Is this basically right?

Is this basically right?

Wisconsin, Michigan and Pensylvannia also belong to dumbfuckistan.

this

Trick question, it's all dumbfuckistan

Everything except Alaska, Montana, (das it) Maine, Vermont, and New Hampshire should be Dumbfuckistan.

If you're a hillary voter

Yes. A significant part of modern technological and scientific progress come from blue US states.

if you reverse the labels it is

It's really more like this

t. knower

Wisconsin is heaven on earth fight me

>his "CORRECTION" doesn't include New Jersey, miseruh, and only half of California

No. The map looks more like this

All americans are dumb. For every racist redneck there is a ghetto nigger.

I come from California and I can tell you that tech is a tiny bubble and that 99.9% of Californians are fucking retarded and/or blown out on dude weed LMAO or on meth. The taxes and living expenses go up year after year but they never move, just bitch about it because “muh cali weather”

I don't get the map.

Yes your right this is more accurate :^)

Maybe Anchorage ...

>Alaska

Sarah Pallin

Considering how many states with significant African American or Hispanic populations are labelled as "Dumbfuckistan" while the very white regions of New England and the Pacific Northwest are labelled as "America", I think this map is very racist. I will report you to the UK Cyber Police hoping they will arrest you for hate speech.

>implying you wouldn't motorboat them tiddies

i wanna fuck her hard

mommy merkel mommy merkel mommy merkel

This is pretty much what northerners think. But if you ask me the whole country is really one big dumbfuckistan. A whole lot of ugly coming out of everywhere, not just the south. Isn't fair giving them all the blame for being stupid when everyone else is doing it too.

My god no.

Why do people still use the 2004 electoral map for these?

No, this is.

Wisconsin is just BadMinnesota

...

Almost.

>Wisconsin
>Michigan
>Pensylvannia

Kauai is pretty neat

>still trying after Nov. 9

cringe

name one (1) positive impact trump has had on our country

Pretty much. Although, some of those states dont deserve to be in red, since the rigged electoral college is a shit system.

The good thing is that Georgia will become a blue state within my lifetime

LOL HE TRIGGERED LEFTIST KEKS XDDD

BASED MAGA PEDE GOD EMPEROR

and texas too

when the GOP is finally irrelevant I will be so happy

Colorado is not in Dumfuckistan (it's honorary west coast). Other than that it's accurate.

This and also Illinois. It's just Michigan and Wisconsin but blue.

Enlighten this leaf about why these states are gonna be blue please

>still posting the wrong image

Not him but he squashed TPP. Hard to think of something other than that but it certifiably is something.

Yes because the dnc is so much better and not corrupt or bigoted in the slightest

I believe its mostly because of the Latino population. Across the board, minorities within the country are more likely to vote Democratic. Trumo didnt win the election, but because of the way they draw district lines, more votes did not give Hillary the states she won.

Why do you have a Two Party System anyway?

They aren't. Just delusional Tumblrites dreaming.

>le Gerrymander faic

They're one of the few places in the country young professionals are actually moving to. Their cities are also just rapidly expanding period and generally speaking urban voters vote left regardless of demographics. We've seen it with Virginia and Colorado which moved from swing state to solid blue. NC used to be solid red and is now a swing state. GA and TX will be come swing states pretty soon and from there it's only a matter of time until they turn blue (Hillary already got 43% of the vote in Texas this year). Having said that you can pretty much guarantee every other swing state is going to be solid red in a bit of time. (NYC, DC, etc move to NC and GA, LA, SF, Seattle move to TX and CO, rust belt swing states move into NYC, DC, LA, SF, and Seattle to replace the other workers.)

Those states aren't going to flip blue unless the Democrats find someone who connects with that part of the country. The last time Texas and Georgia voted Democrat was when Jimmy Carter, a Southerner, was running. I don't see anything to indicate that such a candidate is anywhere on the horizon.

