Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Eat the Poor, They Vote Republican

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Eat the Poor, They Vote Republican

    If ever there was a better reason to vote against health care reform, education funding, employment benefits, environmental protection, and health and safety rules this is it. These "moral" evangelgical christians believe they know what is best for me -- that their choices in terms of who I decide to love, what I watch, what I read, or what I listen to is somehow better than the one I could make myself.

    Well, working-class and lower-middle class christians I have news for you. I can't actually make physical war on you, though you have obviously decided to make war on me and feel justified in taking away my freedom or hating my secular, godless way of life. What I can do is vote for economic policies that hurt you, your communities, and your children directly but benefit me indirectly. Blue states heavily subsidize Red states in countless ways -- from rural health and welfare provision to farm subsidies. If voting to slash the federal budget everywhere and at all times hurts you more than it hurts me, if the elimination of health and safety rules, welfare, and the like takes more days off your lifespan and that of your children than it does mine then so be it.

    It's not my family that will get black lung, but the socially conservative coal miner and his children that will. My family won't be affected by free trade, but I hope "faith" feeds religious textile workers in North Carolina once textile quotas are removed and free trade in that good is allowed. I'll be sure to shop at Walmart instead of a small business knowning every dollar spent there is a nail in the economic coffin of "mainstreet", small town America. I'll be sure to by foreign goods as much as possible since low-wage manufacturing is primarily located in the south. Indian call centers can't replace rural one fast enough for my purposes. I benefit from all these things, directly due to lower prices and indirectly through the off chance a southern baptist community somewhere might be hurt.

    Jesus can provide, not me. If I want to subsidize people who hate me I'll fill my SUV with Saudi gas.

    If the market's creative destruction ruins these communities I say Adam Smith, thou art my God. Creative destruction. Bring it on.

    http://nytimes.com/2004/11/03/opinion/03kris.html?hp

    OP-ED COLUMNIST
    Living Poor, Voting Rich
    By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

    Published: November 3, 2004


    In the aftermath of this civil war that our nation has just fought, one result is clear: the Democratic Party's first priority should be to reconnect with the American heartland.

    I'm writing this on tenterhooks on Tuesday, without knowing the election results. But whether John Kerry's supporters are now celebrating or seeking asylum abroad, they should be feeling wretched about the millions of farmers, factory workers and waitresses who ended up voting - utterly against their own interests - for Republican candidates.

    One of the Republican Party's major successes over the last few decades has been to persuade many of the working poor to vote for tax breaks for billionaires. Democrats are still effective on bread-and-butter issues like health care, but they come across in much of America as arrogant and out of touch the moment the discussion shifts to values.

    "On values, they are really noncompetitive in the heartland," noted Mike Johanns, a Republican who is governor of Nebraska. "This kind of elitist, Eastern approach to the party is just devastating in the Midwest and Western states. It's very difficult for senatorial, Congressional and even local candidates to survive."

    In the summer, I was home - too briefly - in Yamhill, Ore., a rural, working-class area where most people would benefit from Democratic policies on taxes and health care. But many of those people disdain Democrats as elitists who empathize with spotted owls rather than loggers.

    One problem is the yuppification of the Democratic Party. Thomas Frank, author of the best political book of the year, "What's the Matter With Kansas: How Conservatives Won the Heart of America," says that Democratic leaders have been so eager to win over suburban professionals that they have lost touch with blue-collar America.

    "There is a very upper-middle-class flavor to liberalism, and that's just bound to rub average people the wrong way," Mr. Frank said. He notes that Republicans have used "culturally powerful but content-free issues" to connect to ordinary voters.

    To put it another way, Democrats peddle issues, and Republicans sell values. Consider the four G's: God, guns, gays and grizzlies.

    One-third of Americans are evangelical Christians, and many of them perceive Democrats as often contemptuous of their faith. And, frankly, they're often right. Some evangelicals take revenge by smiting Democratic candidates.

    Then we have guns, which are such an emotive issue that Idaho's Democratic candidate for the Senate two years ago, Alan Blinken, felt obliged to declare that he owned 24 guns "and I use them all." He still lost.

    As for gays, that's a rare wedge issue that Democrats have managed to neutralize in part, along with abortion. Most Americans disapprove of gay marriage but do support some kind of civil unions (just as they oppose "partial birth" abortions but don't want teenage girls to die from coat-hanger abortions).

    Finally, grizzlies - a metaphor for the way environmentalism is often perceived in the West as high-handed. When I visited Idaho, people were still enraged over a Clinton proposal to introduce 25 grizzly bears into the wild. It wasn't worth antagonizing most of Idaho over 25 bears.

    "The Republicans are smarter," mused Oregon's governor, Ted Kulongoski, a Democrat. "They've created ... these social issues to get the public to stop looking at what's happening to them economically."

