Urban Democrats and Rural Republicans

[Missourian]

2000

2004

2008

So I'm looking at these maps that I posted yesterday in another thread and it brings be around to thinking once again about the enigma of the city Democrat and the country Republican.

I have had some theories about that such a perhaps country folks are more religious or city folks see more of the crime and homelessness or country folks are closer to nature but none of them held up under scrutiny.

But yesterday something new came to me, a new hypothesis regarding the political divide between urban and rural.

I think urban dwellers have become accustom to being dependent.

Now don't take this as any kind of insult. It takes a lot of infrastructure when so many live in such a small area.

When a water main breaks or the power goes out in my town it's an inconvenience. When the same thing happens in the city, it's an emergency.

No one comes to pick up the garbage? No biggie, I got a burn barrel. In the city, big problem, refuse everywhere.

Streets don't get ploughed? So what, I got a freezer full of food AND a 4wd. In the city it would be mayhem.

What I'm getting at is if the government shut down in my county, I might not even notice, but if the same thing happened in a metropolitan, it would be a disaster.

Now this is just a theory and perhaps one that others before me have advanced.

Feel free to poke holes in it or trash it completely.

 

[Amanda]

I like it. I'm a rural Republican transplanted to the city and I agree with you 100%. Armageddon could have happened and we'd have never known it if it wasn't on TV.

 

[garyd]

Looks good to me and the demographics appear to support it. The more urbanized an area is the more likely it is to vote Democratic.

 

[midcan5]

I remember a class I had in college in which a study compared mental health in the city as opposed to suburban areas, the conclusion was people are healthier in the city because the city offers more. The more was people, organizations, churches, schools, and basically help. Wo/man is a social animal and being a social animal we have survived by helping each other. Just this week I helped an elderly neighbor unfreeze their water line.

A second wrong assumption is that republicans are rural? Most repubs I know are very much city people or populous suburban area folk. Myths die hard but the small percentages that define red or blue are pretty much meaningless. Next theory please.

 

[jillian]

So I'm looking at these maps that I posted yesterday in another thread and it brings be around to thinking once again about the enigma of the city Democrat and the country Republican.

I have had some theories about that such a perhaps country folks are more religious or city folks see more of the crime and homelessness or country folks are closer to nature but none of them held up under scrutiny.

But yesterday something new came to me, a new hypothesis regarding the political divide between urban and rural.

I think urban dwellers have become accustom to being dependent.

Now don't take this as any kind of insult. It takes a lot of infrastructure when so many live in such a small area.

When a water main breaks or the power goes out in my town it's an inconvenience. When the same thing happens in the city, it's an emergency.

No one comes to pick up the garbage? No biggie, I got a burn barrel. In the city, big problem, refuse everywhere.

Streets don't get ploughed? So what, I got a freezer full of food AND a 4wd. In the city it would be mayhem.

What I'm getting at is if the government shut down in my county, I might not even notice, but if the same thing happened in a metropolitan, it would be a disaster.

Now this is just a theory and perhaps one that others before me have advanced.

Feel free to poke holes in it or trash it completely.

First of all, your map is misleading because the "red" parts vote land... not people.

I agree that there is a divide between urban and rural folk. But the reasoning has nothing to do with urban folk being "dependent"... it has to do with the need for more government in managing a greater population and a greater budget. you will also find more educated people in cities because that is where the jobs are...

Rural folk have a fantasy that they don't need government and that "guvment" is the cause of problems, not teh cure.More educated people understand that without a well-run government you don't have roads; you don't have schools and you don't have a standard of living of any note.

Now explain, if it's about dependence why red states take more money from the feds than they pay and why blue states pay more than they take.

Nice job compressing the blue areas and expanding the red ones, btw... try a bit more realistic map....

http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/map.html

 

[Jennifer.Bush]

sub

 

[Missourian]

First of all, your map is misleading because the "red" parts vote land... not people.

I agree that there is a divide between urban and rural folk. But the reasoning has nothing to do with urban folk being "dependent"... it has to do with the need for more government in managing a greater population and a greater budget. you will also find more educated people in cities because that is where the jobs are...

Rural folk have a fantasy that they don't need government and that "guvment" is the cause of problems, not teh cure.More educated people understand that without a well-run government you don't have roads; you don't have schools and you don't have a standard of living of any note.

Now explain, if it's about dependence why red states take more money from the feds than they pay and why blue states pay more than they take.

I realize that as a member of the ignorant rural community I may be comfused but isn't dependence on the government and need for government the same thing.

