
Rochester 48K
Troy 39K
Syracuse 28K
Utica 23K

Newark 72K
Jersey City 29K
Paterson 20K

Philadelphia 565K (Philadelphia city merged with Philadelphia county)
Pittsburgh 49K (78K with Allegheny)
Allegheny 29K
Reading 23K

Wilmington 21K
Murderkill 7K
Christiana 5K

Baltimore 212K
Frederick 8K
Annapolis 5K

Washington 61K
Georgetown 9K

Richmond 38K
Petersburg 18K
Norfolk 15K

Wilmington 10K
New Bern 5K
Fayetteville 5K

Charleston 41K
Columbia ?? (not discerned, but probably less than 10K)
Georgetown 2K
Camden 2K

Savannah 22K
Augusta 12K
Columbus 10K

Pensacola 3K
Key West 3K
Jacksonville 2K

Mobile 29K
Montgomery 9K
Tuscaloosa 4K

Natchez 7K
Vicksburg 5K
Columbus 3K

New Orleans 169K
Donaldsonville 11K
St. Landry 10K

San Antonio 8K
Galveston 7K
Houston 5K

Little Rock 4K
Camden 2K
Fort Smith 2K

Memphis 23K
Nashville 17K
Murfreesboro 3K

Louisville 68K
Covington 16K
Newport 10K

St.Louis 160K
St.Joseph 9K
Hannibal 7K

Chicago 112K
Peoria 14K
Quincy 14K

Indianapolis 19K
New Albany 13K
Evansville 11K

Cincinnati 161K
Cleveland 43K
Dayton 20K
Columbus 19K

Detroit 46K
Grand Rapids 8K
Adrian 6K

Milwaukee 45K
Racine 8K
Madison 6K

St.Paul 10K
St.Anthony 3K (opposite Minneapolis on east bank of Mississippi)
Minneapolis 2K

Dubuque 13K
Davenport 11K
Keokuk 8K

Leavenworth 7K
Atchiston 3K
Wyandott 2K (north of Kansas/Kaw River, on Missouri, now part of KCK)

San Francisco 57K
Sacramento 14K
Marysville 5K

Portland 3K
Eugene 2K

Territories

South Park 11K (near Fairplay)
Denver 5K
California Gulch 3K (near Leadville)

Pembina 4K

Nebraska City 2K
Omaha 2K

Virginia City 2K

Santa Fe 5K
Mesilla 2K

Salt Lake City 8K
Provo 2K
Ogden 2K

(none in Washington Territory)
63  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Were there any big cities in the South pre-1860? on: September 23, 2014, 12:55:59 am
1850

In areas of the country without formal county subdivisions, populations of cities were often estimated from census returns.

Portland 15K
Bangor 9K
Augusta 8K

Manchester 14K
Portsmouth 10K
Concord 9K

Burlington 6K
Bennington 4K
Rutland 4K

Boston 137K (with Roxbury, Charlestown, and Dorchester 183K)
Lowell 34K
Salem 20K
Roxbury 18K
Charlestown 17K
Worcester 17K
New Bedford 16K
Cambridge 15K
Lynn 14K
Springfield 12K
Fall River 12K
Taunton 10K.

Providence 42K
Smithfield 12K
Newport 10K

New Haven 20K
Hartford 14K
Norwich 10K

New York 516K
Brooklyn 97K (with Williamsburgh 128K; with all of Kings County 138K)
Albany 51K
Buffalo 42K
Rochester 36K
Williamsburgh 30K
Troy 29K
Syracuse 22K
Utica 18K
Poughkeepsie 14K
Oswego 12K
Lockport 12K
Newburg(h) 11K.

Newark 39K
Paterson 11K
New Brunswick 10K

Philadelphia 121K (with Spring Garden, Northern Liberties, Kensington, Southwark, and Moyamensing 344K; entire Philadelphia County 409K)
Spring Garden 59K
Northern Liberties 47K
Kensington 47K
Pittsburgh 47K (with Allegheny 68K)
Southwark 39K
Moyamensing 27K
Allegheny 21K
Reading 16K
Lancaster 12K

Wilmington 14K
Milford and Mispillion hundreds 6K
Murder Hill hundred 6K.

