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.
Im not saying that the Bay Area is flaming liberal like San Francisco, Oakland and Berkeley.
What I am saying is that Santa Clara, Contra Costa and Sacramento Counties as recently as 30 years ago were Conservative strongholds. Contra Costa County for a long time was referred to as Orange County North due to their politics.
Today,
Things have changed significantly. All 3 of these 1M+ counties have resoundingly voted democrat in most national and state races for a while now.
Arnold Schwarzenneger got more votes in the Bay Area this last time around because he has proven himself to be far more to left-leaning on several social issues and people like that. The people most dissapointed with him are Republicans.
Southern California on the other hand, seems to have followed a national trend toward becoming more conservative. I think the rise of evangelical christians down there is partly to blame. But the OC, Inland Empire, San Diego and Ventura Co. are all red as red can be.
Northern CA isnt like that at all. Last election, Richard Pombo, staunch GOP rep from Stockton lost his seat to a democrat-that was a huge victory considering how powerful he was in DC.
In fact, the Bay Area doesnt have a single Republican in its entire 10-member congressional delegation to the House.
1) Counties such as contra costa remain democratic due to high amounts of urban blight in inner contra costa county. The outer more rural and suburban regions are still to this day republican strong holds. All the whites simply left the urban parts and went to the suburbs and so did their republican votes.
2) Sacremento has such a close ratio of democrates to republicans, that to say either party has influence is a fallacy.
3) I can agree santa clara has made significant headway in being more liberal, due to the fact that its wedged between the sf penninsula and the blue collar east bay.
4)Most republicans are fine with arnold, as they are fine with any republican that is lucky enough to oust a democrat and become govorner. Im speaking in terms of total polarity, not just social issues like abortion or medicinal weed.
5) Southern California has always been republican. Ie ronald reagan, richard nixon, and the duke himself
6) The richard pombo issue strikes dear to me because my parents own properties and reside in pleasanton. There are 2 key reasons pombo lost. 1) Evidence of political corruption
2) He was ousted by a local pleasanton businessman whom was well known and respected in the tri valley. By the way pombos jurisdiction is not stockton alone, its a wierd jerrymanderd district that encompases the cities stockton, tracy, livermore, dublin, pleasanton, and morgan hill.
That then is a good example of imbalance. The two parts of the state are forever going away from each other. The region has never regained or never was too balanced unlike the spheres around Chicago and LA. Upstate NY has been an outmigration zone for decades. They haven't been meeting the needs as Upstate NYers have long time left those areas.
People still move to the LA, and Chicago areas, also NYC. NY as a state keeps losing represenation. Check with Gov Spitzer who won on that philosophy and to loosen the nepotism grip in Albany by providing more jobs to keep people in the upstate regions.
Perhaps one of us didn't grasp the OP's post:
"Which states are dominated by one city? Which are equally balanced? For example, Chicago dominates Illinois. Also, how does each condition (balanced or unbalanced states) affect the other cities within the each state?"
My point was that NYC does NOT dominate upstate NY. This is regardless of outmigration. People in Syracuse still don't need to go to NYC to have heart surgery; people in Buffalo still don't need to go to NYC see an MLB game or hear a first-rate symphony orchestra; people in Rochester don't need to go to NYC to buy a Mercedes Benz.
Location: Uniquely Individual Villages of the Megalopolis
646 posts, read 805,940 times
Reputation: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Around
Perhaps one of us didn't grasp the OP's post:
"Which states are dominated by one city? Which are equally balanced? For example, Chicago dominates Illinois. Also, how does each condition (balanced or unbalanced states) affect the other cities within the each state?"
My point was that NYC does NOT dominate upstate NY. This is regardless of outmigration. People in Syracuse still don't need to go to NYC to have heart surgery; people in Buffalo still don't need to go to NYC see an MLB game or hear a first-rate symphony orchestra; people in Rochester don't need to go to NYC to buy a Mercedes Benz.
So as I've often heard NYC does not dominate that region upstate. However it does dominate the coastal areas of the NE and MidAtlantic.
But they don't much stay in Upstate NY either for anything and that was my point.
But yeah it's a whole different world up there and there were probably more links to other Great Lake cities than with NYC. However, getting their goods to NYC markets were paramount I would imagine.
The Erie Canal and all, that was part of the reason for its existence to pull raw goods east and refine them upstate before distributing them elsewhere.
Consequently the economic and transportation links were made servicing the large markets south regardless of more recent times cultural division. Those industries rather dried up and only somewhat replaced. Buffalo has become somewhat of a regional banking center in the newer economies. That was where the imbalance came in within the state, not necessarily the whole general region. How could NYC claim to dominate an entire region and even the world WITHOUT dominating the whole state it's in? That would be quite a feat.
Did not Kodak leave Rochester for San Diego? They do have still great universities up there and there are a number of people in the City who when to SUNY Buffalo, RIT, etc.
