Somebody posted this article over at that place where latent homosexuals and guys who order mail-order brides hang out:
http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/columns/2005/06/why_the_democrats_will_keep_losing.htmlSince the 2004 elections, many have been debating "why Kerry lost," and more broadly "why the Democrats have been losing ground." Much of the debate has focused on the never-ending seesaw of "swing voters vs. base voters," or cultural/religious/"What's the Matter with Kansas?" issues, even George Lakoff-type "reframing" of key concepts and themes.
But what has been completely missing from the conversation is the fact that even when the Democrats win more votes, they don't necessarily win more seats. That's true in the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House, and the Electoral College. That's because there is a structural disadvantage for Democrats resulting from regional partisan demographics in red versus blue America that now are strongly embedded into our fundamental electoral institutions. This unfair structural disadvantage makes it more difficult for Democrats to win than Republicans. It's like having a foot race in which one side begins 10 meters in front of the other, election after election.It's an interesting article -- but, my brain being fried, and all, from a long day of following a 3 year old around, I'm trying to decide if this article is the end-all, be-all of this argument.
Is there institutional/Constitutional bias against the Dems?
The Shriveled Penis Club seems to think not:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1421591/posts?q=1&&page=1#1You have to sift through half the post, before you come to anything that even resembles a
potential argument, from a sentient human being -- save one voice of reason that squeaks by, completely ignored by the Rushbots.
Anyway -- for people who are better than I am at deciphering statistics, numbers, etc. -- is the article accurate? Are we really at a built-in disadvantage?
I guess I'm looking at it from the point that all the freeper arguments are moot -- no matter how or why you try to paint it, it seems that Democratic voters are receiving less representation. Why, of course, IS important -- but in light of them attempting to get rid of the filibuster, so they can make this a totalitarian nation, and all their crowing about how Loony Mammon Smoke-Machine Jesus rules 'Murica -- I think it's funny that they're STILL -- the minority? Or are they?