Shocking... or is it?

[Buffa1oso1di3r]

I got this in an email from a very conservative friend of mine. I want to know what you members think. Mr. 03SHOOTER is going to love this:

Unreported statistics about the 2008 election
COUNTY BY COUNTY RESULTS
RED FOR McCAIN, BLUE FOR OBAMA



Prof Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, points out interesting facts concerning the 2008 Election:
The original posting with this information is below a Newsweek article at this link: http://www.newsweek.com/id/163337

-Number of States won by: Democrats: 20; Republicans: 30
-Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000; Republicans: 2,427,000
-Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million; Republicans: 143 million
-Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13.2; Republicans: 2.1

Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Republican won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens. Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in rented or government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..."
Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.

So, although I'm a High School student, I just have one large question. How did Obama win, if this is true?

[armysc_25b]

While I can't speak for other states, I did monitor Florida's vote very closely (that being where I maintain my voter registration, residency, etc.). The margin for Democrat to Republican in Miami-Dade, Palm Beach, and Broward Counties was outrageous. 1,321,360 votes for Obama; 797,315 for McCain. (Source: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/res...unty/#FLP00map) The vote margin there was more than double the entire state's results (524,045 in these counties to 204,577 statewide).

That being said, look at the population in the counties McCain won. 2 counties right next to my home county have 10,000 votes each, while my home county (which almost went Obama (scarily I might add)) had over 200,000 votes. In the counties Obama won, he won by a sizable margin for the most part, and it was in metro areas (Tallahassee, Tampa/St. Petersburg, Orlando, Daytona, and Miami).

That's how he won my home state, and it's upsetting. He won in the counties he needed to, which were the populated areas of the state.

Oh, and your source... I couldn't find any comments, or didn't see any noticable links to this info. Could you please direct link?

[CAPSmith]

New York Times has a similar map that they posted just after the election. It's interactive and gives a few different views; state winners, county bubbles, county leaders and voting shift.

It will also allow you to change the election year from '92-'08 to see the change over the years.

http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/re...ident/map.html

Enjoy.

[HairyEyeball]

Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million; Republicans: 143 million

So much for the myth of 'one man, one vote'.

The key is in the demographics, which electoral districts are primarily composed of 'producers' and which of 'parasites'; and since EDs are determined by population, and 'parasites' tend to a much higher population density, ergo wielding a disproportionate influence, candidates promising more 'bread and circuses' at 'government' expense have a built-in constituency. Outright fraud is also more rampant in such areas, but that merits a separate thread.

[reddog]

Interesting map. You will find that the two blue spots in the center of the state of Pennsylvania are college towns. On the east, Philadelphia on the west, Pittsburgh. The vast majority of us rural Folks are those 'God fearing, gun loving, hard working people' that our Presidential Nominee seems to have had trouble with. It's like the vote never counts for us rural Folks.
Easy Brother,
Reddog...

[Machine]

Originally Posted by reddog

Interesting map. You will find that the two blue spots in the center of the state of Pennsylvania are college towns. On the east, Philadelphia on the west, Pittsburgh. The vast majority of us rural Folks are those 'God fearing, gun loving, hard working people' that our Presidential Nominee seems to have had trouble with. It's like the vote never counts for us rural Folks.
Easy Brother,
Reddog...

Yep. The blue spot in the middle of VA is UVA, and of course the metro DC area and Tidewater region are always blue.

[Buffa1oso1di3r]

So, basically, the only reason why Obama won was because of these reasons:

1. By promising "the gifts of the treasury", he secured the votes of those who were already on welfare.
2. Those who were on welfare are densely populated, and so, he only had to win the most populous locations in each state to carry said state
3. The states that he did not win were full of "Christian, tax-paying, land owners", however, those states had the population density of two people per square mile (exaggeration, yes, I know).
4. Those states that did have people on welfare had the most votes in the Electoral College.

Correct?

[03_SHOOTER]

Originally Posted by Buffa1oso1di3r

So, basically, the only reason why Obama won was because of these reasons:

1. By promising "the gifts of the treasury", he secured the votes of those who were already on welfare.
2. Those who were on welfare are densely populated, and so, he only had to win the most populous locations in each state to carry said state
3. The states that he did not win were full of "Christian, tax-paying, land owners", however, those states had the population density of two people per square mile (exaggeration, yes, I know).
4. Those states that did have people on welfare had the most votes in the Electoral College.

Correct?

Not just welfare Buffa1o, but those who have been taught since they were zygotes that the welfare state (the bread and circus mentality) is somehow a "good" thing, and that self reliance is a "bad" thing. Unfortunately, those are the people who live in the highest density population centers, and they continually vote for their "bread and circuses", which is why I oppose unrestricted universal suffrage, but that's a rant for another thread.

[TruBlu]

Originally Posted by Buffa1oso1di3r

So, basically, the only reason why Obama won was because of these reasons:

1. By promising "the gifts of the treasury", he secured the votes of those who were already on welfare.
2. Those who were on welfare are densely populated, and so, he only had to win the most populous locations in each state to carry said state
3. The states that he did not win were full of "Christian, tax-paying, land owners", however, those states had the population density of two people per square mile (exaggeration, yes, I know).
4. Those states that did have people on welfare had the most votes in the Electoral College.

Correct?

Well the only reason why Obama won was that he brought in more votes than McCain. His appeal to the welfare loving metropolitan folk may or may not be related, what really matters is that Obama won with 365 electoral votes and approximately 66 million votes; McCain lost with 173 electoral votes and approximately 58 million votes. What Prof Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, fails to point out are the simple statistics that I have (source) pointed out.

Originally Posted by 03_SHOOTER

Unfortunately, those are the people who live in the highest density population centers, and they continually vote for their "bread and circuses", which is why I oppose unrestricted universal suffrage, but that's a rant for another thread.

I'm surprised that rant hasn't arisen from your corner yet.

[Billyd]

Originally Posted by TruBlu

I'm surprised that rant hasn't arisen from your corner yet.

Not to encourage 03 too much, but do you understand why he might be against universal suffrage? I do and I must agree with him. I will, however, permit him the honor of starting that discussion.