mandate, my ass

[egypturnash]

A little more politics crap.

There's a map that someone made that colors states as a red-blue continuum based on their republican/democrat percentages, rather than the ones beloved of the news media that show binary red/blues, or only the strength of whichever side had a majority.

All that red-purple is still pretty unpleasant to a godless trans faggot like myself. But it's still... off. Because the states that went overwhelmingly for Bush are overwhelmingly empty places.

Someone else found a map that was distorted by population. And plugged in the colors from this one. America looks a hell of a lot more Democratic when you do that.

Bush does not represent what he thinks he does. Not at all. If you voted for him, I'm holding you responsible for every damn thing his administration does.

Comments

[prickvixen.livejournal.com]

I've noticed that red and blue don't make a very good gradient. Red and green would be better. Or 'commie' and 'hippie' if you prefer.

[shatterstripes.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I've been noticing that too. Too similar.

Commie/hippie works for me, but I'm in favor of applying insulting terms to both sides as evenly as possible.

[prickvixen.livejournal.com]

Aren't those both insulting terms? :)

[shatterstripes.livejournal.com]

Yeah. This is why it works for me.

Though weren't they kinda synonymous in the sixties? "pinko commie longhair faggot"? And I think the Bend Over For Big Money Jesus party would be more offended by being called "commies" than the We Used To Have A Point Here party would be at being called "hippies".

[prickvixen.livejournal.com]

Yes, they were synonymous. But it's interesting that the anti-commie party now has red as its color, just as it was amusing that Vladimir Putin expressed openly his pleasure that Bush was re-elected. Time was when having the Russians endorse you was the kiss of death, but now it's a-okay!

[ben-raccoon.livejournal.com]

The County map (http://www.kieranhealy.org/files/misc/purple_america_2004_small.gif) is surprisingly comforting, too.

[(Anonymous)]

What do the black counties represent in that map? Also, isn't it a bit strange that there is a general trend towards the democrats along the mississippi river? Maybe propper hydration is important to being a liberal?
-Karass

[shatterstripes.livejournal.com]

Black: no data available/no data in a format anemable to their tool.

Mostly, I see a trend to city=democrats. Cities cluster along rivers and around bays, historically. Somewhere to be a point of exchange for shipping routes.

[kinkyturtle.livejournal.com]

My theory is, Republicans hate having neighbors. Maybe misanthropy makes you vote Republican. Or maybe they're both just caused by the same brain dysfunction. :}

[shatterstripes.livejournal.com]

Nah. I've been pretty misanthropic at times, but never Republican.

[kinkyturtle.livejournal.com]

I know what it is! Being Republican makes you addicted to owning vast tracts of land. And then defending all that empty space with a gun! From, y'know, marauding Japanese foreign exchange students looking for the Halloween party.

[kysh.livejournal.com]

I want to own 'vast tracts of land', and I'm totally anti-gun control.

But nobody could ever consider me a republican. Libertarian, maybe, democrat, maybe.. socialist, maybe.. anarchist.. maybe.. Not-really-associated-with-any-part? Probably. But definitely not republican.

-Kysh

[pseudomanitou.livejournal.com]

I kind of agree with Kinkyturtle.

And while you may be misanthropic in social context, that has not affected your ability to grasp and study culture - so I don't think you count as purely misanthropic.

...or maybe you have to be raised a Republican first to become misanthropic, but it doesn't always work the other way around...

[ultraken.livejournal.com]

There isn't one for the 2004 election yet, but I like the red-grey-blue map better than that red-purple-blue one; showing population density through saturation makes it even more informative. The warp map shows the same information, though it's a bit weird.

[radd.livejournal.com]

I'd go even further, believing that those who did not vote at all are equally responsible as those who voted for Bush. One thing that continues to dissapoint me is that despite how "polarized" the nation apparently was, only slightly more than half the nation could be bothered to actually vote.

Between the ages of 18 and 24, I heard (and this is unconfirmed, just hearsay) only 1 in 10 voted.

[rayjaysuyin.livejournal.com]

I believe that's because the majority of us are sick of having to choose between the lesser of two evils.

Gimme a candidate who says what s/he means and means what s/he says, and actually has this country's best interests at heart, and I might actually go register...

[radd.livejournal.com]

I can completely understand that sentiment. However, I will point out that I have voted in the past three or four elections, and only once, ONLY ONCE have I cast my vote for "the lesser of two evils", and that was this past election.

Are you aware of all the third party options? I honestly don't blame anyone who voted for Nader, Badnarik, Cobb, or any of the others. They voted for their candidate, and they didn't give in to adding to the problem of the 'lesser evil' philosophy that plagues our election system.

Over 40% of eligible voters did not vote at all in the previous election. If those people had voted, and those votes had gone between even 2 or 3 different 3rd parties, on November 3rd the political map would have looked astoundingly different. Even if none of those parties had won, the amount of support would have been overwhelmingly more than enough to show that these parties were realistically able to take an election within the next couple administrations.

[(Anonymous)]

Being that this is the first election in which I was of age to vote, I somehow avoided being "sick" of picking the lesser of two evils. In fact, isnt it backward logic to say that the young people are the ones who should be sick of voting for the lesser of two evils? Or do people just get sick of that type of thing faster these days?
-Karass

[wolphyn.livejournal.com]

I agree. Those who didn't vote are the most responsible, because if the 18-24-year-olds of the country had turned out for Kerry (as everything indicated that they would have), Kerry would have won. Just barely, but he would have. At least, that's the impression that I'm under.