Election 2004 County breakdown

[MonteZuma]

Conversly, why do Urban populations tend to support a more liberal candidate?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have a few unformed theories on why urban [edit: and suburban] populations are more left wing:

 

* Higher standard of education in urban [edit: and suburban] areas

* Diverse populations - exposure to all kinds of minorities (sexual, racial, financial, medical, etc)

* More wage earners and less self-employed (as %age)

 

Because of this, I think many people in cities [edit: and suburbs] support the things that left wing politics stands for (equality, social justice, workers rights), and they recognise the role government plays in this.

 

I guess the opposite is true for right wingers. For the most part, rural folk live in a monocultural and intolerant society. Outsiders, including state and federal governments - and city folk, are distrusted. Rural folk therefore support governments that are generally less interventionist and promote 'traditional' values.

 

Obviously there are exceptions. If I felt like witing an essay I'd say something about those too.

 

$0.02

[Guest Recombo]

I'm going to dismiss the 'automated farm system' generalization as something said with little thought. Automation takes more people to run, more to maintain, and it's more costly. Farmers are using this, but it doesn't replace them as farmers....it simply adds to their crew.

 

I like your theories Montezuma and I can agree with some. However, let's relook at that first one....education. The best education exists in suburban areas. Most urban schools are not able to support great education or exceptional teachers because of the financial obligation. Suburban areas tend to collect the most tax dedicated to education. More tax dollars per student.

 

Exposure and self-employed is generally true. However, excluding farming, most self employed earn twice or more than corporate wage earners from what I can see....but it's not 100% true.

 

I'll concede to the intoleration of rurals folks. There is no denying that of them. Then again, they are not forced into situations where getting along is par for the course. It bugs me too.

 

However, it's my opinion that many people who voted for Kerry didn't necessarily like Kerry - they just wanted something different for better or for worse. I think many of those types would be dumbfounded to understand what Pres Bush HAS done in accordance with Democratic demands. Quite a bit.

[MonteZuma]

I agree with pretty much everything you've said recombo... (which feels kinda wierd )

 

But....for the sake of discussion, I disagree with this....

 

Automation takes more people to run, more to maintain, and it's more costly.  Farmers are using this, but it doesn't replace them as farmers....it simply adds to their crew.

 

Automation is one of the reasons many rural communities are in decline. Farms in the North America and Australasia have some of the lowest numbers of workers per hectare because their farms are highly automated and chemical reliant. There is much less need for farm labour. Machines are cheaper to run than people.

 

Sure some jobs are created to produce and maintain the equipment and supply the chemicals, etc, but this hasn't outweighed the loss of farm workers. In fact I think there has been a decline in employment in this area in the last 30 years.

 

The biggest job growth in the rural sector is in wholesale and retail sales - and most of those jobs are in regional centres and cities.

 

Farmers are being replaced by machines.

[Dr.Worthless]

I have a few unformed theories on why urban populations are more left wing:

 

* Higher standard of education in urban areas

* Diverse populations - exposure to all kinds of minorities (sexual, racial, financial, medical, etc)

* More wage earners and less self-employed (as %age)

You are grossly mis-informed.

 

Urban Studies

 

 

The findings presented in this report do not paint a flattering portrait of high school graduation for public schools in the United States.

 

    * The national graduation rate is 68 percent, with nearly one-third of all public high school students failing to graduate.

    * Tremendous racial gaps are found for graduation rates.

    * Students from historically disadvantaged minority groups (American Indian, Hispanic, Black) have little more than a fifty-fifty chance of finishing high school with a diploma.

    * By comparison, graduation rates for Whites and Asians are 75 and 77 percent nationally.

    * Males graduate from high school at a rate 8 percent lower than female students.

    * Graduation rates for students who attend school in high poverty, racially segregated, and urban school districts lag from 15 to 18 percent behind their peers.

    * A great deal of variation in graduation rates and gaps among student groups is found across regions of the country as well as the states.

 

Thats right, Graduation rates for students who attend school in high poverty, racially segregated, and URBAN school districts lag from 15 to 18 percent behind their peers. Graduation rates for Hispanics and African Americans is at 50%, where as caucasians is at 75%. Since you already established for us that rural america is monoculturalistic, (meaning only whites) and the multi-culturalistic areas are all urban, by your definition urban areas are educating the african americans and hispanics, and statistics show you're doing a poor job.

