Bridging the gap!

August 10, 2023

[No audio version today; I am on the road!]

          As Democrats continue to reflect on the lessons of their victory in Ohio, I want to add a thought to the conversation that is not immediately intuitive. It arises from a reader comment (by John C) citing a New York Times map showing the county-by-county results for Issue 1. The NYTimes map is HERE and is accessible to all. As noted by the reader, the map portrays a stark divide between rural and urban areas in Ohio. The reader urges Democrats to reflect on the map and then raises this question:

Going forward and thinking about a potential national map, how do we bridge the gap in voting seen in the voting patterns and how do we doggedly work to assure that on a national map we don’t see states with rural communities pull the country into another disastrous electoral loss?

          The reader’s question has vexed the Democratic Party for more than two decades. Democrats have done far more to improve the lives, health, and well-being of rural residents than have Republicans. Indeed, Republicans seem intent on denying rural residents the healthcare, infrastructure, food security, job security, and retirement security that they desperately need. And yet, rural voters seem to blame Democrats for their problems without acknowledging all the good the Democratic Party has done for rural residents.

          That disconnect is a major challenge for the Democratic Party. Without meaning to minimize or dismiss that challenge, we cannot fall victim to the seductive simplicity of the “rural” vs. “urban” mythology that seems apparent in maps like the one prepared by the NYTimes.

          Without criticizing the reader’s important question or the accuracy of the NYTimes map, we must recognize that portraying political divides by land mass distorts the reality of American politics. Indeed, the typical “red states” vs. “blue states” binary depiction of America is misleading to the point of being harmful. Such cartoonish representations encourage frustrated citizens to talk about a “coming civil war” in America—which is not going to happen!

          America is far more variegated and heterogeneous than “red states” vs. “blue states” maps depict. Let’s look at the Ohio results as an example.

          The first point is that depicting voting-results based on land mass is inherently misleading. Land does not vote; people do. The NYTimes chart makes it appear that the urban centers in Ohio (Columbus, Cincinnati, Dayton) are “blue” bastions while the rest of Ohio is “red”—and that the state is roughly evenly divided between rural and urban voters. But if the relative sizes of counties were adjusted to reflect their population density, it would become apparent that Ohio, as a whole, defeated Issue 1. (Of course, we can’t “write off” the voters who lost, a point that I address below.)

          For example, in Franklin County (seat of Columbus, the state capital) the results were as follows:

Franklin County (544 sq miles)

No:   246,977    (75%)

Yes:    82,031   (25%)

          Compare Franklin County to Noble County, which is about 75% of the size of Franklin County as measured by land mass:

Noble County: (405 sq miles)

No     961   (38%)

Yes 1,568  (62%)

          On the NYTimes map, Franklin County and Noble County appear to be about the same size, suggesting that rural voters in Noble County offset the vote in Franklin County. That is an obvious and unavoidable distortion of maps presenting voting results by land mass. The NYTimes map creates a misimpression about the degree of polarization of voters in Ohio based on the alleged “rural” vs. “urban” divide.

          Which brings me to my second point: Noble County isn’t “red” any more than Franklin County is “blue”—unless we want to pretend that the 961 people in Noble County and the 82,031 people in Franklin County who voted and lost do not exist. The voters who “lost” in the Issue 1 election do exist and cannot—indeed, must not—be ignored.

          When we reduce America to “red states” and “blue states,” we mentally ignore the tens of millions of Democrats who live in “red states” and are fighting the good fight every day. We cannot forget them. They need our support, attention, donations, and community. Otherwise, they will give up and go away. That would be a tragedy of immense proportions.

           Finally, note that rural Noble County (62% v 38%) is less polarized than urban Franklin County (75% v 25%). Moreover, there was only a 607-vote difference in Noble County between the “winners” and the “losers”—a margin that is surmountable and should give Democrats hope that they can one day be the majority party in a supposedly “red” county.

          Okay, enough with the math. My point is that every state, county, city, and town in America is diverse politically and we should not surrender to a cartoon that allocates counties to one party or the other.

          Is the “rural” vs. “urban” divide in America real? Of course, it is! But it is not binary. We ignore that truth at our peril.

          Let me close this section by discussing an interview that prompted me to write on this topic. A reporter in the field asked an Ohio voter who supported Issue 1 what she thought about the potential that the proposed initiative would lose. The voter was obviously upset at the prospect of losing and gave a reply that said, in part, “A civil war is coming.” No, it is not!

          To understand why, let’s consider the supposedly “red” Noble County discussed above. What are the divided citizens of Noble County going to do in the “coming civil war”? Go to the town square, line up 961 citizens on one side and 1,568 citizens on the other side, and start shooting at one another? No, those politically divided citizens of Noble County are friends, neighbors, family members, and church members who disagree on a political issue. They rely on one another every day of their lives for employment, healthcare, infrastructure, city services, and spiritual support. They will not “go to war” against one another.

          Are the citizens of Noble County going to attack Franklin County, where 82,031 like-minded Ohioans live? No!

Is Ohio—where a majority of voters support reproductive liberty—going to attack California for being too liberal? No!

          Vocalizing the fantasy of a “coming civil war” is a way for voters to vent their anger about losing dominion over communities they once controlled by birthright. Is scattered violence possible? Of course, it is! See January 6th. But scattered violence is not a “civil war” and we should stop suggesting that “a war is coming”—because such talk feeds the delusional fantasies of “lone wolves” and misguided, lost, and angry young men.

          The results in Ohio reflect an America that is diverse, pluralistic, contentious, multicultural, divided, and united in equal measure. Some look at that mixture of attributes and see a nation warring camps of red and blue. We should look at those qualities and see the strength of a vast nation that is more than the sum of its parts.

          Yesterday in Ohio, thousands of communities voted on an emotionally charged issue that divided friends, neighbors, and family. Today, those friends, neighbors, and family returned to the task of making a better life for themselves and future generations. They may still disagree on Issue 1, but that’s okay. That is the very idea of America—we can disagree without dissolving into warring states, counties, and towns. As Churchill said, “Democracy is the worst form of government except all the other forms of government.”

Concluding Thoughts.

          Thanks for accompanying me on my ramble. Let me end where I began—the question posed by the reader, “How can we bridge the gap in the voting patterns?” The answer is at hand: Joe Biden’s policies have addressed the concerns of rural voters more directly than any other president in a generation. Communicating that fact is on us. The resources are available. We need to reach out to rural residents in the same way we reached out to Ohio voters—at the grassroots level. Referring people to WhiteHouse.gov is not a winning strategy. Talking to rural voters is. Join a grassroots organization that is reaching out to Americans where they live.

          As I was writing “Concluding Thoughts,” I received a note from the leader of my SwingLeft chapter asking me to promote an effort to form new SwingLeft groups in Richmond (VA), Queens (NY), and Twin Cities (MN). See Swing Left Team Up Program. If you live in one of those communities and are looking for a way to become involved, SwingLeft is a great organization. But there are hundreds of other organizations that are waiting for you with open arms!

          If you haven’t already joined a grassroots organization, now is the time to do so in advance of 2024! We need to get to work on “bridging the gap” between Democrats and voters who feel that they have been left behind or forgotten.

          Talk to you tomorrow!