Thursday, March 5, 2009

Red State Blue State, How Great



What you are looking at directly above are the Electoral College maps of (top) President Reagan's 1984 presidential election's sweeping victory winning every state but Minnesota, and before that President Nixon's 1972 overwhelming victory winning every state but Massachusetts.

More importantly the right wing was not only popular, they were the power brokers of the time and they were the rulers of the kingdom. Subsequently the left wing was only able to interrupt the right wings agenda with a short stint of 4 years from President Carter. Then a more successful campaign with progressive ideals ensued with the 8 year term of President Clinton. Today it is a different story as the popularity of the Republican party continues to fade.

This next illustration is the Electoral map in Clinton's 1996 victory over Bush #1, You now begin to see the changes in the attitude toward the less populist right wing mores. In spite of Clinton's economic success, and his ability to totally eliminate the deficit and hand over the largest surplus in modern time to the next administration, the left wing failed to continue governing the White House. Instead Bush #2 won the next two presidential elections by very narrow margins, in his first victory he won the Electoral college but lost in the popular vote. In the second contest he won the state of Ohio by a few hundred votes once again giving the victory to Bush.

America is in a mess and many people are in a bad place right now, some of them because of the inept administration that ruled as an anarchy over the last 8 years, and other Americans through thoughtless spending. In the end the largest amount of money went to the top 5% of Americans while average middle class incomes decreased by $2,000 during the Bush administration. The failures and the recklessness of the past administration led to the overwhelming victory once again by the left wing and now President Obama.

President Obama's Electoral map (below) indicates that a few states that were red had felt that they needed a change from the policies that emaciated their people and they ended up in the left wing column. Although Obama had garnered 365 electoral votes in his commanding victory over John McCain, it is worth noting that Clinton's margin of victory of 379 electoral votes in his election was larger.

If the current administration is able to lift America and Americans up during the next 4 years, then there is a good chance that the map will change once again, when the incumbent, President Obama runs for the White House against Rush Limbaugh in 2012.

7 comments:

conservative generation March 5, 2009 at 12:35 PM  

Good points. Liberals definitely have an opportunity.

The funny thing about your post is that I remember writing something very similar about Bush's win over Kerry, but in favor of the conservative movement.

I also find it interesting when you look at the whole US map from the county detail instead of state. Suddenly, the whole country goes red.

LibertyCast March 5, 2009 at 5:02 PM  

That's because conservatives cover more rural area and liberals tend to be more concentrated in urban areas.

Conservatives also tend to be in an L shape throughout the states while there are more liberals tend to be at the coasts.

Statistically these tend to be the greatest truths in how to geographically display the political polarity.

Joseph M. Fasciana March 5, 2009 at 5:12 PM  

To C Generation,

I see your point, history in this case works both ways, in the 30's FDR had the whole country blue for many terms and JFK then LBJ. After that I point out a couple of the most obvious modern elections that where Conservative landslides.

The Law March 6, 2009 at 8:22 PM  

Interesting post. My interpretation of the map is a little different...

I don't think Al Gore was a bad candidate (let us for argument's sake pretend he didn't say he invented the internet =] ). I have been wondering for several years if Clinton got us out of a deficit and into a surplus, then why would we elect Bush?

I think the republican vision of the economy is focusing on maximizing the profit margin... running the US economy more like a business. When it works, it works well i suppose, though I wasn't around for Ronald Regans presidency lol. But it is certainly an attractive proposition... we have a surplus, and now a party comes into power that maximizes of profits further. Bush #2 was able to (barely)convince that though it isn't broke, we can make it better. The 2nd term was stricly about the war, and I didn't think Kerry was a convincing candidate (though he'd be far more effective than Bush I think).

I suspect then that if Obama is successful and he pulls us out of this ditch and back into the golden days, that one or two terms after his run, we'll see a largely red map again.

This is not to say democrats clean up republicans messes, but rather a republican economic model, if implemented properly and fairly, probably is a better way to further monetize a surplus. It is akin to being broke all your life, getting serious about managing your debt, finally obtain a disposable income, and then someone comes along and says "hey, you can invest your disposable income and be even richer!" That's a tough one to turn down I think. Curious to know what y'all think =)

Joseph M. Fasciana March 6, 2009 at 11:01 PM  

To L,

You bring up very valid points. I am of the opinion that neither party will do us any good until lobbying for profit making institutions is outlawed, and allowed only if they are lobbying for non for profit causes.

Regards,

Joseph

Anonymous,  August 30, 2009 at 1:56 PM  

You got your dates wrong! Clinton defeated Bush 1 in 92. Note also, in the Nixon, Carter, Reagan, Clinton years -- the Republicans were the "blue states." This was changed by media because of the negative association of red, i.e., we can't have left leaning dems associated with the color red. Come on dude -- GET IT RIGHT.

The Skeptic,  September 15, 2009 at 10:43 AM  

Perhaps the problem has less to do with the fact that one party has a better economic ideology and more to do with the fact that Americans vote based on private interest rather than looking at what's fair--- and until they do, why should politicians look out for the big picture and not for the little groups who actually acknowledge what the politician does for them.

  © Blogger template The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP