What a Difference a Week Makes

San Francisco -- I still smile whenever I read or hear the phrase, "President-Elect Obama." And as we learn more about the election results, it becomes even clearer that Americans voted overwhelmingly for "new energy for America." Since the election, environmentalists have picked up another key Senate seat, in Oregon, where Jeff Merkley unseated Gordon Smith. Seven of 2008's "Dirty Dozen," selected every year by the League of Conservation Voters, are gone.

Every four years, the New York Times publishes a county-by-county "Voting Shifts" map showing how much change there was in each county's vote for the Republican and Democratic presidential candidates. This year's map illustrates a striking fact: Most of the country -- almost all of the country --  got bluer. Even regions that Obama didn't carry (with one significant exception) gave him a bigger percentage of the vote than they gave to John Kerry. Yes, rural counties in Arizona got redder, as did some in Alaska -- but both states, while going for McCain, did so by a smaller percentage than they did for Bush in 2004. Obama's mandate is national, not regional. Even in conservative Utah, every county voted a lot more Democratic than in 2004.

What was the one big exception? There's a crescent of redder counties beginning on the Ohio/Pennsylvania border, swooping down through the coal fields of West Virginia, Virginia, eastern Kentucky, through Tennessee, northern Alabama, and over into the oil and gas fields of Louisiana, Texas, and Oklahoma. This geography has two commonalities: It's the heart of the "Bible Belt," the region of strong, socially conservative, and overwhelmingly white evangelical Christianity, and it's the center of America's dependence on fossil fuels. Carbon-dependent counties went more strongly for John McCain than they had for George Bush -- while the rest of the country swung the other way. You can literally see the new energy economy and the new politics that it powers emerging on this chart.

Now, Obama didn't beat McCain as handily as Bill Clinton beat Bush, Sr. and Bob Dole -- because there was no Ross Perot to pull off disaffected Republicans. But he got an absolute majority of the vote, which Clinton never did, and far more absolute votes than any president in recent history. There's a mandate there -- the challenge will be to take advantage of it.

Comments

[UN]

Until people like Mr. Pope quit picking and chosing their science by ignoring the UN study on meat consumption this green movement will go no further. That is why 69% of the US polled by CNN a few months ago said they wanted to open the coasts to drilling.

As long as Carl and Obama are eating meat they are part of the problem. We know the repubs don't care - sadly looks like Carl is with them.

[Dr. J. Singmaster]

No difference between weeks in the ever-expanding, never-ending messes of organic wastes and sewage that will probably be what wastes our descendants" lives if we do not act now. The facts that 1. EPA has announced a conference on the risks of drugs in drinking water and that 2. NAS has just released a major report warning of major action being needed to control pollution from storm drain discharges indicate that present handling of those messes is not working any more. Unfortunately those indications of problems with the messes have not yet gotten the attention of any environmentalists, who ought to be calling for action.
I urge Carl to start looking beyond his narrow viewpoint and start calling Sierra Club members and others to get the pyrolysis program going to handle those messes. Carl has gotten an e-mail statement on how the pyrolysis program would destroy germs, toxics and drugs in those messes while actually removing some carbon from the natural biocycling of carbon dioxide that occurs with the messes. Dr. James Singmaster, Fremont, CA

[kim]

I have been wondering who might be rumored to take over as EPA Chief when Obama got elected. But not wanting to jinx anything, didn't dare look until I had some spare time this evening. When I saw the name Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., I thought, yes, there is hope for change, great change. I hope it comes to pass.

[Ed]

In 2004, John Kerry got 34.5% of the vote in Greene County, Indiana. Many people here have relatives who were in the Klan not that many years ago. The county is on the edge of Indiana's coal production area, not far from Illinois. Most of the county is farm country. We rank 79th and 81st out of 92 counties in per capita and median household income in the state respectively. Only about 20% hold a college degree. It is the fifth largest county in the state but ranked 49th in population.

I list all this to emphasize the rural, conservative nature of the county. If any county was to hold fast to previous voting stats it would be this one. Yet, in spite of the demographics and the historic connection to the KKK, this year voters gave Barak Obama 41.9% of the vote.

There is no doubt that vote totals like this from the rural counties contributed to his win in Indiana. Clearly, even the voters in my adopted county are ready for change.

[Jim G]

I looked at the demographic stats on nytimes.com, and it is clear that minorities were a huge factor in the election. Bush had the Hispanic vote, but the Hispanics went for Obama this time. I would like to believe this change was based on issues. Unless polls were / are conducted to find out, we can't rule out the switch was due to Obama also being a minority -- minorities voting for minorities. While caucasians voted for a minority based mostly on issues I presume. Resulting in a conclusion that we should go with minority candidates when they are equally qualified as in the case of Obama.