It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Democrats Occupy Less Than 35% of the US

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 4 2016 @ 11:59 AM
link   
I even gave Democrats Fla and Ohio and they occupy less than 35% of the US.

US Land Mass: 3,794,083.06

GOP Land Mass: 2,468,497.25
DNC Land Mass: 1,325,585.81

As of Polls right now:

GOP: 25 States controlled
DNC: 25 States controlled (gave them Fla and OH)

Pretty scary stuff that a party can control over 65% of land where they have very limited support in those states.




posted on Oct, 4 2016 @ 12:01 PM
link   
a reply to: LifeMode
Is there a link?
I would like to see if they did it on a state, county or township basis.

edit on b000000312016-10-04T12:01:43-05:0012America/ChicagoTue, 04 Oct 2016 12:01:43 -05001200000016 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2016 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: LifeMode

Population density.



posted on Oct, 4 2016 @ 12:03 PM
link   
a reply to: LifeMode

You understand many Democrats live in cities and conservatives live on basically farms?
edit on 4-10-2016 by imjack because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2016 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: LifeMode

Clearly you don't know how population density works.



posted on Oct, 4 2016 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

No link, I got the land mass of the US and each state then used the current median of the polls on projects.fivethirtyeight.com... which is pretty good polling since it takes in dozens of polls real time.

Another interesting point, the GOP, if they take Fla and Ohio they would lock in 27 states and occupy almost 70% of the land mass of the US and still lose.



posted on Oct, 4 2016 @ 12:07 PM
link   
It's all about compartmentalization and corral zones.




posted on Oct, 4 2016 @ 12:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I never said anything about population. This is about land mass, not people. I understand about population but wanted to look at things from a different angle. So basically you have city dwellers influencing national laws that in many cases really do not apply to someone living in Alaska or Montana like gun laws and violence for instance.



posted on Oct, 4 2016 @ 12:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: LifeMode
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I never said anything about population. This is about land mass, not people. I understand about population but wanted to look at things from a different angle. So basically you have city dwellers influencing national laws that in many cases really do not apply to someone living in Alaska or Montana like gun laws and violence for instance.

Yeah. So? That is how we set the country up. This is also why we have a Senate where elections are per state and not per person.

This thread looks like you just trying to stir up controversy where there is none.
edit on 4-10-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2016 @ 12:11 PM
link   
a reply to: LifeMode

Everyone knows this is still ignorant, why humor it?

I lived in Texas for 4 years, there are Democrats out the ass there. This doesn't mean the state will vote blue.
edit on 4-10-2016 by imjack because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2016 @ 12:29 PM
link   
a reply to: LifeMode

This is a pretty good visual representation of population density and their political proclivities.



We can start this work by looking at the political attitudes, which frequently overlaps with social ones. Consider the following maps of the 2008 U.S. presidential election. The first map shows states with red, Republican majorities, and those with blue, Democratic majorities; the second one shows this same information, but with a focus on population density.

As we can see, Republican voters were clustered in the south, the Great Plains, and the interior west, while Democratic voters were clustered in the northeast, Great Lakes, and west coast. As it so happens, the red areas also generally reflect sparsely populated areas, and the blue areas, more densely populated areas, revealing a correlation between cities and Democratic values.


Source


edit on 10/4/2016 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2016 @ 12:30 PM
link   
a reply to: imjack

Again, I'm not talking about people. Only land mass and the color of how a state voted or is going to vote. I could have used the 2012 data and it would have showed almost the exact same result. Red states occupy over 65% of the US.



posted on Oct, 4 2016 @ 12:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Thanks, this is a great picture of the dynamics of the country. I was not trying to upset anyone, just wanted to see the land aspect of it. I already knew about the population aspect.



posted on Oct, 4 2016 @ 12:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
I would like to see if they did it on a state, county or township basis.


Hey, butcher.


I did find this... Source




posted on Oct, 4 2016 @ 12:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: butcherguy
I would like to see if they did it on a state, county or township basis.


Hey, butcher.


I did find this... Source


Thank you BH!
I hope that you are having a lovely week!



posted on Oct, 4 2016 @ 12:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: LifeMode
a reply to: imjack
Red states occupy over 65% of the US.


Yes. Blue states are generally smaller, even though they have a higher population. Too bad for Republicans that buffalo can't vote, huh? (j/k)...



posted on Oct, 4 2016 @ 12:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Omg look at that conservative dominance. They control almost 1/3.
/joke .



posted on Oct, 4 2016 @ 12:57 PM
link   
This is a county by county breakdown back in 2000 when Bush and Gore were supposedly 50/50 split and Gore won the popular vote by a small margin. Not much blue to be found. Voter fraud only has to occur in a few urban Democrat counties to push them over the top.

Also really shows how a few urban counties can dominate an entire state. I understand why most of the land mass of California and New York want to break away and be a different state. Their votes don't have any effect concerning the electoral college.




posted on Oct, 4 2016 @ 01:06 PM
link   
The concept of "land == votes" died back around the time of the 3/5th compromise...

One person == one vote (regardless of how much land they own/occupy).



posted on Oct, 4 2016 @ 01:13 PM
link   
a reply to: imjack

No kidding. Going to be really interesting what happens the next 10-20 years of more people voting on welfare, living paycheck to paycheck or no paycheck. They will just keep voting for more and more handouts. Totally not sustainable but shush...don't tell them that.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join