Baltimore 169K
Cumberland 6K
Frederick(town) 6K.

Washington 40K
Georgetown 8K
(Alexandria returned to Virginia).

Richmond 28K
Norfolk 14K
Petersburg 14K
Wheeling 11K

Willmington 7K
New Bern (Newbern) 5K
Fayetteville 5K.

Charleston 43K
Columbia 6K

Savannah 15K
Augusta (12K in 1852)
Columbus 6K

Pensacola 2K
St.Augustine 2K
Jacksonville 1K

Mobile 21K
Montgomery 9K
Huntsville 3K

Natchez 4K
Vicksburg 4K
Columbus 2K

New Orleans 116K (with Lafayette 131K)
Lafayette 14K (this was a city in Jefferson Parish, which was annexed to New Orleans (and Orleans Parish)
Baton Rouge 4K.

Galveston 4K
San Antonio 3K
Houston 2K

Little Rock 2K

Nashville 10K
Memphis 9K
Knoxville 3K

Louisville 43K
Covington 9K
Lexington 8K (est)

St.Louis 78K

Chicago 30K
Quincy 7K
Galena 6K

New Albany 8K
Indianapolis 8K
Madison 8K

Cincinnati 115K
Columbus 18K
Cleveland 18K
Dayton 17K

Detroit 21K
Monroe 3K
Grand Rapids 3K
Kalamazoo 3K

Milwaukee 20K
Racine 5K
Kenosha 3K

Burlington 4K
Fairfield 1K
Iowa City 1K

Sacramento 7K
Placerville 6K
Nevada City 3K

Territories

St.Paul 1K

Santa Fe 5K

Portland 1K
Madison 2K
64  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: LA: 1972 Gubernatorial General Election Result on: September 22, 2014, 11:58:20 pm
Wait ... Louisiana Governor used to be an on-year election?

No, this election actually took place across three rounds which extended into the following year.  First, the primaries took place on general election day 1971 (i.e. November 6th).  Then there was a runoff for the Dem primary on December 18th.  Then finally the general election took place on February 1st 1972.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana_gubernatorial_election,_1971%E2%80%9372

So when did they start doing the jungle primary?
After the 1971-2 election.  Edwards received about 1/4 of the vote in the Democratic 1st Primary, in which over a million votes were cast.  Meanwhile Treen was nominated in the Republican 1st Primary in which under 10,000 votes were cast.

Edwards was narrowly nominated in the 2nd Primary, and then had to defeat Treen in the general election.  Fewer votes were cast in the general election than the 2nd Primary, but it appears that all of Johnston's support went to Treen.

Previously, the general election had been a superfluity; so it was logical for it to be eliminated.  It was also hoped that it would eliminate a Republican getting traction from a one-on-one election.  The constitution does not specify the manner of election.

Edwards took office in May 1972, so that a January election was not that odd.  The 1974 constitution moved the beginning of the term to March, and with an amendment adopted in 1986, effective in January 1992, moved the beginning of terms to January.  The legislature continues to meet in March of even-numbered years.

The primary in 1971 was, like most (all?) non-federal elections in Louisiana, was on a Saturday.  The current election date for the Open Primary and the runoff are in mid-October and mid-November of an odd-numbered year (legislators and executive offices, both serve 4-year terms).
65  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Complete List of Gubernatorial Candidates on: September 22, 2014, 09:57:05 pm
Texas:

Greg Abbott
Wendy Davis
Brandon Parmer
Katie Glass

Let me know if I made any errors or forgot anyone.
It is Kathie Glass, with an 'h'.
66  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Were there any big cities in the South pre-1860? on: September 22, 2014, 06:58:10 pm
I'm surprised that Kaskaskia, IL didn't show up on the list. It's the oldest city in the state and the site of the territorial government and the first state capital. It was a significant river town in the 1700's and at the time of statehood they claimed a population of about 7K.
I am dubious of the claim of 7K.

