November 9, 2004
-
You're Either With Us, or Against Us
It has been pointed out to me that it is not so much a thing of red state vs. blue state, but more so, we as a country are divided along urban vs. rural lines. In cities we tend to vote more for Democrats, and in rural areas for Republicans.
Now, this is why I’m pissed. Since cities tend to be the targets of terrorist attacks it seems to me that when rural people make gay marriage more important than terrorism they are saying they don’t care what happens to us. For example, in New York City, my home town, the site of the 9/11 attacks, and probably the most likely target for another terrorist attack, voters went 85% for Kerry. They know that Bush didn’t and still isn’t protecting them. Of course it matters to them, and they vote accordingly.
And it doesn’t escape my attention that if some terrorist exploded a nuclear bomb in New York City that it would be quite convenient for the Republicans. Why should they care?
So if you think I’m bitter, let me tell you this. I have actually been mellowing and taking a more tempered view of it all as the days slide by. But then I think about how I will feel when a terrorist does strike again, and I get angry all over again… at Republicans.
Comments (28)
my feeling are the same. have you seen this map?
http://www.princeton.edu/%7Ervdb/JAVA/election2004/
*gasp*
I was talking w/ my father about this. It's easy to cast a vote when that's all it is, casting a vote, expressing opinion, and when there are no real concrete consequences to you as a result. "Sure, I'll vote to bad gay marriage. It seems like a bad thing, and I'm not gay and none of my friends are gay, so what the hell."
...
Can we somehow establish a philanthropic rule? Philancrocy?
Well, look on the bright side: soon there won't be any more rural area. Global urbanization, baby. Get ready to Pave Gaia.
You brought out a very good point. I live about an hour from Seattle, which for the most part is known to be liberal/democratic..
My little town here is a different story. Diary farmers, loggers...
My daughter goes to a community college in a small town in Oregon and she is shocked by the close minded Bush supporters down there, not to mention the conservative religious views.
I do get so irritated at the ignorance....
The irony is that urban voters have more at stake (in terms of terrorism), but rural/suburban voters are the ones more motivated by fear. That's why Karl Rove's fear-mongering campaign ("If you elect Kerry THIS will happen to you...") played so well. And not just fear of terrorism, but fear in general: that gays will marry and destory our society; that free-thinking northeastern "liberals" will corrupt our youth, etc. It's like that in America. Fear sells well and always will, because from within the parochial bubble the world always looks like us and them.
...one other thing, I think it will be amusing to watch the Bush administration spin another terrorist attack on U.S. soil. They don't have Kerry to lean on anymore...
I live in the north dakota... enough said on that. Before here... rural utah. That stated, I do not vote republican. I wish I could pin it down to just one issue, but I don't. I think people simplify their choice for president too much.
I think you have a valid point.
But at least you can feel safe that your traditional religious beliefs about marriage will be protected even though your life may not.
The red/blue rural/urban dichotomy doesn't actually fit. 'Blue' urban areas are a given, while 'red' rural areas might as well have been coin-tosses, meaning it's more accurate to say we're a purple vs. blue nation, especially if you measure county by county per capita.
See here.
ignorance kills....
I agree with you wholeheartedly on this one.
i like how religious conservatives and bush supporters are automatically close minded and arrogant.
and preacher, i like how you're smiling at the thought of another terrorist attack, that's good.
And prometheus, I really can't get myself to buy your stand that republicans are pro-terrorists. I don't know, maybe it's because I'm only 19 and haven't been jaded by years of hypocricy and cynicism (not saying that you have), but somehow I just don't think that anyone is cold hearted enough to want thousands of Americans to die so they can stay in office.
Also, just a side note, something i just thought of when thinking about governemt being full of liars, what do you think about the whole going to the moon deal? Do you think we did?
heh, read this, http://www.thespacereview.com/article/184/1
it's the forrest gump of us government conspiracies.
what does moonwalking have to do with this?
btw, I was smiling at the fact Bush & Co. can't blame Kerry for more terroist attacks. God forbid another terroist attack, I lost friends in the WTC so don't even get me started. peace.
nothing, like i said.
and what you said was that you will be AMUSED by bush trying to spin another terrorist attack. So, what it boils down to, is that if there is another terrorist attack on us soil, it will amuse you.
mighty - preacher explained himself, he will not be amused at having more friends killed, as will not I, so let it go. I happen to agree with him that the one bright side of Bush remaining, and it isn't really one, is that it will be clear who's fault it is, whatever happens. But, that's hardly a consolation, if something really disastrous happens, which I think is possible.
