The real difference between liberal states and Conservative States
 

The real difference between Conservative States and Liberal States in America is this.....In a Liberal State the state is crime laden and there are few nice places. In a Conservative State there are many nice places and a few bad places. :whistling:

Do you guys agree?

Need stats.:whistling:

People who say such things probably have not been a lot of places. I understand some people dont care about culture(other cultures) society, cities, whatever isnt their happy little world....

But, some of the nicest, wealthiest, most cultured, most intersting, and flat out fun places are pretty liberal. Austin, Seattle and San Francisco come to mind. Hell, the whole State of California is simply a wonderful and amazing place. New England is awesome, Orgeon, Washington State...stunning.

I am talking about crime, Rabbi. One of the most beautiful states in the Us is Virginia. But we do have some "bad places". Californey is a beautiful state but the people are not so pretty..not like tv shows...:rofl:I hate overdeveloped areas in all countries. Too much trash etc.

I don't have stats but my personal experience reflects this for the most part.

Youngstown Ohio, controlled by Liberal Democrats and is one big (insert bad word here) hole!

www.disastercenter.com/crime/macrime.htm

Massachusetts seems to have a few high crime areas,but still lower than average crime rates.

Not at all.

Crime is a problem that can be managed. It depends on a lot of factors.

What you COULD say is that the more developed an area is, the more services are provided, the more liberal the constituents tend to be.

Yea lemme tell you, New England is rough.











:rofl:

Not at all.

The most populated cities in the states are full of crime and liberals. It's actually the opposite of your post, in my state at least, whereas the majority of the state itself has low crime and is full of conservative ways, but the liberal s--t hole cities are more populated, thus they have more voters.

That's been my experience. I worked in Baltimore, Miami, Dallas, and New Orleans. In every one of them, crime was out of control, but in many of the smaller, more rural areas, life was nice.

The big difference I saw in living in liberal areas was that they taxed the bejesus out of you for everything, and regulated everything to death (just outside of Annapolis, MD, where I lived for five years, they actually checked to make sure you were putting out recyclables in the bin, and would reportedly fine you if you didn't put any in).

Nope. Not at all.

It's hard to do a mathematically rigorous correlation, because it's hard to quantify the degree of "liberalness" of a state, so I'll just grab a few examples.

Alaska, which is pretty much as "conservative" as states get by the definition I think you meant, had a per-capita violent crime rate 40% higher than the national average. New Hampshire's crime rate is 65% lower than the national average, and it's a very liberal state.

But then you look at another pair of states: Wyoming's crime rate is almost 50% lower than the national average, and California's is 8% higher.

Your statement isn't even "oversimplified" it's just wrong.

Selection bias. You were a federal agent (I assume, based on the screen name) and you saw lots of crime. But big cities also have lots of people in them, and most of those people are never involved in a crime.

Of course they're not. But, that doesn't change the fact that all four of those cities had extremely high murder rates and crime rates.

Baltimore was the worst. I actually saw two people shot and killed, while on surveillance, in incidents that had nothing to do with what we were doing. If you sat anywhere long enough, you would see a serious crime. New Orleans wasn't much better.

And, nothing happened to people who got arrested in Baltimore. It was as close to anarchy as I think a city could get (although guys I know who worked Detroit, too, said it was actually worse than Baltimore).

And, cities don't get much more liberal than Baltimore.

But, I also worked in the suburbs of these cities, too. And, they weren't nearly as bad (in fact, it was funny that many of the larger drug dealers lived in the suburbs, but dealt their dope in the cities). We all commuted to work. :)

:rofl::rofl:

I live in Arkansas which is liberal, has a St. Gov't that is controlled by Dems and is fairly crime free.

Sure, we have a few "rough" areas but a lot of the state has very little crime.

Plus since our state is controlled by Democrats we have a balanced budget and have not had the problems that some states have had.

White trash trailer park rednecks vote (R) in the Presidential Election but live their lives very liberal.

I think the initial premise is hard to justify. Define a liberal vs. a conservative state? Most states are varying shades of purple. Unless you can produce a state that has overwhelming conservative or liberal victories in popular vote year after year, it is difficult to claim any place as one or the other.

They do, although they're not at the top of the rankings by any means. Miami and Baltimore are quite high (according to the 2010 FBI UCR numbers) but Memphis, St. Louis, Oakland, and Detroit are higher.

Oddly (I was surprised, at any rate, when I looked) New Orleans and Dallas have fairly low crime rates compared to the worst offenders, with rates roughly half of Memphis. Still substantially higher than the national average, of course, but I was surprised to see they were that low.

I believe South Carolina has the highest crime rate in the country, but it's always leaning right.

CT overall has a very low crime rate, although we have some really bad inner cities(Bridgeport, New Haven, Hartford). Stay out of those and there isn't too much crime.

Actually, the violent crime rate in Arkansas is 10% higher than the national average.

A liberal State is just a conservative State that hasn't been mugged yet. :supergrin:

Liberal States have nice areas because many times they are the “cash registers” of the Nation or State (Washington DC) or due to advantageous to business locations like the East or West Coast.

That said people vote with their feet. They vote for freedom.

Take City Line Avenue in Philly; guess which side of the street is a slum? Liberalism illustrated.

Yep. Here in IL we have 102 counties. 99 of them vote conservative. Our last gubernatorial election the republican won 99 of 102 counties, but lost the election. Cook county is in the othere 3. Wanna guess where the highest crime is?:whistling:

I think you would be surprised at how much crime affects the average person. You do not need to raped, robbed or nurdered to be a victim of a crime. Vandalism, burglaries of homes and cars, theft of cars are all prevelent. I grew up in nice neghborhoods in a crime ridden city. We were the victims of burglaries 3 times. We had our car window shot out with a 12 gauge. All of it was essentially background noise. Where I work it is pretty common to talk to one victim and then have a few others pop out of their homes. Most do not report it.

As for the OP I do not agree.

Pretty and livable are two different things. The worst two weeks I ever had was a week in San Fran. Didn't like WA, except the climb to Mt Rainiers' glacier.

Been and lived in enough places that I don't go anywhere unarmed any more, so that eliminates both East and West Coast liberal states as well as the Second East Coast, Chicago. I have friends that come down from Chicago occasionally and they were horrified when I pointed out everybody in my residence for the get together was armed, except for them

(The 'Ruling' politicians concerns about me carrying a gun tell me all I need to know about what they think of me, and who to stay away from.)

SF is a hard place to live or visit for very long unless you have a lot more money than the average person. I would not live there unless my gross income was over $300,000.

The rest of the state gets better as you get further from LA or SF. The Sierras and their foothills are amazing this time of year. All the tourists go to Yosemite and Tahoe in the summer. The fall is perfect time. Due to my wife being in school for a lot of our marriage it has been a long time since we have gone up there this time of year. I hope to get up there in the fall one of these years before the oldest kid hits grade school. Even places like Monterey or Santa Cruz are nice this time of year even though they are pretty close to the sucky parts of CA.

As for Washington I think it is a pretty nice place. I would live closer to the OR side of the state though. Much prettier and less people. The Seattle area just seems like a mess to me. Their gun laws are very good considering CA is next door and transplants have damaged OR. NV looks like it is going downhill faster than OR and WA these days. I think it is because Sacto and even SF are pretty close to Reno. Not to mention LV is just 4 hours away from LA. That is pretty much a day trip.

The only difference is population.

And this is scary, as the country's population continues to explode past unsustainable proportions.

In the future, we all live in a liberal state.