Daily Ramblings

1) Extremely interesting Wall Street Journal article today about affluent West coasters moving into Montana and changing the political and economic demographics of that state. The state is now split between the largely rural, libertarian and Republican East and the more affluent, left-leaning West. A Democratic Presidential candidate has a chance to win here for the first time since 1992 (which wasn't even really a win for a Democrat since Ross Perot siphoned away a large proportion of Bush's votes.) The shift in US demographics is really a facinating subject that's being highlighted by this election cycle. Former "cowboy" states like Colorado and Montana (and even to some extent North and South Dakota) are suddenly in play for the Democrats. Similarly, states "colonized" by residents from more liberal areas of the country like Virginia (the DC suburbs) and North Carolina (the research triangle) are also now potential sources of votes for Democrats. Yet at the same time, states like Ohio and West Virginia are beginning to lean more heavily Republican. One theory proposed for this is that state's are dividing into those who have been affected positively by the shift to the information economy and those who have been affected negatively, with the former voting Democrat and the latter voting Republican. This seems to be a little democratic-centric to me. My personal opinion is that our current economy allows people to become much more flexible with where they live. So if liberal software programmers from California, like the man described in the article, wish to move to a place like California or North Carolina there is less standing in their way. So new democratic "enclaves" are springing up throughout the country, wherever large groups of these young (or youngish) urban professionals decide to set up shop. Meanwhile the Republican parties embrace of the religious right's social agenda, has consolidated their support of economically disenfranchised voters in former Democratic strongholds like Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia, who vote according to social issues, because neither party well represents their economic agenda (less free trade, etc) because it's worse for the country as a whole. So this trend of what we're seeing in Montana is only the beginning and over the next 10 to 20 years I believe a large part of the traditional post-Southern Strategy political map of the United States will be rewritten.

2) I'm reading David Herbert Donald's biography on Lincoln and I have just gotten to the section on Lincoln's tenure in Congress and his speeches on the Mexican War. Two things stood out for me. First, Lincoln believed that once a President began a war the populace should not criticize the President until after it's completion. He stated "that all those who, because of knowing too little, or because of knowing too much, could not conscientiously approve the conduct of the President, in the beginning of it, should...as good citizens and patriots, remain silent...at least till the war should be ended." Of course Donald added in a few ellipses there so it's possible he slightly misconstrued Lincoln's meaning. Second, the following quote is an interesting rebuttal to the Bush doctrine of preemption:

"Allow the president to invade a neighboring nation, whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion,...and you allow him to make war at pleasure...[this would] place our President where Kings always stood."

3)You know its going to be a long week when Tuesday feels like a Thursday.

4)Interesting link in the Financial Times to a US Obesity Map

5) 14.5 mile long run on Sunday, personal PR and did it at 6:45 pace