If Hillary Clinton holds blue leaning states, she's won the election.

[320 Years of History]

People in high population areas should never have a see what people do in low population areas with their land…

Of course, because there's so much to see watching corn grow.

 

[AceRothstein]

Is that map supposed to mean something?

By county, that is how the country should be broken up… LOL

Land doesn't vote.

People on the land do vote... you know by county. Dip shit
Lol

Why should a county of 500 count as much as a county of 5 million? Smaller population states are already over-represented in the electoral college.

You want mob rule voting?

Why don't you want all people's voices to matter? Your proposal is moronic.

 

[AceRothstein]

Is that map supposed to mean something?

By county, that is how the country should be broken up… LOL

Land doesn't vote.

People on the land do vote... you know by county. Dip shit
Lol

Well, I have news for you. The few hundred folks in "East Bumfuck" don't get as many votes as do the tens of millions of people concentrated in the county's population centers. The electoral system doesn't accord votes by the acre; thus even if all the sparsely occupied land in the country happens to have only Trump supporters or Republicans of some other stripe in it, their votes don't outnumber those of the people who live in densely populated places.

U.S. Population Density




The map you posted earlier.

People in high population areas should never have a see what people do in low population areas with their land… If it was not for the electoral college it would just be a mob rule in this country.

And your proposal would give all the power to rural areas where 15% of the population lives. No thanks.

 

[Rustic]

By county, that is how the country should be broken up… LOL

Land doesn't vote.

People on the land do vote... you know by county. Dip shit
Lol

Why should a county of 500 count as much as a county of 5 million? Smaller population states are already over-represented in the electoral college.

You want mob rule voting?

Why don't you want all people's voices to matter? Your proposal is moronic.

That's why the country should be split up by county... there's never going to be a uniting of red and blue.

 

[Rustic]

By county, that is how the country should be broken up… LOL

Land doesn't vote.

People on the land do vote... you know by county. Dip shit
Lol

Well, I have news for you. The few hundred folks in "East Bumfuck" don't get as many votes as do the tens of millions of people concentrated in the county's population centers. The electoral system doesn't accord votes by the acre; thus even if all the sparsely occupied land in the country happens to have only Trump supporters or Republicans of some other stripe in it, their votes don't outnumber those of the people who live in densely populated places.

U.S. Population Density




The map you posted earlier.

People in high population areas should never have a see what people do in low population areas with their land… If it was not for the electoral college it would just be a mob rule in this country.

And your proposal would give all the power to rural areas where 15% of the population lives. No thanks.

Why? They would only control what happens in their county/state. People in big city area should never have any say what happens in rural ranch/farm/wilderness areas.

 

[Rustic]

By county, that is how the country should be broken up… LOL

Land doesn't vote.

People on the land do vote... you know by county. Dip shit
Lol

Why should a county of 500 count as much as a county of 5 million? Smaller population states are already over-represented in the electoral college.

You want mob rule voting?

Why don't you want all people's voices to matter? Your proposal is moronic.

This is supposed to be a republic not a democracy

 

[Rustic]

Progressives would control the blue areas, red areas will be controlled by conservatives/libertarians… Simple

 

[320 Years of History]

Progressives would control the blue areas, red areas will be controlled by conservatives/libertarians… Simple

??? Conservatives already do control the "red areas." Why do you suppose we call them "red areas?"

 

[AceRothstein]

Land doesn't vote.

People on the land do vote... you know by county. Dip shit
Lol

Why should a county of 500 count as much as a county of 5 million? Smaller population states are already over-represented in the electoral college.

You want mob rule voting?

Why don't you want all people's voices to matter? Your proposal is moronic.

This is supposed to be a republic not a democracy

Which is why we don't use county boundaries to determine our President.

 

[320 Years of History]

Land doesn't vote.

People on the land do vote... you know by county. Dip shit
Lol

Well, I have news for you. The few hundred folks in "East Bumfuck" don't get as many votes as do the tens of millions of people concentrated in the county's population centers. The electoral system doesn't accord votes by the acre; thus even if all the sparsely occupied land in the country happens to have only Trump supporters or Republicans of some other stripe in it, their votes don't outnumber those of the people who live in densely populated places.

U.S. Population Density




The map you posted earlier.

People in high population areas should never have a see what people do in low population areas with their land… If it was not for the electoral college it would just be a mob rule in this country.

And your proposal would give all the power to rural areas where 15% of the population lives. No thanks.

Why? They would only control what happens in their county/state. People in big city area should never have any say what happens in rural ranch/farm/wilderness areas.

Red:
I have news for you. People in the "big city" mostly don't even think about the "roo-raal" parts of the country and what goes on there. Truly, I have been to many "big city" events and not once happened upon prattling and social banter about the affairs of rural America. Whether, for example, a growing hamlet somewhere in the "Middle of Nowhere, USA" could solve its traffic problem by putting in a second stoplight just doesn't come up.

 

[OldLady]

Haul back on the snobbery a little bit, 320. Roo-raal areas don't always have very kind things to say about you city folk either. Probably best we keep those things to ourselves, don't you think?

 

[Trump.Stamped]

Yay for us.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Child Poverty Higher and More Persistent in Rural America

The negative consequences of growing up in a poor family are well known. Poor children are less likely to have timely immunizations, have lower academic achievement, are generally less engaged in school activities, and face higher delinquency rates in adolescent years.1 Each of these has adverse impacts on their health, earnings, and family status in adulthood. Less understood is how the experience of poverty can differ depending on the community context. Being poor in a relatively well-off community with good infrastructure and schools is different from being poor in a place where poverty rates have been high for generations, where economic investment in schools and infrastructure is negligible, and where pathways to success are few.2 The hurdles are even higher in rural areas, where low population density, physical isolation, and the broad spatial distribution of the poor make service delivery and exposure to innovative programs more challenging.

