Stunning Figures! Are we moving to a geographical separation?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 08:11:26 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderators: muon2, 15 Down, 35 To Go)
  Stunning Figures! Are we moving to a geographical separation?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Stunning Figures! Are we moving to a geographical separation?  (Read 5399 times)
Shira
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,858


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: June 08, 2004, 02:04:15 AM »


RI and WY are two states that no one cares too much about (from electoral standpoint). They are small and well defined. However, if you look into their numbers you would be stunned.
In 1988 Bush Sr. got in RI 16.7% less then he got in WY.
During the 12 years from 1988 to 2000 this number grew to 36.54%. Bush Jr. got 69.01% in WY and only 32.47% in RI.  This is a huge change and reflects the polarization our country is undergoing. In the North-East the Dems are strong and getting stronger. In the North-West and Mid-West (Nebraska for example) the GOP are strong and getting stronger.
Is this the beginning of a geographical separation? It is well known that many conservatives are trying not to live in liberal counties and vice versa. It seems that this trend is not marginal and the polarization is going to grow.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,693
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: June 08, 2004, 11:52:56 AM »

Yes, we are. The number of swing counties are vastly seperating. I refuse to live in any conservative county myself (even though the county I currently live in voted for Bush, that was only because of the Nader vote, and the city I live in which makes up more than half the county's population is rather liberal). I'm hoping that this continues until we have a country where one doesn't ever have to deal with liberals or conservatives if they never want to.
Logged
Ben.
Ben
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,249


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: June 08, 2004, 02:52:27 PM »

I'm hoping that this continues until we have a country where one doesn't ever have to deal with liberals or conservatives if they never want to.

...You have no idea what you’re wishing for... I'm sorry but think about that statement and then see how idiotic it is my friend.
Logged
Lunar
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,404
Ireland, Republic of
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: June 08, 2004, 04:40:52 PM »
« Edited: June 08, 2004, 04:48:40 PM by Lunar »

Just because WY and RI are seperating doesn't indicate a trend for the whole United States.

Some states are getting closer and some are seperating.  What's the big deal?

Picking two years at random:

In 1940 Franklin Rosevelt got 51.52% less in North Dakota than in Mississippi.

In 1952 Eisenhower got 41.11% less in Georgia than in Vermont.
Logged
Shira
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,858


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: June 08, 2004, 05:02:48 PM »

Just because WY and RI are seperating doesn't indicate a trend for the whole United States.

Some states are getting closer and some are seperating.  What's the big deal?

Picking two states at random:

Not at random.
You would see the same trend if you compare any state of the North-West (not WA)  to any state of the North-East (including NH)


Logged
Lunar
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,404
Ireland, Republic of
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: June 08, 2004, 05:03:48 PM »

I wasn't saying that you were picking states at random...I was explaining my own two choices that followed the colon.
Logged
Shira
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,858


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: June 08, 2004, 05:11:27 PM »

What I was basically claiming is that we become more and more polarized. The Rep states become more and more Rep and the Dem states become more and more Dem. What's important is not the politics of it, but rather the sociology.
Logged
Schmitz in 1972
Liberty
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,317
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: June 08, 2004, 05:20:07 PM »

Our country has always been divided by sociology, but at times it's just been stronger than others. Take the 1850's for example, our nation was so divided in that era that by the time a new decade rolled around we had begun a civil war! And just look at some of the statistics during the elections before and after the war, the south was so solidly democratic (granted of course that blacks weren't allowed to vote except in reconstruction) that no republican could ever win there.  I do believe we are going through one of the most polarized eras in Amercian history but I think we'll come out of it, just as we did the one that lasted the second half of the 19th century
Logged
Shira
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,858


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: June 08, 2004, 05:24:00 PM »

It won't evolve into a civil war.
Logged
WalterMitty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,572


Political Matrix
E: 1.68, S: -2.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: June 08, 2004, 05:35:12 PM »

goodness.

tell me im imagining this thread.

let me ask WHAT DOES IT MATTER if someone is liberal or conservative?  why would you want to live in a place where you interact with only those who think like you?

i dont base my friendships on political ideology.  i feel sorry for those who do.  they are missing out on a thing called LIFE.
Logged
Shira
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,858


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: June 08, 2004, 05:39:41 PM »


We are talking about demographical and statistical FACTS and not on whether it is good or bad
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,802


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: June 08, 2004, 08:08:42 PM »

Its not just people moving into areas where people have similiar ideology--- there's also the potentiality that people who grow up in a certain area are socialized into politics in a certain way. For example one of my professors doesn't follow baseball because he grew up in North Dakota and there were not major league teams around there back then. It's the same way with politics. Usually, people have similiar politics as their parents. Children who grow up in con areas tend con, and those who grow up in dem areas tend dem. Regional partisanship was following through most of the mid-20th century and bottomed out in the 70s. Except for 1964 and the "solid south" (one way or the other), the parties from the 1930s-1970s generally were not extremely ideologically distinct. The same applies for the progressive period, 1900s-1910s. During this period partisanship generally fell off. Now we are seeing a return of the 19th century dynamic. This was a very bad dynamic for the Democrats, who were a permanent minority for most of the years 1856-1928, only somehow miraculously managed to win ultra-narrow victories once in a while.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,693
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: June 08, 2004, 08:59:38 PM »

goodness.

tell me im imagining this thread.

let me ask WHAT DOES IT MATTER if someone is liberal or conservative?  why would you want to live in a place where you interact with only those who think like you?

i dont base my friendships on political ideology.  i feel sorry for those who do.  they are missing out on a thing called LIFE.

Do you think me and Brambila would get along in real life?
Logged
Shira
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,858


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: June 08, 2004, 10:06:00 PM »

In 1988 Bush Sr. got 3.35% less in SD then in NJ.
 In 2000 Bush Jr. got 21.06% more in SD then in NJ.

The total relative shift: 24.41% which is huge.

The Deep South states (not FL), on the other hand, were stable during these years. The GOP advantage there over the Dems has remained around the 10%-14% during all these years
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.034 seconds with 11 queries.