Now, I don't really think Republicans are consciously pro-terrorist, but we know their priorities by what they do, and what they do suggests that stopping "us" from getting hit, might not be high enough on their list to consider seriously enough. And for that I will hold them responsible.
As for Bush and Rove, I'm not sure I would put it past them to have thought, "hmmm, all the liberals in one place..."
but what of the moon? did we really go?
I've been trying to mellow but.....it's not working out to well. I AM going to be part of the solution, some how some way. Me in little rural, bum fuck Wisconsin....I might just find the right things to say.
I also think that all of this talk about electronic voting states not lining up with exit poles might also be skewed a little, because everyone keeps saying that florida was electronic, but i definitely filled out a piece of paper and i live in florida. it was scanned by a machine, but there was definitely a piece of paper i filled out, as did a lot of my friends who live around the state.
We're doomed! John Ashcroft has resigned! What of our safety, John????
Actually, ole' Johnny A. apparently thinks that the job is done. His resignation letter states that the goal of ensuring security and safety for Americans has been achieved. Really? I guess that's alot like Bush's statement on the aircraft carrier, "Mission accomplished." Wow. It must be an awesome cosmos those guys live in, where there's no more terrorism and the war in Iraq is over. How do I get a ticket to that place?
Wow yall. The reason the urban/rural discrepancy exsists is this: Out in the country we have a more simple, salt of the earth lifestyle. Families live under good morals and family values without all of the moral decay that a big city can breed. Why the hell do you think Vegas is nicknamed "Sin City"?? Duh??? Big cities tend to breed tolerance, Which in turn breeds more moral decay. Thats why we saw so much blue in the big cities and red in the rural areas. When you lead a life of debauchery an tolerance, You tend to become a little less able to discern right from wrong. Whereas, If you try and do your best to lead a morally good life while keeping it simple, Things are much clearer. Thank goodness the red prevailed. Call it fear, call it ignorance, call it uneducated or whatever. It doesnt take a genious to recognize whats right and wrong.
First of all, Braddock, thanks for coming. I like debate.
Second first of all, Las Vegas is hardly called "sin city" because it's urban. It's a haven for gambling, and prostitution is legal. Not your typical example (and not for nothing, but Nevada went for Bush). But New York has prostitution too. The prostitutes apparently did a lot of business when the Republicans were in town for the convention. Explain that one to me. Wait, I'll explain it, they don't do what they say. Their rhetoric is not just words, it's phrases.
Perhaps people in the city, who are exposed to the diversity a city has to offer are the ones with perspective on right and wrong. Especially in New York, where the twin towers fell, and maybe that's why your brand or morals tends to be less important in the face of a real crime.
You know what baffles me. Why do you think that being simple is better? Why do you think that knowing stuff and getting into the complications of the issues that face us can only lead us astray. It's not a surprise that Iraq, the war on terror, the economy, the environment are all in the toilet. It's because when you expect the answers to complicated questions to be simplicity, you're bound to do the wrong thing. There are ways to cut through the complication and find simple solutions. But shunning an understanding of the issues isn't the way.
It doesn't take a genius. You're right. It also doesn't work.
Tell me, do think that the sexual molestation that went on in Abu Graib was moral?
Yeah, folks out in the country are so much more "moral" than the rest of us. I suppose that's why Methamphedamine abuse is so much higher in rural areas, and why alchoholism is statistically the family passtime in Mayberry America. And I'd suppose that deaths related to drunk driving are highest in rural areas because them folks are so goshdarn moral out yonder, to say nothing of rates of incest and child abuse. And schools -- well heck, we don't want to be judgin rural America by its schools do we? Well shucks, I suppose if we were all living in knee high wheat fields this country'd be a plum wonderful place -- cept' all them urban liberals clutterin' up the place with their free-thinkin' and such.
Here are a few stats about kids in the moral paradise that is rural america:
<LI>Eighth-graders in rural America are 83 percent more likely than those in urban areas to use crack cocaine, 43 percent more likely to smoke marijuana, and 29 percent more likely to drink alcohol.
