The shrinking influence of the rural voter

[GitRDun]

I spent some time explaining the electoral system to my daughter. She was wondering why Obama won when the map was so red. Came across this interesting fact:

55 electoral votes - California
54 electoral votes - 11 states: Alaska (3), Arizona (11), Utah(6), Idaho (4), Montana (3), Wyoming (3), North Dakota (3), South Dakota (3), Nebraska (5), Kansas (6), Oklahoma (7).

There is this map of US population density

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USA-2000-population-density.gif

I am trying to envision how the GOP moves ahead and it occurs to me these well to do "job creators" (cough, cough, bullshit!, cough, cough) make their fortunes in largely Democratic strongholds but get many of their votes from rural areas, one of the places poverty is huge:

Check out this link on rural poverty, money quote "The two biggest countries of Northern America, United States of America and Canada, are countries associated with prosperity rather than need. Both are major donors of aid to poorer countries. Yet there is poverty even in affluent North America – and most of it is in rural areas."

http://www.ruralpovertyportal.org/region/home/tags/americas

What I am getting at here is I think that this cognitive dissonance in the rural areas has to end at some point. Perhaps there is an opportunity for Dem's over time. Why should the rural poor vote for a party that supports polluting their land to extract resources, but ships jobs overseas, etc. Are the social issues really that important to them?

[murielm99]

1. I live in one of the teal areas

(according to the population map), of a very blue state. Here in Illinois, we even added some Democratic members to the House of Representatives.

I have tried to change minds here for almost thirty-five years. It seldom works. My county went red for Rmoney, in Obama's home state. I think the only thing that will work in an area like this is demographic change. Personal exposure to Democrats can work sometimes. But unless we change people while they are still young, few of them will have open minds. We can keep working and hoping, but only time and a changing population will help.

[Wellstone ruled]

2. The Dem support used to

come from the rural areas,the repuks worked the farm folks against the Unions. Then had the NRA with the help of the Farmers Insurance Group,play havoc on them. With the collapse of the Co-op's by Regan the die was cast. Most of the rural communities are totally depend on the Dept. of Ag. If one doubts,ask folks who live in those areas. Example,Minnesota gets approximately 56 cents per dollar sent to D.C.,Utah gets almost 3 dollars per dollar sent to D.C.. O.K.,make sense.

[enough]

3. I live in a PA county that is half rural, half suburban.

The suburban half is upscale. The rural half is divided between very wealthy large landowners and very poor rural areas (largely trailer parks). The most depressed, downtrodden and dilapidated areas are where the large majority of Romney signs have been on display. Romney signs and signs (many home-made) expressing Obama-hatred.

The county voted 50-50 with Romney coming out ahead by a sliver. But the really active outspoken Romney support was coming from the poorest rural areas. I don't know how this will change.

[malthaussen]

4. It changes by actually offering them something they need.

The GOP does not offer any substantive support to the rural poor, but neither does the Democratic party. What the GOP has offered them is support for their hatred, their egos, and their denial. Unless we can trump that with something of substance, they will always be on the other side.

-- Mal

[truebluegreen]

5. Agree 100%

[GitRDun]

6. I suspect you are right.

The social issues seem to me to be the only real logic behind rural areas largely supporting the R's.

My thinking is a real war on poverty, expanding education opportunities is the right course.

The internet's ability to shrink the planet will ultimately main stream even rural populations to what is going on outside their communities.

[im1013]

7. I (unfortunately) live in bright red MS,

and I can say with absolute certainty that, yes, the social issues ARE really that important to them.
My husband is from here, so he understand them a little better than I do,
and he actually has talked to many people and as soon as he explains to them that Mormons
are NOT Christians, they very quickly change their tune about Romney.

I'm an atheist, so I just think they're all nuts.

[frazzled]

8. Land doesn't vote, people do

I guess that's how I'd explain it.

I'm shocked at the number of white spaces out West, where the density is 0-1 persons per square mile! (As opposed to the Northeast, where the density is 250 - 66,995 per sq. mi.)

Romney turned a lot of the "yellow" areas red: it looks impressive, but there are only 1-4 people per square mile living in those vast yellow spaces. Amazing.