Hispanics will not be the majority in Texas but will be at a point where they can vote with democrats to win in Texas.
I don't know about Georgia but it has slowly been becoming liberal especially in Atlanta because of the booming economy there.
The fellow above me summed it up a lot better.
Both parties are very corrupt.
Everyone knows this.
What will decide the 2020 election is who the democrats choose.

you know if you turned your lips inside out, you'd look like Jimmy Carter, heheh.

Thanks for explaining it. Now I'm sorry to be a bother but could you be so kind as to answer my other question here about why you only have Two Parties (at least two parties that matter)? Again sorry if I'm being annoying.

Clinton was from the South, no?

yea, he's from arkansas

He was from Arkansas and served as governor for 2 terms and was the attorney general there as well.
Hence why Arkansas went blue in 1992

You going to prove it wrong or use the cringy "le" jokes?

Trump won Georgia with a 50% vote for Republicans in 2016, as opposed to the 53% of votes that went towards Romney in 2012. The numbers are declining while more minority populations becone eligable to vote. Demographics have already shifted, majority of babies born today are non-white.

He was but he ran against a guy from Texas the first time and a guy from Kansas the second time. Also no Democrat presidential candidate post-Clinton has won jack in the South or Midwest. Northeasterners like John Kerry and Hillary Clinton do not win you those states--Trump is also a Northeastener but picked a Midwestern VP.

What? I wasn't trying to prove you wrong, I was just memeing about Gerrymandering being a thing. I didn't mean to offend.

The Hispanic vote is mostly a meme though.

>Illinois Wisconsin or Minnesota
>shit tier by any standard

The two parties are best thought of as coalitions that contain a wide range of ideologies ranging from the most timid centrists to some real lunatics.

>Alabama has a lower HDI than fucking Nunavut
Nani?!

it is british "banter"

Hdi is a meme

Some of the Democrat names I've heard mentioned for 2020 include people like Corey Booker and Fakeahontas, both Northeasterners, so it appears they haven't figured out why they lost.

Just how it's been historically, We've really only had two major parties for almost 200 years. Plus there's the issue nowadays where if neither candidate gets the majority of the electoral vote the congress gets to decide the election. Not that it really matters, since even Ross Perot who got 20% of the vote didn't win a single state.

Maybe.
But the hispanics in Texas are increasing.
The good news for the republicans is that a large chunk of midwestern states are becoming more solid red.
I agree.
Trump with a midwestern president simply dominated the Virginian and Clinton.
It's just how good you can live not how good you will live.
If they run either they will lose.
Booker will cause another fracture like Hillary did and Pocahontas is simply too controversial.

At least Nunavut can claim some natives who are distantly related to Asians

Alabama is cursed with black people.

Yeah, income, education, and healthcare are all memes you southern nigger.

What's wrong with Warren?

>It's just how good you can live not how good you will live.
The statistics are literally per capita.

Booker isn't too bad, but they'll lose hard as fuck if they put Elizabeth Warren forward. Trump would make a joke out of her

They've been saying that their pet minorities will finally dethrone White Supremacy™ for a good long while now, despite the Right's electoral suplex being the biggest kick in the dick to that idea realistically possible.

She is way too left.
Democrats don't need another warren sanders running or it will alienate the midwesterners who mostly Centrist.
I'd rather have booker running then her.

she's far-left politically and has socialist tendencies economically

What I'm getting from this thread is that Trump will serve a second term?

The thing about Democrats is that they're very lazy, unmotivated voters. Obama was the only Democrat presidential candidate since LBJ to win a solid majority of the popular and electoral vote. Other than that, all electoral landslides post-1964 have involved Republican presidential candidates.

I disagree, Booker I think is safe enough to appeal to either side of the democratic party. Hillary was essentially a republican who was in favor of social justice, Booker is an actual democrat with positive experience.

Worst of both worlds. She's super left like Bernie, but she's not anti-establishment so you're pushing pretty much everyone that isn't in a large city to vote for Trump.

Northwest, actually

She used to be cool when she was simply a Consumer Protection Bureau advisor and Senator, but the nomination of Hillary Clinton to the Dems in the primary shattered any semblance of her consistency and loyalty.

