They Only Look Dead
(Greg note: there's an error in the image below, as noted in the updated entry with a few more states here.)
State Rep districts in the south. Red & Blue filled in as you would suspect. A few white spots in Louisiana for Independents (plus one vacancy).
Needless to say, it's not quite as red as one might guess. My hypothesis that led to this was that the face of the Democratic Party is distorted a fair amount based on broader elections: statewide offices, Congressional seats, etc. I figured that if I were to look at a map of State Rep districts by party, it would probably show some still-remaining strength in several rural/small town areas throughout the south. Florida, Georgia, & Texas seem to have been the "best" at Republican takeovers in these areas. The others? ... not quite as effective.
I'll probably get around to crunching some numbers to back this up sometime tomorrow. Not sure if time will allow for even more analysis, but there's obviously some room for a good deal more.
Most of the districts, I just edited the color manually based on the state's lege website list of members. For Texas, I felt comfortable enough to work from memory. If anyone spots an error, by all means lemme know.
Click on the map below for a big blowup image if you're into that sorta thing.
ADD-ON: Google Earth file here. (6MB)
Categories
Politics-20093 Comments
Leave a comment
I guess this is one area where Texas can learn from Mississippi.
Ouch!!! And yet ... so unfortunately true.
Wasn't it Molly Ivins who said "...and this leads us to Texas' other state motto, 'Thank God for Mississippi!'"?
Also, it's a kind of relief, actually, that it is only the states upon which Republicans concentrated funds and political capital where the rural Democrat is endangered at the local level. This, after all, implies that in the future, sufficient investment and attention from the national party would have a similar potential to change the political landscape.
One last thing, more shamefully admitted: I don't so much mind conservative Democrats in general, but the legacy of the Dixiecrats makes me jumpy when conservative Southern Democrats are the topic of debate. It becomes a lot less about looking for converts, keeping an open mind, and maintaining the "vital center" of the party, than making effing sure that each candidate isn't evidence we've gone back so far right-ward that Phil Gramm-types once again feel welcome.
I hope this impression is entirely immature and unfounded; it certainly feels politically immature, at least. On the other hand, I have half-baked notions that green energy is going to be the bridge-issue over which we'll finally have the chance to win back rural voters - in West Texas, at least. So maybe I shouldn't be so nervous.