Thread by @Grace_Segers

There's a problem with how America considers its cities. Too often, residents of major cities are considered "coastal elites" (if they're white) or denizens of crime-ridden hellholes (if they're not). There's an idea that cities don't represent "real America."

And because city dwellers are written off electorally, they can be written off in the national narrative constructed by journalists and politicians.

This goes for city dwellers in more red states also. Members of a state's big cities can be looked down upon by those in the rest of the state. Citizens of city X don't represent the real concerns of the state, conventional wisdom goes. (Think St. Louis, for example.)

And that damaging mentality can extend to entire states. Think about how many pundits write off California.

40 million people live in California. It has one of the biggest economies in the world. AND it has more registered Republicans than the entire populations of some states.

I'm from New York. My family is from Arkansas, and most of my relatives live there. How often do you hear about either of those states in reporting about presidential elections? Neither of them are even "important" primary states, much less in the general election.

My point is, politicians and journalists have a problem. We have an idea about who the "important" voters -- important Americans -- are. They generally don't live in cities. They generally don't live in states where the election result is certain.

The 700,000 people in DC are just as American as the 700,000 people in Wyoming. The 8.5 million people in NYC are just as American as the 8.5 million people in Virginia. The 3 million people in Arkansas are just as American as the 3 million people in Iowa.

We in the political and journalistic class need to stop writing off Americans because they come from a place we don't believe is politically important. And we need to stop writing off human beings for coming from a place that we have prejudged based on racial makeup and politics.