I pointed out, here, that homicide rates are highest in red states. Since Republicans try to win votes with tales of out-of-control violent crime in big bad blue cities, I have often wondered to myself why a Democrat never seems to cite data pertaining to the issue. It's just a fact, for instance, that the states with the five highest homicide rates are, in order, Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, Missouri, and Arkansas. Maybe hot weather causes armed citizens to shoot one another? I don't know, and neither do Republicans. Illinois, a favorite whipping boy of the Republicans on account of Chicago, does crack the top 10 at number 9—which means, by the logic of the complaint, that it's doing better than the bottom five and also better than South Carolina and Tennessee (numbers 6 and 7, respectively).
I doubt it was because she received my telepathically transmitted advice, but I see now that the Democratic challenger in Oklahoma's gubernatorial race pointed out in a debate that, under the Republican incumbent, the state has higher rates of violent crime than either California or New York. The video of the entire debate is above; the exchange I'm referring to begins at the 41:00 mark. The reaction of the Republican governor is sort of funny. He laughingly denies that it's true and appeals to the audience: "Oklahomans, do you believe that we have higher crime than New York or California?" The audience, and even the debate moderators, seem to think it's a wild charge: "We'll fact check that," says one of the questioners. When he does, he'll discover that she's right. Of course there are fewer homicides and other violent crimes committed in Oklahoma than in New York or California. But the number of these crimes per 100,000 population is somewhat higher in Oklahoma, and an Oklahoman is more likely to get shot than a Californian or a New Yorker.
Actually, I think the fact checking has occurred, because the other day Marc Thiessen, a wingnut columnist whose delusions are published on the editorial page of the Washington Post, wrote a piece dismissing "the red state murder problem" as a "bogus claim" intended to divert attention from a raging crime epidemic in Democratic cities. He doesn't deny that violent crime rates tend to be highest in red states, but argues that this is because of all the criming in "Democrat-run cities" like New Orleans, St. Louis, Kansas City, and Birmingham, Alabama. Without these cities, says Thiessen, crime rates in the red states would drop significantly.
But this is no argument at all. Blue states have "Democrat-run" cities, too. St. Louis and Kansas City are in Missouri; New Orleans is in Louisiana; Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Oakland are in California; and New York City is in New York. Rates of violent crime are considerably higher in Missouri and Louisiana than in California and New York. Why? Thiessen's column is just gaslighting, but, if I was determined to take him seriously, I'd say his solution to the riddle must be that blue cities in red states are hell holes compared to blue cities in blue states. If you value your life and live in Birmingham, move to L.A. before it's too late!
Comments