WOW, AAA.... it's a rare occasion that I catch you as dead wrong as this... "...The Democrats' electability predicament comes into focus when you compare the map of Giver and Taker states with the well-worn electoral map of red (Republican) and blue (Democrat) states. You might expect that in the 2000 presidential election, Republicans, the party of low taxes and limited government, would have carried the Giver states â while Democrats, the party of wild spending and wooly bureaucracy, would have appealed to the Taker states. But it was the reverse. George W. Bush was the candidate of the Taker states. Al Gore was the candidate of the Giver states. Consider: 78 percent of Mr. Bush's electoral votes came from Taker states. 76 percent of Mr. Gore's electoral votes came from Giver states. Of the 33 Taker states, Mr. Bush carried 25. Of the 16 Giver states, Mr. Gore carried 12..." http://elitetrader.com/vb/showthrea...ght=gore+AND+bush+AND+red+AND+blue#post422262
The North invaded "us?" No wonder you gravitate to Bush and his black and white, us or them mentality. As a Californian, I would be more than happy to secede from the red states and see who does better. It might be painful at first, but in the long run, I will take our natural resources and intelligence over the hick states anyday.
currencies would be the great equalizer... a cali dollar compared to a kansas dollar would be like the euro versus the ruble...............meaning even cheaper produce for the cali people, and the right to start as many unprovoked wars as the kansans would like...let them weaken their own currency and die because they don't like islam... it would be a pretty cool thing to watch...
If Ahnold had been a democrat, he would have been voted in too. Our main party in California is Hollywood.