    "What we once thought - that people would vote in their economic self-interest - is not true, and we Democrats haven't figured out how to deal with that."

    Bill Clinton intuitively understood the challenge, and John Edwards seems to as well, perhaps because of their own working-class origins. But the party as a whole is mostly in denial.

    To appeal to middle America, Democratic leaders don't need to carry guns to church services and shoot grizzlies on the way. But a starting point would be to shed their inhibitions about talking about faith, and to work more with religious groups.

    Otherwise, the Democratic Party's efforts to improve the lives of working-class Americans in the long run will be blocked by the very people the Democrats aim to help.

  • #2
    Tripe!! i don't when I have read a more provocative piece -- when a free and fair and non-violent vote is characterized as a "civil war", well, it's just so unfair, so distant from the reailty that Mr. Krugman seeks to impose on it, that any reader may ask whether Mr. krugman has taken his medecine today or not - it's really grossly unfair, and I would suggest it invites readers to construe reality as if it were turned on it's head.

    The media and those who craft questions that are then presented as polling data, have suggested that the question of "Values" is itself dangerous, isn't anyone who writes and reads here invoking "values" in the case he or she makes or is persuaded by?? I totally agree that fundamentalist trends are dangerous and we should keep our eyes on them, but to turn the very notion of "values" into a dangerous notion, is an idiot notion.

    "values" are integral, fundamental, regardelss of what positon one may take, because they are foundational.

    Mr. Krugman's dismay that "the millions of farmers, factory workers and waitresses who ended up voting - utterly against their own interests" is plain silly, these millions also have a larger interest as Americans, as fellow citizens - for those who have assumed for themselves the Atlas like or Sissyphusian (u Choose) "obligation", perhaps the experience of Euope and the far east, the deliberate murder of more than 110 million person, in the name of class warfare, has not been instructive, or perhaps it has been, after all what use "values" when a glorious end is pursued in the name of those who have not voted for any such pursuit -- but what do they know, they are just God loving, God fearing hicks.

    God, guns and gays - well, it makes for a caricature, if only trhe majority of Americans knew what was right and good for them, if only they would let these self appointed championsof the blue collar worker, tell them whats good and right for them -- oh oh, "values" again.

    So the Democracts have become even more radical in the pursuit of the, "blue collar worker" who wants not class warfare but the opportunity to take pursue the "good life" ?-- good luck democrats, take care with the prescription self appointed champions of the "blue collar worker" have offered, kill or cure, is a rash, reckless and desperate idea.

    Mr. Krugman has it right, "values" are not the exclusive preserve of the Republican party, but Mr. Krugman fails to make a more important point, this class warfare stuff just does not go done well among the majority of electorate - what they want is their "enablement" to avail the opportunity for a better life in the framework of the American dream.
    _____________________

    Comment


    • #3
      The Democrats also continue the stupidity that they are there to save us, when the best thing they can do is leave us alone, and let us tell THEM what we'd like to see done. Their technique to help the rural populace, is comparable to holding someone dying of thirst under water for five minutes. If they truly wanted to help "the poor" and farmers, they'd eliminate taxes for those making less than $24,000 a year, eliminate property taxes for family farms, and make all medical bills and prescriptions tax deductible. But they can't stand not to impose their social tyranny on people.
      The black flag is raised: Ban them all... Let the Admin sort them out.

      I know I'm going to have the last word... I have powers of deletion and lock.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Horrido
        The Democrats also continue the stupidity that they are there to save us, when the best thing they can do is leave us alone, and let us tell THEM what we'd like to see done. Their technique to help the rural populace, is comparable to holding someone dying of thirst under water for five minutes. If they truly wanted to help "the poor" and farmers, they'd eliminate taxes for those making less than $24,000 a year, eliminate property taxes for family farms, and make all medical bills and prescriptions tax deductible. But they can't stand not to impose their social tyranny on people.

        I suppose the GOP is the champion of the lower class, right?

        Comment


        • #5
          It is not material who has won.

          Leave the acrimony behind.

          Just ask for a fair deal.

          Bush is much more chastened.

          His belief in God has increased.


          "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

          I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

          HAKUNA MATATA

          Comment


          • #6
            Fonnicker, I never said they were, I'm just telling you why the left is considered a threat. The democrats can either listen to us and learn and come to terms with their flawed philosophy and make adjustments if they want power, or continue in their denial and continue to lose. Judging by recent statements by the left, they will continue in their arrogance and lose. I would really like to vote Democrat, I really would, but a number of their key positions and attitudes prevent me from doing so. I can't think of any legislation the Democrats have passed that have helped me, but a lot that has threatened me. Currently, the only main issue I hold against the Republicans is abortion, as I am emphatically pro-choice, but hopefully the Reps will realize that attacking abortion will do to them what the Brady Bill did to the Dems in 1994, and won't touch it.
            The black flag is raised: Ban them all... Let the Admin sort them out.

