Which issue will hurt J.Kerry the most?

[nclib]

I'm really not much of a yankee.  Though born and bred in PA the political region selector said that my #1 political region was 'Peripheral South'.

Where did you find that selector at?

It's at selectsmart.com

Soulty, do you happen to know what states the 13 regions match up with? After each region it gives a link for explanation, but it's never opened correctly for me.

For example, Mid Atlantic

It says:
 
Copy & Paste
Results Code:  <Li>My #4 result for the SelectSmart.com selector, <a href="http://www.selectsmart.com/FREE/select.php?client=PoliticalRegion"><B>U.S. Political Region Selector</A></B>, is <I>Mid Atlantic</I><P>

What specifically is meant to be copied?

[12th Doctor]

I'm really not much of a yankee.  Though born and bred in PA the political region selector said that my #1 political region was 'Peripheral South'.

Where did you find that selector at?

It's at selectsmart.com

Soulty, do you happen to know what states the 13 regions match up with? After each region it gives a link for explanation, but it's never opened correctly for me.

For example, Mid Atlantic

It says:
 
Copy & Paste
Results Code:  <Li>My #4 result for the SelectSmart.com selector, <a href="http://www.selectsmart.com/FREE/select.php?client=PoliticalRegion"><B>U.S. Political Region Selector</A></B>, is <I>Mid Atlantic</I><P>

What specifically is meant to be copied?

Hmmm.  That I cannot say.  I don't know if we had that problem before.

As for your question, I think that it is up for interpetation.  I know that mid-Atlantic would be Maryland, Eastern PA, Deleware, New Jersey.  That area.  

The Rust Belt is Western PA, East Ohio, Eastern New York and probably Detriot and Northern West Virginia as well.  

I'll pull it up and take a look at some of the other ones.

[??????????]

My #1 result was the Desert Southwest. My#2 result was Texas. Interesting.

[nclib]

This is getting really emotional...

You have no idea how emotional class/cultural/regional issues are in the US.  Basically rural areas in most of the country, and the South as a whole, resent, even hate, the liberal urban elites (and coincidentally their poor racial dependents).  The urban leftist elites despise the above mentioned ruralites.  I can tell you that rural people who are nowhere near the South actually identify or at least strongly sympathize with the South.

Certainly. Politics and culture do tend to coincide. It is very interesting that on this board (and in real life) the conservatives are sympathizing with the South and the liberals aren't. Regardless of where they actually live. My region in N.C. has a relatively proportion of people who are either migrants from the North and/or liberals. Very few liberals here identify with the Southern culture even if they grew up here.

[??????????]

This is getting really emotional...

.
You have no idea how emotional class/cultural/regional issues are in the US.  Basically rural areas in most of the country, and the South as a whole, resent, even hate, the liberal urban elites (and coincidentally their poor racial dependents).  The urban leftist elites despise the above mentioned ruralites.  I can tell you that rural people who are nowhere near the South actually identify or at least strongly sympathize with the South.

Certainly. Politics and culture do tend to coincide. It is very interesting that on this board (and in real life) the conservatives are sympathizing with the South and the liberals aren't. Regardless of where they actually live. My region in N.C. has a relatively proportion of people who are either migrants from the North and/or liberals. Very few liberals here identify with the Southern culture even if they grew up here.

That's sad NCLib, that the native southerners have forgotten their roots. Their is so much culture and pride in being a southerner and giving it up for the ways of our Northern neighbors is depressing

[zachman]

Taxes is the only explanation for a Kerry loss in NH.  

NH has no historym and I'm not real proud of it.

[??????????]

Taxes is the only explanation for a Kerry loss in NH.  

NH has no historym and I'm not real proud of it.

Moving.

[dazzleman]

This is getting really emotional...

.
You have no idea how emotional class/cultural/regional issues are in the US.  Basically rural areas in most of the country, and the South as a whole, resent, even hate, the liberal urban elites (and coincidentally their poor racial dependents).  The urban leftist elites despise the above mentioned ruralites.  I can tell you that rural people who are nowhere near the South actually identify or at least strongly sympathize with the South.

Certainly. Politics and culture do tend to coincide. It is very interesting that on this board (and in real life) the conservatives are sympathizing with the South and the liberals aren't. Regardless of where they actually live. My region in N.C. has a relatively proportion of people who are either migrants from the North and/or liberals. Very few liberals here identify with the Southern culture even if they grew up here.

