Map of Election Results by County

[barn32]

Election Results by County (http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2012/Pres/Maps/Nov10.html#item-3)

Mark Newman of the University of Michigan has produced a map of the presidential election in which each county is colored red or blue depending on who won it. He also has cartograms and other maps (http://www-personal.umich.edu/%7Emejn/election/2012/) of the election, which are reproduced here under the Creative Commons (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/) license.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2012/Images/election-by-county-2012.png It is pretty striking how many counties Romney won. It is also striking that Obama got 2.5 million more votes than Romney. If the blue counties are as blue as the red counties are red, that means that more people live in the small number of blue counties than in all the red ones combined. In other words, while there aren't many blue counties, that's where most of the people live. To give an example of this disparity, 3.8 million people live in the 469 square miles of the city of Los Angeles. This is half a million more people than the combined populations of Alaska, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota, which together cover 1.6 million square miles. These four states are 3,400 times larger than Los Angeles but have appreciably fewer people. In other words, while the land area of the red counties is vastly greater than that of the blue counties, there are hardly any people living in many of them.

The map clearly shows Obama's strengths: the Northeast, the upper Midwest, the West Coast, and the Colorado-New Mexico axis. There is also some strength in the South. In Southern Florida, Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties are full of New York transplants who are strong Democrats. There is also a blue band that curves down from North Carolina. These are counties with large black populations.




Link (http://www.electoral-vote.com/)

[Mike at A+]

I'd be interested in seeing a welfare and food stamp map. hcap? any charts?

[hcap]

I'd be interested in seeing a welfare and food stamp map. hcap? any charts?
So sounds like your strategy would be to cut welfare and food stamps so you repugs have a chance in 2016?

Sounds about right for a party on it's last legs. Close early voting and weaken the poor so they can't get to the polls :)

[dartman51]

Basically, 4 cities won the election for Obama. New York, L.A., San Fran and Miami. Without those four, maybe only 3, Obama loses. :ThmbUp:

[Mike at A+]

So sounds like your strategy would be to cut welfare and food stamps so you repugs have a chance in 2016?

Sounds about right for a party on it's last legs. Close early voting and weaken the poor so they can't get to the polls :)
I have no strategy. I'm just an observer. And my observations indicate that people who want free stuff without working for it seem to vote Democrat. When the checkbook runs dry and the free stuff is no more, then what? I'm all for a safety net for the disabled but this is ridiculous. Race is not a disability.

[hcap]

Basically, 4 cities won the election for Obama. New York, L.A., San Fran and Miami. Without those four, maybe only 3, Obama loses.

Well, a number of righty pundits have called for nuking the Times and the UN.

That should help

Then again so would an updated set of policies

[dartman51]

Well, a number of righty pundits have called for nuking the Times and the UN.

That should help

Then again so would an updated set of policies


:lol: No nuking. The Times is irrelevant, and the U.N. just needs to be booted out of the country, and that has nothing to do with the election. Let them mooch off of some other country for awhile. :ThmbUp:

[PaceAdvantage]

Sounds about right for a party on it's last legs.Yeah, yeah...last legs...100 year Dem rule...blah blah blah blah blah...

You do realize it was only eight short years ago that George W. Bush, yes George W. Bush, who many on the left consider to be the very worst President to ever live, WAS REELECTED as a Republican....you do realize this, correct?

If THAT can happen, the party certainly isn't on its last legs.

And I wouldn't be gloating so much...this wasn't an easy victory for Obama, neither in the sense of a campaign, nor in the sense of the popular vote.

You guys are acting like this was Reagan vs. Mondale all over again (hint, Reagan garnered almost 59% of the popular vote (58.8 to be exact) in 1984 and 525 electoral votes.

[hcap]

I have no strategy. I'm just an observer. And my observations indicate that people who want free stuff without working for it seem to vote Democrat. When the checkbook runs dry and the free stuff is no more, then what? I'm all for a safety net for the disabled but this is ridiculous. Race is not a disability.Race? 61% of the population receiving welfare, listed as "means-tested cash assistance" by the Census Bureau, is identified as white, while only 33% is identified as black. So who "deserves" support? Remember although the Black population is only about 15% of the overall population more blacks are below poverty level than whites. It is not an easy situation.


Persons most likely to be eligible -- single mothers living in poverty with children under 18 to support by welfare participation by race: 74.6% of African Americans in such dire straits are on welfare, compared with 64.5% of the poor white single moms.

I suspect poor red states, rural and urban, (and there are more poor red than blue), get welfare and food stamps as well as urban centers in the blue ones.

