re: #120 HappyWarrior

Delaware is actually pretty densely populated.
en.wikipedia.org

Anyhow, I think there’s something to density and vote correlation. I had a bunch of townhouses that I had to canvass Saturday and my canvassing partner and I both theorized that people in these type of developments are more likely to be Democratic since they’re forced to acknowledge their neighbors and interact with them. Density allows us to see our collective humanity more than sparsely populated. It’s easy to see why the myth of the rugged individual took off in places with big land masses but not as many people. I’m no Marxist but there’s a reason why he predicted Marxist revolution would start in the urban industrial centers. He was wrong- it was Russia but on paper, he got it.

I suppose that’s true. In nominally liberal states such as New York or California, the urban areas tend to go for liberal candidates whilst the rural areas go for conservative ones.

Even here in conservative Nebraska, President Obama won an electoral vote in 2008 (NE-2, Omaha and South Sioux City). He didn’t win the same district in 2012, possibly because so many Democratic candidates were disassociating themselves from the President. (Like Maine, we split our electoral votes.)