I think we are actually in agreement. That is exactly what I am saying. Cities are dependent of government. They have a need for more and more or their system breaks down.

Conversely rural folks can get by with significantly less government.

I don't think it's a fantasy that rural folks don't need or want more government as my examples attest to.

Lastly educated sure as hell don't mean smart. I'm sure all those Wall Street bankers, mortgage lenders, real estate brokers, financal planners, hedge fund managers and.insurance mogels had degree's out the wazoo and look at the mess they got us into.

As for your question, it seems pretty simple to me an I wonder why you guys keep bringing it up.

States like Wyoming and Montana are huge and have small populations. States like Conneticut, Maryland, Massechuetts and Vermont are tiny but have huge populations.

(Just incase it didn't come across in print the way I intended, that's mock indignation at the beginning of this post...a little ribbin' between friends.)

 

[jillian]

I realize that as a member of the ignorant rural community I may be comfused but isn't dependence on the government and need for government the same thing.

I think we are actually in agreement. That is exactly what I am saying. Cities are dependent of government. They have a need for more and more or their system breaks down.

Conversely rural folks can get by with significantly less government.

I don't think it's a fantasy that rural folks don't need or want more government as my examples attest to.

Lastly educated sure as hell don't mean smart. I'm sure all those Wall Street bankers, mortgage lenders, real estate brokers, financal planners, hedge fund managers and.insurance mogels had degree's out the wazoo and look at the mess they got us into.

As for your question, it seems pretty simple to me an I wonder why you guys keep bringing it up.

States like Wyoming and Montana are huge and have small populations. States like Conneticut, Maryland, Massechuetts and Vermont are tiny but have huge populations.

(Just incase it didn't come across in print the way I intended, that's mock indignation at the beginning of this post...a little ribbin' between friends.)

I know re the mock indignation and ribbing. It's all good. I took it as intended

Again, if rural people are the ones who are "dependent on government", then tell the red-staters to stop collecting our tax money.

I agree that educated doesn't always mean smart... and uneducated doesn't mean dumb... but it does mean narrower in terms of world view, I think. As for the wall street types, I can't disagree with you... I think they're a bunch of spoiled brats who deserve a kick up the rear.

On the other hand, if government, yes government, did its job and regulated them properly, perhaps we wouldn't be in as bad of a mess.

 

[Missourian]

Again, if rural people are the ones who are "dependent on government", then tell the red-staters to stop collecting our tax money.

Well if y'all could start growing crops on top of your skyscrapers and rabbits on your balconies the government could save the cost of building roads and bridges to get stuff to you. We've filled our quota of your exports: lawyers, bankers and stockbrockers.

 

[HelloDollyLlama]

1. Cities outproduce the rural areas by at least 10 to 1.

2. The red states are net consumers of tax dollars; the blue states are subsidizing them, in everything from agricultural subsidies to loans to electrification projects to roads to hospitals to to USDA assistance to welfare to flood coverage. Y'all are welcome!

 

[amrchaos]

Missourian, you may have a point.

I am a Georgian by birth and traveled to Wyo, Michigan, D.C., and Illinois...The concept of Government on the local scale effects national politics.

Septic tanks in large cities?? How about an extensive plumbing network throughout south central Ga? Believe it or not, both concepts are more costly(This is not to say that underground plumbing is absent in rural areas--the amount of plumbing in a general area is dependent on the number of people in it. Or if the area has industry since there are some industrial parks scattered across the South that has need for plumbing as well.)

If a watermain breaks? What if a Septic tank needs maintainence or Powerline falters. Do not think that Rural life is a replica of early 20th rural life. There is a constant drive for both electrification and water management directed towards agriculture and small communities inside of most Agri-subsidy Bills. Small town America is growing with the incorporations of small communities into chartered towns and so forth.

Look at Sarah Palin, she became mayor of a small town that was incorporated not to long ago. Thus The Republican star is a product of the drive found in small town america--the desire for civic status while meeting the needs of the citizens in and around its borders.

Small towns want growth/growth potential. Strange enough, Mrs Palin was criticized by the left for pandering Congress for "Pork" in her attempt to meet this need.

ADDon--Note to Hello:::Without Domestic Agriculture, costs of living will skyrocket. Cities are as productive as they are because they are the culmination of products, resources and man power of our civilization. A rural American can live off his property just fine without the produce of cities--Yet the concept of a City surviving without the produce of Agriculture, mines, timber, et cetera is not reality.

