Red State, Blue City

[Bob]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...ban-rural-divide-is-splitting-america/265686/ The only major cities that voted Republican in the 2012 presidential election were Phoenix, Oklahoma City, Fort Worth, and Salt Lake City. With its dominant Mormon population, Mitt Romney was a lock in the Utah capital; Phoenix nearly voted for Obama. After that, the largest urban centers to tilt Republican included Wichita, Lincoln, Neb., and Boise.

The gap is so stark that some of America's bluest cities are located in its reddest states. Every one of Texas' major cities -- Austin, Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio -- voted Democratic in 2012, the second consecutive presidential election in which they've done so. Other red-state cities that tipped blue include Atlanta, Indianapolis, New Orleans, Birmingham, Tucson, Little Rock, and Charleston, S.C. -- ironically, the site of the first battle of the Civil War.

 

[Bob]

read and ponder mr anderson

 

[Leader of the Banned]

One of the qualities of liberalism is openness to new experience. You're much more likely to be exposed to a wider variety of experiences and cultures if you live in the city than if you live in a rural area. Still there are some more progressive enclaves in less populated areas, and I find those most intriguing.

 

[BeachRob]

Politicos anticipate less of a democratic return vote in the next cycle, when Obama is no longer the headline of the ticket. GOTV in urban locations was very big in 2008 and 2012.

 

[Bob]

Politicos anticipate less of a democratic return vote in the next cycle, when Obama is no longer the headline of the ticket. GOTV in urban locations was very big in 2008 and 2012.

cite something

 

[BeachRob]

cite something

I suppose I could begin by citing myself. I rode along with Dem GOTV operatives in 2008, in a semi-rural area of Alabama nonetheless. One of the most interesting experiences in my life... Second, maybe, to working in a gubernatorial primary.

Here is a Huffington Post article from 2011 stating there was an anticipated falloff between the 2008 and 2012 cycles in Dem registration and participation. It turned out not to be the case. Obama has/had a very well organized and effective GOTV strategy that did nearly as well in 2012. That machine won't be available to the next candidate.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/30/obama-2012-campaign-voter_n_868693.html

I like that the Atlantic presents hard raw data in graphics, etc. But, what are they trying to say? It seems exactly what you would expect from a bunch of New England intellectuals who have set up camp in DC.

Atlanta, Birmingham, and New Orleans have gone Blue...? That's not really the case, is it? The Red have gone out of Atlanta, Birmingham, and New Orleans. They moved to Alpharetta, Mountain Brook, and Metairie.

There is a growing trend/likelihood/etc of cities swinging entire states? Not really. In a similar vein as Huffington Post's article, organizations focused on social issues pertaining to race have been polling and tracking the emotional involvement of 2012 voters in the 2016 election. The NAACP found exactly what they expected when they decided to conduct this poll:

http://www.naacp.org/press/entry/na...atic-advantage-on-quality-of-life-issues-subs

There is probably a better than average chance that Hilary Clinton, or whoever the (D)Candidate is, wins POTUS in 2016. But it won't be because of ATL, NOLA, and Bham.

It'll be I-4, here in Florida, where the GOP has pulled an uber-fail by letting the tea-partiers "sit in daddy's lap and drive."

Based on what we are seeing in polling data headed toward 2016, you shouldn't have as tall of blue spikes as you see in the Atlantic's graphics from 2012. You might see a midsized blue plateau through N.Central Florida and possibly in the Texas triangle. But, not a repeat of the map shown... at least in the cities you quoted. (Excluding Texas.)

 

[Bob]

interesting that you run to using intellectual as an insult or weakness. that's a tell. Those New England intellectuals used to be the backbone of the GOP before the Civil Rights Bill. "Atlanta, Birmingham, and New Orleans have gone Blue...? That's not really the case, is it? The Red have gone out of Atlanta, Birmingham, and New Orleans. They moved to Alpharetta, Mountain Brook, and Metairie." proves the article's point, as they were displaced by blue voters in greater numbers. it's well thought out. urban population centers do in fact, determine these elections. the GOP has to break the tbagger's cycle of alienating independents and over half their own party. it's lose/lose, but of course you know this. 2016 will all be determined by the GOP's candidate. My take on it is they are utterly doomed until the Teaster's go back to the back of the bus, meaning no place on the ticket. It's gotten that bad for the GOP. Go down the list a Tea Party favorite's and try not to cringe as you read the list of characters. Regarding I-4, of course when you balance the state budget by stealing from teacher's paychecks, and kill infrastructure projects, there will be payback. you don't have to be an "intellectual" to view this, do you?

 

[BeachRob]

I stand by my comments bashing the Atlantic's reporters. The guy who wrote the article... Josh Kron. He was born in New York, NY. He attended Skidmore College, and went on to be a field reporter in Uganda. What in the world qualifies him to write about US politics and voting trends in red states? He makes these broad overgeneralized statements and backs them up with impressive graphics. But, the thesis is wrong.

"Other red-state cities that tipped blue include Atlanta, Indianapolis, New Orleans, Birmingham, Tucson, Little Rock, and Charleston, S.C. -- ironically, the site of the first battle of the Civil War."

Well, Duh! Anyone who lives Georgia, Louisiana, or Alabama knows that Atlanta, New Orleans, and Birmingham were going to have big turnouts for the Democratic ticket in 2008 and 2012. (I'm sure it's the same in Little Rock, Charleston, and Indianapolis. No clue on Tucson.) About Charleston... I fail to see the irony. The way the article starts out with statements about the Civil War reeks of 'click bait,' in my opinion.

"The voting data suggest that people don't make cities liberal -- cities make people liberal."

What does the author mean by this? Again, I think he is overgeneralizing; and he has no idea what is actually going on in these states.

Bob, you mention the Tea Party. The Democrats gave the Republicans that horrible poison pill a while ago. A constituency that historically aligned with the Blue Dogs or Dixiecrats were ready to defect, and would have voted conservative in the last few cycles anyway. Republican leadership felt this group needed to be validated and let them hold the 'talking stick.' The problem is that the Tea Partiers haven't given the 'talking stick' back! It's a horrible miscalculation on the Republicans' part. As a result, Republicans run the risk of having alienated one of the fastest growing segments of the US' population. And, as opposed to the record number of new registrants in 2008, the constituents of I-4 and Houston vote regardless of who heads the ticket.

I don't know anything about teachers' paychecks and infrastructure projects. What's going on there?

 

[Bob]

See Rick Scott....it's under his resume

 

[Bob]

Scott killed High Speed rail... balanced a 2-3 billion dollar State deficit by unilaterally forcing teachers/public worker's to fund 1/2 their pensions. He sold it to the public by saying it was only 3 percent of their pay. This year after stealing for 3 years, Scott has funded teacher pay raises by allotting the money to counties without the stipulation they go to raises. Result? Many of the revenue starved counties are keeping the money for other purposes. Orange county has given administrative positions a 4 percent raise, and the middle finger to the teachers. There are 67 counties all with their own Scott driven mini circus. What do you expect from a sociopathic tea partier elected by a whisker?