Romney's appearance at the NAACP convention was a set up... designed to widen the Black White divide. He was hoping to catch them booing his "free stuff" line knowing he could use that to further the "resentment narrative" the Right cultivates with White GOP voters. They are told their tax money is wasted on minorities and freeloaders on safety net programs. Swept under the rug is how Red states seem to be the beneficiaries of much federal spending at the expense of "blue" states. A fascinating study! http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1451268
One of the earliest and most controversial descriptions of the red-blue divide came from Boston Globe reporter Mike Barnicle, appearing on MSNBC after the 2000 election, when he dubbed the Bush states the “family values” states and the Gore states “the sense of entitlement” states....
Mike Barnicle’s characterization of the red and blue states provided an interesting and, depending on one’s perspective, intuitive starting point for explaining differences between blue and red states. It would seem to make sense that the states that lose money to the federal government would be more likely to vote for the candidate who promised to cut taxes and reduce the scope of government, and that the states that gain from the federal government would support the candidate who would protect or increase federal spending. If Barnicle is correct that Democratic states are “entitlement” states, then we should expect that the states won by Democrats in the past few elections should receive the most in federal spending compared to the tax revenues they send to Washington. In short, Democratic states may be net beneficiaries of federal government spending while Republican states may be net contributors to the federal government.
The evidence shows that such a story is exactly backwards. In a paradox of the Electoral College, Republican presidential candidates since 1984--when data on state tax burdens are first available---have won most of the states that benefit from federal spending, while Democrats have won most of the states that bankroll the federal government. In every year during this 20-year period, between 25 and 32 states have gained more in federal spending programs than they have paid in taxes to the federal government, while the remaining minority of states has footed the bill. This political economy of redistribution plays out in the Electoral College as increasingly Republican states are increasingly dependent on federal spending. These paradoxical empirical patterns hold under several different perspectives on the data, including controlling for state and individual-level conservatism on social issues, military spending per state, and the partisan balance of a state’s governorship and representation in Congress.
Guess those Red GOP states love "free stuff"!