In 1810, the population for Illinois Territory was 12,282 divided between the Randolph and St.Clair counties (the two counties that covered most of Illinois when it was part of Indiana Territory).  The 12,282 may have included a very few in present-day Wisconsin; but even by 1820 the population of Wisconsin, which had been transferred to Michigan Territory, was only 1,444.

Randolph County had 7,275 in 1810; while St.Clair had 5,007.   But without tracking down a map, I would assume that Randolph extended east to the Wabash, and would have included the Ohio River, picking up lots of pioneers who had come down the Ohio or across from Kentucky.

In 1820, the new state of Illinois had 55,211 persons and had been divided into 19 counties.  Randolph had 3,492 (after having provided for 10 counties, plus parts of 5 others).   Madison was the most populous in 1820, with 13,550, but that was because it had not yet been divided (Jo Daviess was partially created from Madison), though Alton may have been founded by then.

Fayette County (home of Vandalia, where the state capital was located) had not been created, but its progenitors counties only had about 6,000 persons, which argues against a wholesale movement from Kaskaskia when the capital was relocated.

There may have been settlers who took refuge in Kaskaskia during the War of 1812.  And there may have been descendants of French traders and Indians who were not counted, whose residency might have been intermittent.   But I can't find anything to support the 7,000 figure other than it is repeated a lot.
67  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Were there any big cities in the South pre-1860? on: September 22, 2014, 01:27:47 pm
In 1820, there were 7 states that didn't have any cities - big or small. How is it possible that, say, Dover DE wasn't a city?
Dover was not incorporated until 1829, even though it the capital since 1777.

A legislature would only need to meet a week or two, once a year.  In November 1787, Delawareans elected 30 delegates (10 from each county) to the ratification convention for the US Constitution.  They met on December 4, and ratified the Constitution on December 7 (Tuesday to Friday).

In the first congressional election in 1789, about 2000 votes were cast for Delaware's sole representative.  Nobody could afford to take much time off to be a legislator.  Throughout most of the 19th century, Delaware's Senate had 9 members, and its House 21 members.  Think how tiny capitals such as Frankfort, Montpelier, or Pierre are even today.

In 1830, Cincinnati had 25K (more than doubling from 1820), but the next largest cities in Ohio, all had about 3K (Dayton, Chillicothe, Zanesville, and Steubenville).   Chillicothe and Zanesville both served as early capitals.  When Columbus was named the capital in 1812, it didn't exist.  The move occurred in 1816, but Columbus did not become a city until 1834.

While Ohio had cities in 1830, Indiana and Illinois did not.  But Ohio had 3 times the population of Indiana, and about 6 times that of Illinois.
68  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Were there any big cities in the South pre-1860? on: September 22, 2014, 12:30:51 pm
By 1830, you are starting to see development of inland cities, but they were dependent on transportation, usually by water.  The Erie Canal was completed in 1825, bringing several cities to the list.

Portland 13K

Portsmouth 8K
Dover 5K

Boston 61K (18K more in Charlestown, Roxbury, and Dorchester)
Salem 14K
Charlestown 9K
New Bedford 8K
Gloucester 8K
Nantucket 8K
Springfield 7K
Lowell 6K
Newburyport 6K
Lynn 6K
Cambridge 6K
Taunton 6K
Roxbury 5K
Marblehead 5K
Middleborough 5K

Providence 17K
Newport 8K
Warwick 6K

New Haven 10K
Hartford 7K

New York 202K
Albany 24K
Brooklyn 12K
Troy 12K
Rochester 9K
Buffalo 9K
Utica 8K
Hudson 8K