She went from fighting for consumer rights to supporting a literal bank shill in the blink of an eye, just to get a (D) presidential win. You don't throw yourself at those opportunities if you have any shred of dignity. You abstain and wait til 2020, quietly. Her support for Clinton is the problem.

I wouldn't rule it out

Warren not only is extremely dumb but she has a loose mouth and tends to say embarrassing things.

He has a pretty good shot.
Democrats can't seem to get anyone good that their voters will vote for whereas the Republicans have an entire array of politicians that are well-known.
Rubio,Kasich,Cruz and even Scott.
Wasn't that medical shilling a big thing for him?
I'm just wondering if the far leftists will fracture again especially if warren runs.

probably
dems are just shattered, if they have some serious candidate we will know by this time next year but it should've been apparent already. Republicans may not like Trump but they should know better than to try and put up someone to stop him again since he btfo everyone last time. Only Pence could stand a chance and then Trump would just push the gay genocide stuff

I think Trump will definitely serve a second term. I don't think he'll have a republican house and senate at his disposal. The great thing about Trump is that he can blame pretty much everything his voters don't like (such as getting rid of, or not getting rid of healthcare) on the political parties and not himself. Unless the dems run Gabbard of Sanders (which is never going to happen) there's no reason for any of the rust belt to move to the dems. If the GOP gets half the shit they want done done then people will be furious with them. But they won't take it out on Trump.

I've honestly no idea. The media had me convinced that Trump was going to be slaughtered and he's also literally Hitler, and then he won HARD.
And since nothing this presidency actually seems harmful so far, the question is if the media a screeching so far has had any effect.

>it will alienate midwesterners
Midwesterners are the ones who rejected Clinton because she was a corporate neolib shill. Update your facts and stop talking about things you haven't researched

>if u don't vote like mi ur a dumbfuck
>lok at mi, im so toleront xDDDDDD

Double standards are an american pastime

I've heard about it but really that's the ONLY negative thing I've heard about him. His record is squeaky clean otherwise unlike Clinton, and also unlike Clinton he's done stuff like live in the projects as mayor of Newark so people think of him as someone who really knows what the struggle is. If Booker appears solid Warren won't risk it for that exact reason, plus she seems pretty focused on running the senate.

isn't Pence the VP?

The Democrats also have the problem of too many geriatrics representing the party like Joe Biden, the Clintons, Pelosi, Maxine Waters, etc. The Republican Party has more youthful faces like Rubio, Ryan, Walker, etc.

They do seem to be at least somewhat aware of this and the Dems have made a few efforts to get younger--for example, Barbara Boxer and Harry Reid are gone now and Gen Xer-aged Senators have replaced them. Dianne Feinstein's time may be coming to a close as well, there's a push within the party to replace her with someone who isn't in their 80s.

>hawaii
>america

Just for laughs, here's 2008. There are very consistent regions in the country that wouldn't touch Hillary with a 10-foot pole dating back even 10 years ago

And there're very consistent regions in the country who have no fucking clue what they're doing.

I did mean the neoliberal capitalists but Clinton definitely wasn't a leftist.
She has an election so in 2018 so if she runs then it'll be easier to tell her motives.
He can run in 2020 in the republican primary.

Wait, the unincorporated territories can vote as well? I thought they didn't because, well, they're not a part of the US itself.

>The media had me convinced that Trump was going to be slaughtered
I honestly had to wonder what reality they were living in. Everywhere I'd see the Trump lawn signs, the huge rallies, Hillary's total non-likability and scandals coming out on her every week.

They can only vote in primaries since those decide which candidate the parties will run.

Huh, still kind of weird that they can vote at all about such a thing.

I lived in Texas and all my friends were right wing no matter what.
So I assumed my state was the exception and the media narrative was working everywhere else.

You think Anderson Cooper ever comes within 50 miles of suburban America? No. His kind live in their gated rich liberal neighborhoods and they're basically like George HW Bush with the grocery scanner.