Most people would rather work than just survive. But hard times creates a need by the poor for assistance.

[lamboguy]

if anything, that map proves that the democrats are winning on account of geography as well as demographics. the blue seems to be located in densely populated area's. that seems to be a tough egg to crack even with a good solid candidate. some of those area's have republican leaders in their states holding majorities in state houses.

[hcap]

Yeah, yeah...last legs...100 year Dem rule...blah blah blah blah blah...

You do realize it was only eight short years ago that George W. Bush, yes George W. Bush, who many on the left consider to be the very worst President to ever live, WAS REELECTED as a Republican....you do realize this, correct?

If THAT can happen, the party certainly isn't on its last legs.

And I wouldn't be gloating so much...this wasn't an easy victory for Obama, neither in the sense of a campaign, nor in the sense of the popular vote.

You guys are acting like this was Reagan vs. Mondale all over again (hint, Reagan garnered almost 59% of the popular vote (58.8 to be exact) in 1984 and 525 electoral votes.I am not sure when the, gloating will subside. Almost 4 years of an inane 24/7 anti-Obama fest does motivate those on the receiving end to take advantage when the opportunity arises, to return all favors :lol: :lol:

Although a 100 year ruling may be an exaggeration, the demographics are NOT in your favor. That is a systemic problem for repubs that is not going away anytime soon.

[Mike at A+]

Race? 61% of the population receiving welfare, listed as "means-tested cash assistance" by the Census Bureau, is identified as white, while only 33% is identified as black. So who "deserves" support? Remember although the Black population is only about 15% of the overall population more blacks are below poverty level than whites. It is not an easy situation.
So lets look at that in light of the votes cast and WHERE they were cast for 0bama. THE INNER CITIES. This is where the $$$$$ are going for welfare. The other recipients are spread out all over the country . The big electoral votes are in states with INNER CITIES AND HIGH MINORITY CONCENTRATION and that's why 0bama is able to get away with rhetoric like "vote for revenge" and "punish your enemies". It was 0bama who played the race card. Such strange bedfellows, elite whites and double digit IQ, zero work ethic minorities happy to live on the crumbs thrown to them. I guess in today's America it is a formula for success in politics. Democrats are riding that horse for all it's worth. Until the checkbook runs dry and the handouts diminish. Funtime!

[PaceAdvantage]

the demographics are NOT in your favor.I do believe this is your subtle way of admitting that the Democratic party never had the intention of helping eradicate racism in America, despite their rhetoric. In fact, quite the opposite.

The more the Democrats can propagate the false notion that all Republicans are racists, and the more diverse the nation becomes, the better your chances of winning.

Quite an ugly way to operate, but I do applaud you on what recently has been quite an effective tactic.

But please never again try and proffer the notion that Democrats are interested in seeing racism come to an end in this country. The party of Democrats has become the party that is all about race, racism and divisive tactics.

[hcap]

So lets look at that in light of the votes cast and WHERE they were cast for 0bama. THE INNER CITIES. This is where the $$$$$ are going for welfare. The other recipients are spread out all over the country . The big electoral votes are in states with INNER CITIES AND HIGH MINORITY CONCENTRATION and that's why 0bama is able to get away with rhetoric like "vote for revenge" and "punish your enemies". It was 0bama who played the race card. Such strange bedfellows, elite whites and double digit IQ, zero work ethic minorities happy to live on the crumbs thrown to them. I guess in today's America it is a formula for success in politics. Democrats are riding that horse for all it's worth. Until the checkbook runs dry and the handouts diminish. Funtime!Your analysis leaves out non-poor minorities and women Obama won women, those under 30, 90% of Blacks and something like 70% of Latinos. Certainly, not all on welfare or food stamps. Obama won by more than the just poor on assistance

332 electoral to 206 is more than just lazy slackers voting blue

[hcap]

I do believe this is your subtle way of admitting that the Democratic party never had the intention of helping eradicate racism in America, despite their rhetoric. In fact, quite the opposite.

The more the Democrats can propagate the false notion that all Republicans are racists, and the more diverse the nation becomes, the better your chances of winning.

Quite an ugly way to operate, but I do applaud you on what recently has been quite an effective tactic.

But please never again try and proffer the notion that Democrats are interested in seeing racism come to an end in this country. The party of Democrats has become the party that is all about race, racism and divisive tactics.Absolute nonsense. Excuse me while I add how irrational PA off topic is most of the time to my collection of things to gloat about.

