Urban/Suburban/Rural breakdown of 1988-2008 election

[JohnnyD]

Found this image pretty interesting when thinking of past elections, who was running and whether there was an incumbent candidate or not. What struck me as most interesting is even with a plummeting approval rating during the 2004 election, Bush had a marginal increase of support from suburban homes yet an extremely significant increase in urban homes.

Aside from being a complete clown, I think it had to do with Kerry appearing elitist.

Also, with more and more people moving to Urban areas, the trends shown seem to not have a bright outlook for Republicans

Discuss...


http://www.esquire.com/features/data...-0209?src=digg

[RIJIMMY]

In the grand illusion that has become the modern media, there is only a "Republican Attack Machine" while the Democrat force never gets mentioned. Everyone knows the evil Karl Rove, but who is the Democrat equivalent?

If you take that same chart, and overlay it with the areas with the highest amounts of illegal immigration and highest amounts of welfare you'd see a direct correlation with the core of the Democrats support. This is a result of the Democratic machine (twice the size of the Republicans and gets free media airtime). they have succesfully painted the Repubs as anti-Immigrant and anti-Civil Rights. Two lies.

So what you have is an entire ruling body dedicated to pandering to those who feel they are entitled while painting a negative image on those who are successful.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

So what you have is an entire ruling body dedicated to pandering to the low lifes of society while painting a negative image on those who are successful.

And Comments like that really help change the image of the republican party.

So your 60 hour work week, because you make a nice salary, means your successful while the guy working 2 jobs and 60 hours a week at minimum wage make him a low life.

That may not be what you meant but that sure as hell is how it reads

[RIJIMMY]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

And Comments like that really help change the image of the republican party.

So your 60 hour work week, because you make a nice salary, means your successful while the guy working 2 jobs and 60 hours a week at minimum wage make him a low life.

That may not be what you meant but that sure as hell is how it reads

it depends, does that person making minimum wage feel that he/she is entitled to equal housing, equal education for their children and equal medical benefits as everyone else? If yes, then you have accurately captured my opinion.

I'm sure you and others will hop on a moral high horse, but in reality, none of you would want your vision of America to look like urban centers. You dont want many of those residents living next to you or your kids going to school with those kids. These people all have equal opportunity to better themselves, the governments job is not better them. The Democrative agenda to me, is to lower everyone to the same level. Punish success.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

If you take that same chart, and overlay it with the areas with the highest amounts of illegal immigration and highest amounts of welfare you'd see a direct correlation with the core of the Democrats support.

And where did you get these facts?

The rampant regurgitation of Republican catch-phrases is astounding to me. There's no "opinion," people just drink from the same kool-ade. Every week some issue is brought up in Republican circles and then by that Wed or Thursday, every political discussion turns into a Republican vomiting out whatever it was they heard/read earlier that week - rinse and repeat. *yawn*

I think part of the reason for Republican candidates' terrible image in the media as smear-mongers might in part be due to the way in which they project themselves in the public eye. For instance, during the Bush/Kerry election, 64% of Bush's ads were negative compared to 34% for Kerry.

Also, look at how it appears the average Republican portrays him/herself. Look at this forum section as an example. A majority of the direct conflicts created are started by a disagreeing Republican.

Hell, on numerous occasions Fox News has been cited blatantly altering facts in favor of the Right Wing.

So please stop regurgitating the latest "thing to complain about" from Republican circles. I already read about how "the media is strongly biased for the liberals" 3 days ago. Next, you're going to start stating that the only reason McCain and Palin lost is because "that Tina Fey exploited me."

[The Dad Fisherman]

Then if thats what you mean then why don't you say it like that instead of lumping everybody together and calling them a derogatory term....thats where my issue lies with what you stated.

I've stated before I don't believe anybody is entitled, you get what you earn.....but I also don't believe on %$%$%$%$ting on somebody if i don't know their circumstances.

A guy doesn't speak good english...well he must be an illegal Alien. (even though he came here on a legal visa to try and make a better life for himself)

A guy using Food stamps...Well just another guy milking the system tit. (Even though he just got laid off from his job that he worked for the last 10 years)

Just because a Guy doesn't make it into the higher 3rd of the earners of this country doen't make him less of a man than anyone else.

Definition: lowlife

noun
a person who is deemed to be despicable or contemptible;

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

it depends, does that person making minimum wage feel that he/she is entitled to equal housing, equal education for their children and equal medical benefits as everyone else? If yes, then you have accurately captured my opinion.

