Why do working-class Americans vote Republican?

[Nbadan]

At least they claim. Very, very few practice the beliefs.

"practice their beliefs"....spoken like a Republican....

[Nbadan]

I guess to the populous that wants handouts, they don't understand how working provides more wealth. Wealth is not a fixed size that when one person gets more, someone else gets less. Those getting less are because they are not motivated to try to get more.

I don't think people want 'handouts' that's a cop-out....they just want a bigger piece of the pie...and to spend more time with family...

[tim_duncan_fan]

the democratic party currently has a better marketing campaign that attracts minorities despite not really doing much for minorities

lol there's no marketing necessary when people know that the majority of folks that don't like minorities on principle are part of the Republican party.

American politics is much simpler and less sophisticated than some people might be willing to believe.

You can't win minority votes if your party only talks about blowing up Arabs and uses code language to diss blacks, Mexicans and women.

There's no "marketing" to it when one side trots out minstrel show re s like Herman Cain and Sarah Palin.



What we need is a new party that is locked to the left socially and strictly responsible fiscally...but that's not what the government wants and the American citizenry is too stupid to demand it.

So we'll continue to fight over stupid like whether to acknowledge the relationship of 2 s on a federal level (an obvious "sure, why not?") and nothing will change for the vast majority of this country in terms of the economy and education.

[spurraider21]

lol there's no marketing necessary when people know that the majority of folks that don't like minorities on principle are part of the Republican party.

eh, there's the mindset that has been embedded that if you're a minority you'll be better off under democratic leadership even though there's nothing that really indicates that at all

[tim_duncan_fan]

eh, there's the mindset that has been embedded that if you're a minority you'll be better off under democratic leadership even though there's nothing that really indicates that at all

There is a slight difference:

People that vote Democrat are more likely to not despise you as a minority on principle.

When it comes to social issues of choice, liberty and equality regardless of race, sex and sex preferences, there really is only one party to pick.

That social difference is purposefully retained in order to maintain the mostly false dichotomy.


If we we ever stop fighting Republicans over whether to let s marry or whether to arrest people for insignificant like weed, we might actually start paying attention to important like our falling behind as a nation in terms of education and the need to rectify our economy and thing things our economy is based on.

And relatively nobody in government wants the people paying attention to things that actually matter.

[spurraider21]

There is a slight difference:

People that vote Democrat are more likely to not despise you as a minority on principle.

all this mumbo jumbo aside is there any definitive evidence that minorities do better under democratic leadership than republican?

[HI-FI]

I think it's better spent on what the multibillionaires want to spend it on because a.) they earned it, b.) you're not en led to it, and c.) it's a free country....

You are a shill, and your posts are the text equivalents of those annoying robocalls that both parties send out during election cycles....

if he's a shill it would make a lot more sense than what he's writing. when they pull the plug on this site, it will be nothing but trolls and shills left.

[DarrinS]

There is a slight difference:

People that vote Democrat are more likely to not despise you as a minority on principle.

lol

Liberal cities are bad for blacks
http://www.bloombergview.com/article...bad-for-blacks


lol, white "progressives" economically segregating themselves from blacks

[tim_duncan_fan]

all this mumbo jumbo aside is there any definitive evidence that minorities do better under democratic leadership than republican?

No.

That's what I'm telling you.

The difference between the parties is in the social issues. It's not "mumbo jumbo". Blacks and hispanics don't feel welcome in the Republican party and as a result of that, neither do young, inclusive types of folks.

Get over the tribalism and pay attention. I'm not advocating for either party beyond saying the Republican voting block is decidedly more racist (in addition to gay-hating and women-fearing).


I'm saying that in terms of economics and trying to improving the status of the average Aemerican, neither party gives a as both are focused on firming their grip on power and adding onto the money piles of the rich people that funded the politicians of said parties into their leadership positions.


Goals of American Politicians both Dem and Republican:

1. Retain cushy leadership job that provides notoriety, power and an easy living situation

2. Pay back the people that funded you by pushing policies that benefit them

3. Maybe set up your offspring to be in roughly the same position of power and notoriety you are in or better



The end.

You're trying hard to score points for the red team and I'm not even defending the goal.

Both teams are and yet they are running up the score on the sheeple.

lol

Liberal cities are bad for blacks
http://www.bloombergview.com/article...bad-for-blacks


lol, white "progressives" economically segregating themselves from blacks

Rich people move away from poor neighborhoods, period. I lock my car doors in sketchy hoods like any other person.

Brilliant analysis, Mr. Sheep!

[spurraider21]

No.

that's why its marketing. they dont actually benefit minorities, they just have them believing they do

im not on either team, i'm just an observer. as i've said before, i despise both parties. but i live in SoCal which is superduper liberal so thats the stuff i get shoved down my throat on a daily basis

[tim_duncan_fan]

that's why its marketing. they dont actually benefit minorities, they just have them believing they do

And you're under the impression that Republicans would actually serve minorities better.