So the presence of blight = Democratic voters? Not 'round these parts!
with the disapperance of union jobs and less stringent economic intervention, you get alot of democrates who now cater to the "welfare class" and service industry /working poor in inner contra costa county.
Location: Uniquely Individual Villages of the Megalopolis
646 posts, read 805,940 times
Reputation: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair
The problem with this statement is that San Francisco is a world city at the center of a global powerhouse metropolitan area that exceeds LA in many ways, whose innovations and dynamics have global implications, that is far more iconic than LA is.
Los Angeles is the true super power on a world scale level compatible to New York, but California is so huge that L.A. and San Fran don’t bump heads like say, D.C. and Baltimore do.>>
That was something Monumental said not I, you're quoting that poster see post 35. .
1) Counties such as contra costa remain democratic due to high amounts of urban blight in inner contra costa county. The outer more rural and suburban regions are still to this day republican strong holds. All the whites simply left the urban parts and went to the suburbs and so did their republican votes.
Ellen Tauscher represents the wealthiest district in the East Bay(covering Alamo, Lafayette, Orinda, Moraga, WC) and she is a democrat. She beat a republican over 10 years ago. Like I said, they arent flaming like me, but they arent the conservative stronghold they once were-in fact, that's all but eroded.
Quote:
2) Sacremento has such a close ratio of democrates to republicans, that to say either party has influence is a fallacy.
I have to disagree. Sacramento City is quite progressive and the surrounding suburbs in the county are leaning left-of course Placer and El Dorado Counties are solidly GOP, but Sac County, being heavily influenced by the huge influx of Bay Area housing refugees is changing.
Quote:
4)Most republicans are fine with arnold, as they are fine with any republican that is lucky enough to oust a democrat and become govorner. Im speaking in terms of total polarity, not just social issues like abortion or medicinal weed.
But these issues along with his environmental awareness have made him popular with Democrats. Also, if you recall the last budget stalemate, it was the governor vs the republicans. And I dont think CA republicans are the kind that care about their party winning so much as they are about their agenda-Arnold no longer represents that to many of them. He didnt get tons of votes the Bay Area because SF became more conservative, but because he became more centrist.
Quote:
5) Southern California has always been republican. Ie ronald reagan, richard nixon, and the duke himself
Those are the kinds of republicans I dont mind. Even Nixon is better than W.
Quote:
6) The richard pombo issue strikes dear to me because my parents own properties and reside in pleasanton. There are 2 key reasons pombo lost. 1) Evidence of political corruption
2) He was ousted by a local pleasanton businessman whom was well known and respected in the tri valley. By the way pombos jurisdiction is not stockton alone, its a wierd jerrymanderd district that encompases the cities stockton, tracy, livermore, dublin, pleasanton, and morgan hill.
The reason why that district is drawn that way is because John Burton(D), long time SF state govt powerhouse got back at Ellen Tauscher for not supporting Nancy Pelosi back when she was running for House Minority Leader-she voted for David Bonier from MD instead so in 2000, when state legislators redrew lines, he cut the Tri Valley from her district which cut off millions of dollars in campaign contributions from that area( that's a huge business center being the HQ of Chevron, biggest Co in California) Burton totally shafted his own party member even though he knew Pombo would essentially be in The Bay Area which you and I know doesnt make sense-the areas are night and day in so many ways.
So as I've often heard NYC does not dominate that region upstate. However it does dominate the coastal areas of the NE and MidAtlantic.
But they don't much stay in Upstate NY either for anything and that was my point.
But yeah it's a whole different world up there and there were probably more links to other Great Lake cities than with NYC. However, getting their goods to NYC markets were paramount I would imagine.
The Erie Canal and all, that was part of the reason for its existence to pull raw goods east and refine them upstate before distributing them elsewhere.
Consequently the economic and transportation links were made servicing the large markets south regardless of more recent times cultural division. Those industries rather dried up and only somewhat replaced. Buffalo has become somewhat of a regional banking center in the newer economies. That was where the imbalance came in within the state, not necessarily the whole general region. How could NYC claim to dominate an entire region and even the world WITHOUT dominating the whole state it's in? That would be quite a feat.
Did not Kodak leave Rochester for San Diego? They do have still great universities up there and there are a number of people in the City who when to SUNY Buffalo, RIT, etc.
Stuy, I think we are talking past each other in this dialog. I'll give it one more shot:
1) NYC >is< a dominant city within the Western hemisphere.
2) But the OP was asking about dominance >within a state<.
3) There are other cities in NYS that are dominant enough in their regions that they overshadow NYC within those regions. In other words, NYC could be situated on the west bank of the Hudson--in NJ--and it wouldn't change anything for the upstate cities--they'd survive just fine without being in the same state as NYC.
Make sense?
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.
Not 'round these parts!
