Republicans love DEI

There weren't many slaveowners in urban areas.

The brightest red state in the Union is Wyoming, a state with virtually no history of slavery.
The second reddest is West Virginia, a state that exists entirely because of its abolitionist popular revolt against the slave owning rich men from Richmond.
- You're not wrong (cherry picking a little though), and I get that there is more nuance and some exceptions to the generalization. But there certainly is a lot of overlap between Slave Owning and Republican States. Enough that one would be justified in at least wondering if there was a correlation.
  
  But there certainly is a lot of overlap between Slave Owning and Republican States.
  Only in the last forty years. These used to be staunchly Dixiecrat territories prior to the Southern Strategy.
  But I might point you to a different map.
  
  A huge part of the D/R switch under Nixon/Reagan came through Gulf Coast O&G tycoons. That's what gets us Wyoming and W. Virginia as bright red. It's why Pennsylvania - home of the Gettysburg address along with some of the fiercest abolitionist activists and civil rights organizations - into the purple category.
  The degree to which the country has become a Petro-State has revolutionized politics domestically.
  So long as that industry endures, the GOP-aligned land barons are going to have all the money they need for revanchist political projects.
  
  Neat! That certainly does explain a lot!

Isolation breeds xenophobia

Urban areas tend towards D, rural tends toward R. Smaller population states have smaller, less populous urban areas, thus the discrepancy.

Why? My theory is that smaller communities can force out opposition, so they tend to have more uniform ideas (trends towards tradition) whereas larger communities have to compromise to make a healthy community, meaning more diversity of ideas and more empathy towards traditionally counter-culture groups.

because rural areas correlate with less educated populations, and people who have less education tend to vote Republican.

rural areas correlate with less educated populations
Huntsville, Alabama is one of the reddest corners of the reddest states in the country. It has the highest per capita populations of rocket scientists in the world.
- Look up the definition of the word “outlier” and then get back to us.
  
  Look up the definition of the word “outlier”
  Is it an outlier or a counterfactual?
  I could also point at the Federalist Society or the Heritage Foundation. No shortage of conservative intellectuals in these circle. Plenty of conservatives in business schools, law schools, and medical colleges. And as red states try to purge their academic institutions of "marxist" liberals, we're seeing a rising tide of conservatives as university faculty, staff, and senior administrators - virtually all with graduate level degrees.
  On the flip side, the SEIU is full of liberal democrats despite their members rarely having more than a high school diploma. The service sector is flush with low-education liberal voters. The vocational trades are flush with liberal voters. As are agricultural workers, particularly in states like California, Arizona, Georgia, and Florida.
  This isn't a good litmus test for determining ideological bias.
- Huntsville imported 1000+ Nazi scientists to work on rockets in the 50's. That may explain the outlier.
  
  Excellent point.
- Huntsville, Alabama is not rural. It's the most highly populated city in Alabama. I'm not claiming that there are not intelligent people who are full of hate that support Republican policies, nor am I claiming there are no cities which support Republicans. The question was why do rural areas typically vote Republican.
  
  It’s the most highly populated city in Alabama.
  Then why does it have a Republican mayor? Urban + Educated should equal Democrat, right?
  The question was why do rural areas typically vote Republican.
  I would argue that it isn't simply rural areas that trend Republican but mineral rich areas with exceptionally large wealth gaps that tend to have powerful GOP fundraising operations.
  
  Your example describes about one percent of rural America. How does your theory hold up when applied to areas that are predominantly a service or agricultural economy? Where are these powerful GOP fundraising operations, because the party has been pretty notoriously hemorhaging campaign funds for awhile now.
  While those conditions do allow for authoritarian regimes to maintain strength in third-world countries, they do not apply one to one to the U.S. In fact, they don't apply at all, because our economy is structured very differently to those countries.
  