 

Do you have any facts to back up your statements, or are you talking from opinion?

[MonteZuma]

Thats right, Graduation rates for students who attend school in high poverty, racially segregated, and URBAN school districts lag from 15 to 18 percent behind their peers.  Graduation rates for Hispanics and African Americans is at 50%, where as caucasians is at 75%.  Since you already established for us that rural america is monoculturalistic, (meaning only whites) and the multi-culturalistic areas are all urban, by your definition urban areas are educating the african americans and hispanics, and statistics show you're doing a poor job. 

 

Do you have any facts to back up your statements, or are you talking from opinion?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you had any comprehension skills you'd know when I was stating an opinion.

 

As I said, I agree with Recombo, who already made the point that you are trying to make (and he did it in just a few lines ).

 

You are splitting hairs and ignoring the main argument - which is that there is a general difference in the political affiliation of rural folk and the rest (whatever you want to call them). Not every city in the world has a downtown ghetto district filled with poverty-stricken native and african americans and hispanics, so the point you make is meaningless in many US cities and the rest of the world. I lumped urban and suburban in the same category (it is the convention here. There are no ghettos - disadvantaged people live in the suburbs where housing is cheaper).

 

If you want to discuss differences between three community groups (urban, suburban and rural), then I'd refer you back to this statement:

 

Obviously there are exceptions. If I felt like witing an essay I'd say something about those too.

 

I still don't feel like writing an essay' date=' but if I did, I'd probably divide communities into 5 groups:

 

Urban (to make you happy - I like to make people happy [img']http://www.ssforum.net/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif[/img] )

Suburban

Peri-urban

Rural

Regional towns

 

Maybe I'll go into that tomorrow?

[Yupa]

The findings presented in this report do not paint a flattering portrait of high school graduation for public schools in the United States.

• The national graduation rate is 68 percent, with nearly one-third of all public high school students failing to graduate.
   
   
   
  
• Tremendous racial gaps are found for graduation rates.
  • Students from historically disadvantaged minority groups (American Indian, Hispanic, Black) have little more than a fifty-fifty chance of finishing high school with a diploma.
    
  • By comparison, graduation rates for Whites and Asians are 75 and 77 percent nationally.
    
  • Males graduate from high school at a rate 8 percent lower than female students.
    
  • Graduation rates for students who attend school in high poverty, racially segregated, and urban school districts lag from 15 to 18 percent behind their peers.
    
  • A great deal of variation in graduation rates and gaps among student groups is found across regions of the country as well as the states.
    

Thats right, Graduation rates for students who attend school in high poverty, racially segregated, and URBAN school districts lag from 15 to 18 percent behind their peers.  Graduation rates for Hispanics and African Americans is at 50%, where as caucasians is at 75%.  Since you already established for us that rural america is monoculturalistic, (meaning only whites) and the multi-culturalistic areas are all urban, by your definition urban areas are educating the african americans and hispanics, and statistics show you're doing a poor job.

It's a list: "high poverty, racially segregated, and urban", not "urban districts with racial segregation and high poverty".

 

There are plenty of stupid republican people in middle america that are not caucasian.

 

Graduating high school doesn't make you smart.

 

Having a higher graduation rate than somewhere else does not make you smart.

 

side {

he who scoffs at automation today loses his pathetic job tomorrow (not because he scoffed... )

imo if your parents were dumb, the chances for you to not be are incredibly low; public schooling has little to do with it, and I'd say even less the older you get - I imagine it _could_ have more to do with it, but the US public education system is terrible and it's clear most of us would rather have a president that says "Gawrsh, all of those kids will go to school, it's strategery!" instead of actually fixing something

}

[Dr.Worthless]

Monte, I frankly do not wish to discuss any subject matter where one participant believes that a certain population is under-educated by default, not only is it ignorant, its !@#$%^&*anine.

 

By simply typing in "highschool graduation rates" in google, your belief that urban america is more educated than rural america is debunked, so education cannot be a factor in the difference in voting record.

 

Having a higher graduation rate than somewhere else does not make you smart.

 

Heh, so please, tell me what does make you "smart"? Voting for Kerry?

