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.
I didn't make my original point with regards to that issue clearly and I decided to not to revisit it as it wasn't really worth the energy at the time. Trust me, I get the urban gardens, eben to a couple, nice to see.
The original point I wanted to make was more about understanding the mindset of the folks whose life and livelihood depend on growing their food for themselves and/or market. The ones for whom it is not a novelty or grand experiment or a better option vs. Whole Foods. It was more around understanding why those people place value on different parts of life that the majority of the urbanites may not. That paradigm obviously colors how they vote, how they view the world etc.
Some here would call them unenlightened etc. and everyone is entitled to their opinion.
Not everyone is like that. I have a lot of respect for anyone that goes out and works the soil with their hands. What I don't respect is industrialized/mechanized/high-volume farming with a bunch of pesticides and chemicals ran by large corporations and their poisons and toxins they put in our food. I come from a smaller Midwestern city where you see farms as soon as you leave the suburbs. Nothing but acres of corn. I can't speak for a New Yorker or someone from the Northeast where that type of activity is like an hour, hour and a half two hours away.
I'm not sure about the hippies for which urban gardens are a novelty. These are the same hippies for which life in general is a novelty, along with the urban hipsters, you know, their distant cousins. It could be an honest living for those unemployed in the inner city that can't get a job.
The only region in the United States where the rural areas voted for Obama and against Bush in the past few elections is New England. Which is also one of the most educated parts of the country.
What I don't respect is industrialized/mechanized/high-volume farming with a bunch of pesticides and chemicals ran by large corporations and their poisons and toxins they put in our food.
That's what makes it possible for you to afford to eat.
Maybe it WAS elitist for America at large to tell rural America to get with the program and let women vote. Maybe it WAS elitist for America at large to tell rural America to get with the program and let minorities vote. Maybe it WAS elitist for America at large to tell rural America to get with the program and let blacks into the same public schools as whites and into the same restaurants as whites. Maybe it DID show a disdain for the rural way of doing things, the rural me and my kind mentality. And if it did, so be it- America at large was elitist, and rural America was bass-ackwards. Maybe rural America might start to notice a historical trend?
What a crock of compost! Perhaps you missed my post about the first states to give women the right to vote? Hint: Not urban, not eastern.
1869 Wyoming territory grants first woman suffrage since 1807. (Amitted to union in 1890, with women voting.)
1893 After a vigorous campaign led by Carrie Chapman Catt, Colorado men vote for woman suffrage.
1894 Despite 600,000 signatures, a petition for woman suffrage is ignored in New York.
1895 Elizabeth Cady Stanton publishes The Woman's Bible. Utah women regain suffrage.
1896 Idaho grants woman suffrage.
1910 Washington (state) grants woman suffrage.
1911 California grants woman suffrage.
1913 Alaskan Territory grants suffrage. Illinois grants municipal and presidential but not state suffrage to women.
1917 North Dakota, Indiana, Nebraska, and Michigan grant presidential suffrage; Arkansas grants primary suffrage. New York, South Dakota, and Oklahoma state constitutions grant suffrage.
Do note that the first state east of the Mississippi to give women the vote was Illinois (probably more opportunities for graft and corruption), followed by NY and Michigan.
Now tell me that Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, Idaho, Washington state in 1910, Alaska, Illinois, North Dakota, Indiana, Nebraska, Michigan of 1917, Arkansas, South Dakota and Oklahoma are/were urban states when they adopted suffrage.
No, MantaRay, no matter how much you wish it were so, it was mostly rural, mostly western women who got the right to vote first.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohiogirl81
Tend to, yes. As an absolute, no, because first off there are many definitions of conservative and liberal; secondly, because, contrary to the blatherings of some folks, not everyone can be painted with the same brush based solely upon where they live.
What about suburban areas? Mixed bag?
Jefferson County, Colorado was a major battleground county in the most recent election. Jeffco is virtually ALL suburban, including several suburban cities.
Now tell me that Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, Idaho, Washington state in 1910, Alaska, Illinois, North Dakota, Indiana, Nebraska, Michigan of 1917, Arkansas, South Dakota and Oklahoma are/were urban states when they adopted suffrage.
Illinois obviously was urban, Chicago is (and was) big. The census classifies Colorado and Washington as majority urban at 1910, though obviously the cities were small:
Illinois obviously was urban, Chicago is (and was) big. The census classifies Colorado and Washington as majority urban at 1910, though obviously the cities were small:
Illinois, even today is a big ag state. It was far more rural in 1913. It doesn't matter how the census bureau classified Colorado in 1910; they gave women the vote in 1893. Denver's population at the time was ~100,000 people.
