Comments on: 2004 Purple America

By: Steven Taylor

Steven Taylor — Mon, 08 Nov 2004 14:46:43 +0000

BTW--your MSNBC link goes to some alternative energy story...

By: Steven Taylor

Steven Taylor — Mon, 08 Nov 2004 14:46:08 +0000

Actually, maps like this are far more accurate than the stark Red v. Blue. Many GOPers get a tad too excitred about the number of Red counties. Yes, Bush won decisively, but the standard by county count inflates the significance thereof. Winning a bunch of sparsely populated counties in Kansas isn't as impressive as winning LA County, for example.

By: Dave Schuler

Dave Schuler — Fri, 05 Nov 2004 17:39:16 +0000

All of this would be interesting if we had a proportional representation system. But we don't and as it is Democratic victories are likely to become increasingly a phenomenon of big cities.

By: Jay Solo

Jay Solo — Fri, 05 Nov 2004 14:35:11 +0000

Ah, I had the idea for something like this but didn't want to bother to create one myself. It's not exactly what I had in mind, but close.

By: Rodney Dill

Rodney Dill — Fri, 05 Nov 2004 12:54:54 +0000

Another MSM ploy to make the republicans feel the need to apologize for only winning by 3 million.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Fri, 05 Nov 2004 04:04:21 +0000

Well, certainly, blue is darker and distorts the red more than the reverse. But DeLong's point--made initially after an election in which his guy won a slim majority but lost in the Electoral College--is that we're not really Two Americas in the way the pure Red and Blue map leads us to believe. Even in such Republican bastions as Alabama--or Democratic bastions like Oregon--there is 30-40 percent of the population who voted for the other guy. It's a useful thing to keep in mind.

By: Bithead

Bithead — Fri, 05 Nov 2004 03:48:33 +0000

Certainly looks better for the Democrats this way, doesn't it? Not nearly as much red. Once can see why Delong wanted this used... and why the press will likely adopt it.