[RIJIMMY]

Johnny - FU, Im not a republican and dont regurgitate anything. If you are so blind that you cannot observe the DECLINE of urban areas and that those same areas have the HIGHEST concentration of Democratic votes, you are a moron. Take a ride to Lowell MA, let your kids run around the streets with you, say hello to the people on the street. Welcome to YOUR america.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

A guy using Food stamps...Well just another guy milking the system tit. (Even though he just got laid off from his job that he worked for the last 10 years)

Just because a Guy doesn't make it into the higher 3rd of the earners of this country doen't make him less of a man than anyone else.

Agreed 100%. The welfare system was designed for those who've lost their job, been injured or had a death of the bread-maker. Unfortunately, it has turned into a money tree for those who choose not to get a real job/education, or have 6 kids even though they have no education or skills.

The crime is that it has resulted in everyone getting gov't assistance looking like a low-life bum. The worst is for those people that have extinguished all other options and have enough pride in themselves to use it as an absolute last resort (sometimes waiting significantly longer than they should) - that's a person that should never be called a low-life.

[RIJIMMY]

here you go Johnny, as far as my "facts" I could do more research and create a graph, but I am 100% certain that "city" = "urban" and that a graph of this data would correlate with the graph of Democratic support.

entire article - http://www.brookings.edu/articles/20...licy_katz.aspx

Discussions of welfare reform almost always begin—and sometimes end—by citing the remarkable halving of the national welfare caseload since 1994. Much less frequently noted is that the decline in the caseload has not been uniform nationwide. Most strikingly, the decline has been slowest in the nation's urban areas. As a result, the welfare rolls have increasingly concentrated in the cities. Today nearly 60 percent of all welfare cases can be found in 89 large urban counties.

[RIJIMMY]

I changed low lifes to "those that feel they are entitled"

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

it has turned into a money tree for those who choose not to get a real job/education, or have 6 kids even though they have no education or skills.

Agree with that 100% and those are the people that are the problem...I don't have any sympathy for them.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

Johnny - FU, Im not a republican and dont regurgitate anything. If you are so blind that you cannot observe the DECLINE of urban areas and that those same areas have the HIGHEST concentration of Democratic votes, you are a moron. Take a ride to Lowell MA, let your kids run around the streets with you, say hello to the people on the street. Welcome to YOUR america.

There's a major decline in urban areas. Never stated there wasn't. I know Lowell is a sh*thole. My girlfriend goes to school in Springfield, probably the biggest POS location in New England and I'm there almost weekly. Five minutes of driving around and you know exactly what the populace is like. But I disagree that the cause of decline is because of Democratic support in those areas, thus why I asked for a cite.

Correlation does not imply causation. Thus, why I'd still like to see the facts.

Also, there is absolutely no denying that the "hot topic" in Republican media this week has been the modern media's supposed bias against Republicans. Turn on Fox News or look at any Right Wing website. And you just happened to be spouting exactly what they've been "reporting" all week.

**Edit** Just read your other reply with the article, and again, I agree that there's no denying a correlation of welfare and urban populace. The poor flock to cities - it's been happening for centuries.

[RIJIMMY]

I think you are misreading my point, or I could be misstating it. I am not sayng the Democratic support is causing the decline. I am stating that the rise in Democratic support in those areas is a result of the decline, not vice versa.

As far as spouting the current hot republican topic, ask Dad F or Spence if I havent been spouting this topic for years. For the record, I dont watch FOx News, however. Fox is often mis-represented by having forums where conservative guests give their OPINIONS vs. their news reporting. Big difference.

[fishbones]

JohnnyD and The Dad Fisherman,

I've always been on the conservative side of the fence. But working where I do now, has made me even more so. I still believe that there are people who legitimately use unemployment and welfare as tools to make it through tough times and get back on their feet. But, there are people who manipulate the system to avoid having to fully support themselves.

If you ever want to see people "milking the system" come to work with me some day. You probably wouldn't believe some of the crap I have do for people who have no desire to support themselves. I see it in the real world (or for what passes for the real world in Providence, RI) every day that I go to work. It may not happen where you guys live and work, but I'm not exagerrating when I say that I have to send out at few as 1 and as many as 5 or 6 letters each week to employees who quit their jobs or get fired. They need letters to bring to their case workers so they can continue receiving government benefits. Most of these employees quit or do something to get themselves fired within the first month of employment. I've actually had people tell me that I have to put in the letter that they were laid off so they can get their benefits.

Then, there are other people from the same neighborhoods who are dealing with the same circumstances that want to get off the system and support themselves. And while they bust their tails working for minimum wage, the lazy a-holes sit at home eating Doritos and watching Dr. Phil.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

I think you are misreading my point, or I could be misstating it. I am not sayng the Democratic support is causing the decline. I am stating that the rise in Democratic support in those areas is a result of the decline, not vice versa.

