Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"The analysis found that red states, or those that voted Republican in the 2012 presidential election, were much more likely to depend on the government than blue states."
How many times do these stupid ass red state/blue state liberal opinion pieces have to be debunked before the left wing idiots stop posting them? Is there some sort of leftist moron quota we don't know about?
How many times do these stupid ass red state/blue state liberal opinion pieces have to be debunked before the left wing idiots stop posting them? Is there some sort of leftist moron quota we don't know about?
This is a discussion board..No? Why not post a rebuttal to what OP posted....It may be difficult..but at least try..as plain old whining about Lib's is already getting kinda old..and Elections aren't even coming for over year and half...
Democrats living in expensive blue states that contribute more to the federal government than they get back vote Democratically.
You're welcome.
I can't believe I'm going to waste the time trying to explain this to you but here goes nothing...
You live in Washington state, it would be considered a "blue" state by your logic based on the 2012 or 2008 POTUS elections. Here are the results for WA for the last 7 POTUS election cycles.
Not a single time has the Dem POTUS candidate received over 57% of the vote. About 1.3 million people voted for Romney in WA in 2012. Washington is actually one of the more wide spread states when it comes to the red/blue divide, most are a lot closer to 50/50.
Now basic logic (I know, just trying to keep up) would dictate that even the most drastically blue state has tons of people voting red. The same can be said for dark red states and blue voters.
When people start to make broad statements about red states or blue states it makes intelligent people like myself cringe. Unless you can prove that the people in each red or blue state are the ones consuming more or less of that government money the entire argument is a failure, just like this thread.
I can't believe I'm going to waste the time trying to explain this to you but here goes nothing...
You live in Washington state, it would be considered a "blue" state by your logic based on the 2012 or 2008 POTUS elections. Here are the results for WA for the last 7 POTUS election cycles.
Presidential elections results
Year RepublicanDemocratic 2012 41.29% 1,290,67056.16%1,755,396 2008 40.48% 1,229,21657.65%1,750,848 2004 45.59% 1,304,89352.82%1,510,201 2000 44.59% 1,108,86450.21%1,247,652 1996 37.32% 840,71249.81%1,123,323 1992 31.99% 731,23443.41%993,037 1988 47.97% 903,83550.03%933,516
Not a single time has the Dem POTUS candidate received over 57% of the vote. About 1.3 million people voted for Romney in WA in 2012. Washington is actually one of the more wide spread states when it comes to the red/blue divide, most are a lot closer to 50/50.
Now basic logic (I know, just trying to keep up) would dictate that even the most drastically blue state has tons of people voting red. The same can be said for dark red states and blue voters.
When people start to make broad statements about red states or blue states it makes intelligent people like myself cringe. Unless you can prove that the people in each red or blue state are the ones consuming more or less of that government money the entire argument is a failure, just like this thread.
Thank you for illustrating that Washington State is a blue state and has been for 20+ years. We have not had a Republican governor since 1981. We passed gay marriage by vote. Blue state.
Clearly this doesn't please you but it is what it is.
Democrats living in expensive blue states that contribute more to the federal government than they get back vote Democratically.
You're welcome.
I live in one of those expensive blue states. My taxes and the "fees" are ridiculous. If Democrats contribute more it's because they drain their populace dry. Thanks for nothing!
Democrats living in expensive blue states that contribute more to the federal government than they get back vote Democratically.
You're welcome.
People on welfare programs lean much more toward the Democrats than the average, as you'd expect. Recipients of the most concentrated welfare dollars (people in public housing) back Democrats by over 80%: Super-Economy: Are Welfare Recipients mostly Republican?.
The phenomenon here (individuals dependent on the government being more likely to vote for Democrats while states as a whole often go the other way) is an example of what is called Simpson's Paradox: Simpson's paradox - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Reading the wiki will explain the math and logic behind these sorts of statistical phenomenon.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Is there some sort of leftist moron quota we don't know about?
