Yes, this is a map which launch an epic piece at that Daily Kos. The piece itself epitomizes leftarded thought, and line of thinking. It is, in all fairness, an elegant and sophisticated piece. And, it’s based upon a piece of information the author entirely misinterpreted. Rendering the entire foundation of the article, wrong.
The article (which the leftards call a diary entry for some unknown reason) is this.
The basis of the article (other than a complete misunderstanding of the Republican party and the authors personal prejudices) is the map above. It’s a map of counties in the 2008 election which voted more Republican than 2004. From that, the author surmises that the Repubs are now the party of the “Borderers”. Well, I’ll let the author tell it ……
I find this map endlessly fascinating. Nominally, this is a plot of counties that voted “more Republican” in 2008 than in 2004. But what’s striking about it to me is that it tracks, almost exactly, the settlement patterns of Borderers in America. In other words, non-Borderers were drawn into the Democratic Party by Barack Obama and/or repelled by John McCain; Borderers responded in the opposite way. In an earlier diary, I characterized this electoral phenomenon as a wide-scale rejection of the “president as warlord” concept. But today I want to explore a different set of implications of this voting pattern, because now we have some new data points: the behavior of the “teabaggers” and 9/12 Movement, the rise of Glenn Beck and this weekend’s Values Voters’ Summit.
My hypothesis is this: Despite retaining some Cavalier-esque aristocratic attitudes toward wealth and privilege (and extramarital sex), the Republican Party — at least, its base of “movement conservatives” — has essentially become one and the same with Borderer culture. Its platform is Borderer in nature, its values are Borderer, its means of self-expression are Borderer. Yet the media continue to treat the party and the movement as if they represented approximately half the nation.
The author goes on to make sweeping statements and over generalizations about the early immigrants to the US, and makes a not-so-subtle disparagement towards the Republican base and early Borderer immigrants. It’s interesting that this group of immigrants is probably the only one where leftards still feel it’s okay to disparage. While I won’t dwell on this persons entirely skewed view of American history, the various immigrants, the history of both the Democrat party and Republican, and how things are, today, I’ll just say it’s a monstrous bit of projection and character assassination born from ignorance and prejudice.
Instead, I’ll just knock the foundation of his stupidity out from underneath him. Here’s part of his introduction.
Since the political realignment of the 1960s, we have essentially had a Northern Party (the Quaker–Puritan Democrats) and a Southern Party (the Borderer–Cavalier Republicans), with the Great Plains and the Mountain West leaning toward the Republicans until just recently.
What world is this lunatic living in? Since the 60s? I’m wondering if the author is old enough to be spewing this revisionist history. Does he not know this isn’t ancient history and that people actually have lived through these times and are still alive? I haven’t looked at a history book which mentions a couple of fellows, but, do they not teach about a guy named Jimmy Carter, and where he was from? Or a couple of other fellows who had a campaign slogan of “double bubba”? (pronounced “dubba bubba”) Well, what’s 3 decades when you’re a young commie trying to revise history? The fact is, the old gentry of the South, or the “Cavaliers” as the author stated, still has a very prominent Dem leaning.
So, in 2008, many counties, almost exclusively in the south, voted more Repub than Dem. Somehow, the author concludes that’s where the Repubs are. Here, are the actual results by county, in 2008.
Yes, scroll up and down and compare the two maps. The reason why some of those counties voted more Repub was because they were predominantly Dem to begin with. The plains can’t vote more Repub because they’re mostly Repub already! And, this was a Dem win year.
Now, in fairness to the leftard, and because he probably can’t reason well, he doesn’t use a 2012 map.
I couldn’t find one which showed more or less Dem/Repub maps. But, because we’re not leftards, we can make conclusions from other maps. Let’s look at map color graded by the percentages of Dems and Repubs. the bluer the county the larger percentage voted Dem, redder, Repub.
Oh, never mind, found one. Oh, snap, his entire premise destroyed. For the sake of older eyes, I took some brightness out of the map. You can view the original here. While it is slight, the South voted more Dem than Repub in 2012 as compared to 2008. ………
Breaking!!!!! Dems are the party of the Borderers!!!! Which are nothing much more than knuckle dragging intolerants, which compromise on nothing!!! To begin with, left-wing totalitarianism has fertile soil in two aspects of Borderer rank ways: “tanistry” and “macocracy.” Tanistry is the selection of a “thane,” or warlord, to lead a clan. “By the rule of tanistry, one man . . . was chosen to head the family: he who was strongest, toughest and most cunning,” Fischer writes. …… A lot like the Chicago mafia/politics, amirite?
It’s funny. Reading these lunatics and their sophistry, I really have to wonder if they actually know any Repubs or people who identify with Tea party people. They write volumes on things which they know absolutely nothing about.
Looking at this map, it sorta makes that “only 22%” map seem a little dated, and insufficient to draw conclusions from, no? But, why do a little research and surfing when you have such an elegant hypothesis to spew? Forget being right or wrong, just spew it.