I am sad tonight Since I, apparently, live in an anti-America part of America. I feel like an eskimo who hates snow. Share: Twitter Facebook Google+ 2008 Elections
I am sad tonight because I can’t figure out WTF your post is about.Care to enlighten? Did $your_state turn red, or did I miss something?
I am sad tonight because I can’t figure out WTF your post is about.As reported in the WaPo online, Sarah Palin during a campaign stop in NC “made a point of mentioning that she loved to visit the ‘pro-America’ areas of the country, of which North Carolina is one. No word on which states she views as unpatriotic.” Also in the piece is this absolute gem:Giving credit to a higher power for the day’s poll ratings, the Alaska governor told the roughly 500-person audience that things might be changing. “We even saw today, thank the Lord,” she said, looking upwards and raising her fist, “We saw some movement.”
I like it that God takes a personal interest in the campaign. 🙂
Thanks, Redhand. My bad for omitting the link.
For the party that likes to tout economic growth, the Republicans are surprisingly bad at being nice to the parts of the country that generate almost all the wealth.
Nate Silver at fivethirtyeight.com has an interesting analysis of just how white the demographics lean at cities Sarah Palin has visited, and are presumably the real Americans who are pro-America who see things the way she does.If I had the time, I’d like to follow up Alon’s point and see where these cities fit in on a wealth-creation scale, although I will admit that the list would be skewed by the fact that the wealthiest cities are so solidly democratic that no candidate will waste their time there.
Canuck, it’s hard to compare cities here. It’s also hard to look at cities candidates visit, because swing states tend to generate less wealth than solid states. Virginia is a complete welfare state; Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida are tax recipients by a small amount.What we can say, as far as wealth creation goes, is:- Urban areas generate wealth; rural areas suck it in. The exceptions include DC and large states’ capitals (like Albany) and military-oriented cities (like Norfolk).- Successful cities generate more wealth than depressed ones. However, even very depressed cities, like Detroit and Cleveland, are tax donors.- Older cities (NY, SF) generate more wealth than newer ones (Houston, Atlanta). Even so, pretty much every big urban area in the Sunbelt generates wealth (with the exception of San Diego and Phoenix, which are tax-neutral).- Within each urban area, richer areas generate more wealth. City cores have higher per capita federal spending than the suburbs, but this mostly reflects their higher daytime populations.The first and third effects are larger than the fourth, so blue America ends up generating more wealth than red America, but there are lots of exceptions. I haven’t looked at Texas data, but my guess is that money there flows from Houston and Dallas toward Austin.