 

I'm willing to go it alone in this discussion (As I always do on these forums) because it is absolutly !@#$%^&*anine to label someone stupid because they didn't vote for the candidate you support. Its no different than labeling someone stupid because of the color of their skin. You have absolutely no facts to support any claim that "stupid people vote republican, smart people vote democrat".

 

Oh, and Monte, shove it up your !@#$%^&* =). It was a legitimate question in which you answered in your typical offensive, combative way. As with 95% of the things you spew on this forum, you have no factual backing to support what you say.

[Yupa]

Monte, I frankly do not wish to discuss any subject matter where one participant believes that a certain population is under-educated by default, not only is it ignorant, its !@#$%^&*anine.

asinine

By simply typing in "highschool graduation rates" in google, your belief that urban america is more educated than rural america is debunked, so education cannot be a factor in the difference in voting record.

...and you had that urban.org page as your homepage or something?

Heh, so please, tell me what does make you "smart"?  Voting for Kerry?

...um, I didn't say that, but I am happy to say that it was not smart for anyone to vote for Bush

I'm willing to go it alone in this discussion (As I always do on these forums) because it is absolutly !@#$%^&*anine

asinine

to label someone stupid because they didn't vote for the candidate you support.

...no it's not. People opposed Hitler, but the majority was with him. Don't be idiotic.

Its no different than labeling someone stupid because of the color of their skin.  You have absolutely no facts to support any claim that "stupid people vote republican, smart people vote democrat".

I'm not sure if anyone claimed that (been a while since I read this thread from the beginning, though). I think the general consensus amongst those of us with brains, however, is that Kerry was the lesser evil of the two big candidates.

[Dr.Worthless]

I'm not sure if anyone claimed that (been a while since I read this thread from the beginning, though). I think the general consensus amongst those of us with brains, however, is that Kerry was the lesser evil of the two big candidates.

Heh, since you brought hitler into the discussion, he didn't build the first fully mechanized war machine with idiots, nor did he come up with tactics that he revolutionized warfare with idiots, nor was he on the verge of nuclear weapons with idiots, nor did he invent jet engines with idiots, (I could go on)

 

WHAT!? Smart people supported Hitler OMG!?!?!?

 

Thank you for being the internet police on my spelling, rather than counter-point the facts I present all you can do is Nit-pick. Very typical of this forum, there's about 3 folks that can hold an intelligent discussion, then the refuse comes in and spews useless !@#$%^&*.

 

I'm not sure if anyone claimed that (been a while since I read this thread from the beginning, though). I think the general consensus amongst those of us with brains, however, is that Kerry was the lesser evil of the two big candidates.

 

Wow, Logging onto the internet and posting on a forum puts you in the "Have brains" category!? SIGN ME UP BABY, I QUALIFY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Or do you have to be anal and proofread peoples posts to qualify?

 

If you can justify calling people stupid because they didn't support your candidate, then I can justify calling you a loser, because you've been voting with a losing party for the last 8 years. Tell ya what, I'll just fall back on the catchall republicans enjoy right now. You can continue to believe you're smarter than everyone else, me and my party will just continue to run the country.

[Yupa]

Heh, since you brought hitler into the discussion, he didn't build the first fully mechanized war machine with idiots, nor did he come up with tactics that he revolutionized warfare with idiots, nor was he on the verge of nuclear weapons with idiots, nor did he invent jet engines with idiots, (I could go on)

 

WHAT!?  Smart people supported Hitler OMG!?!?!?

Yes, Hitler was so smart he ended up committing suicide. Germans were so smart they submitted to unconditional surrender. Truly, besides the extermination of Jews, I don't see Hitler and Bush as that different - both greedy idiot warmongers with a large, stupid middle class blindly following.

 

Even if Hitler had taken over every last bit of earth on this planet (ridiculously unlikely), he still would've been an idiot. If you can't see it, then, well, oh wait you voted for Bush. Nevermind.

 

Thank you for being the internet police on my spelling, rather than counter-point the facts I present all you can do is Nit-pick.  Very typical of this forum, there's about 3 folks that can hold an intelligent discussion, then the refuse comes in and spews useless !@#$%^&*. 

I just thought it was funny given what you were talking about. Plus asinine is a fawnky word.