That's sad NCLib, that the native southerners have forgotten their roots. Their is so much culture and pride in being a southerner and giving it up for the ways of our Northern neighbors is depressing

As a subtext to the regional splits is the urban/rural split, which could be driving the regional split.

The northeast is the most heavily urbanized section of the country, and also the most liberal.  But even in the northeast, some the rural sections, such as parts of upstate New York and Pennsylvania, tend to vote Republican.

Rural states in the plains and west section of the country vote Republican.  Rural sections of California, Oregon and Washington vote Republican.  Urban parts vote Democratic.

Even in the south, urban areas vote Democratic.  There is a de facto alliance between sophistocated urbanites and poor minorities, although the so-called sophistocated urbanites would mostly run from any real association with minorities.

One interesting thing about the US, that is not true of Europe, is that there is a very strong and deep-seated anti-urban mentality, a feeling that cities are bad, and those who live in them are inferior.  This ties in with, and is reinforced by, the whole race issue, although it would exist even without the race issue.  The elites who live in cities, who are able to buy their way out of the deficiencies of city life (through private security, private schools, etc.) stay in the cities and, through their limousine liberalism, force detrimental policies on those who can't afford to buy their way out of the effects of them.  Non-elites who live in cities are mainly consumed with finding a way out, after which they join their new suburban neighbors in looking down on those who are still in the cities.

The more I think about it, I think the rural/urban split is even deeper than the regional split.

[??????????]

In the south its split with urban areas. Tampa and Jacksonville both went Republican last time and Tampa has a VERY strong Republican Cuban base.

[nclib]

dazzleman,

I would agree that the rural-urban divide is also pretty strong, but that wouldn't explain why suburbs of Charlotte, Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, etc. are very conservative and rural areas along the Mississippi River and in New England tend to be moderate.

[dazzleman]

dazzleman,

I would agree that the rural-urban divide is also pretty strong, but that wouldn't explain why suburbs of Charlotte, Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, etc. are very conservative and rural areas along the Mississippi River and in New England tend to be moderate.

You're right.  It doesn't explain everything.  I think the political split is a combination of region and level of urbanization.

In addition to my other comments, I would also add that elite urbanites tend to look down on those who live in suburbs and rural areas.  On the other hand, non-elite urbanites are much more likely to aspire to living in the suburbs than to look down on them, since for them, suburban life generally represents a significant improvement over what they have in the cities.  As I said, those who are most positive positive about living in cities are those who have enough money to buy their way out of the deficiencies of city life.

[zachman]

Television vs. non-viewers, that is another Democrat vs. Republican, Urban vs. rural split.

[dazzleman]

Television vs. non-viewers, that is another Democrat vs. Republican, Urban vs. rural split.

That's very true, and part of the whole picture.  What we're talking about, in the regional and rural/urban split, is a large cultural divide, and television is a big part of it.

[Gustaf]

This is getting really emotional...

.
You have no idea how emotional class/cultural/regional issues are in the US.  Basically rural areas in most of the country, and the South as a whole, resent, even hate, the liberal urban elites (and coincidentally their poor racial dependents).  The urban leftist elites despise the above mentioned ruralites.  I can tell you that rural people who are nowhere near the South actually identify or at least strongly sympathize with the South.

Certainly. Politics and culture do tend to coincide. It is very interesting that on this board (and in real life) the conservatives are sympathizing with the South and the liberals aren't. Regardless of where they actually live. My region in N.C. has a relatively proportion of people who are either migrants from the North and/or liberals. Very few liberals here identify with the Southern culture even if they grew up here.

That's sad NCLib, that the native southerners have forgotten their roots. Their is so much culture and pride in being a southerner and giving it up for the ways of our Northern neighbors is depressing

As a subtext to the regional splits is the urban/rural split, which could be driving the regional split.

The northeast is the most heavily urbanized section of the country, and also the most liberal.  But even in the northeast, some the rural sections, such as parts of upstate New York and Pennsylvania, tend to vote Republican.

Rural states in the plains and west section of the country vote Republican.  Rural sections of California, Oregon and Washington vote Republican.  Urban parts vote Democratic.

Even in the south, urban areas vote Democratic.  There is a de facto alliance between sophistocated urbanites and poor minorities, although the so-called sophistocated urbanites would mostly run from any real association with minorities.

