Why is Minnesota different? (Minneapolis, Dayton: law, activity, farmer)

[iNviNciBL3]

Originally Posted by phlinak

I believe this is the explanation. Study after study has demonstrated that the more educated a person is, the more likely they are to identify with, accept and embrace liberal political views.

Education and Political views have nothing to do with each other.

You can be smart and be pro-life, for traditional marriage and or small government.

[susieJD]

From my studies of the state, the first ethnic people here in MN were Germans, not Sweds.

[golfgal]

Originally Posted by susieJD

From my studies of the state, the first ethnic people here in MN were Germans, not Sweds.

Actually, much of the state was first visited by the French...

[WriterDude]

Originally Posted by golfgal

Actually, much of the state was first visited by the French...

Ya, sure, and Louis Hennepin was Belgian.

Louis Hennepin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Ghengis]

Originally Posted by susieJD

From my studies of the state, the first ethnic people here in MN were Germans, not Sweds.

No, not Germans, Swedes...more precisely Gotlanders.

recent studies have debunked the debunking of the Kensington Runestone which for the most part consisted of skeptics loudly shouting "Is Not!, Is Not!"

Kensington Rune Stone - Case Closed

Conclusions of Fact
1. There were multiple witnesses who saw the rune stone, tangled in tree roots, when it was discovered.
2. The age of the tree was estimated to be 25-30 years, and the stone had been in the roots since the tree was new. That time period alone pushed the latest date of carving back to before there were any settlers in this part of Minnesota.
3. Olof did not have runic knowledge. The claim that he had books with runes is false, he did not obtain those books until after the stone was found, in an effort to understand it.
4. The world’s top scholars of the day did not know of many of the runes, proclaiming them “made up,” even though they were later proven to be genuine. There is no way Olof Ohman could have known this.
5. There is extensive root leaching on the back of the stone that fits the description given by observers of how the roots were wrapped around the stone.
6. The KRS is about 31 x 16 inches and 6 inches thick. it weights about 200 lb. It is greywacke which is a very hard stone that would have been difficult to carve.
7. The stone was cut down from a larger stone before carving, and expertly done. The so-called split side is equally aged as the carvings.
8. Over the years, all runes on the KRS have been found elsewhere from a similar date period. None of the runes can be said to be made-up or too recent and indicative of a modern forger. Most of these were found in the runic practice of Gotland, lending further credence to the possibility that the carver was of the Cistercian order.
9. The stone is double dated to 1362 using the Easter Table Code which is further evidence still of a Gotlandic connection.
The three categories of fact above are historical, physical and linguistic. It should be noted that “photographic” is not one of them. While photographs can be weighed as evidence, they can never rise to a conclusive level. The only possible conclusion of fact regarding KRS photographs is that they have, over the years, shown many distortions both accidental and intentional, and are therefore always suspect. We have the stone. Old photos are not necessary to clarify reality.

[QuietBlue]

A couple of things that I haven't seen brought up yet:

1) It's important to distinguish between economic and social liberalism and conservatism. My late grandparents, for example, were ardent Democrats who were very pro-union and pro-social safety net, but were also qute traditional in their social beliefs and would have voted for the gay marriage amendment had they lived in this state when it was up for a vote. People aren't necessarily all one side or the other.

2) The FL (Farmer-Labor) in DFL is really important to how politics historically worked in this state. The Farmer-Labor party was a third party that dominated state politics for several decades (until Humprey merged it with the Democratic Party), and it was pretty much an alliance of laborers and small farmers who felt they had shared goals and concerns. This party was active elsewhere as well, but it held on longer in Minnnesota than it did elsewhere.

[atler8]

Yes, Minnesota & the Dakotas are very unlike in so many ways. But, are there shared factors at work in the upper Midwest beyond what have been discussed here thus far that cause 2 of your neighbors, Wisconsin & Iowa, to also be rather reliably blue in terms of presidential politics & to also have progressive histories in regard to legislation & gender & civil rights issues?
The row of plains states from North Dakota on down to Texas have long been reliably red & centers of bed rock conservatism & the contrast could hardly be more striking.

[Glenfield]

Originally Posted by atler8

Yes, Minnesota & the Dakotas are very unlike in so many ways. But, are there shared factors at work in the upper Midwest beyond what have been discussed here thus far that cause 2 of your neighbors, Wisconsin & Iowa, to also be rather reliably blue in terms of presidential politics & to also have progressive histories in regard to legislation & gender & civil rights issues?
The row of plains states from North Dakota on down to Texas have long been reliably red & centers of bed rock conservatism & the contrast could hardly be more striking.

I suppose it depends on what you mean by "long." Prior to 1980, Texas, like most southern states, was reliably a Democratic state.

Texas Presidential Election Voting History

[atler8]

Yes, that is true Glenfield but it was a conservative Democratic party in Texas back then, LBJ notwithstanding. The typical man-on-the street member of the Texas Democratic Party had more in common then with some of the views of today's Republican party.
What has hapened in my lifetime is that to a large degree the 2 major parties have flipped to polar opposites in viewpoints & in comparative strength in vast areas of the U.S., but not in all areas. And the strength of their constituencies have flipped correspondingly in various geographic areas. New England & the South both come to mind as prime examples.

[Craziaskowboi]

If Minnesota really wanted to be different, they'd start spelling it 'Minnæjʃøtå.'