 

Wow, Logging onto the internet and posting on a forum puts you in the "Have brains" category!?  SIGN ME UP BABY, I QUALIFY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  Or do you have to be anal and proofread peoples posts to qualify?

I have cable, there is no formal logging on.

If I were proofreading your post I would've mentioned the "absolutly".

 

If you can justify calling people stupid because they didn't support your candidate, then I can justify calling you a loser, because you've been voting with a losing party for the last 8 years.

I'm 21. I have voted once and it wasn't Democrat. Stop operating under !@#$%^&*umptions.

 

Tell ya what, I'll just fall back on the catchall republicans enjoy right now.  You can continue to believe you're smarter than everyone else, me and my party will just continue to run the country.

Do whatever you like. Just because I realize Bush is an idiot doesn't mean he directly effects me much.

[Dr.Worthless]

Yes, Hitler was so smart he ended up committing suicide. Germans were so smart they submitted to unconditional surrender. Truly, besides the extermination of Jews, I don't see Hitler and Bush as that different - both greedy idiot warmongers with a large, stupid middle class blindly following.

 

Heh, you're a joke. I'm done with the thread, enjoy =)

[Yupa]

wewt, I got the whoooooollleee thread, TO-MY-SELF

[MonteZuma]

Monte, I frankly do not wish to discuss any subject matter where one participant believes that a certain population is under-educated by default, not only is it ignorant, its !@#$%^&*anine[sic]. 

Statistically, certain populations do have different levels of education. That is one of the reasons why they are often called 'disadvantaged'. Your own quote singled out Native Americans, Hispanics and Blacks. Rural people are also disadvantaged in terms of access and at!@#$%^&*udes to tertiary education.

 

...education cannot be a factor in the difference in voting record.

Every exit poll and every election analyst disagrees with you.

 

Some more raw data for you to analyse:

 

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/res...0/epolls.0.html

 

Can you figure out what this means? Let me help:

 

* You are more likely to vote Democrat (at the last election) if you did not graduate high school *or* if you have a postgraduate degree.

* You are more likely to vote Republican if you graduated from high school or a Bachelors degree or are an undergrad.

 

This is starting to explain some of the differences. Obviously if you want to compare the relationship between education and voter behaviour you need to look at more than just high school graduation statistics. I think we both learned something In any case, I think these results coincide with my initial theories about why city/urban/suburban people vote Democrat more often than rural people.

 

Having a higher graduation rate than somewhere else does not make you smart.

On average, graduates do have higher IQs than non-graduates, but you're right. The graduation rate is affected by many things. Education does change your view on the world though though - and therefore can change how you vote.

 

Heh, so please, tell me what does make you "smart"?  Voting for Kerry?

The best indicator of intelligence is the ability to understand and/or solve complex problems. My *opinion* is that republican 'solutions' to complex problems are ill-conceived.

 

I'm willing to go it alone in this discussion (As I always do on these forums)

Kleenex?

 

you answered in your typical offensive, combative way.

BS. You are deluded.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[MonteZuma]

Ooh! Nearly missed this:

 

http://www.ozemail.com.au/~montie/vote.jpg

 

Wow...city folk vote Democrat and rural folk vote Republican

[Guest Recombo]

That poll can be very subjective. I'm going to nullify that intellect has any meaning to your political affiliation by looking at income since it was broken down so clearly. Look at the vote by income:

 

The poorest people voted for Kerry, the richest voted for Bush. As you get richer you vote more republican.

 

Now, if I've !@#$%^&*umed right, there are few if any MIT graduates working at McDonalds at under 15,000 per year. And likewise there are few if any millionaires who don't possess a degree in one form or another (excluding inheritance and lotto winners).

 

I'll counter my statement above by referring back to the previous post above. So what does this prove? Simply that intellect has nothing to do with your political affiliation as it can be countered both ways.

 

The original intent here was to show that this was an election about population sprawl. Nothing more.

[Vile Requiem]

Eh, it doesn't matter.

 

Enjoy your brand spankin new National ID Card.

[Dr Brain]

No Christian will ever accept a national ID card. Bush == Christian.

[MasterDrake]

Tell me something wth does being a christian have to do with a national ID card, nothing no sit and stfu kids

[Guest Recombo]

Let's try to keep it civilized here.