Newark 11K

Philadelphia 80K (164K, including Northern Liberties 29K, Southwark 21K, Kensington 13, Spring Garden 12K, Moyamensing 7K).
Pittsburgh 13K (15K including Allegheny)
Lancaster 8K
Reading 6K

Baltimore 81K

Washington 19K
Georgetown 8K
Alexandria 8K

Richmond 16K
Norfolk 10K
Petersburg 8K

Charleston 30K

Savannah 7K
Augusta 7K

Cincinnati 25K

Louisville 10K
Lexington 6K

Nashville 6K

Largest cities less than 5K:

St.Louis, MO 5K-
New Bern, NC 4K
Mobile, AL 3K
Natchez, MS 3K

City-less states: VT, DE, IN, IL
69  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Were there any big cities in the South pre-1860? on: September 22, 2014, 12:12:17 am
By 1820:

Portland 9K

Portsmouth 7K

Boston 43K
Salem 13K
Nantucket 7K
Newburyport 7K
Charlestown 7K
Gloucester 6K
Marblehead 6K

Providence 12K
Newport 7K

New Haven 7K

New York 123K
Albany 13K
Brooklyn 7K
Hudson 5K
Troy 5K

Philadelphia 64K
Northern Liberties 20K
Southwark 15K
Kensington 7K
(these 4 plus Spring Gardens 112K)
Pittsburgh 7K
Lancaster 7K

Baltimore 63K

Washington 13K
Alexandria 8K
Georgetown 7K

Richmond 12K
Norfolk 8K
Petersburg 7K

Charleston 25K

Cincinnati 10K

Lexington 5K

New Orleans 27K

Other largest cities less than 5K:

Trenton, NJ 4K
New Bern, NC 4K

City-less states: VT, DE, TN, IN, IL, MS, AL
70  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Were there any big cities in the South pre-1860? on: September 21, 2014, 11:54:49 pm
By 1810:

Portland 7K

Portsmouth 7K

Boston 34K
Salem 13K
Newburyport 8K
Nantucket 7K
Gloucester 6K
Marblehead 6K
New Bedford 6K

Providence 10K
Newport 8K

New Haven 6K

New York 96K
Albany 11K
Schenectady 6K

Philadelphia 54K
Northern Liberties 20K
Southwark 14K
(Collectively 87K)
Lancaster 5K

Baltimore 47K

Washington 8K
Alexandria 7K

Richmond 10K
Petersburg 6K

Charleston 25K

Savannah 5K

New Orleans 17K (Louisiana did not become a state until two years later in 1812)

Largest cities less than 5K:

Lexington, KY 4K
Trenton, NJ 3K
Cincinnati, OH 3K

Citieless states: VT, DE, NC, TN
71  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Were there any big cities in the South pre-1860? on: September 21, 2014, 11:38:52 pm
By 1800, there were the beginnings of cities in other states, and explosive growth in the largest cities:

Portsmouth 5K

Boston 25K
Salem 9K
Newburyport 6K
Nantucket 6K
Gloucester 5K
Marblehead 6k

Providence 8K
Newport 7K

New London 5K

New York 61K
Albany 5K
Schenectady 5K

Philadelphia 41K
Northern Liberties 11K
Southwark 10K
(if included with Philadephia 62K)

Baltimore 26K

Norfolk 7K
Richmond 6K

Charleston 19K

Savannah 5K

Largest cities of "states", with city population under 5K:

Portland, ME 4K
Alexandria, DC 5K-

States with no cities: VT, NJ, DE, NC, KY, TN

Other than Richmond and Schenectady all were ports.   In Massachusetts, while the ports were developing, the most populous county was Hampshire, which at that time included Hampden and Franklin counties (ie the Connecticut Valley)
72  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Were there any big cities in the South pre-1860? on: September 21, 2014, 11:20:23 pm
I realize that up to the 1930's or so, population in the south was spread, people lived rural, and concentrations of population were rare. Everything was based on plantations, agriculture, and farmland. But I for the life of me can't find any "big" cities besides New Orleans. Here's a list of southern cities, particularly cities from former-Confederate states, that now have 100,000+ (with the exception of just very big cities in TX), and their population in 1860:
In 1790 there were 12 cities of over 5,000 persons.  Organized by state:

Boston 18K
Salem 8K
Marblehead 6K
Gloucester 5K

Newport 7K
Providence 6K

New York 33K

Philadelphia 29K
Northern Liberties 10K
Southwark 6K
The latter two were in Philadelphia County.  If we add them to Philadelphia, that would make 45K, or the largest city by a large amount.

