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.
After reading about Trump's behavior at G7, I think drastic measures need to be taken. Since we can't abolish the Electoral College for whatever the reason, people in liberal states need to figure out how to move in enough numbers to red states to turn this country around. This can't be allowed to happen again; he is a national embarrassment and a real threat to the word's security and political stability.
So, who's joining me in my move to Iowa?
It wouldn't take much the focus should be on turning Texas and Florida solidly blue. If we get the right people in there they're done.
A bit more seriously - I am a student of history (I think 50+ years of reading thousands of pages each year at least partially qualifies me)....
Much of the problem in the USA is that we don't except our basic history...instead we build fables and cartoons (and history books in school) to sanitize it all and then we use the legends of "everyone is equal" to make ourselves feel good.
BUT, as is evident - and fully explained in many books - American is a child of England and was not settled for "Freedom of Religion". The formation of an official country (USA) really didn't change much other than who got the goods...before you had to beg the King or one of his Lords, now you had to beg the POTUS or the Congress or the Governor or whoever held the land from back when the King reigned (William Penn, etc.)...
I am reading a book now which details how America - at least the British Version (Jamestown, Pilgrims, etc.) was founded almost 100% on two various ideals that we somehow skip over...
1. It was Corporations - joint stock corporations - that financed and "owned" everything, from the ships to any land or goods (Gold, etc.) which they found.
2. It was a way for England to get rid of MANY of their undesirables - sort of the same way Castro sent his undesirables here.
#2 is the subject of a book I am reading now and it makes it very clear - although it doesn't take much thinking to see this truth. Most all the people sent here - even the Pilgrims - were expendable "waste"....sure, there may have been a few adventurous military officers, but to settle any news lands (Colonialism) required vast amounts of LABOR. Expendable labor.
And so the illiterate, the debtors, the petty criminals and many more were shipped here for a "2nd chance" as what we may call indentured servants and laborers (white underclass in social terms)...
The book makes clear that 99% plus of these people are written out of history...and they, and their kin, live on today by the 10's of millions and they too are largely written out. Americans are uncomfortable talking and thinking about "class" even though it has been the foundation of most everything that happened since the Brits landed.
I'm not just using the current book to arrive at this conclusion - this ties in with everything else I have read about Jamestown, settlement of the Appalachians (where I actually lived or awhile), my own ancestors on one side (coal miners) and virtually every other accurate record.
But we don't like to talk about this - nor accept it.
Being a "liberal", I am under the silly assumption that "the dream" is somewhat achievable. But also being a realist, those who take a look around can see that most everything reflects the original intention of colonization - which includes waste people....and waste resources.
By very definition, it took many waste people to support those who write the history books.
This is all very much in play today - as it has been virtually every day since the founding. Those "waste people" who feel stepped on truly HAVE been stepped on, partially their own fault (cluelessness) and partially due to ancestry and historical events. If a genius was born in a hollow in KY in 1830, chances are they would become a coal miner...maybe the smarter one who shored up timbers. If the same genius was born in Boston, they would go to Harvard and likely run the government eventually.
BUT, fast forward to today - and the "teaming masses descended from waste people" somehow blame it on everyone else who did better than they did - even those like my family who came over in 1900 or so and were coal miners. Just by a stroke of luck, they were sent to mines in PA - which is close enough to the cities of the NE that some eventually moved that way - and met and married more educated families, and then rose up (upwardly mobile).
If my ancestors had been dragged to SW VA. or WV. the same would likely not be true.
The same goes, in other fashions, for poor Southern Whites and all the other "waste people" from African Americans to Mexicans and Native Americans.
Summary - it's not "our" fault. It's the history of America and when looked at closely, it's usually stock companies in NYC and in London that you can trace the use of "waste people" right back to. Others played their parts in the great game (the mine foreman, etc.) but that is the story of modern industrial society. For every foreman there are likely many many worker bees.
The Blue vs Red state thing is a construct with SOME truth behind it - there are states which were more exploited by the stock companies and states which were less (often where the stock companies were located)....
Simple example - the richest man in the world, Andrew Carnegie, lived in NYC and said he would never want to live in the dirty Pittsburgh air. For every Carnegie and Frick (also moved to NYC) there were THOUSANDS of "waste men" and their families.
So what is the answer? First, it's education and realization that all men and families were NOT created equal. But we don't like to talk about that, so the next steps are unlikely to be taken.
Look what happened to Hillary when she suggested massive Trade Educational programs to bring up the masses to current speed. No No NO....we can't have that! We'd rather use you "waste people" as pawns since your vote is one vote too! We'll get you angry and BS you and at least you'll feel better even tho nothing has changed.
Those Northern Cities would be frozen shhhhhhholes without us sending them our oil and gas.
And I know how to spell Northern.
You don't know much history!
Oil was discovered in PA. The amts of nat gas being produced in PA and up in that area are incredible. Anthracite, which built this country, was 95% mined in NE PA. It built the great Northern Cities.
(earlier, it was Whale Oil, the center of which was New Bedford, MA).
A Texan uses 250% more energy than someone in New England. They also ship vast quantities of their oil and gas to the world market...whoever pays gets it.
No, they were plenty warm - and even had clean air - from hard coal. Hard coal is very clean - and burns with no visible smoke.
