Presidential Election 2004 results by county

HOLY CRAP! That map is bleeding Republican red!

right chiprj, but land mass does not equal population. look at someplace like kansas, lots of land few people. and then someplace like new york city, little land lots of people. you get the idea

That's a fascinating map, Drag.

Being from Indiana, that state makes perfect sense - the entire state is red except for Indianapolis, the major metropolitan center, Bloomington, the home of the largest university in the state, and Gary, the home of a large union population.

Cheers,
Daiwa

The only problem with this map is it looks outragouesly red but GW only won by 3.8 million votes, it wasn't a landslide. Places like N and S. Dakota Wyoming, etc. look nice and red, but there just aren't that many people there. Of course Texas went for him. It doesn't reflect population, it reflects acreage.

Bush does very well in rural areas and smaller towns. Even New York looks red and it went convincingly to Kerry. The Democrats do better in population centers.

One good thing about the electoral college system is that big city liberals don't always have a say on what rural conservatives can do with their land. Why should a big city liberal that knows nothing about farming dictate what a farmer can and cannot do with his land with ridiculous environmental laws?

I wish electoral votes weren't separated by state as they seem to be these days, but by county. As one could see, much of California went to Bush, but since many more people live on the coast, all of California went to Kerry. Candidates should receive the votes from the counties they win, and the majority of that state will receive the extra one or two electoral votes. I think that'd also give third parties a better chance.

what's goin on in the grey areas?  is that still uncounted or just a glitch?

Gary, the home of a large union population

used to be home of a large union population would be more accurate i think.  can't pay your dues without a paycheck.

what's goin on in the grey areas?

Possibly zero population areas? Hmm very Red for a 51%/49% race.

I wish electoral votes weren't separated by state as they seem to be these days

when were they not?

Possibly zero population areas? Hmm very Red for a 51%/49% race

the far southeast coast of florida was washed free of people this summer?    most of the state of maine moved somewhere else?    actually most of the vast ashtray areas of the great basin seem to be red.

when were they not?

I mean like, today, the winner of the state wins the entire state, even if almost half of the state voted for the other person. What I'd like to see is the electoral votes of a state divided by the amount of counties the candidates won. For example, in California, if there were 1,000 electoral votes, and 488 counties voted for Bush and 510 voted for Kerry, then Bush would win 488 electoral votes and Kerry would win 510 plus the 2 extra votes.

the winner of the state wins the entire state, even if almost half of the state voted for the other person

maine has some sort of procedure in which its four votes arent dedicated merely to the winner unless he or she passes a certain threshold (i believe that's how it works)

voters in colorado didnt support an initiative last tuesday that would have assigned electors to both winners and losers by percentage. 

 

Oh yeah, that map really spotlights how it was the richest 1% and stupid, evangelical southerners that voted for Bush. They thought Bush stole the 2000 election and completely ignored the fact that there was real opposition. They just thought they had to "educate" people and we'd all agree. I hope they do it again next time.

milwaukee county, wi is way too small or way too red i think