Again, it's not marketing if one team says "we don't want you".

It's not as sophisticated as "marketing" lol.

[spurraider21]

And you're under the impression that Republicans would actually serve minorities better.


Again, it's not marketing if one team says "we don't want you".

It's not as sophisticated as "marketing" lol.

lol its not like republicans actually say "we don't like minorities"

if you dont like the "marketing" term thats fine, but you see what i mean by it.

[DarrinS]

Rich people move away from poor neighborhoods, period. I lock my car doors in sketchy hoods like any other person any other person.

Brilliant analysis, Mr. Sheep!

Hmmm, "sketchy hoods". I see.

[Winehole23]

fits here, if awkwardly: http://www.courthousenews.com/2014/10/09/72290.htm

[HI-FI]

that's why its marketing. they dont actually benefit minorities, they just have them believing they do

im not on either team, i'm just an observer. as i've said before, i despise both parties. but i live in SoCal which is superduper liberal so thats the stuff i get shoved down my throat on a daily basis

i've never understood that. do people in Cali not realize that liberals own that state and have caused a lot of the problems, or do the people and illegals continue to vote Democrat regardless? are there many conservatives there or have they fled?

[Uriel]

They pay their fair share just by making more. To keep squeezing the rich because you hate them is stupid. Besides, their buying things with their extra money pays for jobs. Their investments provide capitol for borrowing.

First of all, it's "capital" and not "capitol." Second, it's pretty obvious you're not an economist, because you're merely regurgitating the myths that are so pervasive on the right. In an IMF report, real economists debunked the notion that tax breaks for the wealthy create jobs for people at the bottom.

I think it's better spent on what the multibillionaires want to spend it on because a.) they earned it, b.) you're not en led to it, and c.) it's a free country....

You are a shill, and your posts are the text equivalents of those annoying robocalls that both parties send out during election cycles....

I find it so ironic that you would label me a "shill" considering you're the one who's merely subscribing to the Republican Party's modus operandi, while being unable to display any capacity for independent critical thinking.

I've read numerous books, journals, and academic articles on a wide-range of social, political, and economic treatises. I've engaged in discourse and debate with various people from all walks of life, and have formulated my political views through logic and reason.

You, on the other hand, merely regurgitate whatever is said on Fox News. Please read a book for once (or at least attend an Economics class), instead of getting all your information from Fox News, since you clearly don't have sufficient background knowledge to engage in reasoned discussion. You're way out of your league in this debate. Step outside of your narrow universe.

[spurraider21]

i've never understood that. do people in Cali not realize that liberals own that state and have caused a lot of the problems, or do the people and illegals continue to vote Democrat regardless? are there many conservatives there or have they fled?

most conservatives in Cali are in orange county, and in the middle of the state like Fresno. but yeah, i dont get some people's mindset. i think they believe bush ed over california... i'm in further disbelief that they actually brought back jerry brown ... but to be fair the alternative was meg whitman. its just a terrible state, politically speaking. then everybody pretends to be liberal but they actually voted down Prop 8 a few years ago to legalize gay marriage

i dont think electing a bunch of conservatives will necessarily fix anything here though. at this point the state might be best off just filing for BK and hitting the restart button

[Infinite_limit]

most conservatives in Cali are in orange county, and in the middle of the state like Fresno. but yeah, i dont get some people's mindset. i think they believe bush ed over california... i'm in further disbelief that they actually brought back jerry brown ... but to be fair the alternative was meg whitman. its just a terrible state, politically speaking. then everybody pretends to be liberal but they actually voted down Prop 8 a few years ago to legalize gay marriage

i dont think electing a bunch of conservatives will necessarily fix anything here though. at this point the state might be best off just filing for BK and hitting the restart button

San Diego is actually quite conservative given the military & wealthy suburban areas

When Bush ran for re-election, I was usually the only White person siding for Kerry in my classrooms. Poor Republicans are in the South and thus Californians don't see that. They simply look at which supporters resemble them physically and also who they want to emulate career wise.

Poor Republicans are usually involved religiously. Poor Democrats are wide ranging and cross many racial, cultural and career lines

[HI-FI]

most conservatives in Cali are in orange county, and in the middle of the state like Fresno. but yeah, i dont get some people's mindset. i think they believe bush ed over california... i'm in further disbelief that they actually brought back jerry brown ... but to be fair the alternative was meg whitman. its just a terrible state, politically speaking. then everybody pretends to be liberal but they actually voted down Prop 8 a few years ago to legalize gay marriage

i dont think electing a bunch of conservatives will necessarily fix anything here though. at this point the state might be best off just filing for BK and hitting the restart button

agree with that. i don't know if conservatives would fix anything either, i just find it strange how much liberals have bankrupted that state yet people keep voting for them. i figure the elites want to emulate that model in Texas, bring a load of illegals here and convert it blue, regardless of the outcome. Texas is naturally more conservative and quite a bit different so I'm hoping the results won't be the same.