One interesting thing about the US, that is not true of Europe, is that there is a very strong and deep-seated anti-urban mentality, a feeling that cities are bad, and those who live in them are inferior.  This ties in with, and is reinforced by, the whole race issue, although it would exist even without the race issue.  The elites who live in cities, who are able to buy their way out of the deficiencies of city life (through private security, private schools, etc.) stay in the cities and, through their limousine liberalism, force detrimental policies on those who can't afford to buy their way out of the effects of them.  Non-elites who live in cities are mainly consumed with finding a way out, after which they join their new suburban neighbors in looking down on those who are still in the cities.

The more I think about it, I think the rural/urban split is even deeper than the regional split.

Where do you get the idea that we don't have rural/urban splits in Europe? The urban elite resent rural people enormously and have a very condescending view of them in Sweden, anyway.

[dazzleman]

This is getting really emotional...

.
You have no idea how emotional class/cultural/regional issues are in the US.  Basically rural areas in most of the country, and the South as a whole, resent, even hate, the liberal urban elites (and coincidentally their poor racial dependents).  The urban leftist elites despise the above mentioned ruralites.  I can tell you that rural people who are nowhere near the South actually identify or at least strongly sympathize with the South.

Certainly. Politics and culture do tend to coincide. It is very interesting that on this board (and in real life) the conservatives are sympathizing with the South and the liberals aren't. Regardless of where they actually live. My region in N.C. has a relatively proportion of people who are either migrants from the North and/or liberals. Very few liberals here identify with the Southern culture even if they grew up here.

That's sad NCLib, that the native southerners have forgotten their roots. Their is so much culture and pride in being a southerner and giving it up for the ways of our Northern neighbors is depressing

As a subtext to the regional splits is the urban/rural split, which could be driving the regional split.

The northeast is the most heavily urbanized section of the country, and also the most liberal.  But even in the northeast, some the rural sections, such as parts of upstate New York and Pennsylvania, tend to vote Republican.

Rural states in the plains and west section of the country vote Republican.  Rural sections of California, Oregon and Washington vote Republican.  Urban parts vote Democratic.

Even in the south, urban areas vote Democratic.  There is a de facto alliance between sophistocated urbanites and poor minorities, although the so-called sophistocated urbanites would mostly run from any real association with minorities.

One interesting thing about the US, that is not true of Europe, is that there is a very strong and deep-seated anti-urban mentality, a feeling that cities are bad, and those who live in them are inferior.  This ties in with, and is reinforced by, the whole race issue, although it would exist even without the race issue.  The elites who live in cities, who are able to buy their way out of the deficiencies of city life (through private security, private schools, etc.) stay in the cities and, through their limousine liberalism, force detrimental policies on those who can't afford to buy their way out of the effects of them.  Non-elites who live in cities are mainly consumed with finding a way out, after which they join their new suburban neighbors in looking down on those who are still in the cities.

The more I think about it, I think the rural/urban split is even deeper than the regional split.

Where do you get the idea that we don't have rural/urban splits in Europe? The urban elite resent rural people enormously and have a very condescending view of them in Sweden, anyway.

I don't doubt that.  My impression had been that Europe didn't have the same deeply-ingrained notion of urban inferiority as the US does.

[Gustaf]

This is getting really emotional...

.
You have no idea how emotional class/cultural/regional issues are in the US.  Basically rural areas in most of the country, and the South as a whole, resent, even hate, the liberal urban elites (and coincidentally their poor racial dependents).  The urban leftist elites despise the above mentioned ruralites.  I can tell you that rural people who are nowhere near the South actually identify or at least strongly sympathize with the South.

Certainly. Politics and culture do tend to coincide. It is very interesting that on this board (and in real life) the conservatives are sympathizing with the South and the liberals aren't. Regardless of where they actually live. My region in N.C. has a relatively proportion of people who are either migrants from the North and/or liberals. Very few liberals here identify with the Southern culture even if they grew up here.

That's sad NCLib, that the native southerners have forgotten their roots. Their is so much culture and pride in being a southerner and giving it up for the ways of our Northern neighbors is depressing

As a subtext to the regional splits is the urban/rural split, which could be driving the regional split.

The northeast is the most heavily urbanized section of the country, and also the most liberal.  But even in the northeast, some the rural sections, such as parts of upstate New York and Pennsylvania, tend to vote Republican.

Rural states in the plains and west section of the country vote Republican.  Rural sections of California, Oregon and Washington vote Republican.  Urban parts vote Democratic.