That I agree with. I will apologize than, because I mis-understood. I read it as basically the Democrats were the cause for the increase of welfare in the cities.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by fishbones

If you ever want to see people "milking the system" come to work with me some day. You probably wouldn't believe some of the crap I have do for people who have no desire to support themselves. I see it in the real world (or for what passes for the real world in Providence, RI) every day that I go to work. It may not happen where you guys live and work, but I'm not exagerrating when I say that I have to send out at few as 1 and as many as 5 or 6 letters each week to employees who quit their jobs or get fired. They need letters to bring to their case workers so they can continue receiving government benefits. Most of these employees quit or do something to get themselves fired within the first month of employment. I've actually had people tell me that I have to put in the letter that they were laid off so they can get their benefits.

Then, there are other people from the same neighborhoods who are dealing with the same circumstances that want to get off the system and support themselves. And while they bust their tails working for minimum wage, the lazy a-holes sit at home eating Doritos and watching Dr. Phil.

I believe all of it. Which is why I've always been a supporter of decreased Welfare benefits and increased oversight. I worked the Emergency medical field in Hartford for 3 years and I was continually amazed. Women having their 4th kid at the age of 21. People with BMWs and big screen TVs in their homes but are on State health insurance.

It's interesting that you had to send those letters out even for people that were only there a month. In MA, I believe you have to be employed for 90 days before you are eligible for any kind of state benefits due to losing your job. If I could, I'd also refuse to send the letters out for those that were fired. I wouldn't doubt they were fired for the same reasons they want welfare - laziness.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Oh I know there's plenty of people scamming the system.....I've seen it. Would never deny it. And got no use for them. It just strikes a nerve in me when everybody gets lumped in to that group because they legitimately need assistance.

Besides I feel better now knowing that RIJimmy loves me....

Originally Posted by fishbones

JohnnyD and The Dad Fisherman,

I've always been on the conservative side of the fence. But working where I do now, has made me even more so. I still believe that there are people who legitimately use unemployment and welfare as tools to make it through tough times and get back on their feet. But, there are people who manipulate the system to avoid having to fully support themselves.

If you ever want to see people "milking the system" come to work with me some day. You probably wouldn't believe some of the crap I have do for people who have no desire to support themselves. I see it in the real world (or for what passes for the real world in Providence, RI) every day that I go to work. It may not happen where you guys live and work, but I'm not exagerrating when I say that I have to send out at few as 1 and as many as 5 or 6 letters each week to employees who quit their jobs or get fired. They need letters to bring to their case workers so they can continue receiving government benefits. Most of these employees quit or do something to get themselves fired within the first month of employment. I've actually had people tell me that I have to put in the letter that they were laid off so they can get their benefits.

Then, there are other people from the same neighborhoods who are dealing with the same circumstances that want to get off the system and support themselves. And while they bust their tails working for minimum wage, the lazy a-holes sit at home eating Doritos and watching Dr. Phil.

[fishbones]

TDF, who can't love a guy who has Archie Bunker as his avatar?

I agree that everyone shouldn't be lumped in together. Almost all social service programs need to be overhauled so they can work the way they were initially meant to be. Unfortunately, politicians don't want to upset the apple cart and lose out on a very large demographic of voters. The more people who rely on the government, the better for the politicians. They can use the social service programs as leverage to get elected or stay in office.

And did you notice that I used the general term "politicians" instead of "Democrats" which is what I was really thinking? I must be getting swept up in the whole new administration and all the CHANGE it's going to bring!

[TheSpecialist]

Let me ask you guys something. Should someone on public assistance, or chronically on public assistance, like living in tenements be allowed to own luxury vehicles?

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by TheSpecialist

Let me ask you guys something. Should someone on public assistance, or chronically on public assistance, like living in tenements be allowed to own luxury vehicles?

Do I think it's right?
No, but it is a fine line and a slippery slope to say what people can/can't do... so you get food stamps, no Flatscreen TV for you.

Somehow the system needs tweaking, but how? takes someone smarter than me to figure out

[RIJIMMY]

Los Angeles – The gang capital of the world is taking a new tack against them: cash damages.

The city of Los Angeles, plagued by 23,000 violent gang crimes since 2004, including 784 murders and 12,000 felony assaults

Another urban center that has increased its support of Democrats.

[Joe]

My son is studying the Civil Rights Movement in fourth grade social studies class. His textbook refers MLK as a, "community organizer."

When Palin and Rudy mocked Obama's work as a community organizer at the convention - that was a critical mis-step. With that one comment, they lost any hope of gaining traction in cities. Community organizers are among the most respected people in urban areas.

[RIJIMMY]

Joe, my girl came home last night with some MLK homework for 1st grade. We went to youtube and watched the I had a dream speech and she was really into it. Pretty cool - technology today

[Joe]

"One day, this nation will rise up, in fulfillment of its creed."
This Tuesday.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by TheSpecialist

Let me ask you guys something. Should someone on public assistance, or chronically on public assistance, like living in tenements be allowed to own luxury vehicles?

