Blaglash.com

While watching the RNC last week it struck me that republicans and democrats have neglected a demographic.  They’ve mocked, harangued, claimed and divided the demographic/geographies of “Small Towns” and “Cosmopolitan Cities”.  The republicans have decided to run with the whole small town values thing, and I guess the democrats have had the city thing down for a while now.  They’re both ignoring The Suburbs. 

I don’t even know what percentage of America lives in the suburbs.  I’m not sure what a small town consists of, but I am guessing it is less sprawl-ey than a suburb; I don’t think they’re the same thing.  And both Obama and McCain haven’t really called dibsies on the suburban demographic- nor have I noticed any direct appeals to them.  How could they appeal to them?  Why haven’t they tried?  How did the dichotomy of city/small town develop, and why is there so much tension between the two groups?  Are their values and expectations really that different?

1.  Both Obama and McCain could do a lot to appeal to suburban voters.  Suburbanites really care about education- Palin’s PTA mom claim  might be a swipe for this- and from my understanding, No Child Left Behind is affecting them negatively.  Suburban school districts are usually well-funded in comparison to city ones- but educational programs, alternative testing methods, an influx of teachers, high pay for teachers and physical education reform might be a good way to get the ball rolling.  Those ideas would actually work for rural and urban areas too. 

Developing more public transpotation connecting cities to suburbs might also be a way to reach the suburban demographic- I mean, Joe Biden takes the Amtrak every day, but not everyone has that option.  Public transportation improvement is sort of a holy trifecta that needs to be mentione more often by poltical candidates- it helps unemployment, will help global warming, and produces revenue. 

2.  I suspect that the candidates have overlooked the suburbs as a demographic because they’re hard to define, and seem relatively well-off compared to people in inner cities, distant urban area and Southern small towns.  But the truth is that there are a lot of people living in the suburbs.  Right now, their votes aren’t courted or claimed. 

3.  I am not sure how or why the tension between city and small town has developed; though I suspect it stems from classism, and more recently, racism.  Small Town-ers claim to have a moral superiority, that they’re “real” people with “real” values.  It’s understandable for cityfolk to recoil against that claim.  Who wants to be called an “unreal” person? 

4. In truth, the interests and political gains are different in both groups, and that’s why separate cases on behalf of candidates have to be made.  The middle ground is seen in the suburbs, where people often see both sides of the spectrum. 

I’d like to see one of the candidates mention the suburbs.   I feel like it would be kind of radical, which is funny because it’s the least radical place to live.