Following up on the current Republican assertion that what is urban cannot also be local, there’s been a lot more discussion today concerning cities and their political leanings.

The Overhead Wire asserts that building cities “shouldn’t be a partisan issue.”  There’s certainly something to be said for that – as adding density is probably one of the most obvious ways to embrace the free market.  Likewise is the recognition that all transportation modes are subsidized, and rail transit is the most effective means of transport in urban areas.  There are plenty of things within the urban condition for conservatives to like:

Conversely, Yonah Freemark takes a look at the results from the most recent Presidential race, showing that the voting patterns for people living in more dense areas just don’t show much bi-partisanship:

The contrast is even more remarkable in the counties on the limits of typical density; those that are most urban went overwhelmingly for Mr. Obama, while those that are the most rural went to Mr. McCain with a large majority.

2008 Presidential Election Results in Extreme Low and High Density Counties
Density	Total Votes	# of Counties	Obama Share	McCain Share
0-14 ppl/sq mi	2.5 million	667	38 %	60 %
10,002-57,173 ppl/sq mi	3.7 million	8	81 %	18 %

Since we’re discussing election results, I’ll use this opportunity to show off some of the cool cartograms from Mark Newman at the University of Michigan.  Yonah broke down the results by county and by density.  County by county results look like this:

2008 Presidential election results by county

And, when you look at the same data in a cartogram that scales county size in proportion to population, graphically displaying the density of the county:

2008 Presidential election results by county - scaled by county population

So, there’s obvious truth to Yonah’s point, as well – America’s big cities are quite blue.

The larger point, however, is that national partisan divides and cleavages don’t apply all that well to local issues.  There are numerous politicians that are certainly progressive on national social and economic issues, but wouldn’t be on the forefront of progressive urban policy.  Likewise, business-oriented leaders like Mike Bloomberg (regardless of his party affiliation) are certainly progressive at the local level. Guys like Bill Lind (from the video above) and the late Paul Weyrich emphasize the points.

There’s certainly a conservative niche in urban areas that could be carved out, but it’s not clear that Republicans want to do the carving.  When Jim Oberstar’s draft transportation bill is labeled as an “exercise in lifestyle modification,” or that transit opponents argue that advocates want to force everyone into Soviet housing, it’s clear that they don’t care to take that step.