If your point is that the Southern states are crucial to electoral victory, then you're right.
But I think the analogy to the War Between the States is flawed in multiple ways, and in poor taste.
Just my opinion...not a flame.
Why "in poor taste"?
I think the comparison is quite valid. Take a look at any state...take California....You have a handful of counties voting liberal democrat, making the laws for the rest of us, consolidating power and wealth in the university ridden, coastal cities. Lack of representation and being ruled by the wealthy north is what the Civil War was about.
I'm having a hard time too. How can on compare slavery and the wealth begotten from slavery to today? It's a bit of an insult to the progress we've made.
I think the analogy to the War Between the States is a good one, not from a purely geographical perspective, but from an ideological one.
I think you have to go back to 1860 or 1776 to find the nation so polarized philosophically.
And the geographical picture is misleading as there are large minorities in the "Blue" states which supported Bush and vice-versa.
But by and large, I would say the South in general better represents "traditional American values" than the northeast or the "Left" coast.
Whaddyamean? The democrats have already declared that it is a war between the states. They are the one's who have declared everyone who doesn't live in NY, SF and Hollywood as hicks.