'06 Race Focuses on the Suburbs, Inner and Outer

In searching for any advantage in this year's hard-fought Congressional elections, the two parties are focusing with increased intensity on those cul de sac jungles of tenuous political loyalties, the suburbs and exurbs.

After years in which Republicans capitalized on rapid growth in outlying areas, Democrats now see an opportunity to make gains in close-in suburbs where changes in the composition of the population are working in their favor. In a dozen or so Congressional districts that are leading battlegrounds in the midterm elections, older, more densely packed suburbs are trending Democratic, helping to offset Republican dominance on the sprawling exurban frontier.

Democratic hopes of retaking the House, party strategists say, could hinge on places like Bellevue, a city of 107,000 just across Lake Washington from Seattle. Here, a fast-growing Asian population and an influx of empty-nesters and singles living in new residential complexes have helped to make this the kind of district that, while continuing to send a Republican to Congress, has turned increasingly Democratic.

Both sides are taking steps to tailor their messages to, and train their firepower on, those swing suburbs. On Friday, President Bush will fly into this prosperous district as the draw of a fund-raiser intended to help Representative Dave Reichert hold on to his seat. The president's arrival will follow hard on the heels of a visit by Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, who is in charge of the Democrats' efforts to win back the House.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/16/us/16suburbs.html?hp&ex=1150430400&en=c13d117dbb0f4919&ei=5094&partner=homepage

We make policies to cater to those who are most detached from reality. The city and countryside, where actual production takes place, will be ruled from the barcaloungers of Whitemanistan. I guess that's been true for years, but it's sick that the parties are up and admitting it. No wonder we spend trillions of dollars a year prosecuting marijuana smokers and conducting made-for-TV wars.

what are you talking about?

We rule them while trying to please whitebread suburbia. Hence the war on drugs, "workfare," etc. Most of our worst policies (I mean both New Dem and Repuke) come from trying to get suburban votes.

In terms of understanding where/how elections will be decided. I've been trying to study the new suburban battlegrounds and what House districts they might impact.

Here are more relevant paragraphs from the Times article:

"In "The New Metro Politics," a study he conducted with Thomas W. Sanchez, Dr. Lang found that in the last several presidential elections, a clear pattern had emerged: the more crowded the suburb, the greater the Democratic vote; the more open space or newer the suburb, the greater the Republican vote.

In the inner suburbs, the rings just around big cities, Democrats won 58 percent of the presidential vote in 2004, Dr. Lang found. In the mature suburbs, the next tier out, the Democratic share was less, 51.9 percent.

But the fastest-growing areas are at the far edge, sometimes 80 miles or more from the urban center, and that is where Republicans built up huge majorities. In the outer two tiers of the study, President Bush won 56.6 percent of the 2004 vote in what Dr. Lang called "the emerging suburbs," and 62.3 percent in the exurbs.

"At each greater increment of urban density, Democrat John Kerry received a higher proportion of the vote," Dr. Lang wrote. The pattern was the same in red states as in blue.

Democrats, who need a change of 15 seats to win control of the House, are studying Dr. Lang's research in an effort to get there.

"His thesis is very much at the center of this race," said Zack Silk, the campaign manager for Ms. Burner, the Democratic challenger to Mr. Reichert here."