Well, it’s getting really late and I’m pretty tired by now, so forgive me if I’m less than cogent, but I’ll offer a little bit of a theory.
There are higher concentrations of Democrats in the heavily populated areas because they are more removed from the predominately rural and agriculturally-oriented midwest and south and the rugged individualism of the western states.
Values among those whose environment is primarily western or agricultural tend to be more in line with traditional conservative values. Among these would be self-reliance; indivdualism; strength of character in terms of fighting your own battles and stoically bearing your own troubles; a polite and respectful demeanor; manners; sexual propriety; etc.
Large cities consist of populations that are either long divorced from the world of agriculture, farming and wild west individualism…or that have long since fled from it, such as African-Americans and other minorities. These populations tend to be less concerned with the values of mid-America and regard them as backward, uptight and repressive. And their greater population densities allow funding for more social programs and government aid.
Basically, conservatives are relatively monolithic in their beliefs, which center on strength of character (as they define it); a strong military; people taking responsibility for their own lives; a more strict moral code in terms of manners and language and sexuality; and as little governmental intrusion into their lives as possible.
The big-city Democrat base, by contrast, consists of a hodge-podge of almost everyone else. They are a rough and fairly disorganized conglomeration of white do-gooders, African-Americans, Jews, homosexuals, women’s rights activists, environmental activists, government program and nanny-state proponents, etc. – basically the traditionally disenfranchised and those who would like to help them. This vastly varied conglomeration of people, goals and interests (and often conflicting interests) results in the typical liberal politician’s inability to define what he’s for. Liberal politicians try to be all things to all people and therefore have constantly to shift their support and beliefs to try to accomodate their volitile constituent base.
Neither of these groups in my opinion is always right or always wrong. Good and bad emanate from both. They are merely different, and who’s right or wrong is usually defined by the passage of time. (However, given that I’m primarily a conservative, I have to say I believe the greater good comes from the conservative viewpoint.)
Anyway, that’s my rough take on it. Obviously, this explanation is a highly generalized and simplified one, but I think it gets across the point I’m trying to make as to why heavily populated and industrialized areas tend to vote Democrat and the rest of the country tends to vote Republican.
(As an aside, I want to say it hasn’t been my intention to offend anyone with anything I’ve said here. But, being as this is the SDMB, I probably have. If so, please accept my apologies as the offense was unintentional.)
