TheDeadFlagBlues
Junior Chimp
![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif) ![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif) ![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif) ![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif) ![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif)
Posts: 5,987
|
![](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/post/xx.gif) |
« on: November 22, 2012, 09:24:22 PM » |
|
|
« edited: November 22, 2012, 09:37:00 PM by TheDeadFlagBlues »
|
I find it embarrassing that threads like these are still posted on the Atlas. Wealthy, educated liberal professionals who live in cosmopolitan spheres are the bedrock that the Democratic Party sits on. While they aren't as electorally important as poors, they control the strings of power.This has been the case for over a decade. Marin County stands out only because the county lines are drawn in a way that creates homogenous community. As mentioned in the thread, the Oakland and Berkeley hills are even more Democratic (~90% Obama). Comparable localities include: Cleveland Heights, St. Louis Park, Bainbridge Island, Evanston, Newton, Tenafly, hilly parts of west LA that include Beverly Hills etc. Nearly every major urban area includes at least a few precincts that display similar behavior.
It's important to note that Marin County's voting behavior is amplified by the bay area's cultural opposition to anything remotely related to the GOP at this point; where even non-descript, ultra-wealthy, ultra-white suburban developments voted ~60% for Obama. I imagine a similar community with similar demographics populated by, say, wealthy educated would be more marginal.
edit: I spend too much time sifting through precinct results...
|