This brief looks at both the incidence of high child poverty (20 percent or greater) over the past three decades and at the places where such high child poverty has persisted for all of those decades (see Box 1 for definitions of high and persistent child poverty). Our analysis documents both that the incidence of high child poverty is growing nationwide and that rural America includes a disproportionate share of children living in counties characterized as having persistent high child poverty.
Child Poverty Higher and More Persistent in Rural America

Republicans don't give a shit about rural America.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

According to CNN's predictions, so long as Mrs. Clinton holds on to the states that currently lean "blue," she's won the election. If she wins in any of the "battleground" states, her win moves closer to being a landslide.

2016 Electoral Map (Interactive)

In other news, if Hillary had a cock, she'd be a guy

 

[WaitingFor2020]

According to CNN's predictions, so long as Mrs. Clinton holds on to the states that currently lean "blue," she's won the election. If she wins in any of the "battleground" states, her win moves closer to being a landslide.

2016 Electoral Map (Interactive)

It's so over. So sad. At least neither Hillary nor Trump can last more than four years. Vote Warren in 2020!

 

[WaitingFor2020]

According to CNN's predictions, so long as Mrs. Clinton holds on to the states that currently lean "blue," she's won the election. If she wins in any of the "battleground" states, her win moves closer to being a landslide.

2016 Electoral Map (Interactive)

In other news, if Hillary had a cock, she'd be a guy

And so would you.

 

[320 Years of History]

Haul back on the snobbery a little bit, 320. Roo-raal areas don't always have very kind things to say about you city folk either. Probably best we keep those things to ourselves, don't you think?

I'm not deriding the people who live in either place. I didn't do that. My point is that it's preposterous to think that in the city people think about what's going on in rural areas or have any interest in opining about what would be better or worse as goes the politics and management of those areas. The point is that their interest in that is so nonexistent that in the city, folks don't think about such things; thus they certainly don't talk about them.

I happen to have a home on the side of a mountain in "Middle of Nowhere, WVA." I enjoy the bucolic charm and peaceful solitude of the place. There's a town about 30 minutes drive distant, the first mile of which is on the road from the house to edge of the property. One piece of the property borders a national wilderness area that one accesses via an unpaved road.

Apparently, per Rustic, rural folks do discuss what goes on in big cities. Okay; I'll take word for it seeing as I wouldn't know. I don't generally interact with the folks in the small town closest to my property, other than to purchase provisions when I need them.

 

[OldLady]

Yay for us.

Whoever "us" may be....

 

[ptbw forever]

Child Poverty Higher and More Persistent in Rural America

The negative consequences of growing up in a poor family are well known. Poor children are less likely to have timely immunizations, have lower academic achievement, are generally less engaged in school activities, and face higher delinquency rates in adolescent years.1 Each of these has adverse impacts on their health, earnings, and family status in adulthood. Less understood is how the experience of poverty can differ depending on the community context. Being poor in a relatively well-off community with good infrastructure and schools is different from being poor in a place where poverty rates have been high for generations, where economic investment in schools and infrastructure is negligible, and where pathways to success are few.2 The hurdles are even higher in rural areas, where low population density, physical isolation, and the broad spatial distribution of the poor make service delivery and exposure to innovative programs more challenging.

This brief looks at both the incidence of high child poverty (20 percent or greater) over the past three decades and at the places where such high child poverty has persisted for all of those decades (see Box 1 for definitions of high and persistent child poverty). Our analysis documents both that the incidence of high child poverty is growing nationwide and that rural America includes a disproportionate share of children living in counties characterized as having persistent high child poverty.
Child Poverty Higher and More Persistent in Rural America

Republicans don't give a shit about rural America.

All the state funding goes to the cities, and usually when a state has a big city their state government is Democrat.

Democrats have already admitted they don't give a shit about rural people via Nancy Pelosi.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Child Poverty Higher and More Persistent in Rural America

The negative consequences of growing up in a poor family are well known. Poor children are less likely to have timely immunizations, have lower academic achievement, are generally less engaged in school activities, and face higher delinquency rates in adolescent years.1 Each of these has adverse impacts on their health, earnings, and family status in adulthood. Less understood is how the experience of poverty can differ depending on the community context. Being poor in a relatively well-off community with good infrastructure and schools is different from being poor in a place where poverty rates have been high for generations, where economic investment in schools and infrastructure is negligible, and where pathways to success are few.2 The hurdles are even higher in rural areas, where low population density, physical isolation, and the broad spatial distribution of the poor make service delivery and exposure to innovative programs more challenging.

This brief looks at both the incidence of high child poverty (20 percent or greater) over the past three decades and at the places where such high child poverty has persisted for all of those decades (see Box 1 for definitions of high and persistent child poverty). Our analysis documents both that the incidence of high child poverty is growing nationwide and that rural America includes a disproportionate share of children living in counties characterized as having persistent high child poverty.
Child Poverty Higher and More Persistent in Rural America

Republicans don't give a shit about rural America.

All the state funding goes to the cities, and usually when a state has a big city their state government is Democrat.

Democrats have already admitted they don't give a shit about rural people via Nancy Pelosi.

Rural areas are republican red. Isn't it incumbent on republicans to do something about the areas they control?