A Divided America

There’s a ton of analysis on the Election this week but this one by Marketplace was unique and I found the results very interesting.

“In our Two Americas coverage of the 2012 presidential election, we’re dividing the nation in two using a variety of numbers to see how each candidate performed in various segments of the economy.”

The authors wanted to know what the Electoral College results would look like if the United States was divided into 2 groups based on median income rankings.  One group contains the 25 states with the highest median income and the other group contains the 25 states with the lowest median income.

Conventional wisdom tells us that über 1%-er Romney and the Republicans mainly do the bidding of the wealthy and Obama and the Democrats represent the poor.  Not according to this:

Romney carried the lower wage states and Obama carried the higher wage states and both results weren’t even close!  Remind Leftists of this fact the next time they trot out that meme.

The next analysis was performed like the first but instead of dividing the US based on median income; they used the state unemployment rates.  One group contains the states with Unemployment rates over 8% (Out of Work America) and the other group contains states with unemployment rates below 8% (Working America).

The Out of Work group went overwhelmingly for Obama and the Working group went to Romney but just barely.

So if you are out of work (which is a direct results of the policies of the Obama, Pelosi and Reid) you decided to give Obama another 4 years.  That makes a lot of sense, right?

This is just another example of how deeply divided the US is based on 4 years of Mr. Hope and Change.  Imagine how polarized we’ll be in 2016.

This entry was posted in politics. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to A Divided America

  1. Pingback: More election analysis: Yep, we’re DIVIDED, but NOT in the way you might think | Two Heads are Better Than One

  2. Great post, bro. Had to borrow most of it this morning; too good to just link.
    Many thanks as always, Cosmo.

    **BTW: congrats on your par on #1… 😉

  3. blaine says:

    Although not found in any of his writings, Benjamin Franklin is widely reported as saying, “When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.”

    There is a strange dichotomy in the 2012 election in that the areas that went for Obama are mostly urban with the very rich who can afford the luxury of being liberal and the very poor who have learned to become dependent on the liberal policies imposed on them by their rich neighbors living in their protected enclaves.

    Before LBJ declared, ” The War on Poverty.” in 1964, African American marriage rates were higher than white marriage rates. Now, 72% of African American babies are born to unwed mothers, thus guaranteeing African American children the highest chance of living a life of poverty, crime and dependency.

    Benjamin Franklin’s worst fear may just come true as long as there are rich liberals and politicians who refuse to acknowledge the tremendous damage they are doing by making the poor and now, middle class, dependent on policies that deprive them of their liberty and dignity.

    As long as there are poor and middle class people who come to believe they are victims, (and in one sense they are victims) entitled to government largess and who will vote it for themselves, the future of the country is in peril.

    What is needed is a charismatic leader who can articulate this danger as Ronald Reagan did. Mitt Romney for all his decency, wasn’t that man. Mitt’s wealth and Mormonism, made him too easy a target for demagogues from both the left and right.

    I don’t know who will step up to the challenge but his country sure needs him.

    • What about Marco Rubio? Conservatives love to “articulate” ideas (and I’m all for that) but to garner a winning majority we need to get sophisticated on getting out the vote, messaging, optics, and all around strategy too.

      Sorry to be a little off topic.

  4. blaine says:

    I like Marco Rubio but not because he is Hispanic. I like Rubio because he is young, smart, handsome and as articulate as Ronald Reagan.

    Republicans must close the gap with young, single women. They can not win without them.

    African Americans are going to go over 75% Democratic no matter what.

    Hispanics mostly live is States where their votes are not going to change the outcome. California, New York, New Jersey and Illinois are red states that aren’t going to change with a 20 point gain in the Hispanic vote. Texas is not going to change from Republican. That only leaves Florida which is a must have for Republicans but is not a reason to pick Rubio.

    Republicans must have a young woman on the ticket. That means Nikki Haley, governor of South Carolina or Susana Martinez of New Mexico. Both were not ready this year but may be ready in 2016.

    I like Rubio and Christie with Martinez or Haley. All could be strong candidates and ready for 2016 assuming Christie wins reelection next year.

    But Christie needs to loose 100 pounds. Even though 65% of American voters are overweight, we may not be ready for another president like William Howard Taft who weighed in at over 300 pounds.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s