<LI>Except for Ecstasy (MDMA) and marijuana, tenth-graders in rural America use drugs at higher rates than tenth-graders in urban areas.
<LI>Twelfth-graders in rural America use cocaine, amphetamines, inhalants, alcohol, cigarettes, and smokeless tobacco at higher rates than their urban counterparts.
More can be found here: http://www.hazelden.org/servlet/hazelden/cms/ptt/hazl_alive_and_free.html?sf=t&sh=t&page_id=25353
Ok this city people vs country people crap needs to stop.
Bush won 51% of the popular vote. That means 49% did not vote for him. So yes it would be a bad idea for him to discount the opinions and ideas of the 49%. However i hear a lot of people grumbling about how ignorant/uninformed/hateful/religious/rustic most of the country must be to have voted for Bush. This is really arrogant. Acting like you are the enlightened few and talking about the intelligence of the rest of the country is basically just a pretty way of saying "Well you're stupid" which is what a 6 year old will say upon losing an argument. Second, this is the way Democracy (and representative republic) works. Majority rules. You may think the majority is stupid or fearful or whatever, but the fact remains that they are the majority. If you don't have enough faith in democracy to think that at the very worst the country will make a mistake that will have to get cleaned up down the road, then maybe you should emmigrate to Canada like i hear so many threaten to do.
Saying half of the country (and then some) doesn't matter just because you don't agree with them is childish. Making comments about the country folk is also foolish. Sure your vocation and style of living may be more 'sophisticated' but if it weren't for all those farmers in those red states who would grow the soybeans that go in nearly everything you eat. Even if you didn't need them (and i submit that you do) that doesn't mean they don't matter.
Grow up. Get some people elected to congress in 2 years, and try to run a better campaign next time. Or here's a novel idea. Try to change some peoples minds if you're convinced you're right. Let me give you a hint... telling someone they're a moron whose opinion doesn't matter isnt a good way to get them to see it your way.
Hey andytoth, try reading all of the comments before replying. The tone of my comments was in response to the equally exaggerated tone of those a few above. And the issue has nothing to do with who is "stupid" or "enlightened." We were discussing 'moral values' and the alleged supremacy of those in rural America. I'm glad some people grow soybeans and some work on wallstreet. We need them both. What we don't need is the moral values brigade making it sound as though rural America has some sort of monopoly on morality and the rest of us are heathen barbarians.
My apologies for the tone of my comment... i have seen and heard an awful lot of comments made regarding the types or people who vote either way and the places in which they live, most of which were probably not in this thread or even this blog.
I did read all the comments and at the time it seemed like we were about to get into the battle of the stereotypes: latte drinking suburbanite philosopher versus unintelligent rustic church-going farmer. I agree with you that such images don't always (and in fact usually don't) hold true, and my point is that even if they were true that doesnt change the validity of an election
Andy - I still haven't conceded that there is any reliability to the election results, but in any case a lot of people voted for both candidates.
In fact, a strange mix of demographics combined forces to vote for Bush, and the ones I understand best, I think, are the fundamentalist religious ones (and the stupid ones, of course, you can explain their vote simply by saying, "well, they're stupid.") The ones I don't understand are the ones who are obviously smart, and in some cases very much aligned with the democrats on their positions (often being moderate Christians), yet still vote for Bush.
Part of that, I'm finding, is that they are misinformed. I know this from talking with them, that they believe things that are untrue (too much fox news, or ABC, or NBC or any of the major networks).
And when I tell them the truth, they don't believe me. I told one that homeland security funds were being spread so thin among places that have little risk, that the NYC firemen haven't even replaced the radios that didn't work and caused so many of them to die inside the WTC, and he told me that couldn't be true, that we would be hearing all about it. I offered him the article and he didn't read it. I loaned him Richard Clarke's book, and he kept it for 3 months and never read it.
As for calling people stupid. Sometimes it does help to get mad at people. Sometimes it does help to call them names. It helped Karl Rove and GW, and what they said wasn't even true. And quite honestly, people who brag about their simplicity, who are proud that they don't know anything and somehow think it makes them better, deserve it. Especially when their actions cause pain and sin. And that's something they need to know.
Due to a xanga bug, I had to post another comment in order to get the last one to show.
everyone here is too smart for me keep up the debate its real interesting, even thought its right over my head.
Comments are closed.