This cynical map is being passed around the net by irked Kerry supporters. Origin unknown (perhaps someone can get me an attribution). People, get over it.
I’d suspect the Canadians are pushing this idea.
A more interesting map is this one showing the blue versus the reds not by state, but by counties. Fascinating. Here’s an interesting stat:
Square miles of
counties won
Bush 3.28 million
Kerry 741,000
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Bad Behavior has blocked 4666 access attempts in the last 7 days.
Believe me, Canadians would not be pushing this one. They like the buffer zone between them and Jesusland.
Most Canadians view the US the way Europe does and really want no part of it (except maybe Alberta).
Square mileage is irrelevant until real estate get suffrage.
I would highly doubt that any self-respecting Canadian would push a map that would join the US and Canada. Sure , we like the US but we are VERY big on sovereignty. 🙂 Although, Bush did win the election so anything could happen!
I love the county-by-county map. It goes to show you that, generally speaking, it’s the big cities that control the electoral votes in any given state. NY State goes big Kerry, despite the vast majority of it (geographically) looking red. Ditto California. In fact, here’s the CA. map for the 2002 gubernatorial election:
http://vote2002.ss.ca.gov/Returns/gov/mapB.htm
So why do cities generally go liberal and suburbs/rural areas go conservative?
Better map: http://www.boingboing.net/images/Purple-USA.jpg
Canadians would not be pushing this one
Especially the Parti Quebecois, I’m thinking. 🙂
Here’s the info on moving to Canada.
Wow, how ignorant and stupid.
Responding to Augie’s question:
It’s not out of line to acknowledge higher levels of education and access to information in general — in urban settings. The word “urbane” also comes to mind. It’s accurate.
Another result of more and better education is less reliance on religion and “value systems” that may be centuries out of date.
The county map thing gives me a chuckle, living in a “populous county” by New Mexico standards. With the capitol of the state taking up one chunk, we have a couple of thousand square miles — with about 160,000 people.
Voter turnout was over 70% — and Kerry got 70% of that.
No one up here needs any more latte-sipping, hairy-armed Liberals. Our country runneth over with them already. It’s just gross. Don’t see this as Bush winning so much as it is Kerry losing his own election… He just kept talking and talking until he talked himself out of public favour. So long!
Eed – Gotcha. Liberals are educated folk, open-minded. Conservatives are dumb Jesus freaks relying on morality that’s out of date.
I can see now why it’s nearly impossible to be bi-partisan on anything: the snooty arrogance of the left.
Augie
With regard to why cities go liberal and rural areas are more conservative – I’ve always assumed it had something to do with how stark the problems – and contrasts – are, in metropolitan areas.
I live in Oregon, and when I go to Portland I see: lines at the Rescue Mission, people with cardboard signs (“Homeless”, etc) at freeway on-ramps, and people sitting on sidewalks asking for spare change – things I don’t see away from a city.
I’ve always assumed people in rural areas see much less need for a “Welfare State” than those of us in/near metropolitan areas.
Is it because in rural areas most people know everyone else, and “take care of their own”? – whereas the metropolitan areas are full of people who are strangers to each other?
Poverty isn’t unknown in rural areas – by any means – but I think it tends to effect the majority in a given geographic area. Whereas metropolitan areas have jarring contrasts between those who have, and those who don’t. ðŸ™
You don’t get it, do you, Augie. While my personal politics absolutely are Left. I know a bunch of well educated Conservatives who also voted for “someone other than Bush”.
I realize that if you rely solely on TV talking heads to inform yourself, you might have these problems. But, do you think the numbers — anywhere — tell you that rural schools produce better education scores? Not even by Bush’s “standards”.
Urbane communities are more sophisticated, and better educated. Facts are facts, Jack. I happen to live [right next to] such a community predominantly “Liberal” — if that word makes you feel better. The folks I get to discuss military history with are mostly conservative. Folks I get involved with on environmental issues are conservative and liberal, though, mostly the latter. The only communities in the world making as big a deal as Bush does about religion — are the folks who flew hijacked planes into the Twin Towers and are hanging out in their own hoods several thousand miles away.
Bush just figures that’s part of Armageddon. Do you?
What’s your problem? Education? Rural inferiority complex?
Anonymously
Thanks for the link to the “Purple” map. It matches my sentiments exactly: It was a close election – and every “blue” state had “red” voters, and vice-versa – but that fact seems to get lost in the “one state (county) – one color” maps.
Which is why I thought it was funny when the USA Today map listed square miles “won” – which seemed to be a nod/wink toward the (obvious?) fallacy that such large amounts of Red acreage has zero bearing on the number of votes cast. (Unless we lived in a bizarro world where the population density of each and every county was exactly the same!) 🙂
Works for me. I never met a Canadian I didn’t like. Please take us in.
Ed,
We can play this stereotype game all day. For example, I attribute the left tendencies of the cities to the sheep effect. When large numbers of people live within a short proximity of each other, they tend to stop thinking for themselves and follow whatever way everyone else goes. Like the saying goes, “Everyone in New York assumes everyone thinks just like them.”
The claim of better education in the cities is baseless. John’s post about the voter IQ’s is comical but a hoax. You asked if there is any evidence that rural area education is as good as urban education. As it turns out, the answer is “Yes.” The http://www.collegeboard.com/about/news_info/cbsenior/yr2004/reports.html”> Collegeboard manages the SAT test. The national report is a PDF which breaks down the demographics of scores. Near the bottom of the report, is the break down of average scores by location of High School. The mean of Large City is 495/505 (Verbal/ Math). The mean of Medium-size City is 510/515. The mean of Small City or Town is 508/512. The mean of Rural is 503/506. Either those numbers are statistically equivalent or we must accept that education in the rural areas is better than that of the Large Cities. You are forgetting that in many cases the public education system in the cities is far worse than in rural areas. Look at the Los Angeles Unified School District. It has to be one of the worse public school systems in the country. A big reason for that fact, IMO, is that it is far too big.
The claim about access to information is also baseless. If anything, with the expansion of the Internet, people in rural areas have access to more information than they ever have. Even if the people do not have direct access to the Internet, the newspapers certainly do. If more information made people liberal, Kerry should have won easily. How do you explain cities like Austin which is considered the next Silicon Valley?
The reality is that your entire claim is liberal arrogance that assumes the liberal way must be right way and that, generally, anyone that disagrees is stupid. That attitude does little to help both sides understand each other and does not help both sides to work together. Further, it does not help your cause of convincing voters.
Is the “Jesus” of this so-called “Jesusland” the Jesus of the Jefferson Bible (also called “The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth Extracted Textually from the Gospels”)?