That argument doesn't hold. Cities rarely have Republican government, and when they do its, its RINO types. Also, you're kind of chicken-egg here, because it could just be that the poor cities elect progressive leaders, not necessarily the other way around.

Detroit, like Pittsburgh, went down because it relied on three companies based on one industry. Economic diversity is key to keeping a city thriving.

So, according to you, with the chicken-egg comment, the progressives turned the city way back in 1961 and not the other way around? It's a fair argument and I will not dispute it. However, they have reached the same ends despite of all available means. That is the decision which doomed them. Unfortunnately, they don't even realize it yet.

No, Detroit did not "go down" because they relied on one industry. Detroit was a pit in the hayday of the automotive industry. Detroit was a hell-hole long before the auto industry crashed.

What killed Detroit was corruption, unions, crime, and a population that has deteriorating morals, ethics, and no desire to better themselves.

100% spot on. It has had NOTHING to do with Detroit's reliance on the auto industry. If that were the case, then people wouldn't mention the cities losing companies like Hudsons and Strohs from the downtown area. Fact is, the people in the city created their own misfortunes, not because of a city relying on the auto industry to take care of them, but because they relied on corrupt politicians to take care of them, rather than doing what was necessary to make the city a better place to live. They taught their children to work the "system" and not value an education. They taught their children that crime was a way of life, but not the right way to live.

Detroit was not a "poor city" when they started electing progressive leaders. I would venture to say that those progressive leaders simply took advantage of the poor, and then worked their way up to forcing out the middle class to create a larger population of poor citizens within their limits.

Let's look at some facts here from 2006:

City, State, % of People Below the Poverty Level:

1. Detroit , MI 32.5%
2. Buffalo , NY 29.9%
3. Cincinnati , OH 27.8%
4. Cleveland , OH 27.0%
5. Miami , FL 26.9%
6. St. Louis , MO 26.8%
7. El Paso , TX 26.4%
8. Milwaukee , WI 26.2%
9. Philadelphia , PA 25.1%
10. Newark , NJ 24.2%

U.S. Census Bureau, 2006 American Community Survey, August 2007
What do the top ten cities (over 250,000) with the highest poverty rate all have in common? (DEMOCRATS)

Detroit, MI (1st on the poverty rate list) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1961;
Buffalo, NY (2nd) hasn't elected one since 1954;
Cincinnati , OH (3rd)...since 1984;
Cleveland , OH (4th)...since 1989;
Miami , FL (5th) has never had a Republican mayor;
St. Louis , MO (6th)....since 1949;
El Paso , TX (7th) has never had a Republican mayor;
Milwaukee , WI (8th)...since 1908;
Philadelphia , PA (9th)...since 1952;
Newark , NJ (10th)...since 1907.

Facts are facts, no matter how you try to spin them.