 

I would, however, like to try to understand how Hitler and Bush were alike. Just because you don't like Bush Akai, doesn't make him a villan.

 

Hitler killed over 6million jews in concentration camps. The closest to that in most recent history is that of Sadam Hussein to the Northern Iraqi people. I'm quite sure that Bush's goal was to remove Hussein from power to stop the butchering of people. Maybe I'm wrong.

[Dr Brain]

Tell me something wth does being a christian have to do with a national ID card, nothing no sit and stfu kids

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Read the book of Revelation. Specificly the parts relating to the mark of the beast. The common interpretation is that it is some form of national ID.

[»SD>Big]

Tell me something wth does being a christian have to do with a national ID card, nothing no sit and stfu kids

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Read the book of Revelation. Specificly the parts relating to the mark of the beast. The common interpretation is that it is some form of national ID.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

i remember some crazy man telling me and my buddy the EXACT same thing on the bus a couple of years ago.

 

not saying that you're crazy, or that the notion crazy, just re-afirming that i've heard about it, just never looked into it.

[»Ducky]

Wow, too much garbage being flung around.

My outlook is simple.

 

-Voting-

5% Religion

10% Misc.

20% Education

30% Location

30% Wealth

 

Some coincide with others, but those are the natural splits I see.

Bush is not hitler, though I sometimes wonder if being blind to certain needs of a people is villainy in itself.

 

Intelligence is measured by the amount of motivation someone has. Being smart yet unwilling to use the intellect is in essence being stupid.

I have lived as a stupid person for the majority of my life.

Books and scores mean little, as none will ever allow you to view decisions made in haste; which are the ones that change lives and society more than all else.

 

No such thing as "Right" and "Wrong". People do things because it will satisfy a need with-in themselves. Happiness is the main need. Doing Heroin isn't wrong; It gives you instant gratification and overwhelming happiness to have it. There are undesirable side effects, but obviously the happiness is superior in the cycle.

 

Wrong things happen as accidents. No one chooses to do a wrong thing, they happen by mistake. Hitting a child on the street by accident when driving is wrong.

 

Believing such, it is easy to understand that the war in iraq, (Though to myself, I would have never done it the way it had happened) is not wrong, only someone elses choice. The majorities choice in this case.

To say either side is stupid is of little matter. 6 stupid people will always have sway over 4 intelligent.

 

My $3.56

[Dr Brain]

Wow, too much garbage being flung around.

My outlook is simple. 

 

-Voting-

5% Religion

10% Misc.

20% Education

30% Location

30% Wealth

 

Some coincide with others, but those are the natural splits I see.

Bush is not hitler, though I sometimes wonder if being blind to certain needs of a people is villainy in itself.

 

Intelligence is measured by the amount of motivation someone has.  Being smart yet unwilling to use the intellect is in essence being stupid. 

I have lived as a stupid person for the majority of my life.

Books and scores mean little, as none will ever allow you to view decisions made in haste; which are the ones that change lives and society more than all else.

 

No such thing as "Right" and "Wrong".  People do things because it will satisfy a need with-in themselves.  Happiness is the main need.  Doing Heroin isn't wrong; It gives you instant gratification and overwhelming happiness to have it.  There are undesirable side effects, but obviously the happiness is superior in the cycle.

 

Wrong things happen as accidents.  No one chooses to do a wrong thing, they happen by mistake. Hitting a child on the street by accident when driving is wrong.

 

Believing such, it is easy to understand that the war in iraq, (Though to myself, I would have never done it the way it had happened) is not wrong, only someone elses choice.  The majorities choice in this case.

To say either side is stupid is of little matter.  6 stupid people will always have sway over 4 intelligent.

 

My $3.56

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

You're wrong. There is a right and a wrong. It's very clearly defined. Know that thing called a conscience? Yep. That thing. That's what tells you right and wrong.

[»Ducky]

What your teacher told you in 2nd grade is wrong

 

People do not make wrong decisions willingly. Convince me otherwise.

[Dr Brain]

What does my 2nd grade teacher have to do with anything? (Yes, a few of the things he taught me were incorrect, but that doesn't relate to right and wrong)

 

I can never ever convince you of something when you have a closed mind.