So, @colliric When they show the districts how much of a percentage is that, when it shows that it's under control?
I think you're being purposefully misrepresenting this. I know, as well as you, that an area can be politically conservative and that can represent a mere 35% of the population.
I know how the system works, remember? Canada has more than two political parties, too.
eg. Edmonton is Conservatives. Calgary is Liberal. This only represents that 40% of each voted as such and truly doesn't represent the population's ideology.
It's bullshit. This whole thread is Bullshit. Liberals and Conservatives live in cities. The truth is that because of the population density, it appears as though liberals are the vast majority, when it's probably closer than you think.
Also, living in cities is eco-friendly. 7 Reasons That City Living Is Eco-friendly1. Density and better land use
When living centers are heavily populated and planned with mixed-use neighborhoods (residential combined with commercial), the space is used more efficiently. Consider a square mile of a suburb and a square mile of a city. Which has a better use of space? There are more activities in a city square mile, making it more efficient.
2. Public transportation, extensive bike lanes, and walking paths
Good public transportation eliminates the need for you to own a car. Traveling by bus or train, you save money on insurance, gas, parking and car repairs. There are fewer emissions per person when there are hundreds packed into one mode of transportation. As with public transportation, if you can walk or bike anywhere, you will not need a car. In the country or suburbs, you need to get in your car to run errands or get to work.
3. Recycling centers and recycle/reclamation programs
Many good-sized cities now have full recycling programs. Smaller communities lack this option or services are limited.
4. Green spaces
Urban planners and city governments are getting smart to the advantages of green spaces. Parks, nature preserves, botanical gardens, waterways and greenbelts soften the harshness of a city, reconnect people to nature and become social gathering places, teach environmentalism and offer psychological well being for residents. Aside from the added beauty, green spaces also absorb rainwater runoff, prevent soil erosion, cool the city, and turn CO2 into oxygen.
5. Urban gardening or farming, and farmer’s markets
City codes are changing to allow residents to grow food and keep livestock. You may be able to dig up your yard for a small vegetable patch, or you can grow in containers on your balcony or porch. If you can’t grow in your own yard, look for a community garden. Whether you can grow at home or not, farmer’s markets are sprinkled throughout cities. Farmers come in from the country and sell fresh, organic produce. Buying local for a wide variety of goods is easier in cities.
6. Job opportunities closer to home
There are more jobs and a larger variety in a city. Pay is generally higher, too, than a suburban job. Your commute is likely to be shorter, saving you money and reducing emissions at the same time.
7. Accessible nightlife, culture, and social services
There are an unlimited number of things to do when you want to go out with less fuel to burn to get to them. There is a lot of stimulation and inspiration in a city only a short journey away from home. Art abounds in a city. A large variety of music, theaters and museums offers an education in itself. A city provides more libraries, recreation and medical services than a suburb or rural area. You may not be able to find all of these in one place, so decide on what suits your needs best.https://www.builddirect.com/blog/reason ... -friendly/Which Is More Environmentally Responsible, Urban or Rural Living?Cities are characterized by dense housing, with many more people living in a comparatively small area. This concentrates human land use, easing pressure on natural areas outside the city. Without the high demand for suburban or rural living, there would be much less pressure on agriculture lands and wild lands, less habitat fragmentation, and less roadkill-causing car traffic.
This dense urban fabric means small dwellings, requiring far less energy to heat and cool and leaving less room for energy-hungry appliances than the bigger homes typical of the countryside.
A walking lifestyle is more accessible in the city, where the workplace may be located within walking or biking distance. In rural areas people are much more reliant on car transportation, contributing to greenhouse gas emissions. For those not walking to work or to conduct errands, public transportation options are usually much more accessible to urban residents.
Access to quality local food. Surprisingly, it is often easier to find farmers markets in the city, where shoppers can make choices that favor local foods grown following sustainable practices. However, some of the worst food deserts in the country are in economically depressed urban areas, where the only accessible sources of food are convenient stores and fast-food restaurants offering few healthy and environmentally conscious options.
While it is admittedly more of a health issue, in the United States water quality is generally better in cities, counter-intuitively. There, everyone is connected to a municipal water source that has been treated and is routinely tested. In rural areas, most people rely on well water, which vary greatly in quality and is rarely tested. Furthermore, the proximity to intensive agricultural operations can increase the chances of groundwater being contaminated by pesticides.
Sewage treatment is centralized, monitored, and generally effective in cities. Rural residents rely on a patchwork of septic systems of various ages and level of maintenance.https://www.treehugger.com/environmenta ... ng-1203972
“Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.” ― Ralph Waldo Emerson