ROGER SIMON COLUMN
MARCH 14, 2005
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. - - I am watching a TV reporter tell me about the 10 fastest-growing states in America.
Nevada is first and California is tenth, but that is not the real purpose of the story.
No, the real purpose of the story is to point out that nine of the 10 - - all except California - - are Red States and how this is more bad news for the Democrats.
The reporter solemnly tells me that the Red States have picked up 7.5 million voters, while Blue States have picked up only 4.6 million.
To which I have only one reaction: So what?
Is there something in the air or water in Red States that automatically converts people from the Democratic to the Republican party? (Or vice versa?) Do people really say, "Well, I've just left Illinois and I'm living in Nevada now, so I better vote Republican."
Sure, people do tend to be influenced by the people around them, but people are far more likely to vote for reasons other than what state they live in. And regional differences are not what they once were in America.
For one thing, Americans are a highly mobile people. In 2003, according to the U.S. Census, some 7.6 million Americans moved from one state to another. This tends to break down regional differences, which have been eroding at least since the construction of the interstate highway system, if not before.
Much too much has been made out of Red States vs. Blue States in America. It is a handy way to think about some political matters, but it is not proof of some great chasm in the country.
In fact, the United States is a highly unified country, not just socially, but politically. There is no viable party of the extreme left or the extreme right in America. There is no significant communist or anarchist party on the left and no party advocating a military coup on the right.
I try to avoid sports metaphors, but as one political analyst said some years ago, "In America, politics is played between the 40 yard lines."
We play in the middle of the field. We avoid political extremes. The two parties battle to shove the ball a few yards one way or the other.
There are also some people - - hard as this is for some to believe - - who look at the two parties and don't see a whole lot of difference.
And maybe that's why the last two presidential elections were so close: Not because the country is so deeply divided, but because the choices aren't really much of a choice.
In 2000, the two major candidates "battled" over how to spend vast (and imaginary) surpluses. In 2004, the two major candidates "battled" over an Iraq war that both wanted to continue.
Sure, there were real differences between the candidates on other issues and there are real differences between the parties, but a great divide in this country? A vast gulf? A chasm?
I don't buy it.
And let's keep in mind what many people who live in the supercharged political world that I live in often forget: Many, many Americans simply don't care much about politics at all.
They don't pay much attention to politics and find all this Red State vs. Blue State stuff irrelevant to their lives.
And they may be right.