|
A Very Revealing Election Graphic See also graphic breakdown of votes by county, published in today's Boston Globe, is really worth a look. It's a sea of red, even within most of the "blue states" outside of New England. As the difference in popular vote is a mere 3%, a map that adjusted the graphic representation of county size in proportion to population (and/or in proportion to density) would show a lot more blue, and furthermore it's unfair to say that a given county is "all red" or "all blue" as a 51% red county and a 75% red county are clearly very different stories, but a few observations about the Democrat's geographic challenge that are still probably valid. -
Because their voters are dispersed so widely, the GOP has a much more difficult job to do for door-to-door canvassing in many of the "battleground states", yet they apparently got their vote out far more effectively than the Democrats. -
On the other hand, because their strong areas tend to be more contiguous, the GOP may have an easier job moving volunteers into contested areas when needed. -
When you're surrounded by red counties for hundreds of miles in all directions, it's going to take a lot more than an army of volunteers to change your vote to blue. It's going to take a shift in ideas. BTW: I have a question for those of my readers who are more familiar with Southern geography and demographics than I am. What is the explanation for the blue streak along the Missisippi River valley and the East-to-West blue streak extending through the state of Mississipi (broken only by one county), completely across Alabama and into Southwest Georgia?
|