Domestic Elections: Does geography determine the elections more than individual beliefs?

Do politicians make decisions based on the area they represent or their own personal opinion?

This is the question of partisanship. Do we elect officials to represent the majority opinion of their constituency or do we elect them to make decisions that we expect to be best for us even if it's not directly what we agree with?

I personally side with the second option. This is why we are a representative democracy and not a pure democracy. This allows room for error. We are not all political experts. Those who are typically find themselves in some sector of government for part or all of their career.

That aside, once the representatives are in these positions, do they vote based on the overarching well-being of the communities they have an obligation to or do they keep national interests in mind? I think that most support regional interests. This is exactly where geography comes into play. I have never noticed the importance of geographical factors in politics until our discussion last week, but it is certainly a prevalent aspect of voting behavior in government.

We discussed three political cultures in the U.S.: moralistic, individualistic, and traditionalistic. I can't speak as much for the first two viewpoints, which are more based in Northern parts of the U.S. However, I have a lot to say about the "traditionalistic" viewpoint.

First of all, it is shocking. I think of Southern politics as the exact opposite. Our regional politics supposedly reveal that we think elites in society are the only ones who should extensively participate in government and politics. I think that there is fine dividing line that this problem doesn't address. People THINK they have a lot of say in government and that they make a huge difference with little actions. The viewpoint of many politicians rests in meeting the basic needs of the large populations that live rurally and have little education. Then, the people believe that their actions are having an effect, while the government ensures stability.

I do agree that many in the South believe that "most governmental functions should not exist". Once again, this comes from rural education and the simpler, traditional way of living in the South. If the direct purpose cannot be seen in something, then of course there is no need for it to exist! (according to many minds here)

Overall, I think that these trends in state governments do exist to form regional patterns of government behavior, however, it is no wonder why you don't get many college students agreeing that they represent these on a personal basis. College is meant to help us see beyond our own views and stretch our minds to understand opposing viewpoints. Even if moralistic, individualistic, and traditionalistic patterns exist, you are not likely to find them represented in higher education.