            I know I'm going to have the last word... I have powers of deletion and lock.

            Comment


            • #7
              I agree with most everything you've said, but for me it's also the issue of their weakness on defense. That's huge for me, that's one of the only reasons govt exists.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Gio
                I agree with most everything you've said, but for me it's also the issue of their weakness on defense. That's huge for me, that's one of the only reasons govt exists.
                Major wars of the 20th century were won under the presidency of Democrats. I think Democrats have fought more wars than Republicans.

                In any case turns out defence of the nation has not been the top issue of this election, it was "moral value".

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Ghostbuster
                  Major wars of the 20th century were won under the presidency of Democrats. I think Democrats have fought more wars than Republicans.

                  In any case turns out defence of the nation has not been the top issue of this election, it was "moral value".
                  Excuse me sir, I am entitled to my opinion. I'm sure if you'd had your way, i wouldn't but this is still America. I believe George W Bush is a stronger leader and I believe the war in Iraq was justified. And In any case, did it ever occur to you that support of the military ties into morality? The whole idea of democracy in the middle east? No, because you scream that we're norrow minded then do it yourself.
                  That's my opinion, today the reality is that the majority of Americans rejected your vision(of course, i'm being rather generous in calling it a vision or rather lack of as many thought), and that's what happened.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    haha, and at what point did these democratic presidents actually direct a major war and win? last time i checked the Americans were late for both world wars, and supplied arms and material in a major part. they did their bit in the pacific fighting the japanese in WW2, but when did these presidents direct and control what happened? to the point of it being noteworthy they were a great democratic leader?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Gio
                      Excuse me sir, I am entitled to my opinion. I'm sure if you'd had your way, i wouldn't but this is still America. I believe George W Bush is a stronger leader and I believe the war in Iraq was justified. And In any case, did it ever occur to you that support of the military ties into morality? The whole idea of democracy in the middle east? No, because you scream that we're norrow minded then do it yourself.
                      That's my opinion, today the reality is that the majority of Americans rejected your vision(of course, i'm being rather generous in calling it a vision or rather lack of as many thought), and that's what happened.
                      You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but not to facts.
                      Bush may be a strong leader to you, but in my opinion he is a right wing nut. Yes he did get the 51:48 majority but look at his voters, large majority of his voters believe that the world was created in 7 days! They also believe that Saddam had WMD and he was responsible for 9/11. Bush won because of 3G factor, God, Guns, and Gays, precisely the issues on which elections are decided in countries like Nigeria, Sudan, and Somalia.
                      Criteria for voting was not war on Iraq but "moral values", I guess repeatedly telling an assortment of lies to drum up support for war is considerd good "moral values", right? Misleading is considerd good "moral values", right?
                      What amazes me that how comfortably he blurts out those lies, he probably assumes that we are all dumb people! He did it again when in his very first press conference he said some people opposed going to against Taliban. I don't remember anybody opposing Afghan war, do you?
                      Last edited by Ghostbuster; 05 Nov 04,, 16:30.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Geoff
                        haha, and at what point did these democratic presidents actually direct a major war and win? last time i checked the Americans were late for both world wars, and supplied arms and material in a major part. they did their bit in the pacific fighting the japanese in WW2, but when did these presidents direct and control what happened? to the point of it being noteworthy they were a great democratic leader?
                        You mean they were not great democratic presidents? That would be a rather blinkerd view, and so would be diminishing the importance of winning WWI and WWII. Both the world wars were the biggest war of the last century, and it was WWII that shaped the history of 20th century more than any other event of the last century.

                        The credit goes to Democrats for winning those mega wars and changing the course of history. That is the fact, wheather you like it or not.
                        Last edited by Ghostbuster; 05 Nov 04,, 16:27.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Ghostbuster
                          The credit goes to Democrats for winning those mega wars and changing the course of history. That is the fact, wheather you like it or not.
                          unfortunatly those are not the same democrats we have today, the democratic party has been highjacked by activist.
                          Whoever is unjust let him be unjust still
                          Whoever is righteous let him be righteous still
                          Whoever is filthy let him be filthy still
                          Listen to the words long written down
                          When the man comes around- Johnny Cash

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by donnie
                            unfortunatly those are not the same democrats we have today, the democratic party has been highjacked by activist.
                            Yes times have chaned. During those days all the southern "RED" states used to vote for Democrats.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Gio
                              I agree with most everything you've said, but for me it's also the issue of their weakness on defense. That's huge for me, that's one of the only reasons govt exists.
                              Ironic, since I feel the Republican Party is weak on foreign policy.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X