Can one city really make that much of a difference?

[mpholland]

I knew Portland was a liberal city, but I never really knew how it compared to the rest of the state.

"Still, in delving into the statistics, it becomes apparent that without Portland in the mix, the suburbs and the rest of Oregon would be a red state, not blue."

From the Portland Tribune

http://www.pamplinmedia.com/pt/9-new...al-is-portland

[icenine]

It is not the city but how many people live in it...if they all vote blue and they outnumber the rest of the state then they will be in the majority.


I think no one voted for Romney in some of the Philadelphia districts in 2012, which made Paul Ryan opine that he would have won had it not been for the urban areas of the nation.
No shit Ryan duh!

[icenine]

if voter suppression does not work look for some red states to try and take away one man one vote so that one candidate does not collect all of a states' electoral votes in a winner take all system....

they will try proportional electoral votes weighted by pluralities....and then try to put in some nefarious schemes to make rural counties weigh more in the final tally. Sort of like a parliamentary system of awarding delegates...

then the baggers may win....boooooooooooooooooooo!!

[Boreas]

This is nothing new or unique. Urban areas, especially large ones, are usually liberal and rural areas conservative. Even here in the PRC, the LA, SF, San Jose and Oakland areas are liberal and the Central Valley is pretty far right.

In Oregon you have not only Portland but also Eugene and Salem that are pretty liberal. Grant's Pass is probably red though and Ashland too but they're pretty small cities. Don't know about Medford.

John

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by icenine

It is not the city but how many people live in it...

I think it's the city too. For starters, cities are where cultural and educational areas tend to be located. (Can you think of a museum, symphony hall or major university that's located in the middle of nowhere.) This make cities and the near suburbs magnets for intellectuals. The other side of the urban coin is grinding poverty among many of the people there. The record of liberals as social reformers makes these poor city-dwellers a more or less natural constituency for liberal politicians.

John

PS: yes, I am saying that, for the most part, intellectuals and educated people tend to be liberal.

[bobabode]

Are you saying that science has a liberal bent?

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by bobabode

Are you saying that science has a liberal bent?

No it is just that people with brains enough to be scientists have a liberal bent.

[piece-itpete]

It's the colleges' liberal agenda at work

Originally Posted by icenine

It is not the city but how many people live in it...if they all vote blue and they outnumber the rest of the state then they will be in the majority.


I think no one voted for Romney in some of the Philadelphia districts in 2012, which made Paul Ryan opine that he would have won had it not been for the urban areas of the nation.
No shit Ryan duh!

I know McCain didn't receive a single vote in some Cleveland districts.

Pete

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by icenine

It is not the city but how many people live in it...if they all vote blue and they outnumber the rest of the state then they will be in the majority.


I think no one voted for Romney in some of the Philadelphia districts in 2012, which made Paul Ryan opine that he would have won had it not been for the urban areas of the nation.
No shit Ryan duh!

Yep, barren land doesn't have many voters.

[mpholland]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Yep, barren land doesn't have many voters.

If only the deer and elk could vote.