http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2012/10/rodden_on_the_g.html
Jonathan Rodden, political science professor at Stanford and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution speaks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the geography of voting. The main focus is on the tendency of urban voters around the world to vote for candidates on the left relative to suburban and rural voters. Rodden argues that this pattern is related to the geography of work and housing going back to the industrial revolution. He also discusses the implications of various voting systems such as winner-take-all vs. proportional representation, the electoral college and how political systems and voter preferences can produce unexpected outcomes.
Check your history books. People move to the City because it's easier, density means opportunity, but it also means conflict. Populism arises as politicians parcel out positions divvying up the public and satisfying their specific group demands. Like a good restaurateur they serve the meals their clients want. That's good politics. It's the politics of victory.
The equivalent in economics is Gresham's Law which reads: “Bad money drives out good if their exchange rate is set by law.” This is the case in politics. The “exchange rate” is government/taxpayer transfer funds and they are set by law along with the election code. It's how things are and how they'll always be...
rino's lose because their message is un-respected! Romney can say all he wants he believes in whatever, but people sense it is not true and everyone knows he's flipped on a dime to try to be someone he's not. Just like McCain tried.
People can sense this and it's why he lost. If he really was the opposite of Obama and proved it, he would have had more chance of winning. Romney lost because enough "conservatives" stayed home.
You can't win when you're fighting both yourself AND the dem/MSM.