4 ms·

Why are those areas Republican dominated? I thought the poor are supposed to be Democrats.

bitwize 5y ago
The poor in dense, urban areas typically are Democrats. Out in the countryside, people have less exposure to information and less contact with a diverse community, making it easier for Republicans to instill false consciousness by whipping up fear of the other.
- golemiprague 5y ago
  I could say the same thing about blacks in the cities, not very educated, no contact with white or hispanics or anything except from blacks and yet they vote democrats. Let's admit it, these days there is no correlation between rich vs poor and voting, the rich people in silicon valley mostly vote for democrats.
- mionhe 5y ago
  Erm, these areas have internet and go to school like anyone else. They're plenty exposed. What does "instill false consciousness" mean to you? When I try to parse this sentence I get "make people incorrectly believe" maybe? I'm not clear on your meaning. All in all, if I'm reading you correctly, you're saying that people are being tricked by a political party, yes? That being the case, it's definitely possible that you're right. I would suggest, however, that it appears much more likely that both major parties are playing that game. I mean, I watched the last American president endure four years of accusations from his political rivals that he would start wars, persue extremist agendas, and be the destruction of his country. We were told that if he wasn't stopped, everything would go to hell in a handbasket. So he was stopped. Afterward, their candidate for presidency appears to be ushering his country to hell in a handbasket. Seems like everyone is playing fast and loose with the truth anymore. I believe that's a pretty typical politician game.
- LogonType10 5y ago
  I know for a fact that the San Joaquin valley is more diverse than San Francisco.
  - hindsightbias 5y ago
    And San Joaquin County went overwhelming for the liberals in 2020: https://www.sjgov.org/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=33619 https://www.sjgov.org/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=33619 Perhaps you should look at demographics and voting patterns for your chosen sections of the valley.
- cipher_system 5y ago
  Could it be that the people in dense urban areas have more exposure to propaganda and more contact with political commissars, making it easier for Democrats to instill false consciousness by whipping up fear of the other. Or should we maybe try to avoid this kind of toxic rhetoric all together.
- hagbard_c 5y ago
  [flagged]
  - dang 5y ago
    Please don't post ideological flamewar comments to HN, or take HN threads further into flamewar generally. It's not what this site is for, and it destroys what is for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html As for politics- there's no ban. The question of what's on topic vs. off topic is complex. I've posted many long explanations of this: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=political%20overlap%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so.... Some links to start with, if you want to read more: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21607844 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21607844 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22902490 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22902490 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17014869 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17014869 If anyone has a question that hasn't been answered there, I'd like to know what it is, and if you know a better way for HN to relate to political topics while fulfilling its mandate, I'd definitely like to know what it is. Just please familiarize yourself with the past explanations first, because if it's something simple like "just ban politics" or "just allow everything", I've answered many times already why it won't work.
    - hagbard_c 5y ago
      The proposal has been done before: add a "show/hide politics" option to the preferences, similar to the "show dead" option. Allow users to mark posts for being political, set this flag on a post once a threshold has been passed. Hide posts with the "politics" flag by default but do not shadowban users for political reasons - this ends up showing personal political bias and only worsens the problem. Users who do not mind political banter enable "show politics" in their preferences which makes these posts visible to them. It is impossible to keep all politics out of the subject matter discussed on this site since there is a conscious effort to politicise everything, this is especially clear in "progressive" circles. Since it (for now) is also there where most tech development happens politics often come directly from the source. Add the flag, allow users to mark posts and the problem is mostly solved - or at least it is out of sight for those who don't like these discussions and for those who visit the site without logging in. Trying to ban them altogether is futile since it nigh impossible to do without showing personal political bias.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  It takes a record book worthy amount of tone deafness to suggest that the poorer parts of the republican base have been hoodwinked into spending generations voting for a party that promises to solve their problems but does nothing of the sort but the same part of the democratic base hasn't. The republicans have served poor rural voters no better or worse than the democrats have served poor inner city voters.
  - dariusj18 5y ago
    I don't think it's generations, just over the last 20 years. It was the inevitable long term effect of the Southern Strategy.
  - kcplate 5y ago
    For about the last 35 years (since Bush 41) I saw no discernible difference between the parties in terms of governance (lots of difference in rhetoric though). However, once the pandemic hit there tended to be a much greater amount of authoritarianism regarding pandemic policies coming from elected democrats. Interestingly it was across the board as well. Even down to the local community levels, it seemed to me that the democrats were interested in way more heavy handed approaches. This seems to have now expanded beyond pandemic management to other things as well. That is a concern for me.
- kcplate 5y ago
  Interesting. I live in a very rural community in a neighborhood that is incredibly diverse, not only racially, but by age and religion too. We get along just fine. Perhaps this area tends towards republicans because folks around here aren’t overly hung up about their differences and seem more to focus on their similarities. They also seem to be more capable of self-sufficiency and less day to day reliance on the government…even those with modest incomes. That tends to be the GOP messaging (at least around here) and people are drawn to it. Their life perspective tends to run counter to the dem messaging of division and government reliance. We also have two different fiber optic ISPs willing to provide internet to our homes. I assure you there is definitely no lack of information around here.
- dang 5y ago
  Please do not take HN threads into political flamewar hell. We're trying for something different on this site. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
barbacoa 5y ago
Democrats have become a coalition party of the cultural and economic elites as well as the subsidized poor. Republicans tend to be the party of the working class.
epistasis 5y ago
It's the rural-metropolitan divide. Often the poor in rural areas are also Democrats. But all those farmers (huge land wealth), car dealership owners, plumbing empire magnates, or trucking magnates, are incredibly Republican. But rural areas have far less opportunity than urban areas, and the wealthy often pass their empires down to their children, further hoarding opportunity. So even though there is a ton of wealth for a few at the top, there's extremely little opportunity. Urban metropolitans often offer much more opportunity, as well as greater amenities in the form of culture etc.

The poor in dense, urban areas typically are Democrats. Out in the countryside, people have less exposure to information and less contact with a diverse community, making it easier for Republicans to instill false consciousness by whipping up fear of the other.

golemiprague 5y ago
I could say the same thing about blacks in the cities, not very educated, no contact with white or hispanics or anything except from blacks and yet they vote democrats. Let's admit it, these days there is no correlation between rich vs poor and voting, the rich people in silicon valley mostly vote for democrats.
mionhe 5y ago
Erm, these areas have internet and go to school like anyone else. They're plenty exposed. What does "instill false consciousness" mean to you? When I try to parse this sentence I get "make people incorrectly believe" maybe? I'm not clear on your meaning. All in all, if I'm reading you correctly, you're saying that people are being tricked by a political party, yes? That being the case, it's definitely possible that you're right. I would suggest, however, that it appears much more likely that both major parties are playing that game. I mean, I watched the last American president endure four years of accusations from his political rivals that he would start wars, persue extremist agendas, and be the destruction of his country. We were told that if he wasn't stopped, everything would go to hell in a handbasket. So he was stopped. Afterward, their candidate for presidency appears to be ushering his country to hell in a handbasket. Seems like everyone is playing fast and loose with the truth anymore. I believe that's a pretty typical politician game.
LogonType10 5y ago
I know for a fact that the San Joaquin valley is more diverse than San Francisco.
- hindsightbias 5y ago
  And San Joaquin County went overwhelming for the liberals in 2020: https://www.sjgov.org/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=33619 https://www.sjgov.org/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=33619 Perhaps you should look at demographics and voting patterns for your chosen sections of the valley.
cipher_system 5y ago
Could it be that the people in dense urban areas have more exposure to propaganda and more contact with political commissars, making it easier for Democrats to instill false consciousness by whipping up fear of the other. Or should we maybe try to avoid this kind of toxic rhetoric all together.
hagbard_c 5y ago
[flagged]
- dang 5y ago
  Please don't post ideological flamewar comments to HN, or take HN threads further into flamewar generally. It's not what this site is for, and it destroys what is for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html As for politics- there's no ban. The question of what's on topic vs. off topic is complex. I've posted many long explanations of this: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=political%20overlap%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so.... Some links to start with, if you want to read more: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21607844 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21607844 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22902490 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22902490 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17014869 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17014869 If anyone has a question that hasn't been answered there, I'd like to know what it is, and if you know a better way for HN to relate to political topics while fulfilling its mandate, I'd definitely like to know what it is. Just please familiarize yourself with the past explanations first, because if it's something simple like "just ban politics" or "just allow everything", I've answered many times already why it won't work.
  - hagbard_c 5y ago
    The proposal has been done before: add a "show/hide politics" option to the preferences, similar to the "show dead" option. Allow users to mark posts for being political, set this flag on a post once a threshold has been passed. Hide posts with the "politics" flag by default but do not shadowban users for political reasons - this ends up showing personal political bias and only worsens the problem. Users who do not mind political banter enable "show politics" in their preferences which makes these posts visible to them. It is impossible to keep all politics out of the subject matter discussed on this site since there is a conscious effort to politicise everything, this is especially clear in "progressive" circles. Since it (for now) is also there where most tech development happens politics often come directly from the source. Add the flag, allow users to mark posts and the problem is mostly solved - or at least it is out of sight for those who don't like these discussions and for those who visit the site without logging in. Trying to ban them altogether is futile since it nigh impossible to do without showing personal political bias.
throwaway0a5e 5y ago
It takes a record book worthy amount of tone deafness to suggest that the poorer parts of the republican base have been hoodwinked into spending generations voting for a party that promises to solve their problems but does nothing of the sort but the same part of the democratic base hasn't. The republicans have served poor rural voters no better or worse than the democrats have served poor inner city voters.
- dariusj18 5y ago
  I don't think it's generations, just over the last 20 years. It was the inevitable long term effect of the Southern Strategy.
- kcplate 5y ago
  For about the last 35 years (since Bush 41) I saw no discernible difference between the parties in terms of governance (lots of difference in rhetoric though). However, once the pandemic hit there tended to be a much greater amount of authoritarianism regarding pandemic policies coming from elected democrats. Interestingly it was across the board as well. Even down to the local community levels, it seemed to me that the democrats were interested in way more heavy handed approaches. This seems to have now expanded beyond pandemic management to other things as well. That is a concern for me.
kcplate 5y ago
Interesting. I live in a very rural community in a neighborhood that is incredibly diverse, not only racially, but by age and religion too. We get along just fine. Perhaps this area tends towards republicans because folks around here aren’t overly hung up about their differences and seem more to focus on their similarities. They also seem to be more capable of self-sufficiency and less day to day reliance on the government…even those with modest incomes. That tends to be the GOP messaging (at least around here) and people are drawn to it. Their life perspective tends to run counter to the dem messaging of division and government reliance. We also have two different fiber optic ISPs willing to provide internet to our homes. I assure you there is definitely no lack of information around here.
dang 5y ago
Please do not take HN threads into political flamewar hell. We're trying for something different on this site. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

barbacoa 5y ago

Democrats have become a coalition party of the cultural and economic elites as well as the subsidized poor. Republicans tend to be the party of the working class.

epistasis 5y ago

It's the rural-metropolitan divide. Often the poor in rural areas are also Democrats. But all those farmers (huge land wealth), car dealership owners, plumbing empire magnates, or trucking magnates, are incredibly Republican. But rural areas have far less opportunity than urban areas, and the wealthy often pass their empires down to their children, further hoarding opportunity. So even though there is a ton of wealth for a few at the top, there's extremely little opportunity. Urban metropolitans often offer much more opportunity, as well as greater amenities in the form of culture etc.