How could they be? I'm not saying there probably aren't some extreme cases - inheritance, gift, contest winnings - but how can someone who's supposedly poor even afford to pay the excise tax on the vehicle?

A system of Checks & Balances needs to be put into place. Random audits of those on public assistance should be done to evaluate the need. I'm not talking about the BS meetings where they call the person in to some state building and put on a show, I'm talking about in-home meetings - a state employee going to the home and having a quick look around and asking some questions.

Now, people might say that this is an invasion of privacy, but I disagree. I pay my taxes to the government and get pissed when the funds are not being used appropriately or are blatantly being wasted. I go to town meetings to be aware of what's going on in the town. Now, flip that coin: the government is paying for me to live, then the government should be allowed to come in and make sure I am not wasting that money - be it on big screen TVs, a luxury car, the casino or drugs.

As terrible as it is to say, someone that is on government assistance should not be afforded the same luxuries as someone that is not. Big screen TVs, pool tables, Lincoln Navigators and BMWs are called luxury items for a reason. They are for those that have the excess funds to afford them. I know I can't afford a BMW and I'd like to think I make a healthy living. If a person on welfare can afford a BMW, then they're getting far too much money. If I can't afford one, how could a person on welfare afford one?

/end rant

[sokinwet]

"How could they be? I'm not saying there probably aren't some extreme cases - inheritance, gift, contest winnings - but how can someone who's supposedly poor even afford to pay the excise tax on the vehicle?"

I challenge anyone to show me a welfare mother driving a BMW! This is just the same old tired arguement from those who feel that any type of social safety net is their $$ being spent for "lowlifes". Are there crooks? Sure...just like on Wall Street. You steal; you should be in jail.

I think I commented on a similar thread a while ago so I'll just say this. Do a search on Welfare to Work laws; then check out the rates of payment under welfare; then look at the trend in welfare as opposed to what it was in the 90's. I have worked in the housing field for 30 years and serve on the Board of Directors for a MA South Shore homeless Continuum of Care. The clients of these social service agencies barely have money for housing and food and public assistance does not provide for any excesses. I imagine that with the economic turmoil we're in there will be a lot more lowlifes around...and one of them might be you...and some people will hate you for it!

[EarnedStripes44]

Were back to talking about Low lifes Scamming the system eh....

Did'nt Madoff make bail. He probably stole more than all the "conventional" thieves that ever sat in Rikers Island for the last decade combined...But he makes bail.

But lets get back to talking about thieving welfare mothers and hoarding government cheese because they can't hide themselves behind gated communites.

[EarnedStripes44]

[QUOTE=RIJIMMY;654944] You dont want many of those residents living next to you or your kids going to school with those kids.[QUOTE]

With those kids.......

Are you referring to the 3rd graders I tutored in Booker T. Washington High School College. Or the Burke and Madison students that attend my Financial literacy workshops every summer. Which kids are you talking about.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Joe

My son is studying the Civil Rights Movement in fourth grade social studies class. His textbook refers MLK as a, "community organizer."

When Palin and Rudy mocked Obama's work as a community organizer at the convention - that was a critical mis-step. With that one comment, they lost any hope of gaining traction in cities. Community organizers are among the most respected people in urban areas.

It funny, under daddy a "community organizer" was a point of light. Under the son it was something to be ashamed of.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by sokinwet

"How could they be? I'm not saying there probably aren't some extreme cases - inheritance, gift, contest winnings - but how can someone who's supposedly poor even afford to pay the excise tax on the vehicle?"

I challenge anyone to show me a welfare mother driving a BMW! This is just the same old tired arguement from those who feel that any type of social safety net is their $$ being spent for "lowlifes". Are there crooks? Sure...just like on Wall Street. You steal; you should be in jail.

I think I commented on a similar thread a while ago so I'll just say this. Do a search on Welfare to Work laws; then check out the rates of payment under welfare; then look at the trend in welfare as opposed to what it was in the 90's. I have worked in the housing field for 30 years and serve on the Board of Directors for a MA South Shore homeless Continuum of Care. The clients of these social service agencies barely have money for housing and food and public assistance does not provide for any excesses. I imagine that with the economic turmoil we're in there will be a lot more lowlifes around...and one of them might be you...and some people will hate you for it!

Great point - my dad has a few apartments he rents to mostly to people on section 8. Many of them have some sort of job or jobs but they have no skills. Some are better people than others. But the common thread is that they have NOTHING - we give them our old furniture, cloths (rarely - as long as they don't look used), have them do work like paint or rack leaves for extra money, etc.

RIJimmy - that's mostly in Ansonia. I know someone who has many (could be 50 units) in the Anson street area of Derby who will tell you the same thing.