Posted on 09/20/2020 7:26:51 PM PDT by BlackFemaleArmyColonel
I don’t have a particularly strong take on how the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg will affect either the presidential election or the race for control of the Senate. And I’d encourage you to avoid putting too much stock in anybody else’s take for now, too. The very earliest indication is that President Trump’s desire to move full-speed ahead toward naming Ginsburg’s replacement could be unpopular, but that’s based on only one poll.
But here’s what I do know: the Senate is an enormous problem for Democrats given the current political coalitions, in which Democrats are dominant in cities while Republicans triumph in rural areas. And because the Senate is responsible for confirming Supreme Court picks, that means the Supreme Court is a huge problem for Democrats too. Sure, Democrats might win back the Senate this year — indeed, they were slight favorites to do so before the Ginsburg news. But in the long run, they’re likely to lose it more often than not.
You can probably grasp intuitively that a legislative body which provides as much representation to Wyoming (population: 580,000) as California (population: 39.5 million) will tend to favor rural areas. But it’s a bigger effect than you might realize, so let’s run some numbers. At FiveThirtyEight, our favorite way to distinguish between urban and rural areas is based on using census tracts to estimate how many people live within a 5-mile radius of you. Based on this, we can break every person in the country down into four buckets:
Rural: Less than 25,000 people live within a 5-mile radius of you;
Exurban or small town: Between 25,000 and 100,000 people within a 5-mile radius;
Suburban or small city: Between 100,000 and 250,000 people within a 5-mile radius;
Urban core or large city: More than 250,000 people...
(Excerpt) Read more at fivethirtyeight.com ...
Rural stew? Is that another name for possum stew? Sounds like good vittles Granny!
Why do you think the democrats want to make DC and PR states?
Uh oh. Rural skew. A problem to be eliminated.
I suspected. The answer is “NO”!
This is the same idiot who predicted Hildabeast had a 96% chance of winning. This clown is nothing more than an attention whore with no record worthy of anything except failure.
Pure bias.
It’s the Dem Party’s hatred against rural America that hurts it in the Senate.
Lots of Americans really don’t want to live in a ghetto.
You obviously have a lot of white privilege not wanting to live in the ghetto hahaha
Except he is right on this one.
The composition of the Senate, and also the electoral college, is doing exactly what the founding fathers intended them to do. That is to keep large population centers from running roughshod over the rural areas. If the senate or electoral college went strictly by popular vote then we’d long ago have become a communist nation.
This is not really a problem for Democrats: it is a political opportunity.
All dims need to do is recruit and fund solid American candidates to run in rural states - and support those candidates by repudiating the dim party pro-communist/pro-socialist/pro-terrorist/anti-American platform.
Just do it!
In fairness, I think hr recognizes that but won’t offend his audience by saying it.
It’s a strength of our system that the feeders have political equality with the eaters.
You know, one thing they might try is to stop pushing policies that rural voters hate...
He is correct on this issue.
I had long tried to understand how the Senate was ever in Democrat hands, when Democrats were so blatantly anti-rural.
There were several reasons. The most important was the Democrats (progressive media) controlled the information flow to rural people and to nearly all Americans.
Then, most farmers were beholden to the Farmer welfare system of crop price subsidies.
Now, the Progressive control over the information flow has dwindled significantly, and there are very few farmers in rural areas who are dependent on farm subsidies.
The Democrats, meanwhile, have moved very far left, and have become almost entirely a party of the urban cores.
They have almost nothing in common with rural values. They have to depend almost entirely on lying to deceive rural voters. It worked when they controlled the information flow.
They don’t control the information flow now, though they might if they gain control of the government again.
They always drag out Wyoming, but the ‘Rats have Delaware, Vermont, R.I., Maine, & N. H. on the small state side.
Given the DC EV situation, the Senate and the EC are not quite the same.
He isn’t just smart he’s libtard smart.
Repeal the 17th, and the Rats will never even sniff a Senate majority again.
He’s lying right off the bat.
I saw two that’s TWO polls showing that going ahead with the hearing is astronomical high 60.
This jerk says it’s “unpopular.”
As usual...FAKE NEWS.
I always thought I lived in a small town, guess I was wrong. Based on the criteria above I live in an extremely rural area. There is only 17,000 people in our 20,000 square mile county.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.