I think we won more because of idiotic statements such as yours than painting the repugs as racists. Minorities see typical responses by conservatives to racial issues, and are well aware of who talks down to them. That is one reason you guys lost. You paint yourselves as bigots. Ask Rushbo about his "Magic Negro" jingle or think about how well the whole bither issue went over with blacks.

[Mike at A+]

Your analysis leaves out non-poor minorities and women Obama won women, those under 30, 90% of Blacks and something like 70% of Latinos. Certainly, not all on welfare or food stamps. Obama won by more than the just poor on assistance

332 electoral to 206 is more than just lazy slackers voting blue
Again, stupid people and people with no work ethic. Not the America we should be striving for. I'll be dead and cremated when the shit hits the fan. Thankfully.

[PaceAdvantage]

Absolute nonsense. Excuse me while I add how irrational PA off topic is most of the time to my collection of things to gloat about.

I think we won more because of idiotic statements such as yours than painting the repugs as racists. Minorities see typical responses by conservatives to racial issues, and are well aware of who talks down to them. That is one reason you guys lost. You paint yourselves as bigots. Ask Rushbo about his "Magic Negro" jingle or think about how well the whole bither issue went over with blacks.There you go again. The Magic Negro thing wasn't a Rush creation, now was it? No, it wasn't. He was parodying what he read in the LA Times I believe...or some left-wing publication.

It's funny you bring this all up though. Because when *I* am the one upset that someone considers a limerick about the KKK to be "all in good fun," suddenly, *I'M* the bad guy.

Only in Democrat bizzaro world could that happen, and only on this board.

[Tom]

I am not sure when the, gloating will subside. Almost 4 years of an inane 24/7 anti-Obama fest does motivate those on the receiving end to take advantage when the opportunity arises, to return all favors :lol: :lol:



You think we will stop? :lol:
It only gets worse with this air head in charge. You know that.
I only regret many of you will not have internet access for all 4 years to read about it.

Magic Negro - yeas a leftist LA Time writer.
And Ding Harry - hcap, no one was a racist as he in his comments.
Funny, the Blacks are upset over that phrase and yet keep voting for the party that keeps them down. Remember, the "man," the"massa"was usually a democrat. No one has done more to keep Black back than democrats. Bank on it.

[JustRalph]

You know, I hate to go against the grain sometimes, but here goes.

Take that map and lay it over the highest educated areas in the country and it looks exactly the same.

Romney got 1.5 million less votes than McCain/Palin.

Highly educated people are left leaning, we all know that. They drag along the minority vote by whatever means, and you throw in a "war on women" chicanery that works, you get your ass kicked at least in the electoral college
End of story.

The highly educated are smarter, normally. They are normally brought up in advantaged homes or at least homes that value education. They share a overwhelming and honest trust in governments ability to govern. They normally have less skin in the game when comes to economics. They lead better lives due to their educational advantage, normally related to better employment opportunities and the locations they live in. New Yorkers are brilliant people, So are Bostonians. These huge cities are economic centers. They support the nation. You can't divide people up by these maps without taking these things into account. I have met brilliant people all over the country. But I have met a hell of a lot more idiots in those red states. It's a fact. They don't have the same opportunities. It's just a fact. But that doesn't mean their values when it comes to religion and government are wrong. They get their values and react to government based on ther environment. Just like the blue states. Red states often are more in touch with a ground game to support the less advantaged (think churches) and they see it work in their culture. They see people who are uplifted and grateful. But they have never been exposed to the likes of the inner city of Baltimore, Charlotte, Los Angeles. I have. The rural red staters especially, are completely unaware of the permanent underclass and why it still exists three generations on. They see it as failed government, they no longer support. They are correct in assuming it's failed government.

Liberals in these blue cities don't care as much that there are huge problems with government because they aren't as close to it as others are. Example: New Yorker City residents don't give a flying **** about illegal immigration. They have been used to immigration of every form for a hundred years. They could give a shit that in Arizona peope can't even drive out onto their ranches without the fear of being kidnapped. Example: Bostonians could give a damn about coal miners in WV who live in what is already the poorest state in the nation. Bostonions can afford to pay another ten percent for electricity. It won't break them, it doesn't hurt enough. But when there is no market for coal, the state of WV breaks down further. It's already a lawless drug riddled marijuana factory. Guess what happens over the next four years? They won't give a shit in Boston.

There is further isolation between the red states and big cities every day. If you are a conservative and don't realize these things, you're just flying blind.

