6 ms·

A bit cynical take here? What if people vote for GOP for other reasons and because there is a two party system they have to weight this issue amongst others.

psychometry 5y ago
Are you referring to the billionaires who vote Republican because they believe it benefits their personal financial situation and they don't care about anyone else's? Or is there some other type of person who actually benefits under the sorts of policies like this that the GOP has been pushing for the last 50 years?
- krastanov 5y ago
  While I share your strong negative feelings, we need to be a bit more honest. There are such people as one issue voters that are perfectly aware of how the GOP will vote on other issues and do not like it (or even hate, e.g., Trump), but are abortion or 2nd ammendement absolutists.
- jacob2484 5y ago
  For many, the Democratic party left me and swung to the left. I'm all for policies which are low taxes & limited government (remember under Trump & before corona, we had record unemployment even among minorities). Hence my move to a red, growing state (Texas). It's a vote between economic growth and personal freedom over culture/identity politics.
  - psychometry 5y ago
    Unfortunately you misunderstand not just the indicators of a healthy economy (hint: look at cost of living and changes in wealth distribution and not just employment figures) but also the reasons for why such indicators change over time. On economic issues, people ascribe far too much blame or thanks to whoever happens to be president at the time. Whatever positive indicators you think pointed to a healthy economy in 2017 or whenever probably have nothing to do with the regime at the time; that was just the continuation of a decade of post-recession growth. Anyway, where are you going to move to next now that Texas is slowly turning purple?
  - JshWright 5y ago
    "Record unemployment" gives a lot of credit for something that largely happened under Obama. What was the percentage improvement? "Trump didn't screw it up" isn't as impressive a claim though, I suppose...
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - long_time_gone 5y ago
    I don't see where this bill supports "limited government", it seems like the government is expanding it's powers by restricting yet another thing. I'm more of a quality-of-life kind of person, but to each their own. If I was optimizing for "personal freedom", I'd try find a state that allows you to do things like use legal marijuana, bet on sports, purchase a Tesla in-state, automatically register to vote, etc. And while Texas does have an impressive economic growth record, some other states (California and NY) are actually growing faster [1]: The most trusted measure of economic strength says California is the world-beater among democracies. The state’s gross domestic product increased 21% during the past five years, dwarfing No. 2 New York (14%) and No. 3 Texas (12%), according to data compiled by Bloomberg. I remember before Corona, we had record deficits and government spending. How is that an example of limited government? [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-06-14/california-defies-doom-with-no-1-u-s-economy https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-06-14/califo...
- wyager 5y ago
  If you can’t understand why poor rural voters like republicans, it’s because you’re missing information, not them. It’s perfectly comprehensible if your understanding of politics goes beyond what you can get from talk show hosts. Have you asked yourself why rich people pretty reliably vote Democrat if, according to your model, it’s going to disadvantage them?
  - psychometry 5y ago
    I'm not missing information. I'm well aware how poor education, racism, and general bigotry motivate people to make irrational choices in the voting booth. I never said that "rich people" are disadvantaged under Democratic policies. In any case, you should remember there's a big difference between a 1%er and a 0.001%er.
    - frockington1 5y ago
      As an Ohioan, its the "poor education, racism, and general bigotry" name calling that is alienating a large voting block. If you are on the fence, you're not going to vote for the party calling you a racist because of the color of you're skin and where you live
      - JKCalhoun 5y ago
        I understand the sentiment, but I haven't seen facts back it up. Who are these Democrats calling Ohio voters racists?
    - rootusrootus 5y ago
      > poor education, racism, and general bigotry They don't see themselves that way. So when you accuse them of being these terrible things, they resent you. And if they resent you, they are not under any circumstances going to vote for you, even if it might be to their benefit in reality. We could debate for a long time exactly how we got here, and everyone thinks the other side is entirely responsible.
      - 5y ago
joshstrange 5y ago
How is it cynical? They are all voting for it and so they all support it.
- sokoloff 5y ago
  In every case I can think of in life, there are things I care about and things that get swept along with that. I have one electric distribution utility provider. They use service trucks that have internal combustion engines. Suppose I was passionately pro-EV and against ICE vehicles; it would still not be a contradiction that I purchase my electricity distribution from that one available grid provider. "He's buying from them, so clearly he must support their use of ICE vehicles." I can virtually guarantee that you disagree with at least one position that the candidate you voted for has taken. They're your representative, not your agent.
xphilter 5y ago
How is your view any less cynical? Implicit in yours is that the party knows that and does as much bad stuff (like this) because they know they have unwavering support on a few issues.
vharuck 5y ago
Ideally, bad representation for issues that aren't intrinsically GOP should be corrected in a primary. I don't know much about primaries (I'm an independent in a state where I can't vote in primaries), but I have a funny feeling primaries don't see much fair competition.