  How does your theory hold up when applied to areas that are predominantly a service or agricultural economy?
  The Nevada service sector is the heart of the Democratic vote in that state, just as one data point. Similarly, if you go out to California or New York, you'll find far more service sector democrats than white collar professionals. And where do you think all those Mississippi Democrats are coming from if not the agricultural industry? Millions of African American and Latino ag workers turn out for the Ds every year.
  While those conditions do allow for authoritarian regimes to maintain strength in third-world countries, they do not apply one to one to the U.S.
  Wyoming, Idaho, Montana, the Dakotas, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Utah, Kansas, Colorado, Texas - show me a mineral rich state and I'll show you a right-wing mega-millionaire (maybe even a billionaire or four) bankrolling the bulk of the conservative political scene.
  The US is a hodgepodge of municipal and state authoritarian regimes and has been practically since its founding. With the exception of the Lincoln-era Abolitionist movement, it took us until the Great Depression to get a popular brand of politics meaningfully decoupled from some sponsored industry. Even then, its flaky and hesitant and prone to being co-opted.
  But you're fooling yourself if you think we haven't brought our imperialist practices home to the core. Every dirty trick and bloody fist you've seen employed abroad has a parallel back home - often with an individual or organization that tried it first in one place before importing or exporting it to another.
  
  Then why does it have a Republican mayor
  Come on man. They literally said:
  nor am I claiming there are no cities which support Republicans
  in the comment you're replying to
- cough Project Paperclip cough

There's a lot of knowledge drain in republican states. People who go to university and lean left usually move out of the state, for 1. Being closer to like minded people 2. Lots of jobs and opportunities exist purely in cities

Basically people dont usually stay in red states if they lean blue

And then nobody wants to move back. At best you've got some purple cities like Austin starting to shift blue, but even then. I was in Austin for a few days this spring. I was infatuated. Started looking at home listings. Then I realized I'd be living in Texas. Who the hell wants that?
People who go to university and lean left usually move out of the state
That's as much a part of the employment prospects as anything. States with large industrial and commercial centers tend to end up with the old "Blueberries in the Tomato Soup" effect. Austin, Houston, and increasingly Dallas in Texas, for instance. Atlanta in Georgia. Tampa and Tallahassee in Florida.
Basically people dont usually stay in red states if they lean blue
Some of the most populous states in the country still tilt red. Florida and Texas most notably, but Pennsylvania and Ohio and Georgia and North Carolina as well.
If the state has a lucrative industry, people move there regardless of the prevailing state ideology. That's one thing Republicans do tend to get right. Attracting big corporate HQs to your state can make up for a lot of your shitty revanchist social policies.
- Texas is gerrymandered to shit, and employs pretty nasty voter suppression tactics in populous (see: blue) counties by having very few polling stations per capita in those areas and making it a crime to give water/food to people waiting in line to vote. Big Texas cities are blue for the most part (maybe a few exceptions in the DFW area)
  If you look at pretty much any of the cities within Texas on the latest map, you can see that they consolidate the core of the city into one or two solid blobs, then split the rest out to be diluted by rural areas. See Dallas/Tarrant County, Travis County, Bexar County, and Harris County for the most obvious cases of these.
  https://redistricting.capitol.texas.gov/docs/88th_Senate_Tabloid_2024_05_20.pdf
  On a population level, Texas is basically a blue state held hostage by a red state administration.
  
  Yeah. And the problem is that that won't change unless blue people move outside the cities and into the rural areas. And most have absolutely no desire to do so. Those that do, have no desire to be politically isolated.
  
  You're telling me that the solution to systemic voter suppression is a massive urban exodus to spread out the voting population until it's homogenous?
  That's the solution, instead of I dunno, forcing the Texas government to stop suppressing voters?
  
  Well yeah, do that too. But as long as we're weighing votes based on land, Texas will remain a red state.
  Fixing voter suppression tactics might help federal elections. Probably just Senate, actually. But state office elections...there are far more red counties and towns than there are blue cities and towns. And somehow that matters.
  
  On a population level, Texas is basically a blue state held hostage by a red state administration.
  The State Senate is absolutely gerrymandered to shit, without a doubt. But from a gross popular perspective, Texas consistently turns out a healthy majority of conservative voters. We saw this play out after 2018, when Abbott's campaign staff took to their own aggressive GOTV operations (along with assorted nasty tricks in blue urban centers). The GOP was turning out north of 6M Republican voters in 2020 and north of 4.4M in 2022. This is substantially more than the 2.6M they were managing going back to 2014 and before.
  Beto's thesis for winning in 2018 was interesting, and drastically increasing the Dem base in the years since has been great for municipal Dems. But the idea that Texas is a blue state given the 10-15 pt margins Republicans continue to win with in years with double the turnout of historical races really requires you to ignore all the Central and West Texas right-wingers who have been showing up in droves over the last ten years.