Reply #48: Think of it this way if you're wondering about the significance of the map and the claim

[kenny blankenship]

the claim that "nearly all of America voted for McCain."

You could parachute yourself onto that map in a car, and drive all day, 2 days even, and wherever you get out of your car to stop in a diner or gas station you'd hear, "Well people round here didn't vote for 'im. Nobody I know says they did. And if they did they'd know better than to admit it." Knowing how many people around you share your opinion tends to have an effect on the strength of your opinion. If you were of the McCain persuasion you could probably travel hundreds of miles in several directions and find mostly people who voted like yourself--when you manage to find people. Your rejection of Obama as President would be intensified by basically never bumping into an Obama supporter, and being surrounded by just McCain supporters. Everyone you know voted for McCain and opposed Obama, but there's Obama in the White House anyway. People who are geographically isolated tend to develop their own regional accent, to the point that people outside of their locale sometimes don't understand their speech. A polarized political map such as this will likewise tend to produce people who feel like they live in a different countries. It's that polarized. 2004 was very polarized, but this time suburbs voted more like the cities instead of the countryside. Red America and Blue America still exist, in fact they may be further apart than ever. Suburbs moved over to Blue America and took their money with them, which means Red America along with being a bit smaller in numbers, is poorer and more rural than before.

WHat I'm getting at is the significance of the map has to do with the state of mind, the sentiment and general outlook, of Red America. "More alienated than ever before, even more angry than before" is what I'd expect to see in reports written by a traveler wandering through Red State America.