5 ms·

Well, for starters, liberals and conservatives concentrate themselves into geographical areas, and beyond that there are regions that attract a given kind of po

Well, for starters, liberals and conservatives concentrate themselves into geographical areas, and beyond that there are regions that attract a given kind of politics (landlocked vs coastal regions). When theres such a concentration of people who think alike, people can just think its a no brainer as to why a majority would be on their side. Not to mention the divided, heavily opinionated, clickbait driven news media.

MuffinFlavored 4y ago
> into geographical areas It's almost as if you can summarize the entire thing as "what you believe is based on where you were raised", and as a message board of "intellectuals/thinkers/tinkerers" who are collectively aware just how much can be learned/how much information is out there (online, talking about HackerNews), it seems weird that this is like... "accepted" at a national scale. Not that we have any control of it. It's just weird...
- 7speter 4y ago
  Its been like this from the country’s founding. Look at the regional split of founding father influence, 30-50 years later, which states became free states and which stayed, then after which state stayed in the union and joined the confederacy. Other such indicators too, Im sure but those are the easiest ones.
dragonwriter 4y ago
> Well, for starters, liberals and conservatives concentrate themselves into geographical areas Not as much as popular media pretends, the illusion of this is true is mostly an artifact of the electoral system. > and beyond that there are regions that attract a given kind of politics (landlocked vs coastal regions). Again, not really, though there is a bit of a second order effect; the divide is more urban/rural, and, again, is exaggerated in popular perception largely because of FPTP voting and other political structutres which artificially magnify even slight local dominance (e.g., local governments with vote N of M with N winners super-FPTP bodies, which give local aligned bare pluralities 100% control of a multiseat body, aren’t unheard of.)

MuffinFlavored 4y ago

> into geographical areas It's almost as if you can summarize the entire thing as "what you believe is based on where you were raised", and as a message board of "intellectuals/thinkers/tinkerers" who are collectively aware just how much can be learned/how much information is out there (online, talking about HackerNews), it seems weird that this is like... "accepted" at a national scale. Not that we have any control of it. It's just weird...

7speter 4y ago
Its been like this from the country’s founding. Look at the regional split of founding father influence, 30-50 years later, which states became free states and which stayed, then after which state stayed in the union and joined the confederacy. Other such indicators too, Im sure but those are the easiest ones.

dragonwriter 4y ago

> Well, for starters, liberals and conservatives concentrate themselves into geographical areas Not as much as popular media pretends, the illusion of this is true is mostly an artifact of the electoral system. > and beyond that there are regions that attract a given kind of politics (landlocked vs coastal regions). Again, not really, though there is a bit of a second order effect; the divide is more urban/rural, and, again, is exaggerated in popular perception largely because of FPTP voting and other political structutres which artificially magnify even slight local dominance (e.g., local governments with vote N of M with N winners super-FPTP bodies, which give local aligned bare pluralities 100% control of a multiseat body, aren’t unheard of.)