Small towns, Big cities and Politics

[96Qowner]

As I've been watching all the various commentators on TV over the years, and especially now with Sarah Palin in the race, I've often wondered just how insular these people really are. They, of course, all live in large metropolitan areas like NYC and Washington, DC, and I doubt they have very many true conversations with people in small towns. They also overwhelmingly lean to the left. This year especially, the MSM has been unabashed in their favoritism towards Obama. It's nothing particularly new. They also favored Gore and Kerry. It's just something we Republicans have gotten used to - we filter out their bias, read between the lines and pick out the facts from the opinion.

And it's not just the commentators. People in large cities are Democrats. Most of us have seen the voting maps from past elections. I went searching and found the one from the Bush/Kerry race:



http://www.usatoday.com/news/p...p.htm

I also found a couple other maps of population density:



http://www.treehugger.com/file...0.php



http://earthobservatory.nasa.g...17439

And it was hard to find out what percentage of the population lives in large cities vs small towns, but I did find this:

The Census Bureau estimated population for about 19,500 incorporated places nationwide last year. Of these, 262 have 100,000 people or more, and combined their population was 82.4 million. Some 2,621 places contained between 10,001 people and 99,999 people, for a combined population of 77.2 million. And another 16,607 incorporated places contained 10,000 people or fewer, for a total of 28.7 million people. That adds up to 188 million people — meaning 123 million people weren’t accounted for.

http://blogs.wsj.com/numbersgu...s-408/

It might be safe to say that less than half the population lives in cites of 100,000 or more. Yet ALL of the people who give us our news and opinions live in large cities. There are NO national television people who live in small towns. This disturbs me. What's more, these people typically find small town America "amusing".

So, here's my question, particularly for those members who live in large cities. Do you ever get out of your city and hang out with folks in small towns? If so, in what manner and how often? Do you think many people from NYC or Wash, DC do? Do you think our national commentators and news people do? More than half the population lives in these places, and they DO go to large cities often.

So, who is more well traveled? Who is more likely to understand America? I'm biased because I live in one of our small towns, but the logic seems inescapable. If Charles Gibson and Katie Couric never hang out in small town America and don't have any small town American friends, what the hell would they know about this country?

What do you think?

[smockers83]

I'm in agreement for the most part. Most people who live in the cities don't travel to rural America, they travel to other big cities. Now, I know some city people go to rural America to vacation for the weekend or something. My family is big in the skiing business in the Midwest and we get large groups of people from large cities, mainly Chicago and Milwaukee. Those people are our biggest business generators. But those groups have dwindled in the past few years, most likely due to the economy. We used to get these groups almost every weekend with multiple groups on holiday and special weekends, but they represent a small portion of the city population. Is it the economy or are they starting to travel elsewhere?

To say one group is more well traveled than the other, I wouldn't go that far. Its just where these two populations tend to travel to. The urban population tends to travel to other cities around the country and the world. The rural population tends to travel to other rural areas and the cities of the US. Being from small town America, I've been all over England, NYC, Detroit, San Diego, L.A., Orlando, Knoxville, Louisville, Chicago, Toronto, Phoenix, Milwaukee and I'm sure some others. But I've also been through many rural areas such as the corn fields of Iowa and Indiana, around South Dakota (which I thought was more rural than any other area I've been to), all over rural Michigan and Wisconsin, the rural Appalachians, rural Pennsylvania and Ohio, rural Ontario and again I'm sure some others I'm not thinking of at the moment.

The better question I feel would be who has traveled more and because of that, who understands America more?

Here's the definition of the rural population by the Census:The Bureau of the Census defines an urbanized area by population density. An urbanized area consists of a central city and surrounding areas whose population is greater than 50,000. In addition, other towns outside of an urbanized area whose population exceeds 2,500 are included in the urban population, leaving all other areas rural.

[APEXi240]

More than half the population lives in these places, and they DO go to large cities often.

So, who is more well traveled? Who is more likely to understand America? I'm biased because I live in one of our small towns, but the logic seems inescapable. If Charles Gibson and Katie Couric never hang out in small town America and don't have any small town American friends, what the hell would they know about this country?

What do you think?

I live in what would be considered a small town (pop around 40,000) but that does not describe the area in which I live. My town is 2.2 square miles, for a rather high population density. So while technically I can say I have plenty of friends that live in small towns, my viewpoint would be different than yours.

You state that you visit large cities, and many people from small towns do, but there are no statistics that I think either of us would be able to find in which states which group (large city dwellers, or small town dwellers) "visits" the other's home more often. Furthermore, just because you visit somewhere does not mean you have a grasp of what it is like to live in such an area, just as much as I would not be able to understand what it is like to live in a rural area (no matter how many times I visit my family, friends, etc).

Thirdly, you have a large number of people that emmigrate from rural areas to the big cities, and vice versa (although I would tend to think that people who are raised/live in large cities immigrate to suburbs more often than to rural America). Those types of people would be most apt to ask these sorts of questions.

[C-Kwik]

The better question I feel would be who has traveled more and because of that, who understands America more?

I think the fundamental issue is that small town America and Big City America tend to have different views and needs. Regardless of who is in a position of better understanding, their vote will still likely be influenced primarily by that which brings them the most benefit/least drawbacks.