psychometry 5y ago

Are you referring to the billionaires who vote Republican because they believe it benefits their personal financial situation and they don't care about anyone else's? Or is there some other type of person who actually benefits under the sorts of policies like this that the GOP has been pushing for the last 50 years?

krastanov 5y ago
While I share your strong negative feelings, we need to be a bit more honest. There are such people as one issue voters that are perfectly aware of how the GOP will vote on other issues and do not like it (or even hate, e.g., Trump), but are abortion or 2nd ammendement absolutists.
jacob2484 5y ago
For many, the Democratic party left me and swung to the left. I'm all for policies which are low taxes & limited government (remember under Trump & before corona, we had record unemployment even among minorities). Hence my move to a red, growing state (Texas). It's a vote between economic growth and personal freedom over culture/identity politics.
- psychometry 5y ago
  Unfortunately you misunderstand not just the indicators of a healthy economy (hint: look at cost of living and changes in wealth distribution and not just employment figures) but also the reasons for why such indicators change over time. On economic issues, people ascribe far too much blame or thanks to whoever happens to be president at the time. Whatever positive indicators you think pointed to a healthy economy in 2017 or whenever probably have nothing to do with the regime at the time; that was just the continuation of a decade of post-recession growth. Anyway, where are you going to move to next now that Texas is slowly turning purple?
- JshWright 5y ago
  "Record unemployment" gives a lot of credit for something that largely happened under Obama. What was the percentage improvement? "Trump didn't screw it up" isn't as impressive a claim though, I suppose...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- long_time_gone 5y ago
  I don't see where this bill supports "limited government", it seems like the government is expanding it's powers by restricting yet another thing. I'm more of a quality-of-life kind of person, but to each their own. If I was optimizing for "personal freedom", I'd try find a state that allows you to do things like use legal marijuana, bet on sports, purchase a Tesla in-state, automatically register to vote, etc. And while Texas does have an impressive economic growth record, some other states (California and NY) are actually growing faster [1]: The most trusted measure of economic strength says California is the world-beater among democracies. The state’s gross domestic product increased 21% during the past five years, dwarfing No. 2 New York (14%) and No. 3 Texas (12%), according to data compiled by Bloomberg. I remember before Corona, we had record deficits and government spending. How is that an example of limited government? [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-06-14/california-defies-doom-with-no-1-u-s-economy https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-06-14/califo...
wyager 5y ago
If you can’t understand why poor rural voters like republicans, it’s because you’re missing information, not them. It’s perfectly comprehensible if your understanding of politics goes beyond what you can get from talk show hosts. Have you asked yourself why rich people pretty reliably vote Democrat if, according to your model, it’s going to disadvantage them?
- psychometry 5y ago
  I'm not missing information. I'm well aware how poor education, racism, and general bigotry motivate people to make irrational choices in the voting booth. I never said that "rich people" are disadvantaged under Democratic policies. In any case, you should remember there's a big difference between a 1%er and a 0.001%er.
  - frockington1 5y ago
    As an Ohioan, its the "poor education, racism, and general bigotry" name calling that is alienating a large voting block. If you are on the fence, you're not going to vote for the party calling you a racist because of the color of you're skin and where you live
    - JKCalhoun 5y ago
      I understand the sentiment, but I haven't seen facts back it up. Who are these Democrats calling Ohio voters racists?
  - rootusrootus 5y ago
    > poor education, racism, and general bigotry They don't see themselves that way. So when you accuse them of being these terrible things, they resent you. And if they resent you, they are not under any circumstances going to vote for you, even if it might be to their benefit in reality. We could debate for a long time exactly how we got here, and everyone thinks the other side is entirely responsible.
    - 5y ago

joshstrange 5y ago

How is it cynical? They are all voting for it and so they all support it.

sokoloff 5y ago
In every case I can think of in life, there are things I care about and things that get swept along with that. I have one electric distribution utility provider. They use service trucks that have internal combustion engines. Suppose I was passionately pro-EV and against ICE vehicles; it would still not be a contradiction that I purchase my electricity distribution from that one available grid provider. "He's buying from them, so clearly he must support their use of ICE vehicles." I can virtually guarantee that you disagree with at least one position that the candidate you voted for has taken. They're your representative, not your agent.

xphilter 5y ago

How is your view any less cynical? Implicit in yours is that the party knows that and does as much bad stuff (like this) because they know they have unwavering support on a few issues.

vharuck 5y ago

Ideally, bad representation for issues that aren't intrinsically GOP should be corrected in a primary. I don't know much about primaries (I'm an independent in a state where I can't vote in primaries), but I have a funny feeling primaries don't see much fair competition.