Don't get me started on the smartet people in the world in Silicon Valley. These people own the entire country economically and they are more Liberal than any place in the nation. And they suck more money out of Red States than anybody else. If you're a conservative and don't think you're an idiot, pull out that fancy $400 smart phone and shoot a picture of yourself, label it idiot and put it on the wall. If you doubt that, look here:

http://www.financetwitter.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Obama_Dinner_Who.jpg

I apologize for any typos. Did this on the iPad

[PaceAdvantage]

I find it amazing just how differently the same exact picture of all those CEOs raising glasses while dining would have been received had it been Romney in that photo instead of Obama.

Could you imagine the negative press Romney would have gotten...little rich boy dining with all those rich CEOs...laughing at all the "little people" while they feast on caviar and drink champagne....

But the Obama photo gets nothing...hardly a peep...most of the potential Romney critics probably think the actual photo is "cool."

Whatever...it's pointless anyway...but just thought I'd offer it up for consideration.

[Stillriledup]

I find it amazing just how differently the same exact picture of all those CEOs raising glasses while dining would have been received had it been Romney in that photo instead of Obama.

Could you imagine the negative press Romney would have gotten...little rich boy dining with all those rich CEOs...laughing at all the "little people" while they feast on caviar and drink champagne....

But the Obama photo gets nothing...hardly a peep...most of the potential Romney critics probably think the actual photo is "cool."

Whatever...it's pointless anyway...but just thought I'd offer it up for consideration.

Yeah, but here's the difference, Obama is the actual president. If Romney was in that photo, he would have been in there as just another guy who used to be a governor...so yeah, it would have been viewed differently.

Now, if Romney won election and then showed up in that same photo a year from now, i dont think the reaction would be nearly the same as if he was in that current photo as a guy who wasnt the president.

Being president carries a lot of weight, that title usually means you're a pretty big deal.

[PaceAdvantage]

Yeah, but here's the difference, Obama is the actual president. If Romney was in that photo, he would have been in there as just another guy who used to be a governor...so yeah, it would have been viewed differently.

Now, if Romney won election and then showed up in that same photo a year from now, i dont think the reaction would be nearly the same as if he was in that current photo as a guy who wasnt the president.

Being president carries a lot of weight, that title usually means you're a pretty big deal.Ummmm...not the point at all, but I'm not surprised you either don't get it or are willfully ignoring it.

[Stillriledup]

Ummmm...not the point at all, but I'm not surprised you either don't get it or are willfully ignoring it.

Its a loaded question. Of course Romney would be criticized more for being in that picture, but only because he's not the president and no other reason.

[dav4463]

Its a loaded question. Of course Romney would be criticized more for being in that picture, but only because he's not the president and no other reason.


Of course he would have been "rich white guy with all his rich white friends".

If there was a popular vote instead of electoral college, I think Romney or any republican would win because many of the states such as Texas....know republicans are going to carry the state. That is why so many people do not bother voting. There are many more red states than blue states and if all the people actually voted; the popular vote would be conservative every time.

[Stillriledup]

Of course he would have been "rich white guy with all his rich white friends".

If there was a popular vote instead of electoral college, I think Romney or any republican would win because many of the states such as Texas....know republicans are going to carry the state. That is why so many people do not bother voting. There are many more red states than blue states and if all the people actually voted; the popular vote would be conservative every time.

You can say the same thing about Calif and NY for the Dems. There's gotta be a ton of people who dont bother voting in those states due to it being a fait accompli. A lot would change if everyone knew that all votes count equally.

[Ocala Mike]

There are many more red states than blue states and if all the people actually voted; the popular vote would be conservative every time.



If this is so, why are the R's passing all these state laws RESTRICTING voting? You're way off with this; UNIVERSAL, MANDATORY SUFFRAGE would be the end of the Republican Party, as we know it.

[sandpit]

If this is so, why are the R's passing all these state laws RESTRICTING voting? You're way off with this; UNIVERSAL, MANDATORY SUFFRAGE would be the end of the Republican Party, as we know it.

I have a friend that believes all Americans who vote should pass some sort of simple test proving they are competent to cast a ballot. While I don't mind the idea, it has no chance of ever happening; the Democrats would cry "racism" immediately.

I think a better way to get around it but still make everyone use their brains is to remove the straight party selection and also remove all party affiliations next to everyone's name on the ballot. I think we'd see some different outcomes.

[dav4463]

There should at least be a test on the very basic of issues. If you are truly stupid; you do not need to vote.

[JustRalph]

There should at least be a test on the very basic of issues. If you are truly stupid; you do not need to vote.

How about a minimum tax level?

