Our City Online

Messageboard - General Columbus Discussion

NOTE: You are viewing an archived version of the Columbus Underground forums/messageboard. As of 05/22/16 they have been closed to new comments and replies, but will remain accessible for archived searches and reference. For more information CLICK HERE

Where Columbus Ranks on Liberal/Conservative Scale

Home Forums General Columbus Discussion Where Columbus Ranks on Liberal/Conservative Scale

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 22 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1034065

    Ned23
    Participant

    Ever wondered? Well the Economist did a tally, and VOX made nice pictures for it. Apparently we rank between Milwaukee and Dallas:

    The Most Liberal and Conservative Cities in America

    Big US Cities by Politics

    #1034082
    Walker Evans
    Walker Evans
    Keymaster

    Interesting. Thanks for the link!

    #1034092
    Caleb
    Caleb
    Participant

    Hahah Washington DC is very liberal according to this. I guess politicians weren’t surveyed? :)

    #1034192
    Heathercat42
    Heathercat42
    Participant

    I think we fall in the right spot. It’s one reason why I moved here from Jax FL.

    I’m kinda shocked that Charlotte wasn’t more to the right… but when your topmost city for comparison is Mesa, AZ… not really. ;) It’s long been a hotbed for immigration politics and religious influx (pun intended, I do believe the heat affects them).

    #1034287

    shepardess
    Participant

    If I’m reading this right, it looks like around 75% of big cities are on the liberal side. That sounds high to me. Or maybe the conservatives are just louder.

    #1034292

    A higher number and percentage of Conservatives vote compared to liberals.

    #1034293

    gramarye
    Participant

    I figured we’d be pretty close to the middle. Columbus is known for being the big purple city in the big purple state.

    That said, I’m surprised at Dallas being only one spot more conservative than us. I knew Austin was a blue spot in a red sea, but I didn’t think Dallas was even anywhere near Columbus’ level. (I also see, though, that Ft. Worth is a separate metro by whatever measurements this survey used, and it’s much more conservative than even Houston. Maybe if you made a weighted average of the two, you’d come out closer to where I was picturing DFW landing.)

    #1034296

    chaking
    Participant

    With the exception of some of the truly progressive/liberal cities like San Francisco, Seattle, Portland et al, this list appears to simply be a list of registered democrats/republicans or voting trends in a city. It’s hardly surprising then to see cities with large minority populations who traditionally lean towards the democrats to be considered more liberal. However, I would say Detroit, Atlanta, Buffalo, St. Louis, New Orleans and others are altogether not as progressive as a city like Columbus, Austin, Tucson or some others listed.

    So when they say conservative or liberal, it seems maybe they actually mean republican/democrat.

    #1034298
    Walker Evans
    Walker Evans
    Keymaster

    If I’m reading this right, it looks like around 75% of big cities are on the liberal side.

    Bigger cities are generally more liberal. It’s been that way for awhile now.

    Worthwhile read:

    http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/11/red-state-blue-city-how-the-urban-rural-divide-is-splitting-america/265686/

    #1034300
    rus
    rus
    Participant

    I figured we’d be pretty close to the middle. Columbus is known for being the big purple city in the big purple state.

    From the underlying study (PDF warning):

    First, we developed a new scaled measure of policy outcomes using data from the Inter-
    national City/County Management Association’s (ICMA) 2010 survey of government sus-
    tainability. The ICMA survey asks city offcials a series of questions about policies that have
    been enacted by the city government, which they are asked to answer on a factual basis.
    The survey has an emphasis on environmental policies, but also asks about an array of other
    policies, such as whether the city provides financial incentives for afordable housing, pro-
    vides funding for preschool education, or has a program for the purchase or development
    of historic property, among many others. These questions are scaled in the same way as
    our measure of citizens’ policy conservatism, using the 2-parameter quadratic item response
    model introduced into political science by Clinton, Jackman, and Rivers (2004). Much as
    individuals choose whether to support a given policy, city government must choose whether
    to enact these policies, providing us information about the conservatism of the city as a
    decision-making body.
    The resulting measure is as close as we were able to come to a broad liberal-conservative
    policy score for each city. This measure is a one-dimensional summary of a wide variety of pol-
    icy \stances,” but in this case the stances are actual enacted policies. However, this measure
    is not without drawbacks. The survey is intended to evaluate local efforts towards environ-
    mental sustainability, and so many of the questions are focused on policies geared towards
    energy, the environment, and conservation. We find little evidence of a higher-dimensional
    structure in this data, lending credence to our assumption that this set of questions repre-
    sents policy more broadly, but it is always possible that this unidimensionality is the result
    of the exclusion of certain policy issues. This is one reason why our analysis uses three other
    measures of policy outcomes that we describe below. A full list of questions used on the
    ICMA survey is provided in Appendix C, and the estimates themselves are available from
    the authors.