Even in the south, urban areas vote Democratic.  There is a de facto alliance between sophistocated urbanites and poor minorities, although the so-called sophistocated urbanites would mostly run from any real association with minorities.

One interesting thing about the US, that is not true of Europe, is that there is a very strong and deep-seated anti-urban mentality, a feeling that cities are bad, and those who live in them are inferior.  This ties in with, and is reinforced by, the whole race issue, although it would exist even without the race issue.  The elites who live in cities, who are able to buy their way out of the deficiencies of city life (through private security, private schools, etc.) stay in the cities and, through their limousine liberalism, force detrimental policies on those who can't afford to buy their way out of the effects of them.  Non-elites who live in cities are mainly consumed with finding a way out, after which they join their new suburban neighbors in looking down on those who are still in the cities.

The more I think about it, I think the rural/urban split is even deeper than the regional split.

Where do you get the idea that we don't have rural/urban splits in Europe? The urban elite resent rural people enormously and have a very condescending view of them in Sweden, anyway.

I don't doubt that.  My impression had been that Europe didn't have the same deeply-ingrained notion of urban inferiority as the US does.

Well, no, it's rather rural inferiority here. To an extreme extent.

[Siege40]

I don't think those are John Kerry's main problems, his flip flopping on every single issue is his downfall. Why oh, WHY did the Democrats chose him! It should of been an "Anyone but Kerry campaign" not an "Anyone but Dean campaign." At least Dean had a message, a record and an attitude you could get behind. John Kerry, as the Comedian John Stewart often points out is a zombie on stage.

So we have a Rich Texan, tax cutting, militaristic, private, incomprehensible Republican vs. a Rich, Northeaster, taxing, flip-flopping, zombie-like Democrat. What a fight. LOL, I love politics.

Siege40

[??????????]

I agree Siege, and thats why I see it a very very big uphill struggle for Kerry. Believe me, when the Bush campaign goes full blast Kerry is going to get flattened.

[Siege40]

I agree Siege, and thats why I see it a very very big uphill struggle for Kerry. Believe me, when the Bush campaign goes full blast Kerry is going to get flattened.

Wow... I Republican is agreeing with me...

Whatever happened to the charismatic leader? Clinton had Charisma, so did Reagan, Bush and Kerry are so flat and two-dimensional, they are human stereotypes. Texas Conservatice and New England Liberal, this must be some sort of divine comic for the entertainment of the political gods.

Siege40

[??????????]

The parties are both scared to say what they believe and that aggravates the heck out of me. The Republicans should say what they believe and the Democrats should to (no matter how wrong they are). The nation is polarized and I don't know what its going to take to give our nation a kick in the butt. Just the slow decline of our great nation.

[Siege40]

What are these hidden messages that they fear to say? I assume it has something to do with them afraid of scaring off the moderates.

Siege40

[??????????]

Exactly! But the whole point is that if you are in a party stand up for your beliefs and state them. Nothing is getting done because its been locked up since Clinton came in and it just keeps getting worse every time around. Career politicians are the problem, the founders never intended Politics to be the main job of any Congressman or President. They would farm or practice law and when Congress was in session they would go and do that as like a second job or part time job.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

How exactly has our great nation "declined"?

The parties are both scared to say what they believe and that aggravates the heck out of me. The Republicans should say what they believe and the Democrats should to (no matter how wrong they are). The nation is polarized and I don't know what its going to take to give our nation a kick in the butt. Just the slow decline of our great nation.

[??????????]

Lets see we are now mostly a Import nation, our morals are slowly declining with legalized abortion and now trying to legalize homosexual marriage. Look at the kids, so many of them today dont even care. I hope that changes.

[Siege40]

Exactly! But the whole point is that if you are in a party stand up for your beliefs and state them. Nothing is getting done because its been locked up since Clinton came in and it just keeps getting worse every time around. Career politicians are the problem, the founders never intended Politics to be the main job of any Congressman or President. They would farm or practice law and when Congress was in session they would go and do that as like a second job or part time job.

I was watching CNN a week ago and the Republicans in the discussion were calling Kerry a Liberal. The Democrats refused and they argues, loudly, about it. Why is it bad to be a Liberal? Democrats are the LEFT party. Here we have a LIBERAL party. I just don't see the problem of being a Liberal.

I agree Career politicians lose perspective over time I think. They end up speaking in Politicanese and ignore who they're actually there for, their constituents, not the party.

Siege40