I don't know how to fix California tbh. I've never been to SoCal but need to check it out once and also to visit the Bay area again, see the new Levi Stadium.

[101A]

"Fair share" is asking those who are more well-off to pay a bigger share of taxes. The money of multibillionaires is better spent on financing health and education for the general public, instead of private yachts and vacation homes in island resorts. Don't you agree?

What does it matter what I agree? It's not my money. Who am I to judge how someone spends theirs; how they live their lives? I would think as a Democrat, you would not be in favor of such moral condemnations. Or is it only certain behaviors that you are open minded about? The top income tax rate is back to where Bill Clinton set it; 39%. Most states have income taxes on top of that.

Again, what is "fair"?

Or are you more concerned with ac ulated wealth, and not income per se?

I would start, by the way, by eliminating the discrepancy between income and capital gains tax rates. It seems like a natural place to begin. The Democrats controlled the entire government not so many years ago - this was not proposed. They, however, did get rid of the "Bush Tax Cuts" (but only for the top earners - everyone else kept their lower rates). Despite those evil rates being repealed, income disparity has continued, and continues to trend upward...that's not what we were told would happen.

What gives?

[boutons_deux]

"What gives?"

the top rates are not high enough, the 1000s of tax avoidance loopholes and criminal tax evasion (eg, Mitt Romney) exist. I think the income inequality is past a tipping point where wealth ac ulation, esp with the corrupt politicians on the take from that ac ulated wealth, will continue. Also, job and wage suppression has kept the 99%'s incomes flat, even a real decline by 10%+ since 2000.

The rich are getting richer, the non-rich are getting poorer, and it's due to the rich gaming govt policies, and criminal tax evasion.

[russellgoat]

I can, because I'm one of them. We have a vision of an egalitarian society—one that will treat all people equally, regardless of their race, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or any other factor that only serves to divide people. As Martin Luther King said, "I have a dream that one day, people will be judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." To that end, we're willing to vote for economic policies that will further that vision. And the Democrats, when they support the raising of the minimum wage, pay equality for men and women, and tax rates that ask people from various income levels to pay their fair share, all help to realize that vision. In other words, we're willing to vote against our economic self-interest in order to achieve a fairer and more just society for everyone.

Which is why I can't understand why working-class Republicans would want to vote for a society that disproportionately favors the wealthy at their expense.

You s are the most racist people on earth, you don't like treating other races equally. You gooks are everywhere but you only allow a very small fraction of immigrants to your countries. I'm 100% sure that when you become the majority in Canada and Australia the immigration laws will be way more strict than they are today.

[101A]

"What gives?"

the top rates are not high enough, the 1000s of tax avoidance loopholes and criminal tax evasion (eg, Mitt Romney) exist. I think the income inequality is past a tipping point where wealth ac ulation, esp with the corrupt politicians on the take from that ac ulated wealth, will continue. Also, job and wage suppression has kept the 99%'s incomes flat, even a real decline by 10%+ since 2000.

The rich are getting richer, the non-rich are getting poorer, and it's due to the rich gaming govt policies, and criminal tax evasion.

Actually, I think it's primarily because, due to automation, individual worker productivity has skyrocketed in the past few decades. The business owners have reaped several lion's shares from that increase - without sharing it with the worker themselves. Compound that, now, with globalization in manufacturing, and consolidation in many other industries, and the middle-management and well-compensated labor jobs are evaporating, as well. We are left with a slide into two distinct classes: the owners, and the workers. (Exceptions are high-skilled positions; Dr's, Lawyers, Engineers, IT and Scientists) - these more and more, are making up the "upper middle class" - where they derive their incomes from actual compensation for work performed.

They, in turn, get punished the most when the "War on the Rich" gets waged. They don't have ac ulated wealth, they have income; which is what is targeted. The truly rich, those with ac ulated wealth, then, personify the war, but don't take the brunt of the shots in it. The news reports show the massive wealth of the bankers on Wal-Street, and then the politicians punish the Dr.'s and Lawyers on main street for that wealth.

By design.

[Blizzardwizard]

"Fair share" is asking those who are more well-off to pay a bigger share of taxes. The money of multibillionaires is better spent on financing health and education for the general public, instead of private yachts and vacation homes in island resorts. Don't you agree?

This x100.

Right on brother.

[Wild Cobra]

I don't think people want 'handouts' that's a cop-out....they just want a bigger piece of the pie...and to spend more time with family...

If that's true, they are most certainly stupid to vote democrat!