<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Big city Barack</title>
	<atom:link href="http://redbluerichpoor.com/blog/2008/11/big-city-barack/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://redbluerichpoor.com/blog/2008/11/big-city-barack/</link>
	<description>Why Americans Vote the Way they Do</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Dec 2009 10:59:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: bullfighter</title>
		<link>http://redbluerichpoor.com/blog/2008/11/big-city-barack/comment-page-1/#comment-1257</link>
		<dc:creator>bullfighter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Nov 2008 20:29:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://redbluerichpoor.com/blog/?p=256#comment-1257</guid>
		<description>County size varies by region, at least as far as counties outside big metro areas are concerned. For example, Midwestern states tend to have a lot of counties and therefore low population per county. This will not affect counties with populations of, say, 250k and up, but it will be important for the points around the middle of your graphs.

Your breakdown by region is thus an important refinement, but I am not sure that the systematic variation in county size corresponds closely to the four standard geographic regions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>County size varies by region, at least as far as counties outside big metro areas are concerned. For example, Midwestern states tend to have a lot of counties and therefore low population per county. This will not affect counties with populations of, say, 250k and up, but it will be important for the points around the middle of your graphs.</p>
<p>Your breakdown by region is thus an important refinement, but I am not sure that the systematic variation in county size corresponds closely to the four standard geographic regions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill Ricker</title>
		<link>http://redbluerichpoor.com/blog/2008/11/big-city-barack/comment-page-1/#comment-1118</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill Ricker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2008 03:05:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://redbluerichpoor.com/blog/?p=256#comment-1118</guid>
		<description>How does this and your just prior couty analyses fit with The Big Sort thesis? Is there any way to separate the transhumanant component, change in county returns due to population shift / demographic change, from personal or national opinion?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How does this and your just prior couty analyses fit with The Big Sort thesis? Is there any way to separate the transhumanant component, change in county returns due to population shift / demographic change, from personal or national opinion?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