[smockers83]

Looking at Michigan, I find it interesting that there are 14 counties that are blue out of 83, yet the state is mainly Democratic since the Depression. Each of those counties though contain large centers of population for their respective areas. Looking at the NYC area, it seems that as you immediately leave NYC, you head into Republican territory. Also looks to me that Democrats seem to love them some Mississippi River.

[smockers83]

I think the fundamental issue is that small town America and Big City America tend to have different views and needs. Regardless of who is in a position of better understanding, their vote will still likely be influenced primarily by that which brings them the most benefit/least drawbacks.

True, but fundamentally all of our needs on a national level are the same, which is what the federal government is for. So if needs and views are different, let local governments take care of those needs and views. State views and needs are different state by state, which is why that system was set up in the constitution. Furthermore, local governments and municipalities are allowed to be set up to deal with local views and needs. Now the federal government does have situations in which it needs to take care of needs in specific areas, like Wall St, the Gulf, etc.

Why project those needs and views onto others who have no need for those needs? That's where the TV bias comes in and the need to understand.

[96Qowner]

You state that you visit large cities, and many people from small towns do, but there are no statistics that I think either of us would be able to find in which states which group (large city dwellers, or small town dwellers) "visits" the other's home more often. Furthermore, just because you visit somewhere does not mean you have a grasp of what it is like to live in such an area, just as much as I would not be able to understand what it is like to live in a rural area (no matter how many times I visit my family, friends, etc).

Thirdly, you have a large number of people that emigrate from rural areas to the big cities, and vice versa (although I would tend to think that people who are raised/live in large cities immigrate to suburbs more often than to rural America). Those types of people would be most apt to ask these sorts of questions.

This is exactly what gives me pause. Just because, like smockers, I've visited and spent time in many of America's large cities, including NYC, Wash,DC, Seattle, San Antonio, Minneapolis, Atlanta, Portland, Chicago, St Louis, Miami, Orlando, Birmingham, doesn't mean that I necessarily understand the people who live there. But, on the other hand, everything I see on TV and read in the newspaper comes from a large city perspective. I think I understand city life quite well. I've spent a great deal of time in Atlanta and Birmingham and I DO understand those people.

I have friends there, of many cultures and origins (Koreans, Chinese, Indians, Pakistanis, flamboyant Gays, Iranians, inner city Blacks, etc) who are very unlike myself and the people I live with. None of them have ever been to Fargo. Few of them know anything about small town America, from my experience talking with them. They are uniformly charmed and surprised to discover that I actually live in Fargo. I am not what they thought I should be. If the conversation turns to the small towns they know, well ... they really ... don't. They'd be totally lost in a small town cafe - all nervous, protective and condescending. I see the same attitude from the commentators on TV. Many of these people grew up in small town America. They mention it. But they've left it behind. They no longer see value in that culture. They apologize for it. They laugh at it. We honestly do NOT laugh at big city folks - we usually just tolerate them and their attitudes and grumble at their lack of civility.

Most of the people in my town have traveled the same way I have. They are no different than I am, no less surprising to the big city folks they meet.

So I wonder. Are folks like me as isolated and insular as they are? Or do we actually have a better perspective? Of course, I think we do, but hey, sometimes I'm wrong.

[smockers83]

Actually, the more I think about it, I think people like me and 96 are kind of the exception of rural people. A lot of my friends who are still back where I'm from rarely get out of the UP, which is the northern 1/3 of MI and is essentially all rural. I don't want to move back up there for numerous reasons but one of them is that most people up there are somewhat intolerant and uncultured. In high school, we had to go down state to play in the state championship and for some that was the first time they had been into the Lower Peninsula or even out of the UP. On the other hand, a lot of rural people have to go to larger cities because small towns don't have everything we need, such as various stores. We always drove 4 hours to Green Bay and Appleton, WI to go school shopping.

Thinking about my friends back in the UP, there's only a few that I could say have really traveled elsewhere, mainly to large cities. If they travel, they really don't go anywhere, and I'm pretty confident that its the same all across the UP.

[96Qowner]

Hm, yeah I said "most" - I should have said "most of the people I know". I also know people who have never traveled farther than Minneapolis.

Two families in Fargo lost a relative in 9-11. They worked in the Towers. We're just not all that isolated here. People are constantly surprised.

[C-Kwik]

True, but fundamentally all of our needs on a national level are the same, which is what the federal government is for. So if needs and views are different, let local governments take care of those needs and views. State views and needs are different state by state, which is why that system was set up in the constitution. Furthermore, local governments and municipalities are allowed to be set up to deal with local views and needs. Now the federal government does have situations in which it needs to take care of needs in specific areas, like Wall St, the Gulf, etc.

Why project those needs and views onto others who have no need for those needs? That's where the TV bias comes in and the need to understand.

When people mark their ballots for federal positions, they generally still vote based on their own personal views. Few are going to take a really big picture view. Especially when Federal officials are trying to regulate many of the smaller issues.

[Jesda]

LOL, did Alaska vote Nader or something?

[C-Kwik]

LOL, did Alaska vote Nader or something?

[ishkabibble]

I don't even know where to begin in this thread. Everyone I have met in the two big cities I have lived in has spent a significant amount of time in a small town. I have met lots of small towners who have never ventured farther than the nearest big city (and some not even that) and are incredibly intimidated by the city.

It works both ways.