Baltimore 14K

Charleston 16K

There were no cities of greater than 5K in ME, NH, VT, CT, NJ, DE, VA, NC, or GA.

The largest cities in these states were:

Portsmouth, NH 5K-
New Haven, CT 4K
Richmond, VA 4K

ME, VT, NJ, DE, NC and GA had no cities.

All of the above other than Richmond were ports.
73  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: What is a WASP? on: September 05, 2014, 11:33:45 pm
This forum uses it in a bizarre way I'd never seen before...  I always thought of it as exactly what it stands for:
White (obvious enough)
Anglo Saxon (English/German/Northern European with fair features)
Protestant (mainline denomination, not evangelical).
I've heard that definition a lot, but
1. In which way are Germans and Northern Europeans Anglo Saxons?
2. Isn't Anglo Saxon almost redundant in this case, because how many White Protestants are there historically that are not British, German, Dutch or Northern European? (Huguenots? Hussites? Valdesi? Sobozinians?)

Excuse my ignorance and preliminary knowledge on the subject, but I was under the impression that the Anglos were from England and the Saxons were from Germany, giving rise to the definition I used.  As for your second point, I agree.  I was just saying I'd usually heard it used that way.  Honestly, without trying to veer off subject or getting to tender subjects, I kind of always associated it with ethnicities of people that the Nazis would have gone all googly-eyes over.
The Angles were from what is now Schleswig-Holstein, who settled in eastern Britain, where they gave their name to East Anglia, the part of Britain that sticks out northeast of London.  But the Angles settled as far north as Edinburgh.  The Saxons were in southern England around London, where they gave their name to Essex, Sussex, Wessex, and Middlesex.  Over time they became intertwined and their language of English developed. 

Anglo-Saxon generally refers to someone from Britain or particularly England, and also the the English-speaking world, particularly the special relationship between the USA and GB (terms such as British or English, of course would not be acceptable in the USA, to the way that they would in Canada or Australia).

WASP may have originally been Wealthy Anglo-Saxon Protestant, the elite, wealthy, largely of English or British descent, Protestants who dominated American business and society, particularly through WWII.  It is a handy term if you are Catholic, or Jewish, or ethnic, or black, and want to claim you are using a descriptive term, but want to use it in a disparaging or derogatory manner.
74  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Is the North ever going to have comeback demographically ? on: September 05, 2014, 05:16:33 pm
75+ years out, climate change could make most of the Sunbelt unlivable and give the Frost Belt a pleasant, temperate climate.
But would they have the 4 seasons like on Baffin Island?
75  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Draw the Congressional Districts of the Alternate States! on: September 05, 2014, 04:49:12 pm
Would Adirondack really have a GOP leg? I could see the state senate, but I doubt they'd have the trifecta.
Local politics would have developed differently.  If the state were Republican, the party would have an easier time recruiting town councilmen and county officials for the legislature.  A potential Democrat candidate would have to (1) pay the filing fee; (2) try to raise campaign funds, or paint the signs himself; (3) get elected; and (4) if elected, be assigned to the pencil-sharpening committee.  As a result, the Democratic candidate might be someone who has the money for the filing fee; and was planning to get a tattoo anyhow, and "Vote for Smith" with a couple of eagles looks cool, and knows a graffiti artist who will paint his 1983 Votemobile.   They may be willing to try again and again in two years.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 228


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines