You obviously haven’t been to the Mississippi Delta. Its probably the poorest place in America. Well, Mississippi is the poorest state, and the Delta is the poorest region, so I would imagine that it is pretty high in the tally.
I’ve never had the “pleasure” of visiting anywhere south of the Carolinas. But from what I understand, West Virginia has it pretty bad too, and parts of Pennsylvania.
Truly sad that so many parts of our country are suffering so much with so little attention.
But the mountains there sure are pretty to someone from MI like me where the topography is boring. A decade ago I had to drive from MI to VA and back, and WV is in between. I was quite aware from the maps this would mean travelling over a mountain range. However, I hadn’t anticipated the how impressive the landscape would be. Are people in WV impressed by the flatness of MI?
[QUOTE=Wesley Clark]
Those who attend religious services regularly vote 56% to 28% in favor of Bush while those who never go voted 60% to 27% in favor of Kerry.
[QUOTE]
The Bush–church connection makes a lot of sense. Both Bush and religion offer simplistic answers to complex questions, demand obedience rather than consensus, and are retrograde in outlook on social issues.
My first love lived in Virginia. I’m from California, Los Angeles to be precise. I went there, saw the Appalachians, shrugged, and wasn’t very impressed. She came out here and we vacationed in the Sierras, and she was pretty floored. I have a 15,000 ft mountain out my window right now, and I went camping on it reguarly , so mountains never really gave me a second thought… though that train ride through the Rockies was awesome.
My impression of Virginia was just a bunch of annoying little hills. Just so, blah. Flat skyline with the tiny little Appalachians in the distance. I’m used to a big snow capped mountain sitting in front of me. So no, I don’t think people from WV are appreciative of the flatness of MI.
I would, however, like to visit the Russian/central Asian steppes. Flat, but historically appealing, and a fairly unique place.
Its not so bad. We just got electricity and even though I have to get online to write this using an abandoned telegraph machine I converted into a 2kbps modem I am still able to get online and post. hell, I haven’t even had cholera in over 8 weeks at last count. Lets see big city slickers say that.
Try looking at those hills in VA on the border with WV. QUITE impressive.
I believe that most records list the actual poorest county in America as Shannon County, South Dakota (the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation).
Being a recent transplant, I can’t really comment from a Hoosier’s perspective on why it’s so pro-Bush. Living in South Bend, I can say that there are a fair percentage of Democrats in this city. I can also attest to the ruralness (rurality?) and the religiousness 'round these here parts.
Couple other notable things:
Indiana was (is?) a huge stronghold for the Ku Klux Klan. Lucky Indiana.
Also, Axl Rose, David Letterman, and Marilyn Manson are all Hoosiers. I’ll not provide any opinion on whether that says anything at all about the state.
The fact that Jim Davis lives here more than makes up for all those things.
Which Jim Davis? This one? I suspect you mean this one.
If that’s the case, then no. No, it doesn’t make up for anything. In fact, it pretty much just augments the list.
Dude, for me it was a bus ride through Gary where somebody shined a beer bottle off my window. If I never reenter Indiana it will be too soon, though I have fond memories of a strip joint in Indy.
Indiana is strongly Bush because the state is strongly Republican and its been that way nearly forever. I don’t know why.
I can find only one occassion Indiana went for a Democrat and the Republican won.
The state voted for Tilden in 1876. That’s the election with the multiple footnotes, Tilden won the popular vote by about 4%, the D’s said he won three southern states the R’s said they won, and the R’s ruled the day after weeks of dispute, leaving Tilden one electoral vote short.
But Indiana voted eight times for the Repuliban loser in the 20th century.
Just cross the border from South Bend you hit Chicago. Chicago is totally democratic to the point where the mayoralty race is very banana republic esque. There was an interesting thread on Bush and the Black vote that raised issues as to why Black’s consistently vote democratic. We found no real answers there so I doubt we will here.
Indiana may be mind-numbingly boring (Columbus, IN huray!) but it is safe and a fairly good place to raise kids.
I have a question/protest about one of the earlier assumptions in this thread.
I has been extensively stated in this thread that one of the reasons Indiana is so pro-Republican is the small population size of its cities - namely, most of them are small, conservative, religious towns that don’t have a lot of the issues that the Liberal side of the spectrum really deals with (class disparity, labor disputes, etc). I am not denying that this premise is largely true.
My question is this: There are a LOT of states like that, from the Dakotas to Oklahoma. Pretty much the entire region is like that, and true, most of the entire region is pro-Bush. But why is Indiana especially pro-Bush?
They’re not (based on a cursory look at the electoral-vote.com website), at least not within the scope you define. They are, however, when compared to their immediate neighboring states (perhaps barring KY).
Why? I dunno.
From what I can tell from knowing a few Indianans, the state is below the Mason Dixon line. They all had southern accents and conservative views. I’m convinced that Indiana is a southern state.
Indiana has had a Democratic governor for the last 16 years, and the second largest city in the state has a Democrat for a mayor. The two Hoosier senators are Bayh (Democrat) and Lugar (Republican).
So it doesn’t seem that the state is as solidly Republican as it first appears.
As a Hoosier living in Indianapolis, I would say that Indiana is fairly split when it comes to ‘yokels.’ We’re basically a border state. I’ve done most of my traveling into the southern parts of the state and have been surprised at the conditions of some of the cities. It seems the higher north you are, the better it gets.
A lot of misperceptions in this thread.
Indianapolis is the 12th largest city in the United States:
Indianapolis has a 2nd term Democrat in the mayor’s office. The northern part has been consistently Democrat as well, ranging from Gary (extremely Democrat) through South Bend (also extremely Democrat).
Uh…the Mason-Dixon line is an actual line - it’s not hypothetical. And if Kentucky isn’t in the South (it fought for the Union), Indiana sure isn’t.
I think Wesley Clark nailed it, with this:
Having lived in Indiana for the last 9 years, I’d say it’s a matter of values. People here are extremely religious, and extremely traditional. I’ve asked many people why we typically have a Democrat Governor, but always vote Republican - the typical response is “because that’s the way my parents voted, that’s the way I’ll vote”. I also fully expect the Republican gubernatorial candidate (Mitch Daniels - Bush’s Director of the OMB) to win tomorrow, despite my valiant phone bank efforts, and for that tradition to continue for quite a while.
I’d also argue with the OP regarding the rest of the Great Lake states. Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan and Ohio are all traditionally swing states. I’d say the ONLY sure thing states bordering a Great Lake are New York and Indiana.