Age 30 or more

[ElKabong]

If this is so, why are the R's passing all these state laws RESTRICTING voting?

I'm not aware of any "RESTRICTING" voting measures. Can you explain?

If by voter ID, that doesn't restrict anyone. You need an ID to write a check or any # of things in life.

[Tom]

There should at least be a test on the very basic of issues. If you are truly stupid; you do not need to vote.

I'd rather see that test given to candidates! :D

[lamboguy]

I'd rather see that test given to candidates! :Dgood one tom!

that's not what beat Romney though because he is very smart, he got beat because he was stubborn

[Ocala Mike]

I'm not aware of any "RESTRICTING" voting measures. Can you explain?



Did I use the wrong word? Just what is it that Republican legislatures in many states have been up to? PURGING? PURIFICATION? I'm waiting for the day when a national election is decided by a single voter: white, male, over 65, rural, southerner, landowner. Oh, wait, I just described myself!

[Steve R]

I'd be interested in seeing a welfare and food stamp map. hcap? any charts?
Here's a food stamp chart by state.

[Ocala Mike]

Oregon way up there? I'm a bit surprised. What's up with that? People that migrated from the Golden State?

[TJDave]

Highly educated people are left leaning, we all know that.

Mostly, I agree.

Why is that?

[BlueShoe]

Sounds about right for a party on it's last legs.
Seem to recall the lefties crowing this right after the 2008 election. Then came the 2010 election.

[Steve R]

Oregon way up there? I'm a bit surprised. What's up with that? People that migrated from the Golden State?
The data is from 2011 and back then Oregon's unemployment rate was among the 10 highest in the U.S. and above the national average.

[reckless]

http://www.financetwitter.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Obama_Dinner_Who.jpg

I apologize for any typos. Did this on the iPad

Now I know why the criminal IPO of Facebook isn't being investigated.

Now I know why the countless copyright and patent violations by Google isn't prosecuted.

Know I know why the long-suffering shareholders of Yahoo, Cisco and Oracle can't get rid of these selfish and greedy CEOs that run these firms despite poor decade-long stock disappointments.

They are all money handlers for and are Friends of Obama!

[PaceAdvantage]

The more I see of that picture, the more I'm amazed there wasn't more of a backlash against Obama. I mean, given all the Occupy movements and whatnot...and Obama using Romney's wealth and business record against him...

And there Obama is, hobnobbing with the biggest names in corporate America...I know...I know...he's on some sort of official economic mission in that photo, right boys? :lol:

It's actually quite shocking that a photo like that basically slipped under the radar (or more likely brushed under the rug by the MSM).

Or maybe it's not so shocking after all.... :rolleyes:

[Tom]

How many in that photo do you suppose will get those infamous Obama waivers on their taxes? :D

[Ocala Mike]

Seem to recall the lefties crowing this right after the 2008 election. Then came the 2010 election.



The Republican Party has only won the popular vote in one of the last six Presidential elections, that being 2004 by a whisker (but you knew that, right?). The 1994 and 2010 mid-term elections were, arguably, anomalies which were reversed just two years later.

Republican dilemma - capitulate towards the center or go balls to the wall and make a stand on the right? Most lefties are actually hoping for the latter. Should be a very interesting next 4 years.

[BlueShoe]

Republican dilemma - capitulate towards the center or go balls to the wall and make a stand on the right? Most lefties are actually hoping for the latter.
Me too. If we move to the center we become RINOs or Democrats Lite. Not willing to give up our conservative principles.

[Actor]

The map is irrelevant. Counties don't vote. People vote.

[Actor]

There should at least be a test on the very basic of issues. If you are truly stupid; you do not need to vote.Who makes up the test? How do you make sure the test is unbiased?

[JustRalph]

Who makes up the test? How do you make sure the test is unbiased?


I do.


The map is irrelevant. Counties don't vote. People vote.

Good point.

[Actor]

Here's a food stamp chart by state.I got a blank US map and shaded in the states with high numbers on this chart. I chose Hawaii and up as "food stamp states," Alaska and lower as "non-food stamp states." You can argue that the line should be drawn elsewhere. Whatever.

Anyway, I can't see any correlation between red-state/blue-state and stamp/non-stamp. I haven't done any math yet so I don't have a precise correlation coefficient.

[Actor]

The map doesn't show state borders but I'm struck by the amount of blue in Texas, which seems to be concentrated along the border and in metropolitan areas. Could the blue grow? Could Texas become a swing state?

Looks like Houston, Galveston, Dallas, Fort Worth are blue. :jump: