4 ms·

> The Democrats completely ignored rural and blue-collar America for a decade and then for 5 years after that, lambasted them as racists, white supremacists, an

by jgwil2 5y ago

> The Democrats completely ignored rural and blue-collar America for a decade and then for 5 years after that, lambasted them as racists, white supremacists, and the cause of virtually every social ill and historical moral failure in our country. While many Republicans like to lambast certain liberal urban strongholds (e.g., for crime and corruption), they're not categorically attacking urbanites and certainly not to the degree or duration that Democrats savaged rural and blue collar Americans. To put these in two separate categories is extremely disingenuous. There are plenty of Democrats still actively campaigning in rural areas and there are plenty of Republicans railing against "coastal elites." Seriously, have you never looked at the comments section on foxnews.com? A guy literally shot up a pizza parlor looking for a Democrat-run child sex ring. There is plenty of demonization being perpetrated by both sides, but the crucial fact of the matter is that, based on the results of recent national elections, one side represents a clear majority of Americans, but still struggles to maintain power. That is fundamentally anti-democratic (note the small d). I'll further note that when the Constitution was written, the population difference between the largest state and the smallest state was still within an order of magnitude; that is no longer the case. > Justifying every bad behavior by pointing out someone else's worse behavior is, while common, deflection and race-to-the-bottom mentality, and it's really killing our country. Sorry, but one side really has been much, much worse. I never claimed that Democrats were perfect, but you are the one who seems to be justifying an anti-democratic system just because some politicians, at some point, were mean to some country folks.

throwaway894345 5y ago
> To put these in two separate categories is extremely disingenuous. There are plenty of Democrats still actively campaigning in rural areas and there are plenty of Republicans railing against "coastal elites." I think you're the one being disingenuous. Railing against "coastal elites" isn't an attack on urbanites, it's an attack on coastal elites. Moreover, that there are Democrats in rural areas doesn't contradict anything I've said or implied (I didn't claim or imply that rural areas are totally devoid of Democrats--that would be absurd). > Seriously, have you never looked at the comments section on foxnews.com? A guy literally shot up a pizza parlor looking for a Democrat-run child sex ring. There is plenty of demonization being perpetrated by both sides It doesn't make sense to rebut "Democrats should court rural voters to gain more senate seats" with "but Republicans are mean too!". I don't dispute that Republicans are meanies too! It's just not productive to weigh the sins of either side, and it's explicitly counterproductive to use "Republicans are meanies" as a reason to defer something actionable today ("Democrats courting rural voters"). This is a loser's mentality. > Sorry, but one side really has been much, much worse. I never claimed that Democrats were perfect, but you are the one who seems to be justifying an anti-democratic system just because some politicians, at some point, were mean to some country folks. Don't apologize, I generally agree with you that Rs are worse. My point, per my previous paragraph, is that it's counterproductive to delay progress until we get the whole country to agree about who is worse. We can just stop being dickish to rural voters--that costs nothing. Anyway, calling the US system "anti-democratic" is absurd, and I'm not sure how to have a reasonable conversation if we're throwing out overt falsehoods. Similarly, the Democratic Party has failed rural and blue-collar Americans for decades and its politicians, pundits, and media have increasingly used rural and blue-collar Americans as the scape goat for virtually every one of our national social ills--if you reduce that to "some Democrat politicians were mean to rural voters" it betrays any appearance of good faith or reasoned participation, and I likewise don't see how this conversation can advance productively.
- jgwil2 5y ago
  > Anyway, calling the US system "anti-democratic" is absurd It was clear from the context that I was talking about the Senate bias towards rural states, not the overall system. > I'm not sure how to have a reasonable conversation if we're throwing out overt falsehoods. Don't worry, I think the conversation has run its course. It seems we're in broad agreement about many things. I hope you'll call your Senators and Representative to express your support for the Freedom to Vote Act (especially if they are Republicans). It may not fix the Senate issue but it's a step in the right direction.
  - throwaway894345 5y ago
    > Don't worry, I think the conversation has run its course. It seems we're in broad agreement about many things. I hope you'll call your Senators and Representative to express your support for the Freedom to Vote Act. It may not fix the Senate issue but it's a step in the right direction. Well-said. :)
- Pxtl 5y ago
  > attack on coastal elites I'm surprised and not surprised that you think this is fine.
  - throwaway894345 5y ago
    I didn’t say it was fine, but admittedly coastal elites are at the very bottom of the list of people for whom I have sympathy. I imagine a heartfelt appeal to the plight of the coastal elite would be tremendously amusing.

by jgwil2 5y ago

throwaway894345 5y ago

> To put these in two separate categories is extremely disingenuous. There are plenty of Democrats still actively campaigning in rural areas and there are plenty of Republicans railing against "coastal elites." I think you're the one being disingenuous. Railing against "coastal elites" isn't an attack on urbanites, it's an attack on coastal elites. Moreover, that there are Democrats in rural areas doesn't contradict anything I've said or implied (I didn't claim or imply that rural areas are totally devoid of Democrats--that would be absurd). > Seriously, have you never looked at the comments section on foxnews.com? A guy literally shot up a pizza parlor looking for a Democrat-run child sex ring. There is plenty of demonization being perpetrated by both sides It doesn't make sense to rebut "Democrats should court rural voters to gain more senate seats" with "but Republicans are mean too!". I don't dispute that Republicans are meanies too! It's just not productive to weigh the sins of either side, and it's explicitly counterproductive to use "Republicans are meanies" as a reason to defer something actionable today ("Democrats courting rural voters"). This is a loser's mentality. > Sorry, but one side really has been much, much worse. I never claimed that Democrats were perfect, but you are the one who seems to be justifying an anti-democratic system just because some politicians, at some point, were mean to some country folks. Don't apologize, I generally agree with you that Rs are worse. My point, per my previous paragraph, is that it's counterproductive to delay progress until we get the whole country to agree about who is worse. We can just stop being dickish to rural voters--that costs nothing. Anyway, calling the US system "anti-democratic" is absurd, and I'm not sure how to have a reasonable conversation if we're throwing out overt falsehoods. Similarly, the Democratic Party has failed rural and blue-collar Americans for decades and its politicians, pundits, and media have increasingly used rural and blue-collar Americans as the scape goat for virtually every one of our national social ills--if you reduce that to "some Democrat politicians were mean to rural voters" it betrays any appearance of good faith or reasoned participation, and I likewise don't see how this conversation can advance productively.

jgwil2 5y ago
> Anyway, calling the US system "anti-democratic" is absurd It was clear from the context that I was talking about the Senate bias towards rural states, not the overall system. > I'm not sure how to have a reasonable conversation if we're throwing out overt falsehoods. Don't worry, I think the conversation has run its course. It seems we're in broad agreement about many things. I hope you'll call your Senators and Representative to express your support for the Freedom to Vote Act (especially if they are Republicans). It may not fix the Senate issue but it's a step in the right direction.
- throwaway894345 5y ago
  > Don't worry, I think the conversation has run its course. It seems we're in broad agreement about many things. I hope you'll call your Senators and Representative to express your support for the Freedom to Vote Act. It may not fix the Senate issue but it's a step in the right direction. Well-said. :)
Pxtl 5y ago
> attack on coastal elites I'm surprised and not surprised that you think this is fine.
- throwaway894345 5y ago
  I didn’t say it was fine, but admittedly coastal elites are at the very bottom of the list of people for whom I have sympathy. I imagine a heartfelt appeal to the plight of the coastal elite would be tremendously amusing.