Are sections (e.g. Southern, Northeastern) declining in importance?

[Orser67]

Throughout U.S. history, geographical sections have been an important predictor of voting habits. For example, Obama did far better among whites in New England than he did among whites in the Deep South. In the last couple elections, though, it seemed as if Democrats generally improved on their performances in metro areas regardless of section, and Republicans improved on their performances in rural areas regardless of section.

I certainly don't think that geographic sections will ever stop being a useful predictor of voting habits. But is the declining importance of geographic section a long-term trend, and if so, how far will it go?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Sectional divisions matter less than they used to. Let's thank Southernization for this.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

The new sections are the economic core (trending D) and the economic hinterland (trending R). Regions don't matter as much in an increasingly homogenized country.

[Adam Griffin]

The South has long since won the political battle from a national perspective, and whether people realize it or not yet, has also largely won the cultural battle by intertwining the two (and I don't just mean wrt superficial things like how people all over now say "y'all" but nobody says "yous guys" or whatever). A large part of this is due to its stubbornness and utter insistence on cultural cohesion, whereas other parts of the country never had such fetishes; it was all a matter of time with that dynamic.

The result is a stratified caste-like society along both cultural (and to some degree, even economic) lines, where people from completely different parts of the country have more in common with one another based on whether they both live in urban or rural areas than they have in common with their proverbial neighbors who reside in areas with dramatically different population densities.

The recent polarization we're seeing is just the final indicator of the South's success. Both "sides" have achieved victory in some respects (obviously Urban America has largely won with reshaping perceptions via media and what not), but from a political standpoint, We Are All Southerners Now™.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

The South has long since won the political battle from a national perspective, and whether people realize it or not yet, has also largely won the cultural battle by intertwining the two (and I don't just mean wrt superficial things like how people all over now say "y'all" but nobody says "yous guys" or whatever). A large part of this is due to its stubbornness and utter insistence on cultural cohesion, whereas other parts of the country never had such fetishes; it was all a matter of time with that dynamic.

The result is a stratified caste-like society along both cultural (and to some degree, even economic) lines, where people from completely different parts of the country have more in common with one another based on whether they both live in urban or rural areas than they have in common with their proverbial neighbors who reside in areas with dramatically different population densities.

The recent polarization we're seeing is just the final indicator of the South's success. Both "sides" have achieved victory in some respects (obviously Urban America has largely won with reshaping perceptions via media and what not), but from a political standpoint, We Are All Southerners Now™.

Can you elaborate on this a little bit?

[Del Tachi]

Don't blame Southernization or a divergent urban/rural economy, blame a bland culture of "globalized placelessness" where all Americans pretty much listen to the same corporately-produced music, eat at the same restaurants, and watch the same TV shows.  IT has essentially erased place as a barrier to cultural diffusion.