In any event, those states were smaller and less urban than NY and PA at least.
Last edited by Katarina Witt; 12-13-2012 at 08:52 PM..
Illinois, even today is a big ag state. It was far more rural in 1913.
Sure, it's a big ag state, but that doesn't mean rural areas are where most people live than and now. Illinois has one of the nation's largest cities as well. Census says 38% rural in 1910, 15% in 1990 (from link).
% rural population:
Idaho-93.8 (Gave women vote 4 years earlier)
Wyoming-71.2 (Gave women vote 31 years earlier)
Utah-61.9 (Gave women vote 5 years earlier)
CO-51.7 (Gave women vote 7 years earlier)
1910 rural pop
Washington St. 47%
CA (gave vote 1911) 38.2%
Alaska (1913) 90.5
IL (1913) 38.3
IN (1917) 57.6
NE (") 73.9
MI: (") 52.8
Ark (") 87.1
NY (") 21.1
SD (") 86.9
OK (") 80.8
The other majority-urban states in 1910, NH, MA, CT, NJ and PA did not give women the vote until the 19th amendment was ratified in 1920.
Now you tell me the urban states were pressuring the rurals to give women the vote. I don't think so! NY Is the real outlier; the only state with < 1/3 of its population rural to give women the vote early.
Last edited by Katarina Witt; 12-13-2012 at 09:34 PM..
1869 Wyoming territory grants first woman suffrage since 1807. (Amitted to union in 1890, with women voting.)
This information says that a TERRITORY gave women the right to vote, ie. BEFORE it became a state. You are talking about timelines referencing the US in the process of FORMATION. I am talking about timelines with respect to the US being a formed set of states that have a common national direction, thus having the structure to allow or disallow national social trends to be adopted. NOT territories that call their own shots, not being in the United States, or territories just admitted to the United States and therefore still of the mindset to call their own shots rather than listen to the national voice. So thanks for providing anecdotal information from before it made sense for national social trends to permeate throughought the continental US, but it really has nothing to do with the modern timeframe where national social trends reasonably SHOULD permeate throughout the continental US.
Maybe you're unaware of the BLATANT social divide in the US that originated in the time of territories and US expansion, and ultimately led to the civil war, and the long time it took to end that divide even after the end of the civil war. So thanks for providing irrelevant information from a time when different places clearly did their own thing and there was no continguous national social push to states well established in the union of states.
In times that ARE relevant, you know where the United States was actually the UNITED STATES, cities have led the drive for social rights. The civil rights movement- CITIES first, rural dragging up the rear. Now the gay rights movement- CITIES first, rural dragging up the rear. Do you dare try to deny THAT?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana
Jefferson County, Colorado was a major battleground county in the most recent election. Jeffco is virtually ALL suburban, including several suburban cities.
Good for Jefferson County. BTW, it might interest you to know that there is a difference between suburban and rural. But thanks anyway for giving us an anecdotal tidbit about a county that is virtually all suburban. It's not unlike most suburban counties in the US in having a solid mix of Democratic voters and Republican voters. It IS unlike most RURAL places in the US having a predominant disposition for the Republican vote, with a few exceptions as noted earlier.
It might also interest you to know that when you go south of Jefferson County, Obama didn't even come CLOSE until you get to.....guess what.....PUEBLO county, where you finally get out of the sticks and to a decent sized city/town- Pueblo. You also may find it interesting that as you get away from the I25 corridor near where popluation generally is, counties tend to be more red, VERY RED in fact, so that once you get to the eastern and western borders, Obama basically barely GOT votes, with only somewhere near 1/3 of the vote or thereabouts, often even less, with the lone exception of San Miguel County. All 15 other western or eastern edge Colorado counties- solidly conservative, solidly Romney. Even Colorado verifies the trend I speak of- city influence makes the vote more liberal/Democrat, rural influence makes the vote more conservative/Republican. Of course the OP rightly assumed that to be the case, and simply asked for the motivation, asked a chicken/egg type question. But at least the OP rightly UNDERSTOOD that to be the case.
I'm SO glad you brought up Jefferson County so that I could use it and other Colorado counties to prove my point. Thanks for the gift!
Last edited by nei; 12-14-2012 at 07:48 AM..
Reason: rude
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.
