5 ms·

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 underst

by 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.
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    Allow me to crank the cynicism to 11: The racism rhetoric isn't meant to appeal to the rural poor or anyone with Real Problems(TM). Black, white or neon green if you're living paycheck to paycheck you have more important things to care about than whether someone else thinks your a BadThingOfTheDay-ist. You're not gonna vote for someone promising to solve your image problem. You're gonna vote for someone promising to solve your real problems (unless their proposed solution is wildly incompatible with your ideology) The racism rhetoric is designed to appeal to the suburban white collar class who doesn't have many big pressing day to day problems. If you convince them people who vote against you are racists (which some of them probably already believe at least a little bit) they will vote for you because they don't wanna be called racists and they don't have enough real problems so they care about things like that.
    - Larrikin 5y ago
      I'm sorry but this take comes across as someone who has never interacted with people who are/were effected by racism nor interacted with people that support policies that have been perceived as racially motivated and are completely looking in from a different state or area. It's a nice thought to want to pretend all the problems of poor people are the same regardless of color but it's not true. I have multiple family members that were alive during Jim Crow and had to go-to the segregated black schools. Those people protesting integration as an example didn't just disappear and their opinions didn't either even though America has tried to pretend they have.
      - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
        >I'm sorry but this take comes across as someone who has never interacted with people who are/were effected by racism nor interacted with people that support policies that have been perceived as racially motivated and are completely looking in from a different state or area. Those people exist and I am sympathetic to their plight but they are not the target demographic that politicians are trying to convert using the racism rhetoric. They were mostly already voting for the people pumping out the racism rhetoric. The fact that they may see those politicians as further allies is just a secondary or tertiary bonus. You need to look at this from the perspective of a political strategist with a moral compass that makes Nixon look like Jesus.
- wyager 5y ago
  You’re only making it even clearer that you do get your political understanding from talk shows, or their informational equivalent. If you think hundreds of millions of people are acting irrationally, you’re probably wrong, and you’re probably using some busted first-order approximation “rational” model.
lotsofpulp 5y ago
> Have you asked yourself why rich people pretty reliably vote Democrat if, according to your model, it’s going to disadvantage them? Personally, to give others access to education, parental leave, sick leave, vacation, healthcare, access to broadband internet, ranked choice voting, personal freedoms, public transportation, etc. Obviously Dems are nowhere near perfect, but they at least tick some boxes. But the point is I do not mind voting for someone even if it causes me a loss, as long as I think it helps others.
- syshum 5y ago
  >>Personally, to give others access to education, parental leave, sick leave, vacation, healthcare, access to broadband internet, ranked choice voting, personal freedoms, public transportation, etc and to most republicans and libertarians believe none of those things are a proper role for government nor should be provided by the government
  - kaibee 5y ago
    > and to most republicans and libertarians believe none of those things are a proper role for government nor should be provided by the government So then they are wrong.
    - snovv_crash 5y ago
      It's an opinion, it isn't right or wrong
    - syshum 5y ago
      Or you know they believe the constitution actually means something, and no where in Article 2 Section 8 does the enumerated powers of the US Federal Government say the government is authorized to provide (or even regulate) "education, parental leave, sick leave, vacation, healthcare, access to broadband internet, ranked choice voting, personal freedoms, public transportation,"
      - 5y ago
kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
You do realize that the GOP is a party that caters exclusively to the rich. They only reach down to win votes and then blame the other side when their pro business policies disenfranchise their own base.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

by wyager 5y ago

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.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  Allow me to crank the cynicism to 11: The racism rhetoric isn't meant to appeal to the rural poor or anyone with Real Problems(TM). Black, white or neon green if you're living paycheck to paycheck you have more important things to care about than whether someone else thinks your a BadThingOfTheDay-ist. You're not gonna vote for someone promising to solve your image problem. You're gonna vote for someone promising to solve your real problems (unless their proposed solution is wildly incompatible with your ideology) The racism rhetoric is designed to appeal to the suburban white collar class who doesn't have many big pressing day to day problems. If you convince them people who vote against you are racists (which some of them probably already believe at least a little bit) they will vote for you because they don't wanna be called racists and they don't have enough real problems so they care about things like that.
  - Larrikin 5y ago
    I'm sorry but this take comes across as someone who has never interacted with people who are/were effected by racism nor interacted with people that support policies that have been perceived as racially motivated and are completely looking in from a different state or area. It's a nice thought to want to pretend all the problems of poor people are the same regardless of color but it's not true. I have multiple family members that were alive during Jim Crow and had to go-to the segregated black schools. Those people protesting integration as an example didn't just disappear and their opinions didn't either even though America has tried to pretend they have.
    - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
      >I'm sorry but this take comes across as someone who has never interacted with people who are/were effected by racism nor interacted with people that support policies that have been perceived as racially motivated and are completely looking in from a different state or area. Those people exist and I am sympathetic to their plight but they are not the target demographic that politicians are trying to convert using the racism rhetoric. They were mostly already voting for the people pumping out the racism rhetoric. The fact that they may see those politicians as further allies is just a secondary or tertiary bonus. You need to look at this from the perspective of a political strategist with a moral compass that makes Nixon look like Jesus.
wyager 5y ago
You’re only making it even clearer that you do get your political understanding from talk shows, or their informational equivalent. If you think hundreds of millions of people are acting irrationally, you’re probably wrong, and you’re probably using some busted first-order approximation “rational” model.

lotsofpulp 5y ago

> Have you asked yourself why rich people pretty reliably vote Democrat if, according to your model, it’s going to disadvantage them? Personally, to give others access to education, parental leave, sick leave, vacation, healthcare, access to broadband internet, ranked choice voting, personal freedoms, public transportation, etc. Obviously Dems are nowhere near perfect, but they at least tick some boxes. But the point is I do not mind voting for someone even if it causes me a loss, as long as I think it helps others.

syshum 5y ago
>>Personally, to give others access to education, parental leave, sick leave, vacation, healthcare, access to broadband internet, ranked choice voting, personal freedoms, public transportation, etc and to most republicans and libertarians believe none of those things are a proper role for government nor should be provided by the government
- kaibee 5y ago
  > and to most republicans and libertarians believe none of those things are a proper role for government nor should be provided by the government So then they are wrong.
  - snovv_crash 5y ago
    It's an opinion, it isn't right or wrong
  - syshum 5y ago
    Or you know they believe the constitution actually means something, and no where in Article 2 Section 8 does the enumerated powers of the US Federal Government say the government is authorized to provide (or even regulate) "education, parental leave, sick leave, vacation, healthcare, access to broadband internet, ranked choice voting, personal freedoms, public transportation,"
    - 5y ago

kevin_thibedeau 5y ago

You do realize that the GOP is a party that caters exclusively to the rich. They only reach down to win votes and then blame the other side when their pro business policies disenfranchise their own base.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]