Besides, it was "Northern and British and Dutch" stock companies that ended up developing and owning a lot of the refineries and other industries in the south. Ever hear of Standard Oil Company. Yep, the Rockefellers - and, if I am not wrong, Flagler also (who developed Florida)....
In the scheme of history, brains have always triumphed (eventually) over brawn. Also, those who band together have triumphed over those who separate themselves out.
Those who trade with other nations and develop specialties - have also prospered.
I just saw a proposal that I found interesting. It really wasn't about left vs right though - it was about revitalizing the Midwest where so many people have left due to all the manufacturing jobs leaving. Cities like Cleveland and Detroit who could really handle an influx of people because they were built to handle more people than they currently have. They have the downtown (or had) and the theaters, etc.
The proposal was ~ that there is no reason for the entire federal government to reside in DC where rents/prices are rising and places overpopulated and overpriced.
It talked about the different departments that really have no need to communicate that often or the need to be next door with an example of the CDC in Atlanta given. Different departments could be moved to different states. The fact that DC has one of the highest median salaries wasn't lost on anyone either.
Basically it was -spread the wealth. People in the 'fly over' states pay taxes too - why shouldn't we all share in some of the employment and wealth that the federal government spreads around?
I know we have a local DOD here in my town which employs a lot of people at a very good salary. Occasionally they have to travel to DC. It's worth it.
And there is the FBI fingerprint center in West Virginia that employs a lot of people.
It wouldn't take much the focus should be on turning Texas and Florida solidly blue. If we get the right people in there they're done.
there is no such thing as a "solidly blue" state
New York....out of 62 counties... Hillary won only 16..... trump took 46 counties.
of the 5 boroughs of NYC..Hillary lost Staten Island, she could not even carry the whole city
here are a few of the '''blue''' states Hillary took
look at Nevada...Hillary won the state (popular vote) and got the electoral delegates....but...out of 17 counties...Hillary won only 2....trump took 15 counties
so blue Nevada... is only 1/8th blue... or 7/8ths red
look at Oregon ...Hillary won the state (popular vote) and got the electoral delegates....but...out of 36 counties...Hillary won only 8..... trump took 28 counties
so blue Oregon... is only 2/9ths blue... or 7/9ths red
look at Washington ...Hillary won the state (popular vote) and got the electoral delegates....but...out of 39 counties...Hillary won only 12..... trump took 27 counties
so blue Washington... is only 6/19ths blue... or 13/19ths red
look at Minnesota ...Hillary won the state (popular vote) and got the electoral delegates....but...out of 87 counties...Hillary won only 9..... trump took 78 counties
so blue Minnesota... is only 9/87ths blue... or 78/87ths red
look at VERY BLUE New York...Hillary won the state (popular vote) and got the electoral delegates.... but...out of 62 counties... Hillary won only 16..... trump took 46 counties
so blue New York... is only 8/31ths blue... or 23/31ths red
look at VERY BLUE Maryland...Hillary won the state (popular vote) and got the electoral delegates.... but...out of 24 counties... Hillary won only 7..... trump took 17 counties
so blue Maryland... is only 7/24ths blue... or 17/24ths red
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,604,784 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero
there is no such thing as a "solidly blue" state
New York....out of 62 counties... Hillary won only 16..... trump took 46 counties.
of the 5 boroughs of NYC..Hillary lost Staten Island, she could not even carry the whole city
here are a few of the '''blue''' states Hillary took
look at Nevada...Hillary won the state (popular vote) and got the electoral delegates....but...out of 17 counties...Hillary won only 2....trump took 15 counties
so blue Nevada... is only 1/8th blue... or 7/8ths red
look at Oregon ...Hillary won the state (popular vote) and got the electoral delegates....but...out of 36 counties...Hillary won only 8..... trump took 28 counties
so blue Oregon... is only 2/9ths blue... or 7/9ths red
look at Washington ...Hillary won the state (popular vote) and got the electoral delegates....but...out of 39 counties...Hillary won only 12..... trump took 27 counties
so blue Washington... is only 6/19ths blue... or 13/19ths red
look at Minnesota ...Hillary won the state (popular vote) and got the electoral delegates....but...out of 87 counties...Hillary won only 9..... trump took 78 counties
so blue Minnesota... is only 9/87ths blue... or 78/87ths red
look at VERY BLUE New York...Hillary won the state (popular vote) and got the electoral delegates.... but...out of 62 counties... Hillary won only 16..... trump took 46 counties
so blue New York... is only 8/31ths blue... or 23/31ths red
look at VERY BLUE Maryland...Hillary won the state (popular vote) and got the electoral delegates.... but...out of 24 counties... Hillary won only 7..... trump took 17 counties
so blue Maryland... is only 7/24ths blue... or 17/24ths red
as you can see...nothing is SOLID
Counties don't vote, people do. For example, only 2 of 17 counties in Nevada voted for Clinton in 16 (Clark and Washoe), but those two counties combined have 90% of Nevada's population
Counties don't vote, people do. For example, only 2 of 17 counties in Nevada voted for Clinton in 16 (Clark and Washoe), but those two counties combined have 90% of Nevada's population
That thought process can be applied to the country as a whole which is why we have the Electoral College rather than popular vote for presidential elections.
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.
.