    #1034303
    Walker Evans
    Walker Evans
    Keymaster

    It’s hardly surprising then to see cities with large minority populations who traditionally lean towards the democrats to be considered more liberal.

    Disclaimer: I’m speaking largely in generalities in response to other generalities.

    It could also be said that those who are not minorities who live in cities with close proximity to minorities (racial, sexual orientation, income level or otherwise) are possibly more likely to be empathetic to their issues, thus more liberally-oriented in their political views.

    Conversely, it could be easier for people to remain entrenched in conservative stances that are anti-minority, anti-gay, anti-women or anti-poor if you live in a rural or exurban area where you may live your whole life rarely making any meaningful contact with someone who is poor or foreign-born or gay or a feminist or anything else that your views oppose.

    It will certainly be interesting to see how that all shakes out in the future if the trend of suburban poverty continues to increase across the country:

    http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/suburban-poverty

    Perhaps rural/suburban/exurban conservatives could grow more compassionate toward funding things like social services if they see that it’s their cul-de-sac neighbors who need help, rather than simply opposing anything that just goes towards the ills of society and boogeymen in the big city-proper.

    #1034311
    rus
    rus
    Participant

    It could also be said that those who are not minorities who live in cities with close proximity to minorities (racial, sexual orientation, income level or otherwise) are possibly more likely to be empathetic to their issues, thus more liberally-oriented in their political views.

    Leaving aside the idea there are different methods advocated for solving problems ( is advocating job creation anti-poor? ), there is this:

    http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/04/the_downside_of_diversity/?page=full

    IT HAS BECOME increasingly popular to speak of racial and ethnic diversity as a civic strength. From multicultural festivals to pronouncements from political leaders, the message is the same: our differences make us stronger.

    But a massive new study, based on detailed interviews of nearly 30,000 people across America, has concluded just the opposite. Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam — famous for “Bowling Alone,” his 2000 book on declining civic engagement — has found that the greater the diversity in a community, the fewer people vote and the less they volunteer, the less they give to charity and work on community projects. In the most diverse communities, neighbors trust one another about half as much as they do in the most homogenous settings. The study, the largest ever on civic engagement in America, found that virtually all measures of civic health are lower in more diverse settings.

    #1034413

    jackoh
    Participant

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Walker Evans wrote:</div>
    It could also be said that those who are not minorities who live in cities with close proximity to minorities (racial, sexual orientation, income level or otherwise) are possibly more likely to be empathetic to their issues, thus more liberally-oriented in their political views.

    Leaving aside the idea there are different methods advocated for solving problems ( is advocating job creation anti-poor? ), there is this:

    http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/04/the_downside_of_diversity/?page=full

    IT HAS BECOME increasingly popular to speak of racial and ethnic diversity as a civic strength. From multicultural festivals to pronouncements from political leaders, the message is the same: our differences make us stronger.

    But a massive new study, based on detailed interviews of nearly 30,000 people across America, has concluded just the opposite. Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam — famous for “Bowling Alone,” his 2000 book on declining civic engagement — has found that the greater the diversity in a community, the fewer people vote and the less they volunteer, the less they give to charity and work on community projects. In the most diverse communities, neighbors trust one another about half as much as they do in the most homogenous settings. The study, the largest ever on civic engagement in America, found that virtually all measures of civic health are lower in more diverse settings.

    I guess that what could be concluded from that study is that racism and classism are alive and well in America. Who knew?

    #1034425

    melikecheese
    Participant

    Hahah Washington DC is very liberal according to this. I guess politicians weren’t surveyed? :)

    If you ever look at exit polls and or the details of the votes after an election you’ll find this extremely true. Almost all of DC votes Democratic party. Like 98% blue. CNN used to have some great data on results with maps down to the county and showed the exit poll data. Sadly they don’t share exit poll data but should still have the down to the county maps.

    To the other comment about cities leaning liberal, it makes total sense, again I spend a ton of time with those maps after elections and just about every large city / metro area is pretty much solid blue. We can speculate why and it sounds like people will, but it’s what the people vote. Ohio has 3 big blue spots, then a lot of red out in the country that covers most of the state. But since it’s a per capita thing, the “city folk” can take over the entire rest of the state.

    #1034449
    rus
    rus
    Participant

    I guess that what could be concluded from that study is that racism and classism are alive and well in America. Who knew?

    If by “racism and classism” you mean “people like to be around people they have something in common with, otherwise they tend to withdraw into themselves”, sure.

    Seriously, knowing what we know of each other ( reading each other’s posts here ) do you think either of us would hang out or avoid each other if we were neighbors?

    I’ve no idea what your race is; presume your sex is male given your name but that’s just a guess, but on a basis of ideas I don’t think we’re that compatible.

    I figure we’d avoid each other. Too different to be friends, perhaps even friendly.

    Which seems the real take-away from Putnam’s research. Familiarity doesn’t always breed a stronger community.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 22 total)

The forum ‘General Columbus Discussion’ is closed to new topics and replies.

Subscribe below: