Take a look at these maps.
\
What do you see?
| Homestar Runner Wiki Forum http://forum.hrwiki.org/ |
|
| Can anyone sense something here? http://forum.hrwiki.org/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=1221 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Mrs Commanderson [ Sun Nov 07, 2004 1:10 am ] |
| Post subject: | Can anyone sense something here? |
Take a look at these maps.
\
What do you see? |
|
| Author: | Didymus [ Sun Nov 07, 2004 1:41 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Actually, the distribution of Bush and Kerry voters has more to do with population centers than anything else. Bush scored high with people from rural areas, whereas Kerry scored high in urban areas. Detailed state maps that show county distribution of votes would more clearly show that. As for trying to relate Republicanism with slavery, nice try, but you might want to take a look at Abraham Lincoln's political party before making that assessment. |
|
| Author: | ramrod [ Sun Nov 07, 2004 1:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
That is a rather interesting find. And Didymus, the Republicans of then have switched roles and are now the Democrats. |
|
| Author: | Didymus [ Sun Nov 07, 2004 2:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Even so, there is no direct connection between Republicans and slavery (as Mrs Commanderson implied), regardless of whether the parties have shifted agendas over the past 140 years. I seriously doubt that, if you interviewed Republicans, that you'd find any who were in favor of slavery. Democrats love playing "the Race Card" by implying that Republicans are trying to reinstate segregation and crap like that. They manage to fool most Black people into believing it, too, which is a shame. |
|
| Author: | Mrs Commanderson [ Sun Nov 07, 2004 2:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I was not actually trying to connect them, I was simply pointing out how similiar it was. |
|
| Author: | T-Smash [ Sun Nov 07, 2004 3:18 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Thats kind of strange, hehe, but like didymus said, I bet you couldn't find a Republican that is for slavery. |
|
| Author: | Didymus [ Sun Nov 07, 2004 4:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Here's a theory. Most of the states that were pro-slavery were primarily Agricultural, whereas those that were anti-slavery were primarily Industrial. Industrial centers became urban, and Agricultural regions were predominantly rural. Rural voters tend to be conservative and support Republicans, and urban voters tend to favor Democrats. At least that's my theory. |
|
| Author: | Brunswick Stu [ Sun Nov 07, 2004 4:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
yeah -- we should have kept the west as a few really big (in area) states. Quote: Democrats love playing "the Race Card" by implying that Republicans are trying to reinstate segregation and crap like that. They manage to fool most Black people into believing it, too, which is a shame.
nice accusation. too bad it doesn't hold water. Democrats take African-Americans for granted (except for the fact that Lyndon Johnson, a Democrat, got the Civil Rights Act through Congress; and Democrats tend to support social programs which benefit the poor, which sadly includes a disproportionate number of African-Americans); Republicans just ignore them (except on Election Day, when they get pushed around a bit). of course, Republicans are the ones that like to point out the few (very few) blacks among their ranks at every opportunity to claim their "diversity". to have an elected black Republican speak at the RNC, they had to dig up Michael Steele, Lt. Governor of Maryland (the state in which I live; and believe me, Lt. Governor is not an important position). interesting factoids: of the 40 or so African-Americans in Congress, all of them are Democrats. since Reconstruction, there have been three black Republicans elected to Congress. the only African-American elected to Governor of a state was a Democrat from Virginia. anyway, about the map: I'd say it's more a case of North vs. South, Part 2. Southerners just won't vote for a Yankee Democrat. |
|
| Author: | Didymus [ Sun Nov 07, 2004 6:49 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
North vs. South, eh? Well, I will say this: almost all the Texans I know are RABID Bush fanatics. I mean, you can't even offer a valid criticism of the man without them wanting to jump down your throat! |
|
| Author: | Brunswick Stu [ Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Fhqwhgadshgnsdbkhsdabkfab wrote: Well, of course they are! Bush is a Texan! Who wouldn't vote someone from their own state president?
the people of Tennnessee. |
|
| Author: | Brunswick Stu [ Sun Nov 07, 2004 10:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Gore lost Tennessee, his home state, in 2000. |
|
| Author: | TheNintenGenius [ Mon Nov 08, 2004 1:19 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
On the subject of presidents from your home state inspiring loyalty, I can honestly say I'm utterly ashamed of the sole president Michigan has produced. Why did you pardon Nixon, Ford? Why? On the actual subject itself, I agree with the idea that it's probably related to North vs. South. I mean, the last three Democrats that were elected president were southerners. (LBJ - Texas. Jimmy Carter - Georgia. Clinton - Arkansas) |
|
| Author: | StrongRad [ Tue Nov 09, 2004 2:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Brunswick Stu wrote: the people of Tennnessee.
Just so you know, I fell out of my chair laughing when I saw this.. Funny crap! We had someone bring up the similarity between the slavery map and the way the states went in 2000 in class one day. The answer that the prof gave is pretty similar to what Didymus said. He went into a little more detail, but that's pretty much the answer he gave... Being that he was a historical geographer, I'm guessing he knows what he's talking about, but I could be wrong. With him, you never know. LOL |
|
| Author: | thefreakyblueman [ Wed Nov 10, 2004 2:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Didymus wrote: Democrats love playing "the Race Card" by implying that Republicans are trying to reinstate segregation and crap like that. They manage to fool most Black people into believing it, too, which is a shame.
No major Democratic figure that I've seen has ever said that the Republican party is trying to reinstate segregation. However, you are right that there is no connection between the Republican-going states and the states going for slavery. The only reason that southern states were pro-slavery is that plantations (large farms that utilized slaves) were hugely populous in the southern areas of the United States since, of course, the land in the south is more fertile for most crops. Because of the plantation's need for slavery, most of the owners fought in the Civil War on the side of the Confederacy. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|