Large Cities are dependent--more on Rural Americans than the national government. Trying to extend the luxury of cities to the more Rural corners of the nation is the deal that is presented.

 

[Missourian]

1. Cities outproduce the rural areas by at least 10 to 1.

2. The red states are net consumers of tax dollars; the blue states are subsidizing them, in everything from agricultural subsidies to loans to electrification projects to roads to hospitals to to USDA assistance to welfare to flood coverage. Y'all are welcome!

Forgive me if I don't take your word for it, I don't want to get covered in Dollification.

Roads, bridges and the USDA I'll accept. I'll need a link that proves the rest especially the outproducing 10 to 1.

For roads, bridges and the USDA see above.

 

[doeton]

The idear of rugged individualism does play better in rural areas.

 

[Missourian]

Missourian, you may have a point.

I am a Georgian by birth and traveled to Wyo, Michigan, D.C., and Illinois...The concept of Government on the local scale effects national politics.

Septic tanks in large cities?? How about an extensive plumbing network throughout south central Ga? Believe it or not, both concepts are more costly(This is not to say that underground plumbing is absent in rural areas--the amount of plumbing in a general area is dependent on the number of people in it. Or if the area has industry since there are some industrial parks scattered across the South that has need for plumbing as well.)

If a watermain breaks? What if a Septic tank needs maintainence or Powerline falters. Do not think that Rural life is a replica of early 20th rural life. There is a constant drive for both electrification and water management directed towards agriculture and small communities inside of most Agri-subsidy Bills. Small town America is growing with the incorporations of small communities into chartered towns and so forth.

Look at Sarah Palin, she became mayor of a small town that was incorporated not to long ago. Thus The Republican star is a product of the drive found in small town america--the desire for civic status while meeting the needs of the citizens in and around its borders.

Small towns want growth/growth potential. Strange enough, Mrs Palin was criticized by the left for pandering Congress for "Pork" in her attempt to meet this need.

ADDon--Note to Hello:::Without Domestic Agriculture, costs of living will skyrocket. Cities are as productive as they are because they are the culmination of products, resources and man power of our civilization. A rural American can live off his property just fine without the produce of cities--Yet the concept of a City surviving without the produce of Agriculture, mines, timber, et cetera is not reality.

Large Cities are dependent--more on Rural Americans than the national government. Trying to extend the luxury of cities to the more Rural corners of the nation is the deal that is presented.

Excellent points, and thanks for getting the thread back on topic.

 

[HelloDollyLlama]

Forgive me if I don't take your word for it, I don't want to get covered in Dollification.

Roads, bridges and the USDA I'll accept. I'll need a link that proves the rest especially the outproducing 10 to 1.

For roads, bridges and the USDA see above.

Red states are receiving all of the forms of aid and assistance listed above. And if by Dollification you mean my trademark products, proven fact and superb analysis, then step into my office. For instance, agriculture accounts for 1 percent of our GDP.

Economy of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[jillian]

Well if y'all could start growing crops on top of your skyscrapers and rabbits on your balconies the government could save the cost of building roads and bridges to get stuff to you. We've filled our quota of your exports: lawyers, bankers and stockbrockers.

I have a better idea... how about we really address the fact that red states take far more than they pay in government dollars and blue states pay more than they get.

unless your reason for posting this thread had nothing to do with actually discussing the issues, governmental aid and "dependence" being an issue YOU raised, not me.

 

[Ravi]

Does it really matter? Small towns fold and die if just one business leaves town.

 

[Missourian]

I have a better idea... how about we really address the fact that red states take far more than they pay in government dollars and blue states pay more than they get.

unless your reason for posting this thread had nothing to do with actually discussing the issues, governmental aid and "dependence" being an issue YOU raised, not me.

I already covered it. It you don't want to pay for the roads any bridges that bring you consumer products, only buy things produced in NY. But when you run out, don't come crying to us.

 

[Missourian]

Red states are receiving all of the forms of aid and assistance listed above. And if by Dollification you mean my trademark products, proven fact and superb analysis, then step into my office. For instance, agriculture accounts for 1 percent of our GDP.

Economy of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sorry Dolly, dollification is synonymous with bullcrap and is exemplified by this post that provides not one shred of proof of the statements you tried to pawn off as facts.

Now go back and try again.

 

[jillian]

I already covered it. It you don't want to pay for the roads any bridges that bring you consumer products, only buy things produced in NY. But when you run out, don't come crying to us.

It's not roads and bridges in red states... it's welfare.

But nice almost discussing the issues. It's cool.