Democrats succeed in crowded havens of economic stagnation, like San Francisco, Chicago, Philadelphia and so forth. While Bush did pretty well in high growth cities -- I guess places like Phoenix, Dallas, Charlotte, Atlanta. I have no idea how the causation goes--whether certain cities have low growth because they're so liberal, or so liberal because they're stagnating, or some reciprocal thing, or something else.There is an article coming out in the next print issue of The Economist. No shortage of stuff to read.
BLUE CITIES, OBSOLETE CITIES? Will Wilkinson covers a presentation from one author of The Right Nation (details or compare prices) that reinforces my assertion that the Urban Archipelago is Fantasy Island.