I want to check with Mica on Mornin Joe before I come to any conclusions.

My problem (actually I have scores of problems but why split hairs) is that 90 grand in NYC is real different than 90 grand in Albany or 90 grand in Mpls.

Obama had a landslide victory only if you compare his percentage win to elections going back to 1980.
Same thing goes for electoral votes. But at least we know who won this time.

Other than that I will rely on the old adage:

A horse is a horse, of course of course, and no one can talk to a horse of course...

Marx is attributed to have said that religion was the opiate of the masses. I believe that these days it has been easy credit that has been the opiate of the less well off. And now the with drawl symptoms will start to set in big time.

C

You forgot the most important map of all:

http://strangemaps.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/popvssodamap.gif?w=680&h=410

Not useful comparisons without other maps beside the Bosnian one. I get nada out of it.

What I get out of the US ones is that cities are liberal, country is not. Wow.

A more interesting map, absent here, is the voting-trend one. It shows the whole country going more Democratic, with the exceptions of Appalachia and Alaska. Guess we can conclude that, rather than civil war, we will see less polarization, or at least less symmetrical tension, as conservatives get their asses kicked, deservedly, for fucking up the country so thoroughly.

Here is a juicy, I wish I had said that, quote from Ms Ehrenreich's post:

Which is why any serious government attempt to get the economy going again – and I leave aside the unserious attempts like bank bailouts and other corporate welfare projects—has to start at the bottom. Obama is promising to generate three million new jobs in “shovel ready” projects, and let’s hope they’re not all jobs for young men with strong backs. Until those jobs kick in, and in case they leave out the elderly, the single moms and the downsized desk-workers, we’re going to need an economic policy centered on the poor: more money for food stamps, for Medicaid, unemployment insurance, and, yes, cash assistance along the lines of what welfare once was, so that when people come tumbling down they don’t end up six feet under. For those who think “welfare” sounds too radical, we could just call it a “right to life” program, only one in which the objects of concern have already been born.

If that sounds politically unfeasible, consider this: When Clinton was cutting welfare and food stamps in the 90s, the poor were still an easily marginalized group, subjected to the nastiest sorts of racial and gender stereotyping. They were lazy, promiscuous, addicted, deadbeats, as whole choruses of conservative experts announced. Thanks to the recession, however – and I knew there had to be a bright side – the ranks of the poor are swelling every day with failed business owners, office workers, salespeople, and long-time homeowners. Stereotype that! As the poor and the formerly middle class Nouveau Poor become the American majority, they will finally have the clout to get their needs met.