[lbo-talk] hicks v. slicks

[kjkhoo at softhome.net]

At 12:29 am -0800 4/11/04, Chuck Grimes wrote:
>I agree with this, but only as far as it goes. The correspondence
>between the distribution of red and blue within states, county by
>county, and in the nation as a whole, mirrors population density. This
>is one of the oldest divisions of all, the division between town and
>countryside. The weighted power advantage of the countryside was built
>into US political institutions by those lovable old slave owners from
>the very start. And it has worked once again.
>
>There is really no need to nuance this any more than that. Suburban
>and rural communities are more conservative in their social mind set
>than urban dwellers. The US political structure was designed to
>privilege that mind set by creating the Senate and the Electorial
>College, and it has.

Texas -- can someone explain why:

1. suburban Texas voted almost diametrically against the grain of Texas
2. female Texas went with Bush in a bigger way than male
3. Latinos went with Bush 3:2
4. young Texas went with Bush more than old Texas

More generally, how does the electoral college give an advantage to 
the rural? Aren't the number of electoral votes proportional to 
population?

kj